Both spent well beyond their means chasing the golden chalice of promotion. Our owners have constantly acknowledged about the limitations we have
When you look at teams around the league and what they're spending this year, you can see why Acun has voiced his concerns about the unfair nature of parachute payments. They should be there to cover inflated Premier League wages - ensuring clubs don't go bust - not to fund expensive signings.
I know we wouldn't complain if we were in their position, but deep down everyone can see they need to be regulated better.
Look at Leeds for instance:
Yes, they've had a lot of outgoings, but majority were on loan and have brought in about £26m of fees.
They've already spent £7m on Ampadu.
They're linked with:
Glen Kamara - £6m
Joseph Paintsil - £8.5m
Joel Piroe - £15m
Lewis O'Brien - £10m (we'd have loaned him)
And have been linked with 2/3 more big money signings and have also stated they have no wish to sell Gnoto and Sinisterra despite both wanting away.
So with parachute payments, they're able to make a £20m net loss on transfer fees, retain some of their biggest assets and spend big wages on the likes of Darlow, Ampadu and Rodon even before they sign the other 4 listed above.
Outrageous imbalance with FFP. Our transfer dealings look incredible when you also take this into account.