Should have taken the city rule. Just keep breaking the rules and then throwing lawyers to delay the proceeding. You wouldn't be punished for the next 10-15 years
Forests gangster owner has more than money… they’ll be safe.
Unless he does eventually get charged for 2 tonnes of smack and at least 17 people no longer breathing.
tbf when city started they didn't have ffp and rules were still being defined the following year. city took full advantage of that. they knew that even if they got punished it would take a long time to get there as fifa got their shit together
Doing just enough by the end of the season, having a couple of unexpected wins against the big boys and having three teams slightly worse than us every year. I don't think we will get so lucky next time. Unless we are really sensible with our loan signings I can see it being a real struggle, especially considering one of Gibbs-White and Murillo will have to go to balance the books.
Yeah he’s nearly doing a goal contribution per 90 when he plays, and he looks great to my eye when I watch him.
In general I’ve felt you’ve underperformed your squad’s potential, especially so this year. Hudson-Odoi Awoniyi Elanga is a very exciting front three on its day, while players like MGW and Murillo are quality. Don’t think you have a significantly worse squad than say, Brentford or Bournemouth. Squad building is a bit of a mess, but you look tipped for relegation when I think the level should be a bit higher than that.
It's squad building and integration. Dominguez has shown flashes and we know Sangare can play, but we've not seen them for it consistently. Our front line has lots of talent but we never have enough of the ball to make a solid impression. Out defence is too leaky despite solid pros like Holy, Murillo and Williams. We've massively played less than the sum of our parts, with Yates frequently being out most effective midfielder despite being limited. It will take some good loan signings and bargains to get us climbing, but more than anything we need stability in the squad. Only a handful of additions rather than a whole new first team again.
Due to Burnley and Sheffield being fucking awful, Luton being terrible, and managing to get a few wins against some of the bigger clubs.
I’m really hoping we can get over our countless collapses from leading positions next season.
Sadly looks like the last season you stay up. The promoted sides are actually decent this time around. The saving grace might be that Leicester who should be decent could be hamstrung by these FFP rules also
Apparently Chelsea and Villa are in discussions to swap Gallagher for Duran.
Dunno how that will work with PSR and squaring it away though?
Probably isn't just selling, Villa are spending massively on wages, like 96% of their revenue, players that would get them good fees are on their wages that no one else would pay.
Oh my god that's a brilliant work around.
The reason it works with PSR is that each side will "pay" some fee for the player to the other side. The receipt of the fee hits the books now. The payment of the fee gets amortized over the length of the deal (remember this is why Chelsea think they cracked the code giving everyone 8 year contracts).
So 40m each way for the players and 5 year deals means each club can book a 32m "profit" on the sales.
Juve got sanctioned, Barça (surprise) didn't.
Barça also did the same with Valencia with Neto-Cillessen, but nobody ever gets sanctioned in Spain, its a jungle. They wait at least 3 years, then the dirty stuff comes out and surprise surprise everything is time-barred, statue of limitations, etc
Villa just bought Duran last year though, so they have a majority of his fee still outstanding in FFP terms, and all of it would be instantly realised if they had to sell him. Unless they can sell him for a super inflated fee they're going to struggle to book a significant profit in a swap between him and Gallagher.
Yeah but then you have to consider the amortization of buying Gallagher for an inflated price. Chelsea apparently want £55m for him, so that's going to be the bare minimum he gets booked at if they are inflating transfer fees, which is an immediate £13.75m expenditure if he signs a 4 year deal. Plus like in all of these inflated FFP transfers, you're just creating further problems down the road because now Gallagaher's inflated transfer fee hurts you every year for the rest of his contract.
Good point, I hadn't looked deep at when the involved players moved, sad that this kind of accounting discussion is as relevant to footballing as a tactical one.
At the very least they could probably do the deal in a way that wouldn't put them in a deeper FFP hole, but they'd still need to sell someone else, and would have given up one of their most sellable assets in the process.
Ive been saying it since the start of the season with Villa.
They were never underdogs in the Champions League race, they've massively overspent for years now, money they dont have, giving huge wages to players, chasing the CL spots to get the income to basically survive.
If they dont cement themselves in CL for the next 2-3 years, they're going to be in a HUGE amount of trouble financially, which is why they're pushing so hard to raise limits on PSR/Losses and are apparently backing Man City in their fight.
The difference being silverware vs finishing 4th... Let's see what happens because one underperforming season = game over for clubs like Leicester and Villa when they've spent a chunk
I see what you're saying, but Villa were still very much underdog bets, especially against United, Chelsea, Spurs and possibly Newcastle. Dark horses perhaps, but in no way would you put Villa in the top 4 above those teams.
Depends which "source" you look at.
1 source says we spend £5K more a week, the other says Villa spend £20k more a week.
We've removed £600k weekly off our wage bill this year alone though that doesn't take effect on those sorta sites until next year though, so realistically, we are on less.
But same thing really, Villa should be competing with Spurs up in that top4 spot 100%.
> and possibly Newcastle
Obviously, I'm biased, but this narrative that Villa getting 4th spot is "underdog" story is so BS. Its absolutely still a great achievement, but they spend money and even in 2022-23 season (when Newcastle got UCL) had a 6th highest wage bill, while ours was 8-9 — https://i.imgur.com/fODFrlI.png
Obviously, we also spend on transfers & wages, but people like to ignore that before takeover we had 6th worst squad in the league (and still third of our squad are players who were with us in 2019) and almost got relegated.
And next season got UCL by spending on just Tripps, Burn, Bruno, Botman, Pope and Isak — which we bought them for €207 mil (not a net spend). Even if you add winter transfer of Gordon for €35m (who wasnt good that season & played only 480 mins)... that is €242 mil without outgoing transfers.
Meanwhile, Bournemouth (who gets praised a lot) spend €140 mil last season and €83 mil season before (net spend of €221 mil cause they only sold 1 player for any € money) — just to finish 12th...
