Jump to content

2 out of the 3 teams


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, oldishowl said:

The issues of carrying high wages could be a non issue with relegation clauses

 

That's not going to happen unless you want to stop good players signing for newly promoted teams. 

 

While the PL want them parachute payments will stay. Sadly the onus will be on the EFL to come up with a way to stop them distorting the financial status of the division.  They're a funny thing. Looks at the top of the division and teams have them - but look further down and they haven't stopped Huddersfield and Stoke suffering and didn't stop Sunderland going down. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, oldishowl said:


The thread is about parachute payments.

Fulham got promoted to the Premier League and blew over 100 million on players straight away, not including Mitrovic on loan. They got relegated and because of parachute payments were in a position to pay 22 million for Mitrovic in the championship.

We probably spent less than half that in total.


No club in the championship without parachute payments could afford to spend that money on one player. 
 

The team that played against Cardiff in the semi cost over 40 million without Mitrovic.

They paid around 6 million for Hector when he had 6 months left on his contract.

The sale of Ssesegon was not what kept them going or paid their massive wage bill. It helped but it basically covered the cost of Mitrovic.

 

Clubs understand the financial aspects of the PL now.

The issues of carrying high wages could be a non issue with relegation clauses and player sales.

 

Bournemouth will get 40 million for Ake and similar for Callum Wilson. Why do they need parachute payments to compete against us.?

There is no justification for them.

 

Fulham had Mitrovic on loan in the 17/18 Championship, got promoted and signed him on permanent before the 18/19 Premier League season started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, sherlyegg said:

Feel sorry for a well ran club like brentford...

They had no chance against a team with a £50m start.

 

Reckon they will be 'cheating' soon..we could give em some tips..

lol

Why? Isn't it only proving that even well run clubs living within their means can't compete.

All the club's promoted have spent big to buy quality.

I think many clubs will have to make a decision. Either like Brentford, live within their means and maybe nick promotion one year but generally be resigned to being a really good championship club. 

Or

Go for broke and run the risk of serious sanction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, oldishowl said:


The thread is about parachute payments.

Fulham got promoted to the Premier League and blew over 100 million on players straight away, not including Mitrovic on loan. They got relegated and because of parachute payments were in a position to pay 22 million for Mitrovic in the championship.

We probably spent less than half that in total.


No club in the championship without parachute payments could afford to spend that money on one player. 
 

The team that played against Cardiff in the semi cost over 40 million without Mitrovic.

They paid around 6 million for Hector when he had 6 months left on his contract.

The sale of Ssesegon was not what kept them going or paid their massive wage bill. It helped but it basically covered the cost of Mitrovic.

 

Clubs understand the financial aspects of the PL now.

The issues of carrying high wages could be a non issue with relegation clauses and player sales.

 

Bournemouth will get 40 million for Ake and similar for Callum Wilson. Why do they need parachute payments to compete against us.?

There is no justification for them.

 

This is the real problem, right here.  The gap between the 'haves' and 'have nots' is so huge now. Being able to bring in £40million for bang average Premiership players like Wilson and Ake. Not so long ago, when those kind of players were going for £4 million, the Championship 'have nots' were still getting by on the same free transfers, loans and the occasional half a million pound (or £350k) lower league signings that they have to get by on now.  The difference in the resources available is far larger now than it ever has been.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, rickygoo said:

IT's a matter of finding something that enables the teams getting promoted to try and compete without penalising the EFL clubs. In theory parachute payments are meant to encourage teams going up to improve their squads but not be terrified that a subsequent relegation will cripple them financially.  But how do you do that without disrupting the Championship?

 

 

Make it so that they are sensible enough to not issue stupid contracts to players when promoted. Instead they could ensure contracts are tailored to the possibility of a return to the championship. The current set up actually encourages teams to spend stupidly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, wakefieldowl said:

Make it so that they are sensible enough to not issue stupid contracts to players when promoted. Instead they could ensure contracts are tailored to the possibility of a return to the championship. The current set up actually encourages teams to spend stupidly

 

The players won't sign them. That's the problem 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/08/2020 at 08:45, 83owl said:

Because then they wouldn’t be able to sign any players. Players want stability, they want to know that whatever happens they will still get paid.

But thats not the case, if it became the "norm", they would have no option, they will still get paid and would just need to plan their lives accordingly, it's not as if they are badly paid and why should they get rewarded for failure? The better players would still get picked up by Prem clubs if they deserve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Spookone said:

But thats not the case, if it became the "norm", they would have no option, they will still get paid and would just need to plan their lives accordingly, it's not as if they are badly paid and why should they get rewarded for failure? The better players would still get picked up by Prem clubs if they deserve it.

Clubs are always willing to bend/break the rules when It comes to finances. Say the PL bring a rule in stating all players have a mandatory relegation release clause the clubs will just pay the extra as a bonus or some other incentive to make up the shortfall otherwise the players will look to other leagues, one of the main attractions of playing in England is the wages. 
 

The PL will never bring it in anyway as the EFL and PL are two different things, the PL don’t care if a club struggles financially in the championship due to overspending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/08/2020 at 23:04, rickygoo said:

IT's a matter of finding something that enables the teams getting promoted to try and compete without penalising the EFL clubs. In theory parachute payments are meant to encourage teams going up to improve their squads but not be terrified that a subsequent relegation will cripple them financially.  But how do you do that without disrupting the Championship?

 

 

Agree with this but it can’t be seen as fair to then limit the spending of other clubs. I can’t see how you can square the circle of being fair to the majority while imposing a salary cap yet allowing parachute payments

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There should be a way that if an owner can prove fact fully that he can sustain and compensate for going above the FFP limits he should be allowed to do so. 

 

That said in rugby the salary cap is calculated from last year's earnings along with the seasons potential earning. Which makes more sense becouse little clubs like Rotherham, Bolton or Burton can still go bang chasing promotion ans spending the 39 million. 

It also means a club Newcastles size in our league with an average of say 50k attendance, plus larger merchandise profits can obviously sustain a bigger outlay than say a Burton with an average gate of 10k. Would be a far fairer system all round whist keeping clubs within their revenue /financial budgets. 

Edited by shezzas left peg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/08/2020 at 22:30, WAWAWUTO17 said:

Promoted back to the Premiership with the help of parachute payments. Love the level playing field in this league 👏  Teams like us, want to spend and can't spend. Bloody Joke


Teams should only be allowed to use parachute payments on their existing players from the PL season they got relegated from. 
 

New players should be subject to a wage cap. 

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...