Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The teams that we will be playing next season

1679111214

Comments

  • Just looking at Watford Accounts
    Their transfer debt of £79m at 30/6/19 was made up of £32m payable before 30/6/20 and £19m still outstanding now £27m is just an accounting matter and not real. Obviously there may be amounts outstanding now relating to transfers made between July 19 and now.

    Bournemouth will have paid off £32m of there £80m debt with £48m still outstanding now plus any transfer debt incurred between July 19 and now.

    Neither club had much owed to it for outgoing transfer fees

    Norwich had more transfer fees owing to it than owed by it at June 19 and haven't spent much. Looks like there transfer debt will be no more than a handful of million.

    👍 👎 ( -1 )
  • Can anyone explain to me the point of parachute payments beyond trying to ensure that the big clubs get a leg up over everyone else? Is there more to it than that? When did they start happening? And why?

  • @drcongo said:
    Can anyone explain to me the point of parachute payments beyond trying to ensure that the big clubs get a leg up over everyone else? Is there more to it than that? When did they start happening? And why?

    They started in 2006/07, the idea being to help minimise the risk of administration for clubs still carrying Premier League wages. Helps them balance the books gradually I guess.

  • @drcongo said:
    Can anyone explain to me the point of parachute payments beyond trying to ensure that the big clubs get a leg up over everyone else? Is there more to it than that? When did they start happening? And why?

    To avoid clubs spiralling into bankruptcy.

    If they got rid of them, perhaps clubs would spend a little more sensibly and the gulf would narrow...

    👍 👎 ( 1 )
  • The fact that Norwich are regularly held up as an example of financial responsibility with debts that high just shows how insane football finance is.

  • There seems to be an odd quirk that you get these parachute payments for 3 years irrespective of coming back up.

    So West brom went down. Got 40m. Came back up had their premier league spoils for a season but still trousered their 40m.

    That seems even more bonkers.

    You're giving relegation clubs a huge advantage over the teams in the lower tier

  • @OxfordBlue said:

    @drcongo said:
    Can anyone explain to me the point of parachute payments beyond trying to ensure that the big clubs get a leg up over everyone else? Is there more to it than that? When did they start happening? And why?

    To avoid clubs spiralling into bankruptcy.

    If they got rid of them, perhaps clubs would spend a little more sensibly and the gulf would narrow...

    For me the parachute payment is to mitigate the games inability to get players to agree relegation clauses in contracts.

  • @Right_in_the_Middle said:

    @OxfordBlue said:

    @drcongo said:
    Can anyone explain to me the point of parachute payments beyond trying to ensure that the big clubs get a leg up over everyone else? Is there more to it than that? When did they start happening? And why?

    To avoid clubs spiralling into bankruptcy.

    If they got rid of them, perhaps clubs would spend a little more sensibly and the gulf would narrow...

    For me the parachute payment is to mitigate the games inability to get players to agree relegation clauses in contracts.

    Relegation clauses are fairly standard i believe.

    Take Rodwell. That 40k a week or so he was purported to "earn" for Sunderland in tier 3 was actually a good 50-60% under his premier wages.

  • There will be 4 teams WW have not faced in the Football League before - Blackburn, Derby, Forest, Middlesrough

    Have been in the same division as Luton (and maybe Brentford) 13 seasons

    Of the teams played before in the FL, the longest gap since playing is Birmingham (1994/95)

    Haven't played Birmingham, Watford, Fulham in the FL since 2000

    Last played Swansea in 2004/05 - in the 4th tier

    Club FL Seasons in same division FL Season last in same division
    Brentford 13 2011/12
    Luton Town 13 2018/19
    Bournemouth 11 2011/12
    Rotherham United 9 2019/20
    Bristol City 8 2003/04
    Millwall 6 2009/10
    Preston North End 6 2011/12
    Huddersfield Town 5 2011/12
    Cardiff City 4 2002/03
    Reading 4 2001/02
    Stoke City 4 2001/02
    Swansea City 4 2004/05
    Barnsley 3 2018/19
    Coventry City 3 2019/20
    Queens Park Rangers 3 2003/04
    Fulham 2 1998/99
    Sheffield Wednesday 2 2011/12
    Watford 2 1997/98
    Birmingham City 1 1994/95
    Norwich City 1 2009/10
    Blackburn 0
    Derby 0
    Middlesbrough 0
    Nottingham Forest 0

    👍 👎 ( 2 )
  • Blackburn doesn't seem to get high up many people's lists of the grounds they're keenest to go to. But for any of us who were getting well into our football in the early 90s, it must hold a big appeal.

    The first time I'd become aware of the concept of a team outside the traditional elite buying success, and a superb team in that early to mid 90s run.

    The first former premier league champions (yes, it all started in 92) we've played in a league game, as equals. Amazing.

  • If Eddie Howe stays and AFC get parachute payments and £80 million selling a few players you cannot discount him doing a Sean Dyche.

  • The playing styles of Howe and Dyche are about as diametrically opposed as gou can get though @Wendoverman. A bit like comparing the styles of Gareth and Pep Guardiola!

  • @mooneyman said:
    The playing styles of Howe and Dyche are about as diametrically opposed as gou can get though @Wendoverman. A bit like comparing the styles of Gareth and Pep Guardiola!

    I'd wager that if Gaz inherited the best squad in the league, and was then allowed to luxuriously splash regular 50m wads on signings, that he might be able to tweak his style as well.

  • I meant in terms of coming down and then retaining the manager and going straight back up again @mooneyman rather than panicking and trying to get someone new in.
    Playing style? What's that?

  • Playing style is essentially either tiki taki, long ball or shithousery!

    👍 👎 ( 0 )
  • Am I right in thinking that we have never played Blackburn or Derby before in a competitive fixture?

    If so, how many others would that leave? 6?

  • 7 I forgot Salford

  • Would Harrogate qualify if they win their final?

  • Those three plus United, Arsenal, Everton and Newcastle?

  • Moving on, Fulham beat Cardiff City 3-2 on aggregate so it's a West London affair in the final between Brentford and Fulham. So after tonight's game the teams in the Championship next year are as follows:
    AFC Bournemouth
    Barnsley
    Birmingham City
    Blackburn Rovers
    Bristol City
    Cardiff City
    Coventry City
    Derby County
    Huddersfield Town
    Luton Town
    Middlesbrough
    Millwall
    Norwich City
    Nottingham Forest
    Preston North End
    Queens Park Rangers
    Reading
    Rotherham United
    Sheffield Wednesday
    Stoke City
    Swansea City
    Watford
    Wycombe Wanderers

    👍 👎 ( 1 )
  • Two Welsh excursions confirmed.

    So the final two domestic games will be four London teams playing at a neutral London venue (Arsenal, Chelsea, Brentford, Fulham). That can't have happened too often (though the London venue is a given).

  • edited July 2020

    @drcongo said:
    Can anyone explain to me the point of parachute payments beyond trying to ensure that the big clubs get a leg up over everyone else? Is there more to it than that? When did they start happening? And why?

    No idea on what rationalisation was offered when it was introduced but happy to speculate on why it may be reasonable:

    Absent these payments, I imagine players might be reluctant to sign for clubs seen as candidates for relegation - you'd be less in inclined to sign for a club is you were not sure your wages would be paid. From the alternative perspective, these payments give weaker clubs the possibility of attracting players good enough to help them compete in the league, which competitive balance would be good for the league, of course.

    Naturally, there are other ways to promote competitive balance, such as a salary cap a la rugby, NFL, NHL or NBA, or a soft cap as in MLB's luxury tax. With or without the financial fair play stuff, the imbalance in resources enjoyed by the different Premier League clubs would be an even greater factor than it already is.

    The fact that it gives relegated teams a big edge of Championship rivals is obvious in theory and, it would seem, hugely unfair to those other teams. Too lazy to do the research to see how many of those clubs have been able to get back up while receiving the payments but I fancy it's not as many as it perhaps should be. It certainly adds to the schadenfreude when the Sunderlands occasionally fail as they have done.

  • Aren't parachute payments paid over a couple of years? Also, if a club does go straight back up are they cancelled?

    Clubs like Blackpool must've played a blinder when they went up and didn't really change their wage bill.

  • @HCblue said:

    @drcongo said:
    Can anyone explain to me the point of parachute payments beyond trying to ensure that the big clubs get a leg up over everyone else? Is there more to it than that? When did they start happening? And why?

    No idea on what rationalisation was offered when it was introduced but happy to speculate on why it may be reasonable:

    Absent these payments, I imagine players might be reluctant to sign for clubs seen as candidates for relegation - you'd be less in inclined to sign for a club is you were not sure your wages would be paid. From the alternative perspective, these payments give weaker clubs the possibility of attracting players good enough to help them compete in the league, which competitive balance would be good for the league, of course.

    Naturally, there are other ways to promote competitive balance, such as a salary cap a la rugby, NFL, NHL or NBA, or a soft cap as in MLB's luxury tax. With or without the financial fair play stuff, the imbalance in resources enjoyed by the different Premier League clubs would be an even greater factor than it already is.

    The fact that it gives relegated teams a big edge of Championship rivals is obvious in theory and, it would seem, hugely unfair to those other teams. Too lazy to do the research to see how many of those clubs have been able to get back up while receiving the payments but I fancy it's not as many as it perhaps should be. It certainly adds to the schadenfreude when the Sunderlands occasionally fail as they have done.

    The theory is that the payments lessen the blow of relegation and are swallowed up by offsetting reduced income but clubs have wildly different setups and the payments are arbitrary. It also can't really be expected to take into consideration how poorly run most championship clubs are and the fact that they are mostly losing fortunes too. Somebody mentioned US style salary caps that aren't without merit but also they don't do relegation.

  • @The_Gravelman said:
    Aren't parachute payments paid over a couple of years? Also, if a club does go straight back up are they cancelled?

    Clubs like Blackpool must've played a blinder when they went up and didn't really change their wage bill.

    The parachute payments apply for three years.
    I believe promotion doesn't stop them..which is a bit farcical.

  • I've just looked over parachute payments for the past few seasons and apparently getting promoted does stop the payments.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_League_parachute_and_solidarity_payments#Parachute_payments

  • edited July 2020

    @niebieski said:
    I've just looked over parachute payments for the past few seasons and apparently getting promoted does stop the payments.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_League_parachute_and_solidarity_payments#Parachute_payments

    Thanks for correcting.
    I'd heard a rival manager mention they continued, and he quoted West Brom, and their yo-yoing as a reason of how it's madness.

    But good to see it doesn't apply then

    Also interesting to note, if we got relegated we'd get 11% of the £4.65m each championship club gets for 1 season.

  • As mad as it sounds to say, they'll probably see that as a good outcome!

    21 points would have been an absolute disaster.

  • They could find themselves in a spot of bother - hardly excelled on the pitch last season. Garry Monk could probably have got them ticking with time, but will he necessarily stay after this setback? Even if it was expected.

    Interesting to see what happens to Derby now - alleged to have broken the same rules but not in exactly the same way is my understanding.

Sign In or Register to comment.