£360 billion

[IPAclaret]

The value of the Qataris who are possibly buying ManU.

Can it really get any more utterly ridiculous?

[CaptainKirk]

The sooner we get rid of the Big 6 the better.
Let them go and play each other every week. The rest of us would be left with a much more competitive League (with the top 6 of the Championship brought in).
Obviously, the TV money would go down. All this would mean is players would have to get by on, say £25,000 a week instead of £50,000 as that is where most of the TV money goes anyway.

[equinox]

Maybe one day we'll be bought out by Brierfield, there's some money in that town you know?

[martin_p]

The sooner we get rid of the Big 6 the better.
Let them go and play each other every week. The rest of us would be left with a much more competitive League (with the top 6 of the Championship brought in).
Obviously, the TV money would go down. All this would mean is players would have to get by on, say £25,000 a week instead of £50,000 as that is where most of the TV money goes anyway.

Who even are ‘the big six’ these days? Newcastle replacing Spurs or Chelsea?

[4midable]

Maybe one day we'll be bought out by Brierfield, there's some money in that town you know?

Yeah. Tends to be the sheds and lockups full of columbian tackle

[Inchy]

The sooner we get rid of the Big 6 the better.
Let them go and play each other every week. The rest of us would be left with a much more competitive League (with the top 6 of the Championship brought in).
Obviously, the TV money would go down. All this would mean is players would have to get by on, say £25,000 a week instead of £50,000 as that is where most of the TV money goes anyway.

All it would mean is the better players would disappear to whatever countries are willing to pay the most, leaving a poor standard of football

[Cirrus_Minor]

I thought that this was about how much Chelsea are planning to spend during the next transfer window.

[Vegas Claret]

I don't remember who said it last week but the phrase was "I've yet to see a bag of money win a game', all good and well but it clearly helps as has been shown by the number of points needed to stay up. All it will mean is the PL splitting more into two than even now and instead of needing 38 points to stay up it will be 25.

[Dark Cloud]

The thing is, I thought there was a limit on how much cash owners could pump into a club as espoused by all the the FFP stuff. I (probably wrongly) assumed that whether you had a bottomless pit of cash or not, simply bank rolling the club to purchase success wasn't within the rules any more (as shown with both City and Everton allegedly over spending and possibly getting into lumber over it).

[NottsClaret]

The thing is, I thought there was a limit on how much cash owners could pump into a club as espoused by all the the FFP stuff. I (probably wrongly) assumed that whether you had a bottomless pit of cash or not, simply bank rolling the club to purchase success wasn't within the rules any more (as shown with both City and Everton allegedly over spending and possibly getting into lumber over it).

FFP only applies to the little guys. City can tie up any charges in court indefinitely.

[equinox]

If it takes what City have done to put Madrid in their place then I've no problem.

[CoolClaret]

All it would mean is the better players would disappear to whatever countries are willing to pay the most, leaving a poor standard of football

If there was a European Super League of 18-20 teams there'd be enough talent still about to make the top leagues in all respective Countries entertaining

I somewhat agree with the idea of letting them go. It would be nice to compete in a league in which any and everyone could be in with a shot of winning it!

[Hipper]

If there was a European Super League of 18-20 teams there'd be enough talent still about to make the top leagues in all respective Countries entertaining

I somewhat agree with the idea of letting them go. It would be nice to compete in a league in which any and everyone could be in with a shot of winning it!

We just did but we stupidly went and won it.

[claret59]

We very recently had a Super League that only lasted a couple of weeks as football fans , even those of the 'top six', had no stomach for it and let it be known they would not support it so the whole thing crashed apart from a couple of non UK clubs that we barely hear of now and so have no relevance.
What is needed though is a slimmed down FFP that is rigidly adhered to or clubs lose points for non compliance. As with most things in business 'money talks' and for too long the abuse of FFP has been unchallenged and so continues without any proper scrutiny or sanction for those practising it.

[Winstonswhite]

What’s the reason given why a salary cap wouldn’t work?

[daveisaclaret]

What’s the reason given why a salary cap wouldn’t work?

All the good players would go somewhere that doesn't have a salary cap

[RammyClaret61]

What’s the reason given why a salary cap wouldn’t work?

Restraint of trade or something like that.

[Bullabill]

Restraint of trade or something like that.

Not if the cap is applied to club spending on wages as in the AFL.

[Fretters]

The sooner we get rid of the Big 6 the better.
Let them go and play each other every week. The rest of us would be left with a much more competitive League (with the top 6 of the Championship brought in).
Obviously, the TV money would go down. All this would mean is players would have to get by on, say £25,000 a week instead of £50,000 as that is where most of the TV money goes anyway.

Agreed! We'd have won the Premier League in 2018 without the big six at the time (the exact teams who tried to break away a bit later).

[Lancasterclaret]

Agreed! We'd have won the Premier League in 2018 without the big six at the time (the exact teams who tried to break away a bit later).

Christ, can you imagine the melt down the road if that had happened