Thursday 21 January 2010

At what cost?

The newspapers are full of stories about Manchester United, Liverpool, Portsmouth and other struggling financially, with the real possibility of a top tier club dissapearing from the landscape.

The biggest reason for this - overspending on wages, and transfer fees, not just the immediately reported costs, but clauses that take effect over time, and are largely unseen.

While this goes on, other sports are getting stronger at the club level, with salary caps in place. This guarantees that teams live within their means, and players are not treated like a £5 toaster from the supermarket (one glitch and replaced) - is this a sign of the times?

Competition around Europe for the best players is the widely discussed reason for this, and if a wider body does not do the sensible thing, then why should one nation take the lead to put themselves at a disadvantage?

This leads to the age old club vs country debate, with dyed in the wool fans choosing the club option. But the success (or supposed) of the English leagues within European competition fuels the need to buy players from abroad who are proved, and expensive, rather than risk a failure with an academy product.

But is European success that important, or will a hard decision in the short term, reap long term success?

Most leagues function under a hard cap (if any), with a maximum limit, and often minimum spend on wages, which punishes smaller market teams, who have to stretch themselves to reach the minimum.

Could a flexible cap work?

Instead of a fixed numerical value, a percentage of income makes more sense
This would have to be considered, in whether it uses only gate reciepts, or all income (with TV income being so variable [especially between divisions] this percentage may have to be levied from the previous seasons levels.

Say a 60% cap, giving smaller teams the incentive to try younger players, or innovative tactical ideas, and larger teams the incentive to prioritise key positions to spend money on, and blood youngsters at others. With this idea I would group Wages and Transfer fees together to make up that maximum of 60%, so teams also have to balance a big signing, against their wage demands.

This would allow teams to stay within budget, and strengthen the national side with more qualified playing in the top leagues.

Creativity in expanding revenue would be rewarded as teams would then be able to spend more on their players. The quality of stadiums would be improved to maximise gate takings, giving teams more to spend. Each team would build for the future, and develop longer term aims than just the win/loss column.

Short term loss within inter-league play would surely follow, but is an attempt at the European Cup more important that the survival of a club - surely most people would say no.

Once one league takes the league, then others will see the benefits, and follow - sports are all copycats, and it just needs the precedent to be set. But will anyone have the courage to plan for the future?

Wednesday 13 January 2010

Culinary Confusion

Frozen food always says do not refreeze

Yet we always refrigerate

Freeze, then refreeze

do we then rerefrigerate?

and what is frigeration??

A rose by any other name....is a tulip?

Grand Slam

Baseball, Tennis, Rugby Union all use the term but for different meanings - slightly confusing if you get crossed wires, but they each exist in fairly separate circles.

Football

In Britain, it is Association Rules, in the USA it is American Rules, in Australia it is Australian Rules, many Rugby players use the word to describe their profession - in the globalised world this can at best cause confusion, at worst cause arguments or further deepen stereotypes

Is this just a derivative of popularity focusing the language, or stubbornness from the Brits?

There seems to be a lack of desire to cede the name Football and merge with the more common moniker Soccer

The reasons for the use of Football in a name range (from usage of the foot, having roots in other forms of football, or the size of the ball) but it seems in the UK every other form of Football either drops the word from its name or clarifies the difference. But no sport is called just Football, so surely all of them use this level of clarification

Association Rules Football(Soccer - coming from the aSOCc)
American Football
Australian Rules Football
Gaelic Football
Rugby League Football
Rugby Union Football

Granted, using the terms, American, Australian, and Gaelic, would cause more confusion, but surely the addition of Rules of Football allows for clarity - this would work for Association Rules/Association Football, but not the shortened Soccer (but this is already an internationally used abbreviation - which would probably develop over time for the other sports)

Surely it is time that Brits realised that they are outmoded in their usage of the word football...

Recycled Lightbulbs

3 Channels, 3 things to watch

100's of channels, at most maybe 10 things to watch

There are seemingly no truly new ideas in TV, just a mish mash of others, blending a well known formula with a smaller market idea to seem new.

This is coming from the premiere of Glee on British TV - all the reviews claim it is High School Musical just with a choir over the drama club, and american rules (football) over basketball.


Friday Night Lights, a staple book for fans of american rules, giving insight into small town, high pressure football, first became a film, detailing mainly the football side of the book. Later a TV series arrived (now up to series 4), which took some artistic liberties, by using the whole concept of the small town, but changing names, places, and some happenings.

The big draw of FNL [TV] is that it can engage non-american rules fans, as the gridiron action is not the focal point. The relationships that make the characters are deepened, exploring some of the issues that may affect viewers, looking at the pressures of being the star player, the no-name back ups, the balancing act of a job you love, and the risks it brings.


Sounds fairly like what seems to be occurring in Glee (this may be completely wrong as I am only 2 episodes in) but look at the following parallels - that only scratch the surface

Coach Taylor can't have a baby, faced with the fear of losing job
Mr Schuester is coping with the idea of having a baby, and having to leave his job to support family

Star Quarterback gets injured, and tries to find a place to fit that isn't the field
Star Quarterback tries to find a place to be himself, which isn't as the QB


Is this the future?
Merge two different ideas, to try and get a winner, that seems original due to pulling from at least one small name concept