Financial fair play
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2018 12:43 am
Will disappear. Currently no clubs under embargo. You telling me everyone has complied? No way. This one is gonna be swept under the carpet where it belongs.
https://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboard/
https://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboard/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=27598
Astound me.Juan Tanamera wrote:Do you know how much we have spent on players in the 4 seasons we've been in the premier league?
Of course it is if you don't want balanced views.Vegas Claret wrote:so much better when you aren't here Saxo
So you know the square root of f*** all.Saxoman wrote:I know your record fee, and I know how much they allowed dyche to sign a striker in nahki wells.
I'm confident your record outgoing fee will always be substantially higher than your record incoming. Take that to the bank.Juan Tanamera wrote:So you know the square root of f*** all.
I think Venky's have put more into the club since they took over, how's that working out for you?Saxoman wrote:Just think about it. FFP prevents fairy tales like Jack Walker enabling his small town club to compete with the big boys. Why would anyone other than your tight assed board be happy with that?
Saxoman wrote:I'm confident your record outgoing fee will always be substantially higher than your record incoming. Take that to the bank.
It's now based over 3 years, so some clever book cooking can help avoid embargo's.Saxoman wrote:Will disappear. Currently no clubs under embargo. You telling me everyone has complied? No way. This one is gonna be swept under the carpet where it belongs.
It would be good if you offered balanced views JR but you don't, you just come on here and try to wind people up.Saxoman wrote:Of course it is if you don't want balanced views.
We are just keeping some nuts hidden away for when the darker times arrive that is all.Saxoman wrote:Just think about it. FFP prevents fairy tales like Jack Walker enabling his small town club to compete with the big boys. Why would anyone other than your tight assed board be happy with that?
'Tight assed board'Saxoman wrote:Just think about it. FFP prevents fairy tales like Jack Walker enabling his small town club to compete with the big boys. Why would anyone other than your tight assed board be happy with that?
One minute they are crying foul when someone suggests they bought the title, and the next they are talking about being bankrolled by a benefactor.Saxoman wrote:Just think about it. FFP prevents fairy tales like Jack Walker enabling his small town club to compete with the big boys. Why would anyone other than your tight assed board be happy with that?
It may also prevent 'fairy tales' like Indian chicken farmers taking over your club promising to sign 'Ronaldo or Beckham' but then signing Bradley Orr instead. 'Saxoman wrote:Just think about it. FFP prevents fairy tales like Jack Walker enabling his small town club to compete with the big boys. Why would anyone other than your tight assed board be happy with that?
I really don't understand your point here. If you're saying our board is tight, why would our outgoing record be substantially higher than our incoming? That doesn't prove your point at all, it does the opposite.Saxoman wrote:I'm confident your record outgoing fee will always be substantially higher than your record incoming. Take that to the bank.
Obviously what I meant.Fretters wrote:I really don't understand your point here. If you're saying our board is tight, why would our outgoing record be substantially higher than our incoming? That doesn't prove your point at all, it does the opposite.
I suspect you meant to say it the other way round, that our record incoming fee is substantially higher than our outgoing. In which case, yes, you're right, it's 66% higher (£30m to £18m). But let's not forget that your record incoming fee (£16.5m) is also a lot higher than your record outgoing fee (£8m). 106% higher, in fact.
We didn't buy the title, we bought a fair and level playing field, parity with the big boys, then won the title deservedly through dalglish, harford and parkes brilliant management and coaching. Much of it masterminded may I add, on the public playing fields of pleasington pre brockhall.Claretforever wrote:One minute they are crying foul when someone suggests they bought the title, and the next they are talking about being bankrolled by a benefactor.
Make your mind up.
I assume then in your 'gimme gimme gimme' world of Blackburn Rovers that is isn't alright to live within your means and that clubs must have a sugar daddy to get them through the day? Are we now in a situation (started off by good old Uncle Jack) that you can't expect to have a football club unless some old fool or dodgy super rich oil magnate wants to unload a load of cash so that they can look fashionable and own a football club (and write some money off for the tax man). It's that kind of thinking that is ruining the game and it's the same thinking that will eventually kill off all but the wealthy clubs. Do you really want to see the first million pound per week footballer? Do you really want people who struggle to make ends meet to have to pay their hard earned so subsidise lifestyles that are unobtainable to them, to give money to people who earn more in a week than they do in 10 years or more? Is this what you think should be happening? It's a game for goodness sake, a pastime, people are milking money from the game and it is never coming back. What if Sky TV decide to pull the plug or at least cut what they pay for their rights? Ordinary players who in some cases aren't that good are now commanding huge transfer fees and ridiculous wages, it is going to see off the spectacle we all enjoy because no business can maintain for any length of time the kind of outgoings (ever increasing) that football clubs do. It's about time football all over the world and particularly here woke up and smelled the coffee.Saxoman wrote:I know your record fee, and I know how much they allowed dyche to sign a striker in nahki wells.
No, its about clubs spending within their means and not allowing someone to take reigns of a club, overspend and then run them into debt, ditching them when they get bored or can't buy the success.Saxoman wrote:Just think about it. FFP prevents fairy tales like Jack Walker enabling his small town club to compete with the big boys.
Oh you did, you little tinker. Your spending way outstripped your means, and you outspent the big boys. Your broke the British transfer record twice, and we’re the first club in the UK to pay a player £10,000 per week.Saxoman wrote:We didn't buy the title, we bought a fair and level playing field, parity with the big boys, then won the title deservedly through dalglish, harford and parkes brilliant management and coaching. Much of it masterminded may I add, on the public playing fields of pleasington pre brockhall.
Saxoman wrote:... Top of league one..
But still £20 million a season from the Venkys or you'd be the new Portsmouth..........Mind numbingly crap.. Top of league one.. Young promising first team with a table topping academy side in reserve backing them up.. Whisper it quietly.. Something is stirring at ewood and brockhall.. And its not based on big money spending any more..
The big boys already had competitive squads. We had division 2 players. Dalglish is good, but he ain't that good to compete at the top with players from that league!Claretforever wrote:Oh you did, you little tinker. Your spending way outstripped your means, and you outspent the big boys. Your broke the British transfer record twice, and we’re the first club in the UK to pay a player £10,000 per week.
After you the game changed, and all the big teams began spending more, but at the time you were submitting massive losses year after year, whilst the likes of Manchester United were profitable, and even in years where losses were made they were manageable.
Venkys did that to themselves.Lancasterclaret wrote:But still £20 million a season from the Venkys or you'd be the new Portsmouth..........
In 1993 Blackburn finished 4thSaxoman wrote:The big boys already had competitive squads. We had division 2 players. Dalglish is good, but he ain't that good to compete at the top with players from that league!
Don't play dumb, you know what I mean. We came up in 1992 with a division 2 squad and had to build to be competitive.claptrappers_union wrote:In 1993 Blackburn finished 4th
In 1994 Blackburn finished 2nd
In 1995 Blackburn finished 1st
Did Jack Walker recruit Division 2 players for three seasons on the bounce?
Youve changed your tune, havent you?Saxoman wrote:Mind numbingly crap.. Top of league one.. Young promising first team with a table topping academy side in reserve backing them up.. Whisper it quietly.. Something is stirring at ewood and brockhall.. And its not based on big money spending any more..
1.1m Newell. Our first million pound player. Hendry £700,000.UpTheBeehole wrote:Mike Newell signed for £1.3m
Hendry for over £1m.
Bear in mind Cantona joined Man Utd for £1m, and Schmeichel for £500k
The money Jack Walker spent on transfers was massive for a club the size of Blackburn - don't forget the state-of-the-art stadium at the time too.Saxoman wrote:Don't play dumb, you know what I mean. We came up in 1992 with a division 2 squad and had to build to be competitive.
Wtf are you on about? I'll say it slowly.. We came up with D2 players and had to build a squad to compete. This we did for the next 3 seasons, culminating in our title win.claptrappers_union wrote:The money Jack Walker spend on transfers was massive.
Can you imagine Sean Dyche being allowed to build and financially compete with the likes of Manchester City, then claiming we won the league with 'Championship players' in three years time?
So when Walker took over and they were in the lower reaches of the old second division they would have still got promoted and won the league if he hadn't rocked up with his millions? Rovers didn't create a level playing field they virtually created the boom and bust economy that is modern football. Without Walker there would have been no Dalglish, no Shearer, no Sutton, no Savage, need I GO ON. Taking into account inflation Blackburn Rovers under Walker spent money the like of which had never been seen in football before. They didn't create a level playing field, they created the absolute opposite.Saxoman wrote:We didn't buy the title, we bought a fair and level playing field, parity with the big boys, then won the title deservedly through dalglish, harford and parkes brilliant management and coaching. Much of it masterminded may I add, on the public playing fields of pleasington pre brockhall.
UTD generated enough revenue to afford it, Rovers didn't.Saxoman wrote:1.1m Newell. Our first million pound player. Hendry £700,000.
Dion Dublin also signed for utd for 1m.
Andy Cole 8m.Quickenthetempo wrote:What's Rovers record signings by the way?
Duff to Chelsea £18m? Outgoing.
That right crap centre forward for £7.5? Incoming.
But utd ALREADY had a multi million pound squad to compete for the title, before signing anybody.Sidney1st wrote:UTD generated enough revenue to afford it, Rovers didn't.
It's been well documented that Walker was determined to outspend the big clubs.
Yes, with a benefactor with a bottomless pockets who could compete with the biggest clubs at the time. I'm just making a hypothetical comparison. If a billionaire owner came to Burnley tomorrow and spent the same as the likes Manchester City, United, Arsenal, Chelsea and won the league, would you suggest Burnley 'bought' the title? Yes you would. Just like Chelsea and Manchester City have done in recent times - they have been nowhere for years.Saxoman wrote:Wtf are you on about? I'll say it slowly.. We came up with D2 players and had to build a squad to compete. This we did for the next 3 seasons, culminating in our title win.
They still don't, and it's 2018Sidney1st wrote:
Assuming those figures are reasonably accurate, Rovers didn't generate enough revenue to lose that amount of money each season without the help of Walker.
Yes and no...Saxoman wrote:But utd ALREADY had a multi million pound squad to compete for the title, before signing anybody.