OCK Posted Sunday at 11:41 Share Posted Sunday at 11:41 Just now, madras said: It's why I've asked many times about how we are viewed in the game now for developing talent, bringing in talented kids is pointless if we can't develop them. The academy was bare bones under Ashley. Be just over a decade since it changed it's stance from recruiting physical kids to be trained as footballers, to recruiting technical kids who can be trained to be more physical. Honestly, our standing wasn't very good. It might have improved recently, but I wouldn't be surprised if people were still looking to join Boro and Sunderland locally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bally21 Posted Sunday at 11:41 Share Posted Sunday at 11:41 Sky ffs. They are bleating on about PSR regarding various clubs.. staying this club and that club need to sell today, apparently we needed to raise 60m..how the f*ck do they know? They talked at length about us selling to forest, and forest selling to us, scratching each others backs. Sky are praying that the PL will say it's against the rules. Sky really are the big 6s b*tch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted Sunday at 11:42 Share Posted Sunday at 11:42 Just now, OCK said: The academy was bare bones under Ashley. Be just over a decade since it changed it's stance from recruiting physical kids to be trained as footballers, to recruiting technical kids who can be trained to be more physical. Honestly, our standing wasn't very good. It might have improved recently, but I wouldn't be surprised if people were still looking to join Boro and Sunderland locally. Yeah I know the way it was, just got no idea of how the coaches we've brought in are viewed in the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted Sunday at 11:42 Share Posted Sunday at 11:42 Needs to be root and branch, bringing a few talented prospects is short term. We need to make everything about the Academy 1st class. We’re miles behind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCK Posted Sunday at 11:44 Share Posted Sunday at 11:44 Just now, madras said: Yeah I know the way it was, just got no idea of how the coaches we've brought in are viewed in the game. They're all friends with the guy who recruits them, except for Brazil. But I have a feeling the guy who recruits was an apprentice at Newcastle the same time Brazil was playing, so probably cleaned his boots and owes him a favour or something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeordieT Posted Sunday at 11:48 Share Posted Sunday at 11:48 On 17/06/2024 at 11:12, GeordieT said: Very detailed and concerning analysis of PSR today in Swiss Rambles blog, even assuming for a £50m increase in our revenue from £250m to £300m, he is forecasting a £63m operating loss, compared to the required £2m profit to hit PSR, so £65m needs to be generated from player sales. However, that £65m includes the sale of ASM. So perhaps as much as £40m gap. Plenty of assumptions in play of course. So this assessment was probably fairly accurate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdm Posted Sunday at 11:57 Share Posted Sunday at 11:57 Saw a rumour on Twitter (probably a lot of shit) that suggests The PL have delayed on signing off on sponsorship deals which explains few scrabbling about looking for sales. Disgrace but predictable if true. Must stress tho just a rumour from a random account Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Posted Sunday at 11:58 Share Posted Sunday at 11:58 (edited) 1 hour ago, Bally21 said: Sky ffs. They are bleating on about PSR regarding various clubs.. staying this club and that club need to sell today, apparently we needed to raise 60m..how the f*ck do they know? They talked at length about us selling to forest, and forest selling to us, scratching each others backs. Sky are praying that the PL will say it's against the rules. Sky really are the big 6s b*tch. The blood lust from them, the PL, neutral fans and other media outlets to punish clubs and in effect put them in worse financial sitiuations (only the except opposite of the pretendy justification for these rules) is galling. Like they want the drama and farce of various points deductions across the league. As if its imperative for the future of the game and survival of small clubs that this be punished and ambitous PL clubs be even further restricted. Edited Sunday at 12:57 by Jonas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted Sunday at 11:59 Share Posted Sunday at 11:59 The amount of shit going on behind the scenes where the top six will be lobbying for anything and everything will be absolutely grim. The PL at a board level has obviously learnt a lot from FIFA’s approach to football governance Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted Sunday at 12:00 Share Posted Sunday at 12:00 10 minutes ago, GeordieT said: So this assessment was probably fairly accurate. Bro, just want to know how to calculate that 2m profit requirement? I think most of us would want to know what’s the requirement for next season, especially when we are out of Europe Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted Sunday at 12:05 Share Posted Sunday at 12:05 I think most of us couldnt give a fuck about all this and just want to know what players will be playing next season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turnbull2000 Posted Sunday at 12:05 Share Posted Sunday at 12:05 That sponsorships are being held up by the Premier League (and largely at the behest of Arse/Pool/Man U) wouldn't surprise me at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upthemags Posted Sunday at 12:08 Share Posted Sunday at 12:08 26 minutes ago, Bally21 said: Sky ffs. They are bleating on about PSR regarding various clubs.. staying this club and that club need to sell today, apparently we needed to raise 60m..how the f*ck do they know? They talked at length about us selling to forest, and forest selling to us, scratching each others backs. Sky are praying that the PL will say it's against the rules. Sky really are the big 6s b*tch. They don't - its all bluster... And, in addition to that, they're scared we're going to start spending with the new accounting period opening Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCK Posted Sunday at 12:16 Share Posted Sunday at 12:16 10 minutes ago, Turnbull2000 said: That sponsorships are being held up by the Premier League (and largely at the behest of Arse/Pool/Man U) wouldn't surprise me at all. That can't be true. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Butcher Posted Sunday at 12:20 Share Posted Sunday at 12:20 So going by the Minteh and Anderson fees we were 60m+ over the allowed 105m losses over three years. Quite astonishing management really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted Sunday at 12:21 Share Posted Sunday at 12:21 Just now, The Butcher said: So going by the Minteh and Anderson fees we were 60m+ over the allowed 105m losses over three years. Quite astonishing management really. We were clearly over £35m in the hole. After that it’s unclear how bad things were for this window. I highly doubt we were over £60m in trouble Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upthemags Posted Sunday at 12:23 Share Posted Sunday at 12:23 2 minutes ago, The Butcher said: So going by the Minteh and Anderson fees we were 60m+ over the allowed 105m losses over three years. Quite astonishing management really. To be fair, we don't know how much in excess of Minteh's fee we were over. Some (large) portion of the Anderson sale might just be banked cash to bring in some first team talent this window Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted Sunday at 12:24 Share Posted Sunday at 12:24 3 minutes ago, The Butcher said: So going by the Minteh and Anderson fees we were 60m+ over the allowed 105m losses over three years. Quite astonishing management really. Not really, supposedly 30 million, just because we got 26 million profit on Minteh doesn’t mean we would agree to sell Anderson for 6 million to make up the shortfall. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted Sunday at 12:25 Share Posted Sunday at 12:25 It’s more than probable that we needed to sell one of Minteh or Anderson but feel the values are sufficiently high to have both go through, creating a little more headroom for the next 2 years Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-421 Posted Sunday at 12:33 Share Posted Sunday at 12:33 (edited) Sky reporter just saying that all of these deals still need to be ratified by the PL, and if the PL deem any of these deals not to be 'fair market value' and inflated to suit the PSR requirements, then they (PL) may adjust the fees in their reckonings. WTF... so where was this worry about inflated fees when Man City were spending £100m on Grealish, Arsenal around £100m on Rice, and Chel$ea £115m on Caicedo?? Or is it just a problem when its clubs the PL seemingly want to punish spending/reciving higher fees??? But yeah, lets scrutinise deals where clubs are trying to meets the rules, and when clubs do it, then they may still adjust them so they can punish those clubs?? Sorry if this has been discussed already, but just saw that mentioned on SSN. Edited Sunday at 12:34 by TK-421 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upthemags Posted Sunday at 12:34 Share Posted Sunday at 12:34 1 minute ago, TK-421 said: Sky reporter just saying that all of these deals still need to be ratified by the PL, and if the PL deem any of these deals not to be 'fair market value' and inflated to suit the PSR requirements, then they (PL) may adjust the fees in their reckonings. WTF... so where was this owrry about inflated fees when Man City were spending £100m on Grealish, Arsenal £around £100m on Rice, and Chel$ea £115m on Caicedo?? But yeah, kets scrutinise deasl where clubs are trying to meets the rules, and when clubs do it, then they may still adjust them so they can punish those clubs?? Sorry if this has been discussed already, but just saw that mentioned on SSN. Sky fuming we're about to go on the attack in the market Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted Sunday at 12:41 Share Posted Sunday at 12:41 Don't see how the PL could "adjust the fees" at their will, there is so much precedent for deals like this that it just isn't realistic that they could do that without it being a huge legal minefield, It's literally calling into question the integrity of the people making the deal. We all know there's some underhand stuff going on, but you simply can't prove fair market value when there's a history of players like Anthony moving for £80m or whatever it was. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronson333 Posted Sunday at 12:46 Share Posted Sunday at 12:46 12 minutes ago, TK-421 said: Sky reporter just saying that all of these deals still need to be ratified by the PL, and if the PL deem any of these deals not to be 'fair market value' and inflated to suit the PSR requirements, then they (PL) may adjust the fees in their reckonings. WTF... so where was this worry about inflated fees when Man City were spending £100m on Grealish, Arsenal around £100m on Rice, and Chel$ea £115m on Caicedo?? Or is it just a problem when its clubs the PL seemingly want to punish spending/reciving higher fees??? But yeah, lets scrutinise deals where clubs are trying to meets the rules, and when clubs do it, then they may still adjust them so they can punish those clubs?? Sorry if this has been discussed already, but just saw that mentioned on SSN. If Archie Gray ( who has never played above championship level) is worth £40m, Anderson with his 50 PL appearances at £35m doesn’t sound so bad? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
enthusiast Posted Sunday at 12:47 Share Posted Sunday at 12:47 9 minutes ago, TK-421 said: WTF... so where was this worry about inflated fees when Man City were spending £100m on Grealish, Arsenal around £100m on Rice, and Chel$ea £115m on Caicedo?? Those fees were high because football club owners are daft cunts with no sense, as opposed to a bald-faced attempt to game the system like this shite with £19m academy players with zero games to their name, that's just straight out book-cooking that the legendary Serie A chairmen of the 90s would've been proud of. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCormick Posted Sunday at 12:50 Share Posted Sunday at 12:50 It’s astonishing how far the PL will go to destroy their own product just to appease the anointed ones. The whole thing stinks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now