I hate football sometimes

[poland_exile]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I agree...and I disagree.

Ultimately kn this country, I'd say the real crazy money- it started with Abramovich. Had Putin clamped down properly on the oligarchs in 2000, as he sort of looked like doing but didn't, well Abramovich wouldn't have brought Chelsea put it that way. I believe he set the ball rolling so far as the English game money hype goes.

Wealthy owners would still have existed, but nothing like as wealthy, even the last 10 years at this level, things have spiralled upwards out of control...

I agree though, this is the negative side of that trade-off. Undoubtedly so.

Yes and no. I'd say a key difference is us and others are doing it within the rules and frameworks. Or us and likeminded clu s doing our best to meet it anyway- clubs have been punished anyway.

These 2 finalists and likely Sheffield Wednesday are taking the piss, or have been big time. Yes we may spend more this summer but this is possible by selling the big 3, plus 2 squad players last summer, the restructuring and holding our discipline in the Jan window by not  seemingly making bigger bids for strikers.

Derby have some redeeming features such as sales of key playing assets last 3 seasons- by which I mean 2016/17-2018/19, lesser of 2 evils for me but part of me thinks 'This is crap- Vydra and Assombolonga in please..SL can finance by selling the ground to Peter Hargreaves but paying him the cost- oh and De Rossi on a free, Reece James on loan or and Zach Steffen on loan because why not!'

Good points, well made as always Mr. P. 

Personally, take issue with the very first one mind rgds Abramovich. (a shady crook who should have never been allowed to go anywhere near England IMO, but that's beside the point!). 

He certainly upped the stakes, but chairmen / owners have always done that. Bless his soul, but take Jack Walker. His Blackburn was a passion project as opposed to a vanity project, but his tenure sounds even more ridiculous now than it did back then - let's get Kenny Dalglish out of retirement, let's buy Duncan Shearer from Swindon so they don't go up, let's buy so-and-so, and get Chris Sutton for 10 grand a week (a sum that remains mental and out-of-reach for anyone from the normal world a QUARTER OF A CENTURY ON!!!), etc., etc. That was a madness and definitely a chunky, big domino. 

But super-rich owners will always happen and football fees and wages will always advance at a higher velocity than is normal. 

Bottom line, it's not the owners and chairmen to blame, It's us, the fans, that need a reality check. 

We're the ones who have enabled the game to be taken away from us. We're the headless donkeys renewing Sky or BT or whatever else. We're the ones that feed the monster. We're the ones that have surrendered the game to TV and continue to stick our money into the slot. It's been a velvet takeover because most of us haven't even realized we're to blame. (and I'm including myself in that!). 

I don't know the answer, I would be a genius if I did, but we've lost the game. 

(incidentally, I've gone off on a tangent and not addressed any other of your points, but i've just got back from a stint at a bar following a long train  ) 

 

 

[downendcity]

Man City has now been referred to UEFA's club financial control body.

City say they are disappointed but not surprised and that the accusations of financial irregularities remain entirely false - so that's ok then!

If they are found guilty and banned from the Champions league for a season, as has been suggested, what are the implications as far as the premier league is concerned? If they have broken UEFA's financial rules then surely they have "cheated" and should be sanctioned by the premier league for this also - it would certainly put the cat among the pigeons though.

I don't think I will hold my breath.

 

[Major Isewater]

12 hours ago, Show Me The Money! said:

Really f'ing pissed off with the fact that we have 2 financial cheats in the playoff final to go up to the prem. You don't even get the luxury of knowing they are going to get hammered most weeks and come back down again because they'll have banked a shit load of money in the process.

And to top it all the sports press and media will be Walking into their Starbucks because it's Frank bloody Lampard, especially if they do go up as well.

I don't actual give 2 his hoots about either Villa or FLDC so why am I so f'ing pissed off?

 

I believe the norm is that the losers of the Wembley play off final trouser the gate money . 

So even that will help them to wriggle out of their predicament.

The best we can hope for is a terrible play off hang over for the club who nearly touched the pot of gold .

 

[Major Isewater]

8 hours ago, poland_exile said:

Good points, well made as always Mr. P. 

Personally, take issue with the very first one mind rgds Abramovich. (a shady crook who should have never been allowed to go anywhere near England IMO, but that's beside the point!). 

He certainly upped the stakes, but chairmen / owners have always done that. Bless his soul, but take Jack Walker. His Blackburn was a passion project as opposed to a vanity project, but his tenure sounds even more ridiculous now than it did back then - let's get Kenny Dalglish out of retirement, let's buy Duncan Shearer from Swindon so they don't go up, let's buy so-and-so, and get Chris Sutton for 10 grand a week (a sum that remains mental and out-of-reach for anyone from the normal world a QUARTER OF A CENTURY ON!!!), etc., etc. That was a madness and definitely a chunky, big domino. 

But super-rich owners will always happen and football fees and wages will always advance at a higher velocity than is normal. 

Bottom line, it's not the owners and chairmen to blame, It's us, the fans, that need a reality check. 

We're the ones who have enabled the game to be taken away from us. We're the headless donkeys renewing Sky or BT or whatever else. We're the ones that feed the monster. We're the ones that have surrendered the game to TV and continue to stick our money into the slot. It's been a velvet takeover because most of us haven't even realized we're to blame. (and I'm including myself in that!). 

I don't know the answer, I would be a genius if I did, but we've lost the game. 

