EFL actually want Derby to work and be sustainable

[Ambitious]

The EFL are one of the most incompetent sports governing bodies in the entire world. I hate almost everything about they go about their business, especially how they market the league and their long-term aims. 

Any governing body discouraging investment is destined to fail, especially when run exclusively with a strategy that creates a substantial unlevel playing field for teams to compete. 

You only have to look at the numbers of a Derby County with investment in the squad, against a Derby County without investment in the squad - it's almost a third down on average. Investment, competition... it all generates interest and interest generates money. 

There is a reason ALL Premier League clubs overall have attendances 90% plus capacity whereas clubs in the Football League are running just over half. 

[jono]

It’s very simple … if you need to have the parachute system then FFP / P and S has no meaning or logic. The two just don’t run in sync 

Either Parachute and free for all ….. or  no parachute and FFP / P and S across the board. 
 

It really doesn’t matter which .. it just has to be straight and open

[Cam the Ram]

Derby - Hey, here's our accounts. By the way, we used an alternate method involving amortisation.

EFL - Hmmmmmm. It's unusual, but fine, we'll sign off on them.

*Years Later*

EFL - Lol, changed our mind, now they aren't ok.

 

Derby - We've sold our stadium and will add the profit to our accounts.

EFL - We don't like that, but it's not against the rules. We disagree with the valuation of the stadium however.

Derby - OK. Here's a valuation from an independent company who provide a similar figure.

EFL - Nope, we don't agree with the professionals, we'll begin disciplinary action. 

 

Independent panel - Derby didn't do anything wrong.

EFL - Meh, what do you guys know. We will appeal with a new independent panel.

New independent panel - We believe a 100k fine is appropriate for Derby's wrongdoing.

EFL - Nah, we don't like that, let's appeal. Oh and let's also try and relegate them after the season is finished.

 

Derby - Hey, we've renewed Jack Marriott's contract.

EFL - OK.

*6 months later*

EFL - Changed our mind. Marriott is free to leave. And no, you can't sign anyone to replace him, Waghorn, or any of the other players who left.

*Months later*

Derby - Please, we don't have enough senior players to even field a team, just let us sign some.

EFL - *Sigh* Fine, but only 4 or 5. And no more than 4.5k a week! And if you re-sign players like Davies or Wisdom they will take up 1 of those spots. 

 

Derby - Hey we're having some injury problems and would like to use a couple of young lads, but they'll then count as senior players. Can you be a little lenient with this?

EFL - Lol no. 

 

 

I'm really relieved the EFL are trying to help us and make us work. It's really nice to know they have our back.

[1of4]

The EFL want Derby to be sustainable and work, is this a joke? Parry and his cohorts have acted like bully boy dictators, while interpreting the rules of the EFL in a way that suits their own agenda.

Since the club proved in court, the value of the stadium had not been over estimated. The head officials of the EFL appear to have done everything in the power to stop The Rams from being a workable club. At ever turn the EFL have stopped Derby competing on equal terms with all the other clubs in the championship.

So unless the EFL can show that their original actions over the stadium weren't taken to purely pacify another club's owner. Then no I didn't believe they want or care if we do or do not survive, never mind being sustainable.

[IslandExile]

30 minutes ago, Cam the Ram said:

Derby - Hey, here's our accounts. By the way, we used an alternate method involving amortisation.

EFL - Hmmmmmm. It's unusual, but fine, we'll sign off on them.

*Years Later*

EFL - Lol, changed our mind, now they aren't ok.

 

Derby - We've sold our stadium and will add the profit to our accounts.

EFL - We don't like that, but it's not against the rules. We disagree with the valuation of the stadium however.

Derby - OK. Here's a valuation from an independent company who provide a similar figure.

EFL - Nope, we don't agree with the professionals, we'll begin disciplinary action. 

 

Independent panel - Derby didn't do anything wrong.

EFL - Meh, what do you guys know. We will appeal with a new independent panel.

New independent panel - We believe a 100k fine is appropriate for Derby's wrongdoing.

EFL - Nah, we don't like that, let's appeal. Oh and let's also try and relegate them after the season is finished.

 

Derby - Hey, we've renewed Jack Marriott's contract.

EFL - OK.

*6 months later*

EFL - Changed our mind. Marriott is free to leave. And no, you can't sign anyone to replace him, Waghorn, or any of the other players who left.

*Months later*

Derby - Please, we don't have enough senior players to even field a team, just let us sign some.

