Financial Fair Play

[Blue Colored Sky 1,807]

Agree with points a & b but we need to add that finishing first is necessary: -

c) in order to be one of the top seeds in next season's Champions' League draw. If not we'll be in pot 2 and face the possibility of a much tougher group.

Also agree with your observation about UEFA syphoning off a greater percentage of England's TV rights deal and redistributing it across the continent. While I don't have any real issue with that, I'm all for football's wealth being spread around, I do feel a bit aggrieved about one aspect of it. As I said earlier in the thread, it's English football fans, not English football clubs, who will foot the bill. The clubs will still get a big revenue increase, albeit not as big as it might have been. We fans on the other hand, will just get a bigger bill for our pay TV services.

I don't remember this particular detail from my reading of the announcement but doesn't logic dictate that the prize money for a draw will be €750,000 not €500,000?

Lastly, and I only mention this in case it is helpful to you, where you have used the word growed you should say grown instead. As you know well by now, the English language defies logic and there is in fact no such word as growed.

Thanks

Few points :

a) Indeed, the money UEFA will receive from BT is paid by customers in England. And it's not coming back entirely to English clubs but rather is redistributed across all participants. So you there are going to pay for extra prize money for clubs from Romania, Slovenia etc. That's why UEFA has increased prize money significantly in % ... Sorry bro

However I believe that market pool for English clubs is going to grow significantly nonetheless but not as much as one would expect.

In that 2013/14 season, from that market pool, PSG & Juve have netted much more money than Chelsea despite going out earlier in the competition. I think it's going to change, I don't believe that English clubs would allow to let this money slip from their hands, the money that all in all should fall to them because THEIR contract has grown that significant (and will be paid by English customers)

b ) Personally don't think that will be easier in the group stage. The first pot will contain 8 champions from 8 countries of highest coefficent ranking in UEFA. And while you will have there Barcelona, Bayern, Juventus, Chelsea, PSG you also will have Benfica, Zenit and Dynamo. 3 clubs that you can't draw.

But apart from pot 1 further forward you will have clubs seeded according to their coefficent so pot 2 will contain clubs like Real Madrid, Atletico, Porto, Arsenal, Man City etc. Fortunately, there are clubs that are not regarded as very strong and have high coefficent, thanks to their well-doing in Europa League. But in theory if every big club had high coefficent, then pot 2 would be stronger than pot 1 because you wouldn't have clubs like champions of Portugal, Ukraine and Russia.

All in all I don't think that it will change that much. If you're champion or not, you have a chance to draw a very strong opponent or some minnows. But it should ensure that variety will be reasonably bigger and that's main reason for a change of people who are sick of Arsenal, Bayern; Psg, Barcelona in the same group every year. However to really change this seeding and have way bigger variety, get things really interesting in the group stage, then they should do something more like changing coefficent calculator to have more emphasis on recent years. It's weird that last year is as important as that 5 years ago.

Would like if group stage progress would be more difficult for big clubs when they currently face usually only 1 significant competitor for a place.

c) No, award for a draw remains the same. Only here they haven't increased money.

d) Thanks. I know what form is correct but I forgot, don't know why exactly. Sometimes I don't have that sense for the language and write with mistakes.

[Fernando 6,585]

That Mirror article on City really raises a few questions....

At least at Chelsea we have a business model and can demonstrate 100% compliance. Buy low, sell high(er)

City have nothing of the sort. A £50 million fine is nothing to them. They have renegotiated half way through the deal.

Unless FFP excludes clubs from CL it will achieve nothing.

No to me the problem with CIty was the sponsorship deal that UEFA deem good.

Now there was a report that they wanted to improve their deal for more money.

If UEFA continues to let them with such deal then they will be okay in the long run. Because FFP is all about revenues and clubs are increasing their revenues.

The Etihad deal is eventually a deal with themselves but UEFA does not see it like that....

[OhForAGreavsie 6,057]

... Thanks. I know what form is correct but I forgot, don't know why exactly. Sometimes I don't have that sense for the language and write with mistakes.

Last time I mentioned this you disagreed, but your English really is very good.

... No, award for a draw remains the same. Only here they haven't increased money.

Ah right, thank you.

This is interesting, I wonder how they are budgeting for this. The difference between all 96 group games being drawn or all 96 resulting in a win for one of the clubs is a whopping €48m in prize money terms. Obviously there will be draws but since no one knows how many, UEFA can't predict with certainty how much prize money will be paid out. Presumably they will budget for the historically average number of draws but what will they do if there is a surplus? My guess is that they'll bank it as a hedge against a future deficit.

...b ) The first pot will contain 8 champions from 8 countries of highest coefficent ranking in UEFA...

