ThunderPower_14 Posted June 11 Share Posted June 11 6 hours ago, Czarnikjak said: So you are OK with Newcastle potentially winning the league every season? We're currently in that exact situation with Man City. The rules didn't prevent them from getting there. I'd be happy enough with a soft salary cap or similar, but the current system sucks and stops the status quo from being challenged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted June 11 Share Posted June 11 6 minutes ago, ThunderPower_14 said: We're currently in that exact situation with Man City. The rules didn't prevent them from getting there. I'd be happy enough with a soft salary cap or similar, but the current system sucks and stops the status quo from being challenged. Said last week they need to scrap FFP and then introduce a lot of new rules that target everything that's wrong with the game and squad building, squad salary cap, loan caps, harsher rules on squad registration, maybe even go as far as to say that players that aren't registered are cut American sports style Let Chelsea spend £500m every summer but they can only pay £5m per week in wages across the squad, they can't loan any of them that are over 21 and anyone not registered in the 25 man squad is automatically given a free transfer with Chelsea picking up the tab for lost wages, all of that must also be supported by bonds so that if boely walks away he's still liable for the cost rather than the club There are other control mechanisms they can use, it doesn't have to be FFP or nothing 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Precision Posted June 12 Visiting Supporter Share Posted June 12 (edited) Good article by Martin Samuels and not behind a paywall. https://www.thetimes.com/article/3a6ccd55-8e87-4bf9-b3c9-ac088b7870bb?shareToken=415fc791a8d1be513442df9495e35aa6 Quote …There are two main possible outcomes to City’s challenge to the league over Associated Party Transactions (APT). City lose and the competition carries on as it is. The same financial regulations, the status quo. If they win, and APT is overturned, City will have more money to spend through larger sponsorships and investments from Abu Dhabi but, as Manchester United discovered, that doesn’t always spell success either. United have been colossal spenders but haven’t won the league since 2013 when Sir Alex Ferguson left, because he was a football genius and the rest of them weren’t… Edited June 12 by blandy Extract added Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 58 minutes ago, Random Precision said: Good article by Martin Samuels and not behind a paywall. https://www.thetimes.com/article/3a6ccd55-8e87-4bf9-b3c9-ac088b7870bb?shareToken=415fc791a8d1be513442df9495e35aa6 Preparing the fans for the inevitable... He's right, but only if that spend cap (or something like it) mentioned in the article comes in. If it doesn't (and I'm not sure how many clubs would vote to approve it to enable it to) then not sure it's the irrelevant outcome that the article is trying to sell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 i got as far as him suggesting that good players don't want to sit on benches which simply isn't true followed by everything will be fine once pep leaves city which obviously makes everything ok, just ride it out for another 5 or 6 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 Just now, villa4europe said: i got as far as him suggesting that good players don't want to sit on benches which simply isn't true followed by everything will be fine once pep leaves city which obviously makes everything ok, just ride it out for another 5 or 6 years Yep. It only works is there a spend cap. Players don't want to sit on the bench AND not be paid millions. If city can pay then enough, then most are happy to only play 20 games. Then they can build a squad big enough to compete and win on all fronts. There will be a drop off when Guardiola leaves, and us having Emery let's us punch above our weight, but these are temporary factors. Their big spending capability with no cap let's them have a permanent advantage so only a matter of time until they get it right. The same applies to United. If they'd sacked Ten Hag and rid the club off its toxic players and staff, they've got the money to try and get it right. Thankfully they stuck with him and I'm not convinced he's the answer to their problems. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 21 minutes ago, MrBlack said: The same applies to United. If they'd sacked Ten Hag and rid the club off its toxic players and staff, they've got the money to try and get it right. Thankfully they stuck with him and I'm not convinced he's the answer to their problems. yeah that's the other thing, the notion that everything is ok and everyone will get a chance and its fair because man utd and chelsea have bad owners and spend money on shit, or that spurs don't spend their money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David-Copenhagen Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 9 hours ago, MrBlack said: Disagree. City are already complaining that the rules stop them from spending more and filed a lawsuit to that effect. They're at their current FFP ceiling (which they've artificially lifted by cheating 115 times), and they want to spend more. If they can, then players will happily go there to rotate and win and earn more than they would do coming to us to rotate, not win and earn less. Newcastle haven't even started but have trillions waiting if they're allowed to. Nas and Wes dont have that bottomless pit to call on. Yes, our manager and coaching setup seems to give us an advantage over most other clubs, and combine that with our owners being able to spend whatever they want, we'll continue to pull away from the rest of the league. But City have a similarly exceptional setup and could spend basically infinitely more than us to keep improving it and keeping us behind. Fortune plays a part, and we may win the odd thing in this hypothetical future, which may well be better than what we get currently, but ultimately City will become more consistent being able to spend more, not less. Nas is reportedly wanting spending capped in line with the highest revenue. Its absolutely the right thing to do. Lifting it totally is bad for us, bad for competition, and bad for the sustainability of the league. On the rotate part, how many players can you register? Just 25 in the PL and 8 needs to be home grown players. After that you are left with u21 and scholars. So there is a limit to how many you can sign. So yes Man City can sign more players, but they can't play them - So they would be paying them no to play for anyone else.