EFL - *Sigh* Fine, but only 4 or 5. And no more than 4.5k a week! And if you re-sign players like Davies or Wisdom they will take up 1 of those spots. 

 

Derby - Hey we're having some injury problems and would like to use a couple of young lads, but they'll then count as senior players. Can you be a little lenient with this?

EFL - Lol no. 

 

 

I'm really relieved the EFL are trying to help us and make us work. It's really nice to know they have our back.

It sounds like a joke. It would be funny but, effectively, that's what's happened.

It's nuts. The EFL simply are not fit for purpose.

Bury the EFL, resurrect Bury the football club.

[uttoxram75]

The EFL gave up any pretence at impartiality when they were "disappointed" and found it "regrettable" when Derby were only fined for the accounts amortisation stuff. That is not the language of a professional body.

The mask slipped, small minded fearful men who are in thrall to Gibson, Parry and Maguire.

[PistoldPete]

One guy in the rams forum challenged someone who said the majority of Rans fans thought the Efl has a vendettta against us. He thought that was presumptuous.
 

Maybe that persons should read this thread. 
 

I suspect it isn’t just a majority but an overwhelming majority of Rams fans think that Efl are unfair to us.

And the loudest chants I have heard recently even before they tried to relegate us last year were the **** the Efl ones.

Edited October 29, 2021 by PistoldPete

[The Key Club King]

I know parachute payments are universally hated but the principle reason for them is to aid promoted clubs from the Championship. The Premier League is the hardest to stay in after promotion and requires a huge increase in wages just to compete. The increased wages cannot possibly be sustained when relegated were they not to be given parachute payments to cover 2/3/4 year contracts. Instead clubs would either spend less and increase the chance of relegation, or gamble and hope it pays off (we know how that works when it fails). 

Despite the parachute payments, relegated clubs from the Premier League still only have a roughly 1 in 3 chance of getting promoted the next season which is not that different to the other leagues.

The problem is not parachute payments, the problem is that the 20th best club in the country gets £95m in TV money and the 21st gets about £8m (and that includes solidarity payments from the Premier League).

Back on topic - our problem isn't the EFL, its Mel Morris.

[Oldben]

Expenditure of championship clubs summer 2021 ...

1. Sheffield United

Net spend = +£25.20m (Income: £25.20m, Expenditure: Nil)

2. Bournemouth

Net spend = +£21.60m (Income: £24.21m, Expenditure: £2.61m)

3. West Bromwich Albion

Net spend = +£17.17m (Income: £17.17m, Expenditure: Nil)

4. Blackburn Rovers

Net spend = +£15.41m (Income: £15.93m, Expenditure: £522,000)

5. Stoke City

Net spend = +£8.42m (Income: £12.60m, Expenditure: £4.19m)

6. Reading

Net spend = +£8.37m (Income: £8.37m, Expenditure: Nil)

7. Cardiff City

Net spend = +£900,000 (Income: £900,000, Expenditure: Nil)

8. Preston North End

Net spend = -£1.26m (Income: Nil, Expenditure: £1.26m)

9. Nottingham Forest

Net spend = +£788,000 (Income: £788,000, Expenditure: Nil)

10. Derby County

Net spend = +/- £0 (Income: Nil, Expenditure: Nil)

So parachute payments makes a difference. The efl knew Derby had zero chance of being competitive without spending and had in fact already been forced to sell a number of key players that could have helped the club.

It shows how great a manager Rooney is to be achieving anything with a threadbare team, imagine what he could he could achieve if he had the spend power of the top 4 teams here. He probably needs that spend power since Derby require a significant rebuild.

I like how our defence is performing but let's not discuss their combined age or whether we think at there age they would do so well next season.

Guardian when he took over Manchester City built from the back, knowing a strong defence makes a strong team but he had a major budget. Rooney has had significant spending issues.

The efl are responsible for giving Derby 12 points and could soon give 9 more, they have tied derbys hands behind their backs and send gey out of that one.

The efl are derbys jailer but I don't believe the crime fits the time so to speak.

If the efl really cared about the championship they would add a spending cap like they previously did in League One.

The spending cap could be agreed across all teams.

They would also give more power to fan organisations.

In Germany, The 50+1 rule guards against this. In short, it means that clubs – and, by extension, the fans - hold a majority of their own voting rights. Under German Football League [DFL] rules, football clubs will not be allowed to play in the Bundesliga if commercial investors have more than a 49 percent stake.

