City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

BlueMoonz1977 said:
Break away league will happen eventually through this.........fuck uefa
Click to expand...
Breakaway League? It's about a third of the likely membership of any breakaway league that are behind this more so than UEFA. Namely Bayern, Barca, Dortmund, Juve, Atleti, Napoli and maybe Madrid.
 
aguero93:20 said:
How many current day players are on the board of UEFA?
Click to expand...

the game today is all about the players and the power of money they can get from a move to a big club and money is generated for players and nothing else the clubs lost all the power with the bosman rule and player power rules the game today. clubs are now just seen as a bank and players just taking and taking as much as they like

if uefa want the change football then the clubs need to have a back bone and not bent over and they should stand up and say enough is enough. money in football is in one hand out the other money its going out of the game quicker than its coming in long term contracts have to be done or you lose them for nothing 5 years deals are now standard and after 3 years another deal is put in place or the players will move its simple you have the clubs by the balls

its the likes of barca and united and madrid that are scared of losing there best players to clubs like man city and PSG its not really about the silverware and titles but the players
 
It’s such nonsense. When will they stop
3rd party ownership of players?

As others have said it sounds good to ‘other’ clubs who are lagging behind but the big clubs will benefit ultimately. They’ll sign players on the basis of sponsorship and endorsement even is salaries of transfer fees are capped.
 
ancoats said:
the game today is all about the players and the power of money they can get from a move to a big club and money is generated for players and nothing else the clubs lost all the power with the bosman rule and player power rules the game today. clubs are now just seen as a bank and players just taking and taking as much as they like

if uefa want the change football then the clubs need to have a back bone and not bent over and they should stand up and say enough is enough. money in football is in one hand out the other money its going out of the game quicker than its coming in long term contracts have to be done or you lose them for nothing 5 years deals are now standard and after 3 years another deal is put in place or the players will move its simple you have the clubs by the balls

its the likes of barca and united and madrid that are scared of losing there best players to clubs like man city and PSG its not really about the silverware and titles but the players
Click to expand...
I give up.
 
BlueAnorak said:
Need to buy our summer recruits now. As you can't implement a rule that affects a pre-existing transaction.
Click to expand...
This is so true. We have such a young squad with players who will develop for years yet in almost every position. Time to get a top striker, central defender and replacement for fern quick
 
taleofbluehalves said:
It’s such nonsense. When will they stop
3rd party ownership of players?

As others have said it sounds good to ‘other’ clubs who are lagging behind but the big clubs will benefit ultimately. They’ll sign players on the basis of sponsorship and endorsement even is salaries of transfer fees are capped.
Click to expand...
TPO was banned last season.

That's the reason I can't see this passing the ECA. Spending 100m net is beyond the bounds of possibility for the vast majority of their membership and they rely upon youth development and selling players, there's zero benefit for them in this and they'll see straight through it
 
Is it a cap of 100m full stop or is it related to how much revenue you make somehow.. like you can spend what you make in revenue plus 100m? I’m just trying to see how the rags will use this to their advantage.
 
Theengelbert said:
Is it a cap of 100m full stop or is it related to how much revenue you make somehow.. like you can spend what you make in revenue plus 100m? I’m just trying to see how the rags will use this to their advantage.
Click to expand...
100m net. So whatever you get for player sales + 100m = what you can spend. Don't think the rags are behind this one, they need to be able to buy their way out of trouble if necessary.
 
BlueAnorak said:
Need to buy our summer recruits now. As you can't implement a rule that affects a pre-existing transaction.
Click to expand...

When FFP was introduced any contract before a certain time was exempt unless other criteria wasn't met
If a club failed that criteria then the old contracts were then added, which is why we failed FFP by £120M
Believe me, they'd find a way of dragging up older deals to ensure we failed
 
This is getting really stupid and boring .
Football clubs almost never go out of business.look at the league tables say from 1920. How many of those clubs still exist. That was without any restriction. Even clubs like Rangers at elite European level went bust but still exist in a form that is undistinguished from its original form.
Northern rock , woolworths etc, etc are far more at risk.....
 
Theengelbert said:
Is it a cap of 100m full stop or is it related to how much revenue you make somehow.. like you can spend what you make in revenue plus 100m? I’m just trying to see how the rags will use this to their advantage.
Click to expand...

The Bayern model, price the elite players out of moves under contract due to net spend, then use their biggest wage bill + restricted increase in wage bill rule to outbid everyone on wages once their contract is up.
 
UEFA should just set a tournament up for Bayern , rags , real , barca then they are guaranteed to win it every year and just let rest of us get on with it .
 
aguero93:20 said:
100m net. So whatever you get for player sales + 100m = what you can spend. Don't think the rags are behind this one, they need to be able to buy their way out of trouble if necessary.
Click to expand...
Chelsea will do well out of that then. They always seem to get ridiculous value for money in selling players.

I think we’d do ok out of this too. Our players aren’t on insane (Sanchez) wages. So they’d be prepared to move to other clubs and they’re young and worth lots. It’d be much harder for the rags to move on older players like Sanchez on big contracts

I guess the best thing is sell players to China where presumably there’s no regulation.

It seems hugely favourable to clubs who already have good players.. if you want to rebuild it’d be a nightmare
 
Theengelbert said:
Chelsea will do well out of that then. They always seem to get ridiculous value for money in selling players.

I think we’d do ok out of this too. Our players aren’t on insane (Sanchez) wages. So they’d be prepared to move to other clubs and they’re young and worth lots. It’d be much harder for the rags to move on older players like Sanchez on big contracts

I guess the best thing is sell players to China where presumably there’s no regulation.

It seems hugely favourable to clubs who already have good players.. if you want to rebuild it’d be a nightmare
Click to expand...
On the other hand, Chelsea's (and City's) loan system would be destroyed if all proposals are implemented. It would favour only Bayern, Madrid and maybe Barca. Academies and youth development would become useless for top clubs like City (25-player squad rule, no players on loan).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top