2-3 players and this team will succeed (2 Viewers)

Evo1883 · Sep 21, 2013

I was at the game today and aside from the first 10 minutes which were scrappy , the first half was almost as complete an away performance ive ever seen city play.
If pressley is given the freedom to get in 2-3 more players to bring in squad depth i truly believe we would make the playoffs at least.
Great to watch, i think we actually Threw the game away today, baker was awful and really annoyed me with his attitude on the pitch , adams distribution was average and felt he was below his best , and after a good first half webster had a stinker.
I think although we lost today to what can only be described as an average vale team , it was our own doing and i saw plenty in the first half to fill me with optimism for the season ahead , chins up PUSB

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Sep 21, 2013

The first half was an accomplished performance, not a great performance. We were the better team and Vale were really poor. We still didnt press home our advantage and create the chances that our dominance should have

SkyBlueHomer · Sep 21, 2013

The problem is though the FFP rules. While they persist in playing games in Northampton we have have a budget a 5th of what we could have had at the Ricoh at that will catch up with us at some point.
I was also at the game, the 1st half was the best I have seen us play for years but the group of us always joke 1 good half 1 bad half. Get things right off the pitch and things I am certain will fall into place, plenty of positives

Grendel · Sep 21, 2013

SkyBlueHomer said:
The problem is though the FFP rules. While they persist in playing games in Northampton we have have a budget a 5th of what we could have had at the Ricoh at that will catch up with us at some point.
I was also at the game, the 1st half was the best I have seen us play for years but the group of us always joke 1 good half 1 bad half. Get things right off the pitch and things I am certain will fall into place, plenty of positives

This season FPP rules apply to last seasons crowds

SkyBlueHomer · Sep 21, 2013

Grendel said:
This season FPP rules apply to last seasons crowds

I have also heard its based on a month by month basis but it doesnt matter does it. Sooner or later it will catch up, this season or next

Sky Blue Spud · Sep 21, 2013

Grendel said:
This season FPP rules apply to last seasons crowds

God help us next season whatever division we occupy. Conference level wages seem likely then.

Grendel · Sep 21, 2013

SkyBlueHomer said:
I have also heard its based on a month by month basis but it doesnt matter does it. Sooner or later it will catch up, this season or next

There is also a suggestion that any loans by the parent company will also count as revenue -- either way the "penalty" is a transfer embargo.

alphabettyspagetty · Sep 21, 2013

FFP allows for equity to be used in calculations. As such, any owner truly wanting to forward the cause of their team can put in mo0ney, as long as it doesn't do it as a loan etc! As such, if sisu truly has a long term plan, then theri is nothing stopping them investing in the team. Sure it can be used as an excuse, but it is a pretty lame blackmail tool for sisu to use.

There is of a course a relatively simple way for sisu to increase the income - bring the club back home!!!!

alphabettyspagetty · Sep 21, 2013

CraigSBA said:
I was at the game today and aside from the first 10 minutes which were scrappy , the first half was almost as complete an away performance ive ever seen city play.
If pressley is given the freedom to get in 2-3 more players to bring in squad depth i truly believe we would make the playoffs at least.
Great to watch, i think we actually Threw the game away today, baker was awful and really annoyed me with his attitude on the pitch , adams distribution was average and felt he was below his best , and after a good first half webster had a stinker.
I think although we lost today to what can only be described as an average vale team , it was our own doing and i saw plenty in the first half to fill me with optimism for the season ahead , chins up PUSB

Not convinced TBH. His first team signing so far - Webster is looking more and more iffy. True not every signing works out, and he could improve, but he was brought in to bolster the defence, strengthen the spine, and he obviously isn't doing what he was brought in to do! He inherited Clarke who took a while, and wilson et al has come from an academy that was built up as potential championship - so a tad ingenuous to put all the praise to SP when Rioch and the gang spent years developing them!

Today might be just a blip, and I hope it is, but cannot simply ignore the abject lack of a plan B from the tail end of last season. For me the jury is still out on him.

stupot07 · Sep 21, 2013

alphabettyspagetty said:
FFP allows for equity to be used in calculations. As such, any owner truly wanting to forward the cause of their team can put in mo0ney, as long as it doesn't do it as a loan etc! As such, if sisu truly has a long term plan, then theri is nothing stopping them investing in the team. Sure it can be used as an excuse, but it is a pretty lame blackmail tool for sisu to use.

