brummie

There is an article in the Athletic today about us and FFP, and the problems we've faced dealing with it. On reading it, although in this case it is coming from journalists rather than a director (as your discussion did), the gist of it is really not that different from what your guy said this week about having to sell, the only really difference being that we are maybe a season or two away from that being a possibility. We could, however, end up having to sell a Luiz, or a Kamara for FFP purposes alone, the same as you might have to sell an Isak or a Guimaraes. Some other things it said which really show how counter-productive FFP is - we have paused plans to rebuild one end of the ground, partly because we didn't want to risk playing in the champions league with a three sided ground in terms of the support and image, but mostly because losing the revenue from that stand whilst rebuilding would have impacted really badly on FFP, which would then be loaded onto the actual costs of the build (that money spent doesn't come into FFP calculations, but it still has to come from somewhere). How insane is it that clubs get into that position? You can't do something to improve your ability to compete long term because it ruins the short term? Yet at the same time, Chelsea can go on spending billions unimpeded.

I was a 'rude boy' when ska made its comeback in 1979 or so, saw Madness, the Specials, The Beat, Bad Manners, all of them at Birmingham Odeon over a spell of 3 or 4 years. Me and my mates used to do the whole two tone trousers, white socks, loafers, fred perry jumpers (no trilby hats, though, a step too far, that).

Ah yes, you're right, as you were.

Football in these terms, it really is fucking nauseating. You know that final scene in The Thick of It, where the 'thought yurt' consultant, Stewart whatever, gives his exit speech, and says he's tried to improve things, but "ultimately, this party is build on a solid base of cunt". It's like that. A solid base of cunt.

*slowly raises eyebrow*

If it is a release clause, you've got no choice but to honour it.

I don't disagree with any of that. By noble, what I mean is in the most general terms - the concept of having a control of how money of spent in football is a good one. Just like the idea of the 'football pyramid' in financial terms is a good one, it is just crushingly disappointing in the way it is actually manifested.

The amazing thing about Suggs is you look at him, and then you look at pictures of him in 1979, and he has barely aged at all. Remarkable.

As someone else said, the effective result of all this is that clubs are incentivised to sell home grown players because of their added FFP value. So, for us for example, Cameron Archer, who has been with us since age 7, is incredibly promising as a player, is now playing for Sheffield United because we needed the extra bonus of a near 20m sale of a home grown player. I read today, Monchi, or director of football, saying that he was happy with our business in the summer window, and that the sales of Archer, Ramsey and Philogene were really necessary to create the FFP wriggle room to be able to get in some of the players we signed. Now, I understand it, that is basically playing the system as it is, and understanding the extra value that these players bring, but if you stop and think about it, is it really good that clubs have to do that? Even Chelsea might sell a player in this window or the next who has started every match but one for them because he's home grown and has the extra FFP value. Aaron Ramsey, with us since a kid, both of his brothers still at the club, mooking around at Burnley because of this. The natural extension of that is that we also know that, should things get really tight, we could sell Jacob Ramsey. Probably for a lot of money (he's better than Grealish was at that age). But how is that positive for football, forcing clubs to look at their "own" that way, because it is the only way they can compete with clubs at the other end of the ladder as it was pulled up? The idea, the aim of FFP is noble, and yes, something has to stop endless spending and purchasing of silverware, but the Man City situation has totally fucking ruined the game for the rest of us.

This whole having to sell story shows how utterly stupid the implementation of FFP is It is a convenient pulling up of the ladder exercise.

I didn't even there was another Eric Dier, what are the chances of that!

Whilst we will struggle to maintain the form for the second half of the season, the odds on us not finishing top 5 are pretty large, and if we fail to do so, it won't be anything to do with the Conference League restarting. We've used the squad really well so far - we have won every game we've played immediately after a CL fixture so far this season - and it doesn't even restart until March.

Stadium sponsorship for established grounds brings in chicken feed. In fact, can anyone even think of one? Established grounds have established names. I don't recall anyone calling SJP the sportsdirectarena or whatever abomination it was, and that is reflected in £££. It only works for new stadiums.

Just think the absolute fucking GOLDness of 65m for a homegrown like Mount.

At the time, when Atkinson went out to do his punditry, the fans were complaining that he would be in the US for the entire tournament, when he should be here, working transfers for the new season. He replied "I'm going to be amongst the best players in the world, where better to be to sign good players?" And then came back with a pundit.

That must make Emi Martinez worth about £3bn.

I still find this figure incredible every time i see it. Benfica sign him in June 22 for approx £10m. Chelsea then buy him in the Jan 23 window, a full, err, six months later, for £115m. Honestly, what could possibly happen to a player in six months to make his price got up 10x? Just fucking laughable.

Chelsea are such a mess.

Sawiris and Edens, our owners, sold a minority stake of the holding company to the investment arm of Comcast (who own, amongst other things, Sky, and are specialists in stadium development) before Xmas. In the same week they bought in, Villa said their plans to rebuilt the north stand and increase capacity were on hold. They were going to do demolition at the end of the season. The fact that happens in the very same week makes me think, they're looking at a total rebuild or - and I fucking hope this doesn't happen - a move to a new ground. There is a lot of stuff happening at the moment, the shirt manufacturer if anything is one of the least controversial things.

They said it was something to do with the application of the sponsor logo or some such nonsense. Castore are a weird company. Grown from nothing to having some big clients in no time at all.

One thing I do know, Castore are fucking shit. That sweaty garbage they did for us is an absolute pile of embarassing shit, and they couldn't even fix the problem.

Of course we will (I have no idea what that means, but yeah, deffo).

Not as far back as I can remember, no. A few people (podcaster, Athletic villa correspondent) have seen the new kit, but are sworn to secrecy, but say it’s “a belter” which fans will love and also that - and this is where I suspend belief - they’ll be cheaper than the Castore dross one of our owners is the largest shareholder in Adidas which probably helps.

You are missing one point, Froggy When it's Duran doing it, it's fine, because that's different. He plays for us.

For those of us who grew up in the 70s and 80s, he was an absolute giant of the game, a rolls royce of a player and a colossus off the pitch.