billyblack Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 On 18/11/2019 at 19:55, Mycroft said: Hindsight eh? The football fans greatest friend. It is if you needed it in this instance 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyblack Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 8 hours ago, SiJ said: The problem is and has been for years the huge disparity in terms of income between the Premier League and the Championship. The potential implications of getting relegated are disastrous and that is why we have the parachute payments. There is an argument that is a reward for failure, but from what I understand it is something the Premier League absolutely insists upon. Thing is, even with the parachute payment system, there are numerous examples of teams struggling in the Championship and even getting relegated to League One. The main folly of it is having a profit and sustainability system in place where a select group of teams have their income boosted by said parachute payments. Doesn't exactly make it a level playing field, does it? Another folly is that a team can clearly be breaching said rules (Wolves, Bournemouth, Leicester and I believe Brighton were sailing very close to the wind too), but you are able to escape any potential ramifications for this if you can secure promotion to the Premier League. If you don't - then you find yourself in a situation like we have. I suppose you could say it is the utlimate punishment for blowing a promotion opportunity...or in our case blowing two opportuinities. Still - something doesn't quite sit right about that. So just put a pay cut clause in all contracts in event of relegation. About 75% paycut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiJ Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 33 minutes ago, billyblack said: So just put a pay cut clause in all contracts in event of relegation. About 75% paycut. Er...yeah, ok. Sure the players and the agents will go along with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sherlyegg Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 4 hours 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. What about clubs who strive to get promoted, miss out and have players on big wages. Simple answer is get rid of high earners..but of course easier said than done, and btw in no danger of going bankrupt. So, tbf I can see no difference from a relegated prem club and champ. club trying to make ends meet....though it's much easier for a relegated club...and thus unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jomaco Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 (edited) 51 minutes ago, sherlyegg said: What about clubs who strive to get promoted, miss out and have players on big wages. Simple answer is get rid of high earners..but of course easier said than done, and btw in no danger of going bankrupt. So, tbf I can see no difference from a relegated prem club and champ. club trying to make ends meet....though it's much easier for a relegated club...and thus unfair. It's a good point, to get promoted you need to have some prem quality, so you pay for it, to stay in prem you need prem quality, what's the difference We failed to get promoted (one could argue partly due to injuries outside of our control) so can we have some money? Or at least let us spend to rectify our misfortune Edited November 19, 2019 by jomaco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minton Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 11 hours ago, LondonOwl313 said: Think that’s how it works.. and why it doesn’t work. First point is that if you compare the wage bills of the bottom 6 in the prem who the relegated teams usually come from, and the wage bills of the teams near the top of the championship there’s not much in it. Wouldn’t be surprised if our wage bill is still higher than the pigs and Norwich right now. So why do teams need cash to soften the blow when they come down. Then you consider that generally teams that come down cut costs, they release players on a free and sell off their better players who don’t want to drop out of the prem. Ok, they might have a few players who are their equivalent of Jordan Rhodes who they can’t shift on big wages.. but doubt that costs anywhere near the £50m they get that supposedly is there to pay that. That means it’s basically a transfer kitty and wages, plus gets them out of FFP too.. and it ruins the competition The obvious solution would be to just take the parachute money, aggregate it and split it 24 ways between all the teams in the division. That’s probably £10-15m a season per club.. then get rid of FFP or make it that you can’t lose anything which is basically the equivalent of a wage cap. Would sort most of the issues out overnight but the premier league clubs will kick off. EFL should just grow a pair and say these are our rules and we won’t admit teams to the league unless they agree to it Couple of points to add: If a team now spends just 1 season in the Prem they only get 2 years of parachute payment, not 3. And if a team is promoted inside the parachute payment window, the parachute payments they would have received are spread out amongst the other teams in the division. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyblack Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 10 hours ago, SiJ said: Er...yeah, ok. Sure the players and the agents will go along with that. Err, if all clubs did it what choice would they have. Im sure they get promotion clauses so why not the other way round. Protects the club from relegation. You see people dont want parachute payments but they dont want alternatives either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyblack Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 9 hours ago, sherlyegg said: What about clubs who strive to get promoted, miss out and have players on big wages. Simple answer is get rid of high earners..but of course easier said than done, and btw in no danger of going bankrupt. So, tbf I can see no difference from a relegated prem club and champ. club trying to make ends meet....though it's much easier for a relegated club...and thus unfair. Well then its that clubs fault for paying for something they cant afford. Simple. I might oi out and buy a brand new ferrari on the off chance i win the lottery... or should i wait.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 5 minutes ago, billyblack said: Err, if all clubs did it what choice would they have. Im sure they get promotion clauses so why not the other way round. Protects the club from relegation. You see people dont want parachute payments but they dont want alternatives either In principle that would be great. In the real world, it wouldn't take long before a chairman waives the relegation clause in order to seal the deal with a prospective signing, and then everyone's back to square one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyblack Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 21 minutes ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said: In principle that would be great. In the real world, it wouldn't take long before a chairman waives the relegation clause in order to seal the deal with a prospective signing, and then everyone's back to square one. There you go then. Its alright trying to blame the EFL then or premier league for parachute paynents. Basically the blame lies with chairman taking too much risk. Reap what you sow. If it works great. If not you are in the mire. Accept it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toppOwl Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 On 14/11/2019 at 19:30, SallyCinnamon said: They’re not corrupt though. FFP is a ridiculous rule, but it’s a rule. Like Asteener said, if you drive over the limit you can’t then complain and say ‘yeah but it’s the laws fault’. They gave us previous warnings with embargo’s. They gave us time to get our finances in order. But instead we kept handing out improved contracts, refusing to sell assets and plodding a long with our heads in the same The law doesn't let drivers of a different type of car break the limit though, therein lies the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyblack Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, toppOwl said: The law doesn't let drivers of a different type of car break the limit though, therein lies the problem. Why should it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 1 hour ago, billyblack said: There you go then. Its alright trying to blame the EFL then or premier league for parachute paynents. Basically the blame lies with chairman taking too much risk. Reap what you sow. If it works great. If not you are in the mire. Accept it. You can blame chairmen who stretch their finances to breaking point and the EFL for overseeing a set of P&S rules which aren't fit for purpose and penalise ambitious clubs who try to redress the imbalance caused by ludicrous parachute payments. No aspect of modern football is blameless, I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toppOwl Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 53 minutes ago, billyblack said: Why should it? Why should the EFL's rules allow some clubs to spend loads of money and limit others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetsheri Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 5 minutes ago, toppOwl said: Why should the EFL's rules allow some clubs to spend loads of money and limit others? They are all owed to spend the same. It's just the relegated clubs coffers are fuller to the tune of £16+ million a year So, over 3 years a relegated club can afford to spend £48m more and remain within the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box_Man Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 28 minutes ago, sweetsheri said: They are all owed to spend the same. It's just the relegated clubs coffers are fuller to the tune of £16+ million a year So, over 3 years a relegated club can afford to spend £48m more and remain within the rules. First year after relegation teams get £40 million, second year they get £35 million, third year they get £15 million. £90 million additional revenue over 3 years...hardly an even playing field for FFP 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetsheri Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 6 minutes ago, Box_Man said: First year after relegation teams get £40 million, second year they get £35 million, third year they get £15 million. £90 million additional revenue over 3 years...hardly an even playing field for FFP Blimey, £16m for 4 years was what i read. Must have been years ago! So a relegated club can lose £129m over 3 years and stay within the rules... Yep that's fair.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toppOwl Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, sweetsheri said: Blimey, £16m for 4 years was what i read. Must have been years ago! So a relegated club can lose £129m over 3 years and stay within the rules... Yep that's fair.... I thought your £16m was wide of the mark, I'm sure Villa got something like £48m first season after relegation, its a nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toppOwl Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 This is a football forum regarding a local team yet the longest recent threads have been about financial rules, this club should be setting its sites on the Premier League the EFL will more than likely send us into L1 oblivion by their actions, this helps football how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthefish2002 Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 5 minutes ago, toppOwl said: This is a football forum regarding a local team yet the longest recent threads have been about financial rules, this club should be setting its sites on the Premier League the EFL will more than likely send us into L1 oblivion by their actions, this helps football how? Think the rules were set up to try and stop clubs over spending and getting into financial trouble like Coventry and Portsmouth over recent years. I have read rules were brought in by EFL at the behest of HMRC after some clubs (Leeds) went into administration and cost the tax payer millions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now