Red Skin Posted March 19 Author Report Share Posted March 19 2 hours ago, CityGill said: I have always wondered why all premier league clubs couldn’t have mandatory contract clauses in all playing staff contracts stating that should they get relegated all players contracts would be reduced to X amount …… determined by the income of the club. It seems to be that one of the biggest justification for parachute payments is to cover wages of players after relegation. So if players under-perform they still have their PL wages guaranteed. This is at the expense of fairness of competition throughout the EFL. It's financial prudence to do so. I don't see why the competiveness of the Championship should be compromised to support clubs that don't do this. Any decent players that relegated clubs have are always in demand, not least by those being promoted from the Championship. They can always generate revenue in this way and still have a very good squad compared to the rest of the Championship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Skin Posted March 19 Author Report Share Posted March 19 5 hours ago, ExiledAjax said: Championship clubs already fly as close as they can to bankrupting themselves, or distort their squads beyond repair, in an effort to chase the riches of the PL. Increasing how much money is given to a promoted team would only increase that desire to do absolutely anything possible to get there. The FFP should take of that though. Not saying it's works as it should, but that's what it's there to do. To stop clubs spending beyond their means. A club that gets promoted then relegated would effectively get the same extra income, but instead of getting it when relegated from the PL they'd get it a year early when they are promoted. I think it would improve competition in both divisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Skin Posted March 19 Author Report Share Posted March 19 5 hours ago, And Its Smith said: They get £150m golden hello already. Seems enough to me And yet all promoted clubs fail to compete with very few exceptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leabrook Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 22 minutes ago, Red Skin said: And yet all promoted clubs fail to compete with very few exceptions. Only once has all promoted clubs gone back down since the premier league started. Plenty of teams have competed just fine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gert Mare Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 (edited) I blame Jimmy Hill for the mess that’s been created in football. Gert Chinner! Edited March 19 by Gert Mare Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 40 minutes ago, Red Skin said: And yet all promoted clubs fail to compete with very few exceptions. I disagree here. Out of the last 10 teams to win the championship, only 3 have gone down the following season. 5 of the last 10 runners up have stayed up. Only 2 of the last 6 play off winners have been relegated. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said: They do, somewhere between 1/4 and even as much as half at times. Think most who get relegated do. However the current system still horribly flawed. Most do, you hear stories of some who don't and think 'they are so ****** if they go down' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 3 minutes ago, Lrrr said: Most do, you hear stories of some who don't and think 'they are so ****** if they go down' Jack Rodwell was in £70k p.w. with a 50% wage drop if they got relegated, but only got triggered if they didn’t go straight back up. They obviously went down again, so he was on £35k p.w in Lg1. Some players will get two clubs vying for their signature. One wants to insert a clause, the other doesn’t. It can sway who he signs for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcusX Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 6 hours ago, And Its Smith said: They get £150m golden hello already. Seems enough to me Isn't this said because even the bottom place finish gets £100m if they go down? So they don't get that upfront to improve their squad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 1 minute ago, MarcusX said: Isn't this said because even the bottom place finish gets £100m if they go down? So they don't get that upfront to improve their squad Nobody buys a player paying the full fee up front nowadays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 4 minutes ago, MarcusX said: Isn't this said because even the bottom place finish gets £100m if they go down? So they don't get that upfront to improve their squad Most clubs seem to take a loan from Macquarie Bank secured on the future revenue payout, or where they’ve agreed to receive a transfer fee in instalments. Good article here. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/feb/11/premier-league-clubs-australian-bank-macquarie-loans-tv-earnings 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Skin Posted March 19 Author Report Share Posted March 19 1 hour ago, And Its Smith said: I disagree here. Out of the last 10 teams to win the championship, only 3 have gone down the following season. 5 of the last 10 runners up have stayed up. Only 2 of the last 6 play off winners have been relegated. So in the last 10 years out of 30 teams promoted how many have stayed up and cemented a place in the PL? I really don't think it's many. Those that do stay up are usually at the bottom of the league. And out of those 30 they'll be a fair few yoyo clubs so featured many times. Every season the bookies and pundits all have the promoted teams as most likely to go down again. I haven't looked at the stats, but I think what I've said is generally the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 23 minutes ago, Red Skin said: So in the last 10 years out of 30 teams promoted how many have stayed up and cemented a place in the PL? I really don't think it's many. Those that do stay up are usually at the bottom of the league. And out of those 30 they'll be a fair few yoyo clubs so featured many times. Every season the bookies and pundits all have the promoted teams as most likely to go down again. I haven't looked at the stats, but I think what I've said is generally the case. 13 out of 30 have gone down I believe. You said very few exceptions which is what I disagreed with. Over 50% have stayed up which means they have competed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDOXO Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 8 hours ago, Red Skin said: Parachute payments have completely undermined the championship as a competition. They seemed to be a knee jerk response to clubs like Barnsley that collapsed after relegation from the top flight because they failed to build relegation terms into players contracts. It's been interesting to hear some of the conversations around Forest's points deduction. One defence I've heard is that as a club promoted they needed to buy a whole new squad of players if they were to have any chance of competing in the Premiership. So why not change the model? Scrap parachute payments and instead use the money to give promoted clubs a golden hello so that can have a better chance of competing in the top flight? The golden hello is built in to promotion obviously Parachute payments need to be far less with money distributed among the otherclubs IMO. However as much as webitch about the the money, the same disparity is becoming obvious between championship and league one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1t_ref_again Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 How about, if prem clubs relegated feel they need a parachute payment to continue funding the club due to players contracts, they start the season with a points deduction, the bigger the PP the bigger the deduction on a sliding scale. This would encourage clubs to be prudent, but if they want to keep the prem players on high wages they will not just walk the league like they do now. Would need a bit of analysis to get the scale of deduction correct, but it could level up the championship, rather than at least 2 PP clubs going up every year 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Skin Posted March 19 Author Report Share Posted March 19 47 minutes ago, And Its Smith said: 13 out of 30 have gone down I believe. You said very few exceptions which is what I disagreed with. Over 50% have stayed up which means they have competed You and your bloody statistics! Perhaps it's one of those instances where the impression doesn't match the reality. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 (edited) 1 hour ago, Red Skin said: So in the last 10 years out of 30 teams promoted how many have stayed up and cemented a place in the PL? I really don't think it's many. Those that do stay up are usually at the bottom of the league. And out of those 30 they'll be a fair few yoyo clubs so featured many times. Every season the bookies and pundits all have the promoted teams as most likely to go down again. I haven't looked at the stats, but I think what I've said is generally the case. key: row 1 - number of years you get PPs for (brackets if you come straight back down) row 2 - amount of PPs (roughly £42m / £35m / £16m) row 3 - season rows 4-6 - promoted teams (dark green - straight back up / light green - with PPs) rows 7-9 - relegated teams (orange - straight back down) Edited March 19 by Davefevs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 2 hours ago, Lrrr said: Most do, you hear stories of some who don't and think 'they are so ****** if they go down' Of course there are some. Rodwell was one, Allen another at Stoke. I believe Mitrovic retained his or got a new deal or somesuch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clutton Caveman Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 20 hours ago, Red Skin said: Parachute payments have completely undermined the championship as a competition. They seemed to be a knee jerk response to clubs like Barnsley that collapsed after relegation from the top flight because they failed to build relegation terms into players contracts. It's been interesting to hear some of the conversations around Forest's points deduction. One defence I've heard is that as a club promoted they needed to buy a whole new squad of players if they were to have any chance of competing in the Premiership. So why not change the model? Scrap parachute payments and instead use the money to give promoted clubs a golden hello so that can have a better chance of competing in the top flight? What if they go back down that year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.