Jump to content

The cost of being a Championship club though...


Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, prowl said:

If all Premier League player contracts were forced to include a relegation clause which reduced their wages to Championship levels on relegation there would be no need for parachute payments.

But what’s Championship level? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, matthefish2002 said:

Think a lot of the problems in football boil down to Footballers wages getting way out of hand.

Not just financially but also the way football has lost its soul.

That’s what amazed me with the European super league plan. There was no mention of reducing or capping players wages. 
 

Clubs like Reading spend 200% of there income on players wages. It’s unsustainable.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, HighworthOwl said:


 

Clubs like Reading spend 200% of there income on players wages. It’s unsustainable.

Agree but i bet we pay Barry more than most players in Europes top divisions and we are third tier. 

Wages in the UK are a joke and are crippling clubs in every League. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The PL clubs will never vote for scrapping parachute payments, or handing money over to the EFL which would properly counter-balance them. 

Forget a government appointed regulator.. they don't believe in it - witness the £k's millions tons of sh*t they are happy to see dumped in the rivers every year. 

The PL will just continue to dump their sh*t on the rest of football. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always said that parachute payments should be replaced by an insurance policy.

 

All PL team should pay a yearly Premium of 10% of their wage bill. If they are relegated then they get 50% of their Prem players wages in the first year, 30% in the second year and 10% in the third year.

 

But it works like furlough. It goes straight to the player and never touches the club's accounts. The clubs then pay the rest of the wages.

 

That way clubs are still covered against players with PL wages, but they get no extra money to spend. We all know that the majority of parachute payments don't cover wages. They are spent on new players, making an uneven playing field. 

 

My system would only cover the wages of players already on the books from the PL years. Teams would have to fund new players purely from their Championship income, like all the other clubs have to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HighworthOwl said:

That’s what amazed me with the European super league plan. There was no mention of reducing or capping players wages. 
 

Clubs like Reading spend 200% of there income on players wages. It’s unsustainable.

 

People were saying wages 20 years ago were unsustainable and they have gone up 3 or 4 levels since then.

This is probably down to mega, mega rich people getting involved in football.

I don't like it one bit that foreign billionaires with no link with the club or area have got involved in our clubs for ego / sport washing reasons. must have moaned about it on here countless times but it is not going to change anytime soon.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/11/2021 at 10:15, SiJ said:

Obviously, you have to factor in COVID for the last few years, but I'm quite shocked that the losses continue to grow at such a rate. 

 

A few years back, you had a number of clubs (including us) spending substantial sums in order to get promoted. Now, that doesn't seem to be going on all that much, yet teams are still losing loads of cash. 

 

 

Yes, expensive hobby innit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For Premiership owners it's a business they want to make money from  . For most in the E F L it's an expensive hobby and the realistic owners realise they will rarely make any money out of it . Some deluded owners chase the holy elephant.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, jonnyowl said:

FFP has made a massive difference then!


The whole reason for FFP was to stop clubs building up massive debts forcing clubs to go into admin.

Spending money they don’t have is a form of cheating and risks clubs going out of business.

 

A solution would be to attach the debt to each club Chairman who agree to write it off as a gift, so each club is projected.

This solution was voted on at the EFL meeting a few years back but the Chairman unanimously voted against it.

 

FFP does allow debt and it does allow it to continuously grow.

However the rules ensure the debt is controlled with a slow and gradual increase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Charles Clegg said:

The PL clubs will never vote for scrapping parachute payments, or handing money over to the EFL which would properly counter-balance them. 

Forget a government appointed regulator.. they don't believe in it - witness the £k's millions tons of sh*t they are happy to see dumped in the rivers every year. 

The PL will just continue to dump their sh*t on the rest of football. 


Of course the PL are only interested in protecting their clubs, same as the EFL don’t care about the PL and only answer to their clubs.

The FA are also 2 faced and are only interested in keeping as much power as possible.

 

The solution would be to have ONE regulatory organisation to everything to benefit the game, instead of 3 separate selfish organisations.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sheffsteel said:


The whole reason for FFP was to stop clubs building up massive debts forcing clubs to go into admin.

Spending money they don’t have is a form of cheating and risks clubs going out of business.

 

A solution would be to attach the debt to each club Chairman who agree to write it off as a gift, so each club is projected.

This solution was voted on at the EFL meeting a few years back but the Chairman unanimously voted against it.

 

FFP does allow debt and it does allow it to continuously grow.

However the rules ensure the debt is controlled with a slow and gradual increase.

 

That's all well and good while the chairman is writing checks to cover expenditure!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, sheffsteel said:

FFP does allow debt and it does allow it to continuously grow.

However the rules ensure the debt is controlled with a slow and gradual increase.

But how does that stop clubs going into admin? Derby..and could have been anybody us included. Once skint you are skint no matter what the debt is. You have to find a buyer pronto or that's the end.

FFP has not stopped rich chairmen throwing cash at it..some escape to the prem some don't.

Then you have to compete with relegated clubs on massive failure payments.

Imo FFP is not fit for purpose and is no way fair.

  • Like 1
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...