United Thread 2014/15 (continued)

[Paul Lake's Left Knee]

Na because under FFP, there's no limits onto what an individual can invest or spend in League 1 or 2 due to the SCMP. The only ruling that exists below the Championship is that you're limited to spending a % of your revenue on wages. In League 2 its 55% I believe and in League 1 it's 60%. But there's no limits on revenue in either in those 2 divisions under FFP, so the owners of clubs can invest as much or as little as they like into their club and it counts as revenue. So under FFP, Liebherr would have been fine to invest £75m in one go at Southampton in League 1 if he fancied, it wouldn't have been an issue.

So now he is investing £75m in one go and not as you stated £15m a year without any issue at all.

Again revising your position when you are pulled up on it. I'm sure you will change your point of view again within a couple of posts. Still no reply as to why you failed to mention Markus Liebherr when you first started talking about Southampton, or didnt the google article you first use mention him?

I'm not at all. Liebherr invested £75m over 5 seasons, it doesn't say how much he invested per season, i just divided it up. But bearing in mind he's a smart businessman and he saved the club from administration in League 1, he would have also been aware of FFP now, so probably would have worked out a plan of how best to invest his money, and seeing as though there are no sanctions in League 1, it would be logical for him to invest it then rather than wait til the Championship and get penalised for it.
The point you made was that Liebherr couldn't have done what he did under FFP. But he could have done. And Liebherr didn't get a mention at first as I was talking about the Saints in 13/14-14/15

Again changing your position after you've been pulled up on it. You were talking about investment of their parachute payments, sponsorships and TV revenue,why didnt you mention him? Because you didnt know. Now you've read up a bit using google you are trying to revise your position with lies now which is a sure fire way to make yourself look like a fucktard.

Over 50 posts on here now, i take it you have over 50,000 on RAWK as losing to them is a thousand times more painful and you care so much more about the Scousers than us. Also you are posting at a rate to become one of the sites top posters within months, also in another 3 days we can look forward to you starting your own threads for example, which will be about as much fun as stabbing a fork in my eyes.

 

[redmanc34]

So now he is investing £75m in one go and not as you stated £15m a year without any issue at all.

Again revising your position when you are pulled up on it. I'm sure you will change your point of view again within a couple of posts. Still no reply as to why you failed to mention Markus Liebherr when you first started talking about Southampton, or didnt the google article you first use mention him?

I'm not at all. Liebherr invested £75m over 5 seasons, it doesn't say how much he invested per season, i just divided it up. But bearing in mind he's a smart businessman and he saved the club from administration in League 1, he would have also been aware of FFP now, so probably would have worked out a plan of how best to invest his money, and seeing as though there are no sanctions in League 1, it would be logical for him to invest it then rather than wait til the Championship and get penalised for it.
The point you made was that Liebherr couldn't have done what he did under FFP. But he could have done. And Liebherr didn't get a mention at first as I was talking about the Saints in 13/14-14/15

You were talking about investment of their parachute payments et al why didnt you mention him? Because you didnt know. You are trying to revise your position with lies now, well done.

Over 50 posts on here now, i take it you have over 50,000 on RAWK as losing to them is a thousand times more painful and you care so much more about the Scousers than us.

I didn't know about Liebherr? Alright then mate. Na, as you see i'm on the United thread, and I wasn't here to be a WUM or for a slanging match or to abuse and insult people, if I was I would have already done it. I was here for a debate with people, and to be honest so far you've been the only one, and I feel it's been good. You only don't like me because I support United. I don't instantly dislike people cos of who they support, and i'm on this forum cos this club as well as United is local to me, and the part of Manchester I come from is like 80% Blues anyway, so I enjoy speaking to City fans about football.

 

[Bodicoteblue]

I think a club like that could get to the Champions League though, and then from that you can build yourself up a lot more. To be honest, with outside investment and all that there can only be one winner of the title. And there's a limited amount of trophies to be won. Most fans know that and they support their team regardless because of a sense of pride they have in their local community, and they wanna be entertained, and just see their teams progress. I haven't met one Burnley fan yet kicking off because they won't win the Premier League, there's what 3/4 teams kicking off about FFP from i've read here, and thats Everton, Villa and City. It doesn't exactly stifle competition as there can be one winner anyway, and unless you turn the league into some kind of American style competition with a salary cap and draft, then there will always be a pecking order, with or without FFP.

