Jump to content

EFL Statement


Recommended Posts

Just now, bigdan2003 said:

 

Only because my thinking is that if it's left to clubs to do they'll get bullied by agents and players. 

 

 

 

I understand what you are saying and i agree to some extent.

 

The only thing is where do you stop with their involvement then? Transfers, Contract renewals etc

 

I wouldn't trust most clubs to run a raffle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parachute payments are effectively premier league prize money that a club is due the season they are relegated in.

 

The money is not given in full, like it would if you finished out the bottom 3, but instead the amount is then paid over 4 seasons in differing amounts.

 

So I struggle to see the reasoning behind why it shouldn't be allowed, the club in question have earnt it after all.

 

The real issue at hand is the amount of money generated by the EFL and the massive disparity between the EFL and that generated by the premier league.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Burnsie said:

They probably do want it to happen anyway!....

 

I'd agree they probably do . It would give  the rest of English football the chance to hit the reset button and take the game back to what it used to be about, football and the supporters .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, S36 OWL said:

 

I'd agree they probably do . It would give  the rest of English football the chance to hit the reset button and take the game back to what it used to be about, football and the supporters .

 

It isn't the fault of Sky, the Premier League, Parachute payments etc that we have been ran like this.

 

None of those factors mentioned force you to rip off supporters and pay very average players stupidly large amounts on lengthy contracts 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, torres said:

 

It isn't the fault of Sky, the Premier League, Parachute payments etc that we have been ran like this.

 

None of those factors mentioned force you to rip off supporters and pay very average players stupidly large amounts on lengthy contracts 

 

This. Clubs had the choice in investing in youth, infrastructure, cheaper tickets, and the community.

 

Instead they spunked it on overpaid jokers like our Joey who can't even take a corner.

 

If you gave me 20k and I spent it on hookers and booze, I might enjoy it, but I wouldn't get away with blaming you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mr Farrell said:

 

This. Clubs had the choice in investing in youth, infrastructure, cheaper tickets, and the community.

 

Instead they spunked it on overpaid jokers like our Joey who can't even take a corner.

 

If you gave me 20k and I spent it on hookers and booze, I might enjoy it, but I wouldn't get away with blaming you.

 

Yeah cause Joey is one of our high earners and the real issue.

 

Do you ever think before posting?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mr Farrell said:

 

This. Clubs had the choice in investing in youth, infrastructure, cheaper tickets, and the community.

 

Instead they spunked it on overpaid jokers like our Joey who can't even take a corner.

 

If you gave me 20k and I spent it on hookers and booze, I might enjoy it, but I wouldn't get away with blaming you.

 

We can have a go though!!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jerseyowl said:

Parachute payments are effectively premier league prize money that a club is due the season they are relegated in.

 

The money is not given in full, like it would if you finished out the bottom 3, but instead the amount is then paid over 4 seasons in differing amounts.

 

So I struggle to see the reasoning behind why it shouldn't be allowed, the club in question have earnt it after all.

 

The real issue at hand is the amount of money generated by the EFL and the massive disparity between the EFL and that generated by the premier league.

Is it really? Never knew that.

 

Do the club's get their tv money up front before the season starts or is that afterwards too?

 

Why do they give them the prize money in 3 instalments rather than all at once? Is it to stop them blowing it all in one go and is it effectively attempting to level the playing field a bit for the championship clubs?  

 

Interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jerseyowl said:

Parachute payments are effectively premier league prize money that a club is due the season they are relegated in.

 

The money is not given in full, like it would if you finished out the bottom 3, but instead the amount is then paid over 4 seasons in differing amounts.

 

So I struggle to see the reasoning behind why it shouldn't be allowed, the club in question have earnt it after all.

 

The real issue at hand is the amount of money generated by the EFL and the massive disparity between the EFL and that generated by the premier league.

Oh and why then if the club bounces straight back up is the remaining parachute monies split between the championship clubs? Not given to the club that earned the money?

 

Seems a bit unfair tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest The Horse

Don't think the top dogs at the Prem want a closed shop.

The clubs in it may do but I doubt Richards and chums think the same.

I reckon they'd love to see Wednesday, Leeds and Forest in the Prem over say Bournemouth, Watford and Burnley for example.

It's much better for their 'product' in terms of appeal, viewers and revenue.

I can see why the parachute payments are there, it's the misuse that's the problem and like someone said above, should be removed from P&S equation to create real financial fair play and to ensure the payments are used in the 'spirit' of their original intention.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jerseyowl said:

Parachute payments are effectively premier league prize money that a club is due the season they are relegated in.

 

The money is not given in full, like it would if you finished out the bottom 3, but instead the amount is then paid over 4 seasons in differing amounts.

 

So I struggle to see the reasoning behind why it shouldn't be allowed, the club in question have earnt it after all.

 

The real issue at hand is the amount of money generated by the EFL and the massive disparity between the EFL and that generated by the premier league.

 

They were devised so that clubs who get relegated can continue to operate and pay their wage bills despite the reduced income from not being in the PL. They were only introduced in 2006 after many clubs (naturally, we were one of them) previously suffered financially because they couldn't offload the big money players.
 
This is why if a club gets promoted whilst still in receipt of parachute payments they stop because they're going back to the huge PL income..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, torres said:

 

It isn't the fault of Sky, the Premier League, Parachute payments etc that we have been ran like this.

 

None of those factors mentioned force you to rip off supporters and pay very average players stupidly large amounts on lengthy contracts 

Sky put the money in...it was up to the clubs how they used it...I remember Sky saying at one point , the money going in would would offset ticket prices for football fans who attended games, to offset armchair fans....didn't happen
Was that down to Sky or greedy football clubs?..the latter I reckon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, alanharper said:

 

They were devised so that clubs who get relegated can continue to operate and pay their wage bills despite the reduced income from not being in the PL. They were only introduced in 2006 after many clubs (naturally, we were one of them) previously suffered financially because they couldn't offload the big money players.
 
This is why if a club gets promoted whilst still in receipt of parachute payments they stop because they're going back to the huge PL income..

 

This.

 

clubs to try and stay up need to offer bigger wages to attract better players.  Problem is if you go down you have these players on good contracts ( they have to offer these contracts to get the player over someone else)

 

the parschute payment SHOULD be used to pay these contracts up without clubs getting crippled .  Some clubs don’t do this though they use that money to gamble and get promotion the next season.  If they get it wrong they are in deep trouble .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, rawowl said:

 

This.

 

clubs to try and stay up need to offer bigger wages to attract better players.  Problem is if you go down you have these players on good contracts ( they have to offer these contracts to get the player over someone else)

 

the parschute payment SHOULD be used to pay these contracts up without clubs getting crippled .  Some clubs don’t do this though they use that money to gamble and get promotion the next season.  If they get it wrong they are in deep trouble .

 

Bizarre that clubs are given the cash for a specific reason, then allowed to chuck it wherever.

 

Something is wrong with the system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...