Quota came into effect in 2010. Manchester City spent £24m on Barca world class midfielder Yaya Toure, £25m on World Cup winner and world class playmaker David Silva and £26m on English workhorse James Milner.
Yet Jenius thinks increasing the demand for English players will send transfer fees plummeting?
It'd take donkey's years for the transfer fees for English players to plummet under this regime.
The only way for them to fall is if the money goes out of our game.
Which will start to happen if these plans go through.
The quality of the PL will be diluted, CL places will be lost, sponsorship money will go, TV money will fall (especially from abroad), clubs will fold and we will be left with a league no better than France of Portugal have.
Although the best English players will probably go abroad and help the national team. Maybe this is the plan... kill off the English club game for a better national team.
Tony Pulis hit the nail on the head: England should try to export players to other leagues. The real problem is that no foreign club wants English players because lack natural talent. English players have sold so many foreign players, yet the likes of Rooney have failed to attract any interest even from megabuck clubs like Real Madrid, Barca and PSG. At the last 2 World Cup finals (possibly more) only England had 100% home-based players, and the results showed.
*English clubs have sold...
I don't think it would get that bad, DJ.
Even with a quota the pl still has the money to attract class foreign players, and coaches, to keep the appeal high and thus the sponsorship money.
It may dilute the quality of the league, but not to the extent you are suggesting, in my opinion.
I don't think it's just down to natural talent, it's also because the best English players are bloody expensive.
I'm sure Rooney a few years ago would have interested many of the top clubs but to get United to sell just isn't worth it. Plus Rooney strikes me as a player that would never go abroad and didn't really need to to achieve his goals at club level.
I think people overstate the playing abroad stuff anyway. There were a few English players playing abroad in the 80's and 90's and it didn't really benefit the national team.
The last three world cup winners have all comprised of mainly players from their own league - the key players as well.
CL success for PL teams won't be happening...the standard of English players have never been good in comparison to Europe so why all of a sudden is it?
PL would turn into a rich man Serie A
Rooney never attracted the slightest interest from foreign clubs. Real Madrid overlooked him and paid massive fees and wages for Ronaldo and Bale. So I don't agree that it's a money issue. In 2013 Matthias Sammer said Rooney would not bring any value to the Bundesliga, and he is deemed England's best player atm - says it all. Which English player would hold a regular place at Barca, Madrid or Bayern Munich?
The defenders were as good as the Europeans. No surprise there's been a decline when Cahill and Jagielka are the best we have to offer.
How would it be a rich man's Serie A?
I'm not sure what the rules say on buying players at 15 from across Europe and world wide, but surely having a bigger proportion of English players, would just down the quality of PL.
What is the benefit for PL teams playing in CL competition from these rules?
You don't know if there was any interest in Rooney from foreign clubs. Just because an offer wasn't made doesn't mean there was no interest, it's speculation on both parts.
I'm sure there was interest from abroad for the likes of Scholes, Lampard, Gerrard et al., in the past.
And I'm not saying it's just money. English players tend not to move abroad, especially the best ones, as they are usually playing at England's biggest clubs.
More often than not the best players from a country stay at the best clubs in that country - particularly in the lucrative leagues.
At the moment there's not an English player that is good enough for the big boys, but that's not always been the case.
What is the benefit for PL teams playing in CL competition from these rules?
-----
None, which is why it will be rejected.
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 8 minutes ago
What is the benefit for PL teams playing in CL competition from these rules?
-----
None, which is why it will be rejected.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good good.
No it doesn't. Top clubs want top players. Their choices will be limited to top HG players for 12 players. This will be a very small pool of players whose price will be increased.
------------------------
I think you thinking in the self interest of the top 4 clubs rather than football in general.
Every club will require 12 homegrown players. So yes the Chelsea, Arsenal, Man Utd and Man City, 12 home grown players will be the best of the lot. However Hull will also require 12 homegrown, so will Blackburn, so will Watford, so West Ham etc.
That means the number of homegrown players increases across ALL clubs. The best of those will of course want to move the big 4 as happens now. But the 'supply' of those players increases which reduces transfer fees for homegrown players in the long term.
