Jump to content

The AVFC FFP thread


Recommended Posts

Applies to everyone as far as I know.

UEFA get involved with the sides playing in their competitions, likes of PSG & Man City. Give them a little fine, but basically allow them to continue spending £300m a window, it's ridiculous really. Only sides who really seem to feel the constraints of FFP are ones like us who are desperately trying to get out the championship but will be restricted and probably fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Applies to everyone as far as I know.

UEFA get involved with the sides playing in their competitions, likes of PSG & Man City. Give them a little fine, but basically allow them to continue spending £300m a window, it's ridiculous really. Only sides who really seem to feel the constraints of FFP are ones like us who are desperately trying to get out the championship but will be restricted and probably fail.

But that's because teams like us are overspending whereas Man City aren't?

Their turnover is something like £500m/season.  They can spend a lot - and they do.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bobzy said:

But that's because teams like us are overspending whereas Man City aren't?

Their turnover is something like £500m/season.  They can spend a lot - and they do.

True, but they needed that injection of money to start with, before FFP came in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Lerner came there was significant injection of money to. But there was no plan. Just buy overpaid English junk and hope for the best. 

And it's fair to say the same thing happened under Tony. Injection of funds with zero plan or strategy, just buy the players with most goals and assists in the league and we should win aayyyy

Edited by Alakagom
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, bobzy said:

But that's because teams like us are overspending whereas Man City aren't?

Their turnover is something like £500m/season.  They can spend a lot - and they do.

How though? Sure there's prize money but have they suddenly got 100,000's of fairweather fans? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, VillaJ100 said:

How though? Sure there's prize money but have they suddenly got 100,000's of fairweather fans? 

While they might not be the biggest team in England they are quickly becoming number one team worldwide in terms of English teams, especially in the younger generations. 

Edited by Alakagom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Alakagom said:

While they might not be the biggest team in England they are quickly becoming number one team worldwide in terms of English teams, especially in the younger generations. 

But also sponsorship by Etihad (£400m) which is also owned by the same owners... within the rules apparently but seems cynical at the very least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, alreadyexists said:

But also sponsorship by Etihad (£400m) which is also owned by the same owners... within the rules apparently but seems cynical at the very least.

They don't get that much from Etihad though - total turnover was £473m, of which more than £250m was from match day and broadcasting.  The craziness of the PL now means doing well generates you ridiculous money.  Admittedly 'other commercial activities' gave them a further 200m, but it's not as extreme as always made out (and much of that will be because of genuine commercial activities). 

They spend a fortune, of course, and arguably got lucky with timing of the rules coming in.  But we're in trouble because of mismanagement, rather than restrictions, imo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, VillaJ100 said:

How though? Sure there's prize money but have they suddenly got 100,000's of fairweather fans? 

They've got hundred of thousands of fair-weather fans across India, China, the South Pacific, the USA and Australia. Anywhere there's TV. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/03/2018 at 17:36, Alakagom said:

When Lerner came there was significant injection of money to. But there was no plan. Just buy overpaid English junk and hope for the best. 

And it's fair to say the same thing happened under Tony. Injection of funds with zero plan or strategy, just buy the players with most goals and assists in the league and we should win aayyyy

Yes, this is the problem. We actually did very much what Citeh have done, but we did it very badly and bought the wrong players for huge fees/wages.  We spent the money required to get top 4 but spent is badly, in some cases catestrophically badly. 

MON was allowed far too much freedom to overspend on dross. He would pay massive wages to players like Habib Beye and then not even put him in the squad. 

Edited by sidcow
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Yes, this is the problem. We actually did very much what Citeh have done, but we did it very badly and bought the wrong players for huge fees/wages.  We spent the money required to get top 4 but spent is badly, in some cases catestrophically badly. 

MON was allowed far too much freedom to overspend on dross. He would pay massive wages to players like Habib Beye and then not even put him in the squad. 

To be fair City did get two attempts at it, first under Thaksin Shiniwatra and then under the current regime.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Yes, this is the problem. We actually did very much what Citeh have done, but we did it very badly and bought the wrong players for huge fees/wages.  We spent the money required to get top 4 but spent is badly, in some cases catestrophically badly. 

MON was allowed far too much freedom to overspend on dross. He would pay massive wages to players like Habib Beye and then not even put him in the squad. 

I remember that season you won away at Everton 4-1 under MON.  I was sure you were going to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Andy81 said:

I remember that season you won away at Everton 4-1 under MON.  I was sure you were going to do it.

Certainly wasn’t villa who won 4-1 at Everton .

we won there 3-2 in the last minute under mon though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eastie said:

Certainly wasn’t villa who won 4-1 at Everton .

we won there 3-2 in the last minute under mon though.

Really? Maybe it was 3-2 it was a night game on TV, MON telling Ashley Young he was a genius on the pitch afterwards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Eastie said:

Certainly wasn’t villa who won 4-1 at Everton .

we won there 3-2 in the last minute under mon though.

We did both, but the 4-1 was under John Gregory in 1998 (juust a month or so after Brian Little quit - Joachim, Charles and 2 from Yorke

Edited by blandy
my memory was playing up
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Andy81 said:

Really? Maybe it was 3-2 it was a night game on TV, MON telling Ashley Young he was a genius on the pitch afterwards. 

That was the 3-2 game. They equalized right on the death and then Young won it in injury time. It was during the run where Jonathan Pearce asked O'Neill if he felt we could win the title and O'Neill asked 'have you been drinking?'

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, El-Reacho said:

That was the 3-2 game. They equalized right on the death and then Young won it in injury time. It was during the run where Jonathan Pearce asked O'Neill if he felt we could win the title and O'Neill asked 'have you been drinking?'

Probably the most amazing match ive ever seen being a villa fan. Lescotts face was priceless 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, El-Reacho said:

That was the 3-2 game. They equalized right on the death and then Young won it in injury time. It was during the run where Jonathan Pearce asked O'Neill if he felt we could win the title and O'Neill asked 'have you been drinking?'

Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â