Portsmouth troubles

[Edenbridge Eagle In Exile]

Originally Posted by david sylvian

the yanks, the home of capitalism, have had policies in place for years in pro football designed to create fair competition and financially viable clubs.

these policies work - they level out the playing field, and provide for entertainment, sustained interest, large crowds and a sport with a long-term future.

problem with football, is that many of the countries that take part in it are riven with corruption, and the clubs are just a by-product of that. That and the governing bodies of football are inept, corrupt, conservative and narrow-minded

other than that, football's is fine shape and run brilliantly

Ah but they don't have promotion or relegation to worry about.

[Edenbridge Eagle In Exile]

The real problem is the massive difference in TV monies between The Premirship and the FL.......

Cannot see any of the big 5 or 6 clubs in the Premiership agreeing to any form of Cap which creates an even playing field accross the 20 teams which can only increase their prospect of relegation to the Championship... and the ensuing loss of TV revenue.......

The prospect of a break away top division with no promotion or relegation looms ever closer!!!!

And that is what Sky probably wants..............

[AJ]

Originally Posted by Edenbridge Eagle In Exile

Ah but they don't have promotion or relegation to worry about.

One of the rules in the NFL is that a team's salary cap(all the players) cannot exceed the amount the team receives in TV money.

[Funk Butter]

Originally Posted by Cleon

Yes, but I'm also telling you that despite the shite we've been forced to put up with the name of competing with foreign clubs and team, England have been crap since 1992, and we've only won 3 Euro Cups versus about 6 or 7 in the period 1972-1992 despite the 5-year ban.

[thehalifaxman]

Originally Posted by AJ

One of the rules in the NFL is that a team's salary cap(all the players) cannot exceed the amount the team receives in TV money.

A lot of Championship teams would have about 4 players if that was our rule

[Jason]

Originally Posted by thehalifaxman

A lot of Championship teams would have about 4 players if that was our rule

Nope. The players would just earn much much less

[Chester 76]

Originally Posted by david sylvian

the yanks, the home of capitalism, have had policies in place for years in pro football designed to create fair competition and financially viable clubs.

these policies work - they level out the playing field, and provide for entertainment, sustained interest, large crowds and a sport with a long-term future.

problem with football, is that many of the countries that take part in it are riven with corruption, and the clubs are just a by-product of that. That and the governing bodies of football are inept, corrupt, conservative and narrow-minded

other than that, football's is fine shape and run brilliantly

Five times the population with less than a third of the clubs.

[AJ]

Originally Posted by Jason

Nope. The players would just earn much much less

Correct answer

[AJ]

Originally Posted by thehalifaxman

A lot of Championship teams would have about 4 players if that was our rule

WHU for one are a disgrace. If you look at their squad it is full of very highly paid players and I am convinced that it's costing them millions in debt in wages, bank rolled by rich owners, but in reality, they are just increasing the amount of debt WHU own to them.

[Funk Butter]

Originally Posted by AJ

One of the rules in the NFL is that a team's salary cap(all the players) cannot exceed the amount the team receives in TV money.

That's not exactly true.

The newest edition of the CBA has a term, "All Revenues" (AR), which pretty much includes all revenue streams. The CBA spells ou the particulars over the course of about 10 pages, but in a nutshell the AR includes ticket sales, revenue from luxury box suites and premium seating, local and national broadcasting (TV/radio/Internet) royalties, concessions, parking, local advertising, stadium leasing, and merchadising. The AR is then divided into 3 distinct brackets: League Media (essentially revue from regular-season games), NFL Ventures/Post Season (self-explanatory) and Local (more or less revenue generated from preseason games). Now, fo r the part that you have been waiting for, the distibution of these revenues:

Projected AR x CBA Percentage = Players Share of AR. This is called the Player Cost Amount. For 2011, that amount is $4,556,800,000 (roughly $142.4 M per team).

Player Cost Amount minus Projected League wide Benefits = Amount Available for Player Salaries. For 2011, that amount is $3,852,000,000.

Amount Available for Player Salaries / Number of Teams = Unadjusted Salary Cap per Team. For 2011, that amount is (3,852,000,000/32 =) $120.375 M.

The CBA Percentage is as follows: Players receive 55% of AR (Media), 45% of AR (NFL Venture/Post Season) and 40% of AR (Local). Overall, the players receive between 47% and 48.5% of total revenue. More specifically, in years 2012-2014 the overall percentage is capped at 48%. For years 2015-2020 the percentage is capped at 48.5%.

I wonder if Gordon Taylor would raise a fuss if the players on Chelsea were getting 48% of the revenues.

[civil eagle]

Results not gone their way could well be taking one of the relegation places, manager just been on 5 live and said had no idea of the issues when took the job

[Funk Butter]

Originally Posted by civil eagle

Results not gone their way could well be taking one of the relegation places, manager just been on 5 live and said had no idea of the issues when took the job

Is he stupid or just a hermit? Sorry, is it the Unabomber who's the manager of Portsmouth?

[civil eagle]

So what happens if they go into liquidation, do only two teams go down and who takes their place in the league does the conference get an extra promotion place?

[DANGERMOUSE]

Originally Posted by Funk Butter

That's not exactly true.


I wonder if Gordon Taylor would raise a fuss if the players on Chelsea were getting 48% of the revenues.

Most definitely: latest figure is 82%!

[sw16girl]

Originally Posted by civil eagle

So what happens if they go into liquidation, do only two teams go down and who takes their place in the league does the conference get an extra promotion place?

The normal arrangement is one less relegated which would cause a knock on effect all the way down the leagues down to the end of that particular pyramid although I think the lower leagues are being moved around again this coming year so it would presumably be sorted out around combined counties level - however there is a possibility that AFC Portsmouth would apply to be elected to the FL and might go in in League 2 which would then mean a bit of a shuffle round to sort it out between Championship and Leagues 1 & 2 - that is very speculative though and more likely they would start further down than that.

[palace nutter]

Huge respect for Pompey fans, they've always been a noisy bunch and have had to put up with a lot of crap over the last two years, none of which their fault. Apparently they stayed for an hour after the game yesterday singing.

[Big Blue Eagle]

Originally Posted by AJ

WHU for one are a disgrace. If you look at their squad it is full of very highly paid players and I am convinced that it's costing them millions in debt in wages, bank rolled by rich owners, but in reality, they are just increasing the amount of debt WHU own to them.

Listening to Claridge before last nights game I nearly came off the M25 when he said that Southampton AND West Ham were financially sound. Now we all know (thanks to the charming Nicola C) that Southampton have gazillions of £££ thanks to their dead owner (interesting to see if they are still there if they do blow promotion this term or don't win the Champions League in the next 3 years... ) but as far as I know WHU have mountains of debt still that Gold & Sullivan didn't take on.

[Beanie]

Originally Posted by david sylvian

the yanks, the home of capitalism, have had policies in place for years in pro football designed to create fair competition and financially viable clubs.

these policies work - they level out the playing field, and provide for entertainment, sustained interest, large crowds and a sport with a long-term future.

problem with football, is that many of the countries that take part in it are riven with corruption, and the clubs are just a by-product of that. That and the governing bodies of football are inept, corrupt, conservative and narrow-minded

other than that, football's is fine shape and run brilliantly

Depends what you mean "work". They create a closed shop with limited access to their product (most Americans could never travel to a live game, it's too far) which creates scarcity and increases the value of the limited product. The 32 clubs have fixed income paid for by TV, because the game is structured round the needs of TV. If a game by chance doesn't sell out then it's blacked out on TV for (I think) 50 miles radius. If a club gets poor attendances so needs to be given more money by the NFL for too long they up and move it to some other city which bids huge amounts of money for the privledge. The players have their education contrived to ensure they go to the right colleges. Doesn't matter if they have no useful skills after football, they are basically so rich it doesn't matter and if not well, who cares.

It provides entertainment - well anything is entertaining if you like that sort of thing, sustained intertest and large crowds, 16 games a week getting say 50k a game (and they don't all get that) is 800k people a week, or around 2.5% of their popluation, about the same percentage as go in total to just three games over here if Man Utd, Newcastle and Arsenal are at home.

The NFL certainly get it high profile - but I'm not altogther convinced it "works", or at least in a way football should copy.

[thehalifaxman]

Originally Posted by AJ

WHU for one are a disgrace. If you look at their squad it is full of very highly paid players and I am convinced that it's costing them millions in debt in wages, bank rolled by rich owners, but in reality, they are just increasing the amount of debt WHU own to them.

They have huge parachute payments remember. I think Cardiff must be one of the worst offenders in our league.

[Random*]

Originally Posted by Funk Butter

I wonder if Gordon Taylor would raise a fuss if the players on Chelsea were getting 48% of the revenues.

Originally Posted by DANGERMOUSE

Most definitely: latest figure is 82%!

Annnnd there is the problem.