Chester & Hartlepool

[westyorkshiregull]

Not sure on that one yorkie buddy.
Fans just stump up a percentage of it and rightly so. I can honestly say I would not feel so inclusive of my club if I didn't stake money in when I can. From my own personal situation i pay for my dad to attend home games and I attend when I can. Makes me feel I've a say in our club. That's just how I feel
Tv money and the riches at top of game keep the premier ballooned in dosh.
Not sure if fans are greedy but perhaps the inflated tv money and high ticket prices at some clubs put the average fan marooned into a corner.
The money does annoy me with these mega stars rolling in millions and millions.

[budegull1954]

I quite agree, westyorkshire, as far as I can see it will be only Man C & perhaps Man U who can win the Premier League for the forseeable future. Utterly ridiculous sums of money being spent by these two clubs - why Man C haven't been investigated by the Financial Fair Play people is beyond me. Perhaps a few backhanders from Etihad? To paraphrase Kevin Keegan, I would love it, really love it if Man C end up winning nothing this season but sadly that's not going to happen. Rant over for the time being but it does disgust me that hardly any of that money filters down to the likes of TUFC, Chester & Hartlepool.

[Jerry]

As for Dave's point about money from the top needing to be filtered down. I disagree with this and always have done but i'm not expecting most to see my point of view which to me is common sense. Why should Chelsea / Man Utd bail out Chester or Hartlepool? If Chester and Hartlepool cannot run themselves properly then that's nobody's fault but the clubs involved. It's harsh and sad but the way i see it.

When Woolies went bust you didn't find BHS / Debenhams and the like queuing up to chuck them a few quid.

Chester FC are a business. As as business they must remain solvent, try and attract more customers and more hopefully more profit. When Woolies went tits up innocent staff lost their jobs just like innocent fans will lose their clubs. They are both collateral damage and it's really tragic but there it is.

I agree with Andy here.

There is a simple way for lower league clubs to be financially sustainable without expecting charity from bigger clubs. Simply stop paying the players so much. When you hear about current Torquay players earning over £800 per week it's hardly surprising the clubs losing money. That's pretty much double what most people are earning in the bay.

[westyorkshiregull]

It's not charity jerry , assosiation football used to be a economy where a decent percentage would filter down and top clubs would purchase players from the league's below.

Remember footballers have a short career and forget the thousands a week some earn but surely footballers at our level earning a reasonable bit above average is not excessive.

[Jerry]

It's not charity jerry , assosiation football used to be a economy where a decent percentage would filter down and top clubs would purchase players from the league's below.

Remember footballers have a short career and forget the thousands a week some earn but surely footballers at our level earning a reasonable bit above average is not excessive.

A short career yes but how many people have a "job for life" these days? Nothing stopping them getting another job once their football career is over.

Anyway it's not that the pay is "excessive" per se, but if it's more than a club can afford then it's too much.

A simple rule of thumb in any walk of life is don't spend more than you earn. Why should football clubs be any different?

[westyorkshiregull]

Agree with that , should run within your means like most of us do at home with budgets.
Point I was making that the money that used to filter down doesn't

It's disgusting the greed

[merse btpir]

There is a simple way for lower league clubs to be financially sustainable without expecting charity from bigger clubs. Simply stop paying the players so much. When you hear about current Torquay players earning over £800 per week it's hardly surprising the clubs losing money.

German football’s rules on spending as a percentage of turnover should reduce the possibility of this taking place in the first place and if it were (even voluntarily) adopted here it would progress a long way to eradicating this nonsense overnight!

Then there is the German model for club ownership...........put simply, football clubs in Germany are sporting associations. Many were formed many years before football was fully codified, as gymnastic clubs. They are not businesses per se although elements of the club can be run as such. The most apparent advantage to this is that any surplus generated by a club stays within the club and is not used to pay off someone else’s debt or to swell the coffers of a non football business.....that ethose would be so vital for a community owned Torquay United just as it is at Exeter City.

