UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

[Deleted member 77198]

Supporters = Customers. The more customers you have the more money you make in gate receipts and commercial revenue. The more money you can earn the better chance of success. It's not rocket science.

But for all these clubs that have the most customers, you can go back to a certain point in time where they had huge outside investment to get them to the top.

There’s nothing more special about Liverpool as a city than Sheffield Bristol Portsmouth or Bradford or many other places. Liverpool isn’t a particularly big place. Liverpool FC are only a big club because back in the late 1950s they had huge investment and went on a few decades of winning a load of trophies. There’s nothing special about that. So there’s no reason that by 2119 that Sheffield United, Bristol City, Portsmouth or Bradford City can’t be as big as Liverpool were in 1985 or they are now.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

The scum were shit for most of their history and poor gates to boot!

Pre-war, certainly. Since the 1950s United have been the best supported club in the country averaging over 55k at times when the best of the rest averaged around 40k.

But pre-war they had average attendances of 11-14k.

Things change. No club is special. No club with a big support now means that support will remain going on forever.

Charlton had one of the best ever average attendances in this country back in the 1930s. It didn’t last.

But all a club needs is good investment to kick start a trophy run and their support will change. There’s no reason why that can’t be ANY club.

 

[oakiecokie]

I have no idea what you're talking about here. Are you going back 50 years or talking about the present?

You`re new on here aren`t you ?

 

[Stoned Rose]

Liverpool were built on sugardaddies' in more than one period.

Most of the 'elite' teams now, benefitted from the same, at different times in their history. Without that charity, many would have disappeared.

Only in the last ten years, did rich owners investing if football teams become a bad thing.

Nobody gave a flying fuck, for example, when John Hall bought a team for Newcastle.

Utd fans cheered Michael Knighton as he promised to buy them players. The investment then, would be billions now by comparison. That enabled them to buy the Premier League & be a Champions League team, which is why they.are so rich now.

They would fail FFP ten times over attempting that level of spending now.

Nobody cared. They loved it. Sky loved it.

Then all those clubs got together to protect themselves, from others doing the same.

FFP.

‘Elite’ post this mate.

Colossal.

 

[Goatmeal]

If they brought in FFP to purely prevent clubs from going bankrupt, they could have made the rules so simple.
I.e As long as there is always enough money in the clubs bank account to cover three years of player salaries then a club should be able to spend what they want.
If the owners walk away then the worst case is there is enough money in the bank to pay the players until most of their contracts run down.
Then realign the club according to the self generating income.
Therefore our owners could just bang around £900m as a back up fund into the clubs account.
Job done and so easy to police.

 

[remember arthur mann]

Pre-war, certainly. Since the 1950s United have been the best supported club in the country averaging over 55k at times when the best of the rest averaged around 40k.

But pre-war they had average attendances of 11-14k.

Things change. No club is special. No club with a big support now means that support will remain going on forever.

Charlton had one of the best ever average attendances in this country back in the 1930s. It didn’t last.

But all a club needs is good investment to kick start a trophy run and their support will change. There’s no reason why that can’t be ANY club.

Funny that, in the sixties l watched City with 60 thou regularly and as I've said previously
It was only GMP that put restrictions on our attendances.!

 

[NorCalBlue]

There’s nothing more special about Liverpool as a city than Sheffield Bristol Portsmouth or Bradford or many other places.

Take that back right now! They have a special knowledge of the game and a special sense of humor - everyone knows that.

 

[JGL07]

Monaco spent fortunes for years playing in front of 10,000 crowds, hardly an example of spending within your means.

10,000 in their dreams!

Monaco generally average 7,500 to 8,500. Although they have topped 9,000 a couple of times.

In their last season in Ligue 2 back in 2011-12, they pulled in an average of 4,458.

 

[Kinkys Left Foot]

Monaco’s ex-manager Arsehole Wenger and his constant whinging and labelling City as being financially doped. Never said a fucking word whilst managing the biggest financially doped side in Europe. What a fucking whopper.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Too many capital U's over the last few pages rags is written with a lowercase r.

Thank you ;)

 

[the talisman]

Good post and I would agree with most of it. It's heavily stacked in favour of the already big and rich club's, that's life though, it can be shit sometimes. In all walks of life it's set up by the rich to protect the rich.

Where I disagree with you is using Utd for comparison purposes, they are consistently one of the richest club's in the world and still will be when they're struggling away looking for the next messiah to bring back the glory days. Picking the 4th or 5th best team in the championship and expecting they can over take Man Utd in a couple of years is unrealistic. No more than it's realistic to expect your local corner shop to be taking on Tesco or a start up taking on Google or Pfizer. As they grow they are swallowed up by the establishment, it's how big business works and always will.

Would FFP stop Leeds overhauling Man Utd in 3 years? 100% It would, would it stop them over 15 years, I don't see any reason why it would. There are examples of what can be achieved by working within your resources over a long period of time, Spurs being a great example that a good manager, smart spending and a long term plan can bring success. Monaco and Ajax are other fine examples of using limited resources well.