Now where do you think those homegrown players will come from? They can ONLY come from two sources. You can grow your own in your academy or you can buy from another English club. This means that the money which often went abroad will stay in the English game as used to happen in the past. This is what is meant as the balance of trade deficit in English football. At the moment too much of the money generated by football goes OUT of English football in transfer fees.
I don't think you quite understand the difference between supply and demand. To bring prices down you have to increase supply. If you increase supply you reduce the demand. Do you think Sterling will be worth so much if Liverpool had another 5 English players ready to take his place?
Basic economics.
And you want to abolish quotas? Do you know how many Spanish youngsters play football compared to English ones? They have 3 qualified coaches for every one English coach. England has all the money so they can play all the Spanish teams if they want. Arsenal were almost doing in that in the 2000s with almost all French teams. Do you know the consequence? Man Utd built teams around English players and their commercial appeal globally went up 4 times Arsenal's commercial revenue when both the teams were winning equally as much. Like it or not, fan appeal globally works around identity. And the premiership is in ENGLAND. Not in Spain or Italy or France or Germany.
If it is dictated that clubs need 12 HG players the demand will increase. Thus the price will increase. If a team have a decent, and in demand, player that players value will increase. If you put limits on the markets then prices will go up.
A club, no matter it's size, will want the best 12 HG players it can get. It is not just the top 4 who will desire the best players possible. Thus it will have to pay for them. You are not increasing supply, you are limiting it with quotas.
The proof is already there. Championship clubs are paying £12m for English players already.
Having 240 English players in the PL will not improve the quality of those players. But the need to have the best 240 English players will push up the prices.
More expensive doesn't equal better, meaning the ENGLAND team will not improve. And English club football will continue the downward spiral it has suffered ever since the HG quotas came about.
As for United, they were always far bigger than Arsenal globally. Absolutely nothing to do with English players. You think the likes of Butt and the Nevilles were bringing in fans from far and wide? United also dominated the PL from 92 onwards, to say Arsenal were winning equally as much is wrong. What is it 13 or 14 titles to 3 in PL era ffs.
Do you think Sterling will be worth so much if Liverpool had another 5 English players ready to take his place?
----
Also, this statement
Sterling is 'worth so much' because he is England's bright young thing. Liverpool don't want to lose him, and a number of teams want him.
Liverpool also have Jordan Ibe to come in for him.
Ross Barkley will likely attract decent money offers. Not because he has proved himself consistently, but because he is English and young.
English clubs need HG players, clubs know this so when they get one who shows a bit of promise they hike the price up. This is only going to increase with the increased demand for HG players.
The supply is not magically going to increase. The players are already there, they just aren't good enough. But these not good enough players will be needed to fill quotas. They won't suddenly become good enough, though, just more expensive.
Tony Pulis talking sense on the matter
Although the best English players will probably go abroad and help the national team. Maybe this is the plan... kill off the English club game for a better national team.
I entirely agree with DJ. To be perfectly honest, I'm not really bothered about the English national team if it's a choice between that or a top-class EPL. England just doesn't produce enough top players, and that has little to do with 'foreigners'.
You are not increasing supply, you are limiting it with quotas.
--------------------------------------------
How are you limiting it? You are prescribing 4 more homegrown players than now. You are increasing the supply.
Now teams will have 12 players as opposed to 8. 12 > 8. And if you abolished quotas you are going to have 0 homegrown players. You said it your self 240 English players in the premier league as opposed to how many now? Probably abt 40/50 because 18 year old foreign players are considered homegrown when they are not!
Where do you think these homegrown players are going to come from? Academies and the lower leagues. The money stays within England.
How is the quality of English players going to improve if they are not getting a chance to play alongside the best? This is not the same argument that was used in 1995-2005 when the best players came to England but the 18-21 year olds were mostly English. Now clubs are full of foreign players disguised as homegrown and English players are not getting a chance.
Pulis, Allyrdce, Wenger etc will always prefer the old system because they can buy of the self and have to do little developing or coaching. Let them earn their corn and actually improve players.
