Champions League

[JamDav1982]

There's a difference between being a club owned by the fans like Barcelona, and a foreign state owned pet project for Arab Shiek's egos.

Having unlimited money pumped into it from oil money Regarldess of economic climate is radically different from just being a rich club spending to their whim.

No no. Newcomer thinks any teams spending big in past is exactly the same as PSG/City with unlimited funds that clubs have no liability on.

If you dont agree they are exactly the same 'you dont like spending' and 'dont like football'.

That is about extent of his argument.

No other business know to Newcomer limits funds that can be put in by owner... apart from just about every major sports league in the world. It is all about being out to get PSG you see.

 

[Messigician]

No no. Newcomer thinks any teams spending big in past is exactly the same as PSG/City with unlimited funds that clubs have no liability on.

If you dont agree they are exactly the same 'you dont like spending' and 'dont like football'.

That is about extent of his argument.

Yeah like I'm pretty sure City doesn't even make a profit since being founded, it's insane how clubs can be allowed to operate like this unregulated.

In fact the current FFP system has inhibited PSG greatly since the Neymar and Mbappe signings, forcing sales and limiting their spend

The new changes seem very troubling

 

[Newcomer]

Nope no blurry line... billionaire with unlimited funds where club has no liability is the difference to all those cases you keep trying to compare to.

Again... distorting market with money from outside football that the owners provide unlimited funds for. That is the difference and that has no end in sight if unregulated. That is the difference between Zidane and PSG spending billions of owners cash.

Nope you are lying. I clearly said 'teams have always spent big' but never has it been to level of one team having unlimited funds through owner that club has no liability on. Again that is the difference.

Shitey strawman attempt 'if you dont like spending dont support Barca'. That about sums up your random pot shot arguments and is not relevant.

I wouldnt like Barca to be taken over and have unlimited funds from an owner to spend any more than any other club and it would ruin football if no regulation to stop it. So that poor argument falls flat like the others.

No you don't draw the line by who is spending the money, billionaire owner with infinite amount of money or by a club having to take a loan to finance it. You are talking about distorting the market and ruining football. What matters is the amount of money that was paid at the time. What Real did with Zidane was truly sensational and his transfer remained on top for several years which was rare in that period. That should tell you it was way ahead of the current market of his time, hence distorting it by using your own words.
Real Madrid is not the only culprit, it talked to you about the Milan clubs for example, weren't there billionaires having fun with their money and making the Serie A the best league in the world ?

You have the exact same argument as the FFP which is a scam for me, so are your argument. It is not a problem for Real to distort the market because they are socio club but it is unacceptable because you spend money of your billionaire owners with limitless amount of money. You must have been the one writing the rule for FFP !

For me, it is the same thing. I look at the bottom line. Real Madrid started very early with Kopa and throughout their history they kept piling on talented players by spending big money, same with all the dominant clubs. I don't see why Real getting into debt should be lauded while the PSG and City of this world should be admonished. I won't cry now that they are getting outbid because it is unfair lol. It was unfair for the poorer clubs before and it is unfair now. This is professional football as its core.

Anyway, this is already the second time i have a disagreement with you and your comment about the other people being relevant or not are that annoying. I had started to talk to you about other stuff but you are that insulting whenever someone disagrees with you.

I will obviously not change your mind and you won't change mind so let's not interact with each other more.

 

[JamDav1982]

No you don't draw the line by who is spending the money, billionaire owner with infinite amount of money or by a club having to take a loan to finance it. You are talking about distorting the market and ruining football. What matters is the amount of money that was paid at the time. What Real did with Zidane was truly sensational and his transfer remained on top for several years which was rare in that period. That should tell you it was way ahead of the current market of his time, hence distorting it by using your own words.
Real Madrid is not the only culprit, it talked to you about the Milan clubs for example, weren't there billionaires having fun with their money and making the Serie A the best league in the world ?

You have the exact same argument as the FFP which is a scam for me, so are your argument. It is not a problem for Real to distort the market because they are socio club but it is unacceptable because you spend money of your billionaire owners with limitless amount of money. You must have been the one writing the rule for FFP !

