Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:10 pm  

Dan_FC wrote:

Isn't it done so the teams who were worse off the season before get first pick too?

I'm sure I like the rotation idea, it happens each season doesn't it? it seems absurd that a player is forced to move to another club and have no say in the matter, I don't see the point in that. Plus I think you can offload rubbish and bring in one big named player. Just because it works for American sports doesn't mean it'll work here.

The idea of a salary cap of some sort would work but any change like a draft system or salary cap is too big a change to happen, it's taken forever for touchline technology to even be discussed so something like draft or salary cap will never happen. I still think clubs having control of their players and transfer fees are the way forward just not in the crazy way it works now, a salary cap could work but clubs will find a way round it.

Yep, to use the NFL for the example, the team who performed worst in the season gets the #1 draft pick, which means the top prospect coming out of college football that year is theirs for the taking, while the Super Bowl winners go last.

And isn't it the case that a salary cap cannot be enforced without a gentleman's agreement? Meaning all 20 clubs have to agree, if one objects (and you can bet City, United, Chelsea and a couple others will), its a no-go?

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:26 pm  

MSH wrote:

Yep, to use the NFL for the example, the team who performed worst in the season gets the #1 draft pick, which means the top prospect coming out of college football that year is theirs for the taking, while the Super Bowl winners go last.

That's quite a good idea. So it's the college players they choose from then? when it was being discussed on here I was under the impression you picked any player from the league, it's only college players they choose? Not a bad way to pick up the best young players.

MSH wrote:

And isn't it the case that a salary cap cannot be enforced without a gentleman's agreement? Meaning all 20 clubs have to agree, if one objects (and you can bet City, United, Chelsea and a couple others will), its a no-go?

I think that is the case, mate. Whether they would have a mjority rules on it I'm not too sure but I think all 20 teams would have to agree for it to be enforced. There's noway Chelsea or City would agree to that, United or Liverpool either. I think they'd all be against it. The problem with introducing something like this is the football world will have to be included too, I don't think FIFA and UEFA would allow England to take on a salary cap and not football in general, even if they did I'd imagine it'd leave clubs over here very disadvantaged too.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:46 pm  

Dan_FC wrote:

That's quite a good idea. So it's the college players they choose from then? when it was being discussed on here I was under the impression you picked any player from the league, it's only college players they choose? Not a bad way to pick up the best young players.

As far as I understand it, its the college players who have made the jump from college to pro, and anyone not in a contract (i.e free agents).

As good as the USA sports setup is, it would never get off the ground here. Rugby has managed it in a sense but both codes are minority sports, so its a bit different. Shame really as the major American sports leagues are hugely profitable and you never hear of an American franchise in massive debt.

I think that is the case, mate. Whether they would have a mjority rules on it I'm not too sure but I think all 20 teams would have to agree for it to be enforced. There's noway Chelsea or City would agree to that, United or Liverpool either. I think they'd all be against it. The problem with introducing something like this is the football world will have to be included too, I don't think FIFA and UEFA would allow England to take on a salary cap and not football in general, even if they did I'd imagine it'd leave clubs over here very disadvantaged too.

Exactly, it'd need FIFA to implement it and there would be just too much objections, not just from the Premier League, but pretty much all the Champions League mainstays, and they'd have more of a say I'd imagine.

Plus it involves Sepptic Bladder moving with the times....

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:07 pm  

The other point about the US draft system is that the colleges have a monopoly of the best players until they are 21/22. That's why college football attracts crowds of up to 100,000. The players who then join the pro's are more mature than your typical PL debutant, less of a gamble. But could you imagine if Rooney, Wilshire, Walcott etc had been prevented from joining the top clubs until that age? The US system is chock full of the most incredibly restrictive practices but nobody rocks the boat.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:23 pm  

Roofs wrote:

For me, clubs that can be proud and have a feeling of achievement are those like Liverpool and Man United, not Chelsea or Man City.

And how would one rate this "achievment" status exactly?

Does a team receive points for each historical cup win and does this erode as the years pass?

Feel free to post the qualifying criteria so I can tell my 7 yr old son that he can one day feel "proud" of Manchester City in accordance with the Roofs Historical Achievment Rating .......

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:59 pm  

MSH wrote:

Shame really as the major American sports leagues are hugely profitable and you never hear of an American franchise in massive debt.

The only reason that you hear about the debts of English clubs is because Man United fans don't like Glazer so they wet their knickers all the time about the debt they're in.

The Glazer's didn't get their Tampa Bay (?) franchise from monopoly money, they'd have done the same thing they did when they bought United. Dallas didn't save up the billion dollars it cost to build their stadium, they'll have gone into huge debt to build it.

But the yanks don't bleat about debt because they know it's the owners problem, not theirs. But Man United and Liverpool fans bitch about their clubs being in the same type of debt.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:13 pm  

Abe Frohman wrote:

And how would one rate this "achievment" status exactly?

Does a team receive points for each historical cup win and does this erode as the years pass?

Feel free to post the qualifying criteria so I can tell my 7 yr old son that he can one day feel "proud" of Manchester City in accordance with the Roofs Historical Achievment Rating .......

Manchester United and Liverpool have (despite spending a lot of money over the years which I am not doubting) brought through a lot of great young English players over the years, their success has been earned over the years rather than just bought. They also have built up global fan bases.

Man City are completely false IMO. For years they came nowhere near been a top English club. They are simply trying to buy their way to success, which is why IMO however many trophies they manage to purchase this season or in coming years means absolutely nothing.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:26 pm  

Catalancs wrote:

Last English player to score in the French league?

Dalian Atkinson?

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:36 pm  

MSH wrote:

As far as I understand it, its the college players who have made the jump from college to pro, and anyone not in a contract (i.e free agents).

No, just college players or players from overseas who have never played in (for example) the NBA before.

If your a free agent then it's open season again.

MSH wrote:

As good as the USA sports setup is, it would never get off the ground here. Rugby has managed it in a sense but both codes are minority sports, so its a bit different. Shame really as the major American sports leagues are hugely profitable and you never hear of an American franchise in massive debt.

Yes you do, there are lots of NBA teams in particular bleeding money, hence the lockout at the minute (if your aware). The deal that decided what the salary cap was/is and how much of the leagues income was spent on players expired and the players union and the league (i.e. the owners) couldn't agree on a figure. There are only a few franchices actually making any sort of reasonable money.

But I agree, there isn't any realistic way of it being implemented over here. Trying to integrate it into an existing setup would just not work, the only one it might be worth trying with is Rugby Union as they already have quite strong ties to Universities.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:39 pm  

I think people are underestimating owners here, do you not think the majority of owners would agree to a salary cap? Just think about it, a cap that prevents them spending more. If done correctly, players' wages would shrink/hit a wall, and their profits would shoot up if they were spending less on wages.

Just give it a think, I know you get some idiotic owners like the City owners, who are simply there to flex their financial muscle in the public eye, but I definitely believe that most club owners would agree to a salary cap. If anybody wouldn't agree to a salary cap, it's the players.