The Footie Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
Why are you lumping the same teams together - surely a club building through merit is what everyone wants to see ?


So it’s just Chelsea and city that have the issue then - when it was happening everyone was universal about them buying everything and wanting rules changed to stop it happening - yet when it’s happens those that complained back then now want to do the same as City and Chelsea ?

Newcastle spent fortunes during the 90’s

Forest weren’t shy when they were spending

They didn’t build on it


So basically you want to see rich owners being able to spend more - how is that fair then if your club doesn’t have a rich owner that’s willing to fund and stand up a club ?

So it’s then down to which club has the richest owner - is that fair ?


You are right - that’s how leagues work ? Why is it ok to work that way in the championship and not ok to work in the Prem ?

Is it because now the clubs that dominated in championship don’t in the Prem


Clubs are encouraged to grow

Spurs owner financed a brand new stadium at £1bn to bring in the growth , we spent 15 years building the club back up

Arsenal spent years building up

Even Man Utd earned their money by buying and selling smart and building off the field

The issue is some fans want that be at that level in an instant , there is believe that just because they have a rich owner they don’t have to be patient and build , they want it now

Arthur, I actually agree with some of what you’re saying. Clubs like Arsenal and Spurs didn’t spend like Chelsea or City — they built smart, invested in infrastructure, and ran sustainably. Fair play to them. But that doesn’t change the reality that all six of those clubs now benefit from rules that protect their status, because they were able to grow and spend at key times before PSR limited how others could follow the same path.

So no — it’s not just about Chelsea and City. The others are protected too, even if they got there differently. United’s commercial empire, Liverpool’s global reach, Spurs’ stadium, Arsenal’s squad value — all of that growth happened before the current caps made that kind of acceleration nearly impossible for everyone else.

And yes, of course I want clubs to be patient and build. But I also think they should be allowed to compete. Not be told to spend 15 years waiting in line behind a financial glass ceiling while others stay out of reach thanks to a head start and a locked-in advantage.

It’s not about instant success — it’s about fair access to the ladder that others already climbed.
 
Rich owners of any business usually spend the bank’s money, acting as guarantors for the loans.

Even Liverpool who, allegedly, only spend what they earn took out a £300m(?) loan for infrastructure spending. It’s how big business runs. All the bank is interested in is collateral to cover the loan if there’s a default and income to service the debt.

Unfortunately, PSR only takes into account what a club earns, not what an owner earns from outside interests.

Stadium and infrastructure expansion is something that doesnt get added into PSR

Clubs like Spurs spent a fortune ( owners money or loan ) to build a massive stadium which has helped them bring in millions

It’s what Everton are looking to do

Newcastle can spend a massive amount to extend or build a new stadium

It’s something that helps any team grow
 
Arthur, I actually agree with some of what you’re saying. Clubs like Arsenal and Spurs didn’t spend like Chelsea or City — they built smart, invested in infrastructure, and ran sustainably. Fair play to them. But that doesn’t change the reality that all six of those clubs now benefit from rules that protect their status, because they were able to grow and spend at key times before PSR limited how others could follow the same path.

So no — it’s not just about Chelsea and City. The others are protected too, even if they got there differently. United’s commercial empire, Liverpool’s global reach, Spurs’ stadium, Arsenal’s squad value — all of that growth happened before the current caps made that kind of acceleration nearly impossible for everyone else.

And yes, of course I want clubs to be patient and build. But I also think they should be allowed to compete. Not be told to spend 15 years waiting in line behind a financial glass ceiling while others stay out of reach thanks to a head start and a locked-in advantage.

It’s not about instant success — it’s about fair access to the ladder that others already climbed.

