New PL financial controls | Clubs agree squad spending cap 'in principle'

so if this new rule is voted in today and it's less than 6x the bottom clubs tv money then we're going to have to be very careful on transfers this summer. I'm expecting it to be voted through. It really hinders united though as they've got a load of shit players they can't get rid of which is a bonus
 
BerkshireBlue said:
so if this new rule is voted in today and it's less than 6x the bottom clubs tv money then we're going to have to be very careful on transfers this summer. I'm expecting it to be voted through. It really hinders united though as they've got a load of shit players they can't get rid of which is a bonus
Click to expand...
What hinders utd is the shit players. And all they ever do is over spend on 2nd rate players.
 
Another hairbrained idea.

No other industry would handicap itself or impose financial restrictions as much as the PL.

Like they actively want to damage the league.
 
Ric said:
Looks like the vote went through.

Click to expand...


I think this is a really significant vote for the future of the PL.

By linking the top clubs spending to the bottom clubs revenue (and therefore ability to spend) the PL is making sure it has to pay attention to the lower third of the table. The only way for City, Chelsea & United to spend more money is to grow Luton's revenue.

It strikes me as a very sensible move to preserve competition, probably the most "fair" thing they've done since abolishing shared ticket revenue in the 70's, although I'm concerned about how much it will exaccerbate the parachute payment problem - the only real way for City/Chelsea/United to grow Luton's revenue is to push for bigger central payments from the PL, which is what the parachute payments are tied to.
 
argyle said:
Another hairbrained idea.

No other industry would handicap itself or impose financial restrictions as much as the PL.

Like they actively want to damage the league.
Click to expand...

No other industry except every other sport on the planet, which all have their own financial controls.

I'm also not sure how this is damaging the league. They've clearly decided that the competitiveness of the PL is it's key differentiator compared to Spain, Germany etc. so they've taken a step which ensures that stays no matter how big the top clubs grow, the bottom clubs in the league will stay competitive and preserve the top to bottom "anyone can beat anyone" thing the PL has been selling to become the biggest league in football.

Top 4 want to spend more? Make sure the lower table clubs are growing too.
 
Last edited:
domalino said:
No other industry except every other sport on the planet, which all have their own financial controls.
Click to expand...

Please do read.

No other industry would handicap itself or impose financial restrictions AS MUCH as the PL.

The NFL, NBA are a single league and aren't competing with others and they're still able to spend a hell of a lot.

The PL seems to want to send business to other leagues, to lower the standard and ability to invest to that of a newly promoted championship side.

It's madness.

Imagine McDonalds being restricted to invest as much as a small burger chain.
 
The beginning of the end of the PL bubble.

La Liga and Serie A must be buzzing and licking their lips.

All those mid-table teams who in the past 5 or so years who have been able to compete for players against the likes of Juventus, Milan clubs, Atletico etc.. those days have gone now.

Back to signing bang average Championship players and hand-me downs from the top teams.

All fool those that voted.
 
argyle said:
No other industry would handicap itself or impose financial restrictions AS MUCH as the PL.
Click to expand...

The Premier League isn't an industry, but even if it were, your point is nonsense. Our domestic cricket and rugby are competing with foreign leagues as well, they all impose spending controls. And La Liga and the Bundesliga self impose far harsher restrictions with 50+1 and Tebas' active spending monitoring.

So even if you were right and this rule was restrictive, it's still less restrictive than what the PL's 2 biggest competitors are implementing so it literally can't be a handicap against them.

The PL seems to want to send business to other leagues, to lower the standard and ability to invest to that of a newly promoted championship side.
Click to expand...

Do you even understand the rule you're complaining about? The current limit would allow PL clubs to spend £566m a year. Which is more than any other clubs in Europe. It's not lowering the spending to the level of a promoted side, it's capping it at 600% what the promoted side can spend.


The Premier League's even revenue distribution and giving the smaller clubs a bigger slice of the pie is why it's so successful now compared to Spain and Germany and Italy where the top clubs stole all the TV money. This is the exact same thing, it's making sure the clubs at the bottom keep growing.
 
