Jason talking sense again

https://www.theguardian.com/fo.....-league-and-efl-talk

Edit: nice picture of Town

Oooh Jason Stockwood spouting his socialist dogma in the Guardian again. About time we got rid and got a proper owner in. Not one that keeps talking sense, all this namby pamby equality excrement, why haven't we spent £5 million on a striker. Sustainability? I excrement it. Do one Stockwoods. Boooo

OK, someone’s got to say it

Since when did talking sense get you 3 points on a Saturday?

Nobody has to say it cheers

Not making friends with the National League board ....lets hope we don't return anytime

According to his comments in that we weren't their friends anyway!

The government white paper delayed. Quelle surprise.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64539586

Quoted from AussieMariner

OK, someone’s got to say it

Since when did talking sense get you 3 points on a Saturday?

It doesn’t get you 3 points but after reading what our chairman has written I believe having someone like Jason at the helm of our great club is worth much more than 3 points.

Some numpty will come on here and say he’s only the owner so he could get a Guardian column, and probably also some guff about the ‘left wing economic establishment’, anti growth coalition, tofu eating wokerati’ cobblers etc etc.

There are people on here who actually buy that. Isn’t that inexpressibly crackers?!?!?!

Quoted from chaos33

Some numpty will come on here and say he’s only the owner so he could get a Guardian column, and probably also some guff about the ‘left wing economic establishment’, anti growth coalition, tofu eating wokerati’ cobblers etc etc.

There are people on here who actually buy that. Isn’t that inexpressibly crackers?!?!?!

Or more likely a numpty on Twitter, where there are far far more of them…

But I dont agree with him on the 5 divisions of 20. The loss of 8 games a season would surely reduce our income, reduce the livelyhoods of lower league footballers

Quoted from horsforthmariner

But I dont agree with him on the 5 divisions of 20. The loss of 8 games a season would surely reduce our income, reduce the livelyhoods of lower league footballers

Or have more meaningful cup games with no U21 teams, replays in the League and FA Cup throughout the competition. That won’t happen of course, hence I agree with you…

Quoted from Limerick Mariner

Or have more meaningful cup games with no U21 teams, replays in the League and FA Cup throughout the competition. That won’t happen of course, hence I agree with you…

Why not absorb the top level of non- league into the Football League and revert back to 92 FL teams plus The Premiersh*t as a separate level at the apex of the football pyramid? You could then have a consistent level of 3 relegation/promotion places for each league - Champion, Runner Up and a third place via play-offs for the promotions.

He makes some valid points and once again, it is written in a way which makes sense.

Still in shock every time he has one published to be honest…

I think these articles do raise the profile of the club. I get friends from around the country texting me to say things like ‘hey just read this by your owner.’ These comments are always positive and I believed the articles send out a message about how our club is run.

Who knows, it may be that they enhance the reputation of the club in the minds of players and agents which would obviously be a good thing? Certainly can’t do any harm.

Quoted from RonMariner

I think these articles do raise the profile of the club. I get friends from around the country texting me to say things like ‘hey just read this by your owner.’ These comments are always positive and I believed the articles send out a message about how our club is run.

Who knows, it may be that they enhance the reputation of the club in the minds of players and agents which would obviously be a good thing? Certainly can’t do any harm.

This. 100%. Well said, Ron.

It winds up the helmets on Twitter for some reason. Suspect they’d not have a problem with him writing for the Telegraph or Daily Mail.

Just caught up by reading this article. First of all, he's certainly made no friends at the National League! His point on the 5 leagues of 20 is a reference to an old proposal, I would like to know where his view sits. Personally, I would just incorporate the 24 team National League into the pyramid as League 3 to form the 116. 120 would be nicer but the top table aren't going to vote for more domestic games for their tired millionaires are they?

I just think, given the commercialisation of football, reducing the league to 20 would punish fans because I can't see many clubs reducing season tickets. Matchday tickets would also get pushed up to keep matchday income level.

I see the argument for effectively having League 3, but that will never happen.  

That would see the Football League need to find the money to fund an extra league (prize money, youth & community schemes etc.).  The addition of an extra 24 teams isn't going to create any extra income, certainly not from advertising or TV deals.  The money would only be found from watering down what's already given to Championship, League One and League Two sides.  Morally, it might be the right thing to do.  But from a perspective of self-interest, very few clubs will vote to decrease their income levels.  

I think it would also require the National League to vote for it as well.  My limited understanding is that voting on decisions in the NL is for those in the top tier and those in the North and South at Tier 6 level too.  Clubs in North and South aren't going to vote for those above them to leave as it weakens their position when it comes to sponsorship revenue etc.  Vanarama aren't paying what they do for Boston and Bradford Park Avenue, they're paying it for Wrexham, Chesterfield, Notts County type clubs.  I suppose the only incentive for clubs in the North/South is that they would be only one promotion away from a much bigger table to eat at.

Not sure I agree that it's the right approach, but the only fundamental change I can ever see in the pyramid that results in five divisions is a return to a more regionalised approach.  League Two and the NL becoming League 2 North and South.  When there's so much demand on a green agenda, Carlisle travelling to Gillingham looks to go against that (of course, totally ignores the exiled fan).  It also goes against increased promotions because at best you're looking at 2 up from each of the regional levels.  

Quoted from diehardmariner

I see the argument for effectively having League 3, but that will never happen.  

That would see the Football League need to find the money to fund an extra league (prize money, youth & community schemes etc.).  The addition of an extra 24 teams isn't going to create any extra income, certainly not from advertising or TV deals.  The money would only be found from watering down what's already given to Championship, League One and League Two sides.  Morally, it might be the right thing to do.  But from a perspective of self-interest, very few clubs will vote to decrease their income levels.  

I think it would also require the National League to vote for it as well.  My limited understanding is that voting on decisions in the NL is for those in the top tier and those in the North and South at Tier 6 level too.  Clubs in North and South aren't going to vote for those above them to leave as it weakens their position when it comes to sponsorship revenue etc.  Vanarama aren't paying what they do for Boston and Bradford Park Avenue, they're paying it for Wrexham, Chesterfield, Notts County type clubs.  I suppose the only incentive for clubs in the North/South is that they would be only one promotion away from a much bigger table to eat at.

Not sure I agree that it's the right approach, but the only fundamental change I can ever see in the pyramid that results in five divisions is a return to a more regionalised approach.  League Two and the NL becoming League 2 North and South.  When there's so much demand on a green agenda, Carlisle travelling to Gillingham looks to go against that (of course, totally ignores the exiled fan).  It also goes against increased promotions because at best you're looking at 2 up from each of the regional levels.  

I believe the NL voting is weighted so that the NLN/S aren't deemed as important! What the NL can potentially bring to the table commercially is the BT deal, which could be used exclusively for Leagues 2 and 3.

Ah yes, I remember now the weighted voting when it came to shutting down the season during Covid.

The BT deal is worth a pittance isn't it?  Also the money we, as a fourth-tier side, get from the Sky/Football League deal is largely owed to the collective bargaining power of the 72.  Sky aren't interested in us, Accrington, Stevenage etc.  But because there's enough 'lesser' clubs in the 72, the bigger ones haven't been able to negotiate on a Championship only TV deal.  Sky or any other TV company would be more than happy to ditch League Two and probably League One to just have a Championship only deal.  

If Tiers 4 and 5 secured an exclusive TV deal, I would guess it would be peanuts in comparison to the cut we presently get (about £500k I think).