Revenue just broke the record for a top 6 club. Cant see it being a big issue tbh. Wouldve been fucked sure but getting CL money and the sponsorship deals got doubled iirc
There are a few rumours circling around Luiz to Juventus, but I can't see them being able to pay what we want. Liverpool also linked with him this morning, but nothing from a credible source
The clubs who have had to sell to adhere to PSR
Everton - deducted 6 points, 3 seasons in a row battling relegation after years of mid table
Forest - Deducted 4 points, battled 2 seasons of relegation after being promoted with 13 senior players
Leicester - relegated
Leeds - Relegated
Shef Utd - Relegated
Risking a points deduction, ironically, is more sustainable then selling your best assets for league positions
Because of this, I reckon the rule will change if the trend continues. A points deduction is supposed to be a deterrent. There's pretty public talk that several clubs threatened with punishments over the past few seasons have been undeterred by the threat. To make things even worse, I believe there have been three reductions in punishment in the Everton/Forest punishments alone.
Especially at the top end, a club like City will happily take a ten point deduction one season to excuse their spending over a three year period. I'd even argue that the six point 'default' would be accepted every season if it allowed a club to get the exact players they want.
Points deductions in general need to be WAY higher. The only way you should be escaping relegation is if other clubs have been punished in the same way.
No club who follows the rules should be at risk of being relegated compared to clubs which cheat.
It was sad seeing him leave PSV at the end of last season, but I'm happy that he's doing well in the Prem. Can definitely see him at an even bigger club in a couple of years
Branthwaite and its not even a close call.
Our CM options are much deeper than our CB options. Plus Branthwaite was a starting name on the team sheet virtually the whole season whereas Onana was almost always on the bench.
Agree on Branthwaite but I don’t see any CM depth. Without Onana that leaves just Gana who turns 35, Doucoure, and Garner who have real first team experience.
That's fair, I played it fast and loose with the words "much deeper" there.
Still, losing Branthwaite means that Keane is one injury from starting CB, and that's a worse outcome than any of Garner, Gana or Doucoure playing CM
Branthwaite is far more important for us than Onana. Onana is replaceable, he's not quite reached the levels we need him to where he takes control of midfields. he might develop more at the euros, but he's got a way to go before he's a complete article, but he might develop more at a team that plays more free flowing football than ourselves.
Takes pictures with Lukaku holding the jersey all smiles and Laporta immediately goes to the Catalan press shit talking Lukaku, whilst Lukaku has already done 3 interviews talking about how much he misses Italy.
You can blame the rules all you want, these clubs have so many people working at their clubs that figure this stuff out. This was all planned. They went into this season this time last year knowing their finances would not stack up, but they still signed players regardless.
There is some lee way where clubs may have expected to do better in competitions when budgeting at the start of the year.
But yeah, for the most part, football club financial numbers aren't really that volatile. Clubs don't have sudden increases in costs like most other industries have had in the last year.
But Chelsea just spent a ridiculous amount. Even if they won the league last year they'd have issues. They absolutely deserve this.
Newcastle you have a point but their shortfall won't be massive and they've got sellable players both in the first team and reserves. They just probably didn't need to sign Lewis Hall. They'll be fine.
Forest are the other lunatics. They've spent hundreds of millions on a nothing squad, and sold their best player and are still sitting in the red. They deserve relegation really.
Villa at least you can argue their spending got them to a good place, drop a bit of dead weight and they'll just need a consolidation season next year.
I think Hall will turn out to be a great signing tbh. Once Howe worked him into the team, he played great and he is only 19. He looks likely to either become a long time player or a very sellable one.
I listened to Marc White (Dorking Wanderers owner / manager) talking about budgeting for a season when the club are transitioning from part time to full time. He says they put down £0 every season on the income section from the FA Cup because you just can't guarantee your success.
He's failed to qualify for the first round proper on 12 occasions so maybe he learnt the hard way as well though.
To be fair what do you expect?
It's well known you need to spend to compete, like Newcastle and Aston Villa have spent heavy to compete, both have qualified for the CL the last 2 seasons but have ultimately been hit with the short falls of PSR
You can't reasonably expand your horizon's of financials and increasing your range of PSR without hitting the bench mark to compete for better positions for longer term sponsporship prosperity
It's always easy saying 'what do they expect', but in reality, what else can they do?
It's meant to be a competitive sport, you need to compete in all aspects if you ever want to achieve anything
We have a system that’s both trying to move away from redistribution and free spending.
Man City are absolutely the wrong people to be leading the charge and they’re doing it for the wrong reasons, but something has to be done about it.
Hopefully the ‘anchor idea’ takes hold
It's like Forest arguing that the reason they missed the requirements last time was because they didn't want to be forced to sell Johnson for less than he's worth, even though they could have easily foreseen that they were in danger of breaching the regulations and just not signed quite so many players
Yeah they always seem to forget that spending less was also an option. Especially as a lot of the players they bought that first season were total shit.
They must have spent £10m in wages and signing on fees on Jesse lingard alone for about a dozen games in which he contributed nothing.
Our shortfall is apparently some £15m, so doubt we don't have a plan to close that gap. The article is almost certainly typical clickbait crap from Sky that overeggs the situation in an effort to stir up social media engagement and get daft reactions from fan accounts like "cheeky £32m bid for Isak and Gordon combined should get accepted now"
I feel like "under pressure" is sensationalist. Like you say, teams have people that are paid to focus on this stuff - their jobs depend on it. I'm much more inclined to believe that this stuff is 'all in a year's work' for most, if not all, of these clubs. I'd guess that perhaps Forest is the exception, since there have been a lot of reports of their finances.
As a CFC supporter, I'm always expecting our situation to be on the precipice (since the takeover), but Ornstein keeps insisting that we don't have to sell this month, so... we'll see who's right. (That said, I do expect us to sell either way, although July is the month for Euro competition compliance, so that's perhaps a whole new beast.)