How can they get to the CL ? They cannot invest in the quality of players needed to attain that level , and when they raise them through the academy they sell them off to support their revenue streams, and they cannot under FFP attract the size of inward investment required, and they cannot raise large sponsorship deals because they are not high profile enough because they are not in the CL. Can you you see a vicious circle there?
You're right - there can only be one winner of the title - but why should there be a limited amount of teams capable of winning it - especially if the criteria for winning it are determined by the spending power of those who are already in a position to win it? If you are not already in that position , then FFP has decreed that you never will be .
I like your idea that supporters of clubs who cannot win anything should just be happy with a sense of pride in their local community while they watch the big clubs Hoover up the trophies! Not at all patronising! "And just see their teams progress" - just how do you propose that they do that ? Buy expensive players - no they can't afford it under FFP ! Bring players through the academy? Good idea -but like at Southampton , watch them go off to "big" clubs.
Yep, there will always be a "pecking order" and FFP has made sure that it is now set in stone.

I'm not trying to be patronising but most clubs know that, and a lot of the time it isn't even to do with investment, it's to do with demographics. If you're from a city you 95% of the time will do better and win more because, 1.you have a larger pool of players to choose from for your academy, cos of the local population, so you have a higher chance of producing high quality players 2.bigger companies are based in cities and they are the one's who carry more financial clout when it comes to sponsorhip, so you can attract bigger commercial investment anyway, from the large local companies (that is more relevent before the globalisation of the Prem as most clubs have foreign sponsors now anyway) 3.like point 1, you have a larger local population which means you have bigger crowds, which again means more money.

Again I understand what you say about Southampton, but if recruitment is good then you use the sale of those players as a stepping stone rather than a negative. Look at the replacements they've found, and if they did that again why couldn't they break into the top 4?

Those are things that will never change, no matter what. Someone like Yeovil could never win the Premier League even if they had your owners, for basically all those reasons. How the league now is basically how it logically should be, with the exception of Villa, Newcastle and Everton who should be higher up the table.

So , by your own reasoning , FFP is inherently unfair because it applies a blanket rule to every club irrespective of their demographics and their ability to raise sponsorship because of an accident of geography and population?
Perhaps those clubs unfortunate enough not to come from big cities or conurbations could move to these areas and become bigger and better as a result - but what an effect that would have on their fans' sense of pride in their local community , eh?

 

[redmanc34]

How can they get to the CL ? They cannot invest in the quality of players needed to attain that level , and when they raise them through the academy they sell them off to support their revenue streams, and they cannot under FFP attract the size of inward investment required, and they cannot raise large sponsorship deals because they are not high profile enough because they are not in the CL. Can you you see a vicious circle there?
You're right - there can only be one winner of the title - but why should there be a limited amount of teams capable of winning it - especially if the criteria for winning it are determined by the spending power of those who are already in a position to win it? If you are not already in that position , then FFP has decreed that you never will be .
I like your idea that supporters of clubs who cannot win anything should just be happy with a sense of pride in their local community while they watch the big clubs Hoover up the trophies! Not at all patronising! "And just see their teams progress" - just how do you propose that they do that ? Buy expensive players - no they can't afford it under FFP ! Bring players through the academy? Good idea -but like at Southampton , watch them go off to "big" clubs.
Yep, there will always be a "pecking order" and FFP has made sure that it is now set in stone.

I'm not trying to be patronising but most clubs know that, and a lot of the time it isn't even to do with investment, it's to do with demographics. If you're from a city you 95% of the time will do better and win more because, 1.you have a larger pool of players to choose from for your academy, cos of the local population, so you have a higher chance of producing high quality players 2.bigger companies are based in cities and they are the one's who carry more financial clout when it comes to sponsorhip, so you can attract bigger commercial investment anyway, from the large local companies (that is more relevent before the globalisation of the Prem as most clubs have foreign sponsors now anyway) 3.like point 1, you have a larger local population which means you have bigger crowds, which again means more money.

