What has football come to?

[TRon]

At the end of the day, football is supposed to be about more than business and more than money. It's supposed to mean something.

 

Fair enough, people might say that's naive and it's just a business now. I that's the case, what's the difference between me supporting NUFC or choosing to support Chelsea for a few months? Or giving up on it completely?

 

If it's just entertainment, or just a business, then it ceases to be beautiful and I don't want anything to do with it.

 

At the moment I feel like an idiot for believing that we wouldn't sell Carroll or that the #9 shirt and NUFC meant anything to him.

 

I can understand this viewpoint but when Sunderland sold Bent I can remember saying that a cold hard look at it would suggest that Sunderland had sold him at his optimum value and personally I felt he was on a downward spiral at Sunderland anyway. While Carroll is a different case there was always a part of me that wondered if he didn't continue in this vein next season we would never get this sort of money for him again. Unfortunately to keep players when the big clubs come calling will mean smashing our wage structure which we obviously aren't prepared to do yet.

[polpolpol]

At the end of the day, football is supposed to be about more than business and more than money. It's supposed to mean something.

 

Fair enough, people might say that's naive and it's just a business now. I that's the case, what's the difference between me supporting NUFC or choosing to support Chelsea for a few months? Or giving up on it completely?

 

If it's just entertainment, or just a business, then it ceases to be beautiful and I don't want anything to do with it.

 

At the moment I feel like an idiot for believing that we wouldn't sell Carroll or that the #9 shirt and NUFC meant anything to him.

 

I can understand this viewpoint but when Sunderland sold Bent I can remember saying that a cold hard look at it would suggest that Sunderland had sold him at his optimum value and personally I felt he was on a downward spiral at Sunderland anyway. While Carroll is a different case there was always a part of me that wondered if he didn't continue in this vein next season we would never get this sort of money for him again. Unfortunately to keep players when the big clubs come calling will mean smashing our wage structure which we obviously aren't prepared to do yet.

 

This round of transfer activity is driven by Chelsea's willingness to spend big before the impact of the finical fair play rules. There's no guarantee that once the roundabout stops spinning now, anyone will be driving it with such big investments in the future.

[ponsaelius]

Just nabbed this off Redcafe, couldn't sum up this thread any more aptly.

 

 

August 3rd 2010: “This is the best club in the country so the targets and expectations are always high. I am really happy to be back, really happy to stay with all my team-mates. My commitment and loyalty to the club and to the fans is the same as it was on my first day when I signed. I felt at home from the first day, I feel the fans love me and everyone knows I am really happy here and really happy to play at Anfield.”

 

5 months later, Fernando Torres hands in a transfer request and is in talks to join Chelsea.

 

October 8th 2010: “All I have ever wanted to do is play for Newcastle. That’s been the case since I was a teenager, playing for the juniors and deserves, and it’s still the same now. Every time I pull on the black and white shirt – and even more so now that I have number nine on my back – it means the world to me so to be able to do that for at least the next five years is brilliant.”

 

3 months later, Andy Carroll hands in a transfer request and is in talks to join Liverpool.

 

[Greg]

I think we need to see an end to agents, all players should be represented by the PFA if they want representation.

 

Never going to happen though.

[cp40]

Cap a clubs wages at the Turnover from the turnstiles.

[Dr Venkman]

At the end of the day, football is supposed to be about more than business and more than money. It's supposed to mean something.

 

Fair enough, people might say that's naive and it's just a business now. I that's the case, what's the difference between me supporting NUFC or choosing to support Chelsea for a few months? Or giving up on it completely?

 

If it's just entertainment, or just a business, then it ceases to be beautiful and I don't want anything to do with it.

 

At the moment I feel like an idiot for believing that we wouldn't sell Carroll or that the #9 shirt and NUFC meant anything to him.

 

I can understand this viewpoint but when Sunderland sold Bent I can remember saying that a cold hard look at it would suggest that Sunderland had sold him at his optimum value and personally I felt he was on a downward spiral at Sunderland anyway. While Carroll is a different case there was always a part of me that wondered if he didn't continue in this vein next season we would never get this sort of money for him again. Unfortunately to keep players when the big clubs come calling will mean smashing our wage structure which we obviously aren't prepared to do yet.

 

This round of transfer activity is driven by Chelsea's willingness to spend big before the impact of the finical fair play rules. There's no guarantee that once the roundabout stops spinning now, anyone will be driving it with such big investments in the future.

 

are the fair play rules actually coming into effect? and what do they mean?

