Should be lots of goals in the final then.Snowflake Royal wrote:So PO Final is a battle of the otherwise bang average one man team, vs the electric attack with a hapless defence.
by Royalwaster » 09 May 2024 09:02
Should be lots of goals in the final then.Snowflake Royal wrote:So PO Final is a battle of the otherwise bang average one man team, vs the electric attack with a hapless defence.
by WestYorksRoyal » 09 May 2024 09:19
by Snowflake Royal » 09 May 2024 09:49
It's win:win.WestYorksRoyal wrote:Bolton definitely a better team than Oxford and won their last meeting 5-0. But it's only 1 game and an upset can easily happen. Obviously I hope not - seems alien enough to finish below them in the table let alone be in a lower division.
by WestYorksRoyal » 09 May 2024 13:04
by tidus_mi2 » 09 May 2024 15:10
Agree, think the Championship is shaping up to be one of the strongest next season for a while and it doesn't look like there will be 3 sides with insanely higher budgets than the rest of the division unlike this season with Leeds, Leicester and Southampton.Snowflake Royal wrote:It's win:win.WestYorksRoyal wrote:Bolton definitely a better team than Oxford and won their last meeting 5-0. But it's only 1 game and an upset can easily happen. Obviously I hope not - seems alien enough to finish below them in the table let alone be in a lower division.
They lose on TV on their big night out.
Or
They go up and get humiliated most weeks for a year.
by East Grinstead Royal » 09 May 2024 15:16
by tidus_mi2 » 09 May 2024 15:19
I understand the 3 coming down will have parachute payments, but Leicester, Leeds and Southampton felt like a new extreme when it came to financial disparity.East Grinstead Royal wrote:The three relegated sides nearly always have insanely higher budgets than the rest of the Championship. That’s what the parachute payments do.
by Hendo » 09 May 2024 16:41
Yeah, if the 3 that come down are Luton, Burnley and Sheffield Untied, whilst they will have PP but can't see them having the same impact as the 3 that came down last year.tidus_mi2 wrote:I understand the 3 coming down will have parachute payments, but Leicester, Leeds and Southampton felt like a new extreme when it came to financial disparity.East Grinstead Royal wrote:The three relegated sides nearly always have insanely higher budgets than the rest of the Championship. That’s what the parachute payments do.
by Clyde1998 » 09 May 2024 22:17
This. Leicester, Leeds and Southampton would probably have the highest budgets in the Championship if no side had parachute payments - giving them PP completely destroys any chance of sides competing with them financially. Luton would have a bottom end budget; Burnley would probably be slightly below average; Sheffield United would be somewhat above average.Hendo wrote:Yeah, if the 3 that come down are Luton, Burnley and Sheffield Untied, whilst they will have PP but can't see them having the same impact as the 3 that came down last year.tidus_mi2 wrote:I understand the 3 coming down will have parachute payments, but Leicester, Leeds and Southampton felt like a new extreme when it came to financial disparity.East Grinstead Royal wrote:The three relegated sides nearly always have insanely higher budgets than the rest of the Championship. That’s what the parachute payments do.
by Silver Fox » 10 May 2024 09:00
And yet someone did compete with themClyde1998 wrote:This. Leicester, Leeds and Southampton would probably have the highest budgets in the Championship if no side had parachute payments - giving them PP completely destroys any chance of sides competing with them financially.
by Sutekh » 10 May 2024 09:44
Annoying thing is that well run and managed clubs can cause a surprise but it is always a "surprise" and no one's ever interested in following that model (they just sort of fall over it by accident) look at the Hull idiots, seem to have started that route only to sack Liam rather than see it through.Silver Fox wrote:And yet someone did compete with themClyde1998 wrote:This. Leicester, Leeds and Southampton would probably have the highest budgets in the Championship if no side had parachute payments - giving them PP completely destroys any chance of sides competing with them financially.
by SouthDownsRoyal » 10 May 2024 09:47
by WestYorksRoyal » 10 May 2024 10:16
We keep getting one non-PP promotion a season which allows the Premier League to argue it is possible. But Ipswich and Luton were practically miracles, while Forest breached FFP and have since been deducted points.Sutekh wrote:Annoying thing is that well run and managed clubs can cause a surprise but it is always a "surprise" and no one's ever interested in following that model (they just sort of fall over it by accident) look at the Hull idiots, seem to have started that route only to sack Liam rather than see it through.Silver Fox wrote:And yet someone did compete with themClyde1998 wrote:This. Leicester, Leeds and Southampton would probably have the highest budgets in the Championship if no side had parachute payments - giving them PP completely destroys any chance of sides competing with them financially.
Therefore it doesn't happen sufficiently in any one season to make a real contest of things. The other 5 teams in promotion and PO positions are hardly a surprise to anyone and would likely all be in the top 10 biggest championship budgets for this season.
Hoping the screw starts turning on Leeds and WBA next.
by Sutekh » 10 May 2024 12:11
There shouldn't be any reward for failure. Numerous clubs have been promoted to the PL. and survived at least one season if not more. These rewards for failing and (usually) overspending should be dumped at the earliest opportunity. There should be relegation clauses enforced in ALL PL contracts specifying wages are reduced by x% and/or providing for various release clauses.WestYorksRoyal wrote:We keep getting one non-PP promotion a season which allows the Premier League to argue it is possible. But Ipswich and Luton were practically miracles, while Forest breached FFP and have since been deducted points.Sutekh wrote:Annoying thing is that well run and managed clubs can cause a surprise but it is always a "surprise" and no one's ever interested in following that model (they just sort of fall over it by accident) look at the Hull idiots, seem to have started that route only to sack Liam rather than see it through.Silver Fox wrote:
And yet someone did compete with them
Therefore it doesn't happen sufficiently in any one season to make a real contest of things. The other 5 teams in promotion and PO positions are hardly a surprise to anyone and would likely all be in the top 10 biggest championship budgets for this season.
Hoping the screw starts turning on Leeds and WBA next.
It's still enormously skewed and just because Kieran McKenna has done a ridiculously good job it doesn't take away from the fact they're structurally unfair.
by Snowflake Royal » 10 May 2024 12:18
Every contract should contain details of how pay will change on promotion and relegation in every division.Sutekh wrote:There shouldn't be any reward for failure. Numerous clubs have been promoted to the PL. and survived at least one season if not more. These rewards for failing and (usually) overspending should be dumped at the earliest opportunity. There should be relegation clauses enforced in ALL PL contracts specifying wages are reduced by x% and/or providing for various release clauses.WestYorksRoyal wrote:We keep getting one non-PP promotion a season which allows the Premier League to argue it is possible. But Ipswich and Luton were practically miracles, while Forest breached FFP and have since been deducted points.Sutekh wrote:
Annoying thing is that well run and managed clubs can cause a surprise but it is always a "surprise" and no one's ever interested in following that model (they just sort of fall over it by accident) look at the Hull idiots, seem to have started that route only to sack Liam rather than see it through.
Therefore it doesn't happen sufficiently in any one season to make a real contest of things. The other 5 teams in promotion and PO positions are hardly a surprise to anyone and would likely all be in the top 10 biggest championship budgets for this season.
Hoping the screw starts turning on Leeds and WBA next.
It's still enormously skewed and just because Kieran McKenna has done a ridiculously good job it doesn't take away from the fact they're structurally unfair.
by Royalwaster » 10 May 2024 13:53
I thought that Oxford now have pretty rich owners themselves - who can afford to build a new stadium for them!?Snowflake Royal wrote:It's win:win.WestYorksRoyal wrote:Bolton definitely a better team than Oxford and won their last meeting 5-0. But it's only 1 game and an upset can easily happen. Obviously I hope not - seems alien enough to finish below them in the table let alone be in a lower division.
They lose on TV on their big night out.
Or
They go up and get humiliated most weeks for a year.
by WestYorksRoyal » 10 May 2024 14:35
I think they do. Certainly they fought off Championship interest for Brannagan by giving him a new contract, which presumably makes him one of the highest paid players in L1.Royalwaster wrote:I thought that Oxford now have pretty rich owners themselves - who can afford to build a new stadium for them!?Snowflake Royal wrote:It's win:win.WestYorksRoyal wrote:Bolton definitely a better team than Oxford and won their last meeting 5-0. But it's only 1 game and an upset can easily happen. Obviously I hope not - seems alien enough to finish below them in the table let alone be in a lower division.
They lose on TV on their big night out.
Or
They go up and get humiliated most weeks for a year.
by Snowflake Royal » 10 May 2024 14:49
Maybe, but they can't build it, replace almost their entire squad and double their average attendance in 3 months.Royalwaster wrote:I thought that Oxford now have pretty rich owners themselves - who can afford to build a new stadium for them!?Snowflake Royal wrote:It's win:win.WestYorksRoyal wrote:Bolton definitely a better team than Oxford and won their last meeting 5-0. But it's only 1 game and an upset can easily happen. Obviously I hope not - seems alien enough to finish below them in the table let alone be in a lower division.
They lose on TV on their big night out.
Or
They go up and get humiliated most weeks for a year.
by Stranded » 10 May 2024 15:33
If they do scrape past Bolton, then their attendance will likely rise markedly - didn't realise they haven't been in the top 2 tiers this century.Snowflake Royal wrote:Maybe, but they can't build it, replace almost their entire squad and double their average attendance in 3 months.Royalwaster wrote:I thought that Oxford now have pretty rich owners themselves - who can afford to build a new stadium for them!?Snowflake Royal wrote: It's win:win.
They lose on TV on their big night out.
Or
They go up and get humiliated most weeks for a year.
by Snowflake Royal » 10 May 2024 16:03
Can't see them adding more than 4k unless they have a very good season, when actually they're likely to have quite a bad season.Stranded wrote:If they do scrape past Bolton, then their attendance will likely rise markedly - didn't realise they haven't been in the top 2 tiers this century.Snowflake Royal wrote:Maybe, but they can't build it, replace almost their entire squad and double their average attendance in 3 months.Royalwaster wrote:
I thought that Oxford now have pretty rich owners themselves - who can afford to build a new stadium for them!?
Agreed on the others, stadium has to be ready by 2026 else they will have nowhere to play given they get kicked out of the Kassam then. Even then the new plan is only for a 16k stadium, which means if they sell out every week based on this year, their average attendance would rank 23rd. Only Blackburn and Rotherham averaged less than 16k.
So to be able to pay the kind of wages needed to even compete, they are going to have to swallow a relatively big loss, which could see them hit FFP troubles.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 628 guests