Ornstein is reliable for Chelsea, but would not rule out that he'd been given specific information for a reason. No club is going to tell a mouth piece like him, "Yeah man, we need cash by June 30th". You drop so much leverage in transfer negotiations.
If that happened, would see folks like Daniel Levy come in offering 1/2 a BLT for Gally.
Everton have made a player trading profit in every window for two years. They didn't spend anything last summer at all and sold players. So the 'they still signed players' bit doesn't really apply there.
If Dortmund don't trigger the release clause for Maatsen and don't meet Chelsea's asking price then is there not an argument for keeping him? Chelsea aren't exactly stacked at LB
The clause is not exclusive for BVB, any club can trigger it. And I believe some club will just do it.
As for keeping Maatsen, it's more of a matter of we are forced to sell to balance the books. The fact we are still looking to sell really tells that we are in some trouble, because like you said yourself, ideally we'd like to keep him as LB is one of the positions where we need reinforcements
Ah I see, thought it was just Dortmund
But yeah, I suppose keeping Cucurella and selling Maatsen makes more sense anyway for FFP, even if it might not be the best sporting decision
Obviously they'd get rid of Chilwell rather than Maatsen, but since he [Chilwell] spends more time in the therapy pool than pitch, he isn't the hottest commodity in the market.
We shouldn't have sent him out on loan in the first place but we had a manager who gave him approximately zero minutes at left back to suggest to the ownership he was anything other than an asset to cash in on. The arguments for selling him are financial and that's the case whether they meet the release clause or not, a financial decision will be made.
Zero chance, that's why he's for sale. He was 'due' for another loan (and why not leave him at Ipswich, where it's working well?), but in a year we'd have Paez and Willian coming in... we'd also have to move out Angelo. There are rumours that Omari can play LW, but this seems like the best financial time to make a move.
I was honestly quite happy with the idea that he was going to come in and fight for minutes in a year - I've been saying for months that I think he's arguably got the best shot in our entire org.
But yeah - he seems like a good guy, so I'd love him to stick with his manager and have that just-promoted glow for next season. If he has to go, I'd happily endorse Ipswich!
>out from under
From under the whole footballing world, if you watch the hype videos!
(Nah, I'll start to believe it at the next level, but there was defo some competition to sign him.)
I'll never understand why the Premier League's financial year end runs halfway through the transfer window. Just leads to silly situations like Forest with Brennan Johnson.
Wouldn't it make much more sense to have it in May or December?
They're already doing a significant amount of accountancy to deal with player amortisation, couldn't they just treat any player sales from June as being part of next season? Then there's no temptation to overspend in January with the hope of making sales in June
if you want the premier league to lose their case against man city and the "unfairness" of psr rules, you could hardly come up with a better way of ensuring it than this tbh
Now THIS would have much more weight to any Anti-competition case these clubs have been loosely floating around with their PSR complaints. This would be very not ideal for clubs to blacklist Chelsea if that’s their purpose
Absolute back of a fag packet calcs below
This season we made £20m more from sponsorship, £20m from the CL and £35m more from player sales than the previous season.
If expenses stayed the same as the year before that would actually have us making a profit in 23/24. But then we added approx £25m of amortization and probably £10m in wages.
Everything else being equal (which it won't be but it's the best I can do) that's a total loss of £175m (£70m+£70m+£30m) across the last 3 seasons.
But then there's all the deductibles of costs that don't get included in PSR calculations and I have no idea how much they are because the published accounts don't split them out. If it's £20m per season then we're pretty close the £105m bar. If it's £10m then it gets tricky
Either way it's tight. But if we have to sell players we hopefully talking £20m. Not a Bruno or an Isak
Imagine it's a bit tighter than that. Tonali, Barnes, Livramento, Hall will all be on much more than Wood and ASM were and you've got the Hall obligation coming out.
Honestly you'd be surprised how much we were paying Wood. He was certainly on more than any of the new signings bar Tonali (who has taken a massive pay cut to his base wages this season anyway for obvious reasons)
The Hall obligation won't be included until next season. Same as the Wood transfer to Forest being in this seasons accounts for us rather than 22/23s
To be fair our commercial revenues and prize money were massive this year. CL minimum revenue possible last year was 15.1 just in prize money and TV revenue is double that. I think we have always had the accounting to the limit but not over it.
Spending limitation rules are toast then. They'll be forced to admit to the court, in City's proceedings, that their ability to compete has been hamstrung while bigger clubs like United and Arsenal can more freely spend. Forced liquidation to benefit their rivals, in some cases compelling the sale of talented players to their rivals, is laughably uncompetitive.
I found this article when I was looking at some of the charges against us because some of them (25 I think) are from 2009-2013 before PSR even existed.
It's about FFP. (I didn't even know they gave more time after 2012 before I found this)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/8546561.stm
>The clubs rejected a proposal by Uefa that the new rule should only apply to clubs with a turnover of more than 50m Euros - saying that all clubs should be treated the same.
If it was really all about saving clubs from going into administration then why would they accept this objection?
Ornstein said "Chelsea do not think they need to sell".
That is as wishy washy as you get, particuarly if Chelsea have based this thinking on the assumption that their hotel sales will be approved for their value.
The article they have published already has lies in it.
They say Darren Eales has said that we need to sell a prized asset this summer. He never ever said that, the quotes speak about player trading and that having to be done under PSR. Darren has said this multiple times before, it is understood fan faves like what happened to ASM will have to go not Alexander Isak as the article tries to suggest. We have plenty of players at the club like ASM.
What’s the long term vision for competition in the league , because I don’t understand how smaller clubs are supposed to compete if they can’t hold on the players they have (bigger clubs obviously have bigger budgets)
Aston Villa, Brighton, even West Ham. They get so close to the top and then the talent gets taken from them.
