Posted April 17, 2014 If every club has to cope with the FFP rules then it will all even out. Spurs wouldn't have got £80m for Spurs but all the players they bought would have been respectively cheaper too. it won't even out, clubs will go bust. Player salaries are no longer sustainable. Spurs may have got the same amount of players for half the money but their salaries will still be the same. Player salaries has nothing to do with rich owners, the wages started to spiral because of the Bosman ruling. The Sky money and rich investors have just enabled it to continue. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 17, 2014 You can't damn rising costs in football then say the game needs billionaires who are to blame for it. We're the easy target, but what about Munich or Man Utd? Both seem to have done alright in these dodgy money days. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 17, 2014 You can't damn rising costs in football then say the game needs billionaires who are to blame for it. We're the easy target, but what about Munich or Man Utd? Both seem to have done alright in these dodgy money days. I didn't say the Billionaires were to blame for rising costs. That's twice in a row you have completely misquoted me. I'm not sure why or how Arsenal are a target. Man Utd are hundreds of millions in debt and German football operates completely different to the Premier League. On the flip side of that coin look at all the clubs who have gone into administration over the last few years. Without exception these clubs get into debt because of player salaries which are getting to the point where they are approaching 100% of the clubs income. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 17, 2014 I didn't say the Billionaires were to blame for rising costs. That's twice in a row you have completely misquoted me. I'm not sure why or how Arsenal are a target. Man Utd are hundreds of millions in debt and German football operates completely different to the Premier League. On the flip side of that coin look at all the clubs who have gone into administration over the last few years. Without exception these clubs get into debt because of player salaries which are getting to the point where they are approaching 100% of the clubs income. Apologies I typed the last post out on my phone and missed a comma. It was supposed to read "You can't damn rising costs in football then say the game needs billionaires, who are to blame for it." The last part being my opinion. Arsenal are an easy target to dismiss my point because we've won nothing recently. The clubs that have gone into adminstration are almost always terribly run. They want too much too soon, have the wrong financial structure, lack of commercial deals. If a shop goes bust, is it because the business was run terribly or because the staff were paid too much? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 17, 2014 There's no one thing that is to blame, but rather a combination of different things that has led us to this stage. What concerns me is the amount of new owners, take-overs, consortiums and so forth that seem to be changing every week. It's not just relevant for the top leagues, but rather the lower leagues, too. It's a huge problem. The idea seems to be that if somebody has some money, that automatically qualifies them to run a football club. It most certainly does not. The clubs aren't being run by good business people, let alone good football people. Yes, inflated wages are a part of the problem. Yes, blowing tons of money on transfers is part of the problem. The same with bad owners who don't have a clue how to run the club. A combination of all of these things result in what we see now; clubs going bust or struggling immensely with debt. Whatever procedures are in place that allow people to come in and buy football clubs/take ownership are clearly badly designed, easily abused and/or not fit for purpose. More needs to be done at that level. Transfer caps and wage limits concern me, for a multitude of reasons. There will need to be some sort of consistency across the ENTIRE WORLD because if Billy Bollocks isn't being offered a lot of money to play in one country, it'll just lead to them staying well clear. On the one hand, we (the FA, fans, players, media, managers, chairmen) love promoting the Premier League and England as a football country, claiming it to be the best in the world, the Premier League to be the best league, etc; but on the other hand, we need these foreign, expensive players to make that happen. Unless there are tons of young, English talent that is there to replace it, and I mean world class quality talent. The tipping point has already come and gone, there's no way you'll be able to attract talent such as Cristiano Ronaldo, Eden Hazard, Luis Suarez to the Premier League if they can get better deals elsewhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 17, 2014 Apologies I typed the last post out on my phone and missed a comma. It was supposed to read "You can't damn rising costs in football then say the game needs billionaires, who are to blame for it." The last part being my opinion. Arsenal are an easy target to dismiss my point because we've won nothing recently. The clubs that have gone into adminstration are almost always terribly run. They want too much too soon, have the wrong financial structure, lack of commercial deals. If a shop goes bust, is it because the business was run terribly or because the staff were paid too much? Ah OK, so are you saying it's your opinion that the billionaire investors are to blame for rising costs? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 17, 2014 Ah OK, so are you saying it's your opinion that the billionaire investors are to blame for rising costs? Partly, yeah. There was high wages before, yes, but the average increased when the likes of Abramovich came in and started hoarding players and trying to nick everyone's top players. Although I agree with you, the bosman ruling hasn't helped at all. But at the same time I think it's a fairer ruling than what was before. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 17, 2014 There's no one thing that is to blame, but rather a combination of different things that has led us to this stage. What concerns me is the amount of new owners, take-overs, consortiums and so forth that seem to be changing every week. It's not just relevant for the top leagues, but rather the lower leagues, too. It's a huge problem. The idea seems to be that if somebody has some money, that automatically qualifies them to run a football club. It most certainly does not. The clubs aren't being run by good business people, let alone good football people. Yes, inflated wages are a part of the problem. Yes, blowing tons of money on transfers is part of the problem. The same with bad owners who don't have a clue how to run the club. A combination of all of these things result in what we see now; clubs going bust or struggling immensely with debt. Whatever procedures are in place that allow people to come in and buy football clubs/take ownership are clearly badly designed, easily abused and/or not fit for purpose. More needs to be done at that level. Transfer caps and wage limits concern me, for a multitude of reasons. There will need to be some sort of consistency across the ENTIRE WORLD because if Billy Bollocks isn't being offered a lot of money to play in one country, it'll just lead to them staying well clear. On the one hand, we (the FA, fans, players, media, managers, chairmen) love promoting the Premier League and England as a football country, claiming it to