How much will FFP change the league
1000th thread on this subject, I know, but it's been a while.
Sides that do have a core of young, home-grown talent, or at least a nucleus of such, how much of an advantage will these teams have?
Of course it depends on how stringently UEFA impose the rules/sanctions but in theory could this signal a change in the tide, at least in England, of clubs having who currently have no problem attracting and paying the big players and the big wages, have to spend time time to re-adjust.
Buying talent is one thing. Creating it or even buying young home-grown talent is often quite another. Could clubs like Chelsea, for example, be in a position within the next few years where they'll have to relinquish their crown as a 'top club' in order to fully adjust to the new rules.
We see it partially now, owners have being aware of FFP for a while. Investing strongly in youth facilities. But all that takes time. Could there be a number of clubs who have, if not a rude awakening, then at least a bit of a shock re-adjustment?
Sides that do have a core of young, home-grown talent, or at least a nucleus of such, how much of an advantage will these teams have?
Of course it depends on how stringently UEFA impose the rules/sanctions but in theory could this signal a change in the tide, at least in England, of clubs having who currently have no problem attracting and paying the big players and the big wages, have to spend time time to re-adjust.
Buying talent is one thing. Creating it or even buying young home-grown talent is often quite another. Could clubs like Chelsea, for example, be in a position within the next few years where they'll have to relinquish their crown as a 'top club' in order to fully adjust to the new rules.
We see it partially now, owners have being aware of FFP for a while. Investing strongly in youth facilities. But all that takes time. Could there be a number of clubs who have, if not a rude awakening, then at least a bit of a shock re-adjustment?
0
Comments
And if they did grow some balls and ban clubs like that it would just hasten a european super league into existence with all the big clubs leaving uefa
Good thing would be it will allow newer clubs for a chance win the competition. Valencia were a force between 1999 till 2004, but with more clubs having a sugar daddy, it has dented many smaller teams of a chance of winning it.
Is it they have to only spend what they generate from matchday income, sponsorship, tv income and club merchandise?
Over 3 years a club can only make a loss of £15m. The first year that counts is this year I believe, which makes you question what City and Chelsea are doing still splashing out, when they are making losses on wages anyway. The interesting thing with this will be the fact that teams not competing for Champions League will happily overspend to build a team and might have a run at the top league places, then perhaps with some clever accounting, they could get their club in position to enter the Champions league.
This is a bad way to punish clubs in my opinion, as we may get people finishing top 4 by surprise and having overspent not expecting to get there. Champions league places should be designated by league position, not a clubs bottom line.
In the end I can see UEFA bending over.
Real Madrid make profits, Barcelona aren't far off.
Plus certain expenditure such as that on grounds is excluded, so I don't think either have much to worry about.
Barcelona were around 350 million euros in debt last year. City and Chelsea spend whatever their sugar daddy gives them but hardly generate any of their own cash, ditto PSG. Does anyone really believe UEFA will throw these clubs out of the CL? Of course not, carry on regardless as this regulation will be a paper tiger.
Yes but FFP is not about debt, it's about profit.
If that's true I stand corrected but I thought debt was part of the total equation. In which case that makes it even more pointless.
No, just profits. So existing debts will not count.
It may make clubs be a bit more careful but all seems a bit pointless. If a blokes got a load of money and wants to spend it on football, with guarantees in place, then let him spend it.
Why? The idea of FFP is that clubs only spend on football what they generate from football. The fact that the "business" behind that may have been bought by loading the club with debt, or they borrowed loads of money for a stadium, is irrelevant. Trying to stop that is trying to separate football clubs from normal businesses which simply can't happen with the vast amounts of money involved.
If Manchester City, Chelsea and PSG only spend what they generate from football they will struggle as they all need their sugar daddies to bankroll them. Their owners won't allow that so they'll find ways around it as they know UEFA won't throw them out of competitions thus making a nice idea pointless as ultimately any sanctions will fail.
Which is why City play at the Etihad, and sponsored by Etihad, who as a company are related to Sheik Mansour who owns City. No wonder everyone smells a rat on that £400million deal. It's amazing how quiet Platini has been on the PSG deal.
They will throw them out. I think the first season any action can be seen to be taken with FFP will be 2014, if I'm correct. However, clubs have agreed to this and are now playing by the rules. For example on this, the naming rights to Eastland's is currently being investigated. The reason being that they are looking at who owns what and what influences they may have. Thus trying to prevent the sugar daddy from using company A to pump money into company B, to get around the FFP rules.
Mallorca were barred from Europe because of financial issues, Rangers are going to be banned next season for the same reason. UEFA will take action, though the clubs will try to get around them. However, things will get tighter, as after this 3 year period the amount of loss over the next 3 year period will drop to £30m and remain at that level.
Another reason for this working is that Platini has almost staked his whole reputation on getting this to work, and if it fails, he'll have failed and he'll be voted out of UEFA with no hope of getting any work at FIFA. So he'll force it to work to save himself.
I hope you are right I really do but I can see either UEFA buckling under a sea of litigation or the clubs saying sod this and forming a breakaway super league. Either way an interesting couple of years beckons.
I'm not sure they can break away and form another league as such. I think part of the latest deal signed between the G14 clubs (or what was that group as it's now expanded) with Uefa and Fifa, the one which took away the August and Feb international friendlies, had an agreement of no break aways in. Uefa and Fifa are quite nervous over that, and have put that in as part of the agreement. I'm still not 100% it will work, with all the money floating around FIFA for votes etc, it wouldn't shock me for envelopes being passed to pass clubs fit, but I hope I'm wrong.