|
Post by gaznandi on Jun 30, 2024 14:01:50 GMT
Sentinel linking Paphos of Cyprus with Laurent, along with the Turkish club.
|
|
|
Post by callas12 on Jun 30, 2024 14:11:21 GMT
I know Barcelona finances are not what they were but this is odd He's definitely very talented can understand top league clubs looking at him but Barcelona? Thought Villa had a buyback option? Villa's buyback option was rather complicated from what I recall. It was something like they had an option to buy back if Hull were in the Premier League alongside Villa. Not sure if it's a buy back clause in general future transfer value amounts or all relative to Hull having gained promotion with Bidace in their squad.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jun 30, 2024 20:28:54 GMT
The unprecedented 'deadline' that has just occurred with a flurry of transfers in the Premier League must change things
How is it going to affect Championship clubs?
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Jun 30, 2024 21:35:20 GMT
The unprecedented 'deadline' that has just occurred with a flurry of transfers in the Premier League must change things How is it going to affect Championship clubs? It’s ironic really they are chucking money around between them to save themselves from rules they agreed
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Jun 30, 2024 23:21:24 GMT
The unprecedented 'deadline' that has just occurred with a flurry of transfers in the Premier League must change things How is it going to affect Championship clubs? It’s ironic really they are chucking money around between them to save themselves from rules they agreed That's why we need a system of quotas say 30 first team 25 under 21 once you reach that 1 in 1 out stops big clubs monopolising players only to send on loan so any they send out on loan count as there quotas should free up telling for further down pyramid to develop and also cut wages
|
|
|
Post by theonlooker on Jul 1, 2024 5:12:30 GMT
The unprecedented 'deadline' that has just occurred with a flurry of transfers in the Premier League must change things How is it going to affect Championship clubs? Late loan deals probably with very few transfers for money.
|
|
|
Post by gaznandi on Jul 1, 2024 8:56:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by drippinggoatsnob on Jul 1, 2024 9:07:02 GMT
I never quite know whether i rate Laurent or not. At times he is an unplayable, power house who grabs goals and on other occasions the game passes him by and he doesn't seem all that bothered. Last year of his contract....I'd probably favour him to move on and get a player in who looks engaged more of the time.
|
|
|
Post by drippinggoatsnob on Jul 1, 2024 9:14:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jul 1, 2024 9:58:23 GMT
I never quite know whether i rate Laurent or not. At times he is an unplayable, power house who grabs goals and on other occasions the game passes him by and he doesn't seem all that bothered. Last year of his contract....I'd probably favour him to move on and get a player in who looks engaged more of the time. Don't think he's got any mirrors. Surely if he saw what a unit he is he'd go out and destroy almost any opponent physically every week. Needs an injection of nasty and playing as a deep lying midfielder. He's nowhere near good enough on the ball to be an advanced midfielder.
|
|
|
Post by coldtuesdaynight on Jul 1, 2024 10:11:10 GMT
The unprecedented 'deadline' that has just occurred with a flurry of transfers in the Premier League must change things How is it going to affect Championship clubs? It’s ironic really they are chucking money around between them to save themselves from rules they agreed Yeah, and all these dodgy accounting practices seem to be putting the clubs financial futures more in danger than before any rules like these existed. The money will presumably have to actually change hands to be recognised as ‘received’ in the accounts. It’s unlikely that money is sitting in their accounts just waiting to be transferred, so it’s likely going to be paid in the form of a debt. In that case what happens if the other club gets relegated and runs into financial troubles? You’ll have to pay your debt to whoever it was sold off to, but might receive pennies in the pound for the debt they owe you. We already have the situation where clubs don’t owe their own stadiums any more… How long before future tv rights are being sold a la Barcelona, or the training grounds? I do wonder just how bad a future 2008 type crash would be for most clubs. I certainly don’t think it would be pretty!
