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

Re: City & FFP (continued)

gmckennasell said:
gordondaviesmoustache said:
gmckennasell said:
it looks like we have just got our noses in the uefa trough , just in time , FFP will hurt for a year or two , but the fact is , we dont have to pay stupid wages and transfer fees anymore , players come to us to win trophies , and play in the chumps league every season. We can now pay decent hungry players 80k to 100k basic a week , and give them incentives to win games/cups/leagues , uefa must be seriously pissed we have gate crashed their party.
I disagree with your last bit, mate.

I believe UEFA has slowly come to accept our place at the top table of European football. The global focus on our games with Barcelona will have significantly crystallised this in their minds imo. They will perhaps appreciate, although never publicly acknowledge, investment of the scope and scale of ADUG at City could very well be a positive force for wider European football.

Platini and UEFA's remit was to keep the G14 from breaking away and FFP's evolution from being about debt to profitability was a clear manifestation of this. Unlike others I've never felt that FFP was about stopping us in our tracks per se , but rather to protect the status quo by restricting practices which threatened their hegemony. FFP has now, for better or worse, achieved that aim, albeit with the exception of City, with PSG arguably previously being part of that elite. I believe that is palatable to most of the cartel and I strongly suspect sentiment among most ancien regime clubs, at least beyond these shores, is ambivalent to our arrival, and quite possibly even benign now the drawbridge has come up. Those aren't sentiments that are shared among our peers in the English game, however, who I'm sure would all wish we'd just disappear.

We shouldn't look upon the G-14 as some sort of homogenous group of identikit clubs. Like any other alliance, built around mutual self-interest, there will be petty rivalries and back-stabbing between the parties. There are many within that grouping who will have realised which way the wind is blowing and come to accept our place among them. People can always come to accept change once they realise there is nothing they can do to resist it.

Hopefully our power base will strengthen at the expense of the likes of Arsenal and Liverpool within European football in the years ahead. It would be a fitting denouement to the project that those who most sneeringly looked down their noses at us and most vociferously resisted our right to exist at the top of the game were the ones left outside once our influence and vision rendered City to be a truly irresistible as a political force within global football, which will surely come to pass, sooner or later.

agree regarding the likes of arsenal and liverpool , would be poetic justice for them to be amongst the also rans ,especially when wenger and rodgers have disrespected our club over sheik mansour's investment , but it should be renamed the Financial unfair play , UEFA have crushed the dreams of clubs who were in a similiar position to us , 5 seasons ago , the likes so of villa,newcastle,sunderland,spurs etc , decent support and sleeping giants , it appears no amount of investment will now allow these clubs to join the "elite" .

It is incredibly unfair on teams like Villa, big clubs that through nothing but bad timing have been fucked, Lerner wants to sell but who will be willing to invest money there knowing if they ever crack the top four FFP will do for them
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Ian Herbert, who has been quite obsessive about FFP, isn't even sure about the squad restrictions. He wrote this:

It is possible that the reduction in City’s Champions League squad could mean a pro-rata reduction in the number of home-grown players they must use next season. But a lack of Englishmen severely restricts their options.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

LoveCity said:
Ian Herbert, who has been quite obsessive about FFP, isn't even sure about the squad restrictions. He wrote this:

It is possible that the reduction in City’s Champions League squad could mean a pro-rata reduction in the number of home-grown players they must use next season. But a lack of Englishmen severely restricts their options.
Ian Herbert. The cockroach of all cockroaches.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

gordondaviesmoustache said:
LoveCity said:
Ian Herbert, who has been quite obsessive about FFP, isn't even sure about the squad restrictions. He wrote this:

It is possible that the reduction in City’s Champions League squad could mean a pro-rata reduction in the number of home-grown players they must use next season. But a lack of Englishmen severely restricts their options.
Ian Herbert. The cockroach of all cockroaches.
You give him too much credit.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

As I've said before, most owners welcome FFP (and particularly the PL's version) as they will be able to keep a lid on costs. They won't be forced to spend the increased media revenue on wages and have to put their own money into their clubs. Whether fans welcome it is another matter.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Prestwich_Blue said:
As I've said before, most owners welcome FFP (and particularly the PL's version) as they will be able to keep a lid on costs. They won't be forced to spend the increased media revenue on wages and have to put their own money into their clubs. Whether fans welcome it is another matter.

As the gap between the top four grows each year there will b questions asked but as long as the likes of Norwich can splurge on Van Wolfswinkle and Sunderland on Altidore all will be well.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

fbloke said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
As I've said before, most owners welcome FFP (and particularly the PL's version) as they will be able to keep a lid on costs. They won't be forced to spend the increased media revenue on wages and have to put their own money into their clubs. Whether fans welcome it is another matter.

As the gap between the top four grows each year there will b questions asked but as long as the likes of Norwich can splurge on Van Wolfswinkle and Sunderland on Altidore all will be well.
What's silly (among many things) about UEFA's rules in my opinion is that clubs close to Europe, like your Southamptons and Newcastles, cannot spend big money to make that push into Europe for fear of making a loss and being punished, but clubs like West Brom for instance could buy the available players without worrying about being fined. So the incentive to make that final push for a better finishing position is lost, since UEFA will simply take any reward off you via fines. Thus strengthening the original top clubs' positions. How did nobody see this before?
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.