Danny P
Member
Registered: 20th Nov 02
Location: Cleckheaton, West Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
Within the next few years.
Disgusting 
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
why so?
The players are the ones who bring in the fans. They bring in the sponsors. They bring in the TV audiences. And they sell the merchandise. So they are entitled to a decent share of the money the clubs bring in.
The market is allowing so much money to come into the game which in turn allows the players these wages.
|
Danny P
Member
Registered: 20th Nov 02
Location: Cleckheaton, West Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
Becuase all this money is ruining what football is, a working mans game.
At moment your right, sponsors, TV money, etc are keeping clubs alive, what happens when all this stops (and at some point its going to stop) then ticket prices will rise to keep the income enough to keep paying players such high amounts, people aint going to be able to afford to pay these prices, and then what are the clubs going to do? They will be fucked. They wont be able to run, and eventually go out of business
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
no, the money will never stop coming in. That would only happen if people stop watching it, so becomes less of an attractive option for TV companies, or other companies to sponsor teams/games. We are the ones driving the amount of money in football today.
It will however slow down and reach a peak soon enough as the current globalisation of the brands reach everyone, after which it will level itself out for a good few years and then start all over again.
|
Danny P
Member
Registered: 20th Nov 02
Location: Cleckheaton, West Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
Well soon enough I predict that people will stop watching it, as its getting daft now (IMO anyways)
Might not effect the big clubs, like Liverpool, Man Utd, Arsenal, because they will always have support from all over the world, but teams like Blackbun, Middlesbourgh, etc, those sort of clubs will soon suffer. They will have to spend big to start to compeate with the bigger teams, and they dont have massive fan bases within England to back this spening up. If the TV people pull money out, then they simply wont have the income to keep these players on the books.
Thats how I see it anyways.
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
They don't deserve it, for a footballer to earn more in a week than a tradesman knocking his pan in 7 days a week ovr a year is scandalous.
Here's an idea channel the extra revenue into reducing the ticket prices andgive football back to the fans.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Danny P
Well soon enough I predict that people will stop watching it, as its getting daft now (IMO anyways)
Might not effect the big clubs, like Liverpool, Man Utd, Arsenal, because they will always have support from all over the world, but teams like Blackbun, Middlesbourgh, etc, those sort of clubs will soon suffer. They will have to spend big to start to compeate with the bigger teams, and they dont have massive fan bases within England to back this spening up. If the TV people pull money out, then they simply wont have the income to keep these players on the books.
Thats how I see it anyways.
But the TV people wont pull out. There are enough big clubs now (top 4, Spurs, Man City, Newcastle, Everton, Villa, West Ham, etc.) who make it worth while for them, regardless of if people watch clubs like Blackburn.
And those kind of clubs will be getting enough money from the TV deals to spend a decent amount of players and compete for the places upto 4th (3rd and 4th included for some of the teams).
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hammer
They don't deserve it, for a footballer to earn more in a week than a tradesman knocking his pan in 7 days a week ovr a year is scandalous.
Here's an idea channel the extra revenue into reducing the ticket prices andgive football back to the fans.
I agree they should pass more onto fans and lower ticket prices, but again its just simple supply and demand ecconomics thats pushing them up.
|
Danny P
Member
Registered: 20th Nov 02
Location: Cleckheaton, West Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
quote:
Originally posted by Danny P
Well soon enough I predict that people will stop watching it, as its getting daft now (IMO anyways)
Might not effect the big clubs, like Liverpool, Man Utd, Arsenal, because they will always have support from all over the world, but teams like Blackbun, Middlesbourgh, etc, those sort of clubs will soon suffer. They will have to spend big to start to compeate with the bigger teams, and they dont have massive fan bases within England to back this spening up. If the TV people pull money out, then they simply wont have the income to keep these players on the books.
Thats how I see it anyways.
But the TV people wont pull out. There are enough big clubs now (top 4, Spurs, Man City, Newcastle, Everton, Villa, West Ham, etc.) who make it worth while for them, regardless of if people watch clubs like Blackburn.
And those kind of clubs will be getting enough money from the TV deals to spend a decent amount of players and compete for the places upto 4th (3rd and 4th included for some of the teams).
So basically what your saying is the rest of the Premiership have to make do with finishing 4th at best 
If thats the case then, the "big 4" should just fuck off to some EuroSuper League and give the rest of the country a chance to win something every now & again.
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
You're right it is the economics of the game and while someone is willing to pay them and no cap is introduced it'll continue to rise.
I just don't see how there is any fathomable way even the greatest player on earth can earn almost a quarter of a million pounds every single week for being good at kicking a bit of rubber filled with air.
I doubt they'd even be able to justify it themselves, it's mind boggling amounts of money.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Danny P
So basically what your saying is the rest of the Premiership have to make do with finishing 4th at best
If thats the case then, the "big 4" should just fuck off to some EuroSuper League and give the rest of the country a chance to win something every now & again.
