Ante's Bubbly Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 I do not think there are any big decisions to scratch our heads over really. It is all pretty much common sense. The Football league and FA let the 22 original premiership rebels get away with it, right from the start. The Football League should, and still could, set the rules for clubs and players coming down to the football league and not the other way around. The three divisions of 72 clubs should not have to toe a line dictated to them by the 20 clubs that happen to be top 20 clubs that season. The prem want clubs to come up to the prem with a fighting chance of success and they do not want teams going down to suffer any financisl difficulties as a result of going down. The EFL clubs do not want a handful of clubs to push up players wages throughout the division, purely because they were not good enough to compete at the next level. If the Premier league wants to pay clubs for failure, then let them, but the EFL does not have to grant them free entry into their top division. Instead of parachute payments the Premiership could pay the EFL for each club coming down to the Championship and let the EFL decide how to distribute the money. Clubs in the Prem would have to advise players that their wages would be X in the Prem and Y in the championship. This would be written into players contracts, so coming down would not be such a big issue and clubs in the prem would have to be better run to deal with the changes brought about by success and failure. A fair ratio could be worked out for spending the EFL's new wealth and voted on, with a positional incentive for Championship clubs that do not get promoted, but finish higher up the table. Maybe even splitting the majority of the pot amongst the 3 play off clubs that just missed out on promotion. This way the money from the prem would reward success, rather than failure and every club in the championship would have an opportunity to boost their income for the next season, based on how well they do. Player bonuses could be part of that common sense approach, allowing successful teams and successful players to earn their higher wages, rather than just getting money thrown at them by clubs and chairmen that have no idea about football or how to develop a successful and sustainable football team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ante's Bubbly Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 23 hours ago, @owlstalk said: 70% wage cap with any team caught breaching it getting immediately relegated = problem sorted immediately If the Prem and EFL can't sort it out the Australian rugby board could. They have droppef teams out of the league altogether, from any of their leagues, for overpaying players. They also strip them of any titles gained over 3 or is it 5 seasons? I think they are fined the prize money too. If clear rules are set and the punishments dealt out swiftly then everybody falls in line, or suffers the consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonnyowl Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 While a salary cap for EFL clubs will be the only way to make the game sustainable. But there are some issues to iron out. If it's 70% of income some smaller clubs will find it very difficult to compete. Ticket prices will never come down! Parachute payments, will make it grossly unfair and what do you do with relegated clubs. FFP will have to change. Then how are clubs who get promoted to Premier League going to change rapidly to compete. I think a better way would be a salary cap set at £20mil and then a % of revenue so smaller clubs like Rotherham and Barnsley can afford at £20mil wage budget. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the third man Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 this will never happen, but call the PL bluff, tell them they are on their own, no promotion or relegation, see how long all the teams, apart the top 6, like to play for nothing each season, no chance of winning the league and just being there to provide opposition for the top six problem is teams in the championship want the money from promotion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@owlstalk Posted June 14, 2020 Author Share Posted June 14, 2020 24 minutes ago, jonnyowl said: If it's 70% of income some smaller clubs will find it very difficult to compete. I know this makes sense but basically it’s saying small clubs can only compete by risking the future of their club by completely overspending with money they don’t have? Owlstalk Shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1948 Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 16 hours ago, pazowl55 said: That's what all the big clubs moan about isnt it in the premier league. And I suppose they have a point. Our gates (even now in the second tier) would put us in the prem range for attendances. When we were in the Prem our gates were top ten. Mind you stadium capacities have altered somewhat since we were last up there so I guess some teams who were usually below us could now draw more. Even so we are Prem on supporter base. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonnyowl Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 2 hours ago, @owlstalk said: I know this makes sense but basically it’s saying small clubs can only compete by risking the future of their club by completely overspending with money they don’t have? That's why i said It should be a set amount and distribute revenue so all teams can afford it, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1948 Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, jonnyowl said: That's why i said It should be a set amount and distribute revenue so all teams can afford it, Why should any team who doesn't have a fan base be given what ammounts to an advantage over clubs who have large fan bases. Our Owls have a large fan base but to support them we have to have a stadium to house them, pay ridiculous amount for policing, health and safety, maintenance and stewarding etc. this doesn't include many costs because of the scale of things. A smaller operation as was Bournemouth and the like benefit from small ground low costs but maximum income from TV whilst they provide relatively few TV subscriptions from their support. Its that that I see as wrong. Edited June 14, 2020 by mark1948 Typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueOwl Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 (edited) Our alternatively, stop meddling and let clubs live with the consequences of their own actions. No need for FFP and salary caps. Financial mismanagement tends to introduce it's own sanctions without those EFL two hats pouring gasoline on the fire and only making things ten times worse. Edited June 14, 2020 by TrueOwl 1 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