The Footie Thread

[Arthur Wedge]

When there were no spending rules.

I know it’s difficult to see rivals overtake or buy players by offering them more money, but imo, they have took the fairy tales out of Football.

Yes, I get all the arguments about Clubs going bust or owners walking away etc, but that’s always been the case.

Was it really a level playing field before spending rules ? Or was it who had the richest owner ?

 

[Swango1980]

ok who set off the Ten Haag alarm

Bdill93

 

[PaulMdj]

Was it really a level playing field before spending rules ? Or was it who had the richest owner ?

Bit of both, but a fan could dream of a Mr Big coming in and getting your team promoted to higher leagues or competeing in Europe in just a few seasons, now it can’t happen.

Look at Newcastle, new owner, Club boost, crest of a wave, and now being hampered, standing still or even going backwards because of the rules, they haven’t been allowed to build on the momentum, forced to sell home grown players to balance the books, it’s not about the football being played, it’s about financial columns.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Bit of both, but a fan could dream of a Mr Big coming in and getting your team promoted to higher leagues or competeing in Europe in just a few seasons, now it can’t happen.

Look at Newcastle, new owner, Club boost, crest of a wave, and now being hampered, standing still or even going backwards because of the rules, they haven’t been allowed to build on the momentum, forced to sell home grown players to balance the books, it’s not about the football being played, it’s about financial columns.

But that’s not a level playing field - that’s a club having more money than anyone else

If you remove the rules then someone with billions of disposable income just goes out and hoovers up the talent

What the clubs that don’t have disposable billions to spend ?

What are they supposed to do

 

[Lord Tyrion]

ok who set off the Ten Haag alarm

I tried my best, I really did

 

[Arthur Wedge]

I tried my best, I really did

It’s all your fault

 

[PaulMdj]

But that’s not a level playing field - that’s a club having more money than anyone else

If you remove the rules then someone with billions of disposable income just goes out and hoovers up the talent

What the clubs that don’t have disposable billions to spend ?

What are they supposed to do

But that’s what happens now! The big Clubs are hoovering up the talent of the mid table teams because they have the spending power.

Lpool only worry about City, Arsenal, maybe Utd and a few others when looking at players.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

When there were no spending rules.

I know it’s difficult to see rivals overtake or buy players by offering them more money, but imo, they have took the fairy tales out of Football.

Yes, I get all the arguments about Clubs going bust or owners walking away etc, but that’s always been the case.

Even at lower levels - Bury etc

 

[Arthur Wedge]

But that’s what happens now! The big Clubs are hoovering up the talent of the mid table teams because they have the spending power.

Lpool only worry about City, Arsenal, maybe Utd and a few others when looking at players.

Right now though a club can only use the money it generates itself which means at times selling players and then it’s within limits

Every club has the ability to build itself up which may take time

But there is no such thing as a level playing field and hasn’t been for 34 years since the Prem arrived

The only way you can have a level playing field is ensure every club can spend the same amount every year

 

[HomerJSimpson]

The only way you can have a level playing field is ensure every club can spend the same amount every year

UEFA wide spending cap so it is a level playing field especially across all the big leagues but never going to happen so we'll keep going around in this merry dance

 

[PaulMdj]

Right now though a club can only use the money it generates itself which means at times selling players and then it’s within limits

Every club has the ability to build itself up which may take time

But there is no such thing as a level playing field and hasn’t been for 34 years since the Prem arrived

The only way you can have a level playing field is ensure every club can spend the same amount every year

That’s the theory, yes, but please explain how that is fair to Clubs who have the spending power, but not the infrastructure?

Your saying it may take time? How long?

There were no spending rules when the Prem was formed, your fall back is Chelsea and Abramovic, but why shouldn’t that happen?

If it’s about money and the best players being hoovered up, why aren’t half the Lpool team playing for City now?

 

[Arthur Wedge]

That’s the theory, yes, but please explain how that is fair to Clubs who have the spending power, but not the infrastructure?

Your saying it may take time? How long?