(incidentally, I've gone off on a tangent and not addressed any other of your points, but i've just got back from a stint at a bar following a long train  ) 

 

 

I have never paid for Sky , BT or whoever.

I hate that the game has no place for smaller clubs who struggle to pay their staff and players .

The big clubs are slowly strangling the life out of our game.

There appears to be little hope of change as money is also valued above the well being of the only planet we have and will eventually be the reason we exterminate the human race .

All because you selfish barstards subscribe to Sky , BT ...

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 16/05/2019 at 01:57, poland_exile said:

Good points, well made as always Mr. P. 

Personally, take issue with the very first one mind rgds Abramovich. (a shady crook who should have never been allowed to go anywhere near England IMO, but that's beside the point!). 

He certainly upped the stakes, but chairmen / owners have always done that. Bless his soul, but take Jack Walker. His Blackburn was a passion project as opposed to a vanity project, but his tenure sounds even more ridiculous now than it did back then - let's get Kenny Dalglish out of retirement, let's buy Duncan Shearer from Swindon so they don't go up, let's buy so-and-so, and get Chris Sutton for 10 grand a week (a sum that remains mental and out-of-reach for anyone from the normal world a QUARTER OF A CENTURY ON!!!), etc., etc. That was a madness and definitely a chunky, big domino. 

But super-rich owners will always happen and football fees and wages will always advance at a higher velocity than is normal. 

Bottom line, it's not the owners and chairmen to blame, It's us, the fans, that need a reality check. 

We're the ones who have enabled the game to be taken away from us. We're the headless donkeys renewing Sky or BT or whatever else. We're the ones that feed the monster. We're the ones that have surrendered the game to TV and continue to stick our money into the slot. It's been a velvet takeover because most of us haven't even realized we're to blame. (and I'm including myself in that!). 

 I don't know the answer, I would be a genius if I did, but we've lost the game. 

(incidentally, I've gone off on a tangent and not addressed any other of your points, but i've just got back from a stint at a bar following a long train  ) 

  

 

Thanks, enjoy your posts.

Appreciate the bit of background on Walker,- I only really associated him with say mid 90's and yes they spent a lot, but wasn't quite aware of his activities in the 2nd tier, ie I knew Dalglish had left Liverpool but wasn't aware he'd retired, didn't even know much about Duncan Shearer either- Alan Shearer yes, but Duncan!  That definitely is a domino. Still associate him moreso with the SL, Gibson, Coates etc tradition than the super rich post Abramovich, he did invest in infrastructure too I believe.My dad told me that players at one time earned not that many times above the average wage- £10k per week still is pretty crazy in real terms now when analysing it, let alone back then,

Agreed- unsure how it can be stopped, more at best a case of limiting it tbh...a hard and fast breakeven requirement for clubs, excluding legitimate expenditure which is exempt- i.e. Depreciation of non playing assets, Infrastructure, Youth, Community and one or 2 other areas that are the non footballing side but either build the club up or perform a social good. ie Revenue excluding these areas £20m, all expenditure on players etc must be no higher than £20m. Wage cap? Who would vote for these though- in terms of Directors or even many fans who want that "next level player" or "One more signing and we've cracked it" Not a chance in all honesty, unicorns.

Agreed- would add agents though, they love their cut- they've helped drive it upwards too, it all contributes.

Ultimately fans paying for TV yes. BT a compounding factor but Sky the main driving force IMO. For a long time they were the only rights holders- 10-15 years maybe, can't remember offhand.

Not just the TV either, ever increasing ticket prices, ever bigger brands of merchandise, yet still fans pay- for as long as people love football though, it'll remain at best at this level and that's likely much too optimistic. Only going one way...unfortunately.

[chucky]

On 15/05/2019 at 23:15, Mr Popodopolous said:

Sponsorship from related parties needs to be if rules enforced correctly- say the going or market rate standard wise is £5m and they get £20m, you simply disregard £15m of income as per their own rules- so if standard commercial income £12m per year say and related party transaction takes it to £32m per year- but the going rate is £5m, then you give a commercial income of £17m in total and a line is drawn through the other £15m.

I'd say 'If you don't want to follow the same rules as everyone else, then piss off- play in the Conference or some other League". I'd be fairly zero tolerance me

[downendcity]

Caught only a bit of Talksport yesterday morning and they had a female agent on the show.

They asked her who was the toughest chairman/owner you had to deal with and after a sycophantic reply of "Simon Jordan" ( he was on the show) she then said " the one that said no".

Therein lies the fundamental problem, as I see it. The ink is hardly dry on the latest squllion pounds sky tv deal than most of it is going straight out of the game into the bank accounts of players and players' agents. I've no problem with top top players earning top money, but the income levels have reached ( probably got there a while ago, to be honest) ludicrous levels, and with the trickle down effect that will always follow money at the top level wages of £30k per week are becoming commonplace in the championship.

How many accountants would advise or allow their clients  businesses to commit more than 100% of their revenue to salaries, yet this is commonplace in football, so why is it allowed to happen because it is essentially a factor that has led to ffp rules being introduced to try and prevent clubs bankrupting themselves? The answer is because owners/chairmen/chief execs do not have the balls to say no, or if they do they risk the wrath of fans ( that well know Star Trek film!) who become angry that they owner is not prepared to "put his hand in his pocket" to fund the latest overpriced and overpaid striker that will guarantee promotion.

t's like the Emperor's new clothes - everyone can see that it is ludicrous but the people in football itself.