In recent times there has been much talk about altering the structure of football in England again. Much of it inevitably stems from the failure of the English national team to win anything since 1966 and the view that there is a lack of young talent coming up through the youth ranks of teams, particularly in the Premier League. Since the formation of the Premier League in 1992, with 24 founder clubs breaking away from the traditional Football League structure, there has been a steady increase in money, viewers, sponsorship and notably a mix of nationalities plying their trade in the pinnacle of English Football. This constant turn over of players and foreign talent coming into squads, along with the desire of clubs to be playing in the so called "best league in the world" has, it has been said, led to fewer opportunities for young players to stake a claim for a place in the first team. Attempts to rectify this have been made but are there larger issues to consider? Is football in England simply headed in the wrong direction?
Today's Premier League has 20 teams and last season saw a substantial increase in sponsorship for distribution to each club taking part, TV money pretty much trebled (from £1 billion to 3 billion). When Manchester City won the league they scooped around £60 million pounds in prize and TV money. With the new TV deal, the bottom placed club will earn around the same amount, up from about £39 million. The next league winners stand to earn around £100 million. Compare this to the Championship, just one tier down and recognised as in the top 5 most popular leagues to watch in football (by attendance), where the last TV deal went from £264 million to its current £195 million and you start to see why there is such a huge difference in how clubs operate between the Premier League and the Football League. Added to this, whilst teams in the Premier League get "placement" prize money, the only team who wins prize money outside of that division are the winners of each league. The teams who are unlucky enough to be relegated out of the Premier League this season will come down off the back of not only earning circa £60 million in revenue from prize and TV money but will then be buffeted by 4 years worth of "parachute payments" intended to help clubs make the transition back into a division where you simply cannot afford to pay the type of wages players earn in the Premier League or pay out huge fees for new squad players. Parachute payments next season will total over £60 million compared to the current £48 million.
Such monetary influence seems to have led to an inevitable gap between those in the Premier League, those outside of it and indeed those that come down from the Premier League into the Championship and the rest of it. It would seem that this gap, whilst things are structured the way they are, only stands to grow even more. Where in the past, there may have been more twists and turns in which teams could be successful, now there appears to be an almost inevitability about which teams will be in the mix for league and cup success. For supporters, hope and dreams play a large part in watching their team, but what if there is no real "hope" of progressing? Surely a more competitive structure with more teams competing with each other would actually be better for everyone, including the national side? Teams coming down from the Premier League can look at the task of getting promotion again in a couple of ways, go for broke and hope to go up at the first time of asking or play a longer waiting game. The go for broke model sees sides using their parachute money to continue to pay higher than average wages and spend more money on transfers to make their squad "better" than the others in the Championship as many of those don't have the money to do the same themselves. Win this "game" and the team can go up with the knowledge that any losses made will be wiped out by the money to be gained in the Premier League and the fines for losses made over £8 million that can now be imposed by the so called "financial fair play" rules coming into the football league will pale into insignificance as well. Lose and you'll be reverting to the longer waiting game, as instead of a fine for the losses you'll be penalised for gaining an advantage (even though you've not actually gone anywhere) via a transfer embargo until you sort your finances out. Such is financial fair play eh?
You may be asking, so how about if we concentrate on youth then? Bring through the right players and teams may stand a chance of being successful? Again, there have been a lot of changes, even at this level. We have gone from 1st team and reserves teams to the current 1st team and under 21 structure. In the past it was thought that youth players didn't get enough competitive football at the right level as reserve teams seemed to consist more of older 1st team players that didn't get many run outs in the league, thus the under 21 system was brought in where teams must largely consist of players aged 21 and under with a maximum of 3 older players allowed. There is also a "Premier League" under 21s which includes all teams with category 1 training facilities rather than it purely being made up of those teams competing in the Premier League at the time. To gain category 1 status though may well be out of the reach of some clubs purely on financial grounds, particularly for those plying their trade in leagues 1 and 2. Again, this may lead to a situation where not only do teams lag behind in first team stakes but their youth team prospects suffer as they can never get to the elite league. Is this situation set to get worse with a proposal for another revamp which would see a rename of the league, global broadcasting rights and financial rewards for success thrown in? Though this is thought of as a way to improve and increase the number of locally grown talent prosper in the future, are we in danger of "B" teams overtaking those in the Championship?
I believe there is much rethinking to be done, it seems unfair for some to gain so much whilst others are left to flounder and maybe perish. If we are to be truly looking at grassroots football, we need to reconsider the structure and money pumped in right at the top. A more even distribution of riches needs to be considered, Champions league qualification shouldn't be the bee all and end all and we should value the likes of Accrington Stanley and Notts County more, after all, they were amongst those that made up the football league in the first place. To do this, the people at the top of the game need to lead change and make the difference. I remain to be convinced that this change will happen.
