At the present time, the only priority for professional clubs is to find a way to end the current season without having to completely call the 2020/21 promotion together.
In his generally simplistic manner, La Liga president Xavier Tabas was ahead of any other administrator, acknowledging that failure to end the season would cost the region $ 1 billion. Seizing this national amount is not an option, and it is clear that doing what it takes to play essential games is the only current busyness in the game classification.
When the dust settles, however, thoughts turn to the future – and especially to how leagues and clubs can protect themselves from the possibility of a similar crisis in the future.
One possibility is that recent events will have a leveling effect, combining different types of interest for the greater good of the game. For example, four German clubs competing in this season’s Champions League have already announced that they will each donate $ 20 million to reduce the burden of other Bundesliga clubs, a sign of optimism that a benevolent ‘we are all together’ mentality could improve in the coming weeks.
Sadly, though, it is unlikely that such a generous spirit will last very long. Unless there is a very strong leadership from the top of the game – which seems impossible to consider in the ethical practices of FIFA and UEFA – we should not take too long to witness the return of the dominance of nude interests, in the various ways underlying the highly competitive environment of professional sports.
In practice, it is unnecessary to accept that the demands and demands of Barcelona, Juventus, Paris Saint-Germain and Liverpool are very different from those of Eber, Sassuolo, Nantes and Watford.
Those of the previous group are very aware, and have for many years been able to achieve great hes audacity and in the second way interfere with their ability to earn by the presence of low light. The question is: can these be settled?
When Barাa defeated Eber 5-0 at Camp Nou in February, millions of people around the world were taking to social media and / or Lionel Messi shook four goals and shook his head to another disappointing performance, a shining endorsement of Antoine Griezmann and Martin Brathwaite. Approving
On the other hand, almost no one was interested in the tactical setup of visiting boss Jose Luis Mendilibar or the battle conducted by Iber center-back Esteban Burgos. In a nutshell, the game is not for Eber because of Barsa.
This is no secret, and no wonder. However, it has always been a surprise to Barca bean counters that the huge commercial revenue generated by this national event was shared between the clubs. Not exactly shared equally, but certainly shared in a way that gives Eber more rewards than its share for attracting worldwide audiences. If we make all the interest, Barsa’s original claim can go, we should get all the revenue. Fair is just fair.
This is, of course, a very simple argument that can be easily disputed. A game can only happen when there are two teams and no one can tune in to watch the Barsa superstars on the empty field. There needs to be an opposition, and not all of them can be at the level of Camp Nur icons.
The desire behind many minds in the corridors of club power, though, is to settle with those games between the top and second tier clubs – or at least to the marginalization. Barca, Juve, PSG and Liverpool don’t want to play against Eber, Sassuolo, Nantes or Watford … they want to play against each other.
If Barাa can bring 5 million fans to the party, Eber can only tempt 5,000, financially – it should be competing against a Juve, PSG or Liverpool who can bring 100 million of his own, or at least a vaguely comparable figure. Broadcasting rights, sponsorships, advertisements, hospitality sales… they will all go through the roof, bringing both clubs to great advantage.
At the moment, these kinds of big events just happen from now on, depending on the tricks and curiosities of the Champions League draw. Liverpool have played two Juventus this century, for example, where they played five times in two years against Watford. Isn’t it the wrong way around? Must one play the best without the blue moon at once? Should not Eber’s natural opponents Sassuolo and Watford, but should Barca shoulder the shoulders of Juve and Liverpool?
If you look at the game from a global perspective, as big clubs inevitably do, this conclusion is not only economical, but also completely justified from a sports standpoint. We all want to see, are we testing ourselves against Thiago Silver more than Griezmann Paulo Oliveira? Kylian Mbappe’s most suitable rival, most would agree, is Virgil van Dijk, not Nicholas Palois.
