Half of all Championship clubs on the brink of collapse

[jono]

6 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

This is what will have the biggest impact on clubs running in a more sustainable manner.

In a typical season, the PL hands out about £360m to EFL clubs. £248-265m of that is to 7 or 8 clubs in receipt of parachute payments.

Outside of the parachute clubs the rest receive:
Championship: £4.65m
L1: £0.7m
L2: £0.47m

You could triple the money given to L1 and L2 clubs (£2.1m and £1.4m respectively), and still give all Championship clubs £11.5m.
To put that into perspective, Preston's Championship revenue is normally at the £12m mark, and Accrington's total revenue in L1 is currently about £2.5m.
With this method, all parachute teams are worse off, but everyone else is in a much better position.

You could even have a sliding scale based on finishing position running through all the leagues.
Championship: £7.6m (1st), £7.5m (2nd), £7.4m (3rd)... £5.3m (24th)
L1: £5.2m (1st), £5.1m (2nd), £5.0m (3rd)... £2.9m (24th)
L2: £2.8m (1st), £2.7m (2nd), £2.6m (3rd)... £0.5m (24th)
It even leaves enough to give parachute teams £10m each per season. Rather than clubs receiving £93m over 3 years they'd still get a reasonable £50m or so over the same period.

 

Remember 'Project Big Picture'?

With that sort of money, you could leave parachute money in place, increase money to all Championship clubs to match that of clubs in Y3 of parachute payments, L1 could increase to £5m and L2 clubs up to £2m.

And when you look at that figure of 11.5 million it represents - in macro maths - the over spend allowed in the current P and S 

in other words an ambitious club / wealthy owner subsidy equivalent .. it is proportionate to where we are now except the league would actually be funding it rather than looking to punish the generous or unwise and reward relegated clubs. Then you add in the balance created by nullifying the parachute advantage and suddenly you have a competition worthy of name .. and sustainable. 
 

you can’t run a champ club with ambition on 25 million a year .. you should be able to .. but PL wages and rewards have distorted it.  The balance needs to be reset. PL’s system as is has wrecked the championship 

[Ram-Alf]

There's been some on here who want to get to the Premier league, I get it and understand it, Anyone worth their salt would want to play and see their team at the highest level.

I'm a huge critic of football in todays age, Perphaps it's because I grew up when players were thugs and kicking an opponent was par for the course, In the 60s and 70s and some of the 80s most if not all had a midfield assassin, Who would take out any player who had the nerve to take out his team player, Today we're left with fake injuries, Concussion substitutes, Feigning a head injury, VAR and it's repercussions of ex amount of minutes to decide whether it's a goal or not, Gamesmanship(also known as cheating which is more prevalent in todays game)Kick offs at silly o'clock, Awful officials, Added time(not injury time)of biblical proportions as players use up time to stop athe game...and more.

I'll take DCFC staying in the Championship over promotion, Why, Because it's the nearest thing I can enjoy, Not what I was used to but better than the above.

Just a taster of what the Premier League is...you just gotta laugh.

 

[BaaLocks]

10 hours ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Doesn't that set of stats very eloquently validate the cliff-edge between the Premier league and the EFL driven solely by broadcasting cash? 

Everything else drives off that. 

It does, doesn't it - it's why it's the promised land and why so many are betting the farm to get there. But there's only room for 20 even if there are (by my calcs) more than half the clubs in the football league - in the same way as the discussion last night - feeling they have a claim to be there, or at least to justify the need to make a charge to be there.

There was a comment in the thread that the 08/09 season somehow scarred the psyche of all Derby fans, I'd similarly argue that the same could be said of the Jim Smith era or the Golden Years. They frame for us what we think our club should be and where it should be. I'm not down oon Derby by saying the risk and reward is against us, I'm just being pragmatic - the Leicester numbers show what is possible but it took £180m of (wise) investment to get there and it will likely take us the same sort of amount.

[TheresOnlyWanChope]

39 minutes ago, James Pond said:

There's been some on here who want to get to the Premier league, I get it and understand it, Anyone worth their salt would want to play and see their team at the highest level.

I'm a huge critic of football in todays age, Perphaps it's because I grew up when players were thugs and kicking an opponent was par for the course, In the 60s and 70s and some of the 80s most if not all had a midfield assassin, Who would take out any player who had the nerve to take out his team player, Today we're left with fake injuries, Concussion substitutes, Feigning a head injury, VAR and it's repercussions of ex amount of minutes to decide whether it's a goal or not, Gamesmanship(also known as cheating which is more prevalent in todays game)Kick offs at silly o'clock, Awful officials, Added time(not injury time)of biblical proportions as players use up time to stop athe game...and more.

