Football 16-17

[DareToDibble]

31 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Huddersfield supporters who have held season tickets since 2009 will be able to buy one for £100 next season. Around £5 a game.

Pre 2009 have been promised a free renewal for 1 year!

Brilliant!

Absolutely fantastic from Huddersfield!

[Gucci Piggy]

5 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

Two penalty shoot wins for Huddersfield! They deserved it on the day to be fair. It's good to see two fresh teams coming up in Brighton and Huddersfield. I fancy they will both do well. 

Huddersfield scored 56 and conceded 58 in the Championship this season, finishing 5th, and won the play offs via three draws and two penalty shoot outs. They're fucked.

As a Yorkshireman, with Huddersfield being my favourite Yorkshire team besides Doncaster (who I support), I'm very glad they got promoted, but they're fucked.

Unless they buy a lot of players.

Edited May 29, 2017 by Will-2609

[CRW5252]

10 minutes ago, Will-2609 said:

Huddersfield scored 56 and conceded 58 in the Championship this season, finishing 5th, and won the play offs via three draws and two penalty shoot outs. They're fucked.

As a Yorkshireman, with Huddersfield being my favourite Yorkshire team besides Doncaster (who I support), I'm very glad they got promoted, but they're fucked.

Unless they buy a lot of players.

I've seen that said about teams before that on the way up and then they end up doing well. Of course they will need signings but they have a great manager which is fundamental. It'll be interesting, I just have a feeling they will surprise a lot of people.

[LJS]

It's the Terry & Totti show...a gulf in class perhaps.

 

[pink_triangle]

7 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

 but they have a great manager which is fundamental. It'll be interesting, I just have a feeling they will surprise a lot of people.

Playing devils advocate, but is one season enough to make a judgment on someone's managerial ability. 

[mjsell]

13 hours ago, Wooderson said:

On the point of the wage cap - the NFL has caught my eye consistently in recent years due to their overt and unapologetic controls on wages/recruitement. Granted it is a walled-garden, but it will ensure the survival of their league. If this spending goes on unchecked much longer the "Premiership" is dead.

 

12 hours ago, The Nal said:

League teams play against league teams. NFL teams only play against other NFL teams.

The Premier League teams are looking to compete with the Madrids and PSGs of the world. Start capping Premier League transfers and wages and the league is over very quickly. 

Sorry for being late to this discussion (it's been a busy weekend), I'm aware it has moved on since here. But I would just like to point out a couple of things on this.

The NFL salary cap does not cap the amount you can pay a single player. It is a team-wide budget, which still allows teams to go big with contracts to the top tier players. I realise the closed nature of the NFL is completely different to that of football, and there would be no like for like system. But I feel that when mentioned in relation to football, a salary cap is often seen to have to be on individual players when that wouldn't need to be necessary. In this system, big players could still demand the big wages, but it would perhaps increase the use and importance of youth players, which might not be the worst thing. It would however, if it's anything like the NFL, put even more power in the top players hands. 

 

[Wooderson]

9 hours ago, mjsell said:

 

Sorry for being late to this discussion (it's been a busy weekend), I'm aware it has moved on since here. But I would just like to point out a couple of things on this.

The NFL salary cap does not cap the amount you can pay a single player. It is a team-wide budget, which still allows teams to go big with contracts to the top tier players. I realise the closed nature of the NFL is completely different to that of football, and there would be no like for like system. But I feel that when mentioned in relation to football, a salary cap is often seen to have to be on individual players when that wouldn't need to be necessary. In this system, big players could still demand the big wages, but it would perhaps increase the use and importance of youth players, which might not be the worst thing. It would however, if it's anything like the NFL, put even more power in the top players hands. 

 

Yes, agreed of course. That trade off was implicit in my thinking - should have made it overt like you say above. If there was a continent-wide cap on salary, for arguments sake 100m annual total salary, this may not even really bite for most clubs for half a decade.

The usual boors on here yesterday don't interest me, but one or two made comments that surprised me. Its clear there has been a effort at a UEFA level to reign in spending. This has failed of course, but the focus was/is there. This is a confirmed issue. To be blasee and fob it of makes you look way out of touch and unaware of the long term impact on the game. Money is the enemy of the game IMO. Always has been. This isnt simply a case of an LFC fan with sour grapes. It is simply stating the obvious - don't come on here next season blathering on about "crucial game for XYZ", "huge contest". These are mismatches from the off. Competition is between 3 teams. Anyone else getting a result is a fluke.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, Wooderson said:

Yes, agreed of course. That trade off was implicit in my thinking - should have made it overt like you say above. If there was a continent-wide cap on salary, for arguments sake 100m annual total salary, this may not even really bite for most clubs for half a decade.

The usual boors on here yesterday don't interest me, but one or two made comments that surprised me. Its clear there has been a effort at a UEFA level to reign in spending. This has failed of course, but the focus was/is there. This is a confirmed issue. To be blasee and fob it of makes you look way out of touch and unaware of the long term impact on the game. Money is the enemy of the game IMO. Always has been. This isnt simply a case of an LFC fan with sour grapes. It is simply stating the obvious - don't come on here next season blathering on about "crucial game for XYZ", "huge contest". These are mismatches from the off. Competition is between 3 teams. Anyone else getting a result is a fluke.

So when the big teams were trying to pus through financial fair play, do you think it was for the integrity of the game, or to look after themselves? As I have said for all the moans about city/chelsea was football better in the 90s/early 00s when Arsenal and Man Utd were trading titles living within their means. Is football worse off from having the likes of Wigan and Bournemouth who would never have been able to rise up without unfair financial advantages over their opponents.

If you restrict earnings of footballer here then they end up going elsewhere. Make it a Europe agreement and they go to China.  While as a neutral it wouldnt bother me much if there was an exodus in terms of the premiership matches.  An often forgotten consequence is that it would cause a move of British players up the pyramid which would worsen the quality of football at the lower levels where my main interest lies.

[TheGayTent]

Wenger has signed his new contract 

[Wooderson]

4 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

So when the big teams were trying to pus through financial fair play, do you think it was for the integrity of the game, or to look after themselves? As I have said for all the moans about city/chelsea was football better in the 90s/early 00s when Arsenal and Man Utd were trading titles living within their means. Is football worse off from having the likes of Wigan and Bournemouth who would never have been able to rise up without unfair financial advantages over their opponents.

If you restrict earnings of footballer here then they end up going elsewhere. Make it a Europe agreement and they go to China.  While as a neutral it wouldnt bother me much if there was an exodus in terms of the premiership matches.  An often forgotten consequence is that it would cause a move of British players up the pyramid which would worsen the quality of football at the lower levels where my main interest lies.

Fine, remove all financial restrictions then.  If China is such a draw for today's pros maybe I'm interested in the wrong sport.

Lets enable the top 3 to build squads that dwarf the rest, ace. But then don't come on here (not you specifically mate) in Oct/Nov and talking about crunch ties outside of the 3 teams with no financial limits. The league will soon start to resemble Spain on Scotland.

[TheGayTent]

Lambert gone from Wolves, and the ex Porto and Valencia boss, Nuno Espirito Santo lined up by the sounds of it. 

Not sure about these Chinese owners....

Edited May 30, 2017 by TheGayTent

[The Nal]

2 hours ago, TheGayTent said:

Wenger has signed his new contract 

Thats surprising. Will Sanchez and Ozil hang about?

[TheGayTent]

Just now, The Nal said:

Thats surprising

Sarcasm presumably 

[mjsell]

2 minutes ago, The Nal said:

Thats surprising. Will Sanchez and Ozil hang about?

I'm hoping the fact it is a two year deal not one is because of the effect that might have on Sanchez/Ozil.

I'm okay with the extension for the time being. Like I have said before, weirdly, as soon as Wenger failed to get top 4 he actually made his position more secure in my eyes. Theres no managers that I can think of that are available, would come to Arsenal with no champions league, and be able to attract the profile of player that I'm hoping Wenger still can. I'm hoping his reputation in Europe is still good enough to sway a few players that might not want to move to a team in EL not CL. It will mean he's going to need to open his cheque book a bit more now though to seal the deal, he wont like that.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, Wooderson said:

Fine, remove all financial restrictions then.  If China is such a draw for today's pros maybe I'm interested in the wrong sport.

Lets enable the top 3 to build squads that dwarf the rest, ace. But then don't come on here (not you specifically mate) in Oct/Nov and talking about crunch ties outside of the 3 teams with no financial limits. The league will soon start to resemble Spain on Scotland.

When I first started watching football Liverpool were winning the league most seasons, I never thought about it at the time but they were probably spending more money to achieve this. Im not sure football has changed as much as some make out. In fact I would that the top 6 of the premiership is more competitive than is has been for years. 

[TheGayTent]

13 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

When I first started watching football Liverpool were winning the league most seasons, I never thought about it at the time but they were probably spending more money to achieve this. Im not sure football has changed as much as some make out. In fact I would that the top 6 of the premiership is more competitive than is has been for years. 

The gap has grown exponentially. 

[pink_triangle]

12 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

The gap has grown exponentially. 

I meant in terms of teams who could challenge for the title. I would say there are more than there has been for quite a period of time. I would agree however  that the gap between these teams and the group below has grown. Thats why I find the idea of being a supporter of a perennial mid table premiership team quite unappealing.  At least as a west ham fan you know you will get the odd relegation to make things interesting!

[TheGayTent]

20 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Thats why I find the idea of being a supporter of a perennial mid table premiership team quite unappealing.  

You don't choose your club as well you know. 

Besides, are there (m)any perennial mid table sides? 

[sdvruxk]

Is everyone forgetting the fact Leicester won it last year? 

Obviously a rarity but it still happened. 

[pink_triangle]

5 hours ago, mjsell said:

I'm hoping the fact it is a two year deal not one is because of the effect that might have on Sanchez/Ozil.

Theres no managers that I can think of that are available, would come to Arsenal with no champions league, and be able to attract the profile of player that I'm hoping Wenger still can. 

Im not sure the lack of champions league is a huge factor, I'm struggling to think of a single manager who I think would have been keen to join Champions league Arsenal, but not Europa league Arsenal.

To me availability is a much bigger factor. Most of the top clubs look like they will stick with their manager while a lack of international tournament also restricts candidates.

[thetime]

Fair play to arsenal and wenger, you shouldn't be sacking managers after they win the FA Cup. 

[DareToDibble]

I must say the meltdown of Arsenal fans that I was expecting doesn't seem to have materialised! Guess we'll see if it's still the case at the end of the transfer window.

I do think Wenger was right when he called out some of the fans and said they way he was treated was disgusting at times. 

[Hugh Jass]

On 30/05/2017 at 5:04 PM, TheGayTent said:

You don't choose your club as well you know. 

Besides, are there (m)any perennial mid table sides? 

Not really anymore. Every club below Everton is only a few bad decisions away from relegation.

Edited May 31, 2017 by Hugh Jass

[eastynh]

On 2017-5-30 at 10:34 AM, pink_triangle said:

So when the big teams were trying to pus through financial fair play, do you think it was for the integrity of the game, or to look after themselves? As I have said for all the moans about city/chelsea was football better in the 90s/early 00s when Arsenal and Man Utd were trading titles living within their means. Is football worse off from having the likes of Wigan and Bournemouth who would never have been able to rise up without unfair financial advantages over their opponents.

If you restrict earnings of footballer here then they end up going elsewhere. Make it a Europe agreement and they go to China.  While as a neutral it wouldnt bother me much if there was an exodus in terms of the premiership matches.  An often forgotten consequence is that it would cause a move of British players up the pyramid which would worsen the quality of football at the lower levels where my main interest lies.

They were trying to push through financial fair play for their own benefit and nothing else. Manchester City have zero  debt, Manchester United have the best part of 500 million pounds in debt. Which situation would you prefer to be in and which is the best for the good of the game? Yet Manchester City were penalised while Manchester United were not. There was nothing fair about FFP, it was there to cement the status of the established elite. What they did not count on was City's exponential growth and the vast revenue streams becoming available to premier league clubs. Because of this FFP actually prohibited a lot of the elite clubs (mainly the Italian giants of Milan). They could no longer compete with mid table premier league teams, never mind the top ones. Hence FFP was silently been forgotten about. Is it even in use? Either way it does not seem to be a consideration to the premier league teams. It was a disgusting attempt at establishing a cartel.

Now that has failed they are attempting this ludicrous scheme where past winners of the champions league get extra Co-efficenct points. So United even though they have been abysmal recently and failed to qualify for the champions league on a number of ocassions will actually be seeded higher than City. It is not about fair, it is about the football authorities maximising revenue streams. It is only a matter of time before your Milans, Uniteds and Liverpools are given invitations when they fail to qualify.

The only way it is fair would be to introduce a salary cap and transfer fee cap. That will never happen though.

[Wooderson]

City fans bragging about lack of debt. Hahahahaha