Quote:
|
Originally Posted by !@#$%!
the effectiveness of the so-call financial fair play. i understand the good intentions behind it, but i don't know that they actually work.
|
They do work, the problem is they only apply to teams that work at a loss; ignoring debt altogether. The big new-money teams can work at a loss because of the wealth of their owners while the big establishment teams can take out massive loans against their blue chip status. FFP would be a lot harder to argue against if it tackled loss
and debt. So in that sense I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of FFP, just the details of it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by !@#$%!
a rising tide lifts all boats.
|
It does, which is part of the problem. When the top-line was around 100m, players could roughly value themselves in relation to that, so it makes sense that say Lukaku is worth 70m, but to double that top line effectively means all players' values will be recalculated in accordance. Good news if you're a smaller club cashing in on an in demand youngster but that money will itself become worth a lot less when trying to replace them. (Although in fairness, that was the case when the top line was 100m.) In terms of buying talent, though, a team like West Ham might be in a position to really stretch itself for a player priced at around 40-50m, but if that same player suddenly gets re-valued at closer to 100m, he's no longer an option. Most clubs, even those in rich leagues like the Prem, just don't have that kind of money and struggle to compete in the transfer market as it is, this will only make it even more difficult.