Last edited:
Premier League clubs have agreed in principle to introduce a spending cap.

A majority of clubs voted in favour of the spending cap, which will be determined by the amount of money earned in television rights by the lowest-earning club in the Premier League.

If approved in June's AGM, the new model will replace the current Profit and Sustainability Regulations from the 2025-26 season.


www.bbc.co.uk

Premier League spending cap: Clubs vote in favour of developing plans

Premier League clubs vote in favour of developing plans to introduce a spending cap in England's top flight.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
domalino said:
I think this is a really significant vote for the future of the PL.

By linking the top clubs spending to the bottom clubs revenue (and therefore ability to spend) the PL is making sure it has to pay attention to the lower third of the table. The only way for City, Chelsea & United to spend more money is to grow Luton's revenue.

It strikes me as a very sensible move to preserve competition, probably the most "fair" thing they've done since abolishing shared ticket revenue in the 70's, although I'm concerned about how much it will exaccerbate the parachute payment problem - the only real way for City/Chelsea/United to grow Luton's revenue is to push for bigger central payments from the PL, which is what the parachute payments are tied to.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I'm not interested in fairness. I want us to be able to outspend every other team. Under current rules, spending is linked to revenues and we are the highest earners so we should be able to spend more. Utd and Chelsea won't be in CL so won't have the revenues to spend as much as us. Why the hell would we want to swap this model for one where Utd and Chelsea (and Newcastle, Arse, Liverpool, etc) can all spend the same as us. No wonder we voted against it
 
Ric said:
Can't imagine the PFA will be too happy with the prospect of restricting their members' earnings.
Click to expand...

It doesn't restrict their members earnings.

That's why it's not a wage cap or a transfer spending cap or an agents fees cap, it's a cap on all combined spending.

If the PFA wants players to earn more, they're now in a position to want to drive down agents fees and transfer fees and make sure the players get a bigger slice of the spending pie.
 
If, in purest terms, all clubs can spend the same amount (which is what I've inferred from the announcement, admittedly I could be wrong) then I don't see the issue with it.

A draft system similar to US sports would be the fairest approach but that's a logistical nightmare at this stage.
 
domalino said:
It doesn't restrict their members earnings.

That's why it's not a wage cap or a transfer spending cap or an agents fees cap, it's a cap on all combined spending.

If the PFA wants players to earn more, they're now in a position to want to drive down agents fees and transfer fees and make sure the players get a bigger slice of the spending pie.
Click to expand...

That only works properly if every league does it.

La Liga doesnt have those controls, neither does Serie A.

Nothing stopping teams in those league paying the demanded transfer fees and agents costs and wages.
 
mexico1970 said:
It'll be a draft system next and then the money will move to Spain where it can breath.
Click to expand...

Yes, I can just see the investors queing up to spend in La Liga now.

Between the clubs you cant actually own, to the legally required reasonable release clauses, to having to run every single euro spend past Javier Tebas before you can spend it or register a player.

The league which is so bankrupt top to bottom they just voted to give away 25% of it's revenue for the next 25 years to a hedge fund for up front cash to keep them afloat.
 
domalino said:
The Premier League isn't an industry, but even if it were, your point is nonsense. Our domestic cricket and rugby are competing with foreign leagues as well, they all impose spending controls. And La Liga and the Bundesliga self impose far harsher restrictions with 50+1 and Tebas' active spending monitoring.



Do you even understand the rule you're complaining about? The current limit would allow PL clubs to spend £566m a year. Which is more than any other clubs in Europe. It's not lowering the spending to the level of a promoted side, it's capping it at 600% what the promoted side can spend.
Click to expand...

I read it would be capping it at around £110m?

La Liga has fucked itself with its spending controls and it's financial decisions. Only two teams ever really compete and one is financially screwed.

Cricket and Rugby isn't comparable as they earn no where near the PL.

Spending caps just won't work in a league with relegation and with other competing leagues unless they adopt the exact same rules and even then it will cause problems.

I can't see the players union going for it either.
 
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