That's not quite right I think. I understand that the champions of the 7 leading nations, plus the Champions' League winners, will be the top seeds. So, for example, if Barca win La Liga, and Real win the Champions' league, then both Spanish giants will be among the top seeds. If we were to fail to win our own league, and find ourselves in pot 2, we then face a better than 71% chance of being drawn against Barca, Bayern, Juve, Madrid or Paris. Precisely the teams we'd prefer to avoid if possible.

No matter which 5 clubs we might avoid because they are in pot 2 with us, the prospect missing them and facing one of the big five instead, is not a good deal for us.

[Fernando 6,585]

Chelsea's Jose Mourinho: Manchester City should lose points for FFP breach

http://www.espnfc.us/barclays-premier-league/story/2427221/jose-mourinho-man-city-should-lose-points-for-ffp-breach

Don't agree with Mourinho.

FFP of UEFA should stay in UEFA.

Should not interfere with the local league and FA.

[Viper22 2,418]

Chelsea's Jose Mourinho: Manchester City should lose points for FFP breach

http://www.espnfc.us/barclays-premier-league/story/2427221/jose-mourinho-man-city-should-lose-points-for-ffp-breach

Don't agree with Mourinho.

FFP of UEFA should stay in UEFA.

Should not interfere with the local league and FA.

To be fair in an ideal world you're right, UEFA should deal with only UEFA issues.

But then the only things UEFA have control over is their CL participation - so unless they either chuck them out of the CL (or relegate them to the EL and put the 5th place BPL team into the CL instead) there is no punishment that will actually make the City owners stop abusing the FFP rules.

But this isn't an ideal world and there is very little chance of UEFA dropping PSG & City from the CL because they're too worried about losing potential revenue (wrong, but an unfortunate truth) so if they don't want to do that the next best thing IMO is to dock them points in their respective leagues.

Over-reaching their jurisdiction yes, but at least it may make City & PSG stop fucking about.

[Fernando 6,585]

To be fair in an ideal world you're right, UEFA should deal with only UEFA issues.

But then the only things UEFA have control over is their CL participation - so unless they either chuck them out of the CL (or relegate them to the EL and put the 5th place BPL team into the CL instead) there is no punishment that will actually make the City owners stop abusing the FFP rules.

But this isn't an ideal world and there is very little chance of UEFA dropping PSG & City from the CL because they're too worried about losing potential revenue (wrong, but an unfortunate truth) so if they don't want to do that the next best thing IMO is to dock them points in their respective leagues.

Over-reaching their jurisdiction yes, but at least it may make City & PSG stop fucking about.

Well the world ain't fair!

Plus FA have their own FFP.

Do not interfere with each jurisdiction, simple as that!

[LDN Blue 7,903]

The world isn't fair. However that's already a known issue, UEFA and football generally is a business and they need to continue growing their business.. That's why UEFA won't expel giants out the CL like Real, PSG, City, Chelsea etc. They simply can't afford not to have these clubs, with their sponsors and massive fan bases, in the Champions League. FFP has only come about because of external pressures for UEFA and FIFA to sort out their financial messes as highlighted by Portsmouth et al.

At the end of the day, clubs can choose to live within or beyond the FFP restrictions. And to be fair, it does look like clubs are trying to comply with it, but they know they can push the boundaries of it and not face exclusion from the CL. Unless they push it too far..

[Fernando 6,585]

PSG chief Nasser Al-Khelaifi wants UEFA discussions regarding FFP

The money will give Premier League sides more financial muscle with which to attract the world's best players and could, according to Al-Khelaifi, leave the rest of Europe unable to compete given the constraints placed upon them by UEFA's FFP rules.

"We're going to speak to UEFA to try and find a solution. With England, which is going to receive enormous TV rights money, financial fair play is not only the problem of French football, but also all the other European countries," Al Khelaifi told reporters after PSG wrapped up their title-winning season with a 3-2 victory over Reims on Saturday.

---------------

That EPL TV deal is what broke the camels back. Now thanks to that UEFA has to lower the restriction of FFP. Which it should be good as it allows more investor with money to spend. I rather see that then same team dominating all the time.

[stroey 2,525]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3108205/Chelsea-earned-record-99m-prize-money-Premier-League-title-success.html

Chelsea earned £99m

[RoyalBlues 4,050]

Let's buy everyone

[Fernando 6,585]

UEFA to relax financial fair play rules

http://www.espnfc.us/uefa-champions-league/story/2507973/uefa-relax-financial-fair-play-rules

Well it was coming. I was saying it that after that new deal from the EPL it had to change.

Because everyone was complaining how teams like Chelsea was able to buy and PSG couldn't.

Oh well better for the game overall then having the same old team always in the semis.

[Fernando 6,585]

Well PSG have their sanctions lifted by UEFA.