Forest buying 16 players

[Robbored]

Fulham did the same and came straight back down. The PL is a tough place for any newly promoted club and if they survive the second season up there is just as tough.

It’s easy to understand why the bookies have Forest as one of the favourites to get relegated.

[Sheltons Army]

15 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Amortisation.

£140m (or whatever) on players on 4 year deals only costs them £35m per season.  Wages too Admittedly but again say 14 players on £60k p.w. Is “only” £42m p.a.

Trying time follow yourS , mr P’s knowledge and understanding of finances and FFP

 

Alright as long as you don’t get relegated I assume Dave ?

Do I follow , and is it that simple , that those deals you highlight (Appreciate you are estimating wages) would mean you are basically dealing with a £77m deficit for each of the following four seasons , in terms of FFP, on the balance sheet (Ignoring any income or other expenditure)  ?

Bit of a problem in Championship !

A Fire sale I assume , or some dodgy transfer dealing to Greece

Edited August 19, 2022 by Sheltons Army

[ExiledAjax]

1 minute ago, Sheltons Army said:

Trying time follow yourS , mr P’s knowledge and understanding of finances and FFP

 

Alright as long as you don’t get relegated I assume Dave ?

Do I follow , and is it that simple , that those deals you highlight (Appreciate you are estimating wages) would mean you are basically dealing with a £77m deficit for each of the following four seasons , in terms of FFP ?

Bit of a problem in Championship !

A Fire sale I assume , or some dodgy transfer dealing to Greece

Or some relegation clauses. Wage (and bonus) reductions of circa 50% aren't unheard of. Players may also have clauses that compel the club to try and transfer them out upon relegation.

We have hefty relegation and promotion clauses in our players' contracts that respectively give significant increases and reductions upon either event.

Not all premier league teams have them, but I'd hope a newly promoted side are using them in any new contract.

[chinapig]

19 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Or some relegation clauses. Wage (and bonus) reductions of circa 50% aren't unheard of. Players may also have clauses that compel the club to try and transfer them out upon relegation.

We have hefty relegation and promotion clauses in our players' contracts that respectively give significant increases and reductions upon either event.

Not all premier league teams have them, but I'd hope a newly promoted side are using them in any new contract.

Plus of course they will be protected by parachute payments. Practically an incentive to overspend 

[Steve Watts]

16 hours ago, Show Me The Money! said:

Apologies if this has been discussed already and another apology as this isn’t City related but I’m baffled as to how Forest seem to be not only buying lots of players (16 now) but also spending quite large amounts of money for a newly promoted club that have a ground not really that much bigger than Ashton Gate. How are they able to do this?

I’ve never liked Forest for some reason as they always seem to be one of these clubs that the media seem to kiss the ass off because of Brian Clough and have fans that think they belong in the prem because they won the European cup a couple of times 40 years ago. I’m basically wanting them to get thrashed every week and will be peeved if they stay up because they are basically over spending beyond there means.

Rant over

You see, I used to have a soft spot for Forest because of Cloughie and how he set his teams to play attractive passing football.  That soft spot disappeared following relegation when it became very clear to everyone that they have the most entitled fanbase I'd come across at that point.  They are rivalled in that by Leeds and Villa now mind.

[alexukhc]

Will they gel in time?

[TransferForum]

Back where we belong…. From a very smug and entitled Forest fan.

[lenred]

36 minutes ago, TransferForum said:

Back where we belong…. From a very smug and entitled Forest fan.

A mid table championship forum with absolutely no connection to my club is exactly where I’d be if I were a Forest fan who was ‘back where I belonged’ at this moment. Whatever floats your boat though.  

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

Trying time follow yourS , mr P’s knowledge and understanding of finances and FFP

 

Alright as long as you don’t get relegated I assume Dave ?

Do I follow , and is it that simple , that those deals you highlight (Appreciate you are estimating wages) would mean you are basically dealing with a £77m deficit for each of the following four seasons , in terms of FFP, on the balance sheet (Ignoring any income or other expenditure)  ?

Bit of a problem in Championship !

A Fire sale I assume , or some dodgy transfer dealing to Greece

3 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Or some relegation clauses. Wage (and bonus) reductions of circa 50% aren't unheard of. Players may also have clauses that compel the club to try and transfer them out upon relegation.

We have hefty relegation and promotion clauses in our players' contracts that respectively give significant increases and reductions upon either event.

Not all premier league teams have them, but I'd hope a newly promoted side are using them in any new contract.

Saw something this morning that said most of their signings have a 75% wage reduction on relegation.  I assume that means they will be on a quarter of their wage and that it wasn’t poorly worded.  They must be paying some “wedge” is all I can say.

As above the problem isn’t necessarily the wages plus amortisation as they’ll have PPs, but more players not willing to put in a shift “down in the championship”.  Whether they’ve negotiated release clauses or not I’ve no idea.