No, far from it!
Im saying they can happily go about making a profit and finshing outside of the top 4 if they so wish. If they want to push forward and break into the top clubs, as in any market in this economy, they'd have to take the risk and invest money.
Its not our fault we are the best teams in the country, surely its upto the others to step up and try to break into this 'elite group' so to speak. I mean teams like Newcastle, Spurs, etc. bring in just as much money as we have been in the past, and spend just as much, but have been poorly run and managed so not got near us.
|
Carl
Member
Registered: 9th May 04
Location: Jimmy Bennett's la la land.
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hammer
They don't deserve it, for a footballer to earn more in a week than a tradesman knocking his pan in 7 days a week ovr a year is scandalous.
I agree but was thinking more along the lines of Doctors etc.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hammer
You're right it is the economics of the game and while someone is willing to pay them and no cap is introduced it'll continue to rise.
I just don't see how there is any fathomable way even the greatest player on earth can earn almost a quarter of a million pounds every single week for being good at kicking a bit of rubber filled with air.
I doubt they'd even be able to justify it themselves, it's mind boggling amounts of money.
its justifyable because they have a skill that cant be taught (you can learn to play football, but you cant learn to be a top player like Gerrard, Ronaldo, etc.), and the economy brings in huge amounts to this market due to their football.
Its the same in any market in this country, and the vast majority of the developed world.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Carl
quote:
Originally posted by Hammer
They don't deserve it, for a footballer to earn more in a week than a tradesman knocking his pan in 7 days a week ovr a year is scandalous.
I agree but was thinking more along the lines of Doctors etc.
but the same goes for Doctors.
The ones who choose to work for the NHS, etc. dont get paid huge amounts (and granted they do great work but they dont bring in huge money) where as the very skilled ones who lead certain fields can bring in millions upon millions a year.
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
quote:
Originally posted by Hammer
You're right it is the economics of the game and while someone is willing to pay them and no cap is introduced it'll continue to rise.
I just don't see how there is any fathomable way even the greatest player on earth can earn almost a quarter of a million pounds every single week for being good at kicking a bit of rubber filled with air.
I doubt they'd even be able to justify it themselves, it's mind boggling amounts of money.
its justifyable because they have a skill that cant be taught (you can learn to play football, but you cant learn to be a top player like Gerrard, Ronaldo, etc.), and the economy brings in huge amounts to this market due to their football.
Its the same in any market in this country, and the vast majority of the developed world.
So your saying the money is there from television revenue streams to justify players being paid these sums of money? Why then do you need the Gillets, Abramovichs, Glazers, Magnussons and Lerners to supplement teams accounts?
The fact of the matter is the debts, however managable they are, were avoidable if the players weren't going for silly transfer fees and then paid a pretty penny week after week.
It's the fact 1 team, whoever they may be, are willing to pay 100k a week that means every other team that wants to compete on a level playing field has to pay the same and it's creating chasms of debt in club accounts across Europe.
|
strick206
Member
Registered: 12th Apr 07
Location: Wigan Drives:Integra DC5
User status: Offline
|
yes united are in a lot of debt, but they are financially stable, paying it off and still able to spend money on players,
as much as i dont agree with the glazers, they havent fucked the club up
chelsea on the otherhand, are running at a huge loss because they have a billionnaire owner, who just supplements them and there income cannot cover the money he puts in, thats whats ruining football
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hammer
So your saying the money is there from television revenue streams to justify players being paid these sums of money? Why then do you need the Gillets, Abramovichs, Glazers, Magnussons and Lerners to supplement teams accounts?
The fact of the matter is the debts, however managable they are, were avoidable if the players weren't going for silly transfer fees and then paid a pretty penny week after week.
It's the fact 1 team, whoever they may be, are willing to pay 100k a week that means every other team that wants to compete on a level playing field has to pay the same and it's creating chasms of debt in club accounts across Europe.
Yes, because these players bring in the money to the clubs, and bring in the huge amounts of fans to watch a good club (hence good players) play their football.
The problem comes from clubs offering too much to players, more than they bring in (or hope to bring in). If they arent a big enough club to pay a top top player what he can get elsewhere then, other than for loyalty (your Carra types) why shouldnt they move to another club offering more. If they wiosh to offer him money that will put them in debt then thats a management decision, but not a fault of the players.
The clubs DONT have to pay it. Life ISNT a level playing field. As I said above its the same in all market places, and if you want the best you pay for the best (hence headhunting in most industries, offering better salaries to move to their firm, etc. etc.).
If clubs do want to compete and break into the top teams then they have to take the risk and invest, sometimes it goes well and othertimes it goes bad...but thats the risk.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by strick206
yes united are in a lot of debt, but they are financially stable, paying it off and still able to spend money on players,
as much as i dont agree with the glazers, they havent fucked the club up
chelsea on the otherhand, are running at a huge loss because they have a billionnaire owner, who just supplements them and there income cannot cover the money he puts in, thats whats ruining football
exactly. Even though I hate to admit it, Utd are taking a risk at investing money and causing huge debt but are doing well from it. It could of easily gone the opposite way.
Chelsea are in a whole different league as arent even run as a business, just a play thing.
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
quote:
Originally posted by Hammer
So your saying the money is there from television revenue streams to justify players being paid these sums of money? Why then do you need the Gillets, Abramovichs, Glazers, Magnussons and Lerners to supplement teams accounts?
The fact of the matter is the debts, however managable they are, were avoidable if the players weren't going for silly transfer fees and then paid a pretty penny week after week.
It's the fact 1 team, whoever they may be, are willing to pay 100k a week that means every other team that wants to compete on a level playing field has to pay the same and it's creating chasms of debt in club accounts across Europe.
Yes, because these players bring in the money to the clubs, and bring in the huge amounts of fans to watch a good club (hence good players) play their football.
The problem comes from clubs offering too much to players, more than they bring in (or hope to bring in). If they arent a big enough club to pay a top top player what he can get elsewhere then, other than for loyalty (your Carra types) why shouldnt they move to another club offering more. If they wiosh to offer him money that will put them in debt then thats a management decision, but not a fault of the players.
The clubs DONT have to pay it. Life ISNT a level playing field. As I said above its the same in all market places, and if you want the best you pay for the best (hence headhunting in most industries, offering better salaries to move to their firm, etc. etc.).
If clubs do want to compete and break into the top teams then they have to take the risk and invest, sometimes it goes well and othertimes it goes bad...but thats the risk.
I'd never suggest it is the fault of the players or that i'd turn down 200k a week based on any moral high ground i'd be standing on if i was in their position.
It's just my own belief that they don't deserve 30 or 40 grand a week never mind 200, they are in about as priviliged a position as you can get doing their hobby and becoming idols and millionaires into the bargain.
|
strick206
Member
Registered: 12th Apr 07
Location: Wigan Drives:Integra DC5
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
quote:
Originally posted by strick206
yes united are in a lot of debt, but they are financially stable, paying it off and still able to spend money on players,
as much as i dont agree with the glazers, they havent fucked the club up
chelsea on the otherhand, are running at a huge loss because they have a billionnaire owner, who just supplements them and there income cannot cover the money he puts in, thats whats ruining football
exactly. Even though I hate to admit it, Utd are taking a risk at investing money and causing huge debt but are doing well from it. It could of easily gone the opposite way.
Chelsea are in a whole different league as arent eve
not run as a business, just a play thing.
id still much prefer united to be a PLC, theyd still have been able to buy who they have if they was still one, as with the extra money for a champs league run, winning the league and also the huge tv deal next year, they could still have spent 50million imo
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hammer
I'd never suggest it is the fault of the players or that i'd turn down 200k a week based on any moral high ground i'd be standing on if i was in their position.
It's just my own belief that they don't deserve 30 or 40 grand a week never mind 200, they are in about as priviliged a position as you can get doing their hobby and becoming idols and millionaires into the bargain.
No I do agree with you totally. Im just saying that it comes down to US!
We are the ones putting the money in, watching the games, buying the sponsors products, etc. And this causes the great influx of money into the sport and allows the money to be spent on wages and transfer fees.
After all the real reason players cost so much isnt because they can win you titles. Its because playing well puts them in the spot light, and that sells merchandise and brings in the money....who from....us again!
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by strick206
id still much prefer united to be a PLC, theyd still have been able to buy who they have if they was still one, as with the extra money for a champs league run, winning the league and also the huge tv deal next year, they could still have spent 50million imo
possibly true. But then again who knows if the money would of been freed up as easily as it seems they have for you.
I still dont know why they havent come out and done a charm offensive now you've won the league and spending money. They could easily go from hate figures to being loved but seem to have missed a trick!
|
strick206
Member
Registered: 12th Apr 07
Location: Wigan Drives:Integra DC5
User status: Offline
|
i personally think there planning to sell up,
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by strick206
i personally think there planning to sell up,
if the rumours of the Chinese consortium are tur then they had the opportunity.
Unless they plan to be the first billion pound club  Probably need to float for that sort of money, as fans emotions will take control and buy up shares for silly money.
|
strick206
Member
Registered: 12th Apr 07
Location: Wigan Drives:Integra DC5
User status: Offline
|
i wouldnt mind having a billionaire owner, but one that runs the club as a business too, not a toy, it just gives us the safety net if we ever have trouble, although i doubt we will
|