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Jul 1, 2024 10:21:05 GMT
It’s ironic really they are chucking money around between them to save themselves from rules they agreed Yeah, and all these dodgy accounting practices seem to be putting the clubs financial futures more in danger than before any rules like these existed. The money will presumably have to actually change hands to be recognised as ‘received’ in the accounts. It’s unlikely that money is sitting in their accounts just waiting to be transferred, so it’s likely going to be paid in the form of a debt. In that case what happens if the other club gets relegated and runs into financial troubles? You’ll have to pay your debt to whoever it was sold off to, but might receive pennies in the pound for the debt they owe you. We already have the situation where clubs don’t owe their own stadiums any more… How long before future tv rights are being sold a la Barcelona, or the training grounds? I do wonder just how bad a future 2008 type crash would be for most clubs. I certainly don’t think it would be pretty! To me these rules are just made up to provide jobs for the boys and serve no useful purpose. If clubs have debt problems they only have themselves to blame and it should be nobody elses business. It is just stopping ambitious clubs with a bit of money from progressing....so what?
|
|
|
Post by cymap on Jul 1, 2024 11:12:10 GMT
Alan Browne leaves Preston after refusing an offer of a 3yr contract. Would he fit in or don't we need another CM
|
|
|
Post by silsdenstokie on Jul 1, 2024 11:16:11 GMT
Alan Browne leaves Preston after refusing an offer of a 3yr contract. Would he fit in or don't we need another CM If the previous incumbent was still in charge he’d be all over that one. That said, I quite rate Browne. We’d need to move some out though
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Jul 1, 2024 11:18:00 GMT
Alan Browne leaves Preston after refusing an offer of a 3yr contract. Would he fit in or don't we need another CM Can see us being in for him.
|
|
|
Post by jimmygscfc1234 on Jul 1, 2024 11:27:47 GMT
Same age as Laurent and probably better but would we offer him the three years he wants?
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jul 1, 2024 11:55:00 GMT
Yeah, and all these dodgy accounting practices seem to be putting the clubs financial futures more in danger than before any rules like these existed. The money will presumably have to actually change hands to be recognised as ‘received’ in the accounts. It’s unlikely that money is sitting in their accounts just waiting to be transferred, so it’s likely going to be paid in the form of a debt. In that case what happens if the other club gets relegated and runs into financial troubles? You’ll have to pay your debt to whoever it was sold off to, but might receive pennies in the pound for the debt they owe you. We already have the situation where clubs don’t owe their own stadiums any more… How long before future tv rights are being sold a la Barcelona, or the training grounds? I do wonder just how bad a future 2008 type crash would be for most clubs. I certainly don’t think it would be pretty! To me these rules are just made up to provide jobs for the boys and serve no useful purpose. If clubs have debt problems they only have themselves to blame and it should be nobody elses business. It is just stopping ambitious clubs with a bit of money from progressing....so what? The issue is that it is the owners who load a club with debt, not the manager, players or the fans. The rules are there to stop fly by night owners loading a club with debt and walking away when the shit hits the fan. It isn't the owners who suffer the consequences of going bust, they walk away with their wealth in tact having placed all the financial risk on the club. The manager and the players are temporarily inconconvenienced - it's the fans who suffer the long term consequences of the debt loaded on their club. This what was brought to light by the fan led review and has led to the proposed new footballing authority. It expressly pointed out that removing constraints and allowing the free market to rule (which is what you are suggesting) would decimate the league pyramid and leave area with4 a massive hole in their community. Is that really what you want to happen? If so you should have spoken up during the review - the majority of the fans who participated in the review think you are wrong.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jul 1, 2024 12:36:27 GMT
To me these rules are just made up to provide jobs for the boys and serve no useful purpose. If clubs have debt problems they only have themselves to blame and it should be nobody elses business. It is just stopping ambitious clubs with a bit of money from progressing....so what? The issue is that it is the owners who load a club with debt, not the manager, players or the fans. The rules are there to stop fly by night owners loading a club with debt and walking away when the shit hits the fan. It isn't the owners who suffer the consequences of going bust, they walk away with their wealth in tact having placed all the financial risk on the club. The manager and the players are temporarily inconconvenienced - it's the fans who suffer the long term consequences of the debt loaded on their club. This what was brought to light by the fan led review and has led to the proposed new footballing authority. It expressly pointed out that removing constraints and allowing the free market to rule (which is what you are suggesting) would decimate the league pyramid and leave area with4 a massive hole in their community. Is that really what you want to happen? If so you should have spoken up during the review - the majority of the fans who participated in the review think you are wrong. The solution to dodgy owners is simple. At the start of the season they have to put whatever money they wish to spend into a fund controlled by the FA and the club. For money to spent both parties have to agree. No further money can be spent by the club during the season only the money originally set aside. Consequently, no club can overspend or spend money they don’t have.
