Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: PaulTheVillan on January 21, 2016, 09:46:07 AM
-
Heard on the radio this morning that the team finishing bottom of the Premier League this season gets (roughly) the following:
- £32m 'prize' fund.
- £32m parachute payment in year 1
- £14m parachute payment in year 2
- £14m parachute payment in year 3
-
Heard on the radio this morning that the team finishing bottom of the Premier League this season gets (roughly) the following:
- £32m 'prize' fund.
- £32m parachute payment in year 1
- £14m parachute payment in year 2
- £14m parachute payment in year 3
frightening when you think that the bottom club next season gets £100 million
-
Heard on the radio this morning that the team finishing bottom of the Premier League this season gets (roughly) the following:
- £32m 'prize' fund.
- £32m parachute payment in year 1
- £14m parachute payment in year 2
- £14m parachute payment in year 3
frightening when you think that the bottom club next season gets £100 million
What a season to get yourself relegated.
-
Heard on the radio this morning that the team finishing bottom of the Premier League this season gets (roughly) the following:
- £32m 'prize' fund.
- £32m parachute payment in year 1
- £14m parachute payment in year 2
- £14m parachute payment in year 3
frightening when you think that the bottom club next season gets £100 million
What a season to get yourself relegated.
'Twas ever thus. Every season, every new deal, is The One that will cast you into an eternal void if you miss it.
-
Heard on the radio this morning that the team finishing bottom of the Premier League this season gets (roughly) the following:
- £32m 'prize' fund.
- £32m parachute payment in year 1
- £14m parachute payment in year 2
- £14m parachute payment in year 3
frightening when you think that the bottom club next season gets £100 million
What a season to get yourself relegated.
'Twas ever thus. Every season, every new deal, is The One that will cast you into an eternal void if you miss it.
It's one hell of a leap from £32m to £100m though.
-
Heard on the radio this morning that the team finishing bottom of the Premier League this season gets (roughly) the following:
- £32m 'prize' fund.
- £32m parachute payment in year 1
- £14m parachute payment in year 2
- £14m parachute payment in year 3
frightening when you think that the bottom club next season gets £100 million
What a season to get yourself relegated.
'Twas ever thus. Every season, every new deal, is The One that will cast you into an eternal void if you miss it.
It's one hell of a leap from £32m to £100m though.
It is, but I'm reminded of a chairman a few years ago (it might have been John Madjeski) who, when asked about the Championship play-off being worth something like £60 million, replied, "Maybe, but that's forgetting the extra £50 million you have to pay out."
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
32 all day long i wont mind a cut in commercial revenue, matchday income and st sales either
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
Indeed. Would you rather say have £32m to spend on players in the Championship or £100m to spend in the Premier?
Yeah, that's a tough one.
-
Which is why it is imperative to get back first time as every year the relegated clubs will have a huge Finacial advantage over the ones allready down there.
This does assume that player contracts do take into account relegation.
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
In the Championship £32m is a figure that should be enough to help you be competitive. Any team subsequently getting promoted will then qualify for the PL numbers.
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
Indeed. Would you rather say have £32m to spend on players in the Championship or £100m to spend in the Premier?
Yeah, that's a tough one.
We could allways try young and hungry!
-
I'd found parachute payment figures previously that were different to those posted in the OP. I suppose it stands to reason that the new, hyper-inflated PL TV deal will bring inflated parachute payments.
-
I'd found parachute payment figures previously that were different to those posted in the OP. I suppose it stands to reason that the new, hyper-inflated PL TV deal will bring inflated parachute payments.
They go up to the ones above at the start of next season (i.e when we would be getting them). There are a few other changes as well - if Bournemouth or Norwich go down then we would get more than them overall due to us being in the Premier League for longer.
-
if Bournemouth or Norwich go down then we would get more than them overall due to us being in the Premier League for longer.
Really? Wow! It's almost as though the PL really want to eliminate promotion and relegation.
-
if Bournemouth or Norwich go down then we would get more than them overall due to us being in the Premier League for longer.