[wormy]

The media have brought so much money to the game. The more money into an industry, the more it trickles down to the people in said industry. Just a shame exactly how far it's got. The money on offer these days will turn any player's head, no matter what their 'loyalty' is to a club. It's just bred a generation of pricks, and I can't see how that will change for a good few generations.

 

Until the punters stop piling the amount of money they do into the game, it'll stay this way.

[polpolpol]

At the end of the day, football is supposed to be about more than business and more than money. It's supposed to mean something.

 

Fair enough, people might say that's naive and it's just a business now. I that's the case, what's the difference between me supporting NUFC or choosing to support Chelsea for a few months? Or giving up on it completely?

 

If it's just entertainment, or just a business, then it ceases to be beautiful and I don't want anything to do with it.

 

At the moment I feel like an idiot for believing that we wouldn't sell Carroll or that the #9 shirt and NUFC meant anything to him.

 

 

 

I can understand this viewpoint but when Sunderland sold Bent I can remember saying that a cold hard look at it would suggest that Sunderland had sold him at his optimum value and personally I felt he was on a downward spiral at Sunderland anyway. While Carroll is a different case there was always a part of me that wondered if he didn't continue in this vein next season we would never get this sort of money for him again. Unfortunately to keep players when the big clubs come calling will mean smashing our wage structure which we obviously aren't prepared to do yet.

 

This round of transfer activity is driven by Chelsea's willingness to spend big before the impact of the finical fair play rules. There's no guarantee that once the roundabout stops spinning now, anyone will be driving it with such big investments in the future.

 

are the fair play rules actually coming into effect? and what do they mean?

 

From 2011-2012 season the operating loss made over each three year period will not be able to break a certain level. In the initial period (up to 2015) that will be £38 million, so one contemporary Andy Carroll blows it all. Of course, Liverpool wouldn't be in trouble, because they sold Torres for the money. But Chelsea would not have been able to roll the first stone by magicking up £50 million if the rules were in place now. Once the loss making clubs are no longer in a position to drive the market, there should be some deflation in fees.

[Village Idiot]

I think we need to see an end to agents, all players should be represented by the PFA if they want representation.

 

Never going to happen though.

 

http://www.sportspromedia.com/notes_and_insights/fifa_could_scrap_licences_in_overhaul_of_agent_regulation/

 

Not sure what will come out of it though.

[Village Idiot]

At the end of the day, football is supposed to be about more than business and more than money. It's supposed to mean something.

 

Fair enough, people might say that's naive and it's just a business now. I that's the case, what's the difference between me supporting NUFC or choosing to support Chelsea for a few months? Or giving up on it completely?

 

If it's just entertainment, or just a business, then it ceases to be beautiful and I don't want anything to do with it.

 

At the moment I feel like an idiot for believing that we wouldn't sell Carroll or that the #9 shirt and NUFC meant anything to him.

 

 

 

I can understand this viewpoint but when Sunderland sold Bent I can remember saying that a cold hard look at it would suggest that Sunderland had sold him at his optimum value and personally I felt he was on a downward spiral at Sunderland anyway. While Carroll is a different case there was always a part of me that wondered if he didn't continue in this vein next season we would never get this sort of money for him again. Unfortunately to keep players when the big clubs come calling will mean smashing our wage structure which we obviously aren't prepared to do yet.

 

This round of transfer activity is driven by Chelsea's willingness to spend big before the impact of the finical fair play rules. There's no guarantee that once the roundabout stops spinning now, anyone will be driving it with such big investments in the future.

 

are the fair play rules actually coming into effect? and what do they mean?

 

From 2011-2012 season the operating loss made over each three year period will not be able to break a certain level. In the initial period (up to 2015) that will be £38 million, so one contemporary Andy Carroll blows it all. Of course, Liverpool wouldn't be in trouble, because they sold Torres for the money. But Chelsea would not have been able to roll the first stone by magicking up £50 million if the rules were in place now. Once the loss making clubs are no longer in a position to drive the market, there should be some deflation in fees.

 

Until this season Madrid or Barcelona haven't posted an operating loss in years (and our previous board was able to cook accounts to still show a profit this year), yet the debt of both clubs hasn't stopped growing. Both clubs' accounts are legal and audited, so I don't see how this kind of oversight can be implemented.

[Dr Venkman]

At the end of the day, football is supposed to be about more than business and more than money. It's supposed to mean something.

