New Football League TV deal

Kenneth E End

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,032
Likes
300
Supports
Luton Town
Thread starter #1
New TV deal has been put in place between the EFL and Sky Sports worth £120m over (I believe) three seasons, which is an increase from the current £90m deal.

Obviously there's going to be an increase for teams all the way down the pyramid, but no where near the sums being suggested previously. Supposedly, the EFL wanted £300m for their TV rights. They definitely failed miserably with that one.

It just reaffirms the need for more money to flow down the pyramid - the team finishing 20th in the PL doesn't deserve or need £100m a year, whereas the 21st team will receive around £12m. Even if that £100m was reduced to £75m a year and the rest filtered down, it would make a huge difference.
 

Son of Cod

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,604
Likes
2,660
Location
London
Supports
Grimsby Town
#2
Already looking forward to both games they will show this season and for the next three seasons.

I wish Sky would get the fuck out of League 2 and just let BT have it. Why do they even bother?
 

Kenneth E End

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,032
Likes
300
Supports
Luton Town
Thread starter #3
Already looking forward to both games they will show this season and for the next three seasons.

I wish Sky would get the fuck out of League 2 and just let BT have it. Why do they even bother?
Would BT bother any more though? If they get EFL rights (they come as a package), they're not going to show any more games. And certainly no Conference games.

Meanwhile, Sky are set to bid £1.8bn MORE than last time over three seasons when PL rights come up for auction later this season.
 

Kenneth E End

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,032
Likes
300
Supports
Luton Town
Thread starter #5
FWIW, from next year, if you pooled together all of the football TV rights in the UK, it equates to £3 billion a year.

The EFL will be getting £40m a year from that. Massive failure from the big wigs.

There has to be some centralisation of this funding to promote fairness.
 
Last edited:

Frealaf

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,714
Likes
508
Location
Norfolk
Supports
Grimsby Town
Twitter
@Gladders1980
#6
FWIW, from next year, if you pooled together all of the football TV rights in the UK, it equates to £9 billion a year.

The EFL will be getting £40m a year from that. Massive failure from the big wigs.

There has to be some centralisation of this funding to promote fairness.
There won't be because the premier league run football in England not the FA
 

shoddycollins

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,426
Likes
1,580
Location
In the John Sheridan Wonderland
Supports
Carlisle United
#7
I'm guessing from the £120m, Championship clubs will get £4.5m each, League One clubs will get £450,000 each and League Two clubs will get £50,000 each. There's a reason they call it trickle down.

Maybe Leagues One and Two should form a breakaway league below the Championship.
 

Son of Cod

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,604
Likes
2,660
Location
London
Supports
Grimsby Town
#8
Would BT bother any more though? If they get EFL rights (they come as a package), they're not going to show any more games. And certainly no Conference games.

Meanwhile, Sky are set to bid £1.8bn MORE than last time over three seasons when PL rights come up for auction later this season.
Going off the basis that BT do show the likes of Braintree, Boreham Wood, etc. then I think they actually would show more L2 games than Sky do. The whole coming as a package thing is bollocks, too. Sky have no interest in showing L2 football, but they want to show Leeds and Villa so we get screwed out of coverage. The job that BT do with the Conference isn't bad at all, with their highlights show, live games and Youtube channel. I see no reason why they would drop that if they had L2 or EFL rights. They have the whole of the CL too, remember. And Serie A, Bundesliga and Ligue 1. All bigger draws than the Conference.
 

Kenneth E End

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,032
Likes
300
Supports
Luton Town
Thread starter #9
Going off the basis that BT do show the likes of Braintree, Boreham Wood, etc. then I think they actually would show more L2 games than Sky do. The whole coming as a package thing is bollocks, too. Sky have no interest in showing L2 football, but they want to show Leeds and Villa so we get screwed out of coverage. The job that BT do with the Conference isn't bad at all, with their highlights show, live games and Youtube channel. I see no reason why they would drop that if they had L2 or EFL rights. They have the whole of the CL too, remember. And Serie A, Bundesliga and Ligue 1. All bigger draws than the Conference.
If that were the case, each L2 club would see a huge drop in TV revenue because L2 games wouldn't draw the same sums as they would as a package. Like it or not, the Championship draw the biggest numbers, because its the highest division in the system.
 

shoddycollins

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,426
Likes
1,580
Location
In the John Sheridan Wonderland
Supports
Carlisle United
#10
If that were the case, each L2 club would see a huge drop in TV revenue because L2 games wouldn't draw the same sums as they would as a package. Like it or not, the Championship draw the biggest numbers, because its the highest division in the system.
Yeah but we could allocate ourselves a bigger share of a smaller pot, and if we were on TV more often then shirt and stadium sponsors would pay more.
 
Messages
1,800
Likes
387
Location
South Cheshire
Supports
Crewe & Sporting Leyland
#11
Seen the fee is actually £180 million a year and not £120 million a year...

Makes staying in the league incredibly important as the solidarity money increase would fund almost 100% of our Academy. Shame we'll get one or two big time dickheads at this level inflating player wages to stupid highs for League Two footballers...
 

Si Robin

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,117
Likes
241
Location
Northway, Tewkesbury
Supports
Cheltenham Town
#12
We were on TV in the National League 5 times in our one season back down there. In our entire 18 seasons in the Football League, not including playoff and cup games, we have been on Sky twice. I think it's brilliant what BT Sport do with the Conference.