be the best in the world, the Premier League to be the best league, etc; but on the other hand, we need these foreign, expensive players to make that happen. Unless there are tons of young, English talent that is there to replace it, and I mean world class quality talent. The tipping point has already come and gone, there's no way you'll be able to attract talent such as Cristiano Ronaldo, Eden Hazard, Luis Suarez to the Premier League if they can get better deals elsewhere. There absolutely has to be a salary cap for football to be pulled back from the financial abyss. The Bosman ruling was the cause of the inital salary boom. Clubs started to offer Bosman players huge salaries because they didn't have to pay a transfer fee, so rolled the perceived purchase cost into the salary. These players were joining clubs and earning twice as much as all their new team mates. But then your best player complains because he want's the same money and then it spirals out of control. In the space of a few years we went from the very top players earning £40k per week, to squad players earning £90k per week. Now Rooney is supposedly on £300k per week. Now every time Man Utd try to sign a world class player he will be demanding a similar package.The other poison is agents, but that's another argument for another day Partly, yeah. There was high wages before, yes, but the average increased when the likes of Abramovich came in and started hoarding players and trying to nick everyone's top players. Although I agree with you, the bosman ruling hasn't helped at all. But at the same time I think it's a fairer ruling than what was before. The Bosman ruling in principle is sound. The agents and clubs were the problem. Agents chanced their arm and argued for the huge salaries because there was no transfer fee and the clubs stupidly agreed. However, this is where the Bosman ruling is flawed, because now the "selling" club get no money and the players get it all. Jump forward 10 years and you have a giant like Man Utd in massive debt and all the players are multi millionaires before they finish puberty.(before I get corrected, I know the Man Utd debt was part of the buyout and not down to players costs, but I was using this as an example of the state of football finances) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 17, 2014 Back to reality tomorrow. We are against Stevanage. The joys. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 The Man City draw has really made the Liverpool vs Chelsea match a winner takes all scenario, although I still have a sneaky feeling there are more points to be dropped by the top 3 before the end of the season. Curse the FA. Atletico Madrid have their league game postponed this weekend whilst Chelsea just get it moved back to Saturday evening. I can't believe that considering the Champions League is a UEFA competition that there is not a standard set of rules for all European Leagues relating to fixtures before and after Champions/Europa League matches. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 The Man City draw has really made the Liverpool vs Chelsea match a winner takes all scenario, although I still have a sneaky feeling there are more points to be dropped by the top 3 before the end of the season. Curse the FA. Atletico Madrid have their league game postponed this weekend whilst Chelsea just get it moved back to Saturday evening. I can't believe that considering the Champions League is a UEFA competition that there is not a standard set of rules for all European Leagues relating to fixtures before and after Champions/Europa League matches. Atletico didn't have a game postponed, they played last night... Although I do agree that the FA should do more to help the English teams. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 The Man City draw has really made the Liverpool vs Chelsea match a winner takes all scenario, although I still have a sneaky feeling there are more points to be dropped by the top 3 before the end of the season. Curse the FA. Atletico Madrid have their league game postponed this weekend whilst Chelsea just get it moved back to Saturday evening. I can't believe that considering the Champions League is a UEFA competition that there is not a standard set of rules for all European Leagues relating to fixtures before and after Champions/Europa League matches. Why would anybody help Abramybitch, Moaninho, Knacker Terry & co.? Chelsea got a fairly handy Premier League fixture draw. Their only tough fixture is Liverpool. They've only themselves to blame for their slip ups like against Villa and Crystal Palace not to mention scraping past relegation candidates 10 man Swansea 1-0 last week. If any team could complain about tough fixtures it's Norwich. Man City, Chelsea, Liverpool and Man United in their last 4 games. I don't hear Chelsea fans complaining about the handy route they've had in the Champions League or the help they got from the referee last week against Swansea.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 I don't think Chelsea should expect any more. They play today. If they put the game back to Friday like Atletico, then Sunderland would have only had a day inbetween that game and the City game. If they postponed the game then that's another game Sunderland fall behind their relegation rivals putting them under even more pressure. Just because Chelsea (or any other team) are chasing two trophies doesn't mean they have the right to inconvenience other teams. I think fixture congestion is just part of the price of success. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 Just seen this discussion. I couldn't agree less clown. I DO want to stop billionaires from coming in and destroying this game. I blame them 70%. And the FFP is an amazing thing that needs to be stuck to and no annoying loopholes. A wage cap I'd be in favour of it too. As for getting less for players. Don't agree, you know what I think would happen, less players would be poached by the stupidly rich clubs. Spurs wouldn't have gotten half of the money, spurs would have kept him! I think the FFP is absolutely vital in keeping football ceven remotely close to the game we all love. Ps two more assists for eriksen - 4 goals 5 assists in his last 5 games! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 Hope Sunderland can hold on... But I don't think they can Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 The ref will help Chelsea if need be. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 The ref will help Chelsea if need be. I doubt it, they've been helping Liverpool with their pens all season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 Sunderland 2-1 up. Crazy stuff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 Fuck that. I'm not a Chelsea fan, but I don't want Liverpool to run away with it. I want nail-biting final matches dammit! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 Barclays Premier League, ladies & gentlemen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 Crazy. Sunderland are pretty much helping to decide the winner of the league. Let's just hope we can hold our nerves and sort out Norwich tomorrow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 Liverpool v Chelsea could still decide the title, though it seems more likely to be between Liverpool and Manchester City now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 Urgh... I'll keep hoping though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19, 2014 Mourinho's first home league defeat with Chelsea after 78 games, football eh. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