There were no spending rules when the Prem was formed, your fall back is Chelsea and Abramovic, but why shouldn’t that happen?

If it’s about money and the best players being hoovered up, why aren’t half the Lpool team playing for City now?

Do you mean they have spending power because they have an owner with disposable billions ?

Why can’t they use that disposable level of money to build the infrastructure?

And it will take as long as it will with good decisions made by the management

There was no need to spending rules before Chelsea because clubs spent the money they earned - the better a club was at earning money the more they spent

If they spent that money well they got more success

 

[Bdill93]

Dalot? Has he helped develop Mainoo and Garnacho, and how would they have developed under other coaches? Has Martinez developed since working with him at Ajax? Still has been one of my favourite players over last 2 years, just disappointing he was out injured so much last season. Amad has looked pretty sharp and looks to have improved.

I think it would be a lot easier for him to develop players if he is able to pick a pretty consistent side week in, week out, as the players become familiar with the players around them. There were a lot of players that came away with a lot of credit in his first season. I think we'll get a chance to see what he can do over the next few months with the current players, and it should be a fairly different team to what he had in his 1st season. Of course, if it is a disaster by Xmas, then it'll probably be time to see if there is a great manager out there that everyone, including non Man Utd fans, are going to laud as a great manager and capable of bring Utd to the top again (I'll not hold my breath ).

I tell you what, they're all world class aren't they...

And players that have regressed? Sancho, Rashford, Maguire, Onana, Antony - the list goes on.

Not a top coach - sorry

Bdill93

Its my favorite thing to do...

 

[GB72]

It is pretty clear that your view depends on the depth of your club's pockets. City, United, Chelsea fans, and probably Newcastle as well now, would happily blow the rules out of the water and spend all they can. They have the funds to do it.

The next tier down financially, looking at Liverpool, Arsenal etc are happy with the FFP position. It stops those teams about them spending so much that they cannot keep up but also allows them the spend enough to stay ahead of the chasing pack. FFP is pretty much perfect for them. If the rules meant that they could only spend as much as most of the clubs below them, I would suspect there would be greater concerns.

The clubs below that suffer as well, they cannot spend enough to move up the league, the get penalised because they have to juggle the books and sell players just to stay on the right side of FFP and the clubs above love it because the lower clubs become an incubator for new players that the bigger clubs can sweep up ready to go as the lower clubs need to sell to stay withing acceptable losses.

So, you could argue that the major beneficiaries of FFP are that second tier financially of clubs. FFP stops the clubs above getting away from them, it stops the clubs below catching them up and it provides them a ready source of talent developed in lesser clubs as they have to sell to stay within FFP. Everyone else is either held back or kept down.

 

[Bdill93]

It is pretty clear that your view depends on the depth of your club's pockets. City, United, Chelsea fans, and probably Newcastle as well now, would happily blow the rules out of the water and spend all they can. They have the funds to do it.

The next tier down financially, looking at Liverpool, Arsenal etc are happy with the FFP position. It stops those teams about them spending so much that they cannot keep up but also allows them the spend enough to stay ahead of the chasing pack. FFP is pretty much perfect for them. If the rules meant that they could only spend as much as most of the clubs below them, I would suspect there would be greater concerns.

The clubs below that suffer as well, they cannot spend enough to move up the league, the get penalised because they have to juggle the books and sell players just to stay on the right side of FFP and the clubs above love it because the lower clubs become an incubator for new players that the bigger clubs can sweep up ready to go as the lower clubs need to sell to stay withing acceptable losses.

So, you could argue that the major beneficiaries of FFP are that second tier financially of clubs. FFP stops the clubs above getting away from them, it stops the clubs below catching them up and it provides them a ready source of talent developed in lesser clubs as they have to sell to stay within FFP. Everyone else is either held back or kept down.

Yeah - it benefits the old "big 6" and no one else.

 

[nickjdavis]

If it’s about money and the best players being hoovered up, why aren’t half the Lpool team playing for City now?

maybe City think that they've got the best players already...those that fit their structure and the style they want to play.