Forest will get circa £115-120m (total revenue inc tv this season).  If they go straight down, they will only get two season’s PPs (£44m and £35m).  That will be eaten by amortisation straightaway.

Its a dangerous game!

[Sheltons Army]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Saw something this morning that said most of their signings have a 75% wage reduction on relegation.  I assume that means they will be on a quarter of their wage and that it wasn’t poorly worded.  They must be paying some “wedge” is all I can say.

As above the problem isn’t necessarily the wages plus amortisation as they’ll have PPs, but more players not willing to put in a shift “down in the championship”.  Whether they’ve negotiated release clauses or not I’ve no idea.

Forest will get circa £115-120m (total revenue inc tv this season).  If they go straight down, they will only get two season’s PPs (£44m and £35m).  That will be eaten by amortisation straightaway.

Its a dangerous game!

Ta , 

Looks a real gamble , but I’ve been surprised by their apparent spending for years

[GrahamC]

3 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

 

 

A Fire sale I assume , or some dodgy transfer dealing to Greece

Already a bit of that with the mysterious summer sale of Joao Carvalho to Olympiakos, Forest’s (then) record signing who barely played, then got loaned out to Almeria (who?), he even struggled there but was sold to Olympiakos apparently at a profit.

Absolutely stinks.

[Bristol Oil Services]

3 hours ago, TransferForum said:

Back where we belong…. From a very smug and entitled Forest fan.

56 seasons at the top, 58 at the second tier. I reckon you belong in both ....

[LondonBristolian]

4 hours ago, Steve Watts said:

You see, I used to have a soft spot for Forest because of Cloughie and how he set his teams to play attractive passing football.  That soft spot disappeared following relegation when it became very clear to everyone that they have the most entitled fanbase I'd come across at that point.  They are rivalled in that by Leeds and Villa now mind.

In fairness to Leeds, their fans have made the most impressive noise I've ever heard at a football match. When they came back to draw with us from 2 down at Elland Road a few years back, it was because their supporters willed them back into the game.

Admittedly I've only been to Forest at points when they've been struggling in the league but - despite the entitlement - their ground is a bit of a library. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

In respect of Nottingham Forest, a couple of FFP bits.

Firstly, their Upper Loss Tariff to 2022-23. I make it £55.5m...the average of 2019-20, 2020-21 then 2021-22 and 2022-23 as usual. Add the 4 ULTs together...£13m x 3 + £35m=£74m. Divide by 4 x 3.

Should be back on the usual cycle by 2023/24, so £61m it is- the combined Covid average it is.

They could always take the option of a big Impairment to accelerate the write down if it's inevitable they are to drop back to the Championship but they have to be mindful of the £55.5m limit!

Some may also depend on how much of their Covid write downs are accepted...I assume that's an on going analysis for all clubs, surely could impact upon their 2018-19, then combined average of 2019-20 and 2020-21 then 2021-22...if it exceeds £39m on further analysis ie adjustment of add-back then that would put them in breach in the year of promotion. 

Otoh they usually sell well, if they drop maybe they will also sell quite heavily .

[PHILINFRANCE]

10 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Already a bit of that with the mysterious summer sale of Joao Carvalho to Olympiakos, Forest’s (then) record signing who barely played, then got loaned out to Almeria (who?), he even struggled there but was sold to Olympiakos apparently at a profit.

Absolutely stinks.

https://www.google.com/search?gs_ssp=eJzj4tFP1zcsNjAty87LtTRg9OIryE8vTS1WSMzJTS3KTAQAkCIJ8Q&q=pogues+almeria&oq=pogues+almeria&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j46i19j0i19i22i30l2.6449j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Edited August 19, 2022 by PHILINFRANCE

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

In respect of Nottingham Forest, a couple of FFP bits.

Firstly, their Upper Loss Tariff to 2022-23. I make it £55.5m...the average of 2019-20, 2020-21 then 2021-22 and 2022-23 as usual. Add the 4 ULTs together...£13m x 3 + £35m=£74m. Divide by 4 x 3.

Should be back on the usual cycle by 2023/24, so £61m it is- the combined Covid average it is.

They could always take the option of a big Impairment to accelerate the write down if it's inevitable they are to drop back to the Championship but they have to be mindful of the £55.5m limit!

Some may also depend on how much of their Covid write downs are accepted...I assume that's an on going analysis for all clubs, surely could impact upon their 2018-19, then combined average of 2019-20 and 2020-21 then 2021-22...if it exceeds £39m on further analysis ie adjustment of add-back then that would put them in breach in the year of promotion. 

Otoh they usually sell well, if they drop maybe they will also sell quite heavily .

Yes ok you obviously know your stuff but...I understand the first sentence, the rest is on a different planet to my brain.

