The on topic thread 3.0

[RPCB]

Ask me tomorrow and I will have already forgotten how many goals they scored that season.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

 

[Bojan KantKick]

 

[Art Vandelay_]

These blank chequebook clubs are good for the game. Made up 3/4 of this season's CL semi's.. and Real.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

The sooner we phase out petrol run vehicles the better for football..hmmph!

 

[DBAH0]

 

[Zidane98]

Ligue 1's delay in new Financial Fair Play rules pivotal in PSG attempts to sign Lionel Messi - Get French Football News

According to L’Équipe, the delay in a new Financial Fair Play stipulation has been key in PSG's pursuit of Lionel Messi, allowing the Paris club to pay the

www.getfootballnewsfrance.com

They were bringing in a 70% wage rule in Ligue 1 which PSG have no chance of meeting before Messi.

Now delayed until 2023/24 conveniently. Word in France is PSG are greasing the palms of DNCG.

 

[Latro]

 

[moomba]

 

[Zidane98]

Thats already happening in La Liga.

There also should be a transfer spending cap with more allowance to up & coming teams.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Thats already happening in La Liga.

There also should be a transfer spending cap with more allowance to up & coming teams.

And get rid of agent fees, make them a fixed portion of the transfer or get rid of them all together. They are already paid commission from contracts. Genuinely surprised Raiola isn't making his own rocket ship to space.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

A decade of FFP and they just decided to copy the NBA. Sounds about right.

 

[chef]

And get rid of agent fees, make them a fixed portion of the transfer or get rid of them all together. They are already paid commission from contracts. Genuinely surprised Raiola isn't making his own rocket ship to space.

Fifa to introduce new agent regulations and limit commission

New regulations to be introduced next year mean the amount of money agents earn from transfer deals will be made public.

www.bbc.com

 

[Bradesmaen]

Fifa to introduce new agent regulations and limit commission

New regulations to be introduced next year mean the amount of money agents earn from transfer deals will be made public.

www.bbc.com

I'm sure that will get delayed.. covid something something.

 

[moomba]

Thats already happening in La Liga.

There also should be a transfer spending cap with more allowance to up & coming teams.

The problem as I see it is that a transfer spending cap would be tied to revenue and all that would do is stop up and coming teams matching the spending of the already rich.

 

[Zidane98]

The problem as I see it is that a transfer spending cap would be tied to revenue and all that would do is stop up and coming teams matching the spending of the already rich.

Its not a problem. You give allowances for developing clubs and ones that balance the books. 50m net spend per season is achievable with 60-70% wage caps would see inflation curbed.

Excessuve tansfer spending also isnt the only way to achieve success. It is the quickest way but not the most sustainable.


Arsenal 2001-2004 are a good example this.

 

[Zidane98]

And get rid of agent fees, make them a fixed portion of the transfer or get rid of them all together. They are already paid commission from contracts. Genuinely surprised Raiola isn't making his own rocket ship to space.

Good idea in theory. I bet the likes of Raiola will simply solicit off the book payments to push transfers through.

But yeah agent fees should be fixed at 3% of transfer fees and ongoing commissions on wages of 0.5%

 

[moomba]

Its not a problem. You give allowances for developing clubs and ones that balance the books. 50m net spend per season is achievable with 60-70% wage caps would see inflation curbed.

The problem being the clubs at the top have 5/6/7/8 times the revenue of the clubs at the bottom. One of the reasons for that is they can access champions league money. So you're basically bringing in a rule that says that a club at the bottom should pretty much know their place and not try to compete with the clubs ahead of them.

If they bought in a cap that says all sides can spend the same on transfers and wages I reckon it would be brilliant. But I suspect a lot of those calling for fair play might not like that too much.

Excessuve tansfer spending also isnt the only way to achieve success. It is the quickest way but not the most sustainable.

Define excessive. We'll probably end up spending over £200m this window, but we'll probably earn £150m more than clubs at the lower end of the table in broadcasting income alone. We're also in a position where we can sell £60m worth of players without losing a first team player (other than Aguero). And by spending that we'll give ourself a much better chance of doing well in the champions league (and earning more champions league money), doing well in the league (earning more prizemoney and qualifying for next seasons champions league) and being a side that sponsors are looking to get involved with.

Arsenal 2001-2004 are a good example this.

Arsenal is a good example of a side that stopped spending, and that has cost it money long term.

 

[Zidane98]

The problem being the clubs at the top have 5/6/7/8 times the revenue of the clubs at the bottom. One of the reasons for that is they can access champions league money. So you're basically bringing in a rule that says that a club at the bottom should pretty much know their place and not try to compete with the clubs ahead of them.