I'll take DCFC staying in the Championship over promotion, Why, Because it's the nearest thing I can enjoy, Not what I was used to but better than the above.

Just a taster of what the Premier League is...you just gotta laugh.

 

All those things about Premier League are unpalatable but surely having thugs dirty tackling etc was also cheating. Plus, there is lots of gamesmanship in lower leagues too (loads in the championship) and is the standard of officiating that much better lower down? Was it better before? The only advantage I see to Derby being in the second tier is we usually win more than lose and it’s a very unpredictable league. The goal has to be top tier, financially it’s not sustainable to be spending lots of money and not achieving promotion. The club will never grow. 

[Alty_Ram]

I'm slightly surprised that some folk are seemingly accepting that the door to the top flight might close and doom us to official Championship 'other league' obscurity for all time (as opposed to the currrent self-imposed 'not good enough to get promoted' version).

Just my personal opinion but I'd rather have a goal/aspiration of a mid-table top flight finish and get the odd hiding from a Man City than winning an utterly irrelevant league with zero prospect of getting to the top table because rules now officially say so. Regardless of the fact that it is much more difficult these days due to the finances involved, as Derby fans our history has given us a belief that you can come from a footballing backwater and still get in amongst the elite.

[Ram-Alf]

12 minutes ago, TheresOnlyWanChope said:

All those things about Premier League are unpalatable but surely having thugs dirty tackling etc was also cheating. Plus, there is lots of gamesmanship in lower leagues too (loads in the championship) and is the standard of officiating that much better lower down? Was it better before? The only advantage I see to Derby being in the second tier is we usually win more than lose and it’s a very unpredictable league. The goal has to be top tier, financially it’s not sustainable to be spending lots of money and not achieving promotion. The club will never grow. 

Thugs back in the day...it'd be intimidating, In todays world some would say "cheating" I grew up watching this week in week out, Those who weren't around decades ago may as well live on Mars, Football then to today is Worlds apart.

Gamesmanship was around when I played local football, It's just more prevalent today, Or seems so as TV provides all the evidence...ie Lacazette ?

The Officials today are poor imo, A guess would be this is world wide too, As now football is run by those who see £s, $s and €s as their goal as it keeps THEM in a life only we could dream of, The World over our officials were seen as the best all those years ago, Not too many if any are involved in World cup final tournaments or the Euro equivalent now, As for the standard down the leagues, They're there for a reason...not good enough and have to work there way up or have someone who can put your name forward ie Stuart Atwell who's teacher was  George Courtney ex top ? official

As for finances, That's not a concern of mine, I pay for a season ticket and take a chance, Similar to going to a restaraunt, You never know what's going to be served up, If DCFC were be no more...It'd be back to watching local football.

 

[Van der MoodHoover]

38 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

It does, doesn't it - it's why it's the promised land and why so many are betting the farm to get there. But there's only room for 20 even if there are (by my calcs) more than half the clubs in the football league - in the same way as the discussion last night - feeling they have a claim to be there, or at least to justify the need to make a charge to be there.

There was a comment in the thread that the 08/09 season somehow scarred the psyche of all Derby fans, I'd similarly argue that the same could be said of the Jim Smith era or the Golden Years. They frame for us what we think our club should be and where it should be. I'm not down oon Derby by saying the risk and reward is against us, I'm just being pragmatic - the Leicester numbers show what is possible but it took £180m of (wise) investment to get there and it will likely take us the same sort of amount.

We've had about the right quantum. Just sadly misdirected.....?

[ramsbottom]

On 08/03/2021 at 22:52, DCFClks said:

American sport is horrible. They don't have clubs, they have franchises. Teams relocate to other parts of the country. No relegations or promotions. Commercialization is bad in British football but it's 10 times worse over there.

I was referring more to their system being geared towards parity. Yes they have bigger teams within the NFL, NBA etc, but there hasn’t been decades long dominance like Liverpool & the Manchester teams have enjoyed. And there are more examples of teams “doing a Leicester”. 

[Leeds Ram]

15 hours ago, BaaLocks said:

To clarify, I'm not happy staying down - all of the above is very attractive to me. But it's not the scenario I either laid out or that I think is realistic. I simply don't get this belief that because we won the league 50 years ago somehow that means that if only we get a couple of things right it can all be again. You're right, it's not impossible but besides Wolves, Southampton, maybe Burnley, there's not a club that has managed to hang on for more than a few seasons. I'd take the ride, I'd enjoy it, but it would be an extreme long shot to turn it into anything sustainable and so - if this was a poker hand - you would be a lunatic to go all in. Some think it's our destiny, our right and all we have to do is buy a couple of strikers and the gates will open.