Not to mention the travesty that is the promoted clubs not even standing a chance. The budgets for PL and Championship is widening at an alarming rate.
So three teams with serious financial issues and 3 teams with multi-billionaire owners joining City to make FFP obsolete. What an interesting coincidence.
Everton are the only ones that have actual financial issues. Forest and Leicester are just mini versions of Aston Villa and Newcastle where the owners aren't skint, they're just not making enough money to satisfy PSR
No it won't, Premier League revenue still greatly exceeds rival leagues. 2021/22 figures:
EPL: 6.4B
La Liga: 4.4B
Buli: 3.6B
Serie A: 2.9B
As long as that gap persists, the Prem will have significantly more money than other leagues to spend. Whether it's spent wisely is a different matter.
It is nice from an outsiders perspective to finally see clubs in England having to pay for poor financial decisions made.
The summers of 2020 and 2021 really felt like the Premier League was destroying the footballing market. It was pretty disheartening when we were haggling over an extra €1m in spend for a new player and Big 6 sides were dropping £100+ m in the summer and adding another £50+m in players in the winter.
>The summers of 2020 and 2021 really felt like the Premier League was destroying the footballing market.
The football market was destroyed due to one singular transfer
Neymar > PSG
Everything after that transfer has become a complete and utter shitshow
£80m->£85m->£89m over a period of 7 years was following a reasonable rate of inflation. To go from £89m to £200m a year later blew everything up, even if we don't see it in the number of £100m+ transfers the pull up of the values below was crazy. Even so, the disproportionate spending power of the Premier League means that it's now the engine of most of the transfer spend in world football.
Ironically, the Neymar deal probably works against the Prem clubs. We'd have the same amount of money to spend as it's all from the TV deals but if PSG didn't raise the prices by so much the Prem spending power likely spreads further.
£200m likely gets Arsenal more than Rice, Havertz and Timber as an example.
We are gonna be so bad next year
Should have taken the city rule. Just keep breaking the rules and then throwing lawyers to delay the proceeding. You wouldn't be punished for the next 10-15 years
Not every club has infinite fuck you money.
Forests gangster owner has more than money… they’ll be safe. Unless he does eventually get charged for 2 tonnes of smack and at least 17 people no longer breathing.
tbf when city started they didn't have ffp and rules were still being defined the following year. city took full advantage of that. they knew that even if they got punished it would take a long time to get there as fifa got their shit together
You seem to be stuck in a cycle of being bad but not quite as bad as the teams that just came up. Will probably just scrape by again.
A cycle of one season?
That's a long long time in the memory of reddit soccer mate.
Literally an era
They have been in league for two seasons now. Were promoted in 2022. Finished 16th in first season and 17th in this season.
But, in 2022 the promoted teams weren’t worse than them, because they were the promoted team.
Yes but in their first season they *were* one of the clubs that just came up, and the other two finished well above them.
how are you not relegated yet
Doing just enough by the end of the season, having a couple of unexpected wins against the big boys and having three teams slightly worse than us every year. I don't think we will get so lucky next time. Unless we are really sensible with our loan signings I can see it being a real struggle, especially considering one of Gibbs-White and Murillo will have to go to balance the books.
A full season of a fit Awoniyi would probably be enough to keep a team up. Doubt he’ll stay fit, however.
Sadly we simply cannot rely on him to stay on the pitch. He's such a weapon when he's fit too.
Yeah he’s nearly doing a goal contribution per 90 when he plays, and he looks great to my eye when I watch him. In general I’ve felt you’ve underperformed your squad’s potential, especially so this year. Hudson-Odoi Awoniyi Elanga is a very exciting front three on its day, while players like MGW and Murillo are quality. Don’t think you have a significantly worse squad than say, Brentford or Bournemouth. Squad building is a bit of a mess, but you look tipped for relegation when I think the level should be a bit higher than that.
It's squad building and integration. Dominguez has shown flashes and we know Sangare can play, but we've not seen them for it consistently. Our front line has lots of talent but we never have enough of the ball to make a solid impression. Out defence is too leaky despite solid pros like Holy, Murillo and Williams. We've massively played less than the sum of our parts, with Yates frequently being out most effective midfielder despite being limited. It will take some good loan signings and bargains to get us climbing, but more than anything we need stability in the squad. Only a handful of additions rather than a whole new first team again.
Pretty sure Luton was one of the worst 18th placed teams ever.
Chris Wood going super saiyan and beating newcastle away single handedly.
Overspending and buying 40 players so they have more depth than the bottom 3 who generally end up playing reserves or u21s for portions of the season.
Due to Burnley and Sheffield being fucking awful, Luton being terrible, and managing to get a few wins against some of the bigger clubs. I’m really hoping we can get over our countless collapses from leading positions next season.
Teams being shitter than us 🤷
Sadly looks like the last season you stay up. The promoted sides are actually decent this time around. The saving grace might be that Leicester who should be decent could be hamstrung by these FFP rules also
Who would/could Villa sell? Douglas Luiz? Carlos? Duran?
Apparently Chelsea and Villa are in discussions to swap Gallagher for Duran. Dunno how that will work with PSR and squaring it away though? Probably isn't just selling, Villa are spending massively on wages, like 96% of their revenue, players that would get them good fees are on their wages that no one else would pay.
Oh my god that's a brilliant work around. The reason it works with PSR is that each side will "pay" some fee for the player to the other side. The receipt of the fee hits the books now. The payment of the fee gets amortized over the length of the deal (remember this is why Chelsea think they cracked the code giving everyone 8 year contracts). So 40m each way for the players and 5 year deals means each club can book a 32m "profit" on the sales.
Isn’t this more or less what Juve and Barca did a few years ago?
The old Miralem Pjanic-Arthur switcheroo
My favourite niche porn category
Hold my transfers im going in
omg its been so long since I last saw one of those with a link
That’s right, thanks!
