• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

PSR whinging

Qwerty said:
If it bites us in the arse in a few years time we'll be full of hell.
Click to expand...
1. We wont
2. It won’t. We have been run properly. We have partly spent anything up until this summer (net). We have bought and sold well, and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if we flog diarra and siddiki in the next couple of seasons for healthy profits. That’s the whole point in PSR, it’s about clubs being sustainable and not relying entirely on their owners wallet to prop them up, because too many clubs have and then had d the owner get bored or skint and then the club is up the creek.
 

Salary cap would be the best way of stopping football eating itself, and enable more teams to compete on a level playing field.

Current situation is slightly ridiculous as the uber wealthy clubs can still do what they want to get round it.

Only reason the Mags are whinging is because their owners have lost interest so they are trying to find someone else to blame for the fact they don’t want to spend any money.
 
A Villa supporting former colleague posted something on social media about the importance of having PSR. Within seconds of the post being made he had mags bitching about “the cartel” 😂😂

He removed the post as the sad twats were messaging him directly to complain about his post
 
Brixton said:
Salary cap would be the best way of stopping football eating itself, and enable more teams to compete on a level playing field.

Current situation is slightly ridiculous as the uber wealthy clubs can still do what they want to get round it.

Only reason the Mags are whinging is because their owners have lost interest so they are trying to find someone else to blame for the fact they don’t want to spend any money.
Click to expand...
Had on a minat, but but but they’re tha richast clerb in tha worrrld. They ave Messi sellin tha pies! 🤔🤷‍♂️🤪
 
Arkle said:
They've spent 132 million (plus whatever loan fee they've spent on Ramsdale) and only brought in a little over 30 million from sales and still seem to have money to spend, if they can find someone to come.

Obviously, they're not happy with the Isak situation but that's not directly related to PSR.
Click to expand...
It is when comes to wages, they cant break the wage structure for Isak as they would have to for tonali etc...
I think IMO that is why they cry on about psr they can buy the players but cant pay them what they want. Its so sad.
 
Fetch Fletch said:
I tend to disagree tbh.
The trick is to buy better.
Click to expand...
I’m coming round to that model
Georgewhitt said:
Isn't PSR taken over a 3 year rolling period?

We have been so tightly run over the past few years, we must have loads of freedom on what we spend now, and still be in the black.

Plus selling the odd 37 million pounds of players helps anarl.
Click to expand...
Which was precisely what gave them the advantage to splash out after Ashley had ran them sustainably. Now they have supporters still whining about Ashley, saying that if he had have invested ‘properly’ back then, they would have already been a champions league club when the takeover happened and in effect part of the big…..7?

Still blaming Ashley man, fuck off. There’s no end to their appalling victimhood.
 
Last edited:
FatDrummer said:
You must be logged on to see external links

This is not ‘totally’ aimed at the skunks bleating about ‘Profit and Sustainability Rules’ although they were VERY happy at being “thu richist clerb in thu worrld”. (They were happy at an uneven playing field rather than a more level one).

No….this is aimed at Villa and Forest and Man City (when they are eventually brought to book) et al.
Football was eating itself before these rules came in. It is surely good for the game that ALL clubs are reading from the same hymn book.
Yes, of course, some clubs will be better run than others….that is how competition works….and YES the rules are far from perfect as yet, with too many loopholes.
BUT for the betterment and longevity of the game in England, PSR is surely the right way to go.

…..And I hope to god that WE have had the calculator out to check that we are behaving sustainably!!

(Any thoughts on this?…my fine SMB cohorts)
Click to expand...

This will bite us in the arse soon the amount we have spent… however.. I think the point is the rules would be fine if everyone had been beholden from the start. But - especially city and Chelsea - formerly v middle of the road clubs - have now been able to massively take advantage before the rules and now the drawbridge is up it’s not fair on clubs wanting to do the same
 
Honess10 said:
This will bite us in the arse soon the amount we have spent… however.. I think the point is the rules would be fine if everyone had been beholden from the start. But - especially city and Chelsea - formerly v middle of the road clubs - have now been able to massively take advantage before the rules and now the drawbridge is up it’s not fair on clubs wanting to do the same
Click to expand...
Doubt it’ll have any major effect on us. Either the players we’ve signed are hugely successful and we make a massive profit on them or we sell them for what we paid for them.

We’re well within our PSR and the lack of spending in L1 and the championship is what has allowed us to spend so freely now. There’s no way that this lot would jeopardise the club by spending what it can’t afford on players the way Short used to.
 
ClassicDom said:
Doubt it’ll have any major effect on us. Either the players we’ve signed are hugely successful and we make a massive profit on them or we sell them for what we paid for them.

We’re well within our PSR and the lack of spending in L1 and the championship is what has allowed us to spend so freely now. There’s no way that this lot would jeopardise the club by spending what it can’t afford on players the way Short used to.
Click to expand...

We can lose 105m over 3 years. We’ve made, small admittedly, losses over the last couple of years without any major transfer spend. At the very least we are front loading massively our transfer spend we can do. It’s absolutely the correct thing to do by the way aswell, but if we do stay up PSR will be a restriction for us.
 
Honess10 said:
We can lose 105m over 3 years. We’ve made, small admittedly, losses over the last couple of years without any major transfer spend. At the very least we are front loading massively our transfer spend we can do. It’s absolutely the correct thing to do by the way aswell, but if we do stay up PSR will be a restriction for us.
Click to expand...

The losses we can make will increase for the next 2 years if we remain in the Premier League and we fielded the youngest side in the league at the weekend with loads of salable assets. While there's definitely been an element of front loading our transfer spend, we've still got plenty wiggle room over the coming years.
 
Surprise, surprise….ex mag Dan Gosling (24 appearances in 4 seasons at the Carbuncle on the Hill) has been wheeled into the Sky Sports studio to call for PSR to be scrapped on The Transfer Show.

Sky are active supporters of the Sportswashers. They have ZERO moral backbone.
 
Select coaches said:
How come Man City & Chelsea can just spend what they like, not to mention Man U & Liverpool. There needs to be rules but the playing field should be a bit more level.
Click to expand...

Liverpool can because someone buys one of their kids for 25m every year. And they recycle there other players. They've sold players for 200m this year. There net spend is similar to ours and with amortisation and the amount of their kids they sell they will likely be in profit for the year (not counting previous years movements)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top