Just listening to The Price of Football this morning and if a promoted team go straight back up, the £32m parachute payment goes back to the Premier League and distributed between the teams, so around 3m per team to pay some player to sit on the bench. Should it go to the Championship to strengthen the league below or should the team promoted still get the money to invest in grass roots or academy ect? Let's not be too biased...

It should be going straight to grassroots football.

Maybe split between specific pots, like a pitch pot, facilities pot etc that grassroots clubs can apply for funding from then you can see where the parachute payment money is going. Its frankly disgusting that it goes to Premier League clubs compared to the good it could do throughout the pyramid.

I'll be honest, I thought it was fed back down the chain if that happened, didnt realise it went back into the premier league, which imo is just daft

Jjjack wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 23, 2024 8:13 am

It should be going straight to grassroots football.

Maybe split between specific pots, like a pitch pot, facilities pot etc that grassroots clubs can apply for funding from then you can see where the parachute payment money is going. Its frankly disgusting that it goes to Premier League clubs compared to the good it could do throughout the pyramid.

This is one of the most sensible things I've read on here.

Offaly_Clarets IRE wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 23, 2024 8:02 am

Just listening to The Price of Football this morning and if a promoted team go straight back up, the £32m parachute payment goes back to the Premier League and distributed between the teams, so around 3m per team to pay some player to sit on the bench. Should it go to the Championship to strengthen the league below or should the team promoted still get the money to invest in grass roots or academy ect? Let's not be too biased...

Is that £32m what we receive this season or what we're scheduled to receive over the next couple of years?

Jjjack wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 23, 2024 8:13 am

It should be going straight to grassroots football.

Maybe split between specific pots, like a pitch pot, facilities pot etc that grassroots clubs can apply for funding from then you can see where the parachute payment money is going. Its frankly disgusting that it goes to Premier League clubs compared to the good it could do throughout the pyramid.

No arguments with that. Shame it goes back to the Premier League when they've already planned to part ways with it so to speak.

They could do a vast amount of good with the TV money and affect the game hardly at all.

The PL teams get about £150m each, I think. If 10% of the TV money (which would be £300m per year) could be taken to a charity or non-profit organisation, to be used to purchase sports fields. Basically they could buy the field and put it into basic condition for sports fields (all sports, no need to restrict it to football) and hand the lease to any not-for-profit organisation (schools, local councils, sports clubs, for example) that wants to run it as a community sports centre. The local organisation could pay the running costs and maintenance but the FA charity would own the land. Schools would get their playig fields back in a way that meant they could not be sold off.

Even though we have benefitted greatly in recent years I have never agreed with parachute payments. It’s like rewarding teams for failure (a little simplistic but you get my drift). If they stopped paying them then clubs would not take such massive financial risks to try to stay up, which in turn may stop the hyper inflation that is slowly destroying the game. No other ‘industry’ pays such a high percentage out in wages. No other business area has such massive inflation to deal with. Maybe, and I confess I don’t know, if parachute payments stopped a modicum of financial common sense would return to the game.
But then what do I know.

ArmchairDetective wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 am

Is that £32m what we receive this season or what we're scheduled to receive over the next couple of years?

Relegated clubs receive:

Year 1: 55% of equal share (the equal share is around £79m of the overall £100m+ payment), so 55% of that which is around £43.5m

Year 2: 45% of equal share (if not immediately promoted)

Year 3: 20% of equal share (only if the club has stayed in the Premier League for more than one season).

The money which goes back into the central Premier League pot is the unpaid parachute payment(s), so years 2 and/or 3. Year 1 payment is paid regardless.

Jjjack wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 23, 2024 8:13 am

It should be going straight to grassroots football.

Maybe split between specific pots, like a pitch pot, facilities pot etc that grassroots clubs can apply for funding from then you can see where the parachute payment money is going. Its frankly disgusting that it goes to Premier League clubs compared to the good it could do throughout the pyramid.

As somebody involved in GRF I couldn’t agree more.

Most people not involved don’t realise the costs in running a club. Suitable facilities during winter are scarce, if you and up the number of clubs & teams needing them, and those that are available charge ridiculous amounts to use - and this year due to the prolonged bad weather, we needed to use them for an extra month

I absolutely agree with the argument about the money going to grass roots.

There’s an alternative argument from club perspective, and premier league perspective, that the promoted club should get it. Thats because you only get one years parachute payments if relegated for just one year in the premier league. If you’ve been in several years you get up to three. So I think in our case we lose at least one year technically. To make the club ‘whole’ you could give it to them. Demotion is so disruptive, you lose all your best players and so

The EFL would obviously make an argument it should go to them to improve the standard of the EFL and bridge the gap to the premier league.

One place it should definitely not go is to all the other premier league clubs. But I’d give it to grass roots.