Again I understand what you say about Southampton, but if recruitment is good then you use the sale of those players as a stepping stone rather than a negative. Look at the replacements they've found, and if they did that again why couldn't they break into the top 4?

Those are things that will never change, no matter what. Someone like Yeovil could never win the Premier League even if they had your owners, for basically all those reasons. How the league now is basically how it logically should be, with the exception of Villa, Newcastle and Everton who should be higher up the table.

So , by your own reasoning , FFP is inherently unfair because it applies a blanket rule to every club irrespective of their demographics and their ability to raise sponsorship because of an accident of geography and population?
Perhaps those clubs unfortunate enough not to come from big cities or conurbations could move to these areas and become bigger and better as a result - but what an effect that would have on their fans' sense of pride in their local community , eh?

Not at all, but that's just common sense with regards to demographics. If FFP didn't exist, I very much doubt Yeovil would win the league even with mansour at the helm. The demographics go back about 90-100 years, you can't change that. It's like saying football isn't fair because Maribor won't win the Champions League because they're from Slovenia with only 2 million people so they can't find enough good players because they need HG players. Thats just the way it is, shall we change that rule though and then hand out the Champions League trophy to a different club every year cos at least then its fair

 

[Paul Lake's Left Knee]

I'm not at all. Liebherr invested £75m over 5 seasons, it doesn't say how much he invested per season, i just divided it up. But bearing in mind he's a smart businessman and he saved the club from administration in League 1, he would have also been aware of FFP now, so probably would have worked out a plan of how best to invest his money, and seeing as though there are no sanctions in League 1, it would be logical for him to invest it then rather than wait til the Championship and get penalised for it.
The point you made was that Liebherr couldn't have done what he did under FFP. But he could have done. And Liebherr didn't get a mention at first as I was talking about the Saints in 13/14-14/15

You were talking about investment of their parachute payments et al why didnt you mention him? Because you didnt know. You are trying to revise your position with lies now, well done.

Over 50 posts on here now, i take it you have over 50,000 on RAWK as losing to them is a thousand times more painful and you care so much more about the Scousers than us.

I didn't know about Liebherr? Alright then mate. Na, as you see i'm on the United thread, and I wasn't here to be a WUM or for a slanging match or to abuse and insult people, if I was I would have already done it. I was here for a debate with people, and to be honest so far you've been the only one, and I feel it's been good. You only don't like me because I support United. I don't instantly dislike people cos of who they support, and i'm on this forum cos this club as well as United is local to me, and the part of Manchester I come from is like 80% Blues anyway, so I enjoy speaking to City fans about football.

You should have mentioned him if you knew about him, but you didnt until i did, then all of a sudden you knew all sorts, google is a wonderful tool. I think you are misguided about Southampton and about FFP in general. FFP has created a status quo in the game, you can spin that as stability if you want, but i think the randomness and instability in sport in general is what makes it so great, sure fire way to make something boring is to remove competition or the dreams of teams or individuals.

My sister is a rag, i like reasonable match going rags who can engage their brain and see there is more to football than what happens at Old Trafford and how Old Trafford is effected by any given situation. Your opening post on this forum is the reason why i think you are a deluded fool who regurgitates the propaganda from the swamp as fact when it is anything but fact. I dont dislike you as an individual, I pity you.

 

[blue by birth]

i honestly don't know the answer but we all know who i suspect it is, who has broke the british transfer record more times than any other club ? who was the first club to pay £50,000 a week in wages ? £100.000 a week in wages ? £300,000 a week in wages ?
the only clubs to win PL outside Arsenal & United are Blackburn Chelsea & City and all have had to spend millions to do it, so were we all just meant to watch those 2 take it in turns winning it ?
its great for the neutral that its not a 2 horse race and I've never spoke to any fan outside a top 4 side who has a problem with what we have done so do you want us to believe that United fans are being honest when they say its ruining football ? what a load of bollocks.
whats not fair ? they picked our club over theirs ?

I completely agree with you that competition is good, but the Premier League is run poorly for me anyway, i'm not saying what you're doing is ruining foorball or unfair, but the competition should have never got the stage it's got to where it was a 2 horse race just like you said. I honestly believe if FFP had come in 15-20 years ago, it actually would have been more even. Which is why it will be a good thing in the long run. If it was there 20 years ago, then United have to make a choice between expanding a 40,000 seater Old Trafford, or buying a new player or two. Small things like that believe it or not could have changed the equality of the division back then. I actually think it will be more competitive in the long run, but just like when you invest in something it takes time. You invested in that facility this year, so you're not expecting to be producing a conveyor belt of Messi's every year, but it goves you a better chance of producing players and the standard will increase over time. The same goes with FFP

Cant the mods ban this fucking rag **** as hes just boring the arse out of everybody with his so called facts which are basically just rag bullshit....fuck off you rag twat

 

[Bodicoteblue]

I'm not trying to be patronising but most clubs know that, and a lot of the time it isn't even to do with investment, it's to do with demographics. If you're from a city you 95% of the time will do better and win more because, 1.you have a larger pool of players to choose from for your academy, cos of the local population, so you have a higher chance of producing high quality players 2.bigger companies are based in cities and they are the one's who carry more financial clout when it comes to sponsorhip, so you can attract bigger commercial investment anyway, from the large local companies (that is more relevent before the globalisation of the Prem as most clubs have foreign sponsors now anyway) 3.like point 1, you have a larger local population which means you have bigger crowds, which again means more money.

Again I understand what you say about Southampton, but if recruitment is good then you use the sale of those players as a stepping stone rather than a negative. Look at the replacements they've found, and if they did that again why couldn't they break into the top 4?

Those are things that will never change, no matter what. Someone like Yeovil could never win the Premier League even if they had your owners, for basically all those reasons. How the league now is basically how it logically should be, with the exception of Villa, Newcastle and Everton who should be higher up the table.

So , by your own reasoning , FFP is inherently unfair because it applies a blanket rule to every club irrespective of their demographics and their ability to raise sponsorship because of an accident of geography and population?
Perhaps those clubs unfortunate enough not to come from big cities or conurbations could move to these areas and become bigger and better as a result - but what an effect that would have on their fans' sense of pride in their local community , eh?

Not at all, but that's just common sense with regards to demographics. If FFP didn't exist, I very much doubt Yeovil would win the league even with mansour at the helm. The demographics go back about 90-100 years, you can't change that. It's like saying football isn't fair because Maribor won't win the Champions League because they're from Slovenia with only 2 million people so they can't find enough good players because they need HG players. Thats just the way it is, shall we change that rule though and then hand out the Champions League trophy to a different club every year cos at least then its fair

Well if it's common sense with regards to demographics then it would surely be common sense to tailor FFP to suit those conditions ,and not just arbitrarily apply it to everyone equally, because ,since you so rightly point out , not everyone is equal ,and you can't change those demographics.
I think this is one of the points that m.Dupont is raising in the courts.

 

[Paul Lake's Left Knee]

i honestly don't know the answer but we all know who i suspect it is, who has broke the british transfer record more times than any other club ? who was the first club to pay £50,000 a week in wages ? £100.000 a week in wages ? £300,000 a week in wages ?
the only clubs to win PL outside Arsenal & United are Blackburn Chelsea & City and all have had to spend millions to do it, so were we all just meant to watch those 2 take it in turns winning it ?
its great for the neutral that its not a 2 horse race and I've never spoke to any fan outside a top 4 side who has a problem with what we have done so do you want us to believe that United fans are being honest when they say its ruining football ? what a load of bollocks.
whats not fair ? they picked our club over theirs ?

I completely agree with you that competition is good, but the Premier League is run poorly for me anyway, i'm not saying what you're doing is ruining foorball or unfair, but the competition should have never got the stage it's got to where it was a 2 horse race just like you said. I honestly believe if FFP had come in 15-20 years ago, it actually would have been more even. Which is why it will be a good thing in the long run. If it was there 20 years ago, then United have to make a choice between expanding a 40,000 seater Old Trafford, or buying a new player or two. Small things like that believe it or not could have changed the equality of the division back then. I actually think it will be more competitive in the long run, but just like when you invest in something it takes time. You invested in that facility this year, so you're not expecting to be producing a conveyor belt of Messi's every year, but it goves you a better chance of producing players and the standard will increase over time. The same goes with FFP

Cant the mods ban this fucking rag **** as hes just boring the arse out of everybody with his so called facts which are basically just rag bullshit....fuck off you rag twat

He maybe deluded and a revisionist but he isnt breaking the Coc and hasnt abused anyone despite copping a bit of abuse himself. I think he should stay and keep his none obsession up.

 

[blue by birth]

I completely agree with you that competition is good, but the Premier League is run poorly for me anyway, i'm not saying what you're doing is ruining foorball or unfair, but the competition should have never got the stage it's got to where it was a 2 horse race just like you said. I honestly believe if FFP had come in 15-20 years ago, it actually would have been more even. Which is why it will be a good thing in the long run. If it was there 20 years ago, then United have to make a choice between expanding a 40,000 seater Old Trafford, or buying a new player or two. Small things like that believe it or not could have changed the equality of the division back then. I actually think it will be more competitive in the long run, but just like when you invest in something it takes time. You invested in that facility this year, so you're not expecting to be producing a conveyor belt of Messi's every year, but it goves you a better chance of producing players and the standard will increase over time. The same goes with FFP

Cant the mods ban this fucking rag c**t as hes just boring the arse out of everybody with his so called facts which are basically just rag bullshit....fuck off you rag twat

He maybe deluded and a revisionist but he isnt breaking the Coc and hasnt abused anyone despite copping a bit of abuse himself. I think he should stay and keep his none obsession up.

Maybe so mate but fuck me he really is obsessed with lickle Citeh isnt he... according to the rags we dont register on their radar but somehow all they sing about is us and post on here about us...deluded twats

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

transferleague.co.uk

And Nani is out on loan, so if you wanna even that out then I shouldn't count Falcao. Plus those are the registered squads by both clubs. So why would you register Nani who is in Portugal. And i'm the thick twat?

Whilst I’d admire your resilience on the subject to a certain degree here, I cannot fathom why you’d omit players who, regardless of whether they’re out on loan or not, are still Manchester United players.

“Manchester United have the most expensive squad in Premier League history” - That’s a statement of fact, and it is that the media are peddling at the moment.
“Manchester United have the most expensive Premier League team registered in a single season” – That’s what you’re trying to get across here for some reason. I can only assume because you don’t like the aforementioned fact.

Nani, Hernandez, Powell et al are all current Manchester United players, who just happen to be on loan at another club. Just because they’re out on loan does not mean they’re not Manchester United employees, and therefore the fees you paid for these players, whilst you continue to employ them, count in the figures the media are correctly peddling. And as for Falcao – I could understand the want for omitting him as he’s a Monaco employee by principle, however the fact that you paid between £4m & £6m to include him in your squad this season says that’s also to be taken into consideration.

Wind it in, for your own sake.

That's fair enough, but then by the same account we can include Matija Nastasic at £12m, and Alvaro Negredo at £20.6m as his transfer doesn't offically go through until the end of the season, Nani's fee of £13.5m and Nick Powell at £6m, and lets even throw in CHicharito at £6m would still leave you ahead of us. The media were probably peddling that until the end of January as it was true. You bought Bony though, so now you hold that title. Shouldn't always believe the media. I mean you said it yourself the media is all 'pro-Rag'

I don't disagree with that at all, bud.

But there's also Angelo Henriquez - £4m.

BTW - on what planet did you get a fee of £30m for Fernando? He was £12m.

So right back at you bud. You have the most expensively assembled squad in the league.

(By the way - a quick look at my username will tell you I'm not a City fan as you keep alluding to).