Really? Wow! It's almost as though the PL really want to eliminate promotion and relegation.
If they want to try it out this season I'm sure we'd all support them.
-
if Bournemouth or Norwich go down then we would get more than them overall due to us being in the Premier League for longer.
Really? Wow! It's almost as though the PL really want to eliminate promotion and relegation.
And who is to say they won't.
What it potential does is make a PL of 23 clubs with 6 rotating.
-
Which is why it is imperative to get back first time as every year the relegated clubs will have a huge Finacial advantage over the ones allready down there.
This does assume that player contracts do take into account relegation.
you would hope so
most worrying for me is that currently the sky money is 62% of our turnover
still not to worry
-
if Bournemouth or Norwich go down then we would get more than them overall due to us being in the Premier League for longer.
Really? Wow! It's almost as though the PL really want to eliminate promotion and relegation.
And who is to say they won't.
What it potential does is make a PL of 23 clubs with 6 rotating.
I wouldn't disagree. I just wonder how much extra a newly relegated team that's been in the PL from inception will receive over Bournemouth and Norwich.
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
If we're relegated though, there will only be one maybe two clubs in the Championship who can compete financially with us.
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
I tend to agree with this. We're already seeing inflated prices for players getting thrown about. £24 mill for Berahino, £60+ mill for Lukaku and that's not taking into account the wages. If anything the teams spending big for next season will be the ones gambling the most if they get relegated next season.
-
if Bournemouth or Norwich go down then we would get more than them overall due to us being in the Premier League for longer.
Really? Wow! It's almost as though the PL really want to eliminate promotion and relegation.
And who is to say they won't.
What it potential does is make a PL of 23 clubs with 6 rotating.
I wouldn't disagree. I just wonder how much extra a newly relegated team that's been in the PL from inception will receive over Bournemouth and Norwich.
It's all here (http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jun/02/parachute-payments-clubs-relegated-premier-league)
Promoted clubs who are relegated after a single year in the Premier League will no longer benefit from full parachute payments from the 2016-17 season. The change in the rules means that the promoted clubs, Bournemouth, Watford and Norwich, will miss out on a year of parachute payments if they go straight back down at the end of next season.
The parachute payments system is also changing so that the money – at least £64m – will be distributed to relegated clubs over three years rather than four. Clubs who go back down after a single year in the Premier League will get only the first two years of payments rather than the full three years.
The new rules will not affect the three clubs most recently relegated from the top flight – Hull, QPR and Burnley. They will receive £64m split over four years – £24m in the first year, then £19.3m, then £9.6m for each of the next two years.
From the 2016-17 season relegated clubs will receive 55% of the equal share of broadcast revenue paid to Premier League clubs in the first year after relegation, 45% the following year and 20% in year three. Clubs relegated after a single season will receive 55% and 45% over two seasons with the third payment eliminated entirely.
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
If we're relegated though, there will only be one maybe two clubs in the Championship who can compete financially with us.
which is fine is we come back up in a couple of seasons
-
Reading those figures and the amounts being suggested for next season just accentuate my growing alienation from the modern game, a £32m prize for being one of the worst clubs in the league. Do they also award a prize for players who can kick themselves in the face?
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
If we're relegated though, there will only be one maybe two clubs in the Championship who can compete financially with us.
which is fine is we come back up in a couple of seasons
I don't think it is fine.
The money will fuel inflation of signings as well as salaries. That means the clubs who remain in the division will be able to fund the signings of players who we wont be able to - even if we were able to convince them to play in a lower division.
In the event of being promoted, we will have a relatively weaker squad and the cost of improving that squad to premier league standard will be that much greater.
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
If we're relegated though, there will only be one maybe two clubs in the Championship who can compete financially with us.
which is fine is we come back up in a couple of seasons
I don't think it is fine.
The money will fuel inflation of signings as well as salaries. That means the clubs who remain in the division will be able to fund the signings of players who we wont be able to - even if we were able to convince them to play in a lower division.