The whole world or England. Which is bigger?
If you limit the players to just English you are of course limiting the supply, and also the quality.
240 English players = League 2 quality making up the numbers.
Forcing English players into the PL doesn't magically make them good enough.
A future of Gavin Hoyte, Justin Hoyte, Mark Randall, Craig Eastmond, Sanchez Watt etc etc being PL players just to make up quotas is not improving the England team.
Improve youth football, bring in B teams or at least partnership clubs where youths can get first team experience without having to leave the first class training set ups, improve the transition from youth to first team. Get players to a standard wherein they get first team football because they deserve it, not because there is a forced quota.
Quotas don't improve players, they dilute quality.
240 English players = League 2 quality making up the numbers.
-------------------------------------
You assume this. But actually the huge drop in quality you insinuate is probably only relevant for the top 5/6 clubs. As I have suggested before on this thread, the rules are not specifically aimed at the top 4. The top 4 will always try to get the best players in homegrown category and the best 13 non homegrown players. It is specifically aimed clubs in mid-table and even lower leagues where English players are frozen out because they don't have a mid-level market anymore. Its easier for WBA to buy a foreign player who may not even be that good, and then move him on to another foreign club whenever they want rather than waste time and effort to coach an English youngster.
The whole world or England. Which is bigger?
If you limit the players to just English you are of course limiting the supply, and also the quality.
------------------------------------
Are you serious? The premiership is made up of ENGLISH clubs and are based in ENGLAND. Why shouldn't English players have a chance at English clubs? The aim of the rules is to increase supply of English players to English clubs and stop the transfer hikes on English players that has frozen the market. Talk to any commercial director of a premiership club and they will tell you they love to build up English players in their team because it positively encourages commercial revenue.
Are you seriously advocating all foreign teams? I find it odd that you don't understand that notion of club identity in the fanbase.
Funnily enough Barcelona without Catalan players (not just Spanish) or Real Madrid without Spanish players, or Bayern Munich without German players or Milan without Italians would be laughed at and considered terrible in those countries. But we are supposed to accept it?
I am not racist or xenophobic so I am more than happy with multicultural teams.
Of course I would love players to come through the academy and be world class.
Want I don't want is the likes of Mark Randall, Kerrea Gilbert and Paul Rodgers being pushed into first team squads when they are clearly nowhere near good enough.
As for price reduction, are you serious? If you force teams to have 12 English players then English players price will go up. Not just for the best teams but all the way down the league structure.
We will just see more Jack Rodwells, Scott Sinclairs, Scott Parkers, Shaun Wright Phillips, recycled from good mid table players on the edge of the England squad, to top clubs bench warmers and then to average mid table players.
But the most interesting point is the comparison between English clubs and German and Spanish ones, who successfully use a B team to create world class players.
I totally agree with DJ on this matter.
B team leagues are needed (partnership clubs at the very least). We all fear it because some believe it will take the competitiveness out of lower clubs. nonsense the chance to play against future stars of arsenal, united, chelsea etc. would bring lots of revenue to these lower league clubs. its something we should be embracing not being scared of.
The EPL hit its peak between 2005 and 2010. 2010 the quota came in and suddenly spain and germany overtake us in europe. coincidence i think not.
When people think of the elite clubs in terms of standard they think of Barca, Real and Munich. No English club? City and Chelsea are to those clubs that Arsenal and Liverpool are to them. the difference in standard is large.
We should have at least two clubs talked about on the same level as barca, real and munich. In terms of the size of the club Liverpool and United should be there. in terms of money Chelsea and City. Why arent we because there are so many limitations from making that happen.
I believe we actually produced a better national team under the old system and this quota has actually hurt it. the new one will make our national side a scotland, ireland standard team.
Sign in if you want to comment
FA Proposals
Page 3 of 4
posted on 2/4/15
Quota came into effect in 2010. Manchester City spent £24m on Barca world class midfielder Yaya Toure, £25m on World Cup winner and world class playmaker David Silva and £26m on English workhorse James Milner.