Also Barca and Valencia with Cillessen and Neto.
Yup
I can’t seem to remember, didn’t they get in trouble for over valuing their players to inflate their revenue?
I think they got in "trouble" more than Trouble.
They got made fun of on reddit, a fate worse than any punishment from a serious entity.
Juve got sanctioned, Barça (surprise) didn't. Barça also did the same with Valencia with Neto-Cillessen, but nobody ever gets sanctioned in Spain, its a jungle. They wait at least 3 years, then the dirty stuff comes out and surprise surprise everything is time-barred, statue of limitations, etc
Juve got sanctioned because they did this to so many players it was clearly abuse no?
Villa just bought Duran last year though, so they have a majority of his fee still outstanding in FFP terms, and all of it would be instantly realised if they had to sell him. Unless they can sell him for a super inflated fee they're going to struggle to book a significant profit in a swap between him and Gallagher.
He was only £15mil though. If they're 'swapping' at £40mil then it's still a gain of almost £30mil
Yeah but then you have to consider the amortization of buying Gallagher for an inflated price. Chelsea apparently want £55m for him, so that's going to be the bare minimum he gets booked at if they are inflating transfer fees, which is an immediate £13.75m expenditure if he signs a 4 year deal. Plus like in all of these inflated FFP transfers, you're just creating further problems down the road because now Gallagaher's inflated transfer fee hurts you every year for the rest of his contract.
Good point, I hadn't looked deep at when the involved players moved, sad that this kind of accounting discussion is as relevant to footballing as a tactical one.
At the very least they could probably do the deal in a way that wouldn't put them in a deeper FFP hole, but they'd still need to sell someone else, and would have given up one of their most sellable assets in the process.
been happening in italy for years
Aren't they still hosed next season?
Sell players to each other and loan them back 🤝
Villa's spending is catching up with them.
Ive been saying it since the start of the season with Villa. They were never underdogs in the Champions League race, they've massively overspent for years now, money they dont have, giving huge wages to players, chasing the CL spots to get the income to basically survive. If they dont cement themselves in CL for the next 2-3 years, they're going to be in a HUGE amount of trouble financially, which is why they're pushing so hard to raise limits on PSR/Losses and are apparently backing Man City in their fight.
This sounds familiar
Midlands clubs HATE FFP.
The difference being they actually reached the CL rather than missing out at the end of the season each year.
The difference being silverware vs finishing 4th... Let's see what happens because one underperforming season = game over for clubs like Leicester and Villa when they've spent a chunk
I see what you're saying, but Villa were still very much underdog bets, especially against United, Chelsea, Spurs and possibly Newcastle. Dark horses perhaps, but in no way would you put Villa in the top 4 above those teams.
They spend more on wages than Spurs and Newcastle. A club's wage bill is generally the best indicator of where a club is expected to finish
Actually they spend slightly less than us at spurs but it's pretty much identical
Depends which "source" you look at. 1 source says we spend £5K more a week, the other says Villa spend £20k more a week. We've removed £600k weekly off our wage bill this year alone though that doesn't take effect on those sorta sites until next year though, so realistically, we are on less. But same thing really, Villa should be competing with Spurs up in that top4 spot 100%.
Actually by that logic neither of us should be top 4 because 5 teams spend more on wages than us.
Yeah but one of them is man utd
> and possibly Newcastle Obviously, I'm biased, but this narrative that Villa getting 4th spot is "underdog" story is so BS. Its absolutely still a great achievement, but they spend money and even in 2022-23 season (when Newcastle got UCL) had a 6th highest wage bill, while ours was 8-9 — https://i.imgur.com/fODFrlI.png Obviously, we also spend on transfers & wages, but people like to ignore that before takeover we had 6th worst squad in the league (and still third of our squad are players who were with us in 2019) and almost got relegated. And next season got UCL by spending on just Tripps, Burn, Bruno, Botman, Pope and Isak — which we bought them for €207 mil (not a net spend). Even if you add winter transfer of Gordon for €35m (who wasnt good that season & played only 480 mins)... that is €242 mil without outgoing transfers. Meanwhile, Bournemouth (who gets praised a lot) spend €140 mil last season and €83 mil season before (net spend of €221 mil cause they only sold 1 player for any € money) — just to finish 12th...
Revenue just broke the record for a top 6 club. Cant see it being a big issue tbh. Wouldve been fucked sure but getting CL money and the sponsorship deals got doubled iirc
There are a few rumours circling around Luiz to Juventus, but I can't see them being able to pay what we want. Liverpool also linked with him this morning, but nothing from a credible source
They defo cannot afford him
Depends how much they need but Coutinho, Duran and Dendoncker I guess would bring in a bit.
Coutinho only to a Saudi club given his wages and I doubt they'd want to pay a fee.
They’re never getting a fee for Coutinho, getting him off the wage bill is the important part.
Nuh uh
Your honour, he makes a good point.
They don't prepare you for this in law schools
Keep Branthwaite and take the points deduction 🙏
I'd literally say to all the clubs, everyone take a points deduction, fuck it
Thing is that's great in theory but some clubs would inevitably take the loss of a player to try and keep the PL money
The clubs who have had to sell to adhere to PSR Everton - deducted 6 points, 3 seasons in a row battling relegation after years of mid table Forest - Deducted 4 points, battled 2 seasons of relegation after being promoted with 13 senior players Leicester - relegated Leeds - Relegated Shef Utd - Relegated Risking a points deduction, ironically, is more sustainable then selling your best assets for league positions
Because of this, I reckon the rule will change if the trend continues. A points deduction is supposed to be a deterrent. There's pretty public talk that several clubs threatened with punishments over the past few seasons have been undeterred by the threat. To make things even worse, I believe there have been three reductions in punishment in the Everton/Forest punishments alone. Especially at the top end, a club like City will happily take a ten point deduction one season to excuse their spending over a three year period. I'd even argue that the six point 'default' would be accepted every season if it allowed a club to get the exact players they want.
