The Super League | FA + PL: New Charter & Fines | UEFA: Settlement

Would you be happy if City joined this European Super League?

  • Yes

    Votes: 109 5.3%

  • No

    Votes: 1,954 94.7%
  • Total voters
    2,063
dickie davies said:
No salary cap per individual, but as a collective
As an extreme example, KDB could be taking 50% of the allowance and the other players 50% between them

Obviously it's monitored over a period, say three years
As a suggestion the year before qualifying for Europe and the following two, if still in European competition
Which means you can spend big to get to Europe but need to budget accordingly once there, as a club would have the additional income
Click to expand...
The problem with a percentage cap is that it benefits those with the highest revenue. Which is probably one of the factors that caused us to withdraw from the ESL as they had proposed a 55% cap on wages and net spending so if we were getting less money than United or Liverpool, then we're at an immediate disadvantage.

Whereas in the NFL for example, there's a fixed cap. Think it's $182.5m this coming season. But the NFL do revenue differently as they negotiate not just TV deals but kit deals and major commercial deals. These get shared equally among the 32 teams. There's other revenue streams, including their own local commercial deals, tickets, the food & drink concessions, parking and other things that they can keep for themselves. So there's still a financial discrepancy between the top and lowest earning teams but that doesn't matter as they all have to abide by the same absolute cap.

As a result, Dallas Cowboys are the highest earners by a mile and, without the cap would win the Superbowl every year. But because of the cap, they've not won it for 25 years. So I've come round to the idea of a similar system here, with central kit and commercial deals negotiated by the PL and a fixed cap.

I'd also abolish the current method of transfer fees but have clubs pay off the contract of a player they want to sign. But that payment is included in the cap (although it can be spread out over the life of the contract).

Then we really will have financial fair play.
 
Last edited:
Prestwich_Blue said:
The problem with a percentage cap is that it benefits those with the highest revenue. Which is probably one of the factors that caused us to withdraw from the ESL as they had proposed a 55% cap on wages and net spending so if we were getting less money than United or Liverpoo, then we're at an immediate disadvantage.

Whereas in the NFL for example, there's a fixed cap. Think it's $182.5m this coming season. But the NFL do revenue differently as they negotiate not just TV deals but kit deals and major commercial deals. These get shared equally among the 32 teams. There's other revenue streams, including their own local commercial deals, the food & drink concessions, parking and other things that they can keep for themselves. So there's less of a financial discrepancy between the top and lowest earning teams. But that doesn't matter as they all have to abide by the same absolute cap.

As a result, Dallas Cowboys are the highest earners by a mile and, without the cap would win the Superbowl every year. But because of the cap, they've not won it for 25 years. So I've come round to the idea of a similar system here, with central kit and commercial deals negotiated by the PL and a fixed cap.

I'd also abolish the current method of transfer fees but have clubs pay off the contract of a player they want to sign. But that payment is included in the cap (although it can be spread out over the life of the contract).

Then we really will have financial fair play.
Click to expand...
A socialist vision for football, what could possibly go wrong?
 
City Man said:
I agree but am surprised you've missed the one club with possibly the biggest potential, Newcastle. A big city team with a passionate fanbase capable of full capacity every home game, helped by the ground logistics. If only they could get free of the shackles of Ashley and get an owner with a decent business development strategy, I'm convinced they would be a credible top four force in the PL making it even more attractive than it is now.
Click to expand...
I purposely didn’t use them as they were one of the most successful clubs in English football up to the late 1950s. I tried to use clubs who haven’t ever really had big or sustained success before (I know West Ham won the European Cup Winners Cup... and the World Cup!... but they’ve never won the league).
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Owners could control costs and make money. Which is what they want.That's how all this shit started, because the US owners couldn't compete with the likes of us and Chelsea.
Click to expand...
Our owner isn’t in this for money he’s got more money than he could possibly ever need. This is about global exposure and he wouldn’t be remotely interested in your boring bland model. The football pyramid works by having super clubs and super stars who generate most of the revenue, the solution is to distribute it to the rest of the pyramid. People like to follow and associate themselves with excellence and some ‘everyone is the same’ approach would kill the goose the laid the golden egg. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
 
So we are now left in a position where our greatest enemies, the Qatari clubs Bayern and PSG have their executives taking the roles left by Woodward, Agnelli et all. If we’d have left it at least one of those positions would of been filled by Khaldoon/Soriano.

Great work City.
 
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