As for Wolves, sorry but they are definitely historically a bigger club than Derby County. It's OK, again, no sleep to lose over it. Champions three times, runners up six times, FA Cup winners four times, League Cup twice, UEFA Cup Finalists, Charity Shield four times. And they won the Texaco Cup before we did.....

I mean I didn't say it's because we won the league twice fifty years ago that's why it's possible...  What about Leicester, Aston Villa, West Ham, Crystal Palace, Newcastle, and Brighton too? All clubs that have had spells in the second division and have gone back up to the Premier League to differing degrees of success. You present a picture that it's extremely unlikely that a second division team can go up, stay up and build upon that foundation but it's clearly not that rare with the examples I've given. It's perfectly possible with sensible management that Derby County can become a solid Premier League club that can compete. 

[TheresOnlyWanChope]

2 hours ago, James Pond said:

Thugs back in the day...it'd be intimidating, In todays world some would say "cheating" I grew up watching this week in week out, Those who weren't around decades ago may as well live on Mars, Football then to today is Worlds apart.

Gamesmanship was around when I played local football, It's just more prevalent today, Or seems so as TV provides all the evidence...ie Lacazette ?

The Officials today are poor imo, A guess would be this is world wide too, As now football is run by those who see £s, $s and €s as their goal as it keeps THEM in a life only we could dream of, The World over our officials were seen as the best all those years ago, Not too many if any are involved in World cup final tournaments or the Euro equivalent now, As for the standard down the leagues, They're there for a reason...not good enough and have to work there way up or have someone who can put your name forward ie Stuart Atwell who's teacher was  George Courtney ex top ? official

As for finances, That's not a concern of mine, I pay for a season ticket and take a chance, Similar to going to a restaraunt, You never know what's going to be served up, If DCFC were be no more...It'd be back to watching local football.

 

Football has moved on, nostalgia is nice but all sports develop over time. Gamesmanship is there because of the massive glory on offer compared to the penalties/ costs of failure. Cheating has always been around, Italians and Derby/ English teams in the 70s? Don’t know if standard of officiating is better or worse. VAR complicated things because officials have that to back them up now or to enforce decisions they are too scared to give. 
I want Derby to be in the top division. Don’t understand any other mentality. On the other hand, as long as we don’t go down, championship football has it’s merits and it’s nice getting 23 home matches for your season ticket. 

[Ram-Alf]

1 hour ago, TheresOnlyWanChope said:

Football has moved on, nostalgia is nice but all sports develop over time. Gamesmanship is there because of the massive glory on offer compared to the penalties/ costs of failure. Cheating has always been around, Italians and Derby/ English teams in the 70s? Don’t know if standard of officiating is better or worse. VAR complicated things because officials have that to back them up now or to enforce decisions they are too scared to give. 
I want Derby to be in the top division. Don’t understand any other mentality. On the other hand, as long as we don’t go down, championship football has it’s merits and it’s nice getting 23 home matches for your season ticket. 

Agree all sports develop over time, But in what way, Is it a + or a -, It's down to the individual to decide if they like it or not, I have nothing against those of you who want to see what you concider to be the best for yourself and the club you support.

It's what it has become that I don't like, Supporters were treated as vermin and in some cases rightly so in the 70s and 80s, I've witnessed the good the bad and the ugly over my time since 1966, Supporters are being force fed imo...dross and some lap it up, I have Sky until my contract runs out in August...it will not be re newed...The money men have taken over the asylum.

[BaaLocks]

1 hour ago, Leeds Ram said:

What about Leicester, Aston Villa, West Ham, Crystal Palace, Newcastle, and Brighton too?

I would say that they fall into two buckets - those that have infrastucture and investment to allow them to fund their journey. Newcastle, West Ham and Leicester fall into that bracket.

Brighton, Burnely and Southampton are the more interesting examples and I do think we can replicate that. But I'd suggest that all of those will get caught by gravity eventually - just as Watford, Bournemouth and Norwich have experienced (some bouncing back as we speak).

So I don't say we can't go up, it's staying up that is the hard part and without a Sugar Daddy / Sheikh to fund the development that is needed once we are there. I see no evidence of that being likely to happen so I remain pragmatic / pessimistic in outlook.

[Ghost of Clough]

43 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

I would say that they fall into two buckets - those that have infrastucture and investment to allow them to fund their journey. Newcastle, West Ham and Leicester fall into that bracket.

Brighton, Burnely and Southampton are the more interesting examples and I do think we can replicate that. But I'd suggest that all of those will get caught by gravity eventually - just as Watford, Bournemouth and Norwich have experienced (some bouncing back as we speak).

