FFP in the Football League; good or bad?

In my opinion it's a poor decision by the Football League.

The gap between the Premier League and the Championship is going to be absolutely massive now; despite the gap getting a lot lower in recent years. Teams like Swansea, Norwich, West Brom, Newcastle etc have all been promoted and adjusted to the Premier League easily. With relegated teams not having to abide by FFP rules in the first season down, it's going to give them a huge advantage with the parachute payments they'll receive. And if by some chance a team does manage to go up ahead of these recently relegated sides, their wage budget won't be able to compete with the rest of the league, leading to a load of teams performing like Derby.

Because of the difference in wages, promoted/relegated sides will see their players' wages have to drop and rise so drastically that it's bound to cause frictions between players and clubs.

Players will be even less loyal to football league clubs now too. If an offer came in from a Premier League club they'll be desperate to push a move through more than ever now.

The quality of football will only decrease, and the argument that it will increase competition is bullshit, as the league is already one of the most unpredictable leagues in the world.

For teams with no aspirations to get into much higher leagues, like ourselves, it makes the playing field much fairer which can only be a good thing for fair competition. So as i support Hereford United i think FFP is a great idea.

Bad for teams with large backing if you ask me (Leicester, Us, etc), as we don't turn over enough to cover all our costs at this level. Our wage bill is 92% of out turnover.

Good for those with not much cash though, as Radford said.

As Radford said its good for teams like us.

I think it's a good idea.

It's a necessary measure to stop teams from overspending, and if they do then they have to pay the price..giving the proceeds to other teams in the league.

It will make the teams who do not overspend more competitive...as they are less likely to have to compete with teams who are offering ridiculous wages.

I agree that the gap between the Premier League and Championship may rise....but it's not necessarily true. These are rules that can be broken if the team feels it's worthwhile. High wages are a big problem..and wage reductions upon relegation should be common practice. Too many relegated teams don't do it and if they don't get promoted straight away it can lead to administration.

I reckon that a team like Watford...who have already restructured our finances to make us more sustainable...added to our great youth academy will really benefit from this.

The problem is douchy teams like ManCity and Chelsea will find a way around it....if they haven't already

I'm sure we spend more than we get, we're a big club to the extent of the league. I think the sales of Lambert and Hoskins for £1m each for us has helped us greatly for spending on new players. Not sure how much we actually got out of the Sinclair deal to Chelsea and if we had any deal for future appearences, sell ons etc.

It won't be a bad thing, in the long run.

Mustangt125 wrote:The problem is douchy teams like ManCity and Chelsea will find a way around it....if they haven't already

They don't play in the football league.

Oh my bad I was skimming I suppose.

How will FFP affect the football league, isn't it only there to deny European football to big spenders like City or does it have other effects.

The Bat-Man wrote:How will FFP affect the football league, isn't it only there to deny European football to big spenders like City or does it have other effects.

Stops teams spending the money they don't have in hope of promotion to the PL. Leicester City are a prime example, they spent loads in the summer (by the leagues standards) in hope they could pay it back with promotion but they've failed to even get to the-playoffs. They'll get into debt and end up like Portsmouth.

I think.

Harrold wrote:

The Bat-Man wrote:How will FFP affect the football league, isn't it only there to deny European football to big spenders like City or does it have other effects.

Stops teams spending the money they don't have in hope of promotion to the PL. Leicester City are a prime example, they spent loads in the summer (by the leagues standards) in hope they could pay it back with promotion but they've failed to even get to the-playoffs. They'll get into debt and end up like Portsmouth.

I think.

I think he means what sanctions can be imposed could the FL block promotion?

Theo Filippo wrote:

Harrold wrote:

Stops teams spending the money they don't have in hope of promotion to the PL. Leicester City are a prime example, they spent loads in the summer (by the leagues standards) in hope they could pay it back with promotion but they've failed to even get to the-playoffs. They'll get into debt and end up like Portsmouth.

I think.

I think he means what sanctions can be imposed could the FL block promotion?

Oh, no idea.

Theo Filippo wrote:

Harrold wrote:

Stops teams spending the money they don't have in hope of promotion to the PL. Leicester City are a prime example, they spent loads in the summer (by the leagues standards) in hope they could pay it back with promotion but they've failed to even get to the-playoffs. They'll get into debt and end up like Portsmouth.

I think.

I think he means what sanctions can be imposed could the FL block promotion?

One of the sanctions is a large fine. Which kind of doesn't help.

I don't understand why telling clubs to not spend more than make is such a big problem. It seems fairly sensible really.

The Bat-Man wrote:How will FFP affect the football league, isn't it only there to deny European football to big spenders like City or does it have other effects.

http://www.football-league.co.uk/footballleaguenews/20120425/league-clubs-choose-financial-fair-play_2293334_2748233

TLDR - By 15/16 you will only be allowed to make a £2m loss. You will be allowed investment from shareholders of £3m...so effectively you can make a £5m loss.

Any additional losses carry a fine (if promoted) or a transfer embargo until you are within the rules.

The fine ranges from 1% on the first £100,000 to 100% on anything over £10m with all the proceeds going to other teams in the league who stay within the rules.

Laurencio wrote:I don't understand why telling clubs to not spend more than make is such a big problem. It seems fairly sensible really.

I do not like the idea in the top divisions.

It reduces competition completely.....meaning that only teams like the highest turnovers, crowds and worldwide brands/fanbases will be able to challenge for the title whilst staying within the rules.

If the owner can afford it and the debt is affordable, then I do not see the problem. All teams who are large now had to grow at some point...and had these rules been in place then they probably would not be the teams they are now.

Lux wrote:

The Bat-Man wrote:How will FFP affect the football league, isn't it only there to deny European football to big spenders like City or does it have other effects.

http://www.football-league.co.uk/footballleaguenews/20120425/league-clubs-choose-financial-fair-play_2293334_2748233

TLDR - By 15/16 you will only be allowed to make a £2m loss. You will be allowed investment from shareholders of £3m...so effectively you can make a £5m loss.

Any additional losses carry a fine (if promoted) or a transfer embargo until you are within the rules.

The fine ranges from 1% on the first £100,000 to 100% on anything over £10m with all the proceeds going to other teams in the league who stay within the rules.

Nice.