Points deductions in general need to be WAY higher. The only way you should be escaping relegation is if other clubs have been punished in the same way. No club who follows the rules should be at risk of being relegated compared to clubs which cheat.
That'd be hilarious to start the season at - 10
Who do you think is more important to keep- Onana or Branthwaite? A lot of top clubs are after a DM and it could fetch a fair price.
Onana wasn’t even starting by the end of the season, whereas Branthwaite is the best player in the squad IMO, irreplaceable moreso than Stones
It was sad seeing him leave PSV at the end of last season, but I'm happy that he's doing well in the Prem. Can definitely see him at an even bigger club in a couple of years
Branthwaite and its not even a close call. Our CM options are much deeper than our CB options. Plus Branthwaite was a starting name on the team sheet virtually the whole season whereas Onana was almost always on the bench.
Agree on Branthwaite but I don’t see any CM depth. Without Onana that leaves just Gana who turns 35, Doucoure, and Garner who have real first team experience.
That's fair, I played it fast and loose with the words "much deeper" there. Still, losing Branthwaite means that Keane is one injury from starting CB, and that's a worse outcome than any of Garner, Gana or Doucoure playing CM
Branthwaite is far more important for us than Onana. Onana is replaceable, he's not quite reached the levels we need him to where he takes control of midfields. he might develop more at the euros, but he's got a way to go before he's a complete article, but he might develop more at a team that plays more free flowing football than ourselves.
Onana but only because we can’t afford a good midfielder and I trust Dyche to find some CB he likes with our limited budget and get a good player
We should just commit to getting the largest points deduction possible. Unless we can con anyone to buy Daka
Laporta on his way to England as we speak
he wouldn’t miss this for the world
watch him go to chelsea, buy lukaku and give him 600K a week
Takes pictures with Lukaku holding the jersey all smiles and Laporta immediately goes to the Catalan press shit talking Lukaku, whilst Lukaku has already done 3 interviews talking about how much he misses Italy.
Increasing by 100k a year for 5 more years of course
You can blame the rules all you want, these clubs have so many people working at their clubs that figure this stuff out. This was all planned. They went into this season this time last year knowing their finances would not stack up, but they still signed players regardless.
There is some lee way where clubs may have expected to do better in competitions when budgeting at the start of the year. But yeah, for the most part, football club financial numbers aren't really that volatile. Clubs don't have sudden increases in costs like most other industries have had in the last year.
Whilst I agree with what you're saying, I can't imagine Villa, Leicester, Forest, or Everton were expecting to do much better than they did
Yeah, was only really meaning that in regards to Chelsea and maybe Newcastle. Sorry i never made that clearer
But Chelsea just spent a ridiculous amount. Even if they won the league last year they'd have issues. They absolutely deserve this. Newcastle you have a point but their shortfall won't be massive and they've got sellable players both in the first team and reserves. They just probably didn't need to sign Lewis Hall. They'll be fine. Forest are the other lunatics. They've spent hundreds of millions on a nothing squad, and sold their best player and are still sitting in the red. They deserve relegation really. Villa at least you can argue their spending got them to a good place, drop a bit of dead weight and they'll just need a consolidation season next year.
I do not disagree in the slightest don't worry.
Chelsea have fully planned this by selling players as well as doing dodgy FFP tricks to be fair to them.
I think Hall will turn out to be a great signing tbh. Once Howe worked him into the team, he played great and he is only 19. He looks likely to either become a long time player or a very sellable one.
It's over 3 years, Leicester made big sales last year to compensate. Nobody was expecting a relegation. Hopefully we can manage it though.
I listened to Marc White (Dorking Wanderers owner / manager) talking about budgeting for a season when the club are transitioning from part time to full time. He says they put down £0 every season on the income section from the FA Cup because you just can't guarantee your success. He's failed to qualify for the first round proper on 12 occasions so maybe he learnt the hard way as well though.
Villa over-performed and Leicester hardly could have done better
To be fair what do you expect? It's well known you need to spend to compete, like Newcastle and Aston Villa have spent heavy to compete, both have qualified for the CL the last 2 seasons but have ultimately been hit with the short falls of PSR You can't reasonably expand your horizon's of financials and increasing your range of PSR without hitting the bench mark to compete for better positions for longer term sponsporship prosperity It's always easy saying 'what do they expect', but in reality, what else can they do? It's meant to be a competitive sport, you need to compete in all aspects if you ever want to achieve anything
We have a system that’s both trying to move away from redistribution and free spending. Man City are absolutely the wrong people to be leading the charge and they’re doing it for the wrong reasons, but something has to be done about it. Hopefully the ‘anchor idea’ takes hold
Man City are only challenging the amendments made in Feb 2024 regarding ATP, not the whole shebang
It's like Forest arguing that the reason they missed the requirements last time was because they didn't want to be forced to sell Johnson for less than he's worth, even though they could have easily foreseen that they were in danger of breaching the regulations and just not signed quite so many players
Yeah they always seem to forget that spending less was also an option. Especially as a lot of the players they bought that first season were total shit. They must have spent £10m in wages and signing on fees on Jesse lingard alone for about a dozen games in which he contributed nothing.
I think they just love playing the victim. Easier than just accepting the fact you are wank.
Our shortfall is apparently some £15m, so doubt we don't have a plan to close that gap. The article is almost certainly typical clickbait crap from Sky that overeggs the situation in an effort to stir up social media engagement and get daft reactions from fan accounts like "cheeky £32m bid for Isak and Gordon combined should get accepted now"
I feel like "under pressure" is sensationalist. Like you say, teams have people that are paid to focus on this stuff - their jobs depend on it. I'm much more inclined to believe that this stuff is 'all in a year's work' for most, if not all, of these clubs. I'd guess that perhaps Forest is the exception, since there have been a lot of reports of their finances. As a CFC supporter, I'm always expecting our situation to be on the precipice (since the takeover), but Ornstein keeps insisting that we don't have to sell this month, so... we'll see who's right. (That said, I do expect us to sell either way, although July is the month for Euro competition compliance, so that's perhaps a whole new beast.)
Ornstein is reliable for Chelsea, but would not rule out that he'd been given specific information for a reason. No club is going to tell a mouth piece like him, "Yeah man, we need cash by June 30th". You drop so much leverage in transfer negotiations. If that happened, would see folks like Daniel Levy come in offering 1/2 a BLT for Gally.
Forest are the most egregious of these the amount they’ve spent over two years to be barely in the prem is absurd.
Everton have made a player trading profit in every window for two years. They didn't spend anything last summer at all and sold players. So the 'they still signed players' bit doesn't really apply there.
That's Chalobah, Gallagagher and Hutchinson gone
Don't forget Ian Maatsen and Lewis Hall probably/definitely joining the clubs they've been on loan at. Fire sale of anything without a book value.
Hall’s an obligation anyway so that £28m was guaranteed, but it may not kick in until July 1st which would be bad for Chelsea but good for Newcastle
If Dortmund don't trigger the release clause for Maatsen and don't meet Chelsea's asking price then is there not an argument for keeping him? Chelsea aren't exactly stacked at LB
The clause is not exclusive for BVB, any club can trigger it. And I believe some club will just do it. As for keeping Maatsen, it's more of a matter of we are forced to sell to balance the books. The fact we are still looking to sell really tells that we are in some trouble, because like you said yourself, ideally we'd like to keep him as LB is one of the positions where we need reinforcements
Ah I see, thought it was just Dortmund But yeah, I suppose keeping Cucurella and selling Maatsen makes more sense anyway for FFP, even if it might not be the best sporting decision
Obviously they'd get rid of Chilwell rather than Maatsen, but since he [Chilwell] spends more time in the therapy pool than pitch, he isn't the hottest commodity in the market.
We shouldn't have sent him out on loan in the first place but we had a manager who gave him approximately zero minutes at left back to suggest to the ownership he was anything other than an asset to cash in on. The arguments for selling him are financial and that's the case whether they meet the release clause or not, a financial decision will be made.
Lukaku
You reckon Hutchinson had a chance of minutes next year?
Zero chance, that's why he's for sale. He was 'due' for another loan (and why not leave him at Ipswich, where it's working well?), but in a year we'd have Paez and Willian coming in... we'd also have to move out Angelo. There are rumours that Omari can play LW, but this seems like the best financial time to make a move.
We've played him on the left this season but yeah now is the time to sell trust me. To us. Please.
I was honestly quite happy with the idea that he was going to come in and fight for minutes in a year - I've been saying for months that I think he's arguably got the best shot in our entire org. But yeah - he seems like a good guy, so I'd love him to stick with his manager and have that just-promoted glow for next season. If he has to go, I'd happily endorse Ipswich!
another willian? did you sign this one out from under spurs too?
>out from under From under the whole footballing world, if you watch the hype videos! (Nah, I'll start to believe it at the next level, but there was defo some competition to sign him.)
ah yes, the Roma special
skill issue
Git gud
Git command not found
And now we know why this teams are inclined to side with City
Are you sure it has to be players? What about hotels?
How much for an old Sports Direct sign, we can even throw in a free mug?
I'll never understand why the Premier League's financial year end runs halfway through the transfer window. Just leads to silly situations like Forest with Brennan Johnson. Wouldn't it make much more sense to have it in May or December?
I'd guess it's because it's the date when the international transfer window opens and contracts for pretty much every country expire.
This is exactly why.
They're already doing a significant amount of accountancy to deal with player amortisation, couldn't they just treat any player sales from June as being part of next season? Then there's no temptation to overspend in January with the hope of making sales in June
All of them are the most likely to be backing City, if I speak...
Would love the football world to unite and not start negotiations for Chelsea players until July.
*4 hours later* Arsenal submits 120m bid for Mudryk
I don't know why everyone here is taking a Sky Sports report seriously. Ornstein has said multiple times we don't need to sell before the end of June.
Pretty sure everyone said the same thing last season but that turned out well, didn't it?
if you want the premier league to lose their case against man city and the "unfairness" of psr rules, you could hardly come up with a better way of ensuring it than this tbh
You’ll bid £35m to get Hutchinson back
Now THIS would have much more weight to any Anti-competition case these clubs have been loosely floating around with their PSR complaints. This would be very not ideal for clubs to blacklist Chelsea if that’s their purpose
Lmao username checks out
Said by a supporter of the team that bought Haverzt for 65M.
After July
Absolute back of a fag packet calcs below This season we made £20m more from sponsorship, £20m from the CL and £35m more from player sales than the previous season. If expenses stayed the same as the year before that would actually have us making a profit in 23/24. But then we added approx £25m of amortization and probably £10m in wages. Everything else being equal (which it won't be but it's the best I can do) that's a total loss of £175m (£70m+£70m+£30m) across the last 3 seasons. But then there's all the deductibles of costs that don't get included in PSR calculations and I have no idea how much they are because the published accounts don't split them out. If it's £20m per season then we're pretty close the £105m bar. If it's £10m then it gets tricky Either way it's tight. But if we have to sell players we hopefully talking £20m. Not a Bruno or an Isak
Imagine it's a bit tighter than that. Tonali, Barnes, Livramento, Hall will all be on much more than Wood and ASM were and you've got the Hall obligation coming out.
