dubbs Posted August 13, 2021 Share Posted August 13, 2021 12 minutes ago, ender4 said: Bloody hell, they really don’t want Villa or Leicester and other smaller teams upsetting the ‘Big 6’ If it works that way the ESL will be bloody boring in a few seasons time. Taking the likes of Arsenal with them, will the gooner fans be happy finishing near the bottom of the league every year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted August 13, 2021 Share Posted August 13, 2021 Wow. What a shockingly idiotic system. Trust Uefa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted August 13, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted August 13, 2021 Be interesting to see these (what are after all) anti competitive practices tested in the courts. I'm actually suprised that no one (like us for example) has had a go at FFP. It's clearly designed to stifle competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejs1111 Posted August 13, 2021 Share Posted August 13, 2021 (edited) That system is similar to Major League Baseball in the States. Its not perfect, but frankly its the best of the bunch imo. I'm not a fan of a hard salary cap- the main problem with a hard cap is it limits earning power of players, and frankly just makes the owners more wealthy...because the vast wealth of the league has to go somewhere. That is what happens in the NBA and NFL in a nutshell. MLB have a soft cap with a luxury tax penalty. Basically any team can exceed the cap but you are taxed heavily for exceeding said cap. All the taxes collected go into a big fund and are distributed to the teams evenly that did NOT exceed the cap. I'm simplifying it obviously- but that is the general idea. The luxury tax is not fixed either in MLB. Exceeding it in year 1 is a fixed %, then it increases if you exceed it a 2nd year in a row, culminating in a 50% tax on year 3. If you move below the cap in any year the tax resets. I've read that the soft cap in MLB is an average of the 5th-6th place teams in the league, so not the top... more like top 20%. For example, since this system has been in place- the NY Yankees have paid over $300 million in luxury taxes. Having a system like this in the Premier League would be a great way to provide additional funding to the football pyramid. Imagine taking the average of teams finishing in the European places (5-7) and setting that as the Premier League soft cap. Any team going over that starts paying a luxury tax into a general fund every year. A portion gets distributed thru the football pyramid, the remainder gets distributed to the remaining Premier League teams that stayed below the soft cap. Imagine how much Citeh, Manc, etc would pay in luxury tax. They would either keep paying to help fund everyone else (and improve other teams), or they would start dialing it back to avoid paying taxes...which would in turn help level the playing field. Edited August 13, 2021 by ejs1111 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Czarnikjak Posted August 13, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted August 13, 2021 (edited) 33 minutes ago, ejs1111 said: That system is similar to Major League Baseball in the States. Its not perfect, but frankly its the best of the bunch imo You’re missing the point here. In MLB every team has the same salary cap. What uefa are proposing here is a cap that depends on each team’s individual revenue. This is the whole point of the argument against it. it means that it won’t be the top teams paying the luxury tax. It will be the smaller teams who try to catch up to the elite (like villa ) that will be forced to pay the luxury tax if they want to compete. Edited August 13, 2021 by Czarnikjak 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulberto21 Posted August 14, 2021 Share Posted August 14, 2021 NSWE mentioned in this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted August 14, 2021 Share Posted August 14, 2021 1 hour ago, Sulberto21 said: NSWE mentioned in this Haha so the proposal basically means - top 6 fine, the rest of the table flipped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulberto21 Posted August 14, 2021 Share Posted August 14, 2021 27 minutes ago, a m ole said: Haha so the proposal basically means - top 6 fine, the rest of the table flipped. A load of bollox in other words. It should be an average of the league and UEFA can maybe apply it to every league therefore the European teams don't steal a march and nor do the Premier League teams. Or scrap FFP altogether and let the clubs do what they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparrow1988 Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 Does income from stuff like this go towards balancing FFP? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 6 minutes ago, sparrow1988 said: Does income from stuff like this go towards balancing FFP? Yes, we will be getting some money for renting the venue. It's all classed as commercial revenue and counts towards any FFP calculations. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKP90 Posted August 17, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted August 17, 2021 If we are annoyed about clubs being corporate entities now, a salary cap based on revenue generation will mean that the number one priority of football clubs will be revenue generation. It will have to be to succeed. Success won’t precede wealth, wealth will precede success. Even more so than now. It is 100% anticompetitive. Blanket salary cap is the way forward. The only way to even the playing field is to deny the richest clubs access to their full wealth. It’s why it won’t happen. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 10 minutes ago, HKP90 said: If we are annoyed about clubs being corporate entities now, a salary cap based on revenue generation will mean that the number one priority of football clubs will be revenue generation. It will have to be to succeed. Success won’t precede wealth, wealth will precede success. Even more so than now. It is 100% anticompetitive. Blanket salary cap is the way forward. The only way to even the playing field is to deny the richest clubs access to their full wealth. It’s why it won’t happen. I reserve my judgement until we see full details of what UEFA are to propose. But agree, salary cap purely based of revenue will only lead to entrenching the current elite even further. Blanket salary cap is an interesting one. Difficult to get it right though, set it too high and it won't matter much. Set it low and you will see players filing lawsuits left right and centre that UEFA is denying them income. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKP90 Posted August 17, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted August 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Czarnikjak said: I reserve my judgement until we see full details of what UEFA are to propose. But agree, salary cap purely based of revenue will only lead to entrenching the current elite even further. Blanket salary cap is an interesting one. Difficult to get it right though, set it too high and it won't matter much. Set it low and you will see players filing lawsuits left right and centre that UEFA is denying them income. Indeed, but as long as success and popularity are linked (and that’s always), the alternative, a cap that rewards popularity (revenue) financially will always unfairly favour those clubs that are already successful/popular. This is why ffp cannot be enacted democratically. And why an alternative will never happen, despite it improving the overall health and quality of the league massively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 I'd prefer they just **** off to an ESL than bring in a hard salary cap based on revenue. An absolute horrendous, anti-competitive idea. A salary cap and FPP shouldn't be conflated into the same rules. They are for totally different things. A salary cap is supposed to even the playing field. FFP is supposed to stop clubs from overextending themselves and ruining themselves financially. Just tie FFP to a revenue to debt ratio. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 Arsenal have just agreed a £10 million a season deal for their Sleeve Sponsor. Meanwhile we don’t even get £10m for our shirt sponsor. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 2 minutes ago, ender4 said: Arsenal have just agreed a £10 million a season deal for their Sleeve Sponsor. Meanwhile we don’t even get £10m for our shirt sponsor. Is it the Rwandan autocrat again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 It's impossible to work fully. The only way is to chip at it over time. We should start with the prize money distribution in Premier League. It should be more equitable than it is Premier League prize money 2021/2022: Premier League teams prize by position, table - Interesting Football Do we need a 39m first prize for City and only 2.5m for relegated team? Surely Having the top 6 all make the same prize money due to the financial windfall of European competition makes sense. Then a 10m gap between 7th and 20th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 42 minutes ago, ThunderPower_14 said: I'd prefer they just **** off to an ESL than bring in a hard salary cap based on revenue. An absolute horrendous, anti-competitive idea. A salary cap and FPP shouldn't be conflated into the same rules. They are for totally different things. A salary cap is supposed to even the playing field. FFP is supposed to stop clubs from overextending themselves and ruining themselves financially. Just tie FFP to a revenue to debt ratio. If we changed how we do FFP in Premier League to more forward looking then it has teeth to stop clubs like City breaking the rules and then winning court actions. It's clear we are playing within FFP and it would be better being forward looking so revenue from player sales doesn't "expire" after 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 37 minutes ago, CVByrne said: It's impossible to work fully. The only way is to chip at it over time. We should start with the prize money distribution in Premier League. It should be more equitable than it is Premier League prize money 2021/2022: Premier League teams prize by position, table - Interesting Football Do we need a 39m first prize for City and only 2.5m for relegated team? Surely Having the top 6 all make the same prize money due to the financial windfall of European competition makes sense. Then a 10m gap between 7th and 20th I agree, but the top 6 have been fighting to make the gap between positions bigger. And the other 14 partially conceded the point a couple of years ago when they agreed to give the top teams more of the international pot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 and now they tried their breakaway super league they need to be taken down. They can be out voted on everything and for next couple of seasons shouldn't be consulted on anything. They will never stop forcing a bigger and bigger gap between clubs. We need to reduce their prize money, we then need to set a cap on the additional commercial revenue that can be used for transfers and wages. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts