CVByrne Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 (edited) The strange quirk of the overall FFP rules (both PSR in PL and Squad Cost in UEFA) is that selling a player for 75m profit will equate to 25m per year for 3 years in your income side of the calculation. While buying a player for 75m on a 5 year deal will mean 15m in amortisation cost per year over 5 years. What this means is we will see more squad turnover than we may expect or want as it essentially allows us to have a more expensive squad due to this quirk of the rules. You see City already doing this, players leave and players arrive and big key players are ones leaving. With Jacks sale rolling off for 2024 Squad cost calculation which is capped at 80% we might well need a big sale like Luiz this summer. I think selling Cash, Digne and a couple of Academy players might be enough however. Edited January 13 by CVByrne 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 I think our window hinges upon selling Digne to the Saudi League. It'll free up FFP and take a big earner off the books. If we can sell Digne and Traore and even Chambers, all the better! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 4 minutes ago, CVByrne said: we might well need a big sale like Luiz this summer. Would be sad seeing him go, but if it makes us stronger, it's all in the game, as Omar Little famously said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tayls Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 (edited) At some point we are going to have to get rid of the FFP restrictions because the big dog clubs will become frustrated with not being able to buy freely without having to worry about it - especially if Man City and Chelsea are punished (appropriately). Eddie Howe has already started to moan. If these owners start backing out the PL will **** themselves. At least we’ll get our game back though! Will just be the refs that we’ll have to cope with. Edited January 13 by Tayls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwivillan Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 4 minutes ago, Tayls said: At some point we are going to have to get rid of the FFP restrictions because the big dog clubs will become frustrated with not being able to buy freely without having to worry about it - especially if Man City and Chelsea are punished (appropriately). Eddie Howe has already started to moan. If these owners start backing out the PL will **** themselves. At least we’ll get our game back though! Will just be the refs that we’ll have to cope with. That's nonsense. The UK govt have said regulate the PL or we'll do it for you. I watched the whole Howe interview, he didn't moan. Other sports put in salary caps etc ages ago and life goes on. Lots of owners in PL make money regardless of success. Look at what Glazers paid for Manure vs what they sold 25% for. Loads of shit ref and VAR calls for teams across the board. Making out like it's way worse for us sounds like victim mentality 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
striker Posted January 13 Visiting Supporter Share Posted January 13 (edited) 12 hours ago, ChicagoVillan1983 said: Reading all the FFP stuff, listening to Emery, it seems we should prepare ourselves for not doing any business this month. I'm supportive of that if it's what the team has decided is best. Think it would be a massive mistake not to strengthen when pushing for a CL placement and considering the amount of games Villa will have to play in the second half of the season! Clearly Emery wants to invest in the squad naming players he wants rid off. Most would agree with those named plus I’d add Dendoncker to those surplus to requirements. Luckily all three are certainly saleable for nominal fees or indeed loanee’s therefore I’d expect to see at least two go and two to come in before the window shuts. A quality RB to allow Konsa to play in his best position and a DM to interchange with Kamara should be a priority! Edited January 13 by striker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 12 minutes ago, Tayls said: At some point we are going to have to get rid of the FFP restrictions because the big dog clubs will become frustrated with not being able to buy freely without having to worry about it - especially if Man City and Chelsea are punished (appropriately). Eddie Howe has already started to moan. If these owners start backing out the PL will **** themselves. At least we’ll get our game back though! Will just be the refs that we’ll have to cope with. That's already what the superleague was The revenue that is the back bone for some of these clubs is propped up by superstar signings and they need that conveyor belt, FFP means that they can't FWIW though I don't think that's what the PL is, I think the big clubs already do spend freely they just don't spend it particularly well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 12 minutes ago, Tayls said: At some point we are going to have to get rid of the FFP restrictions because the big dog clubs will become frustrated with not being able to buy freely without having to worry about it - especially if Man City and Chelsea are punished (appropriately). Eddie Howe has already started to moan. If these owners start backing out the PL will **** themselves. At least we’ll get our game back though! Will just be the refs that we’ll have to cope with. That's already what the superleague was The revenue that is the back bone for some of these clubs is propped up by superstar signings and they need that conveyor belt, FFP means that they can't FWIW though I don't think that's what the PL is, I think the big clubs already do spend freely they just don't spend it particularly well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tayls Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Kiwivillan said: That's nonsense. The UK govt have said regulate the PL or we'll do it for you. I watched the whole Howe interview, he didn't moan. Other sports put in salary caps etc ages ago and life goes on. Lots of owners in PL make money regardless of success. Look at what Glazers paid for Manure vs what they sold 25% for. Loads of shit ref and VAR calls for teams across the board. Making out like it's way worse for us sounds like victim mentality He did moan - he said they are frustrated because of it…. Ok, He was asked the question, he gave an answer to it, but the answer implied that they are restricted by FFP and the owners are not able to use their financial resources in a way that they would like to. Fine. But the point remains that clubs are frustrated and it won’t last… Edited January 13 by Tayls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwivillan Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 11 minutes ago, striker said: Think it would be a massive mistake not to strengthen when pushing for a CL placement and the amount of games Villa will have to play in the second half of the season! West Ham played 7 games in Conference from this stage to final afaik. We can't "strengthen" if FFP restricts us. Strengthening assumes improvement. I like Diaby and think he'll come good but he's not even starting for big spend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 46 minutes ago, maqroll said: Would be sad seeing him go, but if it makes us stronger, it's all in the game, as Omar Little famously said. West Ham sold Rice and are doing very well without him. Spurs sold Kane and are doing very well without him. I'm sure if we made a decision to sell a top player we will have it well planned out as we're selling on our terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROTTERDAM1982 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 Transfer thread and all we are talking about is FFP. FFP is a farce and a restriction of trade imposed by a cartel of self-interested so called big clubs. I hope Citeeeeh or Nooocastle or Chelsk take them to court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
est1874 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 22 minutes ago, ROTTERDAM1982 said: Transfer thread and all we are talking about is FFP. FFP is a farce and a restriction of trade imposed by a cartel of self-interested so called big clubs. I hope Citeeeeh or Nooocastle or Chelsk take them to court. If they do, then it's curtains for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 22 hours ago, duke313 said: If Dendoncker leaves, would like us to look at Argentinian Guido Rodríguez of Real Betis, available for free in the summer, or possibly a low fee this month. Linked with Atletico and Milan. He just had surgery on a fractured leg and wont be back soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLVillan Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 1 hour ago, striker said: Think it would be a massive mistake not to strengthen when pushing for a CL placement and considering the amount of games Villa will have to play in the second half of the season! Clearly Emery wants to invest in the squad naming players he wants rid off. Most would agree with those named plus I’d add Dendoncker to those surplus to requirements. Luckily all three are certainly saleable for nominal fees or indeed loanee’s therefore I’d expect to see at least two go and two to come in before the window shuts. A quality RB to allow Konsa to play in his best position and a DM to interchange with Kamara should be a priority! I would speculate that, before a ball was kicked this season, Unai saw Chambers as adequate cover at right-back and as a holding midfielder. If memory serves, I think he even alluded to it in an interview in pre-season. I think he's changed his mind after the way Chambers played at Legia (and he clearly hasn't changed his mind in training since), hence why Chambers hasn't been used and is now free to leave. At 28, Chambers still has plenty of football left in him and would probably be a great addition for a low-to-mid-table club. I can see him at a Luton as replacement for Lockyer for example. The problem we will face in replacing Chambers is finding a player or players who are of the right age, experience, and ability level, who are willing to bide their time to get an opportunity, but are also good enough to slot in when needed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdulaziz1 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 17 hours ago, villa4europe said: As Leicester showed though we will still never catch them in terms of revenue and spending power, it's not sustainable due to the advantages they already have Leicester were unfortunate by a lot of things, they’ve sold Kante who was their main midfield then Mahrez and whoever. They lost their owner. While they’ve still competed and missed two CL promotions which they shouldn’t actually. So it’s not that they didn’t have chance to sustain their progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdulaziz1 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 1 hour ago, CVByrne said: West Ham sold Rice and are doing very well without him. Spurs sold Kane and are doing very well without him. I'm sure if we made a decision to sell a top player we will have it well planned out as we're selling on our terms. West Ham sold Rice after 3 successive European seasons. They’ve been top 7 twice then won the conference (while not being that good in the league). They’ve built a relatively good squad when knowing he’s leaving, but still they’ve maximized their benefit out of him. It’s when to sell while sustain the progress of the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted January 13 VT Supporter Share Posted January 13 1 hour ago, ROTTERDAM1982 said: FFP is a farce and a restriction of trade imposed by a cartel of self-interested so called big clubs. Not really, Premier League clubs voted for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 Just now, PieFacE said: Not really, Premier League clubs voted for it. Ironically, Newcastle voted in favour of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 7 minutes ago, duke313 said: Ironically, Newcastle voted in favour of it In fairness it was under a different ownership Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts