I don't "hate" any team, and especially not Chelsea. I'm not even jealous that you have more money than us. "Frustrated" is probably the closed I can describe the feeling that I have times, but even then I can't say that the feeling overwhelms me. It would be nice to believe that the EPL could be a true level playing-field, where all the clubs charge the same wages, and can only field players that have come through their youth system or academy, but that's pure fantasy. Yeah, we're not as rich as your club, but we're richer than most of the clubs in Europe. I'm grateful for that.
Oh, and by the way, how the hell £ity can remotely be said to be compliant with the Fair Play Rules is completely beyond me!
I may be confused about FFP, but I thought it was about balancing the books.i.e. whatever you spent was OK, as long as it was matched by your income! Last year we generated income of £223.5m ,so as long as our outgoings, wages,transfer fees ,rates etc dont exceed this, we're ok--yes!!!
I think that is basically it. There are rules about what income you can count, not sure if City's sponsorship deal (basically with their owners) is allowable. In the interim there is a permitted level of losses, but generally building towards break even. One year without CL has a real knock on effect () as the loss of income is an equal loss of spending ability.
The point wasn't that you weren't going to make it, it was that you weren't going to be permanently stuck to the top of the table by your overspending. Whilst the FFP might be lenient enough to allow you to manage to get by with things as they are currently, should you fail to maintain your success your spending power will ultimately decrease whilst the regulations on net debt tighten. Not by huge amounts though, mind. Whether UEFA actually do anything should clubs miss FFP or whether they continue to revise the rules to close loopholes is yet to be seen. From what I can see FFP is extremely generous to clubs, allowing them to add non-football generated revenue, so long as it's branded, and allowing them to ignore non-football related costs, even if they're branded. Not to mention the exclusion of one off costs, which is just daft. Stupidly FFP will do little about lowering debts amongst clubs(what it was supposed to do) whilst preventing new money clubs appearing so quickly and slightly inconveniencing the older ones.
We all knew Chelsea would make FFP. By "we all" I mean the Chelsea fans who took the time study the FFP rules or those with enough common sense to realise RA did not become a multi-billionaire by being stupid. I trust Chelsea FC not any forms of media (bar Guardian)
The only way a level playing field can be attained is if the the earning capability of all clubs is monitored. That includes sponsorship money, Sky money etc. the reality is FFP prohibits ambition. The reality is Spurs will never be in a position to generate more revenue than Arsenal or Chelsea, even with a new stadium. QPR or any PL team will never be able to out earn United. If you can only spend what you earn it's likely the top 4 will consist of Arsenal, Chelsea, City and United for years to come. Liverpool generate enough money to compete but will never be able to attract good enough players to move up the ladder and overhaul teams above them. You also need a wage cap, ticket prices to be monitored and regulated. It isn't right that Chelsea should be able to charge their fans (on average) more than Arsenal just because they can't compete with teams around them (in terms of stadium capacity). The same also applies for QPR. Money is going out of the pockets of the average working man (9-5, 5 days of the week) into the rich and wealthy football clubs. It's almost like a reverse Robin Hood (Tory-esque) cycle The only reason I am not completely against a stadium move (so long as its in SW London and has something to do with the history of the club) is because perhaps naively I believe they can be more flexible with ticket pricing
I'm all for a wage cap, wages/agent fees are ridiculously stupid now, preventing real fans from attending games due to inflated ticket prices. I know people who have been sold out of their own stadium even though they were there every home/away game during the tough times of 2nd division football. The club need to start giving something back! 70quid to sit high in the clouds with flat as **** atmosphere, something wrong there.
Good read that, cleared up a few misconceptions I had about FFP and after reading this I doubt FFP will make any difference to any of the big clubs unless they drop out of the champions league places.
If FFP ever works, and it is a big if. All it will do is prevent new Chelseas and Citys and preserve the current status quo. It will actually work in our favour
A lot of this is spot-on DL. I'm coming round to your way of thinking that FFP actually cements the current inequalities rather than removes them. Having said that I think if Spurs were in the CL for three consecutive seasons and Arsenal, City and Chelsea were not then Spurs would have higher revenues, even without a new stadium. The real key to success is maintenance of the CL place - which is why last season's finale when the WBA goalie threw 3 goals in for Arsenal and Chelsea won the CL was so hard to take for Spurs fans.
I think you are wrong about City and the SR blog suggests it too. Also there is a belief that if you appear to be showing willingness to meet the regulations Uefa will be lenient. This isnt the case. I actually thought it was but Uefa has stated it isnt. Man City will struggle to pass it for quite a long time. Chelsea will be fine.
Drogs, wage caps don't work either. In Oz we have wage caps in Rugby League, Union and Aussie Rules.It hasn't made one jot of difference to the status quo. The same teams win and contest the top position every year, the also rans are also running. In Football they cap the clubs total wage bill, so the "stars" get all the money and there is great disharmony. You find the "stars" parents get employed as $200,000 per year cleaners , or their Companies get the contract for catering, there's always a dodge. However, we don't have lunatic ticket prices, but then neither do the Germans. The FFP is doomed to failure if the aim is to create a level playing field, simply because the market ALWAYS wins.
Evidence suggests you are likely to be incorrect. Liverpool have entered their 3rd consecutive year without CL Football and currently still generated a significantly higher revenue than Spurs and City. With City having had a full season of CL football as well as better sponsorship deals and with the addition of winning the PL I fully expect them to leapfrog both. What will keep Liverpool strong is their commercial revenue, but they don't take half of what Arsenal do on a matchday. The reality is if Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs all had £60,000 seaters and charged the same ticket prices + all had CL football evidence suggests Chelsea would by far generate the highest revenue. A larger stadium would take us near enough to the £300m mark give or take. I've gone off topic but I'm just explaining the fact is is nieve to assume FFP will benefit Spurs and Arsenal and disadvantage Chelsea. At the end of the day there is no top player that would choose Spurs or Arsenal over us especially on the back of a CL win so if clubs can spend what they earn, from a selfish point of view it's fine by me but it disadvantages Spurs, Liverpool, QPR or any club with the ambition to better themselves. Also means more power to the football clubs and more money going out of our pockets. I can't think of one positive to FFP myself.
This 100% People need to let go if this idea that football is a sport. It isn't, it's a business. You can't have your cake and eat it. If football was a sport no way on earth would coming 4th or 17th be considered a greater achievement than winning the league but the financial austerity that the PL and CL brings means it is that way. Football cannot be a sport AND a business, it's impossible. And in a capitalist society that we live in, inequality is just life. McDonalds and Nike will always earn more than KFC and Reebok, that's just the way it is.
