General/Non-Spurs Transfers

[Bluto Blutarsky]

The agents of these kids must be raking it in too.

These kids won't get into these teams they are moving to.

Which begs the question, do we need tighter regulations that look after young players?

Probably not, as the kids themselves will be getting paid well with the move but a lot of them are going to be stuck at these clubs at 22/23, when they should have had proper game time and a pathway for them

Really depends on how you define success. They play the game to earn a living. So, if you move to a team where you are overpaid, but not actually playing, is that a “failure”? Even if you never advance?

Certainly you have to consider wages over the course of an entire career, and such a move could stunt later wages. But if you are earning 3 or 4x of what you would otherwise earn, it’s probably a good career choice.

 

[rossdapep]

Really depends on how you define success. They play the game to earn a living. So, if you move to a team where you are overpaid, but not actually playing, is that a “failure”? Even if you never advance?

Certainly you have to consider wages over the course of an entire career, and such a move could stunt later wages. But if you are earning 3 or 4x of what you would otherwise earn, it’s probably a good career choice.

Sure. That is certainly a way of looking at it, and I'm not to disagree on a player making his choices.

However, I do believe this kills the game and kills a lot of young players desires to be the best/choose wisely.

That's why I still believe a salary cap for under 20s or something like that is necessary.

18 year Olds won't get poached by bigger clubs purely because they can pay 3 or 4 times more, they'll decide more based on what is best for development.

 

[Pochemon94]

Sure. That is certainly a way of looking at it, and I'm not to disagree on a player making his choices.

However, I do believe this kills the game and kills a lot of young players desires to be the best/choose wisely.

That's why I still believe a salary cap for under 20s or something like that is necessary.

18 year Olds won't get poached by bigger clubs purely because they can pay 3 or 4 times more, they'll decide more based on what is best for development.

the problem is you can't do this because let's just say you have the next Mbappe, he is only getting 10k per week but really should be getting 200k-300k per week based on his ability, he blows out his knee at 19 and can never play again, he now missed out on life changing money because of the cap.

 

[Ghost Hardware]

 

[$hoguN]

Looks like Villa have got a whole load of swaps and deals happening now. Smart business

 

[Johnny J]

Douglas Luiz: Juventus reach agreement with Aston Villa over deal

Juventus say they have reached an agreement with Aston Villa over a deal for Douglas Luiz.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[sidford]

I don't think it is true that Villa can book 50M in one year if the actual fee is 10M by 5 yrs.

If it is, we'll have clubs folding left and right very soon.

I understand the logic but accountancy isn't always logical. Villa can include the full 50m in their accounts now regardless of whether they receive it all in one lump sum or over 5 years. Obviously better for their bank balance to receive it in one lump but most deals don't happen that way

 

[Nerine]

Sell a player for 20 and buy a player for 20 on a 5 year contract.

The latter is spread over the contact so it's actually 4 million.

20 - 4 = 16 million in for psr.

but then next year aren’t they -4m against PSR?
Or is player amortisation not factored into the losses?

 

[luRRka]

but then next year aren’t they -4m against PSR?
Or is player amortisation not factored into the losses?

It's essentially kicking the can down the road, hoping for a change/scrapping of the rules

Also in villas case, next year will have champions league money factored in which easily covers that 4m you speak of. Essentially gambling on staying in the top 4 (spoiler, they wont)

 

[Dazzazzad]

It's essentially kicking the can down the road, hoping for a change/scrapping of the rules

Also in villas case, next year will have champions league money factored in which easily covers that 4m you speak of. Essentially gambling on staying in the top 4 (spoiler, they wont)

Yup. And if more clubs get into such a bad state of affairs, I guess it's more likely they are bailed out (rules scrapped) for the "health of the game".

It kind of reminds me of the global financial system, which constantly seeks short-term solutions to avoid dealing with reality, creating a bigger and bigger debt bubble.

 

[Hotspur33]

It's essentially kicking the can down the road, hoping for a change/scrapping of the rules

Also in villas case, next year will have champions league money factored in which easily covers that 4m you speak of. Essentially gambling on staying in the top 4 (spoiler, they wont win )

Am I right in saying these PSR rules are UEFA imposed? I guess with the aim of trying to disrupt the Premier leagues financial dominance?
If that’s the case it’ll make it less likely that the rules are suddenly changed.
I seem to remember there was talk of the premier league having external financial moderation.
I hope we don’t see mid season point deductions again though.

 

[luRRka]

Yup. And if more clubs get into such a bad state of affairs, I guess it's more likely they are bailed out (rules scrapped) for the "health of the game".

It kind of reminds me of the global financial system, which constantly seeks short-term solutions to avoid dealing with reality, creating a bigger and bigger debt bubble.

It's more likely they will be changed than scrapped. If these clubs think it's anti competitive now, wait until newcastle start making regular billion pound transfers with no rules to stop them

 

[luRRka]

Am I right in saying these PSR rules are UEFA imposed? I guess with the aim of trying to disrupt the Premier leagues financial dominance?
If that’s the case it’ll make it less likely that the rules are suddenly changed.
I seem to remember there was talk of the premier league having external financial moderation.
I hope we don’t see mid season point deductions again though.

I think there's two separate. FFP which is uefa and PSR which is FA. I think next season or maybe the one after they will be more aligned.

I think uefa are more of a squad cost where wages and purchases can't be more than X% of turnover whereas PSR currently is you cant lose more than 105m in a 3 season period.

When PSR aligns with the uefa model I seem to remember them saying it will be a higher % of turnover than the uefa one but gradually reducing each year until they're more or less aligned

 

[felmani26]

I understand the logic but accountancy isn't always logical. Villa can include the full 50m in their accounts now regardless of whether they receive it all in one lump sum or over 5 years. Obviously better for their bank balance to receive it in one lump but most deals don't happen that way

In my eyes it would be recording the sale as a debtor on the balance (in this case £50m) but the revenue should be released to the profit & loss over the period of the contract so effectively you have £40m as a creditor/deferred income with £10m as revenue in year 1.

You wouldn't have his 5 years worth of salary recorded as an expense in year one so revenue should be recorded likewise.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

It’s primarily a difference between accrual accounting - record revenue when it’s earned (I.e. when you make the sale) versus cash accounting when you record revenue when it’s received.

Cash accounting is typically only used by small businesses or sole proprietors - and even then most will still use accrual accounting. All big companies, like football clubs, use accrual accounting.

For example, if you buy a car, but finance it through a dealership - they record the revenue on the sale, not when you make your payments.

 

[funkycoldmedina]

the problem is you can't do this because let's just say you have the next Mbappe, he is only getting 10k per week but really should be getting 200k-300k per week based on his ability, he blows out his knee at 19 and can never play again, he now missed out on life changing money because of the cap.

There's always going to be a loser in a policy like @rossdapep suggests but sometimes you just have to do things for the greater good. You could put performance clauses in that if they break through into the 1st team and start say 50% of the games they become exempt.

 

[rossdapep]

There's always going to be a loser in a policy like @rossdapep suggests but sometimes you just have to do things for the greater good. You could put performance clauses in that if they break through into the 1st team and start say 50% of the games they become exempt.

Yeah exactly what you could do.

If you have a talented individual like Moore and his club cannot raise hos salary but Chelsea can, then that isn't right.

If no other club had that advantage, as in, the salary is capped, the club have more chance of keeping their talents and keeping them on course.

Part of that "pathway" will be that if they break into the first team, they get a salary increase and that salary increase can't be bigger at other clubs either, so there's less chance of broken promises from other clubs.

In the wake of what Villa, Chelsea, Everton are doing, I'd introduce a rule where these transfers have to go through some judgement.

For example, why do Chelsea believe this player to be worth 20m? And provide similar cases where players of a similar ilk move for 1-2m.

If certain things are not met, they can't make the transfer

 

[Ghost Hardware]

 

[Ghost Hardware]

 

[DJS]

Will Villa struggle without Douglas Luiz as he’s one of their star players isn’t he?