The Banter Thread
- Thread starter CliffyBiro
- Start date
- Status
I read today that along with West Ham Spuds will also try and get the Olympic stadium to play in after the olympics are finished.
It wont stop as long as you have these super rich guys buying up clubs ie Chelski and now City.
When will it though? He's not going to stop spending unless he gets bored one day and runs away to buy a baseball team or something.
And the fringe players won't leave there because they are all more than happy to sit on the bench earning £XXX,XXX a week, they've proven they're nothing but greedy ***** by moving to MCFC in the first place.
It's not a good thing but limiting expenditure to revenue would imo be very bad for the game. It'd completely stifle the small amount of competition in the league as no clubs would have a chance at all of competing with the current rich clubs with high turnovers. Without the vast amount of money injected into Chelsea we'd have probably been looking at a league completely dominated by Man Utd.
I disagree, bringing in some kind of regulations can only be good for the game. Football is in a dire, dire state, people tend to just ignore it though for some reason. It can't get that much worse than it is now, it's time to stop glossing over the fact that nearly all English clubs are in a massive mess.
And paying huge amounts of tax.
I just read that City's wage bill equates to nearly £700k a day. That is just astonishing.
Trouble is, how do you stop that, or even it out a bit? Pretty tough to easily fix.
Aye, this does worry me a bit. That even with forced spending, you'd still have the big team miles ahead, purely on the basis of being able to get more fans in, charge more per game, and sell more shirts worldwide.
Trouble is, how do you stop that, or even it out a bit? Pretty tough to easily fix.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
A day? And they're just a ****ing football club! :/
As sad as it is - we need a more American style level playing field (somehow..). It's football's one negative point, that the richest club can get the trophies and dynasties are built not from players but from being able to outspend or out pay (wages) with respect to the rest of the competition.
As sad as it is - we need a more American style level playing field (somehow..). It's football's one negative point, that the richest club can get the trophies and dynasties are built not from players but from being able to outspend or out pay (wages) with respect to the rest of the competition.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
They'll no doubt all receive a pay rise should they qualify for the Champ's League and/or get a few trophies.
The trouble is, the American style system of sports team funding is actually so socialist I think people over here would choke on their prawn sandwiches if you ever suggested applying it.
Some kind of universal set wage structure would be great. All teams in a division basically given the same amount to spend. All managers essentially on a level playing field. A team's ability to find the right players and play them together properly placed over how much they can pay to get the best in.
Trouble is, are any of the big players now going to allow that? Would any of the boards? I very much doubt it.
Some kind of universal set wage structure would be great. All teams in a division basically given the same amount to spend. All managers essentially on a level playing field. A team's ability to find the right players and play them together properly placed over how much they can pay to get the best in.
Trouble is, are any of the big players now going to allow that? Would any of the boards? I very much doubt it.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
Also don't forget where there's a will there's a way, if a team wanted a player but could only pay him £30k a week, then they might buy him a house or something. I suppose players getting so much money over here mean they rarely venture elsewhere to make money. Sure, Henry on Gillette adverts or Rooney on Gatorade (??) are two examples but there isn't many others. It's nice not having to see Kevin Davis' on Thompsons' waterseal tins.
It's somewhat almost funny that FIFA are so eager to create or allow cash cows such as the Champions League and Premier League respectively, yet they then set aside rules for financial management.
It's somewhat almost funny that FIFA are so eager to create or allow cash cows such as the Champions League and Premier League respectively, yet they then set aside rules for financial management.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Arsenals issue is wages, and increasing wages more than spending power, and Wengers pretty idiotic "it doesn't count if I spend more than 17p " ideas.
Problem is, we're probably paying Djourou 30k a week or more now, Denilson, Diaby probably on 40k + by now, Gallas was a huge wage earner, though had experience no one else offered. Almunia will be on a decent wage now, Rosicky, Eduardo, Vela, Bendtner, RVP on a very high wage, Theo on a VERY high wage considering his utter crapness and most of those guys barely ever play. Wengers reluctant to get rid of players he doesn't use and replace them with "work horse" players who aren't "potentials" and don't take a huge wage.
I really like Rosicky, he hasn't shown his first year form, and frankly we've wasted what must be 10mil + on him by now, Vela's wage is being racked up for a guy that doesn't play, Diaby, Denilson, Song I just don't understand at all, we need to sell Song and add his wages towards a proper DM, sell Theo and Rosicky, buy a single actual winger who isn't always injured and will cost half the wages of those two together yet could provide the team with more games a season than both combined.
We're wasting what cash we do spend on wages. Chelsea don't seem scared of offloading anyone they think isn't worth the wages, and its bringing down their losses dramatically compared to 3-4 years ago, yet they are still winning things. Pay players you play, get rid of those you don't.
The amount of youth players we have on 2-10k a week is far far higher than any other club in the league and that add's up, so far 2-3 have come through, the vast majority we get at 17-18 almost ready for the first team. The problem is how many 17-22 year old players who clearly aren't close to good enough who take up millions upon millions a year all together, rather than ditch them. Simpson, the Hoytes, Djourou, Randall and 80% of our youths clearly have no future at the club, we could ditch them all and be able to afford 3-4 actual starters that could be the difference between 4th winning the league.
Problem is, we're probably paying Djourou 30k a week or more now, Denilson, Diaby probably on 40k + by now, Gallas was a huge wage earner, though had experience no one else offered. Almunia will be on a decent wage now, Rosicky, Eduardo, Vela, Bendtner, RVP on a very high wage, Theo on a VERY high wage considering his utter crapness and most of those guys barely ever play. Wengers reluctant to get rid of players he doesn't use and replace them with "work horse" players who aren't "potentials" and don't take a huge wage.
I really like Rosicky, he hasn't shown his first year form, and frankly we've wasted what must be 10mil + on him by now, Vela's wage is being racked up for a guy that doesn't play, Diaby, Denilson, Song I just don't understand at all, we need to sell Song and add his wages towards a proper DM, sell Theo and Rosicky, buy a single actual winger who isn't always injured and will cost half the wages of those two together yet could provide the team with more games a season than both combined.
We're wasting what cash we do spend on wages. Chelsea don't seem scared of offloading anyone they think isn't worth the wages, and its bringing down their losses dramatically compared to 3-4 years ago, yet they are still winning things. Pay players you play, get rid of those you don't.
The amount of youth players we have on 2-10k a week is far far higher than any other club in the league and that add's up, so far 2-3 have come through, the vast majority we get at 17-18 almost ready for the first team. The problem is how many 17-22 year old players who clearly aren't close to good enough who take up millions upon millions a year all together, rather than ditch them. Simpson, the Hoytes, Djourou, Randall and 80% of our youths clearly have no future at the club, we could ditch them all and be able to afford 3-4 actual starters that could be the difference between 4th winning the league.
that still affects their profit and loss and besides the new uefa rules aren't naive in searching for ways people may try to get around them.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
Yeap I agree with that but simply because they're injured so often. Sad really, but it'd be interesting to see some money spent/games played stats. Theo, Rosicky, even though he's rubbish Diaby and Denilson aren't cheap either I'm sure.
I'd love to believe that I really would, but I'm going to side with the rationale of people being 'cheeky'
I'd love to believe that I really would, but I'm going to side with the rationale of people being 'cheeky'
Another big game where Arsenal don't have close to their best XI out 
. Vermaelen and Fabregas both out, no idea about when Walcott or Van Persie will be fit. Despite having literally 4 of the best players (Walcott started the season incredibly) out, I think Arsenal will play a really good game and only lose 1 or 2 - 0. We'll see.
Also, Ferguson refusing to talk to the media for a month. Shocker
. Vermaelen and Fabregas both out, no idea about when Walcott or Van Persie will be fit. Despite having literally 4 of the best players (Walcott started the season incredibly) out, I think Arsenal will play a really good game and only lose 1 or 2 - 0. We'll see.Also, Ferguson refusing to talk to the media for a month. Shocker
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
Two new defenders to contain Drogba, the hideous simulating beast. A DM that goes walkies. Arshavin.....who knows about him really, he may track back well and miss loads of chances, he may miss loads of chances but then still score one. I think Chelsea will walk all over him.
It's a pity Cesc hasn't pulled through, but as said in another thread it's better he misses this game (which we will lose anyway) than risk a further injury preventing him from playing against weaker opponents. Wilshere at least shouldn't be left in a heap and hopefully I'm not tempting le gods by saying I reckon he'll have a go. Though Essien will be his toughest challenge by a long way.
I'm not optimistic, I think a 2-0 loss will be a good result I could see it being far worse.
It's a pity Cesc hasn't pulled through, but as said in another thread it's better he misses this game (which we will lose anyway) than risk a further injury preventing him from playing against weaker opponents. Wilshere at least shouldn't be left in a heap and hopefully I'm not tempting le gods by saying I reckon he'll have a go. Though Essien will be his toughest challenge by a long way.
I'm not optimistic, I think a 2-0 loss will be a good result I could see it being far worse.
Yeah, as big of a loss as it is, it's better to rest Fabregas, especially with his hamstrings which have been very dodgy over the last few seasons. With any luck it may make Arsenal less attacking but that is not sensible logic, as Arsenal will probably commit more men forwards to compensate for the loss of his incision.
I'm really looking forward to seeing if Wilshere can actually impress in this game, it will be incredibly difficult for him to leave his mark against Chelsea's midfield and it may be too much of a step-up. But I wouldn't put it past him to actually have a good game and that's the exciting thing about him.
That is with half a season out of position too. If he tried he could be scary good.
I'm really looking forward to seeing if Wilshere can actually impress in this game, it will be incredibly difficult for him to leave his mark against Chelsea's midfield and it may be too much of a step-up. But I wouldn't put it past him to actually have a good game and that's the exciting thing about him.
That is with half a season out of position too. If he tried he could be scary good.
- Status