So I don't say we can't go up, it's staying up that is the hard part and without a Sugar Daddy / Sheikh to fund the development that is needed once we are there. I see no evidence of that being likely to happen so I remain pragmatic / pessimistic in outlook.

In you opinion, what infrastructure do those clubs have which we don't?

[Rammy03]

49 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

So I don't say we can't go up, it's staying up that is the hard part and without a Sugar Daddy / Sheikh to fund the development that is needed once we are there. I see no evidence of that being likely to happen so I remain pragmatic / pessimistic in outlook.

If a sugar daddy funded the development of Leicester, why wouldn't one fund the development of Derby County? 

[BaaLocks]

49 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

In you opinion, what infrastructure do those clubs have which we don't?

And so another Monty Python sketch starts - 'yes, we get all of that. But besides the 50,000 all seater stadium, 30k season tickets, global fan base, market valuation of £300m, team valued at £296m, revenue of £179m, commerical income of $48m just how do Newcastle have bigger infrastructure than us? I mean we beat them at home last time we played them in Premier League so that must mean we're a bigger club than them'. 

[BaaLocks]

49 minutes ago, Rammy03 said:

If a sugar daddy funded the development of Leicester, why wouldn't one fund the development of Derby County? 

They might, but they haven't. Keep dreaming, some day it might happen.

[Rab a dab doo]

We had plenty of would be 'Daddies' but seen very little of the their 'Sugar' (Mel being the except) recently. 

[Tamworthram]

1 hour ago, Rammy03 said:

If a sugar daddy funded the development of Leicester, why wouldn't one fund the development of Derby County? 

Did FFP/P&S rules exist when Leicester were funded? I can't remember.

[Leeds Ram]

2 hours ago, BaaLocks said:

I would say that they fall into two buckets - those that have infrastucture and investment to allow them to fund their journey. Newcastle, West Ham and Leicester fall into that bracket.

Brighton, Burnely and Southampton are the more interesting examples and I do think we can replicate that. But I'd suggest that all of those will get caught by gravity eventually - just as Watford, Bournemouth and Norwich have experienced (some bouncing back as we speak).

So I don't say we can't go up, it's staying up that is the hard part and without a Sugar Daddy / Sheikh to fund the development that is needed once we are there. I see no evidence of that being likely to happen so I remain pragmatic / pessimistic in outlook.

This is the problem with your analysis I think, once you receive premiership money then the investment becomes more present and realisable than when you're in the championship so it's more akin to a chicken and egg scenario. I don't remember Leicester spending silly money before their premiership win and neither have Newcastle. West Ham's fans up until last season were always complaining about the lack of cash being spent as well. There has been some investment of course, aided by TV money and owner investment but Derby is just as likely as let's say leicester to find an owner who can finance that growth. Money doesn't guarantee success either, Bournemouth for example were in the top 10 net spenders in Europe at one point during their stay in the top flight. Even in this division we've had years where we've made significant investments on players that have not worked. 

How you define 'infrastructure' I'm not sure... but if that means in footballing terms then our academy and training facilities are often remarked to be up there with the best in the country.  Our stadium is a good size and can easily be extended to 40,000+ for a limited amount of money due to the design of the West Stand too. If you're talking about the inner structures of the clubs and their functionality then I'm not sure how you could possibly remark on any of that. If you're talking about finances then they are oftentimes skewed through premiership tv money so again you'd have to make additional revenue adjustments to our finances (which is simply a guess) to apply that logic. 

Being caught by gravity i.e. 'how big a club is to reflect your natural position in the football order' changes over time, therefore if your performance over a sustained number of years changes then so does your 'gravitational pull' as a club. The football order is not static, in fact it is constantly in flux which is why Leicester for instance are now considered a seriously big player. 

[Ghost of Clough]

20 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

And so another Monty Python sketch starts - 'yes, we get all of that. But besides the 50,000 all seater stadium, 30k season tickets, global fan base, market valuation of £300m, team valued at £296m, revenue of £179m, commerical income of $48m just how do Newcastle have bigger infrastructure than us? I mean we beat them at home last time we played them in Premier League so that must mean we're a bigger club than them'. 

Based on the recent takeover, Burnley were valued at £240m just because they're a PL club (£200m for 84%)
Our revenue would shoot up to at least £150m just from being in the PL. That's not taking into account increased sponsorship deals. Getting money from the PL does not equal infrastructure.

Well done on knowing that a stadium does constitute infrastructure though. That's something we'll never match Newcastle and West Ham on. But what about training facilities, academy, etc..?