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted June 12 VT Supporter Share Posted June 12 I imagine if this news was coming out about, say, the Newcastle owners, this forum would be absolutely up in arms about it 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 10 hours ago, ThunderPower_14 said: We're currently in that exact situation with Man City. The rules didn't prevent them from getting there. I'd be happy enough with a soft salary cap or similar, but the current system sucks and stops the status quo from being challenged. The rules didn't exist when Man City were taken over. If today's rules had existed then, it would have largely prevented Man City from achieving this level of dominance in all likelihood. The problem is fans want different things at different times, and framing the same thing in different ways produces different emotional reactions. 'The current system sucks and stops the status quo being challenged' sounds real bad, we should change the status quo immediately. On the other hand, 'Man City and Newcastle form an eternal duopoly thanks to essentially infinite resources' also sounds real bad, like maybe the status quo isn't such a bad thing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted June 12 VT Supporter Share Posted June 12 2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: The rules didn't exist when Man City were taken over. If today's rules had existed then, it would have largely prevented Man City from achieving this level of dominance in all likelihood. The problem is fans want different things at different times, and framing the same thing in different ways produces different emotional reactions. 'The current system sucks and stops the status quo being challenged' sounds real bad, we should change the status quo immediately. On the other hand, 'Man City and Newcastle form an eternal duopoly thanks to essentially infinite resources' also sounds real bad, like maybe the status quo isn't such a bad thing. The age, old problem damned if you do damned if you don’t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 1 minute ago, Follyfoot said: The age, old problem damned if you do damned if you don’t Indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrim Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 This whole thing stinks to be honest. There's only really a "big 6" because they've been allowed to feed on success from a certain time period, process criminal money, or wipe their arse with any rules with dodgy accounting and sponsorship. Its not competitive or fair and its going to take some successful lawsuits to change it. What was the point of these rules, to stop clubs going to the wall, right? OK, so allow owners to put money into escrow to guarantee any expenditure, or set a spending cap a la NFL. The current set up is a joke and for the birds. You'll have the same teams competing at the top, and promoted teams having very little chance to compete. Absolute bollocks. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul514 Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 5 hours ago, Mazrim said: This whole thing stinks to be honest. There's only really a "big 6" because they've been allowed to feed on success from a certain time period, process criminal money, or wipe their arse with any rules with dodgy accounting and sponsorship. Its not competitive or fair and its going to take some successful lawsuits to change it. What was the point of these rules, to stop clubs going to the wall, right? OK, so allow owners to put money into escrow to guarantee any expenditure, or set a spending cap a la NFL. The current set up is a joke and for the birds. You'll have the same teams competing at the top, and promoted teams having very little chance to compete. Absolute bollocks. Said that for years mate. Can't go bust if a bond is set up for the costs of owning that player (wages and any fee if it isn't all up front) the club the draws down on that to pay the player/club. As you said it is bollocks. Chelsea joined their club, they didn't like it and then Man City happened and they shat their pants. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 More clubs will eventually sue the league. The deck is simply too stacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul514 Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 Just now, The_Steve said: More clubs will eventually sue the league. The deck is simply too stacked. maybe, but we couldn't even get 14 clubs to raise the limit a bit even though its been the same for what? 8 years? 10 years? whatever it has been Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Scorpio Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 The PL don't care. All they want is to keep the sky 6 happy so they don't run off the 'Super' League. As long as the PL keeps the same 6 popular and overpowered they sell TV rights easier abroad. Foreign fans couldn't give a shit about the likes of villa and Palace do they. You would think a league where any team could win it year on year and having the best manager is a deciding factor would be better long term, but it seems the PL disagree and will do anything to plactate the sky 6 and keep them in place. Newcastle, Villa etc have no real chance to threaten. And if they do PSR is used to push them back down. See Luiz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted June 13 Popular Post Share Posted June 13 1 hour ago, The_Steve said: Interesting quotes from Heck “We just came back from the league meetings. We know what we are up against and we almost feel that we have to do this on our own. Because these rules are not set up to reward an ambitious club. Or a challenger. It [changing the three-year permitted losses under PSR to a top limit of £135 million] didn’t go through. I don’t want to keep worrying about it. “When something doesn’t evolve in 11 years and with the cost of living alone, you scratch your head. If the Bank of England says inflation of £105 million through an 11-year period [then £105 million] is now at £143 million. You would think we would follow that same logic but the league has decided not to. I don’t want to waste my time griping about it. I want to find a new path and I think that is where Aston Villa enters into that big club realm. We have to just get there. So how do you get there within the rules? Well, you try to work harder, and get smarter and be better at what you do.” https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/06/13/chris-heck-aston-villa-premier-league-champions-league/ The inflation bits are the most bizarre to me. It's just common sense and logic really. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 3 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said: The inflation bits are the most bizarre to me. It's just common sense and logic really. Which is another reason why we should sue the league. Forget Man City, this is just more proof of their anti-competitive agenda. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 3 minutes ago, The_Steve said: Which is another reason why we should sue the league. Forget Man City, this is just more proof of their anti-competitive agenda. Indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts