FFS It's such an Uneven Playing Field

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22060822

£120 million to name their training complex.

So let me get this right, The Old Toilet Mafia seal a deal with the other Premiership Teams (Bar us and Chelski funnily enough) so we can only lose £35m a year for 3 years (£105m total).

They sign deal after deal after deal for all sorts of rights added to the fact their ground capacity is almost double the nearest team.

It proper stinks now, what can any team do to compete?

I say we go down the PSG route and just spend the cash it would appear without any redress and just say we will see you in court if you have a problem.

Financial Fair Play ........ My Arse.

This must go against some anti-competitive law somewhere? You've got money but we won't let you spend it because it won't be fair on the others. Proper Stinks.

What are the ramification if you don't comply with the FFP rules?

Nobody really knows, I thought they can bar you from playing in the Champions or Europa League? But you can bet it will just result in multiple legal battles if they do.

So we were getting the probe from UEFA for selling our naming rights for £400m - given it's a big, established stadium which doesn't only do football, but many other sporting and entertainment functions, but the rags can sell the naming rights to a closed off, blocked to the public training facility for just under a third of that and NOBODY is going to bat an eyelid?

Joke of a rule, this FFP. I just hope that all those clubs who jumped into bed with the rags are now looking at this and wondering just how much power they've relinquished. If they'd told them to do one, they too could've touted a wealthy owner who could cover them. But now they can't and all they can do is sit back and watch the Trafford leviathan bringing in countless millions selling the badge and continue to gorge itself stupid on every player it can find. THIS is what is killing football, but of course the FA are going to do precisely nothing about it. Never has an acronym been so unintentionally accurate.

True financial fair play would be to cap the amount a club can spend. Not just on wages, but it's total football spend.

That is ridiculous, just as capping losses that a club can make is ridiculous and anti competitive.

The £400M deal with Etihad included £100M for the Etihad Campus, so that is totally excluded from FFP.

The remaining £30M a season is for naming right to 'The Etihad' and shirt sponsorship. I said at the time that we had got market rate or true value from the deal so there really is nothing anyone can do about it.

You will see a plethora of such odd deals because of FFP (maybe just to get around it). Gazprom sponsoring Chelsea's 'energy costs' to the tune of a few million each year springs to mind as does Utd getting their training kit sponsored for more than some EPL clubs get for their shirt deal.

One of the reasons that certain clubs wanted the EPL FFP rules was that their American owners knew it would cap spending for all the teams before the new TV deal kicked in and they got a lot more income. More income without having to spend it means a return on your investment, something they are all crying out for.

Certain clubs accepted that they would never challenge Utd or City so rather than try to compete on the field, they are trying to stop others competing. If you already have a bigger stadium (Arsenal) or are getting one on the cheap (West Ham) then the EPL FFP rules are great news. You are already getting more money than others such as Liverpool or Spurs through gate receipts and now you are restricting others from joining this new hierarchy.

I think we'll have a split between teams that can compete and those that cannot.

Everton could so easily fall away if they don't make the top 4 as I can see a couple of their better players moving on and their manager as well.

The haves will be Utd, City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs and to a lesser extent Newcastle and West Ham.

Within a few years that will be streamlined again (we have seen that this season already with Arsenal falling back and their 'trophy' is simply to be top 4).

No-one else will ever be able to break through without something extraordinary happening like 4 or 5 top class youngsters coming through together. But that won't happen as Utd could just come along and buy the top talent because they can pay triple wages. Can you imagine if WBA had the quality of Beckham, Scholes, Giggs and the Neville brothers coming through at the same time? Maybe they would be paying them £20-30k p/w. Utd come along, buy each of those players for a sum of £70M, pay them £60K p/w and WBA have lost all their promising youth players that could have challenged the elite.

Top young talent will not stay at their clubs for very long because of this (it kinda happens like this anyway) but it will only get worse as Utd can buy all the potential and then discard those that can't make it.

Sorry for the long post, but FFP rules, whether UEFA or EPL, are just a load of old bull.

I think the reason a lot of the smaller teams jumped in bed with the rags was because they see it as beneficial to them remaining in the prem. When at the end of the day this is all their ultimate goal is. They need the obscene TV payout to maintain their Status Quo.

Be funny if the TV money dries up in a decade because the Rags are just so dominant through fixing the playing field.

Why not let more than one sponsor onto the shirts, training gear etc...you see it in France, Italy, South America.



They do it in formula 1, the car is splattered with 8 or 10 sponsors names.

Fuck em........Etihad can be the main sponsor, then get some BIG companies to affiliate with Etihad - no alcohol allowed, so BP/Shell/Evian etc etc...there's another £200m+.

FFP - sorted!!