Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

English Premier League TV rights to be $7.9 Billion over 3yrs

CelibatePimp

By CelibatePimp,
in Charlotte Football Club

Recommended Posts

CelibatePimp Newbie

CelibatePimp

Posted
Posted

On Tuesday, the English Premier League announced that Sky Sports and BT Sport would retain the league’s domestic television rights at a staggering cost: About $7.9 billion over three years starting in the 2016-17 season, a 70 percent increase over what they’re currently paying. And when international rights are factored in, the league is expected take in about $13 billion over the course of the deal, or around $4.3 billion per year.

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2015/02/13/massive-new-english-premier-league-tv-deal-has-the-rest-of-european-soccer-worried/

 

 

Obviously the rest of Europe is worried, very worried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raskle Contributor

Raskle

Posted
Posted

Lol.. La Liga is the best league in the world? Well, that's horseshit. They have 2 teams, and a bunch of scrubs because of how imbalanced their deals are... and now he's crying about someone else being able to afford his toys better? GTFO you silly wanker! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CelibatePimp Newbie

CelibatePimp

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Lol.. La Liga is the best league in the world? Well, that's horseshit. They have 2 teams, and a bunch of scrubs because of how imbalanced their deals are... and now he's crying about someone else being able to afford his toys better? GTFO you silly wanker! :lol:

 

I call it the Bi-Liga.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cbarrier90 Newbie

cbarrier90

Posted
Posted

When was the last time they won it before last year?

 

 

To be fair, for years it was only the Big Four in the BPL before the UAE guys purchased City. And of that "Big Four," Liverpool has yet to win an EPL title and Arsenal hasn't won it since 2003-04.

 

Since the BPL was created in 1992, only five teams have won it, and Blackburn ('95) isn't even in the league anymore while City only started winning in 2011-12.

 

As an Arsenal fan it seems like Arsenal develops the talent to win but ends up selling it off in its prime (Henry, RVP, Fabregas, Nasri, Clichy, etc.) I don't follow the team well enough to be a regular in here but I feel like the goal is just to make the top four and any trophies are just gravy. Spurs is the same way (Bale) but they can't ever break into that top four. I mean, is there really an expectation for Kane to be with Spurs for life?

 

No doubt the BPL is the best league in the world with its success over here really unprecedented and leading domestic U.S. league's to at least consider attempting to garner the same success in Europe. No other league can come close to claiming that success, but competitively the BPL lacks parity just like those other European leagues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goondal Newbie

Goondal

Posted
Posted

I do not necessarily think that BPL is the best league in the world based on quality, I think the three to leagues are all really close, but they certainly are the most popular.

To be fair though, they have a huge advantage stateside and that is the language. This has helped them get better TV deals over here and in turn their popularity grew much faster.

I am excited about the FOX deal for the Bundesliga that starts next season. Would love to see their presence grow over here the way BPL had. Of course as a Bayern fan a lot over here will view me the way I always viewed Man U fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ja Rhule Grand Master

Ja Rhule

Posted
Posted

To be fair, for years it was only the Big Four in the BPL before the UAE guys purchased City. And of that "Big Four," Liverpool has yet to win an EPL title and Arsenal hasn't won it since 2003-04.

Since the BPL was created in 1992, only five teams have won it, and Blackburn ('95) isn't even in the league anymore while City only started winning in 2011-12.

As an Arsenal fan it seems like Arsenal develops the talent to win but ends up selling it off in its prime (Henry, RVP, Fabregas, Nasri, Clichy, etc.) I don't follow the team well enough to be a regular in here but I feel like the goal is just to make the top four and any trophies are just gravy. Spurs is the same way (Bale) but they can't ever break into that top four. I mean, is there really an expectation for Kane to be with Spurs for life?

No doubt the BPL is the best league in the world with its success over here really unprecedented and leading domestic U.S. league's to at least consider attempting to garner the same success in Europe. No other league can come close to claiming that success, but competitively the BPL lacks parity just like those other European leagues.

I'm an Arsenal fan and u r lil wrong there bud. Arsenal used to develop talent and sell it for big bucks to finish paying for almost a billion dollar stadium they built in 2006. In the last 2 years Arsenal spent close to £170m on bring new players in. Arsenal made paying off stadium #1 priority because of 10% interest rate on a loan. Because stadium is completely paid off, Arsenal has close to £120m in annual transfer fees. If not for the injuries, Arsenal could of easily be #1 or #2 in the BPL. Arsenal is a striker away from being a very dominant team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ja Rhule Grand Master

Ja Rhule

Posted
Posted

I do not necessarily think that BPL is the best league in the world based on quality, I think the three to leagues are all really close, but they certainly are the most popular.

To be fair though, they have a huge advantage stateside and that is the language. This has helped them get better TV deals over here and in turn their popularity grew much faster.

I am excited about the FOX deal for the Bundesliga that starts next season. Would love to see their presence grow over here the way BPL had. Of course as a Bayern fan a lot over here will view me the way I always viewed Man U fans.

BPL is the most watched league in US. It means BPL will get mad money from TV deals. Mad money from TV deals means more money for teams to spend on top class players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • jasonluckydog
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By jasonluckydog · Posted

      Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • TD alt
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By TD alt · Posted

      In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...