For me, it is the same thing. I look at the bottom line. Real Madrid started very early with Kopa and throughout their history they kept piling on talented players by spending big money, same with all the dominant clubs. I don't see why Real getting into debt should be lauded while the PSG and City of this world should be admonished. I won't cry now that they are getting outbid because it is unfair lol. It was unfair for the poorer clubs before and it is unfair now. This is professional football as its core.

Anyway, this is already the second time i have a disagreement with you and your comment about the other people being relevant or not are that annoying. I had started to talk to you about other stuff but you are that insulting whenever someone disagrees with you.

I will obviously not change your mind and you won't change mind so let's not interact with each other more.

Nope I said that a team with unlimited funds and no libailty on club would distort the market. That doesnt fit with Zidane. Keep revisting that one and will keep getting same answer as to the difference.

Once again... billionaires with unlimited funds with no liabity on the clubs. That doesnt fit Milan and the difference of spending they were carrying out in comparison to teams around them season after season as would be the case.

I never mentioned Real distorting FFP and it being a scam so can try that flimsy strawman again.

Feel free not to interact. I will respond to anything see fit.

 

[Luftstalag14]

I'm only answering Jamdav with his claim that billionaire City or PSG are ruining football while it has always been like that.

If someone started ruining football it was certainly not PSG. The graphics are just there to prove that point.

So either you dislike football for having been ruined before (in that case, why do you even follow Bar?a ???) or don't give me that PSG/City are ruining football bs argument.

Football was ruined before? Says who? Because clubs spent money like crazy when there were little rules to govern the sport? Yes, advantages were certainly created by those clubs that were able to locate funds to spend and people deemed it unfair, that's why rules and regulations were created to prevent this from happening again and level the playing field.

One critical and striking difference between the likes of Real Madrid of the past and PSG/City of nowadays: Real Madrid didn't have unlimited amount of money like PSG/City does today, if they didn't have the money to spend, they had to borrow it, they had debt and they still do. The same applied to us. You might accuse us of receiving aid from the Spanish government and tax benefit as we are not sport companies (SAD) and you might think this is unfair, but other than that we had to find the money to finance what we spent. PSG and City are not like that at all. If they are allowed to do so, they can tap into their respective sovereign funds and state funds that own them and they have literally unlimited amount of money to spend, without worrying about going into debt and repaying it.

Let me ask you this question: What is the perfect/ideal world for you, newcomer? You want everyone to be able to spend whatever he/she wants on anything and there should be no limits whatsoever? In that case, today it is PSG/City, tomorrow it is ABC/XYZ, sky is the limit, the newer ones, the wealthier ones will push the older, the less wealthier ones aside and there won't be football or any sport to speak of. Is that what you want?

You keep whining about the FFP and how PSG is victimized by it. Exactly how? PSG is facing little challenges in the French league (this season is an exception perhaps), going strong in the CL, what else do you want? Do you want PSG to be allowed to spend unlimited amount of money to buy more players and tie down Mbappe or something?

 

[Luftstalag14]

No you don't draw the line by who is spending the money, billionaire owner with infinite amount of money or by a club having to take a loan to finance it. You are talking about distorting the market and ruining football. What matters is the amount of money that was paid at the time. What Real did with Zidane was truly sensational and his transfer remained on top for several years which was rare in that period. That should tell you it was way ahead of the current market of his time, hence distorting it by using your own words.
Real Madrid is not the only culprit, it talked to you about the Milan clubs for example, weren't there billionaires having fun with their money and making the Serie A the best league in the world ?

You have the exact same argument as the FFP which is a scam for me, so are your argument. It is not a problem for Real to distort the market because they are socio club but it is unacceptable because you spend money of your billionaire owners with limitless amount of money. You must have been the one writing the rule for FFP !

For me, it is the same thing. I look at the bottom line. Real Madrid started very early with Kopa and throughout their history they kept piling on talented players by spending big money, same with all the dominant clubs. I don't see why Real getting into debt should be lauded while the PSG and City of this world should be admonished. I won't cry now that they are getting outbid because it is unfair lol. It was unfair for the poorer clubs before and it is unfair now. This is professional football as its core.

Anyway, this is already the second time i have a disagreement with you and your comment about the other people being relevant or not are that annoying. I had started to talk to you about other stuff but you are that insulting whenever someone disagrees with you.

I will obviously not change your mind and you won't change mind so let's not interact with each other more.

There is a difference between:

- Person A who has $1000 in his bank account, has a job that pays $1000 a year, he spent $3000 to buy some fancy stuff and going into debt and has to pay back the $1000 debt he owes
- Person B who has $100000000000000000 in his bank account, has a job that pays $1000 a year, he spent $3000 to buy some fancy stuff without having to worry about it
- While everybody else (Person C, D, E, F, G...) only has $500 in their bank account, has a job that pays $1000 a year, they can't afford to and they don't want to spend $3000 to buy that fancy stuff, even though they very much would like it.

This was the old days when there weren't many rules. Today, what the FFP does is essentially saying, Person A, if you only make $1000 a year you can only spend $1000, we don't want you to go into debt that will cripple you in the end. Person B, we know you have a lot of money in your bank account, but if you only make $1000 a year, you can only spend $1000, regardless of how much money you have. Otherwise Person B will buy up most, if not all of the fancy stuff and there will be nothing left for everybody else.

 

[Newcomer]

Football was ruined before? Says who? Because clubs spent money like crazy when there were little rules to govern the sport? Yes, advantages were certainly created by those clubs that were able to locate funds to spend and people deemed it unfair, that's why rules and regulations were created to prevent this from happening again and level the playing field.

One critical and striking difference between the likes of Real Madrid of the past and PSG/City of nowadays: Real Madrid didn't have unlimited amount of money like PSG/City does today, if they didn't have the money to spend, they had to borrow it, they had debt and they still do. The same applied to us. You might accuse us of receiving aid from the Spanish government and tax benefit as we are not sport companies (SAD) and you might think this is unfair, but other than that we had to find the money to finance what we spent. PSG and City are not like that at all. If they are allowed to do so, they can tap into their respective sovereign funds and state funds that own them and they have literally unlimited amount of money to spend, without worrying about going into debt and repaying it.

Let me ask you this question: What is the perfect/ideal world for you, newcomer? You want everyone to be able to spend whatever he/she wants on anything and there should be no limits whatsoever? In that case, today it is PSG/City, tomorrow it is ABC/XYZ, sky is the limit, the newer ones, the wealthier ones will push the older, the less wealthier ones aside and there won't be football or any sport to speak of. Is that what you want?

You keep whining about the FFP and how PSG is victimized by it. Exactly how? PSG is facing little challenges in the French league (this season is an exception perhaps), going strong in the CL, what else do you want? Do you want PSG to be allowed to spend unlimited amount of money to buy more players and tie down Mbappe or something?

What i want is the old football where you had big transfer after big transfer like in Italy with even the likes of Parma and Fiorentina having great players. I loved Batistuta and Fiorentina. Now, it is impossible. FFP kills competition.

In the time FFP has been implemented, there has been less competition than before in the leagues. Juventus running away with the title every year. I admit they did work very well and deserve it but Milan clubs or Roma can't spend because of FFP. Roma had 2 world class players in Salah and Becker and had to sell due to FFP. Indirectly, FFP has greatly helped Liverpool to achieve their rise.
The same could be said in France. Monaco succeeded in mounting a good team thanks to their sugar daddy and beat PSG for the title and challenged well in CL. All that to have to dispatch all their players the year after due to FFP. Now, they are just an useless trading club. There is no club able to create anything while following FFP. Club are condamned to be feeder clubs. In fact, without FFP, Mbapp? wouldn't even be at PSG. He was originally set to renew at Monaco but they changed completely their model after being scared by FFP sanctions.

Only reason why PL is competitive is because they have a league full of billionaire owners lmao. Without the unlimited money of Chelsea and City, what would the PL look like ? MU dominating over and over with maybe some threat from Arsenal and Liverpool.

There is no need to talk about Germany, Bayern works well with ot without FFP.

Even the fail experiments like Anzhi or Malaga were fun while it lasted.
FFP = boring football.

 

[Luftstalag14]

What i want is the old football where you had big transfer after big transfer like in Italy with even the likes of Parma and Fiorentina having great players. I loved Batistuta and Fiorentina. Now, it is impossible. FFP kills competition.

In the time FFP has been implemented, there has been less competition than before in the leagues. Juventus running away with the title every year. I admit they did work very well and deserve it but Milan clubs or Roma can't spend because of FFP. Roma had 2 world class players in Salah and Becker and had to sell due to FFP. Indirectly, FFP has greatly helped Liverpool to achieve their rise.
The same could be said in France. Monaco succeeded in mounting a good team thanks to their sugar daddy and beat PSG for the title and challenged well in CL. All that to have to dispatch all their players the year after due to FFP. Now, they are just an useless trading club. There is no club able to create anything while following FFP. Club are condamned to be feeder clubs. In fact, without FFP, Mbapp? wouldn't even be at PSG. He was originally set to renew at Monaco but they changed completely their model after being scared by FFP sanctions.

Only reason why PL is competitive is because they have a league full of billionaire owners lmao. Without the unlimited money of Chelsea and City, what would the PL look like ? MU dominating over and over with maybe some threat from Arsenal and Liverpool.

There is no need to talk about Germany, Bayern works well with ot without FFP.

Even the fail experiments like Anzi or Malaga were fun while it lasted.
FFP = boring football.

I got it, you want more competition in football and the only way to do that is that clubs are allowed to spend whatever they want to buy whichever players they want to beef up their squads to make each club stronger and hence more competitive, right?

In theory that sounds very nice, if everybody is equally rich or poor. But the reality is, there are some clubs that are rich (whether it is due to historical reasons, unfair advantages or ownership structure reason etc.) and there are many clubs that are not so much. So if you had your way and everyone is allowed to spend whatever without any limit or rules, then the rich will likely get richer and those clubs will likely get stronger or more competitive, while the rest are reduced to nothing, even more miserable than today (feeder clubs as you mentioned) because the gap between the rich and poor clubs will be even wider than it is today.

The FFP essentially is trying to (1) rein in the power of the super rich and make sure they don't leave the rest in dust, (2) ensures clubs don't ruin themselves financially by spending money they don't have and (3) create some sort of level playing field for all clubs so the purchasing power is based on how much money you make/revenue, not how much money you have. As a result it does hinder competition a bit, but for the great good (of making football business more sustainable) it is still good. After all, if clubs are left to bankrupt and die easily there won't be many clubs left, and without clubs there will be no competition. Will just be very few super rich clubs left.

 

[Newcomer]

I got it, you want more competition in football and the only way to do that is that clubs are allowed to spend whatever they want to buy whichever players they want to beef up their squads to make each club stronger and hence more competitive, right?

In theory that sounds very nice, if everybody is equally rich or poor. But the reality is, there are some clubs that are rich (whether it is due to historical reasons, unfair advantages or ownership structure reason etc.) and there are many clubs that are not so much. So if you had your way and everyone is allowed to spend whatever without any limit or rules, then the rich will likely get richer and those clubs will likely get stronger or more competitive, while the rest are reduced to nothing, even more miserable than today (feeder clubs as you mentioned) because the gap between the rich and poor clubs will be even wider than it is today.

The FFP essentially is trying to (1) rein in the power of the super rich and make sure they don't leave the rest in dust, (2) ensures clubs don't ruin themselves financially by spending money they don't have and (3) create some sort of level playing field for all clubs so the purchasing power is based on how much money you make/revenue, not how much money you have. As a result it doesn't hamper competition a bit, but for the great good (of making football business more sustainable) it is still good. After all, if clubs are left to bankrupt and die easily there won't be many clubs left, and without clubs there will be no competition. Will just be very few super rich clubs left.

FFP is already doing all that by disallowing some clubs from spending and even punishing them when they do. They become nothing other than feeder clubs while the ones which had amassed enough financial clout by overspending decades ago are free to spend. This is what is unfair in my opinion. The richest clubs have never been richer than now. It is the combination of FFP and CL changes. Same clubs hoarding CL money => more money to spend through FFP => more trophies and CL qualifaction => more money to spend through FFP... An ever self-fulfilling cycle.

PSG is a lucky one because they could go through that ceiling but it was only possible because they had freaking Qatar behind them. No one else has this chance bar City which means the same one will keep enjoying themselves. And even when they fail, they are planning and threatening to make a closed league anyway.

Monaco has one good season and it is over. Even Ajax which is a prestigious club can't build on a good generation. De facto, a feeder club.

This is why FFP is a scam. It is unfair. And the one thing it was disallowing (except under very narrow circumstances) has to be allowed now : investment.

The more FFP fail, the better.

 

[Luftstalag14]

FFP is already doing all that by disallowing some clubs from spending and even punishing them when they do. They become nothing other than feeder clubs while the ones which had amassed enough financial clout by overspending decades ago are free to spend. This is what is unfair in my opinion. The richest clubs have never been richer than now. It is the combination of FFP and CL changes. Same clubs hoarding CL money => more money to spend through FFP => more trophies and CL qualifaction => more money to spend through FFP... An ever self-fulfilling cycle.

PSG is a lucky one because they could go through that ceiling but it was only possible because they had freaking Qatar behind them. No one else has this chance bar City which means the same one will keep enjoying themselves. And even when they fail, they are planning and threatening to make a closed league anyway.

Monaco has one good season and it is over. Even Ajax which is a prestigious club can't build on a good generation. De facto, a feeder club.

This is why FFP is a scam. It is unfair. And the one thing it was disallowing (except under very narrow circumstances) has to be allowed now : investment.

The more FFP fail, the better.

Some clubs become feeder clubs because there have always been divisions/tiers/levels within a country and between national leagues there are disparities due to many reasons (for example the top 5 European leagues rake in more money than the other leagues in Europe), not because of FFP. The pyramids of clubs, as do other things in life, always existed.

But I think I understand where you are coming from. You think FFP places a glass ceiling on the pyramid of club football, protects the established clubs and the rich and restricts and discourages upward social mobility from lower level clubs to break into the elite, right? In a way I agree with you, however, again, that is the price people have to pay to have a sustainable football business (or any sport business or industry). If you want to prop up a club by bringing in some rich investor to invest a lot of money without any restrictions, sure, that club will break the ceiling and probably join the elite soon, but what will happen to the other clubs, especially those who can't find some rich investor to buy the club or to invest in?

Let's say you and I started on the same starting line, more or less. You were lucky and you found some rich investor and now you are spending tens and millions of dollars to buy up the best players in the world. Meanwhile I wasn't lucky enough to find anybody, I am barely getting by. In the old days when we played against each other we both won and lost some games as we were comparable, now you are much, much, much ahead of me and you could easily thrash my first team 10:0 using your reserves. Soon my club will cease to exist as you keep spending money without limits while I don't have any money to spend. This (the lack of FFP or something comparable) will harm football much more than FFP ever will.

 

[Ode to Django]

Who will be the Getafe of the super league

I'm sure the fans will love playing games battling for 13th place every year

 

[Porque]

To be fair what happened to the Russian league with FFP is bullshit. If russian billionaires want to pump oil money into there clubs then who cares.

But if Sheikh's want to do it in England and France, well then I got a problem.

 

[FC B]

Honestly, not many care about that ranking. The bragging right of a club is ultimately measured by the number of trophies it won. Bayern has one more CL trophy than us already and they might add one more by the end of this season, unfortunately.

Many plastic rm fans do "think" that way and not only but why such a narrow and limited way of thinking and evaluating such a sport?
Is football all about trophies won? Isn't it more about passion, joy, emotion, excitement, the thrill of having a team like Pep's Barca that can produce sheer joy to just any football fan?
What's the point of supporting a club mainly because of the number of trophies they have other than being a true glory hunter that associates himself to a club he percieves as the greatest?
Surely trophies are important but not the soul of football.

 

[El Gato]

^pretty sure he's talking about 'bragging rights'. Nothing to brag about if you play well but don't win.

 

[Luftstalag14]

Many plastic rm fans do "think" that way and not only but why such a narrow and limited way of thinking and evaluating such a sport?
Is football all about trophies won? Isn't it more about passion, joy, emotion, excitement, the thrill of having a team like Pep's Barca that can produce sheer joy to just any football fan?
What's the point of supporting a club mainly because of the number of trophies they have other than being a true glory hunter that associates himself to a club he percieves as the greatest?
Surely trophies are important but not the soul of football.

When you are in the moment to enjoy football, yes, those things you mentioned are what matter the most. I was talking about bragging rights. Decades from now few would care about who was the best club in which decade from what ranking agency etc., people measure how successful clubs are by how many trophies the clubs won.

Also I am not talking about gloryhunters or fans who decide to follow club football and say, “hmmm... which club should I be a fan of? Let me see which club has the most trophies. Real Madrid! Bayern! “ etc.