In essence, this means that private investors cannot take over clubs and potentially push through measures that prioritise profit over the wishes of supporters. The ruling simultaneously protects against reckless owners and safeguards the democratic customs of German clubs.  

I can't see that in the uk, but what if fans had to have a representative on the board, whose voice had to legally be listened to, would that be unreasonable. That would be about transparency.

[jono]

43 minutes ago, The Key Club King said:

I know parachute payments are universally hated but the principle reason for them is to aid promoted clubs from the Championship. The Premier League is the hardest to stay in after promotion and requires a huge increase in wages just to compete. The increased wages cannot possibly be sustained when relegated were they not to be given parachute payments to cover 2/3/4 year contracts. Instead clubs would either spend less and increase the chance of relegation, or gamble and hope it pays off (we know how that works when it fails). 

Despite the parachute payments, relegated clubs from the Premier League still only have a roughly 1 in 3 chance of getting promoted the next season which is not that different to the other leagues.

The problem is not parachute payments, the problem is that the 20th best club in the country gets £95m in TV money and the 21st gets about £8m (and that includes solidarity payments from the Premier League).

Back on topic - our problem isn't the EFL, its Mel Morris.

Yes and no. You can quite easily solve the wages issue by making it mandatory that all player contracts have relegation clauses that reflect income differences between leagues. It’s performance related pay. Nothing complex there ! 

[PistoldPete]

32 minutes ago, The Key Club King said:

I know parachute payments are universally hated but the principle reason for them is to aid promoted clubs from the Championship. The Premier League is the hardest to stay in after promotion and requires a huge increase in wages just to compete. The increased wages cannot possibly be sustained when relegated were they not to be given parachute payments to cover 2/3/4 year contracts. Instead clubs would either spend less and increase the chance of relegation, or gamble and hope it pays off (we know how that works when it fails). 

Despite the parachute payments, relegated clubs from the Premier League still only have a roughly 1 in 3 chance of getting promoted the next season which is not that different to the other leagues.

The problem is not parachute payments, the problem is that the 20th best club in the country gets £95m in TV money and the 21st gets about £8m (and that includes solidarity payments from the Premier League).

Back on topic - our problem isn't the EFL, its Mel Morris.

There is a separate thread on Derby’s appeal against the administration penalty .. which in part will help to identify the cause of that problem.

in my view , the root cause of the problem is the unfair distribution of TV money, both as you say between the EPL and the EFL and across teams in the EFL who get parachute money.

that unfairness produces the incentive for teams not in receipt of those unfair payments to stretch their budgets to the limits, and to resort to desperate tactics to balance their budgets such as stadia sale .. which most of the big clubs outside of EPL have done … Derby, Villa, Birmingham, Reading , and Sheffield Wednesday. Forest haven’t owned their own ground for years. 

and in my view the proximate cause of our administration is COVID. 
 

EFL has not helped in either of these … failure to negotiate a proper TV deal for Championship teams , failure to distribute the money fairly. 
 

and making spurious and /or retrospective claims against Derby which then made them ineligible for the COVID loan .

Efl couldn’t have been more destructive towards Derby if they had been trying actually I think they are being deliberately destructive to us. 
 

mel Morris is no longer the owner of the club and anyway is if anything a symptom of the problem not the problem itself. 

 

[LazloW]

10 hours ago, jono said:

I should, in all honesty, be receptive to alternative views. An open mind is a good thing. Partisanship is by definition, one eyed.

Yet where is the honesty and open mindedness from the EFL that has a fixed, slanted playing field via parachute payments and then whips none parachute clubs for daring to challenge. ? Their “perspective”  is worthless while the double standards persist.

They are complicit with the premier league in running a bent competition in the championship while trumpeting their own supposed moral superiority - which is baseless.

Jobsworths, pompous, self important, self promoting, illogical, biased and about as useful as the famed one legged man at a but kicking party with a big fat zero in the integrity stakes. 

 

An excellent post.

It would be wonderful to put this point to the EFL (perhaps without the insults ?) and get some kind of answer. However, as well know, this isn’t possible and, even if you could ask the question, they wouldn’t answer it.

[Mucker1884]

2 hours ago, The Key Club King said:

I know parachute payments are universally hated...

 

Ooh, I wouldn't go that far!

I strongly suspect the likes of WBA, Norwich, Fulham et al are quite partial to them.  No doubt Leeds too, in the not too distant future! ?

 

 

 

[The Key Club King]

1 hour ago, jono said:

Yes and no. You can quite easily solve the wages issue by making it mandatory that all player contracts have relegation clauses that reflect income differences between leagues. It’s performance related pay. Nothing complex there ! 

The problem with that is promoted clubs and small Premier League clubs will struggle to attract high quality players as there is a strong possibility of relegation and therefore a massive pay cut. Staying in the Premier League is harder than getting in to it and reducing small teams ability to attract players will make this worse and possibly lead to a more "closed shop".

It may help to use parachute payments only for existing contracts and not new ones but again, parachute payments do not significantly increase a clubs' chance of promotion after relegation. We all think that they do, logically they should help enormously, but they don't. The toxicity of relegation often means that big squads with Premier League quality players don't always do as well as they should. 

[Crewton]

Mel Morris pointed out some time ago the unfairness of the Parachute Payment system asking how was it fair and equitable for a club to be promoted, stay up for no more than a season, and yet be guaranteed payments of c.£200M that would give them massive leverage over the rest of the Championship after relegation. He also criticised the EFL over the supine way they accepted the PL's TV rights carve-up.

He made his own mistakes, big ones, in the way he sought to level the playing field, but I'm sure his biggest mistake was to first make an enemy of the EFL, and then, for a time,  make them look incompetent. People with big egos don't like to be made to look foolish.

[uttoxram75]

5 minutes ago, The Key Club King said:

The problem with that is promoted clubs and small Premier League clubs will struggle to attract high quality players as there is a strong possibility of relegation and therefore a massive pay cut. Staying in the Premier League is harder than getting in to it and reducing small teams ability to attract players will make this worse and possibly lead to a more "closed shop".

That perfectly encapsulates the original reason why the "big" clubs bought in FFP in the first place. Chelsea, then Man City, put the fear of god into them in case they had even more competition for the lucrative Champions League places.

 

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

What the EFL are saying and what the EFL have done to Derby over the last two years are very different things.

They are allowing two member clubs to go after us with petulant legal action despite us being in administration.

They have hammered us with punitive embargoes and restrictions for more than a full season now despite us being found guilty of nothing so far that warrants anything more than a fine

They dragged out a farcical disciplinary process that should have taken less than 12 months out for an absolute eternity at the behest of another clubs owner that had thrown a strop.

None of those things tell me that they have any interest in helping Derby be sustainable in any way. Quite the opposite, I'd suggest that a significant contributing factor to our current position is their absolute incompetence.

 

[Ellafella]

16 hours ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

The EFL told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - George Orwell, 1884.

Superb quote from arguably the most prophetic book ever written. Imagine a boot stamping a face into the mud etc

[Ellafella]

1 hour ago, Crewton said:

Mel Morris pointed out some time ago the unfairness of the Parachute Payment system asking how was it fair and equitable for a club to be promoted, stay up for no more than a season, and yet be guaranteed payments of c.£200M that would give them massive leverage over the rest of the Championship after relegation. He also criticised the EFL over the supine way they accepted the PL's TV rights carve-up.

He made his own mistakes, big ones, in the way he sought to level the playing field, but I'm sure his biggest mistake was to first make an enemy of the EFL, and then, for a time,  make them look incompetent. People with big egos don't like to be made to look foolish.

There in microcosm, in those words, was where Mel went wrong. Derby County are now reaping the EFL’s “pay back”. It is not just in football that this occurs…it’s everyday life. Take on the establishment but be prepared to be covered in poo in return…

[Comrade 86]

The notion that the EFL are striving to ensure the longevity of the club is the dumbest thing I've heard in a very long time. Their claim just hardens my view of them as an entity so ridden with arrogance and lacking in self-awareness, that they believe they can trot out any old arse biscuits and yet remain totally credible.

Fans without a vested interest may well lap it up and choose to see us as the villain of the peace, but anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of the processes to date and the relative sanctions applied will see their role for what it is. The EFL is simply a lapdog to Sky and the Premier League, whose hubris is so ingrained that any semblance of discord over contract values they 'negotiate' is likely to result in exactly the same level of scrutiny and punitive measures meted out to Derby. We all of us know that the EFL members do not receive an equitable share of the pie, but you don't see any other club picking up the baton and challenging them now, despite there having been significant support for Mel initially. Weak AF in my opinion.

They say that every country gets the government it deserves. I'd argue that's not strictly true, but I'd certainly venture that a number of EFL members have precisely the governing body they deserve. The fact that Gibson and co view us as the real enemy clearly illustrates how blinded by petty tribalism they really are. Frankly, I despise Gibson and his ilk even more than the I do the EFL.