joeyb Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 Seeing the Henri Lansbury to Villa discussion, parachute payments was again brought up. So essentially, they exist to help relegated teams stay in business if they are unable to offload their high earners. With the new tv deals etc, I think the team that finished bottom of the premier league gets around £90-100m in prize money. So this got me thinking, why do they still exist. Clearly the clubs can used the prize money as a way of staying within their means whilst they offload players on premier league wages. It's actually disgusting and ruining the game the fact that the likes of Villa and Newcastle can spend £50m odd each in the Championship. The fact that they get parachute payments on top of the prize money on relegation really does take the piss. Also, parachute payments for 3 relegated teams could amount to £120m or something over 4 seasons. If the FA and Premier League are serious about improving the national team from grassroots up, then why can't they just put this straight into grassroots or wherever they want to spend it to improve the game nationally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 3 minutes ago, joeyb said: Seeing the Henri Lansbury to Villa discussion, parachute payments was again brought up. So essentially, they exist to help relegated teams stay in business if they are unable to offload their high earners. With the new tv deals etc, I think the team that finished bottom of the premier league gets around £90-100m in prize money. So this got me thinking, why do they still exist. Clearly the clubs can used the prize money as a way of staying within their means whilst they offload players on premier league wages. It's actually disgusting and ruining the game the fact that the likes of Villa and Newcastle can spend £50m odd each in the Championship. The fact that they get parachute payments on top of the prize money on relegation really does take the piss. maybe if the relegated teams were only aloud to sign players on a 1 out 1 in basis then that would hold up, but as it is it's designed to give the big boys as much of an advantage as they can get to get back up to the closed boys club at the top, Thankfully the championship is more competitive then that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 I feel parachute payments should be changed to something like a club being given 1 years worth of their wage bill. Any players in demand can be sold to reduce their wage budget as a result. Because its 3 years teams gamble on getting back up in that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littlesh*t Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 I don't get why they don't just scrap it altogether. If the clubs can't afford to pay the wages then let the player go cheap/free to a new team. teams should also be smart enough to put relegation clauses into contracts. I know they started it because of what happened to teams like Leeds but clubs have completely abused it. obviously you can't force sides like villa and Newcastle to get rid of there players but then they run the risk of financial trouble and maybe even bankruptcy if they don't bounce straight back. harsh on the fans but at the end of the day it's the fans that demand success at every club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 I think they should still exist...but with strict terms tied i.e. reduce debt/outgoings within a proportional amount. Sell top earners, or most saleable assets. They should be to help avoid bankruptcy and come with terms, not give a competitive advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: I think they should still exist...but with strict terms tied i.e. reduce debt/outgoings within a proportional amount. Sell top earners, or most saleable assets. They should be to help avoid bankruptcy and come with terms, not give a competitive advantage. my god how did we cope in the 90's? Clubs shouldn't get it full stop! it's their mis management that causes them to get into these troubles, they should insert relegation clauses into contracts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littlesh*t Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 my view exactly. if owners want to run clubs as a business (which 99% of them do) then they need to accept that there will be hard times. I love football but the game is becoming worse and worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littlesh*t Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 my view exactly. if owners want to run clubs as a business (which 99% of them do) then they need to accept that there will be hard times. I love football but the game is becoming worse and worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 Ok how about parachute payments on condition of relegation clauses and rapid sales? It doesn't necessarily provide a competitive advantage. How did we cope in the 90s I believe @Monkehsaid? Gap in revenue between 2 divisions now and then...is a cliff edge now, the PL is well well well out of kilter with even a rich and competitve League like the Championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miketh2nd Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 I agree with the latter of what has been said above. We need parachute payments as the gap between championship,prem wages and transfers are big. However seeing as the championship down doesn't recieve the ridiculous TV money that the prem do maybe we should have a wage cap like in Rugby? Obviously in a ideal world the prem to Aswell but no chance they would even consider it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 I completely disagree we don't need parachute payments we need realistic pay, there needs to be a pay cap, no player is worth 125k a week, 40k mass prem 15k max championship 5k max league 1 2.5k max league 2 1k max in the national anything over that is obscene and just highlight the extreme greed that now infects the game at all levels, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asfred Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 Agreed in principal about reviewing the parachute payments. Why reward a team for doing badly. As a business you need to have three plans, one where you do better than expected, one where you do as expected and one where you do worse. Why should football be different? Think you are going to struggle, don't sign the players or pay the wages, or put in relegation clauses in contracts...I have poor performance clauses in mine. On a side note, Newcastle have spent less than they have got in from transfer fees, and they're not doing to badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 5 hours ago, joeyb said: Seeing the Henri Lansbury to Villa discussion, parachute payments was again brought up. So essentially, they exist to help relegated teams stay in business if they are unable to offload their high earners. With the new tv deals etc, I think the team that finished bottom of the premier league gets around £90-100m in prize money. So this got me thinking, why do they still exist. Clearly the clubs can used the prize money as a way of staying within their means whilst they offload players on premier league wages. It's actually disgusting and ruining the game the fact that the likes of Villa and Newcastle can spend £50m odd each in the Championship. The fact that they get parachute payments on top of the prize money on relegation really does take the piss. Also, parachute payments for 3 relegated teams could amount to £120m or something over 4 seasons. If the FA and Premier League are serious about improving the national team from grassroots up, then why can't they just put this straight into grassroots or wherever they want to spend it to improve the game nationally. Not sure parachute payments make any difference in Villa's case. They are bankrolled by a Chinese billionaire who is happy to splash the cash. Parachute payments is pocket change to him... and we see how the football league follow through with their threats for those who break the rules ala QPR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 The payments have changed a little, this is from the Guardian. The parachute payments system is also changing so that the money – at least £64m – will be distributed to relegated clubs over three years rather than four. Clubs who go back down after a single year in the Premier League will get only the first two years of payments rather than the full three years. I get the theory of why there are payments, but it should really be regulated to make the playing field a lot fairer. The Football League (if it had any bollox) should stop the prem impacting on the fairness of the Championship. By all means give the relegated teams the money to pay the wages of the high earners now slumming it in our League, but the money should not be for team rebuilding because you completely cocked up the previous year ! I could moan about this for a long time, but I've not long got in from work , we have an Indian in the oven and a cold Leffe on the shelf. I shall chill and contemplate 3 points for tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciderbeans Posted January 21, 2017 Share Posted January 21, 2017 And all those that can't accept a wage cap can **** off to China. i agree, get rid of parachute payments and put wage caps on full stop. club that have been relegated should not be provided cash to keep their assets. They has a season to keep their league status and weeny good enough. What they should be doing is selling their expensive assets to keep afloat rather than easily being allowed to keep them and then add on top. its not really relegation otherwise. As far as I'm concerned, the sooner the premiership destroys itself the better. The football league should separate itself and call the championship the top league for the real football and the real fans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.