Jump to content
markg

EFL Statement

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, SiJ said:

Ah, fair enough. 

 

How on earth do you not deliberately overspend when your budget is 236 percent in excess of your turnover? 

 

I mean...I've heard of not keeping up to date books, but come on :duntmatter:

 

 

 

Easy!! Just ask the wife!!

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lawrie’s Left Peg said:


Leeds (embargo) , Forest (embargo) and Bristol (made losses of £47m up to 2018 but we’re permitted to 'invest' an estimated £12m into the club's infrastructure) have all been in breach of P&S rules. So your point is ......

I take your point, not suggesting it’s easy to operate within the rules but these clubs have at least made an effort to offset losses with income from player sales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Burnsie said:

And make the prem a closed shop

 

Which of course it what would happen. But maybe that wouldn't be such a bad thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, SiJ said:

Ah, fair enough. 

 

How on earth do you not deliberately overspend when your budget is 236 percent in excess of your turnover? 

 

I mean...I've heard of not keeping up to date books, but come on :duntmatter:

 

 


Logic says we will only get a slap on the wrist as we didn't intend deliberately to get charged by the EFL  lol

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, WelshOwl74 said:

Can't wait til we play Middlesbrough live on sky last game of season in a relegation decider

 

Rhodes scores a 96th minute winner. 

DC runs up to Gibson ,snatches his £10k hairpiece off his head and takes a dump then wipes his bum on it 


This would be fantastic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all down to players wages, and agents who solicit players around europe and beyond, who inevitably get drawn to the EPL like moths, due to the sky money that perpetuates the ridiculous salaries in the first place.

 

The top half; fairly big championship clubs are caught in a dooms-day cycle of trying to compete for even average PL cast offs, at £40k/week to reach the promised land. You only need half dozen or so of these in your squad and the 3-year P&S cap is quickly blown apart.

 

If you step back and look at football finance in this country rationally, you'd say it's a nonsense. It's clearly unsustainable for the clubs in the championship who get caught out, and the EFL have recognized this. However, as has been said, they can't do this in isolation of the EPL, which is precisely why they both need to come up with a plan, which includes parachutes payments, which distorts the level playing field, which the EFL are seemingly powerless to stop.

 

In the end, the only (main) reason why wealthy foreign people buy provincial championship clubs is to get into the PL. Once there, they can either sell for a profit, if the stay in the championship hasn't drained their wealth due to the debt, or cream off the PL (sky) revenue profit annual and use the ownership as a prestige badge.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parachute payments should only go to those clubs that can prove they need it in order to avoid serious financial issues. I.e, shouldn't go to clubs like Newcastle who clearly didn't need it.

 

Presumably parachute payments are included in all of the accounts, therefore helps towards P&S compliance - is that fair?


But something needs to be done about players wages/contracts - how can a club take a hit on revenue just by being relegated, yet players wages stay the same. Authorities should stipulate that contracts must have a clause that gives clubs the power to reduce the wages of players upon relegation.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, bigdan2003 said:

Parachute payments should only go to those clubs that can prove they need it in order to avoid serious financial issues. I.e, shouldn't go to clubs like Newcastle who clearly didn't need it.

 

Presumably parachute payments are included in all of the accounts, therefore helps towards P&S compliance - is that fair?


But something needs to be done about players wages/contracts - how can a club take a hit on revenue just by being relegated, yet players wages stay the same. Authorities should stipulate that contracts must have a clause that gives clubs the power to reduce the wages of players upon relegation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Authorities? Why?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, torres said:

 

Authorities? Why?

 

 

 

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

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, bigdan2003 said:

Parachute payments should only go to those clubs that can prove they need it in order to avoid serious financial issues. I.e, shouldn't go to clubs like Newcastle who clearly didn't need it.

 

Presumably parachute payments are included in all of the accounts, therefore helps towards P&S compliance - is that fair?


But something needs to be done about players wages/contracts - how can a club take a hit on revenue just by being relegated, yet players wages stay the same. Authorities should stipulate that contracts must have a clause that gives clubs the power to reduce the wages of players upon relegation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Player salary caps for the EFL would be start, with an agreement for PL player contracts and therefore, salaries only to be valid whilst the club is in the PL. Once relegated a variation clause steps in that reverts the salary to the championship cap. I appreciate this is easier said than done, and the PL clubs would argue the contract length/salary is a required incentive to get the player in the first place. However, it currently allows the PL to simply wash it hands of damaging the championship by throwing parachute payment at relegated clubs. The EFL are currently ignoring the problem even exists and simply falling back on their own P&S cap, which seemingly doesn't recognize relegated PL club's wealth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, S36 OWL said:

 

Which of course it what would happen. But maybe that wouldn't be such a bad thing. 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clubs have to get better at negotiating contracts with lower basic salaries and performance incentives, providing a degree of protection in event of relegation.

 

Maybe the removal / reduction of parachute payments would help prompt this, although I’m not expecting any change soon!

Share this post


Link to post
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 .

Share this post


Link to post
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 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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...