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe89 on Jul 1, 2024 12:52:19 GMT
Alan Browne leaves Preston after refusing an offer of a 3yr contract. Would he fit in or don't we need another CM Apparently journos are saying a lot of clubs put off by the amount he was on at Preston and not willing to meet that wage amount. Sheff Utd most strongly linked
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Jul 1, 2024 12:53:55 GMT
The solution to dodgy owners is simple. At the start of the season they have to put whatever money they wish to spend into a fund controlled by the FA and the club. For money to spent both parties have to agree. No further money can be spent by the club during the season only the money originally set aside. Consequently, no club can overspend or spend money they don’t have. We need some new thinking like this. Sticky problem though. How do you handle something like Chelsea with their 8 year contracts though? The rich accountants are always gonna be fucking around with the rules.
|
|
|
Post by atillathehoneybee on Jul 1, 2024 13:03:33 GMT
So have we signed Miyoshi then...Nowt on the website.
|
|
|
Post by gaznandi on Jul 1, 2024 13:14:00 GMT
So have we signed Miyoshi then...Nowt on the website. Nah, that's just someone's opinion on who we should sign
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jul 1, 2024 13:32:04 GMT
The issue is that it is the owners who load a club with debt, not the manager, players or the fans. The rules are there to stop fly by night owners loading a club with debt and walking away when the shit hits the fan. It isn't the owners who suffer the consequences of going bust, they walk away with their wealth in tact having placed all the financial risk on the club. The manager and the players are temporarily inconconvenienced - it's the fans who suffer the long term consequences of the debt loaded on their club. This what was brought to light by the fan led review and has led to the proposed new footballing authority. It expressly pointed out that removing constraints and allowing the free market to rule (which is what you are suggesting) would decimate the league pyramid and leave area with4 a massive hole in their community. Is that really what you want to happen? If so you should have spoken up during the review - the majority of the fans who participated in the review think you are wrong. The solution to dodgy owners is simple. At the start of the season they have to put whatever money they wish to spend into a fund controlled by the FA and the club. For money to spent both parties have to agree. No further money can be spent by the club during the season only the money originally set aside. Consequently, no club can overspend or spend money they don’t have. The solution is fairly simple along those lines but you have to remember that spending money has consequences, liabilities that last a number of years. These set aside funds would also have to cover those liabilities. Also owning and running a football club as a business should not be excluded so a level of debt should be allowed but that should be a level decided to be sustainable for that club based on previous accounts and not one size fits all or allowed to increase year on year seemingly forever, how can that possibly be viewed as sustainable?
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jul 1, 2024 13:35:39 GMT
The solution to dodgy owners is simple. At the start of the season they have to put whatever money they wish to spend into a fund controlled by the FA and the club. For money to spent both parties have to agree. No further money can be spent by the club during the season only the money originally set aside. Consequently, no club can overspend or spend money they don’t have. We need some new thinking like this. Sticky problem though. How do you handle something like Chelsea with their 8 year contracts though? The rich accountants are always gonna be fucking around with the rules. The 8 year contracts have already been dealt with. Contracts are not allowed to be amortised over any longer than 5 years for PSR purposes.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jul 1, 2024 13:42:44 GMT
To me these rules are just made up to provide jobs for the boys and serve no useful purpose. If clubs have debt problems they only have themselves to blame and it should be nobody elses business. It is just stopping ambitious clubs with a bit of money from progressing....so what? The issue is that it is the owners who load a club with debt, not the manager, players or the fans. The rules are there to stop fly by night owners loading a club with debt and walking away when the shit hits the fan. It isn't the owners who suffer the consequences of going bust, they walk away with their wealth in tact having placed all the financial risk on the club. The manager and the players are temporarily inconconvenienced - it's the fans who suffer the long term consequences of the debt loaded on their club. This what was brought to light by the fan led review and has led to the proposed new footballing authority. It expressly pointed out that removing constraints and allowing the free market to rule (which is what you are suggesting) would decimate the league pyramid and leave area with4 a massive hole in their community. Is that really what you want to happen? If so you should have spoken up during the review - the majority of the fans who participated in the review think you are wrong. As I've said a number of times measures to avoid clubs getting into financial peril and measures to somewhat level the playing field don't belong under the same regulations. I honestly don't know why levelling the playing field somewhat is even desirable when if these issues were separated it would be fairly simple to create a level playing field where established clubs were restricted to equitable funding and newly promoted teams were allowed a bonus on top of this to help them compete.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jul 1, 2024 14:04:38 GMT
