There probably aren’t many roundball enthusiasts on here (I only have a passing interest), but I have been following the European Super League kerfuffle pretty closely. It’s been a bit like watching a documentary about greed in sport, but on fast forward.
The TLDR version: A group of extremely wealthy European soccer clubs colluded to attempt to create their own European Super League that existed outside the domestic and UEFA competitions in an attempt to consolidate their power and wealth, and so they could dodge having to actually win their way into the European Champions League (what has been to date the most lucrative league, but required clubs to earn their spot based on their domestic league performance).
There is an excellent piece about it
here.
The writer summarises the issue well:
“The conundrum, in other words, is that European club soccer is being steered by two contradictory imperatives at the same time. There’s an imperative of attention and money, which tells the big clubs to act as though they’re the center of the universe, and there’s an imperative of sentiment, which tells them to act as responsible members of a community. And both those imperatives come from the same source—you and me, and anyone else who loves the current league structure, feel nauseated at the thought of losing promotion and relegation, and yet would rather watch Manchester City–Barcelona inside an active volcano than tune in to Fulham-Burnley in a resort.”
Then it all fell in a heap in the space of 48 hours after fan and political blowback. But it remains an interesting case study nonetheless.
I’ve been thinking a bit about how the AFL balances these tensions. Certainly on the fixturing / TV side the AFL gives priority to the big clubs. Carlton, who have been terrible for the better part of a decade, don’t need to ‘win’ their way onto Friday night games; they are granted them on the basis of their ability to draw an audience. Victorian blockbusters are prioritised because they can draw bigger crowds in Melbourne. And yet, when North and Footscray are given a blockbuster Good Friday Game, which seems fair, it is met (by me) with a bit of a yawn.
The AFL attempts to balance giving commercial benefits to the big clubs (eg, TV and sponsorship exposure, and game day revenue) by keeping ‘equity’ in the league through the draft and spending caps, and ensures the poorer clubs remain financially viable through financial distributions. So while the AFL doesn’t face the tensions to the degree of as European soccer, those tensions still exists. Big clubs, like Collingwood, seem to think there is benefit in keeping the smaller clubs along for the ride, but the system as currently constituted seems to be heading slowly in one direction: big clubs who generate the revenue, and mendicant clubs who make up the numbers in a TV rights deal. It’s hard for the smaller clubs to grow while they are denied primetime slots and fixtures, and they can’t catch up financially. Decades of success or failure could see some shift in the landscape, but it feels like power imbalances are pretty entrenched.
Is it so inconceivable that a group of big clubs might form the view that given they are responsible for the largest share of the TV rights and revenue that they would rather not share it evenly with their small cousins? If in 5 years, say, Amazon reached out to West Coast, Collingwood, Richmond, Carlton, Essendon, Sydney, Adelaide, Brisbane, Geelong and Fremantle to start a new Super League, who says yes and who says no? Wouldn’t an 18 round home and away fixture among the 10 biggest clubs hold appeal to some? Could a version of a 10 team Premier League and a 10 team second division (including Darwin and Tassie) with relegation and promotion also hold some appeal?
The AFL holds a few licences, so that could rule out some clubs like Sydney and Adelaide joining a breakaway league. The WAFC holds the WA licences, so I’m not sure what would happen with them (if both clubs were going to be in Super League, and would derive more income, then might they not be tempted to say yes?).
Would a club like Carlton or Essendon throw teams like North and Footscray under the bus for more money and less competition? Maybe.
Are clubs skewing towards acting like the centre of the universe rather than as responsible members of the community? I’m not sure. Big clubs didn’t like the tax on footy department spending, but also stood with the smaller clubs during COVID.
Is the AFL better at managing the competing interests of clubs better than UEFA? Probably, but it’s definitely an easier gig.
Should the Super League have been the model for starting the AFL (rather than teams joining the VFL)? Maybe. It probably would have been better for the WA teams.
A breakaway AFL league seems a very remote possibility, but it couldn’t be ruled out in my lifetime.
