I understand what you're saying and think there is value in it. This is the most common argument thrown out in opposition to FFP. But if this is being turned into a FFP thread, I would have to say that these types of clubs have never been competitive at the highest levels in any era, with or without FFP.

So, my question would be: how has FFP really affected the competitive balance of the game?

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Tigertown in ATL

Georgia foothills

Member since Sep 2009

29241 posts

Posted on 9/10/14 at 10:53 am to PeepleHeppinBidness

quote:
my question would be: how has FFP really affected the competitive balance of the game?

I would have to say, very little if any right now. Your other comments and reasons make a lot of sense. Might have kept clubs like Leeds out of huge problems.

Perhaps over time, clubs that are big clubs, like Newcastle, and even Forest and some others could compete.

I'm probably just personally offended because I would like to see more balance and a chance for more clubs to get CL spots.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by wm72

Brooklyn

Member since Mar 2010

7804 posts

Posted on 9/10/14 at 11:10 am to PeepleHeppinBidness

quote:
So, my question would be: how has FFP really affected the competitive balance of the game?

I would say that the main effect is that without FFP, top clubs in all the big leagues would be dealing with at least one new Man City/PSG/Chelsea every few years years.

It's not huge in one sense but when so much hinges on CL spots it is significant.

AS Roma, for example, is probably benefiting from Cagliari and AS Bari not currently overpaying for players and becoming CL spot contenders overnight (like Malaga did) since deals with similar groups that own PSG fell through due to FFP concerns.

This post was edited on 9/10/14 at 11:12 am

1 ...

Report Post

Soccer Board - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board