Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
18 minutes ago, Beaconowl said:

I agree, its a dangerous game giving a safety net to those who are over spending beyond their means

I'm so glad we are a well run club and would never stoop to overspending. 😂

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Snap said:

The TV money has all but killed the top league in the country where there's just about 6 clubs can win it these days. That's fast becoming the same in the championship and we're beginning to see that the only clubs that can get promoted are the clubs previously relegated. It's not going to get any better. The parachute payments are in effect rewarding these clubs for failure.

I'd much prefer that money to be spent on saving clubs like Rochdale, Torquay, Bury etc, with strings of course, wouldn't want anyone ttp.

The only way 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Snap said:

The parachute payments are in effect rewarding these clubs for failure.

Completely agree on this one. Clubs should pick up the place money and nothing else. If they've got a massive wage bill then it's fire sale time or you're savvy enough to clauses in contracts. 

Or they could do what the EFL does and every club in the division gets the same amount.

Either way cutting off the parachute payments would stop clubs like the pigs borrowing on the future payments or Leicester gambling on going straight back up and using the payments to still pay PL wages 

  • Like 1
Posted

They'll never get rid of PP, without it the EPL dies.

The EPL got to where it is by spreading the money across the league, not just to a couple of clubs. This makes more competition and brings in more money.

However, with the sums involved, you have to have a big drop off in funding and quality somewhere. The EPL moved this drop into the Championship using the PP. The European clubs have fallen behind because they have the drop right in the middle of their top leagues.

PP is also needed to avoid the situation Wednesday are currently in. Nobody wants to sign due to relegation threat. This allows teams to go up and draw players, who without the payments would just be sitting on an upper team's bench as it is guaranteed income rather than risk relegation and be stuck in the Championship on a massive wage cut.

The fairest way to do it would be to guarantee and fund any contracts over 1 year on relegation. This way they can still get the players in to try and compete but they're not screwed if they come down. They sell or release the player, that funding goes with him.

That stops teams gaming the system.

As for FFP, there is a fantastic system already in place, the SCMP which we were under in L1. Owners can fund what they want, as donations, not loans or shares or any form of strings. Wage at 70% of turnover. Accounts checked and forecasts made every 6 months. Any spend when close to the limit is preapproved so you can't take the piss.

Bit the elephant in the room of sharing the money around more is that player wages will just rise accordingly, so it's not really a fix.

Posted
On 23/02/2024 at 10:25, BraddersTim said:

I have a soft spot for Rochdale, always have had.  It's a proper club and ground, of it's type.  I hope they survive but football  in that part of the world is in a state...Dale, Oldham, Bury...Accrington are lucky to have the owner they have even though he's a bit of a tit sometimes. 

This. 

And the chippy across the road from the ground is a beauty.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...