Brian McDermott's Big City Team League

[GUBRATS 2,415]

2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Thats false though isn't it Yorkshire has had more premier League sides than Lancashire (unless you include the Scousers under the old borders)

OK , if we've decided to be pedantic about it , but even then , they've won less than the current ' still ' Lancashire clubs , if we include the 4 biggies who's population still recognise as being ' Lancastrian ' then it goes out of the window , so Scotchys strange reference to football , when we're discussing RL isn't relevant , is it ? , So why are you trying strangely to support it ?

[Eddie 908]

35 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

It's just not true, there are tonnes of lufc and yccc fans based in the other towns and cities of Yorkshire 

Yes obviously, but it only works one way; people from the surrounding area will support a big(ger) city club but not the other way round. I can’t think of a single example of it working the other way round. 

[GUBRATS 2,415]

5 minutes ago, solly said:

Some people are experts at these sorts of things. It would be best to consult them.

What I can say is that Toronto had zero fans and zero perceived interest. Three years later, they are drawing around 7,000 people per match, feature in mass media and people can't stop talking about them.

London, on the other hand, have had twenty years and yet... 

Clearly London have done something wrong and Toronto have done something right.

There's no shame in learning from those who seem to know how to do. 

And finally we get there , Toronto , the billionaires ' folly ' , whereas London is just the Swinton millionaires ' folly ' 

So you want the current SL bosses to tip millions into getting clubs running in Big City's to replace the clubs they currently have , and the fans of those clubs to then stop following the current clubs ( despite many having had stadiums built ' well the west Pennine ones ' ) and go watching the new ones despite them not existing and having nowhere to play ? 

Sounds good to me

[GUBRATS 2,415]

3 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Yes obviously, but it only works one way; people from the surrounding area will support a big(ger) city club but not the other way round. I can’t think of a single example of it working the other way round. 

Yorkshire is a football wasteland , but we aren't discussing football 

[Eddie 908]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

Yorkshire is a football wasteland , but we aren't discussing football 

What I said applies to any sport, RL included. Most RL club owners are successful businessmen (unlike most people on this forum who feel qualified to tell them what to do) and the owners of Wigan and Saints certainly know that pouring a load of money at Mancs and Scousers to try to get more fans would be akin to burning it in a field. They’d have done it already if they thought it would do any good. 

[solly 155]

6 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

And finally we get there , Toronto , the billionaires ' folly ' , whereas London is just the Swinton millionaires ' folly ' 

So you want the current SL bosses to tip millions into getting clubs running in Big City's to replace the clubs they currently have , and the fans of those clubs to then stop following the current clubs ( despite many having had stadiums built ' well the west Pennine ones ' ) and go watching the new ones despite them not existing and having nowhere to play ? 

Sounds good to me

Oh, for heaven's sake, if that's what you've read in what I wrote then no wonder the code is in the state it's in.

[GUBRATS 2,415]

1 minute ago, solly said:

Oh, for heaven's sake, if that's what you've read in what I wrote then no wonder the code is in the state it's in.

You haven't stated anything , just some spurious nonsense that you are now going to run away from , pretending you have some superior mind set that I cannot understand by reading your mind 

So funny , " We need to do something , but I don't know actually what "

[GUBRATS 2,415]

Can somebody , anybody state , in ENGLISH exactly what can realistically be done to achieve Mr McDermotts ' Super League within the current confines we have , without finding several billions pounds hidden in Nigel's old desk ?

[Kayakman 4,147]

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

Can somebody , anybody state , in ENGLISH exactly what can realistically be done to achieve Mr McDermotts ' Super League within the current confines we have , without finding several billions pounds hidden in Nigel's old desk ?

Allow Ottawa in quickly and give all NA expansion teams half of their allotted due in central funding....use the other half to put towards travel costs for visiting clubs.  Make it work and then move on from there once successful.

[solly 155]

5 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

You haven't stated anything , just some spurious nonsense that you are now going to run away from , pretending you have some superior mind set that I cannot understand by reading your mind 

So funny , " We need to do something , but I don't know actually what "

You're right. I haven't stated anything.

And yet you still found a whole bunch of nonsense that I didn’t say in what I wrote.

Well done. 

[GUBRATS 2,415]

Just now, Kayakman said:

Allow Ottawa in quickly and give all NA expansion teams half of their allotted due in central funding....use the other half to put towards travel costs for visiting clubs.  Make it work and then move on from there once successful.

So reduce half of SL immediately to the Championship and part time , along with their academies ? , And also potentially reducing ( or ending ) the source of that central funding ? 

Cracking idea Grommit 

[GUBRATS 2,415]

Just now, solly said:

You're right. I haven't stated anything.

And yet you still found a whole bunch of nonsense that I didn’t say in what I wrote.

Well done. 

Ok , you didn't mean that which I posted , so what DO you mean ? , What and how do we change from town based clubs to city ones ? 

If you aren't clear , I have to try to fill in the holes , don't leave any holes , then I don't need to fill them in 

[Eddie 908]

Just now, Kayakman said:

Allow Ottawa in quickly and give all NA expansion teams half of their allotted due in central funding....use the other half to put towards travel costs for visiting clubs.  Make it work and then move on from there once successful.

At last a solid idea. I agree on letting Ottawa in quickly (which is already happening) and hopefully NY too. These will be clubs who already have people prepared to invest time and money into making it work. 

On the other hand people saying things like ‘there should be clubs in Barcelona and copenhagen’ is just utterly unrealistic and pointless, unless they’re prepared to go and go it themselves instead of banging away on a keyboard. We’d all love to see it but I also want a car that runs on water and to visit the moon. 

[GUBRATS 2,415]

2 minutes ago, Eddie said:

At last a solid idea. I agree on letting Ottawa in quickly (which is already happening) and hopefully NY too. These will be clubs who already have people prepared to invest time and money into making it work. 

On the other hand people saying things like ‘there should be clubs in Barcelona and copenhagen’ is just utterly unrealistic and pointless, unless they’re prepared to go and go it themselves instead of banging away on a keyboard. We’d all love to see it but I also want a car that runs on water and to visit the moon. 

But there is still the chicken and egg situation , you need the money up front to organise something like this , and it is a huge amount , literally hundreds of millions , and not just in some whimsical possible TV deal , but cold hard cash guaranteed 

So even Kmans suggestion is a water powers car to the moon 

[solly 155]

14 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So reduce half of SL immediately to the Championship and part time , along with their academies ? , And also potentially reducing ( or ending ) the source of that central funding ? 

Cracking idea Grommit 

Where in his post did he say anything you just wrote?

[RP London 2,044]

26 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So reduce half of SL immediately to the Championship and part time , along with their academies ? , And also potentially reducing ( or ending ) the source of that central funding ? 

Cracking idea Grommit 

read what he wrote mate, you may not agree with people 100% but at least dont completely misconstrue what is actually said.. 

1 team.. 1.. not half the league.. 1 team he said to let in.. not necessarily at the expense of anyone either.. why not expand by 2 clubs, one heartland/UK and one Ottowa 

He said to give the NA teams (Ottowa and Toronto... 2 teams) half of their central funding and you use the other half of the central funding to help fund the travel for the rest of the league.. 

It isnt that bad a plan IMHO, you may not think so and that is fine but it is not binning off half the league ffs.

Edited October 15 by RP London

[Tommygilf 2,859]

39 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

OK , if we've decided to be pedantic about it , but even then , they've won less than the current ' still ' Lancashire clubs , if we include the 4 biggies who's population still recognise as being ' Lancastrian ' then it goes out of the window , so Scotchys strange reference to football , when we're discussing RL isn't relevant , is it ? , So why are you trying strangely to support it ?

Because it recognises people don't have to be blood and soil, born in the same postcode types to support their team as those teams grow beyond just their town/suburb/local area in relevance. 

Undoubtedly city based sides tend to be universally better at this but it shouldn't stop those with names of smaller areas in wider conurbations growing too. London's footballing scene is built on it.

[Oliver Clothesoff 2,698]

Think we should just draw a line on a globe, a bit like the equator but call it Waldo’s Wall after all the clowns with wild suggestions and then have North of the Wall v South of the Wall. Two sides, one wall, one winner. 
 

Game One in Panama City, Game Two in Mogadishu and Game Three in Chernobyl. 
 

[RP London 2,044]

1 minute ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

Think we should just draw a line on a globe, a bit like the equator but call it Waldo’s Wall after all the clowns with wild suggestions and then have North of the Wall v South of the Wall. Two sides, one wall, one winner. 
 

Game One in Panama City, Game Two in Mogadishu and Game Three in Chernobyl. 
 

play the one in Chernobyl on a tuesday night and you may get the IRL (or whatever their name is by then) on side!

[GUBRATS 2,415]

18 minutes ago, solly said:

Where in his post did he say anything you just wrote?

I admit I read it as " admit OttAwa and other NA clubs " , meaning the references to NY , Montreal , and so on , so essentially 5/6 teams , which if it was the case reduces the current central funding to the point where current clubs couldn't operate even if you expand the size of SL  , and that is providing SKY are happy to have so many non UK teams in it 

If it's just the 2 then fine , but adding OttAwa isn't Mr McDermotts big city league 

[GUBRATS 2,415]

20 minutes ago, RP London said:

read what he wrote mate, you may not agree with people 100% but at least dont completely misconstrue what is actually said.. 

1 team.. 1.. not half the league.. 1 team he said to let in.. not necessarily at the expense of anyone either.. why not expand by 2 clubs, one heartland/UK and one Ottowa 

He said to give the NA teams (Ottowa and Toronto... 2 teams) half of their central funding and you use the other half of the central funding to help fund the travel for the rest of the league.. 

It isnt that bad a plan IMHO, you may not think so and that is fine but it is not binning off half the league ffs.

Read my post above 

[DC77 137]

3 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

It's a parochial argument that nobody under the age of 50 cares about. 

Wigan can be a Manchester club, saints a liverpool club, wakefield is a decent sized city. 

But parochialism exists, that’s the point, especially in England. Good luck trying to overturn that.

3 hours ago, Eddie said:

And Wigan can’t be a Manchester club and Saints can’t be a liverpool club. I assume you’re not from the North West if you think they can. 

His comments are something you hear from an Aussie (“but St Helens is so close to Liverpool so surely people from Liverpool support them”). In Australia it would be the case, not in England. They see these SL teams on a map across the north of England and assume they have support across the neighbouring cities, they would think wrong. Parochialism is stronger in England than pretty much anywhere else I’ve experienced. 

59 minutes ago, solly said:

What I can say is that Toronto had zero fans and zero perceived interest. Three years later, they are drawing around 7,000 people per match, feature in mass media and people can't stop talking about them.

London, on the other hand, have had twenty years and yet... 

Clearly London have done something wrong and Toronto have done something right.

There's no shame in learning from those who seem to know how to do. 

Bit like the Aussies who have a different (sporting) culture to here, the same applies with North America. What Toronto do cannot be replicated in London for this reason. Mentioned parochialism (Canadians unlike us would be more willing to try new things outside their own area), there’s also a difference in fan culture in that it’s transient in NA (they don’t get attached to clubs like we do, this would have to be the case otherwise teams moving around wouldn’t be part of the franchise system), going to the game isn’t like here where it’s a “ritual”, there it’s a “day out”. Look at the three RL clubs in Cumbria, none of the fans of each club want it...it’s a no no even though a merger (combining all the resources) would make one club (a new one) stronger. In Australia (and in NA) a merger would happen, there isn’t that, quote “religious, or quasi-religious” attachment to a club that exists in the UK. Wimbledon becoming MK Dons makes headline news here, they were public enemy number one...such things happen in NA (and in Aus) at the drop of a hat. It’s a different world.

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

Thats false though isn't it Yorkshire has had more premier League sides than Lancashire (unless you include the Scousers under the old borders)

Yorkshire (or more specifically Leeds United) is a sleeping giant in football. It’s astounding that one of the top seven or eight clubs in the country, a Premier League club in all but name, hasn’t been back in the top flight in more than a decade. 

[Eddie 908]

18 minutes ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

Think we should just draw a line on a globe, a bit like the equator but call it Waldo’s Wall after all the clowns with wild suggestions and then have North of the Wall v South of the Wall. Two sides, one wall, one winner. 
 

Game One in Panama City, Game Two in Mogadishu and Game Three in Chernobyl. 
 

More realistic than a super league with Barcelona, Paris, Rome and Los Angeles in it. 

[RP London 2,044]

4 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Read my post above 

 

5 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

I admit I read it as " admit OttAwa and other NA clubs " , meaning the references to NY , Montreal , and so on , so essentially 5/6 teams , which if it was the case reduces the current central funding to the point where current clubs couldn't operate even if you expand the size of SL  , and that is providing SKY are happy to have so many non UK teams in it 

If it's just the 2 then fine , but adding OttAwa isn't Mr McDermotts big city league 

the point is that it is a start it is never going to be (no matter how much people on here say it would be) 6-10 teams in one year all admitted at the same time.. but to try and grow it and it is a gentle process and you grow towrads a big city league (which also doesnt mean ALL teams MUST be from a big city, but that if you have some then there is more to sell.. which he is correct about)!...

problem with some on this board (not saying its you).. its ALL or NOTHING.. there is no inbetween, there is no patience and there is no common sense.. but boy is there an argument!

[GUBRATS 2,415]

17 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Because it recognises people don't have to be blood and soil, born in the same postcode types to support their team as those teams grow beyond just their town/suburb/local area in relevance. 

Undoubtedly city based sides tend to be universally better at this but it shouldn't stop those with names of smaller areas in wider conurbations growing too. London's footballing scene is built on it.

Was built on it , 150 years ago , and nowhere have I suggested that you have to live on your clubs doorstep , but the massive majority of those who actually do attend do actually live quite close , don't they ?, As I put earlier , my brother in law professes to be a big Man City fan , giving me ( man u ) grief on a regular basis as I work with him , his financial contribution to Man city has been the purchase of 2 shirts in the last 10 years , so yes a point , but a poor one