Go and ask your bank to borrow £1m on your minimum wage as a window licker and you’ll start to get the gist.
the same happened in nba they had to eventually cap salaries. football has survived just about everything from recession to covid without missing a beat. there has to be a limit to where the bubble can keep inflating to. we have sky talking up the biggest prize in football annually. yet in reality Luton just got 1 players transfer fee. that's it now. they can build their new stadium and go back to championship ro below or they can waste it all on a few half hearted players who won't care one jot what happens after they get paid. BTW caicedo to cheslea to happen v v soon. not playing last preseason game
tte criticism FSG are getting is they appear to be more interested in net spend and balancing the books than doing what is required to make the team competitive enough to challenge for the title. We still need another midfielder especially with fab going. Apparently we want Lavia but don’t want to spend want Southampton want for him, which is fair enough. however when you look at the ages of the players they should last a good 5 years + together so next year we need a defender instead of a midfielder and a defender if we don’t buy another before the transfer period ends. I do wonder sometimes if FSG are that foreword thinking. I’m not asking them to be stupid like that clown at Chelsea.
Football is a microcosm of humanity in general. The rich minority make themselves ever richer and the rest try to survive as best they can.
doing what's required? we all know we are on our own, out of our vast resources (3× a lot of clubs) what do you want fsg to do? there's two possibilities 1. run up vast debts to fund these transfers on our books 2. sell us to sportswashers. in reality the only way 1 works is if 2 follows. we have a set amount of revenue to spend on wages and transfers. some of our rivals are sports washers and some are following no 1 (arsenal)
FFP was never about club stability. Ever. That was just the official line given. It's main purpose is, and was always, to protect the historically big clubs and prevent any new clubs joining that group.
I think our greatest mistake was not to continue building after winning the league , especially building in the midfield area . We have learnt our lesson in a difficult way.
I haven’t said that net spend doesn’t matter. But sometimes when the needs require you need to spend more than you may want. We’re in the Europa league this season, not the champions league so revenue from European competition is a lot lower . With Hendo going and now Fab, which was unexpected, we need another midfielder and that is going to cost, but it is necessary. I’m not asking FSG to do a Chelsea but they need to do what’s required this season because they let Fab go, and now need to replace him.
that argument may have some merit in PL but in EFL it does help keep clubs alive from what i can see .
bullshit. but whatever, I can understand the feeling. this is a lot wider than protecting the precious egos of the select few. most of the time I'd agree given the type of super league **** they (and we) get up to. however on this the only accusation that can be made is ffp does not go far enough to reign in the types of things going on round the whole of Europe not just here. if an owner wants to build a club they have Avenues open to them, wide open. Ryan Reynolds is showing what any owner can do. the lad at Brentford is proving exactly what can be done. what separates man utd and Southampton is really global revenue. that's it. the "biggness" is no longer locally relevant. utd can seeming spend 100s of millions and shrug while Southampton cannot. why should that be locked in any more than anything else? I'd contend that ffp needs to go much further such that it doesn't matter how much money is available. if a team can get 20 good players together they should have a chance. salary caps and transfer caps are the inevitable outcome and just possibly.. maybe use possibly the fans going weekly get a break form the sky high prices.
- It's Diego. His M.O. is not so much an argument as a persistant close-your-eyes-and-put-your-hands-over-your-eyes Veruca Salt-type fanny fit of making a case until any opposition gets exasperated and walks away. He's only being doing it for on 14 years now, perhaps he'll get tired soon.
oh give over only 2 PL transfers have been for £100m most are for far far less and the vast majority of PL clubs won't spend more than £50m max and for them that would often be on the back of a big transfer out .
fully agree i have been broadly supportive of FSG but if the money isn't there they must allow the club to open a credit line to fund the necessary transfers
hmmmm so you don't see an upward trend at all then? cheslea are literally as we speak doing a little back room deal with Brighton to screw caicedo's former club out of some of the sell on fee. grealish, rice, fernandez are the top of the tree and soon to have caicedo added. the tier below is rapidly filling with 70mil plus players and just about every player is 40mil plus
Personally I don't agree with it. Although I'd never want Saints to be run that way I don't see why an owner shouldn't be allowed to pump money into a business as long as they're covering the losses (which is what the regulations should be aimed at imo), or why can't a rich fan throw some of their wealth at their club eg Jack Walker. Can you imagine in any other industry business owners being told they're not allowed to invest their money to try and improve profits and their standing? It's absolute nonsense. I'd be all for salary caps btw but it'd have to be worldwide and will never happen.
i said help but it they can only put rules in place to try and stop financial mismanagement but if owners just ignore them it is hardly the Leagues fault .
because what happens when the owner pulls the plug and with outgoings exceeding the revenue bankruptcy awaits . The better known PL clubs have the advantage that normally a buyer would be found easily* but further down the food chain far less likely *much to the relief of our neighbours
