This is what we’re up against

[Spanish]

11 minutes ago, LeedsCityRam said:

100% this.

The sentiment of the OP is totally right but its like complaining about the weather - its totally futile as we have to operate within the system that we find ourselves in. It ain't changing. What is obvious is that in a division artificially skewed by parachute payments, fighting them on a financial basis (particularly with a FFP handicap) is lunacy.

Leeds, Sheff Utd & Norwich (previous time) got up without parachute payments & without exceeding FFP limits - the thing that linked all 3 was a) a well established & consistent pattern of play, b) recruitment totally geared to that style & c) managers with a vision who were backed by their respective owners. All 3 clubs had serious wobbles on their way up but stuck with the project & are now reaping the financial rewards.

Its obviously tough but this isn't a closed shop - we just need to be much much smarter & more strategic in the way we go about our business. We need an edge.

Leeds gambled on promotion I feel.  About the only way it is achievable.  Spend big and face 2 years of poverty then go again

 

 

[LeedsCityRam]

2 minutes ago, David said:

Would love to see a list of where clubs in receipt of parachute payments finished in the table over the years.

Stoke a classic example of getting it badly wrong, Villa were also on the brink before beating us at Wembley. 

Sunderland, did they spend much? Seem to recall they didn’t and the money was covering some horrendous mistakes whilst in the PL. Went down with a squad that wasn’t interested.

My hunch is that majority of those clubs that largely stuck with their managers/squads (Burnley under Dyche, Newcastle under Benitez, Norwich under Farke) were comfortably top 6. Again, comes back to continuity - I bet Fulham do better than West Brom & Sheff Utd next year if they stick with Parker.

Stoke/Sunderland both came down with no manager & therefore were both in flux when they came down. They also had very disruptive & highly paid elements in their squads (which absorbed their parachute payments). Rowett had a very tough few months at Stoke but perversely they'd have been better off sticking with him & letting him remould the squad. Instead they went through 3 managers & were indebted to O'Neill saving them.

Same with Grayson at Sunderland - remember them dominating an opening day draw against us but you can't carry as many over-paid & disinterested players as they were doing. Instead they went through 3 managers that season but unlike O'Neill, Coleman couldn't save them.

[LeedsCityRam]

8 minutes ago, Spanish said:

Leeds gambled on promotion I feel.  About the only way it is achievable.  Spend big and face 2 years of poverty then go again

 

 

Interesting. Suspect they signed off on a competitive budget when Bielsa signed on for another year, thinking they had an excellent chance of going up. If they'd been say, 10th at Christmas I daresay they would have sold a player or two (Kalvin Phillips would have easily raised £15m)

19/20 figures obviously skewed by Covid impacting turnover (over & above the excluded items itemised there). Would agree overall approach was a gamble but when all said & done, it was still FFP compliant.

 

[Spanish]

12 minutes ago, LeedsCityRam said:

Interesting. Suspect they signed off on a competitive budget when Bielsa signed on for another year, thinking they had an excellent chance of going up. If they'd been say, 10th at Christmas I daresay they would have sold a player or two (Kalvin Phillips would have easily raised £15m)

19/20 figures obviously skewed by Covid impacting turnover (over & above the excluded items itemised there). Would agree overall approach was a gamble but when all said & done, it was still FFP compliant.

 

yep not being critical, I knew I had seen it and worth sharing

[jimtastic56]

I agree with everything David has said . It does seem like we are up against a cartel. However it is hard for us to take the moral high ground when a player at DCFC has been dragging £100,000 a week and is now getting £50,000 a week as manager. Double what W.B.A are offering . What would Wycombe say to that?

[Spanish]

6 minutes ago, jimtastic56 said:

I agree with everything David has said . It does seem like we are up against a cartel. However it is hard for us to take the moral high ground when a player at DCFC has been dragging £100,000 a week and is now getting £50,000 a week as manager. Double what W.B.A are offering . What would Wycombe say to that?

thought this was paid by the sponsor?

[BBG83]

While I agree football is broken and salary caps should be applied, the Premier League isn't going to change anytime soon. If it did it wouldn't attract the players it currently does and another country will take advantage.

And just because we're rubbish doesn't mean we can start moaning about relegated teams having an advantage. In 2007 we won the 'biggest prize' in English football, spent next to nothing and came back down with parachute payments. We also appointed Paul Jewell.

Ten years on - In 2017 Norwich appointed a manager, we could have surely attracted ourselves, who's taken them up twice in that time, making the club considerably better off than before he took over. In the same year we re-appointed a manager who failed to get us promoted, after we'd sacked a manager who spent millions on what turned out to be poor value for money.

So no point moaning about things out of our control. Just wish for an owner who makes some sensible and calculated decisions, and a manager who builds a team on a sensible budget.

[Jourdan]

2 hours ago, Nuwtfly said:

Is the point not that, though all these things you mention here can and often do happen, we should still strive for an even playing field and indeed and even starting point for every team at the beginning of every season in their respective leagues?

Parachute payments create inequality in our division, and that inequality is getting more and more out of control.

We will end up with a small, closed off sect of teams each season in the Championship that will look more like a Premier League waiting room than anything else!

Every team (except special cases like Wednesday) starts the season on zero points.

Every team starts with eleven players on the pitch.

I think this is as even as it’s ever going to get.

You take the financial inequality out of football and you lose the magic. Who would watch the FA Cup, for example?

Granted, we could abolish parachute payments and distribute the £120 million to the rest of the Championship or below.

You can re-distribute the wealth, but you can’t ensure clubs will spend the money sensibly.

As @LeedsCityRam says, it is times like these where you have to do things smarter. Having an extra few million guarantees nothing.

[WhiteHorseRam]

3 hours ago, David said:

One hundred and twenty five million pounds for being crap.

If someone writes a 600-page history of the Prem to date, there is the title of your conclusion chapter right there.

[Ambitious]

2 hours ago, GboroRam said:

That would be a recipe for clubs spending beyond their means. In fact it would guarantee it, as the only way to keep up would be to bet the farm each season, and hope by maxing your credit out you can stay competitive.

It would be incredibly boring too. It just becomes a game of who can spend the most money. 

In fact it sounds like exactly the opposite of what I want football to be. Nothing about the fans, entirely about the depth of pockets of the owners. Like we have now, on steroids. And crack cocaine.

What is it now? 

The whole point of the original post was that the money some teams get and the financial parameters they need to spend their money means that the disparity in the league is insane. 

In order to stop the disparity you either need to give the teams without the tools to compete OR you bring in salary caps and other financial restrictions to level the playing field. I'd be ok with either, but the latter is almost impossible to implement. 

[HorsforthRam]

47 minutes ago, Jourdan said:

Every team (except special cases like Wednesday) starts the season on zero points.

Every team starts with eleven players on the pitch.

I think this is as even as it’s ever going to get.

You take the financial inequality out of football and you lose the magic. Who would watch the FA Cup, for example?

Granted, we could abolish parachute payments and distribute the £120 million to the rest of the Championship or below.

You can re-distribute the wealth, but you can’t ensure clubs will spend the money sensibly.

As @LeedsCityRam says, it is times like these where you have to do things smarter. Having an extra few million guarantees nothing.

Any suggestions  of how to “do things smarter”?

Edited May 24, 2021 by HorsforthRam

[Gone]

Footballs broken, one cause and one cause only, Players wages!!! When are the football fans going to wake up. The price we pay for tickets, the price of our TV subscriptions it all goes in the players and agents pockets.clubs are skint trying to meet operational costs they can’t afford, the market is broken no other business would run like this.  The reason for the parachute payments is to cover players wages on stupid contracts when being absolutely poo all season and getting relegated but still keep he same income when the clubs revenue has been/should be slashed.

The only way it will change is to put a salary cap on all players wages and make it a sensible cap and do it ASAP. Either that or we stop paying for Sky, BT, Amazon, stop buying match day tickets, stop buying piss weak beer at £5 a pint and a pie for £4. Dry up the gravy train and stop paying these greedy bar stewards and their parasite agents stupid money. That’s the only way to force the big reset. 

[Parsnip]

10 minutes ago, HorsforthRam said:

Any examples of how to “do things smarter”?

Have Rooney pull some strings, lets get the absolute cream of the Man Utd wonderkid academy here on loan for the season. 

Aa soon as they're signed up and squad numbered, sack Rooney and get a decent manager in.

Not just a hat stand me.

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, TexasRam said:

 The reason for the parachute payments is to cover players wages on stupid contracts when being absolutely poo all season and getting relegated but still keep he same income when the clubs revenue has been/should be slashed.

Rather than a salary cap maybe there could be mandatory relegation wage contract clause, which means no parachute payments - then share it around! Else soon it will be a very limited Prem., an English ESL in all but name.

[Gone]

1 minute ago, RoyMac5 said:

Rather than a salary cap maybe there could be mandatory relegation wage contract clause, which means no parachute payments - then share it around! Else soon it will be a very limited Prem., an English ESL in all but name.

I agree in a way but the cap needs to be for all football not just the English leagues.  Clubs are in huge amounts of debt the incoming doesn’t cover the outgoing, it’s not sustainable and it’s all down to players wages. It’s indefensible, it’s out of balance and it needs to change and change quickly. 

[kingsy1884]

Yes there is plenty of money in the Premier league but that is the whole point of getting out of this division. Many teams come down and fall into mediocrity. 

We wasted our parachute payments and since 13/14 have failed to capitalise on anything. The door has been wide open several times but we failed to take the opportunities.

Now we are further from promotion than we have even been since 20010/11 and that isn't because of the fortunes spilling down from the Prem it is through gross mismanaged by the board causing chaos both on and off the field.

 

[Ambitious]

3 hours ago, SamUltraRam said:

Just to put things into perspective, last season Leeds won automatic promotion without parachute payments and the season before Sheffield United did it.

I agree that promotion is often the relegated clubs to lose but sometimes when they stick with their old manager, or sack their manager and make a bad appointment , it gives other clubs a chance

Leeds also made a £64m loss the season they went up, with Bielsa as one of the highest paid managers in the country. Sheffield United did it really well and managed to stay up for a season, but they were always on borrowed time because they were never committed to remaining in the Premier League. They never spent money like a Premier League team and now they will probably look to pocket a lot of their money whereas Fulham will happily throw some cash around (and I would imagine WBA would too). 

I'd not be surprised to see Fulham and WBA win automatic promotion again next season. 

[strawhillram]

6 hours ago, David said:

£125m for being the worst team in the league.

Just let that sink in.

One hundred and twenty five million pounds for being crap.

That’s 3 clubs coming down with a total of £381m, but that’s not all, the Premier League will also give them parachute payments to soften the blow.

Sorry to start another topic on this, but it’s a topic that needs to be repeated, football is broken. It’s broken and they are doing nothing about it. Why?

We have to try and compete with those 3 next year, with barely any revenue we have to compete against clubs with over £100m in their back pockets.

What hope do we have?

Yes I know money doesn’t always = success, Brentford beat Bournemouth, made it to Wembley but how many years have they been trying to get there? 

Whoever goes up it’s a major achievement, getting past the parachute payment clubs, it’s huge, one season up there and they have banked over £100m, it’s madness.

We can never have a completely level playing field, I understand that, but the PL and EFL could come together and distribute that money out more fairly.

Why are they not?

Why are these questions not being asked?

Do we need to see more clubs liquidated, more clubs going bankrupt trying to compete from the Championship to League 2, all the national media journalists will be all over that, justice for Bury, why not call it out now? 

Heads are so far up the Premier League’s backside the Football League barely gets a mention.

I’m ranting I know, but £125m for being crap. 

Who signs off on that and thinks it’s good for football? 

It’s broken, football is broken.

Money is the root of all EFL 

EFL not a competition anymore. For most clubs it’s about survival, the odd one or two overspend to try and compete with the relegated teams, any decent or young players are Cherry picked by the PL teams
I’m beginning to wonder  what the point is anymore.

The EFL are more concerned with punishing clubs. How can it be financial fair play when the ex PL clubs have such an advantage

I don’t watch PL or European matches, as it’s just show ponies basking in their riches and I’ve no interest in any of the clubs.

 

Edited May 24, 2021 by StrawHillRam

[jono]

The glaring thing, parachute payments apart  is always player wages. I suspect the sustainability of championship clubs .. I.e. maximum income possible to generate versus reasonable outgoings probably indicates a maximum affordable salary of circa 10k per week. 500 K per year is the kind of whack a CEO of an established PLC of some size gets .. Championship footballers ? 
 

I just wonder .. if we let the players do their own thing regarding sponsorship deals if they can, then have a salary cap as distinct from an earnings cap, what this might do to Champ clubs profitability ? 

[Sparkle]

I don’t disagree with parachute payments being in existence as clubs may well have over exposed themselves trying to stay in the premiership. What is wrong is starting on an equal footing as everyone else in the championship, they should all be starting on minus 16 points if they accept the parachute payments and it’s easy to bring in - give them all a years notice that those are the rules starting in season 22/23 - then we will have a competitive league again.

As a second pop at the way football is conducted have all the EFL clubs refuse to loan any players from the premiership clubs then the youngsters will simply hardly ever play in competitive football and the premiership clubs will not be able to hoard them and the better ones can be picked up by more EFL clubs at cheaper money and actually sell them for very good money if a premiership club wanted to actually play them.