There is of a course a relatively simple way for sisu to increase the income - bring the club back home!!!!

They won't inject equity into the club and neither will 99.9% of football club owners.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

fernandopartridge · Sep 22, 2013

Why didn't that cretin Thorn use them. Or Robins?

Astute · Sep 22, 2013

stupot07 said:
They won't inject equity into the club and neither will 99.9% of football club owners.

Are you sure about this? So only one in a thousand club owners pay a clubs upkeep out of their own pocket?

Man Utd were bought with loans. But they owe their owners nothing. Same as most top clubs. Or shall we go to the lower clubs....like at our level. Owners put money into their clubs. The biggest danger for these clubs is when the person putting the money in has had enough. The clubs then are left with squads they can't afford.

Would you like to name any of these 999 out of 1000 clubs that are run like our club?

kmj5000 · Sep 22, 2013

Astute said:
Are you sure about this? So only one in a thousand club owners pay a clubs upkeep out of their own pocket?

Man Utd were bought with loans. But they owe their owners nothing. Same as most top clubs. Or shall we go to the lower clubs....like at our level. Owners put money into their clubs. The biggest danger for these clubs is when the person putting the money in has had enough. The clubs then are left with squads they can't afford.

Would you like to name any of these 999 out of 1000 clubs that are run like our club?

I think you are confusing loans with equity investment (share capital that can't be repaid).

Astute · Sep 22, 2013

kmj5000 said:
I think you are confusing loans with equity investment (share capital that can't be repaid).

Not at all.

Our club gets loans. The vast majority of clubs get cash injections. No share capital as the clubs are owned by one person. No shares exist. In other words the owners put money in to cover the losses but any profit also belongs to them. Most clubs run at a loss though.

DazzleTommyDazzle · Sep 22, 2013

Astute said:
Not at all.

Our club gets loans. The vast majority of clubs get cash injections. No share capital as the clubs are owned by one person. No shares exist. In other words the owners put money in to cover the losses but any profit also belongs to them. Most clubs run at a loss though.

If a club is set up as a limited company ( as I believe they all are - Forest were the last one to be unincorporated back in the 80's) then they are by definition set up with share capital, irrespective of whether that share capital is owned by 1 person or by many thousands of different people.

luwalla · Sep 22, 2013

Astute said:
Man Utd were bought with loans. But they owe their owners nothing.

Right, but thats a loan then, money that needs to be repaid.. Its from a third party, not the owners, but its still a loan... Not an equity injection

And certainly doesnt count towards FFP

Mr T - Sukka! · Sep 22, 2013

Absolutley no chance of the playoffs. CCFC does not do top 6 finishes.

Even with 2-3 players we dont stand a chance. There is no way this squad will cope with the full season.

1) the passing game will not work on boggy winter pitches.

2) injurys will seriously hamper this thin squad. 2-3 wont fix it, will need 5-6 more.

jesus-wept · Sep 22, 2013

How do clubs such as Leyton Orient with their 3 to 4 thousand fans on a good day cope with FFP compared to the likes of us with 10000+(last year) gates ? What extra income do they have than us to make up 6 or 7 thousand a fortnight

stupot07 · Sep 22, 2013

Astute said:
Are you sure about this? So only one in a thousand club owners pay a clubs upkeep out of their own pocket?

Man Utd were bought with loans. But they owe their owners nothing. Same as most top clubs. Or shall we go to the lower clubs....like at our level. Owners put money into their clubs. The biggest danger for these clubs is when the person putting the money in has had enough. The clubs then are left with squads they can't afford.

Would you like to name any of these 999 out of 1000 clubs that are run like our club?

I won't go through them all but I'll give a few examples.

Liverpool:£45m loan last season
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/liverpool-fc-accounts-debts-up-3008725

Leicester city: over £60m loan from king power, with 8% interest charge

http://m.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/story.html?aid=18314005

Forest owed Doherty £75m from personal loans he put in to the club.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/feb/05/nigel-doughty-nottingham-forest

Qpr in debt to their share holders for £89m

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/f...des-will-use-loan-to-finance-new-stadium.html

Lots of loan arrangements discussed on this article

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...ebt-league-how-much-do-clubs-owe-1912244.html

Lots of debt in the Pl

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/may/24/football-premier-league-club-accounts

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

shmmeee · Sep 22, 2013

FFP is irrelevant I think this season. We seem to be under a special deal with the FA. I'm guessing that's in place instead after the Sisu sob story of how we would go bust.

shmmeee · Sep 22, 2013

stupot07 said:
I won't go through them all but I'll give a few examples.

Liverpool:£45m loan last season
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/liverpool-fc-accounts-debts-up-3008725

Leicester city: over £60m loan from king power, with 8% interest charge

http://m.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/story.html?aid=18314005

Forest owed Doherty £75m from personal loans he put in to the club.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/feb/05/nigel-doughty-nottingham-forest

Qpr in debt to their share holders for £89m

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/...des-will-use-loan-to-finance-new-stadium.html

Lots of loan arrangements discussed on this article

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...ebt-league-how-much-do-clubs-owe-1912244.html

Lots of debt in the Pl

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/may/24/football-premier-league-club-accounts

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

Those are hardly either standard practice or model behaviour from club. Mose fans of those clubs would agree they're fairly badly run too.

kmj5000 · Sep 22, 2013

Astute said:
Not at all.

Our club gets loans. The vast majority of clubs get cash injections. No share capital as the clubs are owned by one person. No shares exist. In other words the owners put money in to cover the losses but any profit also belongs to them. Most clubs run at a loss though.

But the point is that loans do not count under the FFP rules - only equity investment (in shares) does.

I think you will find, without exception, that all league football clubs are run as Limited Companies, which, of course, must have share capital. Anyone would be bonkers to run a football club without the protection of limited liability.

stupot07 · Sep 22, 2013

shmmeee said:
Those are hardly either standard practice or model behaviour from club. Mose fans of those clubs would agree they're fairly badly run too.

That's my point Shmmeee the majority of clubs are run poorly and because of the pressure and lure of the PL, clubs have been encouraged to spend above their means to get there. The majority of this has been through loan arrangements.

Swansea is the model I would like to see us follow. They have very strict wage policy and don't spend above their means.

With FFP, in the medium-to-long term clubs will look to reduce their costs and maximise their incomes rather than inject their own cash.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

Stafford_SkBlue · Sep 22, 2013

From the Football League, posted April 2012.
"League 1 and League 2, clubs have chosen to implement the Salary Cost Management Protocol (SCMP) first used in League 2 in 2004/05, although it will operate at different thresholds in each division.
The SCMP broadly limits spending on total player wages to a proportion of each club's turnover, with clubs providing budgetary information to The League at the beginning of the season that is updated as the campaign progresses.
Any club that is deemed to have breached the permitted spending threshold will be subject to a transfer embargo. Wherever possible, The League will seek to tackle the issue 'at source' by refusing player registrations that take clubs beyond the threshold.
At the beginning of the current season, League 2 clubs reduced the permitted spending threshold to 55% from 60% and this figure will continue to be operated next season.
League 1 clubs are currently operating a 'pilot' of the SCMP with clubs complying with a 75% threshold but with no sanctions being applicable this season. This threshold will reduce to 65% in 2012/13 and 60% in 2013/14 with sanctions (transfer embargoes) being applicable in both seasons."

stupot07 · Sep 22, 2013

There are also caveats to those rules that I think OSB posted somewhere, like players under 21(?) are excluded from ffp calculations.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

Jack Griffin · Sep 22, 2013

stupot07 said:
There are also caveats to those rules that I think OSB posted somewhere, like players under 21(?) are excluded from ffp calculations.

Jack Griffin said:
I don't believe for a minute SISU wish to pump any more money into the club.. they are intending to run at break even on a low low budget. If they can achieve that at Northampton then they'll just sit there in the expectation someone else will break.. having acedemy players that don't count in the SCMP calc. is part of that equation.. but OSB's rough calc shows just how far they may be from breakeven..

Players not included are youth players on a professional contract (i.e. players that have been in the club’s YD scheme and have been given a pro contract. They must be 20 years of age or under at the start of the season to be discounted from the SCMP calculation.

Billy Daniels Date of Birth: 03.07.94 Yes
Aaron Phillips Date of Birth: 20.11.93 Yes
Jordan Willis Date of Birth: 24.08.94 Yes
Louis Garner Date of Birth: 31.10.94 Yes
Ryan Haynes Date of Birth: 27.09.95 Yes
Leon Lobjoit Date of Birth: 04.01.95 Yes
Ben Maund Date of Birth: 07.05.95 Yes
Lewis Rankin Date of Birth: Unknown surely Yes

2-3 players and this team will succeed (2 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Banned

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency