1. Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

What financial constraints would you adopt?

Discussion in 'Norwich City' started by tipsycanary, Jun 2, 2013.

  1. tipsycanary

    tipsycanary Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,852
    Likes Received:
    30
    I know FFP will be coming in but it seems very doubtful this will make any difference. In fact it seems to greatly favour the big clubs and could cause even more of a division between teams. Its crazy that teams such as Monaco can be in L2 then suddenly be one of the title favourites in L due to millions being pumped in.

    A more financially balanced game would lead to more competition, which in turn could increase interest, promote better football and increase youth development. Additionally the balance between cub and player power could be addressed.

    Personally I would set all clubs a wage cap, for the club rather than individuals. I feel this would prevent players engineering moves away based purely on money, while still allowing clubs the freedom to pay the better players more. Provided it is low enough it will make a much more competitive system which should be reflected in the matches. Maybe say youth players are not included in the wage? Promote youth development?

    Anyway what you guys think could be done?
     
    #1
  2. KIO

    KIO Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    12,611
    Likes Received:
    3,197
    Sounds good to me although there are always loopholes in any system. Unfortunately the only way there would ever be an equal playing field is if the game returned to amateur status as it was when originally invented.
     
    #2
  3. General Melchett

    General Melchett Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    3,065
    I would love to see a wage cap leveling the playing field but it really isn't tenable.
    Firstly you would have the dodgy inducements and underhand dealing (Rangers).
    Secondly, unless it was globally adopted there would be a huge talent drain from those that adopt the system to those who don't. (And are China and US with developing leagues going to say "OK you lot stop paying so much and keep all the best players, we'll continue to just take your has beens")
    Ultimately you can't punish a business for generating more income and then spending it. e.g. Manure may have a tanker load of debt but the revenue they have is immense and always will be. No one would say they are even moderately at risk inspite of their enormous debt.
    And besides if the salaries were capped then who gets rich? The Glazers and other owners and for the main is that any better?
    You could argue that billionare foreign owners have at least made the PL a little more competative. Without them, might Manure have won the last 10 years straight?
    Football is beyond repair in this respect and we can only hope that the big boys sling their hook for a european superleague to leave the rest of us something to play for!

    Bah!
     
    #3
  4. goldeneadie

    goldeneadie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2011
    Messages:
    6,331
    Likes Received:
    1,301
    i agree that a super league could be good for the rest of each nations top league teams, but teams in the Super League would still want all the money, and the rest of us fighting for scraps with a much smaller TV deal.
     
    #4

Share This Page