In the event of being promoted, we will have a relatively weaker squad and the cost of improving that squad to premier league standard will be that much greater.
Agree which is why we have to bounce, the gap between the PL and below will be enormous.
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
If we're relegated though, there will only be one maybe two clubs in the Championship who can compete financially with us.
which is fine is we come back up in a couple of seasons
I don't think it is fine.
The money will fuel inflation of signings as well as salaries. That means the clubs who remain in the division will be able to fund the signings of players who we wont be able to - even if we were able to convince them to play in a lower division.
In the event of being promoted, we will have a relatively weaker squad and the cost of improving that squad to premier league standard will be that much greater.
sorry it mas my poor attempt at irony
i reckon we could get away with one season any longer and we will be competing against newly relegated clubs who will have a bigger wedge
-
Do they also award a prize for players who can kick themselves in the face?
the Villa have been awarding that to Charles N'Zogbia for the last five years.
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
If we're relegated though, there will only be one maybe two clubs in the Championship who can compete financially with us.
which is fine is we come back up in a couple of seasons
I don't think it is fine.
The money will fuel inflation of signings as well as salaries. That means the clubs who remain in the division will be able to fund the signings of players who we wont be able to - even if we were able to convince them to play in a lower division.
In the event of being promoted, we will have a relatively weaker squad and the cost of improving that squad to premier league standard will be that much greater.
People have been saying the same for years but the three promoted clubs this year are all managing to stay out of the relegation zone without having spent tens of millions of pounds.
Too much is made of the money issue. A well run club is a well run club. If the Villa have done things right, our players will all have relegation clauses in their contracts which will mean their salaries drop in line with our revenue. If any of them want to try to retain a Premier League salary by moving to a Premier League team then good luck to them, but in the most part I don't think there will be too many clubs after our lot and if we've structured things right we won't have to sell them.
-
You're absolutely right that a well run club allows you to compete and undoubtedly out perform clubs who're mismanaged.
You make a point about salaries being scalable, but this is not the issue. The cost of signings is the problem.
The clubs that stay up will use some of their cash to buy players that we wont be able to afford. Their squads will get relatively stronger as a result and create a gap which although not impossible to bridge will be harder no matter how well run we may become.
-
You're absolutely right that a well run club allows you to compete and undoubtedly out perform clubs who're mismanaged.
You make a point about salaries being scalable, but this is not the issue. The cost of signings is the problem.
The clubs that stay up will use some of their cash to buy players that we wont be able to afford. Their squads will get relatively stronger as a result and create a gap which although not impossible to bridge will be harder no matter how well run we may become.
So how do you explain Watford being on 29 points already despite their lack of buying power over the past few years?
There are two things to bear in mind - (1) getting promoted from the Championship involves being one of the best 3 teams in the Championship, and Premier League TV money has absolutely no bearing on that; and (2) the quality of a team is more than just the money spent on it - we were something like the 4th or 5th highest spenders last Summer and look how that panned out.
I agree that a long time spent outside the top flight will make life more difficult for us, but getting relegated isn't the cataclysmic event that it's sometimes portrayed as. Unless Newcastle come down with us we'll be comfortably the biggest club in the Championship, with the biggest ground, the most fans, the best set up (Executive board aside!), etc, etc. If the people that matter get a grip on things and run the club properly we should be back in a sensible time frame and once back in the Prem should have no issue staying up.
-
This money argument is bunk. The more clubs earn/are paid the more they have to give out in fees and wages. Our recovery will depend on good sound management rather than money. No point in slashing our wrists over £32/100 million issue.
so which would you rather have 32 or a 100? Tough question eh?
Oh OK I hope we survive this year by the skin of our teeth and get relegated next season as it would be wonderful!
-
The numbers aren't correct. Until such a time as the overseas rights are flogged nobody knows what the exact figures are. However, parachute payments run at 55%, 45% and 20% of what each Premier League club gets.
