Is FFP/ PSR finally working?

[Andy_Cole]

Seems this is one of the lowest transfer windows in recent year. Barring some dodgy transfers pre July 1st to balance the books it seems that fees have been sensible.

Look at United. I think before PSR we’d have spent £80m on Braithwaite. Probably over spent on Ugarte too. I don’t think this is strictly INEOS doing, but actually a must to stay compliant.

Then City haven’t spent really. Probably in fear of the 115 charges and they don’t want to take the piss. Hopefully over the next few years the windows will normalise. I think the only outrages fee is Alvarez. Hopefully that was honest but I have my suspicions with what Atletico also seem to be doing with Chelsea.

It’s not all clean but give it a few years and hopefully it will get there.

 

[The holy trinity 68]

What I worry about is that the clubs in the league are going to get tired of PSR hampering their transfer spending and there ends up being a vote against it, with PSR being binned.

 

[Nick7]

PSR clearly is working, but the loopholes exploited earlier in the summer show there’s still work there.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

It's working to the extent that it's forcing most clubs to be reasonable from an accounting perspective but it's having the negative side-effect of making Academy products massive assets that are more valuable if sold than if offered a path into a team.

 

[Golden Nugget]

Seems this is one of the lowest transfer windows in recent year. Barring some dodgy transfers pre July 1st to balance the books it seems that fees have been sensible.

Look at United. I think before PSR we’d have spent £80m on Braithwaite. Probably over spent on Ugarte too. I don’t think this is strictly INEOS doing, but actually a must to stay compliant.

Then City haven’t spent really. Probably in fear of the 115 charges and they don’t want to take the piss. Hopefully over the next few years the windows will normalise. I think the only outrages fee is Alvarez. Hopefully that was honest but I have my suspicions with what Atletico also seem to be doing with Chelsea.

It’s not all clean but give it a few years and hopefully it will get there.

I think you’re spot on. Obviously Chelsea pops to my mind instantly - but outside of that, I think it’s worked well.

 

[Pronewbie]

It's working to the extent that it's forcing most clubs to be reasonable from an accounting perspective but it's having the negative side-effect of making Academy products massive assets that are more valuable if sold than if offered a path into a team.

Not completely a bad thing if it incentivises clubs to focus more on their academy, even if it's for selling purposes. So maybe slight tweaks to reward clubs with a high number of academy players in their squad as opposed to punitive measures.

 

[crossy1686]

What I worry about is that the clubs in the league are going to get tired of PSR hampering their transfer spending and there ends up being a vote against it, with PSR being binned.

PSR was brought in to stop the likes of City and PSG buying up the whole sport. Clubs have to take it seriously otherwise they ultimately win the game of 'how high can you go?'.

What we're seeing now is clubs desperately trying to stay within the means of PSR and being fully compliant. Make no mistake about it, it's because everyone is pushing for City to get absolutely hammered. If everyone else is playing teachers pet how bad do City look in the other corner? It also leaves City with no where to go if every other club was compliant and took their punishment gracefully.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

Not completely a bad thing if it incentivises clubs to focus more on their academy, even if it's for selling purposes. So maybe slight tweaks to reward clubs with a high number of academy players in their squad as opposed to punitive measures.

To an extent. It's a bit depressing from a human perspective though.

 

[The holy trinity 68]

PSR was brought in to stop the likes of City and PSG buying up the whole sport. Clubs have to take it seriously otherwise they ultimately win the game of 'how high can you go?'.

What we're seeing now is clubs desperately trying to stay within the means of PSR and being fully compliant. Make no mistake about it, it's because everyone is pushing for City to get absolutely hammered. If everyone else is playing teachers pet how bad do City look in the other corner? It also leaves City with no where to go if every other club was compliant and took their punishment gracefully.

That is actually a very good point, thanks.

 

[M Bison]

Agree and it can only be a good thing for football, i think a wage cap of some description will be brought in at some point too.

I just cant understand Chelsea though, how are they managing to spend so much, especially after the last 12 months of ridiculous spending too?

 

[Pronewbie]

To an extent. It's a bit depressing from a human perspective though.

There's that, but I think it's great that more talents get opportunities to develop at the highest level and earn a better wage elsewhere if necessary. It's just about tweaking the formula to incentivise retaining homegrown players who are good enough to be in the playing squad. Not sure how they can go about doing that and tracking it though.

 

[BuddaBuddy]

Agree and it can only be a good thing for football, i think a wage cap of some description will be brought in at some point too.

I just cant understand Chelsea though, how are they managing to spend so much, especially after the last 12 months of ridiculous spending too?

They've sold 3 academy products at good prices which are pure profit.
The one player they've actually bought and moved on is Maatsen, but they've managed a hefty profit on him as well.

Basically they've been hoarding talent for years and been able to sell them at good prices, a little like Man City is also doing.

 

[Rozay]

It’s sort of working. I think it is frustrating many clubs, and it is seeing players looked at as balance sheet entries more than footballers. But it’s the price we pay because, to me, it is essentially an anti-City/Newcastle rule - and the potential for them to turn the PL into the Saudi Pro League without it means that everyone has to suffer a little bit.

 

[WeePat]

They've sold 3 academy products at good prices which are pure profit.
The one player they've actually bought and moved on is Maatsen, but they've managed a hefty profit on him as well.

Basically they've been hoarding talent for years and been able to sell them at good prices, a little like Man City is also doing.

Maatsen was academy player. He was a pure profit sale too.

Chukwuemeka is rumoured to be getting interest from Palace. We seemingly value him at £40m. That would be a case of buying a player then quickly selling him on for huge profits.

 

[Kag]

There’s something very undignified about the way clubs are operating in order to satisfy the rules. For that reason it’s flawed.

 

[BuddaBuddy]

Maatsen was academy player. He was a pure profit sale too.

Chukwuemeka is rumoured to be getting interest from Palace. We seemingly value him at £40m. That would be a case of buying a player then quickly selling him on for huge profits.

My bad, indeed he were, even more net profit there then.

I don't like their strategy from a "this is what I want the football industry to function" - perspective, but they've been doing it for years and it's worked for them.
Of course they've cooked the books with some under the table payments and what not when neccecary in the Chelski era as well.

 

[SilentWitness]

Not completely a bad thing if it incentivises clubs to focus more on their academy, even if it's for selling purposes.

That is definitely a bad thing.

 

[RedC]

That is definitely a bad thing.

Is it? I'm sure the players would benefit from it.

 

[WeePat]

My bad, indeed he were, even more net profit there then.

I don't like their strategy from a "this is what I want the football industry to function" - perspective, but they've been doing it for years and it's worked for them.
Of course they've cooked the books with some under the table payments and what not when neccecary in the Chelski era as well.

Neither do I, for what it's worth.

I just want to be a normal club that follows all the rules and tries to get ahead by investing in good coaches and smart, savvy business people. This murky world of constantly finding and exploiting loopholes feels very antagonistic and unethical to me, even though no rules are being broken, it makes us look dodgy and untrustworthy.

 

[SilentWitness]

Is it? I'm sure the players would benefit from it.

I think so. Making the academy purely a breeding ground for profit rather than a pathway to the first team and having homegrown talent in your team is sad. I find it sad that for clubs with lower revenue to try and catch up and keep improving that one of the ways to do it is to sell a homegrown product because it's a far better benefit to you than other players. Of course the academy is there to create profit to an extent but the current rules put far too much stock in selling an academy product. There needs to be a bit more balance to it.

 

[BuddaBuddy]

Neither do I, for what it's worth.

I just want to be a normal club that follows all the rules and tries to get ahead by investing in good coaches and smart, savvy business people. This murky world of constantly finding and exploiting loopholes feels very antagonistic and unethical to me, even though no rules are being broken, it makes us look dodgy and untrustworthy.

I'd have hoped most football fans would rather win absolutely nothing, and do things correctly than exploit the system/cheat.
In reality it looks like it doesn't matter for most fans.

 

[Pronewbie]

I think so. Making the academy purely a breeding ground for profit rather than a pathway to the first team and having homegrown talent in your team is sad. I find it sad that for clubs with lower revenue to try and catch up and keep improving that one of the ways to do it is to sell a homegrown product because it's a far better benefit to you than other players. Of course the academy is there to create profit to an extent but the current rules put far too much stock in selling an academy product. There needs to be a bit more balance to it.

I've stated multiple times in this thread that clubs should be rewarded for having academy players in the 1st team, rather than only being incentivised to sell them, or worse - punitive measures that dissuade clubs from investing in their academy.

In reality the vast majority of academy players in PL clubs do not make it to the 1st team, so you're only touching the edge cases. Those who dream of a professional footballing career will benefit if clubs take their academies more seriously.

 

[mu4c_20le]

Knocked us off our perch while oil clubs do whatever they want, so yes

 

[RedC]

I think so. Making the academy purely a breeding ground for profit rather than a pathway to the first team and having homegrown talent in your team is sad. I find it sad that for clubs with lower revenue to try and catch up and keep improving that one of the ways to do it is to sell a homegrown product because it's a far better benefit to you than other players. Of course the academy is there to create profit to an extent but the current rules put far too much stock in selling an academy product. There needs to be a bit more balance to it.