Even on other posts you are talking about “building quickly”

We aren’t “protected” - we have earned the revenue we gain through years and years of work

When we suffered a lack of success our spending suffered as well , we had to buy and build smart

We had to buy cheap and then sell well

If a club starts to suffer on the pitch then the finances will suffer , players will leave , Man Utd have issues with PSR - they are far from protected

It doesn’t take much for clubs to start slipping down the slide

The access to climb the ladder is there , it’s hard yes but it’s there

Forest were on that ladder at one point , so where other teams , they dropped off it because of poor running of the club
 
Yes, Forest can compete — up to a point. But the reality is, we can’t build quickly, even with ambition and good ownership, because the system now blocks the kind of front-loaded investment that City and Chelsea were allowed. We fell off at the end because we had virtually zero strength in squad depth and our players all looked knackered! As an example, in the FA Cup semi final we had injuries/suspensions at full back. So we had to play our 19-year old Youth Academy centre back ant left back instead, up against Omar Marmoush! Later in the game, he went off injured and so to replace him on came our 3rd/4th choice right winger! Meanwhile, City are bringing on Gubdogan, Doku and Foden!

You’re absolutely right that clubs like United, Liverpool and Arsenal have built global fanbases over decades. But part of the reason they could do that is they were never financially capped while they grew. If today’s PSR rules had existed in the ’90s and 2000s, I doubt even they’d have risen the same way.

City and Chelsea did ‘crash the party’ — and the rules were changed after that to stop it happening again. But the problem is: now only they get to stay at the top table, while others are locked out. That’s what people are frustrated about — not the success, but the fact that no one else is allowed to try anymore.

As you said yourself, even if someone rich buys a club now, it’s unlikely they’ll catch up — because they can’t use the same tools that others did. That’s the whole point. The rules don’t create sustainability — they freeze the hierarchy.
Other clubs can try.

Forest recently had 14 consecutive seasons in The Championship. Got to PL, and 3 seasons in, finished 7th. Could easily have been higher.

Villa were in the Championship in 2019. Last three seasons in PL, they've come 7th, 4th, 6th. Could start a regular run in Champions League

Newcastle had all sort of problems with their owner, and after getting back into the PL were consistently lower half of the table. Yet last 3 years, 4th, 7th, 5th. Could start a regular run in Champions League

Conversely, look at the so called "Top 6" clubs that many seem so jealous of. Spurs have a grand total of zero out of 32 PL titles. Liverpool only have two, and had none until 2019.

At the end of the day, any club that competes in the PL is going to have a very tough time. Especially if that club has just come up from the Championship, or recently come up a few years previous. Because there are a good number of clubs that have had many many years to build a brand, and a couple who were lucky enough to have a short cut to success, but who are now trying to build and maintain their global brand.

And, if all clubs could spend as much money as they wished, not only would I guarantee that you'd pretty much see the same clubs fighting at the very top consistently. But, they'd also being even further ahead of the likes of Forest when they get themselves into PL. If it wasn't for PSR, I'm pretty sure Man Utd would still be able to try and buy themselves out of the mess they got themselves into. This windo, they'd have probably just gone out and also bought a GK and No. 9 by now. Whereas instead, they are trying to get rid of players and negotiate even more cautiously to try and curtail their spending.
 
Stadium and infrastructure expansion is something that doesnt get added into PSR

Clubs like Spurs spent a fortune ( owners money or loan ) to build a massive stadium which has helped them bring in millions

It’s what Everton are looking to do

Newcastle can spend a massive amount to extend or build a new stadium

It’s something that helps any team grow

I get that but the debt still has to be serviced. And if money is taken from income to service that debt, it isn’t being used for transfers.

I’m not criticising any club, or business, that spends money, only highlighting where money comes from, i.e. from bank loans secured by collateral and/or guaranteed by rich owners.
 
I get that but the debt still has to be serviced. And if money is taken from income to service that debt, it isn’t being used for transfers.

I’m not criticising any club, or business, that spends money, only highlighting where money comes from, i.e. from bank loans secured by collateral and/or guaranteed by rich owners.

That’s what we had for a few years , we had to service the two loans to build up the stadium and that money was coming out of the clubs coffers - it was something some fans moaned about - why wasn’t the owners just paying the loan , why was the club having to pay the loan themselves
 
I agree that two of the top 6 got ehre undeserved, and that it is hard to get into there for any team because they can't pump in money.