Yet Jenius thinks increasing the demand for English players will send transfer fees plummeting?
posted on 2/4/15
It'd take donkey's years for the transfer fees for English players to plummet under this regime.
posted on 2/4/15
The only way for them to fall is if the money goes out of our game.
Which will start to happen if these plans go through.
The quality of the PL will be diluted, CL places will be lost, sponsorship money will go, TV money will fall (especially from abroad), clubs will fold and we will be left with a league no better than France of Portugal have.
Although the best English players will probably go abroad and help the national team. Maybe this is the plan... kill off the English club game for a better national team.
posted on 2/4/15
Tony Pulis hit the nail on the head: England should try to export players to other leagues. The real problem is that no foreign club wants English players because lack natural talent. English players have sold so many foreign players, yet the likes of Rooney have failed to attract any interest even from megabuck clubs like Real Madrid, Barca and PSG. At the last 2 World Cup finals (possibly more) only England had 100% home-based players, and the results showed.
posted on 2/4/15
*English clubs have sold...
posted on 2/4/15
I don't think it would get that bad, DJ.
Even with a quota the pl still has the money to attract class foreign players, and coaches, to keep the appeal high and thus the sponsorship money.
It may dilute the quality of the league, but not to the extent you are suggesting, in my opinion.
posted on 2/4/15
I don't think it's just down to natural talent, it's also because the best English players are bloody expensive.
I'm sure Rooney a few years ago would have interested many of the top clubs but to get United to sell just isn't worth it. Plus Rooney strikes me as a player that would never go abroad and didn't really need to to achieve his goals at club level.
I think people overstate the playing abroad stuff anyway. There were a few English players playing abroad in the 80's and 90's and it didn't really benefit the national team.
The last three world cup winners have all comprised of mainly players from their own league - the key players as well.
posted on 3/4/15
CL success for PL teams won't be happening...the standard of English players have never been good in comparison to Europe so why all of a sudden is it?
PL would turn into a rich man Serie A
posted on 3/4/15
Rooney never attracted the slightest interest from foreign clubs. Real Madrid overlooked him and paid massive fees and wages for Ronaldo and Bale. So I don't agree that it's a money issue. In 2013 Matthias Sammer said Rooney would not bring any value to the Bundesliga, and he is deemed England's best player atm - says it all. Which English player would hold a regular place at Barca, Madrid or Bayern Munich?
posted on 3/4/15
The defenders were as good as the Europeans. No surprise there's been a decline when Cahill and Jagielka are the best we have to offer.
How would it be a rich man's Serie A?
posted on 3/4/15
I'm not sure what the rules say on buying players at 15 from across Europe and world wide, but surely having a bigger proportion of English players, would just down the quality of PL.
What is the benefit for PL teams playing in CL competition from these rules?
posted on 3/4/15
You don't know if there was any interest in Rooney from foreign clubs. Just because an offer wasn't made doesn't mean there was no interest, it's speculation on both parts.
I'm sure there was interest from abroad for the likes of Scholes, Lampard, Gerrard et al., in the past.
And I'm not saying it's just money. English players tend not to move abroad, especially the best ones, as they are usually playing at England's biggest clubs.
More often than not the best players from a country stay at the best clubs in that country - particularly in the lucrative leagues.
At the moment there's not an English player that is good enough for the big boys, but that's not always been the case.
posted on 3/4/15
What is the benefit for PL teams playing in CL competition from these rules?
-----
None, which is why it will be rejected.
posted on 3/4/15
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 8 minutes ago
What is the benefit for PL teams playing in CL competition from these rules?
-----
None, which is why it will be rejected.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good good.
posted on 3/4/15
No it doesn't. Top clubs want top players. Their choices will be limited to top HG players for 12 players. This will be a very small pool of players whose price will be increased.
------------------------
I think you thinking in the self interest of the top 4 clubs rather than football in general.
Every club will require 12 homegrown players. So yes the Chelsea, Arsenal, Man Utd and Man City, 12 home grown players will be the best of the lot. However Hull will also require 12 homegrown, so will Blackburn, so will Watford, so West Ham etc.
That means the number of homegrown players increases across ALL clubs. The best of those will of course want to move the big 4 as happens now. But the 'supply' of those players increases which reduces transfer fees for homegrown players in the long term.
Now where do you think those homegrown players will come from? They can ONLY come from two sources. You can grow your own in your academy or you can buy from another English club. This means that the money which often went abroad will stay in the English game as used to happen in the past. This is what is meant as the balance of trade deficit in English football. At the moment too much of the money generated by football goes OUT of English football in transfer fees.
I don't think you quite understand the difference between supply and demand. To bring prices down you have to increase supply. If you increase supply you reduce the demand. Do you think Sterling will be worth so much if Liverpool had another 5 English players ready to take his place?
Basic economics.
And you want to abolish quotas? Do you know how many Spanish youngsters play football compared to English ones? They have 3 qualified coaches for every one English coach. England has all the money so they can play all the Spanish teams if they want. Arsenal were almost doing in that in the 2000s with almost all French teams. Do you know the consequence? Man Utd built teams around English players and their commercial appeal globally went up 4 times Arsenal's commercial revenue when both the teams were winning equally as much. Like it or not, fan appeal globally works around identity. And the premiership is in ENGLAND. Not in Spain or Italy or France or Germany.
posted on 3/4/15
If it is dictated that clubs need 12 HG players the demand will increase. Thus the price will increase. If a team have a decent, and in demand, player that players value will increase. If you put limits on the markets then prices will go up.
A club, no matter it's size, will want the best 12 HG players it can get. It is not just the top 4 who will desire the best players possible. Thus it will have to pay for them. You are not increasing supply, you are limiting it with quotas.
The proof is already there. Championship clubs are paying £12m for English players already.
Having 240 English players in the PL will not improve the quality of those players. But the need to have the best 240 English players will push up the prices.
More expensive doesn't equal better, meaning the ENGLAND team will not improve. And English club football will continue the downward spiral it has suffered ever since the HG quotas came about.
As for United, they were always far bigger than Arsenal globally. Absolutely nothing to do with English players. You think the likes of Butt and the Nevilles were bringing in fans from far and wide? United also dominated the PL from 92 onwards, to say Arsenal were winning equally as much is wrong. What is it 13 or 14 titles to 3 in PL era ffs.
posted on 3/4/15
Do you think Sterling will be worth so much if Liverpool had another 5 English players ready to take his place?
----
Also, this statement
Sterling is 'worth so much' because he is England's bright young thing. Liverpool don't want to lose him, and a number of teams want him.
Liverpool also have Jordan Ibe to come in for him.
Ross Barkley will likely attract decent money offers. Not because he has proved himself consistently, but because he is English and young.
English clubs need HG players, clubs know this so when they get one who shows a bit of promise they hike the price up. This is only going to increase with the increased demand for HG players.
The supply is not magically going to increase. The players are already there, they just aren't good enough. But these not good enough players will be needed to fill quotas. They won't suddenly become good enough, though, just more expensive.
posted on 3/4/15
Tony Pulis talking sense on the matter
posted on 3/4/15
Although the best English players will probably go abroad and help the national team. Maybe this is the plan... kill off the English club game for a better national team.
I entirely agree with DJ. To be perfectly honest, I'm not really bothered about the English national team if it's a choice between that or a top-class EPL. England just doesn't produce enough top players, and that has little to do with 'foreigners'.
posted on 3/4/15
DJ
posted on 3/4/15
You are not increasing supply, you are limiting it with quotas.
--------------------------------------------
How are you limiting it? You are prescribing 4 more homegrown players than now. You are increasing the supply.
Now teams will have 12 players as opposed to 8. 12 > 8. And if you abolished quotas you are going to have 0 homegrown players. You said it your self 240 English players in the premier league as opposed to how many now? Probably abt 40/50 because 18 year old foreign players are considered homegrown when they are not!
Where do you think these homegrown players are going to come from? Academies and the lower leagues. The money stays within England.
How is the quality of English players going to improve if they are not getting a chance to play alongside the best? This is not the same argument that was used in 1995-2005 when the best players came to England but the 18-21 year olds were mostly English. Now clubs are full of foreign players disguised as homegrown and English players are not getting a chance.