These heavenly matches, which are currently limited to one decade at a time or even not even, can easily become a regular staple of the sports calendar. All that needs to happen is to create a new league, a super league, if you will, where clubs are constantly allowed to compete against their peers and enjoy the commercial wealth they have. Why should it be so controversial?
Making money for elite clubs to build their own Super League is a fundamental and obvious attraction. The earnings that came in the last stage of the Champions League are indicative of the kind of wealth that is available on a near-weekly basis when large clubs come together.
For example, the estimated revenue of the Champions League for 2018/19 is € 3.25 billion, almost a third of the total season revenue of La Liga ($ 1.8 billion without player sales) means almost the number of games (125 against 380 in the Champions League in La Liga).
The formation of a Super League will obviously provide a big boost to the money of competing clubs, resulting in – theoretically at least – leaving these organizations in a stronger position to deal with an unexpected crisis such as another coronavirus outbreak. So how can the current turmoil encourage decision-makers across the continent to follow that path, resulting in the greatest gains? It is simply good business knowledge.
But there is one more incentive that may be just as compelling as the current context for elite clubs: to take back control.
At the moment, super clubs are at the mercy of many external forces when it comes to making big decisions. National leagues and associations, domestic league affiliates, UEFA and FIFA… they have to consult with everyone before agreeing to anything, and in many cases they dictate the terms by a shot.
To reach the decision to reopen the Champions League this season, a fine dance of cooperation between the five local leagues involved (La Liga, Premier League, Serie A, Bundesliga and Ligue 1), national government, football association and so on will be required. The outlook for competing clubs will be considered, but they will not necessarily be decided because all other competitions will also be considered. If Barাa and Napoli find a date mutually agreed to take the stage for the second of their last 16 meetings, it probably doesn’t matter – all the other stakeholders will have to give them a contract before playing the game, too.
In a Super League – independent of the domestic leagues and the UEFA, the member clubs simply replied to each other – this would not happen. Elite clubs will have the ability to make their own decisions for their own benefit, contemplating how a mid-table Ligue 1 trip to Brest in Strasbourg could affect them.
Next time an unexpected crisis of climate or disease strikes, controlling that level will ease the lives of the biggest clubs – and there will be another thing to realize when planning for the future comes later this year.
Despite all of the above, the European Super League is not inevitable for a variety of reasons, both sports and economic.
For starters, the amount of people’s hostility to the plans will be difficult to overcome, and it is almost impossible to reach the senses among the leading lights that Carl-Heinz Rummenig, CEO of Bayern Munich, is one such example, even among those who believe that even domestic leagues for game giants. Be vivacious.
The future of television rights is probably the biggest unknown when the outbreak caused by the coronavirus goes down. Some broadcasters have already announced their willingness to withhold payment until normalcy is restored, and this may be a representation for the determination that the agreements will need to be reconsidered below.
At this point, no one knows how the practice of watching football fans or the spending of television advertisers will affect the current situation. Maybe, if more games were played behind closed door doors or fans were reluctant to spend two hours sitting shoulder to shoulder with strangers, watching action on TV would be the only option, ratings would go up, and broadcast deal value would increase.
On the other hand, although spending money on TV subscriptions can become a luxury that very few people can afford in the broader economic crisis, which is likely to be the worst seen in a century in the world. In that case, Sky Sports, BIN, ESPN and all the rest of the people can subscribe to several million subscribers, reducing the amount of money they are willing to pay for the right to secure football directly.
If the quality of football goes down, the financial momentum of big clubs going their own way can virtually disappear. Unless TV companies are willing or able to pay for it, the Super League will never be created.
However, a few months from now, when the presidents of the elite clubs of Europe sit together to unleash their losses and face an uncertain future, do you know that thought has been on their mind for a very short time? Risk reduction and maximum profit are the central ingredients of any business; In the football business, these trends can lead to an inevitable conclusion.
Quid-1 will have a lot of impact on society, and one of them may act as a catalyst for the formation of the European Super League.
Learn more about the Sport 360 app