The basis of the German model is the 50+1 rule whereby a minimum of 51% of the club must be owned by club members. This still allows for considerable investment opportunities for private business to invest while preventing them from having overall control of the direction of the club.....rather like the Pompey Trust model for owning Fratton Park. A Bundesliga club board is made up of delegates selected by the shareholders. That way the supporter membership associations or Mutterveiren (Mother Association) have a direct say on the management of the club. The benefits to this method are clear, especially to English supporters who long for an end to the days where English clubs are subject to the whims and excesses of individual owners or uncaring capitalists who use their club to clear their own debts. Corporate interest is curtailed by the interests of the supporters. As long as the supporters have the best interest of the club at heart, that club is unlikely to allow itself to become mismanaged.

Working alongside this model are the DFL’s rules of governance, the Lizenzierungsordnung. These rules regulate the finances of clubs, control the levels of debt that each club should has and imposes restrictions on the amount of money clubs can spend of player’s wages, a major issue in England but also a perceived criticism of the German game and its inability to compete at European level (a view I don’t necessarily subscribe to, but that is another argument). Failure to comply with these regulations can result in the club’s licence being withdrawn and them not being able to participate in the Bundesliga.

If only Englsih football were run so sensibly!

[lucy6lucy]

German football’s rules on spending as a percentage of turnover should reduce the possibility of this taking place in the first place and if it were (even voluntarily) adopted here it would progress a long way to eradicating this nonsense overnight!

Then there is the German model for club ownership...........put simply, football clubs in Germany are sporting associations. Many were formed many years before football was fully codified, as gymnastic clubs. They are not businesses per se although elements of the club can be run as such. The most apparent advantage to this is that any surplus generated by a club stays within the club and is not used to pay off someone else’s debt or to swell the coffers of a non football business.....that ethose would be so vital for a community owned Torquay United just as it is at Exeter City.

The basis of the German model is the 50+1 rule whereby a minimum of 51% of the club must be owned by club members. This still allows for considerable investment opportunities for private business to invest while preventing them from having overall control of the direction of the club.....rather like the Pompey Trust model for owning Fratton Park. A Bundesliga club board is made up of delegates selected by the shareholders. That way the supporter membership associations or Mutterveiren (Mother Association) have a direct say on the management of the club. The benefits to this method are clear, especially to English supporters who long for an end to the days where English clubs are subject to the whims and excesses of individual owners or uncaring capitalists who use their club to clear their own debts. Corporate interest is curtailed by the interests of the supporters. As long as the supporters have the best interest of the club at heart, that club is unlikely to allow itself to become mismanaged.

Working alongside this model are the DFL’s rules of governance, the Lizenzierungsordnung. These rules regulate the finances of clubs, control the levels of debt that each club should has and imposes restrictions on the amount of money clubs can spend of player’s wages, a major issue in England but also a perceived criticism of the German game and its inability to compete at European level (a view I don’t necessarily subscribe to, but that is another argument). Failure to comply with these regulations can result in the club’s licence being withdrawn and them not being able to participate in the Bundesliga.

If only Englsih football were run so sensibly!

On that basis the oyston family would not have a chance of owning a German team, and indeed property developers

[merse btpir]

On that basis the oyston family would not have a chance of owning a German team, and indeed property developers

My point exactly!

[Teigngull]

I know you said it's an other argument Merse but ' The German model ' hasn't done their national team any harm in recent years has it ?
Just typical of this country's mind set really, I'm alright Jack, bugger everybody else, until it all goes tits up then it's somebody else's problem.
Sad , very sad indeed.

[Yorkieandy]

It does piss you off though the money wasted in the Prem.

Currently Saido Berahino is being paid. He never plays and hasn't done so much for the last 2 or 3 years. The mind boggles to think what he's on a week. His lack of footballing activity means he's effectively on unemployment benefit of about £50k plus a week.