 

Fair enough, people might say that's naive and it's just a business now. I that's the case, what's the difference between me supporting NUFC or choosing to support Chelsea for a few months? Or giving up on it completely?

 

If it's just entertainment, or just a business, then it ceases to be beautiful and I don't want anything to do with it.

 

At the moment I feel like an idiot for believing that we wouldn't sell Carroll or that the #9 shirt and NUFC meant anything to him.

 

 

 

I can understand this viewpoint but when Sunderland sold Bent I can remember saying that a cold hard look at it would suggest that Sunderland had sold him at his optimum value and personally I felt he was on a downward spiral at Sunderland anyway. While Carroll is a different case there was always a part of me that wondered if he didn't continue in this vein next season we would never get this sort of money for him again. Unfortunately to keep players when the big clubs come calling will mean smashing our wage structure which we obviously aren't prepared to do yet.

 

This round of transfer activity is driven by Chelsea's willingness to spend big before the impact of the finical fair play rules. There's no guarantee that once the roundabout stops spinning now, anyone will be driving it with such big investments in the future.

 

are the fair play rules actually coming into effect? and what do they mean?

 

From 2011-2012 season the operating loss made over each three year period will not be able to break a certain level. In the initial period (up to 2015) that will be £38 million, so one contemporary Andy Carroll blows it all. Of course, Liverpool wouldn't be in trouble, because they sold Torres for the money. But Chelsea would not have been able to roll the first stone by magicking up £50 million if the rules were in place now. Once the loss making clubs are no longer in a position to drive the market, there should be some deflation in fees.

 

right. so whatever you bring in, you can only spend 38m more than that? is that it?

[madras]

the worlds first football club sheffield FC was formed in order to make money from the unused cricket pitch in the winter. it's always been about money.

 

 

(fuck knows who sheffield played against mind  )

[leffe186]

I can kind of see where the lad is coming from. As for me, it's not my passion for Newcastle I'm losing, it's my passion for the game.

 

I'm with you on this, even as a Spurs fan. You know that you're never going to leave your club whatever happens, but I despair of the game sometimes and this is one of those times. A club that has an operating profit of minus 70M pounds (which is still its best performance for years) just spent more than that amount on two players, allowing another club to spend far far more than we've ever spent on two other players. Both are clubs we're supposedly in competition with, but what kind of competition is that? Yet you still get dickwads like Vincent Kompany trying to tell me that it's good for English football, that "You want to have a competitive league and big spending attracts the top players." f*** OFF.

 

Said this already and can't be bothered to type it out again.

 

The one thing I would say, though, is that the fans of almost all clubs bar the top 5 or 6 have had to come to terms with this kind of thing for far longer than us. How have Southampton fans dealt with Bale and Walcott leaving? Even Spurs had the Carrick and Berbatov moves. I realize that they hadn't come up through our ranks (Sol Campbell, anyone? Wayne Rooney?) but they were the centrepiece of teams that were going places until a bigger fish came and threw money at them.

 

I moved to the US two years ago, and it all looks even more unseemly from over here. I've been a fan of Spurs for over 30 years now. All along, it's been down to us fans to maintain the facade of tribalism, clubs rooted in their community, clubs that mean something more than the cut-throat businesses (yet beholden to the vagaries of fortune) they've always been. It's been a hard job, and I'm tempted to say screw it, send Man U, Man City, Arsenal and Chelsea off to a European league and be done with them.

 

 

[Thespence]

People used the word "Love" a few times yesterday by saying "How can he leave the club he loves". Pique & Cesc both preferred to come to England for bigger bunce rather than work there way through the system at Barca the club they have both claimed to love.We have commentators say about Rooney after he runs 50 yards "He would play like that if he was playing for the Rose & Crown" no he fucking wouldn't as he would around £150K a week. After looking in the NOFC thread you can  see lads paying there own way around the country to play football. I wonder when playing a game you love & playing for clubs you love/support is no longer the most important thing?

[Incognito]

People used the word "Love" a few times yesterday by saying "How can he leave the club he loves". Pique & Cesc both preferred to come to England for bigger bunce rather than work there way through the system at Barca the club they have both claimed to love.We have commentators say about Rooney after he runs 50 yards "He would play like that if he was playing for the Rose & Crown" no he fucking wouldn't as he would around £150K a week. After looking in the NOFC thread you can  see lads paying there own way around the country to play football. I wonder when playing a game you love & playing for clubs you love/support is no longer the most important thing?

 

The players who stay at one club forever,like Giggs,Tony Adams etc,used to be commonplace years ago.Players bought into the loyal to the club ethic,but even before Bosman,players were getting more powerful and since, loyal players are a rarity.

 

Of course this has a knock-on effect to the fans whose idols move on for a greater bank balance,and the fans' emotional attachment is eroded.

 

It's made the game of football half the game it used to be.

[Guest sittingontheball]

If Spuds don't make CL again, selling Bale would do nothing more than cover the drop in income for what, two years? Or the other way, if Chelskis signings ensure they get top four, isn't that a 20M plus payback (vs. Europa League) straight away? 20M for finishing FOURTH.

 

Maybe it's natural that the other teams that have fans posting regularly on here are Everton, Spurs and Villa. Teams with fanbases that may have given them the ability to kick on and mount a challenge in the past, but find it increasingly hard to do so now.

 

 

[Guest neesy111]

Football will implode on itself no doubt, attendances are down in the premiership this season by a decent amount obviously for various differences but still when stories like the carroll situation become more and more commonplace the proper fans will think enough is enough.

 

This week has made me think why do I spend £100's of my hard earned on a bunch of fucking idiots who don't care one iota about the fans that pay their wages.

[polpolpol]

At the end of the day, football is supposed to be about more than business and more than money. It's supposed to mean something.

 

Fair enough, people might say that's naive and it's just a business now. I that's the case, what's the difference between me supporting NUFC or choosing to support Chelsea for a few months? Or giving up on it completely?

 

If it's just entertainment, or just a business, then it ceases to be beautiful and I don't want anything to do with it.

 

At the moment I feel like an idiot for believing that we wouldn't sell Carroll or that the #9 shirt and NUFC meant anything to him.

 

 

 

I can understand this viewpoint but when Sunderland sold Bent I can remember saying that a cold hard look at it would suggest that Sunderland had sold him at his optimum value and personally I felt he was on a downward spiral at Sunderland anyway. While Carroll is a different case there was always a part of me that wondered if he didn't continue in this vein next season we would never get this sort of money for him again. Unfortunately to keep players when the big clubs come calling will mean smashing our wage structure which we obviously aren't prepared to do yet.

 

This round of transfer activity is driven by Chelsea's willingness to spend big before the impact of the finical fair play rules. There's no guarantee that once the roundabout stops spinning now, anyone will be driving it with such big investments in the future.

 

are the fair play rules actually coming into effect? and what do they mean?

 

From 2011-2012 season the operating loss made over each three year period will not be able to break a certain level. In the initial period (up to 2015) that will be £38 million, so one contemporary Andy Carroll blows it all. Of course, Liverpool wouldn't be in trouble, because they sold Torres for the money. But Chelsea would not have been able to roll the first stone by magicking up £50 million if the rules were in place now. Once the loss making clubs are no longer in a position to drive the market, there should be some deflation in fees.

 

right. so whatever you bring in, you can only spend 38m more than that? is that it?

Theoretically. But a load of things are deductible from the running coast calculations like academy development, so there will be a bit of room for fudging the books to make it add up. It should take a few years before sufficient legal/populist/investigative pressure is put on clubs to really comply, but making big money transfers isn't going to look too good for borderline cases.

[leffe186]

If Spuds don't make CL again, selling Bale would do nothing more than cover the drop in income for what, two years? Or the other way, if Chelskis signings ensure they get top four, isn't that a 20M plus payback (vs. Europa League) straight away? 20M for finishing FOURTH.

 

Maybe it's natural that the other teams that have fans posting regularly on here are Everton, Spurs and Villa. Teams with fanbases that may have given them the ability to kick on and mount a challenge in the past, but find it increasingly hard to do so now.

 

 

 

Agreed. There's definitely a little bit of kindred souldom in there.

 

The issue I have with the Chelsea point though, is sure, that might be a 20M payback, but they just spent over 70M to do so. When their operating loss is 70M. We might sell Bale, but the idea that this covers our losses from not qualifying for the CL is misleading - like most clubs since Leeds we simply cannot budget to get into the CL. We've got to treat the CL money as a bonus. Two of the top four have bonkers money because they've earned it, and the other two have bonkers money because it fell into their laps, and that means that they can essentially spunk whatever it takes.

 

The gap cannot be bridged, unless us or Everton do a blinding job of getting a new stadium, or Newcastle, Liverpool or Villa do a blinding job of rebuilding their squads. Even if that happens, we'd need the new financial regulations to hit hard. Villa are the one club of the four that have a sugar daddy, which might help them out.