I would see it as producing more rounded and higher skill young players, that have a better chance of making it in the PL or another top league. Of course, the intention from the club's perspective may be profit, but it would benefit the young players in terms of their career prospects, and if they are good enough, they will usually get to stay. It's obviously a less romantic notion to a fan, though.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

There’s something very undignified about the way clubs are operating in order to satisfy the rules. For that reason it’s flawed.

I think so. Making the academy purely a breeding ground for profit rather than a pathway to the first team and having homegrown talent in your team is sad. I find it sad that for clubs with lower revenue to try and catch up and keep improving that one of the ways to do it is to sell a homegrown product because it's a far better benefit to you than other players. Of course the academy is there to create profit to an extent but the current rules put far too much stock in selling an academy product. There needs to be a bit more balance to it.

I think this is basically where I stand and what I was trying to say earlier. There should definitely be incentives for clubs offering first team football to academy graduates (though I guess clubs will find a way to flout those rules by giving players token appearances or something).

The situation as it is contributes to deshumanize youth players to an extreme by making them bargaining chips on an accounting spreadsheet. Though you're no longer in the realm of the PSR rules, you're then talking about moral ethics/values - which football, for the most part, is devoid of.

 

[Smores]

I think this is basically where I stand and what I was trying to say earlier. There should definitely be incentives for clubs offering first team football to academy graduates (though I guess clubs will find a way to flout those rules by giving players token appearances or something).

The situation as it is contributes to deshumanize youth players to an extreme by making them bargaining chips on an accounting spreadsheet. Though you're no longer in the realm of the PSR rules, you're then talking about moral ethics/values - which football, for the most part, is devoid of.

When you start incentivising teams to keep youth players all you'll get is teams hoarding them with very little minutes. You'd have to qualify it with a minimum number of minutes played which could have worse results if they're played just to meet a threshold.

I think all fans understand the extra value a homegrown player adds so in that sense it is sad if they're moved on, however teams will keep their best ones anyway.

From a player perspective they'll benefit both financially and in their development by being sold to clubs where they'll actually play.

 

[Rozay]

I've stated multiple times in this thread that clubs should be rewarded for having academy players in the 1st team, rather than only being incentivised to sell them, or worse - punitive measures that dissuade clubs from investing in their academy.

In reality the vast majority of academy players in PL clubs do not make it to the 1st team, so you're only touching the edge cases. Those who dream of a professional footballing career will benefit if clubs take their academies more seriously.

Clubs are rewarded for having good players in their teams. As much as I don’t like how Chelsea operate, it’s highly unlikely they would be looking to sell Messi if he came through Cobham. And while we have been happy to sell Elanga or McTominay - we would not sell Mainoo or Garnacho.

The obvious reward for keeping an academy player is that you get to have a striker for free rather than spend 100m on one. So if that player is good enough, any club would be stupid not to keep. And if a player is good enough but their club finds themselves facing bankruptcy or whatever, then they should benefit by cashing in.

I’m not a fan of Chelsea’s clear ‘buy, renovate and sell’ strategy, but beyond that, Connor Gallagher is just not that good.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

When you start incentivising teams to keep youth players all you'll get is teams hoarding them with very little minutes. You'd have to qualify it with a minimum number of minutes played which could have worse results if they're played just to meet a threshold.

I think all fans understand the extra value a homegrown player adds so in that sense it is sad if they're moved on, however teams will keep their best ones anyway.

From a player perspective they'll benefit both financially and in their development by being sold to clubs where they'll actually play.

But this is what's happening right now - I'm saying there should be incentives for actual playing time.

As for the rest, this idea of "oh well they get decent academy training and then they move onto clubs where they'll play" it a purely mercantile way of looking at it, forgetting the human element and the fact we're talking about 17/18/19yo kids most of the time.

 

[Galactic]

it’s the break it 109 times and then we play fair type of FFP.

 

[Pronewbie]

But this is what's happening right now - I'm saying there should be incentives for actual playing time.

As for the rest, this idea of "oh well they get decent academy training and then they move onto clubs where they'll play" it a purely mercantile way of looking at it, forgetting the human element and the fact we're talking about 17/18/19yo kids most of the time.

If you've been a youth player or at least around a youth academy or setup, then you'd know there's always a human element when such things are said - especially by youth coaches. This has more to do with preserving a young man's dreams, motivation even for when they don't make the cut.

I'm surprised you dismiss others as having "a purely mercantile way of looking at it" when they say that. As previously stated, clubs being incentivised to invest more into their academy is a good thing for the young men (even women) chasing their dreams in the country. I'm speaking from experience.

The current situation is not all bad, contrary to what it may seem on the surface. The devil is in the details for mechanisms to reward playing time and prevent hoarding.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

If you've been a youth player or at least around a youth academy or setup, then you'd know there's always a human element when such things are said - especially by youth coaches. This has more to do with preserving a young man's dreams, motivation even for when they don't make the cut.