Pulis, Allyrdce, Wenger etc will always prefer the old system because they can buy of the self and have to do little developing or coaching. Let them earn their corn and actually improve players.
posted on 3/4/15
The whole world or England. Which is bigger?
If you limit the players to just English you are of course limiting the supply, and also the quality.
240 English players = League 2 quality making up the numbers.
Forcing English players into the PL doesn't magically make them good enough.
A future of Gavin Hoyte, Justin Hoyte, Mark Randall, Craig Eastmond, Sanchez Watt etc etc being PL players just to make up quotas is not improving the England team.
Improve youth football, bring in B teams or at least partnership clubs where youths can get first team experience without having to leave the first class training set ups, improve the transition from youth to first team. Get players to a standard wherein they get first team football because they deserve it, not because there is a forced quota.
Quotas don't improve players, they dilute quality.
posted on 3/4/15
240 English players = League 2 quality making up the numbers.
-------------------------------------
You assume this. But actually the huge drop in quality you insinuate is probably only relevant for the top 5/6 clubs. As I have suggested before on this thread, the rules are not specifically aimed at the top 4. The top 4 will always try to get the best players in homegrown category and the best 13 non homegrown players. It is specifically aimed clubs in mid-table and even lower leagues where English players are frozen out because they don't have a mid-level market anymore. Its easier for WBA to buy a foreign player who may not even be that good, and then move him on to another foreign club whenever they want rather than waste time and effort to coach an English youngster.
The whole world or England. Which is bigger?
If you limit the players to just English you are of course limiting the supply, and also the quality.
------------------------------------
Are you serious? The premiership is made up of ENGLISH clubs and are based in ENGLAND. Why shouldn't English players have a chance at English clubs? The aim of the rules is to increase supply of English players to English clubs and stop the transfer hikes on English players that has frozen the market. Talk to any commercial director of a premiership club and they will tell you they love to build up English players in their team because it positively encourages commercial revenue.
Are you seriously advocating all foreign teams? I find it odd that you don't understand that notion of club identity in the fanbase.
Funnily enough Barcelona without Catalan players (not just Spanish) or Real Madrid without Spanish players, or Bayern Munich without German players or Milan without Italians would be laughed at and considered terrible in those countries. But we are supposed to accept it?
posted on 3/4/15
I am not racist or xenophobic so I am more than happy with multicultural teams.
Of course I would love players to come through the academy and be world class.
Want I don't want is the likes of Mark Randall, Kerrea Gilbert and Paul Rodgers being pushed into first team squads when they are clearly nowhere near good enough.
As for price reduction, are you serious? If you force teams to have 12 English players then English players price will go up. Not just for the best teams but all the way down the league structure.
We will just see more Jack Rodwells, Scott Sinclairs, Scott Parkers, Shaun Wright Phillips, recycled from good mid table players on the edge of the England squad, to top clubs bench warmers and then to average mid table players.
But the most interesting point is the comparison between English clubs and German and Spanish ones, who successfully use a B team to create world class players.
posted on 3/4/15
I totally agree with DJ on this matter.
B team leagues are needed (partnership clubs at the very least). We all fear it because some believe it will take the competitiveness out of lower clubs. nonsense the chance to play against future stars of arsenal, united, chelsea etc. would bring lots of revenue to these lower league clubs. its something we should be embracing not being scared of.
The EPL hit its peak between 2005 and 2010. 2010 the quota came in and suddenly spain and germany overtake us in europe. coincidence i think not.
When people think of the elite clubs in terms of standard they think of Barca, Real and Munich. No English club? City and Chelsea are to those clubs that Arsenal and Liverpool are to them. the difference in standard is large.
We should have at least two clubs talked about on the same level as barca, real and munich. In terms of the size of the club Liverpool and United should be there. in terms of money Chelsea and City. Why arent we because there are so many limitations from making that happen.
I believe we actually produced a better national team under the old system and this quota has actually hurt it. the new one will make our national side a scotland, ireland standard team.
Page 3 of 4