Money money money

[ferrarilover]

My feelings, I imagine, are exactly the same as any right thinking football fan; money will kill top level football in this country.
The unstoppable tidal wave of ever increasing salary demands, transfer fees and agents bonuses will, inevitably, grow so large as to necessitate a world super league comprising the 15 or so most grand, super-rich clubs.
Sadly, the curse of 'spend today - recoup tomorrow' has begun to pervade the lower echelons of professional football. Take the case of Cambridge United of two years ago, spent money like there was no tomorrow, failed to win promotion (beaten by a team comprised largely of free players) now languishing in the lower reaches of the BSP.
What of Crawley Town (a team no one likes, but equally a team no genuine football fan would wish to see wound up) should they fail in their £1,000,000 bid to win league status?

At the very top, how long will it be before we see a player on £300,000 a week? I recall, with great sadness, the day I heard of the first players rumoured to be demanding £100,000 a week. Shortly thereafter, we had another player insisting that he be paid more than any other and so the rapid downward descent into oblivion began in earnest.

English football owes a great debt of gratitude to the present incumbent of the Arsenal managerial role. His methods of running a club on a reasonable budget, implementing a rigid wage structure and cap and utilising the youth system of which that club are rightly proud, rather than rely on the vastly inflated transfer market ought to be the model of good practice for managers the world over. By implementing this frugal fiscal policy, he has allowed the club to build, for free, a brand new ground which, it is universally agreed, is the crowning glory of football stadia in this sceptred Isle.

Dearest reader will doubtless concur that a salary of £100,000 a year is a most generous offer to a man charged with partaking in a child s pastime for a living. The merest hint of paying a similar sum per week ought best be met with gentle laughter, free of genuine enthusiasm such that the practice of suggesting such amounts need not be oft repeated.

Where and how it will all end is the guess of any man concerned. For my tuppence, I shall suggest a cataclysm of Louis Vuitton man bags, dollar bills and corporate sponsorship, the light duly emitted a hue of spray tan orange, visible as far away as the planet Mars. Alternatively of course, it could all continue Ad Infinitum, growing larger and larger until the day where football consumes all the world's money in a single weekend.

I fear for the future of football as we know it, it is an odd paradox that to save itself, football may first have to die.

Matt.

[PhilGull]

Football finances are in a mess, from the top to the bottom.
We see the biggest teams in the land with billions of Pounds of debt. Billions. The business of football simply isn't sustainable.

The problem with changing it is to make the first step. No one wants to be the first to impose a wage cap and put themselves at a disadvantage.

As for Arsenal, I would point out that their current healthy financial status comes from them developing and selling Highbury. Their great 'Youth team' is made up of players bought at great expense from other clubs around Europe, and as for a wage cap, that went with Tony Adams, their wages are now just as high as the rest (Fabregas and Arshavin both reportedly on six-figure sums).

As for the future, I can't see it changing. While there are people willing to invest money and pay players hundreds of thousands of pounds a week the problems will persist. Even if the banks decided they had enough and wound up Manchester United someone else would appear and continue spending in the same way.

[PhilGull]

I would also point out that I find it hard to blame the players. If I were offered my yearly salary as a weekly wage I couldn't say no.
I'm reminded of the story of Seth Johnson joining Leeds United. Seth and his agent went to a meeting with Peter Ridsdale. His agent had already told Seth he was expecting about 5k and was hoping to get it up to about 7k. When it came to discussing money Ridsdale opened with an offer of 15k, he then mistook the look of disbelief on their faces for one of disapproval and immediately came back with 20k.

It's the people running the game that are the problem, see the buffoon Mike Ashley as an example. Even after owing a big club for a few years he still understands nothing about the game.

[ReadinGull]

There was a guy on 5 live explaining all the football finances a while back in the wake of the liverpool fiasco.

He was saying that clubs have debts 2 or 3 times the net worth of the clubs turnover is not necessarily bad, its like you or I having a mortgage.

I generally think that for competition reasons it doesnt look so good having throw away millions from billionnaire benefactors, however, that said the current prem teams form seems to displace that theory somewhat....

Generally I think its a shame there isnt more dripping down the leagues and local FA's, but honestly, it ever was thus.

[Fletch]

With no lower league football to follow yesterday a lot of us will have looked to the premiership to get our fix of football for the weekend. The FIFA bidding fiasco really rammed home to me how financial gain has become vastly more important to those in positions of power than what is actually best for the sport itself, and it got me thinking about the premiership and whether the best interests of the premiership clubs are the same as those in charge of the league itself.....

Bleh! I suppose it depends on if you mean those in charge of the Premier league or the Football league Smiffy.

Im sure most of us can remember just why the Premier league was formed. The big clubs didnt like the percentage they got to keep and thought there was too much going to the lower league clubs (in effect). They also thought they could do better at gaining an improved TV payday. TBH, they have marketed themselves very well and got an income well out of recognition of the FL days. Just a shame that more of it doesn't filter downwards.

The Prem league organisation is of course going to look after itself first and foremost. Hence the fact that the parachute payments are substantial. Makes a very uneven playing field for those in the Championship though! That's probably why you seem to get quite a few yo-yo teams (West Brom springs to mind) that can keep far enough ahead of the majority of Championship clubs in terms of income, to be able to recruit the best available players or keep the ones they already have. I suspect its only the financial problems of Hull and Pompey that have kept them out of the top 6 TBH. All credit to Neil W for getting QPR to the top of the pile though. I did say after the PSF (we unjustly lost!), I thought they would be one of the playoff teams, just didnt expect them to be doing quite so well

And dont get me started on the filthy lucre attracting all the foreigners to the Prem Lge. It seems much cheaper to go out and buy an established foreign international, than to recruit and develop young english players to the stage that they are ready for the international competition.

Edit: Young Gosling is probably a case in point on overspending at Prem Level. Everton paid £2 mill for him (18 starts in 18 months according to Soccerbase). I know he had injuries but as a prospective future england player, you would like to think he would get more of a look in. I dont think they paid more than that for Artetta (already established at this sort of level) or Pienaar (same). That make it a big gamble to crash out that sort of money when you can buy established (foreign) players for the same cash.

[PhilGull]

Regarding QPR, don't forget that they are owned by some of the richest people in the world. Look at their transfer spendings (on loans as well as permanent deals) and their wage bill and they will be on a par with teams with parachute payments, likewise Cardiff (although they have spent all their money, and that of the banks and are no close to administration!).

As for the foreign imports, fact of the matter is they are cheaper. Ask 'Big' Sam Alardyce why he goes abroad for talent and there is only one reason. You can pick up a player from a lesser foreign league for half what the equivalent would cost from the Football League.

[Fletch]

Regarding QPR, don't forget that they are owned by some of the richest people in the world. Look at their transfer spendings (on loans as well as permanent deals) and their wage bill and they will be on a par with teams with parachute payments, likewise Cardiff (although they have spent all their money, and that of the banks and are no close to administration!).

As for the foreign imports, fact of the matter is they are cheaper. Ask 'Big' Sam Alardyce why he goes abroad for talent and there is only one reason. You can pick up a player from a lesser foreign league for half what the equivalent would cost from the Football League.

Phil, I dont think Neil W has done anywhere near as much wheeling and dealing (or spending) as the previous incumbents of his office over the last 5 years. QPR may be owned by rich gits but I get the impression they got their fingers burned in transfer dealings by previous managers and keep a fairly tight reign on his spending

[Fletch]

I meant those in charge of the Premier League Fletch. The point I was trying to get at was - Does the Premier League organisation care about the state of the finances of the teams in their league? Is it in the organisation's interests to have clubs in a healthy financial situation? I assume it isn't as the league is full of quality players which couldn't have been purchased if clubs were run sustainably...

You would like to think so but alas it appears not...

I really don't understand a great deal about off the field matters in football :S Is it the responsibility of the Premier League and the Football League to help prevent their clubs from financial problems etc? Or is it solely down to the club themselves? Obviously the Leagues can punish teams in administration with points deducations and transfer embargos... But do the governing bodies in football make any rules e.g salary caps in any of the English leagues to prevent problems from occurring? Prevention is better than cure as the saying goes, and I would like to see measures taken to reduce spending. You only have to look at Argyle to see what a few years of financial mis-management can do to a club.

It seems to be left to the clubs to keep their affairs in order. The leagues only appear to get involved once there are problems. Governing bodies = self-licking lollipops

A salary cap would be lovely but the big clubs wouldnt wear it. The clubs are where the power lies. Hence the Premier League instead of it still being the football league...

As I said I really don't know much about finances, and football's governing bodies, so sorry if any points I make are borderline retarded!

You sound like the ideal person for Chairman of a Prem League club then !!

[Trojan 67]

You can't catch me out, as the thread title suggests, it's an Abba hit, right?

Maybe our Dancing Queens (Westbay,HRG,Zelda(?)) etc would like to comment on the Waterloo that the game at the highest level must surely in the near future be facing.

[Fletch]

When you have to pay so much to the like of Fernando, it certainly is The Name of the Game. Someone like Benners must be thinking Take a Chance on Me. Lets face it, the top of the Premier know that The Winner Takes It All. Im sure Mancini must be thinking Mamma Mia with the pressure he's under ....

[westbaygull]

Voulez vous have the life of a Premiership player? Knowing me, knowing you, I'm sure you would....