But, I wonder what could happen long term to a club like Wrexham?
They are pumping in limited surplus of money, but a huge amount of publicity. They not having ManU, Liverpool or Arsenal cloud, but are they the next thing after them? What could this be worth? If a good player has the choice between Wrexham and Norwich, where do they go? Will that turn into Wrexham or Everton next, then Wrexham or Brentford, ...


I like our 50+1 in Germany, it's just 1 club that is wrecking everything instead of 6. And they currently don't get their way every time, see Wirtz going to Liverpool and Stuttgart playing hardball on Woltemade.
 
I agree that two of the top 6 got ehre undeserved, and that it is hard to get into there for any team because they can't pump in money.

But, I wonder what could happen long term to a club like Wrexham?
They are pumping in limited surplus of money, but a huge amount of publicity. They not having ManU, Liverpool or Arsenal cloud, but are they the next thing after them? What could this be worth? If a good player has the choice between Wrexham and Norwich, where do they go? Will that turn into Wrexham or Everton next, then Wrexham or Brentford, ...


I like our 50+1 in Germany, it's just 1 club that is wrecking everything instead of 6. And they currently don't get their way every time, see Wirtz going to Liverpool and Stuttgart playing hardball on Woltemade.

Wrexham have done well and the two guys have financed the club hugely but even they don’t have the finances to battle any prem club and prob a lot of Championship clubs

This season will be a struggle for them

A lot of people look at the ownership model in Germany and think it’s something to look up to - 50+1 looks a good model but Munich have dominated the league because of their revenue partners
 
Sure, Forest were badly run for a long time. I would never and have never attempted to suggest otherwise. It’s exactly why we fell behind. But bad ownership in the past shouldn’t mean you’re permanently locked out of competing in the future.

The issue isn’t about who messed up 20 years ago — it’s that clubs who were allowed to spend huge losses during their rebuild (like Chelsea or City) are now protected by rules that stop anyone else doing the same.

Look at Man United — they’ve been badly run for years now, but their legacy wealth keeps them competitive and commercially dominant. That kind of safety net isn’t available to clubs trying to grow now under PSR. If any club outside the Sky Six was run the way United have been for the last few years, they would be struggling in League Two.

Legacy wealth is now being treated as something that must be preserved — while others are told to just ‘earn it’ with one hand tied behind their back. How’s that fair competition?

The Cartel like to lecture other teams about earning success - right after they locked and bolted the gates behind them.
It’s the PL that have put those rules in not the “ cartel”

Clubs usually have a vote on any rules so there must have been some sort of agreement.

I see what you’re saying and agree up to a point.
 
That’s what we had for a few years , we had to service the two loans to build up the stadium and that money was coming out of the clubs coffers - it was something some fans moaned about - why wasn’t the owners just paying the loan , why was the club having to pay the loan themselves

Owners can turn debt into shares.
 
Owners can turn debt into shares.

They can - ours didn’t , again something else some moaned about

When it comes to infrastructure I think an owner can spend whatever they like and then how they service that debt or money will be key

Some know that a massive stadium adds value for any potential sale , it also helps bring in much needed revenue

There are lots of avenues out there for clubs to increase their revenue - it just takes a bit of time and these days people don’t have paitence
 
With the exceptional anomalies of Chelsea and City spending their owners money for years to get ahead of the game I’m not sure you can accuse the other clubs from the Big Six! As spending their way to a closed shop at the top! PSR was brought into protect football yes it’s flawed and needs tweaking but ultimately it is needed.

Man Utd have had financial and football issues for years now but are benefited by building a global brand as far back as the 90s when Fergie created something special and they were well run commercially by expanding into China etc and creating the brand they still trade on that’s nothing to do with wealthy owners bank rolling them! But even that hasn’t stopped them falling short on PSR and seen their team decline.

Liverpool didn’t win a Premier League until 2019, they spent years selling players and only really kicked off their rebuild after selling Coutinho to Barca for big bucks and they reinvested it well . Since FSG came in they’ve been well run and built year on year, only the last few seasons have they spent more because they’ve earned it and kept within the rules.

Arsenal haven’t won a League title since 2005, spent years selling their top players like Van Persie, Sanchez, Ozil and Fabregas to other teams, whilst themselves having to trade on lesser names and have traded within their budgets. Again this year they’ve spent big because the last few years they’ve built up slowly to ensuring the revenues within PSR work and improving their league positions to bring in more money.

Spurs! Are they really a big 6 team they’re squad is terrible, their results have been awful and they got a decent draw in the Europa League which they can build off.

The main moans are coming from other teams that have rich owners that can’t quit break into the top echelon of the league because as yet they haven’t earned the right, built long enough to get there or want to find a reason to moan that they can’t splash their owners cash for instant success. It will take teams years to catch up but that’s the price of previous poor ownership models and the fact the other teams have just been so consistent for years.

It’s starting to show at lower leagues that a proper PSR model needs putting in place, Wrexham have bought their way to the Championship, Birmingham spent money on players that most League one clubs last year could only hope to generate in actual revenue! Teams that YoYo between top of the Championship and relegation from the EPL don’t moan when they get 3 years of Parachute payments that keep them well above the level and spending power of other teams in the division giving them greater chance of instant return to the top table.

I’m a lowly Reading fan and right now we’re in state due to poor ownership, I don’t want a rich owner to come in throw money at us to fix it for instant gratification, what I’d like to see is someone come in stabilise the club and make us sustainable for the years to come. The ideal model to any lower league fan is the way Brighton is run, if I could have that I’d be more than happy with a gradual return to get near the top table and enjoy my team.
 
Why did I think he was like 24?? 😂 I guess he made it to the big leagues pretty late. Anyway, defensive midfielder is what we needed the most, hopefully he can strike up a good partnership with Sarr.
Decent player and a huge improvement on what you have in midfield at the moment. Will be an interesting season for spurs extra pressure of added CL games on a still pretty thin squad. But Franck will have you more organised that Ange ever could and I think you’ll finished around 8th.
 
Decent player and a huge improvement on what you have in midfield at the moment. Will be an interesting season for spurs extra pressure of added CL games on a still pretty thin squad. But Franck will have you more organised that Ange ever could and I think you’ll finished around 8th.
I'd agree with that assessment. We have quite a large squad actually, but some of the back-ups are maybe of debatable quality, particularly in defence.
 
They can - ours didn’t , again something else some moaned about

When it comes to infrastructure I think an owner can spend whatever they like and then how they service that debt or money will be key

Some know that a massive stadium adds value for any potential sale , it also helps bring in much needed revenue

There are lots of avenues out there for clubs to increase their revenue - it just takes a bit of time and these days people don’t have paitence

Increase the capacity by 20,000 then times that by £50 a ticket then times that by 19 league matches = £19,000,000. Paying off £300m, without interest, at £19m a year will take over 15 years. There’s CL and cup games to add to that but only the extra revenue the extra seats will bring in.

Once you’re on the CL wheel great but fall off it, as Utd has, sees a drop in income of over £3,000,000 a match + a share of CL prize money.
 
I'd agree with that assessment. We have quite a large squad actually, but some of the back-ups are maybe of debatable quality, particularly in defence.
Numbers wise it’s a big squad but back up quality is thin is what I meant. There’s definitely some real potential there and hopefully they give Franck time to settle and build as you’ve got some good youth coming thru as well.
 
Increase the capacity by 20,000 then times that by £50 a ticket then times that by 19 league matches = £19,000,000. Paying off £300m, without interest, at £19m a year will take over 15 years. There’s CL and cup games to add to that but only the extra revenue the extra seats will bring in.

Once you’re on the CL wheel great but fall off it, as Utd has, sees a drop in income of over £3,000,000 a match + a share of CL prize money.

What does bring in the extra match day revenue is corporate unfortunately, extending the stands allowed us and other clubs to increase the level of corporate packages etc
 
Top