steelcityowlsfan Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 A quote from the Premier League on parachute payments. Sounds like Rick Parry will have a job on his hands convincing the powers that be to scrap parachute payments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanzaroteowl Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 PL looking after their own. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helmut_rooster Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 Best league in the world Biggest **** in the world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoop Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 Morons. How can an extra £40m in the bank not give you an advantage in buying better players and attracting them with bigger wages Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC_owl66 Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 I would have thought it’s not that hard to find evidence that parachute payments are part of the problem, Combined with the huge premier league payday - Plus parachute payments safety net are the reasons that majority of teams are over spending and getting into huge debt, I would like to See Scrapping of parachute payments, scrap FFP as it exists and introduce salary caps. This should allow investment in team infrastructure, facilities , academies and put the brakes on overcommitment on unsustainable player wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@owlstalk Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 Just to be picky but for clarification for the readers, this quote is from the Premier League and not Sky Sports Owlstalk Shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelcityowlsfan Posted May 6, 2020 Author Share Posted May 6, 2020 1 minute ago, JC_owl66 said: I would have thought it’s not that hard to find evidence that parachute payments are part of the problem, Combined with the huge premier league payday - Plus parachute payments safety net are the reasons that majority of teams are over spending and getting into huge debt, I would like to See Scrapping of parachute payments, scrap FFP as it exists and introduce salary caps. This should allow investment in team infrastructure, facilities , academies and put the brakes on overcommitment on unsustainable player wages. Incredible isn’t it. The PL with no interest what goes on below them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0wl18 Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 Get rid of parachute payments, all players to have mandatory relegation wage drops of let’s say 50% with a release clause to allow them to leave. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royalowlisback Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 6 minutes ago, @owlstalk said: Just to be picky but for clarification for the readers, this quote is from the Premier League and not Sky Sports Discuss the post, and not the poster. Only kidding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelcityowlsfan Posted May 6, 2020 Author Share Posted May 6, 2020 5 minutes ago, @owlstalk said: Just to be picky but for clarification for the readers, this quote is from the Premier League and not Sky Sports Yeah feel free to edit title if you can Neil. The point is still worth debating though. PL blind to the issues of these payments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonesy87shef Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 Ffp is a £39m loss over s 3 year period I believe. It’s ridiculous to suggest that clubs receiving £40m a year doesn’t give them a huge sporting advantage. For me scrap parachute payments, include a mandatory (if not already) relegation wage decreases into all contracts. Completely scarp ffp as it’s a joke and insulting to so many clubs. City for example getting kicked out the champions league. Why does the biggest clubs in the world get to have a massive head start on them just because they spent their money building their business 20 years earlier and are now brining in enough commercial revenue to cover expenditure. As for lower league clubs ffp stops healthy competition, same clubs can continue to spend and get ‘relative’ success. As long as an owner can prove funds so clubs can’t go bust then let them spend what they like. I also believe football clubs owners should have 1-2 years of running costs put into escrow. Therefore if the worst happens it gives plenty of time to either find a buyer, lower costs all across the board and allow contracts to run down if they can’t sell off assets. Avoid another Bury situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nbupperthongowl Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 EFL can be fix it with FFP....relegated teams have to make a profit of their parachute payment minus £13m.... level playing field created....sort of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torryowl Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 7 minutes ago, 0wl18 said: Get rid of parachute payments, all players to have mandatory relegation wage drops of let’s say 50% with a release clause to allow them to leave. Bit of a bugger if you sign someone for 50 million get relegated and he walks away for nowt as he would if they cut 50% off his wages Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nbupperthongowl Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 3 minutes ago, jonesy87shef said: Ffp is a £39m loss over s 3 year period I believe. It’s ridiculous to suggest that clubs receiving £40m a year doesn’t give them a huge sporting advantage. For me scrap parachute payments, include a mandatory (if not already) relegation wage decreases into all contracts. Completely scarp ffp as it’s a joke and insulting to so many clubs. City for example getting kicked out the champions league. Why does the biggest clubs in the world get to have a massive head start on them just because they spent their money building their business 20 years earlier and are now brining in enough commercial revenue to cover expenditure. As for lower league clubs ffp stops healthy competition, same clubs can continue to spend and get ‘relative’ success. As long as an owner can prove funds so clubs can’t go bust then let them spend what they like. I also believe football clubs owners should have 1-2 years of running costs put into escrow. Therefore if the worst happens it gives plenty of time to either find a buyer, lower costs all across the board and allow contracts to run down if they can’t sell off assets. Avoid another Bury situation. The escrow is an interesting idea, if premier League teams were forced to save 20% of income for 2 seasons they would have sufficient funds to see out something like covid 19, or survive relegation..... Rather than spending all their income and more besides, suddenly they become more sustainable Parachute payments no longer required Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oakleyrob Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 6 minutes ago, torryowl said: Bit of a bugger if you sign someone for 50 million get relegated and he walks away for nowt as he would if they cut 50% off his wages My heart is bleeding 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonesy87shef Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 7 minutes ago, nbupperthongowl said: The escrow is an interesting idea, if premier League teams were forced to save 20% of income for 2 seasons they would have sufficient funds to see out something like covid 19, or survive relegation..... Rather than spending all their income and more besides, suddenly they become more sustainable Parachute payments no longer required I agree. When this discussion has come up with friends in the past I tend to mention the escrow idea. I’m surprised something similar has never (to my knowledge) been mentioned or floated. I think I’ve mentioned it on here once. Football clubs are business but they feel slightly more unique than just another run of the mill business. It’s upsetting, unfortunate and felt by many when any business goes belly up. With football clubs however it seems to have a much wider financial, mental and community impact that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanzaroteowl Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 If there is no advantage in having £40M to spend a year. Why can't DC spend what he likes if it can be proven that he has the funds? FFP is justbollocks and makes no sense in that case. Not fair play just another obstacle to stop Championship clubs joining the PL club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazowl55 Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 Realistically they are never going to get rid of them are they. Best we can hope for is a better split of the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adelphi1867 Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 24 minutes ago, torryowl said: Bit of a bugger if you sign someone for 50 million get relegated and he walks away for nowt as he would if they cut 50% off his wages Don't sign anyone for £50m then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belfast Owl 2 Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 (edited) Edited May 6, 2020 by Belfast Owl 2 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