-
Under Lerner nothing would change if we stayed up, we wouldn't be spending 100m a summer again would we? It would be 20m net or whatever the average figure it has been for last 5 years.
How would we fall into line with FFP in the championship? Would we meet regulations or get a transfer embargo like recently relegated clubs like Blackburn and Cardiff (QPR should have one aswell but they seem to be a special case for some odd reason).
-
To get out of the Championship and stay in the Premier League you need a good balance squad that can play football. You can then survive injuries or some of your players being cherry-picked. Relying on a few individuals (just as we have in the last couple of seasons) exposes you if you lose them.
With the high finances involved in football these days and possibly going from feast to famine, is it time that relegation/promotion is reduced back to two teams. When you consider it used to be 2 from 22 and now it is 3 from 20, it adds to the excitement for neutral fans but is it actually ruining football because of the high stakes leading to constant change.
-
Heard on the radio this morning that the team finishing bottom of the Premier League this season gets (roughly) the following:
- £32m 'prize' fund.
- £32m parachute payment in year 1
- £14m parachute payment in year 2
- £14m parachute payment in year 3
frightening when you think that the bottom club next season gets £100 million
What a season to get yourself relegated.
'Twas ever thus. Every season, every new deal, is The One that will cast you into an eternal void if you miss it.
It's one hell of a leap from £32m to £100m though.
It is, but I'm reminded of a chairman a few years ago (it might have been John Madjeski) who, when asked about the Championship play-off being worth something like £60 million, replied, "Maybe, but that's forgetting the extra £50 million you have to pay out."
I think it was Alan Sugar who said to the other 19 chairman when going thorugh the TV deals on the table "3 million or 3 Billion, we will all p/ss it up the wall on player wages"
-
I think it was Alan Sugar who said to the other 19 chairman when going thorugh the TV deals on the table "3 million or 3 Billion, we will all p/ss it up the wall on player wages"
The prune juice effect he called it.
-
As it stands 2 of the clubs who went down Hull and Burnley are looking strong candidates to come back up as opposed to the very poorly run QPR who are hovering around mid table. Neither club lost many of their top players and after sluggish starts their quality is telling.The money should give us a massive advantage and we will likely be far and away the biggest club in the league so that alone will help us attract the better players.
Staying in prem league is not just about money , the same as winning it is not just about the money ( though it helps ) you need good scouts , good coaching and good management.
-
A bit nihilistic, but all this talk of parachute payments makes me feel dirty. It's a bit like when Champions League clubs are knocked out but then grafted in to the Europa League. I think it's an unfair advantage (not just for Villa, for whoever is awarded it).
I might have it upside down but I can't wait for football to crash, go bust and we can maybe get our sport back.
-
As it stands 2 of the clubs who went down Hull and Burnley are looking strong candidates to come back up as opposed to the very poorly run QPR who are hovering around mid table. Neither club lost many of their top players and after sluggish starts their quality is telling.The money should give us a massive advantage and we will likely be far and away the biggest club in the league so that alone will help us attract the better players.
Staying in prem league is not just about money , the same as winning it is not just about the money ( though it helps ) you need good scouts , good coaching and good management.
We have to maximise this by getting promoted at the first or second attempt. Once you've been down a few years you blend in, like Leeds.
-
A bit nihilistic, but all this talk of parachute payments makes me feel dirty. It's a bit like when Champions League clubs are knocked out but then grafted in to the Europa League. I think it's an unfair advantage (not just for Villa, for whoever is awarded it).
I might have it upside down but I can't wait for football to crash, go bust and we can maybe get our sport back.
Agreed
-
IF we can get to a position ASAP where we look a good bet for promotion at the first try - we will be a reasonably attractive proposition for some of the better Championship players - especially this time of year .
-
It doesn't take many N'Zogbias to cancel out the difference between £32 million and £100 million. I have found the secret of accumulating wealth is not how much you get in but how much of it you keep. The legendary JJ Gallagher once said to me it's not the deals you do that make you rich, it's the ones you don't do.