The Footie Thread

[Orikoru]

Think wrong there . Ortega is leaving ,and Ederson was muted leaving to go to Galatasaray & Saudi league . Trafford will have a slow bed in ( cup games and cover for injuries) then next season all being well will be City’s No 1

Maybe. But we've seen it countless times when the top clubs buy young English players. They never get a game, just sit on the bench meeting homegrown quota, never develop and end up in the Championship at 28. Hope it doesn't happen to him as we need a decent rival for Pickford in the England side.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Maybe. But we've seen it countless times when the top clubs buy young English players. They never get a game, just sit on the bench meeting homegrown quota, never develop and end up in the Championship at 28. Hope it doesn't happen to him as we need a decent rival for Pickford in the England side.

If they are good enough they will play

Only have to look back at the amount of games the back up GK has played at City and he will get games

 

[Orikoru]

If they are good enough they will play

Only have to look back at the amount of games the back up GK has played at City and he will get games

Well the answer to that is not many. Ortega played around 20 in each of the last two seasons, all competitions. Young players need to be playing more than that to develop I think.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Well the answer to that is not many. Ortega played around 20 in each of the last two seasons, all competitions. Young players need to be playing more than that to develop I think.

So that’s just under half the games as back up - proving the point

He is there as backup and will get games to prove himself that he can be the number 1 when Ederson leaves

 

[Swango1980]

If they are good enough they will play

Only have to look back at the amount of games the back up GK has played at City and he will get games

I'd imagine virtually every young player going to the club think that way. There cannot be many that say "I'm not bothered about playing, happy just to sit on the bench and earn a decent salary". And, when clubs buy players, I'm sure they have the hope the player will grow to become a big player for them in the future.

But, it is a gamble. Just because a few young players have gone on to prosper at the big club, many have seemingly had their career stall, and then decline.

If you sign for a club knowing you are going to be a key first team player for them, you know you are going to get your chance. But, arrive as a squad player with many experienced and good players in your position (especially for a goalkeeper), things could go south quickly. As a goalkeeper, you may only get to play the odd league cup game, perhaps some other games. You are very much seen as the back-up / reserve goalkeeper, and that can be a label hard to shift. Especially if the No.1 stays fit, and you never get an extended run.

 

[Orikoru]

So that’s just under half the games as back up - proving the point

He is there as backup and will get games to prove himself that he can be the number 1 when Ederson leaves

Would rather see him playing every week at Burnley obviously. Not playing dribs and drabs and waiting for Ederson to bugger off. Ederson is only 31, he could easily be first choice for another 4 years or more.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Would rather see him playing every week at Burnley obviously. Not playing dribs and drabs and waiting for Ederson to bugger off. Ederson is only 31, he could easily be first choice for another 4 years or more.

Ederson has been reported to be on the verge of leaving over the last 12 months

He could stay and Burnley and spend a season picking balls out of the net

Or he can go back to one of the biggest clubs in Europe learning from some of the best in the league with the view to take over

He could even be the main GK this season as Ederson has had injury issues over the last couple of seasons

 

[Don Barzini]

Everyone is restricted from spending

Some clubs can spend more because they earn more

If you want your club to spend more then the answer is simple - earn more

last summer we spent £10mil , won the title , we have spent over 10 years building the club back up to be able to increase the revenue to then be able to spend

When the likes of Forest were spending more than other late 70’s there was no issues then or when Newcastle were spending loads late 90’s - no issues then

What’s wrong with clubs getting out there and earning the money to spend

Back in the 70s and 90s, things were different and clubs were not restricted in the way they are now. You already know that Arthur.

"Get out there and earn more money" is just a ridiculous sentiment. I think you already know that as well.

Football is now all about which teams are the most commercially successful. A club can't just decide to suddenly become more commercially successful and generate billions more revenue without sustained success on the pitch. And they can't have sustained success on the pitch because they can't afford to attract and keep their best players.

Dress it up any way you like. It suits fans of certain clubs to believe it's all a level playing field and they are successful because they are just "better" than everyone else. But unless there is some severe delusion going on, I don't see how anyone can truly believe the PSR regs are anything but anti-competitive.

"We don't want too many Leicester City's" after all......

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Back in the 70s and 90s, things were different and clubs were not restricted in the way they are now. You already know that Arthur.

"Get out there and earn more money" is just a ridiculous sentiment. I think you already know that as well.

Football is now all about which teams are the most commercially successful. A club can't just decide to suddenly become more commercially successful and generate billions more revenue without sustained success on the pitch. And they can't have sustained success on the pitch because they can't afford to attract and keep their best players.

Dress it up any way you like. It suits fans of certain clubs to believe it's all a level playing field and they are successful because they are just "better" than everyone else. But unless there is some severe delusion going on, I don't see how anyone can truly believe the PSR regs are anything but anti-competitive.

"We don't want too many Leicester City's" after all......

Back in the days the clubs spent what they earned - they sold players well and bought players well

Forest had no issues breaking the 1mil barrier to help them bring in players

Do people really want a situation where it’s just about which owner has the deepest pockets - open the doors to state ownerships further where dropping 4 billion is no issues to them

Is that what people want to see - there will always be someone richer

What it seems to be is that some want or expect the instant success - spend millions , expect trophies

We spent years lagging behind other clubs commercial and had to go out there and earn the revenue

What’s a fairer system ? If not to ensure that clubs don’t lose millions bringing in players and it being unsustainable

People constantly cry about FFP or PSR not being fair ? Well what is ?

Back to the days of no more buying more than 3 foreign players and you must develop your own ?

In every sport unless in the US there is a always a pyramid where some clubs will always be at the top

I would take a Leicester winning every day over a Chelsea or City winning bankrolled by oil or hedge fund money

If a club wants success on the pitch then build up off the pitch - it may take time and that’s the issue some don’t have the paitence

What is a fairer system ? Being able to spend whatever an owner can afford is only fair to those with very rich owners who are willing to spend that much money -

 

[Hogieefc]

Everyone is restricted from spending

Some clubs can spend more because they earn more

If you want your club to spend more then the answer is simple - earn more

last summer we spent £10mil , won the title , we have spent over 10 years building the club back up to be able to increase the revenue to then be able to spend

When the likes of Forest were spending more than other late 70’s there was no issues then or when Newcastle were spending loads late 90’s - no issues then

What’s wrong with clubs getting out there and earning the money to spend

I'm sure most teams are trying to increase revenue but the so called big six apart from Chelsea are able to attract crowds in excess of 50000 and have shirt sales around the world, how many people in America are likely to buy a Bournemouth or Brentford shirt, the only way to increase revenue is to be successful and to do that you have to win things which is difficult when the top teams have a monopoly.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

I'm sure most teams are trying to increase revenue but the so called big six apart from Chelsea are able to attract crowds in excess of 50000 and have shirt sales around the world, how many people in America are likely to buy a Bournemouth or Brentford shirt, the only way to increase revenue is to be successful and to do that you have to win things which is difficult when the top teams have a monopoly.

Unfortunately that’s the way the sport is now and has been for over 30 years and even more than that

Success for teams is at different levels

Are the likes of Brentford etc expecting to be able to challenge to win the title

We could go down the path of US sport

Drafts , salary caps etc - best players going to the worst teams - trying to find a way to have every team the same level

 

[Pin-seeker]

Unfortunately that’s the way the sport is now and has been for over 30 years and even more than that

Success for teams is at different levels

Are the likes of Brentford etc expecting to be able to challenge to win the title

We could go down the path of US sport

Drafts , salary caps etc - best players going to the worst teams - trying to find a way to have every team the same level

Look at it from a sports point of view rather than business,because end of the day we’re sports fans.
How is it fair that some can spend more than others??

You like to keep telling us that Liverpool only spend what they earn,I’m not sure anyone else really cares about that.

 

[Tashyboy]

Trafford's promising career in the bin then. On his way to becoming the next Scott Carson. Oh well.

Not one of your best posts
Ederson has one year left on his contract and is getting on. City get the best young keeper in the country for peanuts for the next 5 years minimum who learned his trade at City.

 

[Hogieefc]

Unfortunately that’s the way the sport is now and has been for over 30 years and even more than that

Success for teams is at different levels

Are the likes of Brentford etc expecting to be able to challenge to win the title

We could go down the path of US sport

Drafts , salary caps etc - best players going to the worst teams - trying to find a way to have every team the same level

Drafts and salary caps now that would maybe show who really are the best managers!!!

 

[venger]

If they are good enough they will play

Only have to look back at the amount of games the back up GK has played at City and he will get games

Why did Cole Palmer leave then?

 

[irip]

The way things work now financially definitely does not work, clubs having to use creative accounting or sell young players they would rather keep is not what we as fans want to see.

I like the idea of each team having a set budget (agreed by the league/UEFA) for both transfers and wages.

If you sell a player that fee and wages saved can be spent elsewhere on the squad.

I don’t believe it’s fair that if a club wants to improve its stadium or training facilities that this should come out of the transfer budget.

Any clubs that earn more than they are allowed to spend can use this money to enhance the club/fans facilities

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Drafts and salary caps now that would maybe show who really are the best managers!!!

It would be interesting but is that what would we want to see

Isak for example going to Sunderland etc

But we also have things like relegation etc - that’s not something that happens in the US

The only way I can think of that’s fair

Every one can spend to the same amount as the club that earns the most - any gap between what the club earns and that is filled by an owner and the debt is on them

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Why did Cole Palmer leave then?

Because he had Foden in front of him and City were given £50mil for a player who played about 10 games

 

[Arthur Wedge]

The way things work now financially definitely does not work, clubs having to use creative accounting or sell young players they would rather keep is not what we as fans want to see.

I like the idea of each team having a set budget (agreed by the league/UEFA) for both transfers and wages.

If you sell a player that fee and wages saved can be spent elsewhere on the squad.

I don’t believe it’s fair that if a club wants to improve its stadium or training facilities that this should come out of the transfer budget.

Any clubs that earn more than they are allowed to spend can use this money to enhance the club/fans facilities

Stadium and club enhancements or spending etc doesn’t get affected by PSR

A club can spend whatever they like - it’s why Spurs could spend £1bn on theirs

 

[irip]

Stadium and club enhancements or spending etc doesn’t get affected by PSR

A club can spend whatever they like - it’s why Spurs could spend £1bn on theirs

I was talking about if there was a maximum budget brought in for transfers then what you spent on other things like stadiums back room staff canteen staff should not count towards it.

That a transfer budget for each club would only be for transfers and not affected by other spending a club made.