Must be something in that thought process given City's continual winning of the title.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

It is pretty clear that your view depends on the depth of your club's pockets. City, United, Chelsea fans, and probably Newcastle as well now, would happily blow the rules out of the water and spend all they can. They have the funds to do it.

The next tier down financially, looking at Liverpool, Arsenal etc are happy with the FFP position. It stops those teams about them spending so much that they cannot keep up but also allows them the spend enough to stay ahead of the chasing pack. FFP is pretty much perfect for them. If the rules meant that they could only spend as much as most of the clubs below them, I would suspect there would be greater concerns.

The clubs below that suffer as well, they cannot spend enough to move up the league, the get penalised because they have to juggle the books and sell players just to stay on the right side of FFP and the clubs above love it because the lower clubs become an incubator for new players that the bigger clubs can sweep up ready to go as the lower clubs need to sell to stay withing acceptable losses.

So, you could argue that the major beneficiaries of FFP are that second tier financially of clubs. FFP stops the clubs above getting away from them, it stops the clubs below catching them up and it provides them a ready source of talent developed in lesser clubs as they have to sell to stay within FFP. Everyone else is either held back or kept down.

Leicester proved that through good scouting and recruitment along with good management that a club could gain success - its sustaining after

But look through history and the sport always has dominant clubs

But most have done that through building up

Teams that break into the top 6 need to build on

But unfortunately there are always clubs that stand above everyone else and they attract the best players

That’s valid very every team sport unless in the US

 

[HomerJSimpson]

It is pretty clear that your view depends on the depth of your club's pockets. City, United, Chelsea fans, and probably Newcastle as well now, would happily blow the rules out of the water and spend all they can. They have the funds to do it.

The next tier down financially, looking at Liverpool, Arsenal etc are happy with the FFP position. It stops those teams about them spending so much that they cannot keep up but also allows them the spend enough to stay ahead of the chasing pack. FFP is pretty much perfect for them. If the rules meant that they could only spend as much as most of the clubs below them, I would suspect there would be greater concerns.

The clubs below that suffer as well, they cannot spend enough to move up the league, the get penalised because they have to juggle the books and sell players just to stay on the right side of FFP and the clubs above love it because the lower clubs become an incubator for new players that the bigger clubs can sweep up ready to go as the lower clubs need to sell to stay withing acceptable losses.

So, you could argue that the major beneficiaries of FFP are that second tier financially of clubs. FFP stops the clubs above getting away from them, it stops the clubs below catching them up and it provides them a ready source of talent developed in lesser clubs as they have to sell to stay within FFP. Everyone else is either held back or kept down.

The issue is AW is using Chelsea as the yardstick under Abramovic when in theory sides like Blackburn had already bought a title in effect just not under the PL banner so this isn't a new thing. I agree with your analogy and Fulham have definitely been a club that brings players through and sells them on although not alone

 

[PaulMdj]

Do you mean they have spending power because they have an owner with disposable billions ?

Why can’t they use that disposable level of money to build the infrastructure?

And it will take as long as it will with good decisions made by the management

There was no need to spending rules before Chelsea because clubs spent the money they earned - the better a club was at earning money the more they spent

If they spent that money well they got more success

Again, You’re expecting Clubs/Investors/Fans to spend years in the doldrums building up the infrastructure while hoping other Clubs standstill!

The only teams threatened by Newcastle are City and Yous, no one else has an issue.

The bit in bold mate, you’re dreaming, very few Clubs operated that way, most Clubs ran on debt against assests.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Again, You’re expecting Clubs/Investors/Fans to spend years in the doldrums building up the infrastructure while hoping other Clubs standstill!

The only teams threatened by Newcastle are City and Yous, no one else has an issue.

The bit in bold mate, you’re dreaming, very few Clubs operated that way, most Clubs ran on debt against assests.

It is impossible to build up the infrastructure in this way. Success builds success and revenue so a period out of the top 6 and no European football is a disaster for any of the major clubs