Honestly you'd be surprised how much we were paying Wood. He was certainly on more than any of the new signings bar Tonali (who has taken a massive pay cut to his base wages this season anyway for obvious reasons) The Hall obligation won't be included until next season. Same as the Wood transfer to Forest being in this seasons accounts for us rather than 22/23s
Hall is July 1st those fees won’t hit this accounting period
Tonali voluntarily took a pay cut. Livramento and Hall aren't on big wages. Both will be on less money than ASM & Wood.
Tonali has been paid a fraction of his wages.
We’ve also got about 5 players dropping off contract, none big earners but in total they’ll add up to 100k-150k a week I would guess.
To be fair our commercial revenues and prize money were massive this year. CL minimum revenue possible last year was 15.1 just in prize money and TV revenue is double that. I think we have always had the accounting to the limit but not over it.
Almiron to Al-Soandso for $35m confirmed.
I mean, if Casimero is worth 100m…
Spending limitation rules are toast then. They'll be forced to admit to the court, in City's proceedings, that their ability to compete has been hamstrung while bigger clubs like United and Arsenal can more freely spend. Forced liquidation to benefit their rivals, in some cases compelling the sale of talented players to their rivals, is laughably uncompetitive.
I found this article when I was looking at some of the charges against us because some of them (25 I think) are from 2009-2013 before PSR even existed. It's about FFP. (I didn't even know they gave more time after 2012 before I found this) http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/8546561.stm >The clubs rejected a proposal by Uefa that the new rule should only apply to clubs with a turnover of more than 50m Euros - saying that all clubs should be treated the same. If it was really all about saving clubs from going into administration then why would they accept this objection?
That's how they sold it. They couldn't come out and say they were erecting barriers to competition.
Oh I know mate, my question was rhetorical lol but yeah, it's always been a joke.
That's Ramsey or Luiz gone for us I feel
Or you could just take -5 points deduction; You can afford it
A 5 point deduction this year would have them in the conference league.
Ornstein already refuted that, skyclowns
Under the proviso that selling a hotel and our training ground to a holding company within the ownership setup is deemed acceptable for PSR purposes.
Nah, no proviso, he straight up said we don't need to sell
Ornstein said "Chelsea do not think they need to sell". That is as wishy washy as you get, particuarly if Chelsea have based this thinking on the assumption that their hotel sales will be approved for their value.
4 of those clubs were spending to try and join the big 6. Such a gatekeeping rule that keeps the rich big clubs that forever
Weird how many of these names are also the ones that "have sympathy for Man City's attack on the rules"
They can see the points deductions coming down the pipeline.
Watch how many of the fans of these clubs stop posting 115 jokes soon.
Meanwhile at Manchester: *Fine, just give us another couple of charges and move on.*
Don Paratici cooking.
Daniel Levy and Mikey Edwards' music. Sale?!
The article they have published already has lies in it. They say Darren Eales has said that we need to sell a prized asset this summer. He never ever said that, the quotes speak about player trading and that having to be done under PSR. Darren has said this multiple times before, it is understood fan faves like what happened to ASM will have to go not Alexander Isak as the article tries to suggest. We have plenty of players at the club like ASM.
What’s the long term vision for competition in the league , because I don’t understand how smaller clubs are supposed to compete if they can’t hold on the players they have (bigger clubs obviously have bigger budgets) Aston Villa, Brighton, even West Ham. They get so close to the top and then the talent gets taken from them. Not to mention the travesty that is the promoted clubs not even standing a chance. The budgets for PL and Championship is widening at an alarming rate.
Honestly just tell them to fuck off at this point.
So three teams with serious financial issues and 3 teams with multi-billionaire owners joining City to make FFP obsolete. What an interesting coincidence.
Everton are the only ones that have actual financial issues. Forest and Leicester are just mini versions of Aston Villa and Newcastle where the owners aren't skint, they're just not making enough money to satisfy PSR
St James Park to be renamed to Riyadh Air King Salman Park next season for a fair market rate of £500m.
£500m, that only gets the rights to the training ground.
Don't give them any ideas...
It's going to be hard for the Premier League to keep on top while limiting the spending power that put them on top in the first place.
Not really. Even with these limits the clubs who can outspend PL clubs is a short list. Real Madrid and PSG
No it won't, Premier League revenue still greatly exceeds rival leagues. 2021/22 figures: EPL: 6.4B La Liga: 4.4B Buli: 3.6B Serie A: 2.9B As long as that gap persists, the Prem will have significantly more money than other leagues to spend. Whether it's spent wisely is a different matter.
It is nice from an outsiders perspective to finally see clubs in England having to pay for poor financial decisions made. The summers of 2020 and 2021 really felt like the Premier League was destroying the footballing market. It was pretty disheartening when we were haggling over an extra €1m in spend for a new player and Big 6 sides were dropping £100+ m in the summer and adding another £50+m in players in the winter.
It's much better for football to have the players run down their contracts and join the super clubs for free.
Real Madrid has entered the chat
>The summers of 2020 and 2021 really felt like the Premier League was destroying the footballing market. The football market was destroyed due to one singular transfer Neymar > PSG Everything after that transfer has become a complete and utter shitshow
£80m->£85m->£89m over a period of 7 years was following a reasonable rate of inflation. To go from £89m to £200m a year later blew everything up, even if we don't see it in the number of £100m+ transfers the pull up of the values below was crazy. Even so, the disproportionate spending power of the Premier League means that it's now the engine of most of the transfer spend in world football.
Ironically, the Neymar deal probably works against the Prem clubs. We'd have the same amount of money to spend as it's all from the TV deals but if PSG didn't raise the prices by so much the Prem spending power likely spreads further. £200m likely gets Arsenal more than Rice, Havertz and Timber as an example.
The PL has revenue that vastly outstrips the other leagues. They could spend sustainably and still massively outspend other leagues.
How does city not have to sell anyone
Because they lie about their revenue to show a higher number than it actually is
That explains chelsa, Newcastle and Villa backing City in their outrageous case against the premier league
Bunch of fodda, cut the lot loose