The issue is that it is the owners who load a club with debt, not the manager, players or the fans. The rules are there to stop fly by night owners loading a club with debt and walking away when the shit hits the fan. It isn't the owners who suffer the consequences of going bust, they walk away with their wealth in tact having placed all the financial risk on the club. The manager and the players are temporarily inconconvenienced - it's the fans who suffer the long term consequences of the debt loaded on their club. This what was brought to light by the fan led review and has led to the proposed new footballing authority. It expressly pointed out that removing constraints and allowing the free market to rule (which is what you are suggesting) would decimate the league pyramid and leave area with4 a massive hole in their community. Is that really what you want to happen? If so you should have spoken up during the review - the majority of the fans who participated in the review think you are wrong. The solution to dodgy owners is simple. At the start of the season they have to put whatever money they wish to spend into a fund controlled by the FA and the club. For money to spent both parties have to agree. No further money can be spent by the club during the season only the money originally set aside. Consequently, no club can overspend or spend money they don’t have. That might well be a viable solution but it isnt thevfree market solution proposed by the previous poster and the only way that will happen is if the new footballing authorities impose it because most club owners won't do that of their own accord.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jul 1, 2024 14:05:28 GMT
The solution to dodgy owners is simple. At the start of the season they have to put whatever money they wish to spend into a fund controlled by the FA and the club. For money to spent both parties have to agree. No further money can be spent by the club during the season only the money originally set aside. Consequently, no club can overspend or spend money they don’t have. We need some new thinking like this. Sticky problem though. How do you handle something like Chelsea with their 8 year contracts though? The rich accountants are always gonna be fucking around with the rules. I would set a salary cap (controversial I know). This would also involve contract limits.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jul 1, 2024 14:06:09 GMT
The solution to dodgy owners is simple. At the start of the season they have to put whatever money they wish to spend into a fund controlled by the FA and the club. For money to spent both parties have to agree. No further money can be spent by the club during the season only the money originally set aside. Consequently, no club can overspend or spend money they don’t have. That might well be a viable solution but it isnt thevfree market solution proposed by the previous poster and the only way that will happen is if the new footballing authorities impose it because most club owners won't do that of their own accord. Time for the government to act.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jul 1, 2024 14:08:01 GMT
The issue is that it is the owners who load a club with debt, not the manager, players or the fans. The rules are there to stop fly by night owners loading a club with debt and walking away when the shit hits the fan. It isn't the owners who suffer the consequences of going bust, they walk away with their wealth in tact having placed all the financial risk on the club. The manager and the players are temporarily inconconvenienced - it's the fans who suffer the long term consequences of the debt loaded on their club. This what was brought to light by the fan led review and has led to the proposed new footballing authority. It expressly pointed out that removing constraints and allowing the free market to rule (which is what you are suggesting) would decimate the league pyramid and leave area with4 a massive hole in their community. Is that really what you want to happen? If so you should have spoken up during the review - the majority of the fans who participated in the review think you are wrong. As I've said a number of times measures to avoid clubs getting into financial peril and measures to somewhat level the playing field don't belong under the same regulations. I honestly don't know why levelling the playing field somewhat is even desirable when if these issues were separated it would be fairly simple to create a level playing field where established clubs were restricted to equitable funding and newly promoted teams were allowed a bonus on top of this to help them compete. You are advocating some form of regulation. I was arguing with someone who was saying the solution is not to regulate but let club owners do what they want.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jul 1, 2024 14:10:48 GMT
That might well be a viable solution but it isnt thevfree market solution proposed by the previous poster and the only way that will happen is if the new footballing authorities impose it because most club owners won't do that of their own accord. Time for the government to act. Actually the current government aren't doing anything other than lose the election. The Tories have kicked this can down the road - it's something for the next government to sort out.
|
|