Mesut Ozil is rumoured to be signing a new deal with Arsenal at £350k a week. Just say Torquay United got a home FA Cup draw next season in round 3 against Arsenal. It would probably be a 3 or 4 nil win for Arsenal, perhaps more but rarely is. If you compared Mesut Ozil to Luke Young then the difference in class is clearly obvious. As Luke Young is likely to be on what, £1k a week would you say? Just say Young would be on a grand a week. Is Mesut Ozil and his likely predicted performance in the match £349k better than that of Luke Young?

For an extra £349k you'd want Ozil to score 10, set up 10 and dribble around the entire Torquay side 8 times before setting up a tap in for Giroud.

THREE HUNDRED AND FORTY NINE THOUSAND POUNDS EVERY 7 DAYS. For that difference in monetary value supposedly reflecting the difference in quality between him and his non league Torquay counterpart i wouldn't have thought it unreasonable to expect 10 goals from him. I'm being serious

You see it in the FA Cup all the time. Shrewsbury v West Ham both legs. 0-0 at Shrewsbury and West Ham, obviously with injuries but that's no excuse not to be comfortably putting away a league 1 side if the differences in wages are to be believed. Hernandez played most of the first game and barely got a touch yet he's considered worthy of probably 50 times the weekly salary of the Shrewsbury forwards.

Shrewsbury played West Ham twice and you couldn't tell much difference in quality.

It's this gulf in what players from different leagues are paid in relation to each other that is not reflective of the players actual abilities. Christian Benteke has scored 2 goals in 19 appearances for Palace and is probably on 70k plus a week. I would almost guarantee that if you gave Danny Hylton of Luton 19 appearances for Palace in the Prem then he'd get at least one goal and would cost about 95% less.

I did say greedy fans in another thread and i stand by that. Fans want big signings now and to be able to compete with the Jones's. Clubs will just sign anyone now as if they flop it doesn't really matter and they've got shit loads more to spend on some more overpaid shite. Take Kevin Wimmer at Stoke. He's Austrian so i should be more kind to him but in actual fact he's dogshite. He's a solid player that would do well at Ipswich but he's got a foreign name and he came from Spurs so Stoke sign him for about £17 million. He doesn't play as far as i'm aware. So Stoke have Berahino and Wimmer who are probably on 150k a week plus combined and both are doing nothing.

So we come back to the fans. Just say Stoke signed Ollie Watkins from Exeter (now Brentford) instead of Berahino. The Stoke fans would be up in arms saying "who is this guy? Never heard of him!". They want a name from another Prem club even though he might be waste of space.

Why are Arsenal fans moaning? It's because they want Wenger to go out and sign a load big name players to compete with the big boys. Elneny keeps getting games for Arsenal as does Iwobi. They are foreign and sound a bit good. In reality they are both absolute tripe. There are players out there in the lower leagues that could come in and fill their boots but the fans won't want that. They want exotic names and if they command £50 k plus a week then they must be good right?

During my hiatus at TUFC i did indeed go and watch Derby quite a few times and that was an eye opener. Darren Bent for example. He was on 50k plus a week at Derby and he had the odd decent game but by and large no word of lie, IMO Akinfenwa wouldn't have looked out of place doing the same job for a fraction of the cost. I was amazed by the lack of quality when you compare to leagues 1 and 2. Ok yes it was better quality obviously but not anywhere near the difference between say Derby player getting 50k plus a week and Scunny players getting 2k plus a week.

Arsenal fans will continue to go to the Emirates and pay through the nose though.

If it could be argued that any footballer is worth £350k a week based purely on footballing ability, attitude and consistency then that is Lionel Messi. You know that 95% of the time when you watch Barcelona, Messi is going to be a dream to watch. Clearly he is a special talent but surely it is not unreasonable to expect a lot of other players to start closing the gap on Messi in terms of quality and consistency? It makes you realise that the Prem is really just stacked full of overpaid, overrated players with big reputations who don't deliver with the same levels of consistency yet they still command hundreds of thousands of pounds every week. Why are most players so bloody average and inconsistent?!

[merse btpir]

' The German model ' hasn't done their national team any harm in recent years has it ?

I'm not sure if I'm up to speed with any recent changes but, Bundesliga teams were always required to register 8 home-grown players, and at least 4 youth players from the team’s youth academy (a player must have been part of the Bundesliga club for at least three years between the ages of 15 and 21).

Nevertheless, the German Football Association have not set a limit for the maximum number of players registered per season. It’s quite different to the Premier League who impose a limit of 25 and where no more than 17 of non home-grown players are allowed to be registered. Without limiting the squad size, several teams, like Wolfsburg and Bayern Munich, even registered more than 40 players to their Bundesliga roster. As there is no policy or regulation to restrict the number of non-EU players in Bundesliga, it has become a veritable “paradise” for Asian and African players who couldn’t join the Premier League, La Liga or Serie A.

So that's the up-side as regards developing more players for their national team and the downside ~ nowhere is perfect but take the case of Arsenal and how many players they have lost to foreign clubs offering their emerging but 'log jammed' stars a first team squad number as opposed to them being restricted to non Premier and in most cases non European action if they stayed.

Marcus McQuane (18) is the latest, departing for Barcelona this week to play in their B team. In the summer they lost Chris Willock to Benfica B; Dan Crowley who signed a three-year contract with Eredivisie side Willem II and Kaylen Hinds to Wolfsburg. Jadon Sancho told Manchester City he wasn't hanging around waiting for first team football too and moved to Borussia Dortmund where he immediately got a Bundesliga squad number and there are others.

Jadon's getting the first team pitch time he needs instead of idling away in the moribund U23 Leagues in this country.

[Dave]

As for Dave's point about money from the top needing to be filtered down. I disagree with this and always have done but i'm not expecting most to see my point of view which to me is common sense. Why should Chelsea / Man Utd bail out Chester or Hartlepool? If Chester and Hartlepool cannot run themselves properly then that's nobody's fault but the clubs involved. It's harsh and sad but the way i see it.

When Woolies went bust you didn't find BHS / Debenhams and the like queuing up to chuck them a few quid.

Thing is Andy, as I'm sure you well know football, and football finance is a very different animal to manufactoring/retail/service buisness, how times to do football clubs pay dividends football clubs routinely lose money. Manchester City/United, Liverpool etc, are not competeing to sell sweets and DVD's with Chester, Hartlepool, and Torquay United.

If League 1/2 and the non-league pryamid dies, it's really collateral damage, with out Crewe would David Platt gone on the score 27 goals for England, with out then League 2 Swansea what career would our own Gary Monk ever have had. With out the non-league pyramid, would the Vardy's and Smalling's and other's be lost to football forever, that's why the chelsea and Man.U of this world should care about what happens below, with out the lower leagues football dies.

Trevor Francis in 1979 was the first footballer to move clubs for £1 million, 40 years later £75 million gets a defender from Southampton, what should that tell us about, the amount of money coming into the top end of the game. I'm not talking about free hands out's, charity like bail out's for lower league, to pay stupid wages, and splash out transfer fees they can't afford, there so many factor's putting pressure on lower league clubs now, more money does need to, and should be filtering down.

[merse btpir]

It's utterly futile and a waste of energy banging on about the money at the top end of the game and the struggles down below it. We are where we are and it is our responsibility to become both sustainable within those parameters or perish.

Plenty of Premier League TV generated money goes into grass roots football that is far more deserving than a gaggle of so called professional clubs who have been mis-managed by amateurs whether well meaning or not. If other clubs at our level can be sustainable then so can we. If other clubs below our current level can be sustainable then so can we and if we don't work it out then when we drop to their level they too will hold the advantage over us.

I've no time for this constant bleating about what the top end of the game earns......they earn it because people want their product. We don't earn it because not many people want ours so we have to redefine and modify our product so that it reaches out to a wider audience ~ simples!

[Dazza]

That's a bit like saying poverty is entirely permissible most of the time because it's good to have nice fat bankers for economic reasons . !

Yes let's have realism but save us all defeatism .