For reasons previously stated I don't have an issue with FFP preventing club's going mad and risking everything for a quick shot at success.

Talk about drinking the Kook Aid. I have an issue with this assumption that it’s so great to succeed with “limited resources” as you put it.
You must have loved Arsenal when Wenger was tapping up the best kids from across France and North Africa and bribing their parents so that the clubs who developed them got nothing.
What’s so bad about putting money into the game that we love?
If you can pay your employees and pay your bills, spend away, I can’t think of a better way to spend money than bringing in the best players you can.... it’s a form of entertainment after all.

 

[BLUE THUNDER]

I have no idea what you're talking about here. Are you going back 50 years or talking about the present?

I wasn't defending Utd, simply stating a fact that they are so wealthy a championship team is not about to surpass them.

You`re new on here aren`t you ?

Just read your posts.

Who exactly do you support Mr "Canyouseethesky" ?
.... because it clearly is not Manchester City

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

Pre-war, certainly. Since the 1950s United have been the best supported club in the country averaging over 55k at times when the best of the rest averaged around 40k.

But pre-war they had average attendances of 11-14k.

Things change. No club is special. No club with a big support now means that support will remain going on forever.

Charlton had one of the best ever average attendances in this country back in the 1930s. It didn’t last.

But all a club needs is good investment to kick start a trophy run and their support will change. There’s no reason why that can’t be ANY club.

You should take into account that in the 50's it was popular to go and see both clubs

 

[laserblue]

Pre-war, certainly. Since the 1950s United have been the best supported club in the country averaging over 55k at times when the best of the rest averaged around 40k.

But pre-war they had average attendances of 11-14k.

Things change. No club is special. No club with a big support now means that support will remain going on forever.

Charlton had one of the best ever average attendances in this country back in the 1930s. It didn’t last.

But all a club needs is good investment to kick start a trophy run and their support will change. There’s no reason why that can’t be ANY club.

In the early 30s the rags' (as their own fans called them because they couldn't afford to replace their tatty kit) attendances went down to 3,000.

Nice neighbours City bought them a new kit on one of the many occasions when we helped them out in time of need. And what did we get in return? The fucking clock banner.

 

[oakiecokie]

In the early 30s the rags' (as their own fans called them because they couldn't afford to replace their tatty kit) attendances went down to 3,000.

Nice neighbours City bought them a new kit on one of the many occasions when we helped them out in time of need. And what did we get in return? The fucking clock banner.

The biggest problem for me mate,is that most don`t have a clue about their own Rags history.
It appears that real football didn`t start until 1992 some 25 years after their previous good run.

 

[Neville Kneville]

Pre-war, certainly. Since the 1950s United have been the best supported club in the country averaging over 55k at times when the best of the rest averaged around 40k.

But pre-war they had average attendances of 11-14k.

Things change. No club is special. No club with a big support now means that support will remain going on forever.

Charlton had one of the best ever average attendances in this country back in the 1930s. It didn’t last.

But all a club needs is good investment to kick start a trophy run and their support will change. There’s no reason why that can’t be ANY club.

This is what is entirely wrong with FFP.

These clubs are attempting to ensure that is indeed the situation, that because they have been successful in recent decades, they 'deserve' to retain that position forever.

When in reality, if Platini went back in a time machine implementing FFP, at different periods, it would be an entirely different set of clubs at the top now.

 

[Gray]

First post in this thread was the 7th March, nearly 16 weeks ago.

Why is it taking so long?

 

[remember arthur mann]

In the early 30s the rags' (as their own fans called them because they couldn't afford to replace their tatty kit) attendances went down to 3,000.

Nice neighbours City bought them a new kit on one of the many occasions when we helped them out in time of need. And what did we get in return? The fucking clock banner.

In true Trump fashion it'll come out as fake news !!

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

First post in this thread was the 7th March, nearly 16 weeks ago.

Why is it taking so long?

Waiting for most opportune moment to piss on our chips. My money’s on the ban being announced within 12 hours of City unveiling Puma, Rodri, Cancelo and slabhead from Leicester

 

[The perfect fumble]

In the early 30s the rags' (as their own fans called them because they couldn't afford to replace their tatty kit) attendances went down to 3,000.

Nice neighbours City bought them a new kit on one of the many occasions when we helped them out in time of need. And what did we get in return? The fucking clock banner.

In football there is no history, for any club. Fans talk about it, argue about it, deny it in other clubs, but the reality is that football is just one long sequence of now, win this game, move to the next, it's a draw, didn't expect that, then move to the next one and so on and so on.

Fans who waffle on about their history all have one thing in common, there's something wrong with their now.

And come the new season the slate is wiped clean, optimism abounds, the cycle of now kick starts and as the scousers say "we go again".