The ja606 FFP Vote

comment by BrummieBlue! (U3487)

posted 7 minutes ago

hafijur, you're falling into the same trap as my old chum Sandy.
Stats don't tell the full story, under AVB the form was appalling and we were dropping like a stone. Had nothing been done I'm convinced we'd have struggled to make the top ten under AVB - he simply had to go.
............................
Well all you needed to guarantee finishing 10th was to get 2 points from a possible 33 points. heck 1 point may have been enough with gd. AVB was not challenging for the title but top 4 was upp for grabs and he left you in 2 competitions.

hafijur MUFC

I think you will find you are dealing with some serious thick posters tonight, you are trying your best to educate them, but they seem to be oblivious to FACTS. Best of luck mate, I`m off now.

I'm convinced we'd have struggled to make the top ten under AVB - he simply had to go.
====================
Without a doubt

haifur at 3-0 down to Napoli in the CL, after the first leg does not really constitute leaving us in a healthy position in competition.

I'll repeat it again - with AVB at the helm we would not now be the CL & FA Cup winners and sixth place could have been a bonus!

comment by sandy_brown the elder statesman of the Spurs board (U13619)
posted 30 minutes ago
Campioni d'Europa


Sandy, please explain FFP ...the last attempt was comedy gold



Not as comical as your version you clown.
==================
Sandy I'm impressed, so you now understand the difference between Uefa's break-even calculation and club's statutory accounts..I only ask because you were a little confused last time FFP reared its ugly head.

we blew an 8 point lead and the wigan game the refs finished us off with an ovrebo performance against us.
======

You are comedy Gold

He is a cretin Bubbles, don't know why he's on our board he's exactly like that Ronaldinho lover pizza guy

I just unlocked him. I forgot how funny he is

I remember when a £1m transfer was huge money. And not too long ago when £100k a week was a massive salary, and now Arsenal get mocked for not paying more than £100k and £200k+ is the norm. Where would it end? £500k or £1m a week?

-------------------

These figures have to be put into context. When £1m was deemed a lot of money to spend on a player, clubs were generating a hell of a lot less in revenue. For example, in 1989 (a time when plenty of £1m transfers had occurred), United were valued at £20 million. Today they are valued at well over £1 billion. No one could have foreseen the incredible increase in value and revenue that has taken place over the last 20 years or so.

The idea of £500k per week wages may seem preposterous now, just as preposterous as £100k per week wages would have been 10/20 years ago. But it will happen as long as the revenue streams of clubs continues to escalate at the rate they have done over the last few years.

In this respect, a wage cap is not the solution to the "problem". I would rather propose the idea that clubs are limited to spending on wages a percentage of their turnover. FFP is missing a trick in this regard by not imposing such a sanction.

I also think FFP should impose regulations on agents, who are a huge financial burden on clubs. Agents fees should be determined and paid for solely by the players, never by the club.

FFP shouldn't seek to stifle investment into the game. In one respect, it gets it right by stating that investment into infrastructure development (youth, stadium, facilities etc) will not be included in the FFP. This, of course, still gives an "unfair" advantage to the wealthy owners, who can dip into their own pocket to pay for such improvements without having to account for them out of the clubs revenue.

So 81 people want FFP enforced.

8 don't care

and 21 don't want it enforced.

81 seems a bit high to be just United and Arsenal fans.... 21 does seem to be only be a little bit more than the Chelsea and Man City fans combined though..