Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

  • Participation within this subforum is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

Other Club Transfers 2022

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tin-Tin said:
The whole thing is a farce. I get trying to make it a fairer system but there must be plenty of ways to do it other than keep the status quo
Click to expand...
There is always going to be a pyramid with more successful clubs at the top. We (Everton & Villa) may look at Chelsea and think it is unfair and how can we ever compete with them. It is not much different from how teams in the Championship look at us. At the moment you guys are going through a bit of a tough time financially but the reality is you have revenues of circa 200m a year, you are close to completing the build of a new stadium costing about half a Billion, and you pay your manager and players salaries in or about 100k a week. How many clubs in English football would absolutely love to have the financial problems Everton has? Some clubs are genuinely struggling to survive and fans of clubs like Villa and Everton are moaning that we aren't splashing tens of millions on new players this month.

I agree that the system should be changed but it is difficult. If I was making the rules I wouldn't let any clubs live beyond their means. If a club has a wealthy owner and wanted to blow a load of money on new players and high salaries I think the owner should put the entire cost of the player's purchase price and salary in an escrow account. This would fully protect the club against the owner pulling the plug in the future and protect the club from administration due to poor financial management which I understand is the reason behind FFP. It would also reduce transfer fees and owners wouldn't have the appetite to spend their 'own' money and it would calm down the mad expenditure. It would also make a level playing field because if an owner wanted to blow a billion on players they can do without FFP restrictions as the debt would be covered by paying it into an escrow account.
 
Villa_Fan said:
There is always going to be a pyramid with more successful clubs at the top. We (Everton & Villa) may look at Chelsea and think it is unfair and how can we ever compete with them. It is not much different from how teams in the Championship look at us. At the moment you guys are going through a bit of a tough time financially but the reality is you have revenues of circa 200m a year, you are close to completing the build of a new stadium costing about half a Billion, and you pay your manager and players salaries in or about 100k a week. How many clubs in English football would absolutely love to have the financial problems Everton has? Some clubs are genuinely struggling to survive and fans of clubs like Villa and Everton are moaning that we aren't splashing tens of millions on new players this month.

I agree that the system should be changed but it is difficult. If I was making the rules I wouldn't let any clubs live beyond their means. If a club has a wealthy owner and wanted to blow a load of money on new players and high salaries I think the owner should put the entire cost of the player's purchase price and salary in an escrow account. This would fully protect the club against the owner pulling the plug in the future and protect the club from administration due to poor financial management which I understand is the reason behind FFP. It would also reduce transfer fees and owners wouldn't have the appetite to spend their 'own' money and it would calm down the mad expenditure. It would also make a level playing field because if an owner wanted to blow a billion on players they can do without FFP restrictions as the debt would be covered by paying it into an escrow account.
Click to expand...

I don't find it unfair. I do find it farcical as it's a set of rules that the PL never really want to impose. Certainly not to the bigger club's.

I read this morning that FIFA rules state that players can only have up to 5 year contracts. But Chelsea have made the additional years "options" to get round it.

If you're one of the league's cash cows, how you run the club is irrelevant to them. If you're not...well let take a peak in order to "protect" the integrity of the league.

You can stick the FFP rules along side the "fit and proper " tests for owners as failed "rules"
 

Villa_Fan said:
This would fully protect the club against the owner pulling the plug in the future and protect the club from administration due to poor financial management which I understand is the reason behind FFP.
Click to expand...
Everyone knows the reason behind FFP was to try and protect the established order. It has been prophesied as something else, but that is the reality. FFP is never going to work, whoever attempts enforcement of such rules will just be tied up in years of legal wrangling by uber-rich clubs who's owners have more money than God.

COYB!

John.
 
John96 said:
Everyone knows the reason behind FFP was to try and protect the established order. It has been prophesied as something else, but that is the reality. FFP is never going to work, whoever attempts enforcement of such rules will just be tied up in years of legal wrangling by uber-rich clubs who's owners have more money than God.

COYB!

John.
Click to expand...

like us john?

matt.
 
matty1878 said:
like us john?

matt.
Click to expand...
No, nothing like it. Moshiri is a minnow in financial power in terms of owners, we would certainly not be considered as part of the uber-rich. Other clubs have huge financial and even geopolitical power on their side through their ownership models.

COYB!

John.
 
John96 said:
Everyone knows the reason behind FFP was to try and protect the established order. It has been prophesied as something else, but that is the reality. FFP is never going to work, whoever attempts enforcement of such rules will just be tied up in years of legal wrangling by uber-rich clubs who's owners have more money than God.

COYB!

John.
Click to expand...
It was the Premier League clubs at the time that voted for the introduction of FFP, the conspiracy theory doesn't really stack up when you look at the clubs that voted to implement FFP. The only clubs that voted against it were Man City, Fulham, Aston Villa, West Brom, Swansea, and Southampton. Reading abstained and the rest of the PL clubs (at the time in 2013) voted in favour of introducing FFP.
 

John96 said:
No, nothing like it. Moshiri is a minnow in financial power in terms of owners, we would certainly not be considered as part of the uber-rich. Other clubs have huge financial and even geopolitical power on their side through their ownership models.

COYB!

John.
Click to expand...
Yet, Everton was one of the clubs that voted to introduce FFP
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top