[Major Isewater]

19 hours ago, alexukhc said:

Will they gel in time?

If they sign Ronaldo from Man Utd.

[Super]

Maybe they signed too many. Interesting to see how long they keep hold of Cooper if results don't improve.

[Ronnie Sinclair]

Just now, Super said:

Maybe they signed too many. Interesting to see how long they keep hold of Cooper if results don't improve.

I could see him fitting in at Brighton, I'm still not convinced all those signings were his choice.

[Super]

2-3 now. SKY definitely showing the wrong game tonight.

[Major Isewater]

9 hours ago, Super said:

2-3 now. SKY definitely showing the wrong game tonight.

A bit ironic that the club who exposed as flawed the idea to splash out big when promoted should now beat Forest who followed the same route. 
 

[Davefevs]

I don’t really wish Forest any ill-feeling, but I can’t help feeling the way they recruited in the summer was incredibly risky. Financially they will more than likely be ok if they go back down, but it’s the repair job left behind that’s the issue.  Could they have focussed on getting 7 or 8 in and embedded those?  But 20+ imho is bonkers…you’re signing players who won’t play, and you’re praying they don’t disrupt the rest of the squad.

I guess we will have to wait and see.

[Midred]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I don’t really wish Forest any ill-feeling, but I can’t help feeling the way they recruited in the summer was incredibly risky. Financially they will more than likely be ok if they go back down, but it’s the repair job left behind that’s the issue.  Could they have focussed on getting 7 or 8 in and embedded those?  But 20+ imho is bonkers…you’re signing players who won’t play, and you’re praying they don’t disrupt the rest of the squad.

I guess we will have to wait and see.

I realise that not all those players will have been his choice but didn't he import alot of players at Swansea? 

[BCFC-Tom]

They have 31 first team players looking at their OS, so pretty obvious why they signed 21 players albeit that’s a lot of players. 

[Major Isewater]

20 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I don’t really wish Forest any ill-feeling, but I can’t help feeling the way they recruited in the summer was incredibly risky. Financially they will more than likely be ok if they go back down, but it’s the repair job left behind that’s the issue.  Could they have focussed on getting 7 or 8 in and embedded those?  But 20+ imho is bonkers…you’re signing players who won’t play, and you’re praying they don’t disrupt the rest of the squad.

I guess we will have to wait and see.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Fulham have done it a bit differently this time, granted this is their 3rd yoyo attempt and they will have learnt a few things.

7 permanent and 4 loans, somewhere between the two really of keeping faith and building a whole new squad.

Granted, an ability to keep in particular Adarabioyo, Reed and Mitrovic then arguably too Tete and Robinson certainly will have helped. When they came down in 2021, I didn't think they would have kept all 5 of those! Rodak and Cairney also have their uses albeit perhaps not as regulars anymore.

I think Nottingham Forest might have gambled to some extent and Fulham likewise in 2018 on building a squad not just for this year but for the next few years. As in buy big now, if we stay up a good few of these can get better and better together, integrated, cohesive and it's tweaks not masssive changes in the coming years that are needed.

Have to stay up in that 1st season though!

Edited September 17, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[ScottishRed]

31 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Fulham have done it a bit differently this time, granted this is their 3rd yoyo attempt and they will have learnt a few things.

7 permanent and 4 loans, somewhere between the two really of keeping faith and building a whole new squad.

Granted, an ability to keep in particular Adarabioyo, Reed and Mitrovic then arguably too Tete and Robinson certainly will have helped. When they came down in 2021, I didn't think they would have kept all 5 of those! Rodak and Cairney also have their uses albeit perhaps not as regulars anymore.

I think Nottingham Forest might have gambled to some extent and Fulham likewise in 2018 on building a squad not just for this year but for the next few years. As in buy big now, if we stay up a good few of these can get better and better together, integrated, cohesive and it's tweaks not masssive changes in the coming years that are needed.

Have to stay up in that 1st season though!

I think it’s a question of timing @Mr Popodopolous  If we assume the new players do gel it needs to be soonish or it will be too late.

[Northern Red]

I do wonder how much say Cooper really had in all this. I can't think that any manager worth his salt would be happy with a mass of new signings that he has to try and make work, and quickly too.

[Davefevs]

23 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

I do wonder how much say Cooper really had in all this. I can't think that any manager worth his salt would be happy with a mass of new signings that he has to try and make work, and quickly too.

If it works….all of it.

If it goes wrong….it was all the DoF’s fault!

[PHILINFRANCE]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I don’t really wish Forest any ill-feeling.

But 20+ imho is bonkers…you’re signing players who won’t play, and you’re praying they don’t disrupt the rest of the squad.

I guess we will have to wait and see.

I sort of agree with the thrust of your post but, and I know it’s early days, it doesn’t seem to be doing Ipswich any harm.