I'm surprised you dismiss others as having "a purely mercantile way of looking at it" when they say that. As previously stated, clubs being incentivised to invest more into their academy is a good thing for the young men (even women) chasing their dreams in the country. I'm speaking from experience.

The current situation is not all bad, contrary to what it may seem on the surface. The devil is in the details for mechanisms to reward playing time and prevent hoarding.

Fair enough - I disagree with that, but I respect that you have a different view on this and seem to know more than me on the topic

 

[Pexbo]

There needs to be a way of netting costs between two clubs.


If club A sell a player to club B for £10m and club B sell a player to club A for £10m there should be net £0 income and expenditure going on the books meaning it won’t impact your PSR if you do want to do it so there’s no penalty, but it wont benefit you either.

 

[Pronewbie]

Fair enough - I disagree with that, but I respect that you have a different view on this and seem to know more than me on the topic

To be fair my time was over 20 years ago so things may have changed. But it's good that we seem to want the best for youth players.

 

[Mb194dc]

The football bubble is going to burst. For 25 years there's been explosive revenue growth fuelling all the increase in values. It's over now, Messi and Ronaldo are nearing retirement. The game got way more boring and tactical than it was 20 years ago, meanwhile the fixture list has been pushed to the max diluting the quality even more. Kids are playing video games, not watching football in the main.

The whole Sky and other TV deals structure isn't going to be sustainable as the older audience drops off. I reckon we start seeing massive deflation in football and a few clubs probably go under.

 

[dinostar77]

What I worry about is that the clubs in the league are going to get tired of PSR hampering their transfer spending and there ends up being a vote against it, with PSR being binned.

They are all for it unanimously. Its the proposed salary cap that's causing issues. The PFA, Utd, City and another club (can't remember who) are against it.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

The football bubble is going to burst. For 25 years there's been explosive revenue growth fuelling all the increase in values. It's over now, Messi and Ronaldo are nearing retirement. The game got way more boring and tactical than it was 20 years ago, meanwhile the fixture list has been pushed to the max diluting the quality even more. Kids are playing video games, not watching football in the main.

The whole Sky and other TV deals structure isn't going to be sustainable as the older audience drops off. I reckon we start seeing massive deflation in football and a few clubs probably go under.

And Chelsea will only be responsible for 50% of it.

 

[dinostar77]

The football bubble is going to burst. For 25 years there's been explosive revenue growth fuelling all the increase in values. It's over now, Messi and Ronaldo are nearing retirement. The game got way more boring and tactical than it was 20 years ago, meanwhile the fixture list has been pushed to the max diluting the quality even more. Kids are playing video games, not watching football in the main.

The whole Sky and other TV deals structure isn't going to be sustainable as the older audience drops off. I reckon we start seeing massive deflation in football and a few clubs probably go under.

There's a way to go yet on revenue from TV deals if clubs can get into negotiating individual TV rights. Which goes against the collective aspect that makes the PL so strong.

Its why we have all these American investors and backing from venture capitalists. They know football hasn't reached the revenue levels that NFL generates.

However individual TV rights would kill off some clubs and FIFA is doing its best to strangle their golden goose with oversaturation of football.

 

[sideshowbob]

Just need to find a way to close that loophole that Chelsea Villa Newcastle and Forest were using before the deadline by selling players to each other at inflated prices

 

[Pronewbie]

There's a way to go yet on revenue from TV deals if clubs can get into negotiating individual TV rights. Which goes against the collective aspect that makes the PL so strong.

Its why we have all these American investors and backing from venture capitalists. They know football hasn't reached the revenue levels that NFL generates.

However individual TV rights would kill off some clubs and FIFA is doing its best to strangle their golden goose with oversaturation of football.

Football entering its late stage capitalism phase, basically.

 

[Red in STL]

The football bubble is going to burst. For 25 years there's been explosive revenue growth fuelling all the increase in values. It's over now, Messi and Ronaldo are nearing retirement. The game got way more boring and tactical than it was 20 years ago, meanwhile the fixture list has been pushed to the max diluting the quality even more. Kids are playing video games, not watching football in the main.

The whole Sky and other TV deals structure isn't going to be sustainable as the older audience drops off. I reckon we start seeing massive deflation in football and a few clubs probably go under.

Not for a very long time, there are still large markets that have been barely touched, South America for instance and to a lesser extent the USA

NBC just recorded their best ever viewing figurse with an average of just over 500K up to 2.9 million on the last day of the season, that's tiny in a country with over 300 million people, that deal is worth $450 million a season currently, imagine what NBC or another broadcaster would pay if the figures went to an average doubled or tripled.

That's also one of the main reasons why PL clubs play pre-season games in the US, they know there is huge potential to make even more money