However, I have to agree, if BT Sport did get EFL rights then they would do exactly what Sky do now - 97% Championship, 2% League 1 and 1% League 2.
 

Conker

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,238
Likes
199
Supports
Mansfield Town FC
Twitter
@CONKS__
#13
Conference is top of the pack, League two is bottom.

The 700k a year FL and media money we get for being in L2 over the conference makes it worth it though.
 

Vanni

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,537
Likes
2,308
Location
.
Supports
Cambridge United
#14
The Conference's much better for live coverage*, although the Gateshead fans may beg to differ :lol:

*esp. when the club you follow is regarded as a big ex league club.
 

Flaxman's Alibi

Well-Known Member
Messages
574
Likes
371
Location
Pulled Down Town
Supports
Tubby Evans Embalming Army
#15
The Conference's much better for live coverage*, although the Gateshead fans may beg to differ :lol:

*esp. when the club you follow is regarded as a big ex league club.
"Massive club for this level"
The phrase that cheers every former FL fan when the club signs its latest star (who nobody's ever heard of)....

....until about the third season of hearing it and you think: "oh just f**k off shite boy from Kings Lynn Town."
 

Trapdoor

Active Member
Messages
965
Likes
203
Location
Here
Supports
Exeter
#18
Yeah but no doubt at massive expense. The cronies who provide streaming rights to the EFL will be getting even fatter off this scam.
 

Frealaf

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,714
Likes
508
Location
Norfolk
Supports
Grimsby Town
Twitter
@Gladders1980
#19
So, we will be able to legally stream our midweek games. Now that's a great step forward.
Depends how much clubs charge to basically let fans sit at home in the UK and watch it. Either it will be expensive or clubs are going to lose fans through the turnstiles during mid week games, especially away fans
 

dedwardp

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,257
Likes
330
Supports
Colchester United
#20
Just makes reaching the Championship an even more difficult job really, doesn't it?
 

Chris FGR

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,720
Likes
1,729
Supports
Forest Green
#21
If it's expensive people will just find ways to stream it for free, the same way many are getting around the iFollow restrictions.

Wont be long till every game will be streamed, meaning that crowd numbers will be on the permanent decline. But who cares about empty grounds if enough people are paying their subscriptions and the TV moneys rolling in?
 

GTFCfish

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,452
Likes
3,288
Location
Grimsby
Supports
Grimsby Town
#22
Wont be long till every game will be streamed, meaning that crowd numbers will be on the permanent decline
We are managing to get lower crowds home and away perfectly well on our own without the excuse of this streaming stuff.
It's called being fucking shit.
 

AdamStag

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,560
Likes
469
Supports
Mansfield Town
#23
Clubs don't have to stream them, and I hope we don't.

I can't make the home game with Wycombe tonight due to work and expense from Manchester, but nor would I wish to watch it through a stream as ultimately it would be a detriment of the club
 

Frealaf

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,714
Likes
508
Location
Norfolk
Supports
Grimsby Town
Twitter
@Gladders1980
#24
Clubs don't have to stream them, and I hope we don't.

I can't make the home game with Wycombe tonight due to work and expense from Manchester, but nor would I wish to watch it through a stream as ultimately it would be a detriment of the club
If I can't make a game and its on TV somewhere I'm watching it, it costing the club fans is ultimately their fault.

However the tv/streaming gives the more causal fan a bigger excuse to not go to games at all, whereas before they either went or missed it, now they can sit at home and not miss a thing.

Lge 2 clubs will suffer massively especially far flung ones like Exeter, even less away fans will show up midweek
 

Chris FGR

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,720
Likes
1,729
Supports
Forest Green
#25
We are managing to get lower crowds home and away perfectly well on our own without the excuse of this streaming stuff.
It's called being fucking shit.
Excitedly checks fixtures. When are we playing Grimsby? December. Bollocks.
 
Messages
1,800
Likes
387
Location
South Cheshire
Supports
Crewe & Sporting Leyland
#26
Apart from the obvious promotion of trying to get young fans through the turnstiles, I genuinely think the Football League has given up on initiatives to help clubs get adult fans through the gate these days. Face it, the only way crowds go up is if you have success on the pitch and get promotion, you move into a shiny brand new stadium, you gain high profile ownership after your club has been destroyed by a previous owner or (in the case of away followings) you get relegated into a division you haven't been in for a long time. Apart from those Chairmen who have deep pockets, lower league clubs won't reduce prices because they simply can't afford to, so year on year, your fickle casual to moderate fans will see successive mid-table finishes as "mediocrity" and will pack their season tickets in and call it a day.

Lower league clubs will always be fighting a losing battle in this respect. Coventry used to get 20,000 a game, Oldham used to get 12,000 a game, at our peak we were getting just under 8,000 a game on average. In the modern game, these are relics of a past now Sky and BT are showing almost 50% of PL games making it easier to buy a subscription and kids to follow a more successful side. For a football club to get the town behind it, they have to be in the Premier League these days (i.e Huddersfield, who never once sold out their stadium in the Football League) and that's the sad truth of the matter.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
13,057
Messages
769,371
Members
4,357
Latest member
psycho3a