Financial Fair Play - Coming to the Premier League ?
Discussion
Just read this article
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competit...
Sounds like we may actually see the Premier League trying to get it's house in order rather than relying on UEFA which will never really happen in my opinion. If that happens it's got to be a very good thing and long overdue. I had no idea what all the other leagues leagues in Engalnd had finacial controls built into the rule book.
Apart from Man City I can't see anyone else objecting....maybe Chelsea. Has to be a good thing for football.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competit...
Sounds like we may actually see the Premier League trying to get it's house in order rather than relying on UEFA which will never really happen in my opinion. If that happens it's got to be a very good thing and long overdue. I had no idea what all the other leagues leagues in Engalnd had finacial controls built into the rule book.
Apart from Man City I can't see anyone else objecting....maybe Chelsea. Has to be a good thing for football.
London424 said:
No surprise that City would object to it. They don't have a hope of breaking even for a long time...have Chelsea managed it yet?
Of course not. not once since their inception in 2003. The FFP rules are a joke there are easy ways around it.
Whilst fans will happily sell the soul of their clubs for some purchased trophies it will continue to go on, there is no way of stopping it.
It's no surprise to see the American owned Utd agreeing to "financial fair play" proposals from the Amercian owned Liverpool, and supported by the American owned Arsenal. This has nothing to do with levelling the playing field for all Premiership teams and everything to do with keeping it firmly tilted in their favour. Why? Because the American owners are desperate to protect their franchise business models which are wholly dependent on the franchise continuing to deliver revenue growth through success in various competitions, which then translates into the much bigger global marketing and merchandising revenue growth.
Why don't these Amercian owners push for a similar model to US sports, where there is a salary cap and a draft system which sends young talented players to the least successful clubs? Because linking expenditure against income will protect the status quo, and hence their profits.
Why don't these Amercian owners push for a similar model to US sports, where there is a salary cap and a draft system which sends young talented players to the least successful clubs? Because linking expenditure against income will protect the status quo, and hence their profits.
General Bilko said:
It's no surprise to see the American owned Utd agreeing to "financial fair play" proposals from the Amercian owned Liverpool, and supported by the American owned Arsenal. This has nothing to do with levelling the playing field for all Premiership teams and everything to do with keeping it firmly tilted in their favour. Why? Because the American owners are desperate to protect their franchise business models which are wholly dependent on the franchise continuing to deliver revenue growth through success in various competitions, which then translates into the much bigger global marketing and merchandising revenue growth.
Why don't these Amercian owners push for a similar model to US sports, where there is a salary cap and a draft system which sends young talented players to the least successful clubs? Because linking expenditure against income will protect the status quo, and hence their profits.
I thought it was a proposal from Liverpool as the owners have realised they can't compete for the title or get into the Champions league without spending a lot of money. Money they would have to come up with upfront with the potential of receiving no reward on the back end. They obviously don't want to do that. Why don't these Amercian owners push for a similar model to US sports, where there is a salary cap and a draft system which sends young talented players to the least successful clubs? Because linking expenditure against income will protect the status quo, and hence their profits.
If they can reign in the spending of these other clubs they can compete on a more even footing as Liverpool generate a fair amount of revenue on a global scale. I agree with you that it's not looking out for others, but is trying to reposition Liverpool.
London424 said:
I thought it was a proposal from Liverpool as the owners have realised they can't compete for the title or get into the Champions league without spending a lot of money. Money they would have to come up with upfront with the potential of receiving no reward on the back end. They obviously don't want to do that.
If they can reign in the spending of these other clubs they can compete on a more even footing as Liverpool generate a fair amount of revenue on a global scale. I agree with you that it's not looking out for others, but is trying to reposition Liverpool.
Rubbish. You're making it sound like there's some sort of big conspiracy going on, am I right in assuming you're a Chelski fan?. I can understand the argument from both sides but as mentioned it surely cannot carry on like this. There has got to be some sort of structure or it's just a case of who has the most money, when these super teams win the league or even the champions league you never have the feeling of they've earned it but more a feeling of they bought it. Just wrong & not good for football as a whole.If they can reign in the spending of these other clubs they can compete on a more even footing as Liverpool generate a fair amount of revenue on a global scale. I agree with you that it's not looking out for others, but is trying to reposition Liverpool.
FellowPazzini said:
London424 said:
I thought it was a proposal from Liverpool as the owners have realised they can't compete for the title or get into the Champions league without spending a lot of money. Money they would have to come up with upfront with the potential of receiving no reward on the back end. They obviously don't want to do that.
If they can reign in the spending of these other clubs they can compete on a more even footing as Liverpool generate a fair amount of revenue on a global scale. I agree with you that it's not looking out for others, but is trying to reposition Liverpool.
Rubbish. You're making it sound like there's some sort of big conspiracy going on, am I right in assuming you're a Chelski fan?. I can understand the argument from both sides but as mentioned it surely cannot carry on like this. There has got to be some sort of structure or it's just a case of who has the most money, when these super teams win the league or even the champions league you never have the feeling of they've earned it but more a feeling of they bought it. Just wrong & not good for football as a whole.If they can reign in the spending of these other clubs they can compete on a more even footing as Liverpool generate a fair amount of revenue on a global scale. I agree with you that it's not looking out for others, but is trying to reposition Liverpool.
I've posted previously that I can only hope the FFP when introduced can't be circumvented, unfortunately many other posters pointed out that I'm merely dreaming.
My comments were based purely on the article posted, that this motion to bring FFP into the Premier League was led by Liverpool. Nothing about a conspiracy or any such other nonsense.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff