Getting around FFP

[IslandExile]

It's a joke/mess/football killer/[insert other adjectives here]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c5111jg2r3yo

[Ambitious]

It's very, very dangerous - it distorts the market value of academy players and creates a very real pathway to Premier League clubs farming young talent and using them as accounting pawns to avoid PSR regulations. 

It again brings in to disrepute what the regulations are in place for, as well. What's the point in having sustainability rules in place if clubs can make disingenuous, high-value transfers to get round them?  

Juventus and Barcelona did this several years ago, so it's nothing new either. 

 

[Tyler Durden]

I recall the negative comments from certain posters regards Lewis Dobbin when he played for us yet miraculously he is now, in a short space of time, worth nearly £20 million. Joke. 

[Red_ram]

It’s very obvious and in plain sight so expect something to come in further down the line ala ground sales and long contracts, though this will be tougher to quantify; more likely they change how the ins/outs sit as values on the timeline.

It’s the young players who are surely the victims here, moving on with little chance of playing the amount their price tags imply and just unwanted pawns in a money merry go round.

[Ghost of Clough]

This is proof we're all living in a Football Manager simulation.

Back in the real world, Dobbin moves to Preston for £800k as they take a gamble he'll eventually find his shooting boots.

[Crewton]

4 hours ago, Tyler Durden said:

I recall the negative comments from certain posters regards Lewis Dobbin when he played for us yet miraculously he is now, in a short space of time, worth nearly £20 million. Joke. 

I'm surprised Forest haven't bought him for such a knockdown price.

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

How did they come up with the made up transfer values I wonder.

If Kellyman was really potentially as good as the value suggested, then why would Villa not keep him and sell some other crapper academy dude for eleventy billion?

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Dean (hick) Saunders said:

How did they come up with the made up transfer values I wonder.

If Kellyman was really potentially as good as the value suggested, then why would Villa not keep him and sell some other crapper academy dude for eleventy billion?

Who cares, we allegedly have a sell on clause, so the higher the better.

[alexxxxx]

Need a football regulator the whole thing is stupid. PSR is a waste of time made up/proposed by accountants by clubs who thought that people would continue to work like they do and to protect their clubs/top clubs.

Football regulator, hard salary cap and serious penalties (suspension of licenses, lifetime bans for players, staff and agents) who subvert the rules..

[Ghost of Clough]

I don't understand the call for hard salary caps - would it have been fair to limit our spending to match what the likes of Burton can spend in L1?

A better system is a soft cap which includes a luxury tax where a % above the limit is then redistributed between the teams staying within the limit. Imagine being the one team in the PL staying within the limit though... maybe fairly redistributed across PL and EFL clubs. Some of that luxury tax money could even go towards grassroots football in the region near to the offending club?

My personal preference is a wage restriction as a percentage of turnover plus the luxury tax.

[RadioactiveWaste]

11 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

I don't understand the call for hard salary caps - would it have been fair to limit our spending to match what the likes of Burton can spend in L1?

A better system is a soft cap which includes a luxury tax where a % above the limit is then redistributed between the teams staying within the limit. Imagine being the one team in the PL staying within the limit though... maybe fairly redistributed across PL and EFL clubs. Some of that luxury tax money could even go towards grassroots football in the region near to the offending club?

My personal preference is a wage restriction as a percentage of turnover plus the luxury tax.

I like it.

One of my other thoughts is limiting what debts clubs can have, i don't know that could be implimented but basically "owners can give money to their club but the club can't borrow that much vs turnover" - it's not the spending that kills clubs, it's the debts that kill clubs (yes, i know....)

[alexxxxx]

12 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

I don't understand the call for hard salary caps - would it have been fair to limit our spending to match what the likes of Burton can spend in L1?

A better system is a soft cap which includes a luxury tax where a % above the limit is then redistributed between the teams staying within the limit. Imagine being the one team in the PL staying within the limit though... maybe fairly redistributed across PL and EFL clubs. Some of that luxury tax money could even go towards grassroots football in the region near to the offending club?

My personal preference is a wage restriction as a percentage of turnover plus the luxury tax.

Soft cap is used in some US sports and it does seem to work but the big spenders still go for it.

[SSD]

FFP or PSR, whatever it's called now needs to be binned off and overhauled. If the football authorities aren't willing to take into account inflation and increase the spend limits to match then we are going to have this issue where teams will trade players around at ridiculous prices to get around the rules.

FFP has not made the top leagues anymore competitive. Neither has PSR. We still see football clubs getting into big trouble and on the brink of collapse. What is the point of the current regulations? Bin it off, bring in a proper independent body.

I would bring in a rule which states that a football owner needs to guarantee that they'll invest x amount for the next 2 or 3 seasons to keep the football club running day to day. And then they can invest whatever they like at that point. If the football clubs are running at a £40 million loss, for example, get the authority to ensure the owners have cash to keep the club afloat. If they can't demonstrate that, force the club to sell or get new investment.

[alram]

yeah whatever solutions think of the bottom line is the current system is not right at all

 

its all caused by not allowing a level playing field, you just can’t expect to allow some teams spend more than others and not expecting them to fudge the books.

 

in my opinion they should take the highest revenue club in a division & make 80% of their turnover the cap for the entire division but every penny after 80% of your own clubs turnover has to be accounted for before being spent. You get clubs then living within their means and at the same time clubs can spend what their owners want if they can afford it. That’s the best solution I can think of

[Gaspode]

The PSR Six (including our dodgy neighbours down the A52):

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/the-psr-six-and-a-new-loophole-premier-league-transfer-causing-outrage/ar-BB1pk3lZ?ocid=winp2fptaskbar&cvid=d2cb84e19fa84e46da8366953a2603ba&ei=9

[Guest]

On 01/07/2024 at 07:26, SSD said:

FFP or PSR, whatever it's called now needs to be binned off and overhauled. If the football authorities aren't willing to take into account inflation and increase the spend limits to match then we are going to have this issue where teams will trade players around at ridiculous prices to get around the rules.

FFP has not made the top leagues anymore competitive. Neither has PSR. We still see football clubs getting into big trouble and on the brink of collapse. What is the point of the current regulations? Bin it off, bring in a proper independent body.

I would bring in a rule which states that a football owner needs to guarantee that they'll invest x amount for the next 2 or 3 seasons to keep the football club running day to day. And then they can invest whatever they like at that point. If the football clubs are running at a £40 million loss, for example, get the authority to ensure the owners have cash to keep the club afloat. If they can't demonstrate that, force the club to sell or get new investment.

Was it ever supposed to? I think it was brought in for exactly the opposite reason.

[Simmoram2024Ramsrontheup]

It’s absolutely ridiculous how Premier League clubs are totally disregarding any rules and literally making a mockery of the transfer window. For instance how can Will Osula a player who could barely start 4-5 games for us or Sheffield United, suddenly be worth in excess of £15m?

[therealhantsram]

I may be the odd one out, but I have no problem with it. 

It's not some magic that removes their problem. It just pushes it further down the line. 

They still have the problem, and it will limit their ability to move in the market for the next 4 or 5 years. 

This to me is FFP working.

Edited August 6 by therealhantsram

[Gaspode]

2 hours ago, therealhantsram said:

I may be the odd one out, but I have no problem with it. 

It's not some magic that removes their problem. It just pushes it further down the line. 

They still have the problem, and it will limit their ability to move in the market for the next 4 or 5 years. 

This to me is FFP working.

But that ignores the ridiculous inflationary effect that such 'fiddles' introduce - and that damages teams such as ourselves further down the pyramid. If Osula now costs £15M, then a  Championship striker that should cost £2M now costs £5-6M - that can't be healthy for the game....

[JfR]

The Osula move is probably legitimate. Expensive moves for FFP purposes only work if there's also a player being sold the other way, and that doesn't seem to be the case. The figure attached to him might be a reflection of the market going crazy because of other intentionally inflated moves, though.