If they bought in a cap that says all sides can spend the same on transfers and wages I reckon it would be brilliant. But I suspect a lot of those calling for fair play might not like that too much.



Define excessive. We'll probably end up spending over £200m this window, but we'll probably earn £150m more than clubs at the lower end of the table in broadcasting income alone. We're also in a position where we can sell £60m worth of players without losing a first team player (other than Aguero). And by spending that we'll give ourself a much better chance of doing well in the champions league (and earning more champions league money), doing well in the league (earning more prizemoney and qualifying for next seasons champions league) and being a side that sponsors are looking to get involved with.




Arsenal is a good example of a side that stopped spending, and that has cost it money long term.

Leeds a great example of what happens when you spend money you dont have in pursuit of champions league qualification without a benefactor propping up their losses.

As I mentioned previously Arsenal 2001-2004 prove you dont have to spend big to win. Same for Leicester 2016 and Liverpool 2020.

Im suggesting developing clubs get more allowance / leeway on a potential transfer cap than established clubs do in any case to bridge the gap.

IMO transfer & wage caps are the way of the future in UEFA competitions.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Leeds a great example of what happens when you spend money you dont have in pursuit of champions league qualification without a benefactor propping up their losses.

As I mentioned previously Arsenal 2001-2004 prove you dont have to spend big to win. Same for Leicester 2016 and Liverpool 2020.

Im suggesting developing clubs get more allowance / leeway on a potential transfer cap than established clubs do in any case to bridge the gap.

IMO transfer & wage caps are the way of the future in UEFA competitions.

PMSL

 

[moomba]

Leeds a great example of what happens when you spend money you dont have in pursuit of champions league qualification without a benefactor propping up their losses.

As I mentioned previously Arsenal 2001-2004 prove you dont have to spend big to win. Same for Leicester 2016 and Liverpool 2020.

Im suggesting developing clubs get more allowance / leeway on a potential transfer cap than established clubs do in any case to bridge the gap.

IMO transfer & wage caps are the way of the future in UEFA competitions.

Leeds are a great example of spending money they didn't have regardless of whether they qualified for champions league or not.

Don't confuse financial mismanagement with investing in your club.

 

[Zidane98]

Leeds are a great example of spending money they didn't have regardless of whether they qualified for champions league or not.

Don't confuse financial mismanagement with investing in your club.

If only there was a system that forced them to spend within their means back in the early noughties.

 

[moomba]

If only there was a system that forced them to spend within their means back in the early noughties.

Anything that stops clubs getting in the situation Leeds got themselves into would be good.

But Leeds are a good example of why profit and loss isn't really a good way of controlling spending. Profit of £3.7m in 1999, profit of £1.4m in 2000, loss of £3.6m in 2001, loss of £34.5m in 2002. I started posting here in 2001 I think, and one of the first things I did on here was post about how Leeds were in the shit financially. That would have been based on their 99 or 2000 accounts.

If FFP was around then they would have passed right up to the 2005 assessment period. They were already gone by that point.

 

[Zidane98]

Anything that stops clubs getting in the situation Leeds got themselves into would be good.

But Leeds are a good example of why profit and loss isn't really a good way of controlling spending. Profit of £3.7m in 1999, profit of £1.4m in 2000, loss of £3.6m in 2001, loss of £34.5m in 2002. I started posting here in 2001 I think, and one of the first things I did on here was post about how Leeds were in the sh*t financially. That would have been based on their 99 or 2000 accounts.

If FFP was around then they would have passed right up to the 2005 assessment period. They were already gone by that point.

If FFP was around back then the allowable losses would have been in proportion to the amount of money back in the game and alot smaller than they are today. They would have failed in 02 easily and with the threat of penalties it is unlikely they would have gambled so heavily on CL qualification which they needed to balance the books.

 

[moomba]

If FFP was around back then the allowable losses would have been in proportion to the amount of money back in the game and alot smaller than they are today. They would have failed in 02 easily and with the threat of penalties it is unlikely they would have gambled so heavily on CL qualification which they needed to balance the books.

The 2002 results wouldn't have been released until 2003, and wouldn't have been assess for FFP until 2005. I don't think they ever intended for the club to go bankrupt, so I doubt the threat of penalties would have been a bigger deterrent than the threat of the club folding.

But if you look at their finances, they were doing things like selling the ground and leasing back, buying players on tick etc. Good for the balance sheet right now, but putting the club at risk long term.