Transfers & Rumors: Deadline Drama!

[ramssuperbowl99]

7 minutes ago, LeeEvans said:

While I agree I think they're both tied together. When you have good players going for £50m on a regular basis the fee for a genuine superstar is going to explode. £222m is clearly an absurd number but it came to this because of the rising fees for above average players. 

At some level they are tied together but other transfers are limited by financial fair play to at least be in line with the revenue of the team. This is a state-backed transfer. Ronaldo has a release clause of 1 billion Euros - Qatar could pay that no problem if Ronaldo would agree to leave. It could be 5 billion Euros and they could pay it.

There's 2 issues. 1 is the inflation of revenues for sports clubs, which isn't just a soccer problem. We see the same thing in the NBA, MLB, NFL, etc. 2 is a club convincing a government to take on all of their expenses. We see this in America with sports stadiums, but I've never heard of a government cutting a player a massive check like this before. It completely divorces player valuation from the revenue the teams make.

[mse326]

38 minutes ago, texans_uk said:

In 10 years when we are all sitting on our caves riding our modified exercise bikes for electricity watching re-runs of M. A. S. H and Cheers through a VHS on an 18" TV, we will look back on the day when a football club committed to spending half a billion pounds on a human being and realise that was the day that signalled the end. 

To be fair I'm already watching reruns of M*A*S*H and Cheers. Great shows.

[LeeEvans]

28 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

At some level they are tied together but other transfers are limited by financial fair play to at least be in line with the revenue of the team. This is a state-backed transfer. Ronaldo has a release clause of 1 billion Euros - Qatar could pay that no problem if Ronaldo would agree to leave. It could be 5 billion Euros and they could pay it.

There's 2 issues. 1 is the inflation of revenues for sports clubs, which isn't just a soccer problem. We see the same thing in the NBA, MLB, NFL, etc. 2 is a club convincing a government to take on all of their expenses. We see this in America with sports stadiums, but I've never heard of a government cutting a player a massive check like this before. It completely divorces player valuation from the revenue the teams make.

Ah I see. I thought you were talking more in terms of the sum of the money than a countries involvement. It's definitely a shady dealing and the fact a football team has it's expenses covered by an entire country is pretty crazy but I suppose I would ask where you draw the line. What makes one billionaires investment worse than the other? I do agree that Qatar paying Neymar the entirety of the transfer fee so that his transfer is paid for by him and not PSG so that it doesn't count against FFP would be completely unacceptable. I highly doubt that FIFA or UEFA do anything to the people would continually line their pockets though unfortunately. 

[mse326]

2 minutes ago, LeeEvans said:

Ah I see. I thought you were talking more in terms of the sum of the money than a countries involvement. It's definitely a shady dealing and the fact a football team has it's expenses covered by an entire country is pretty crazy but I suppose I would ask where you draw the line. What makes one billionaires investment worse than the other? I do agree that Qatar paying Neymar the entirety of the transfer fee so that his transfer is paid for by him and not PSG so that it doesn't count against FFP would be completely unacceptable. I highly doubt that FIFA or UEFA do anything to the people would continually line their pockets though unfortunately. 

It is shady but I don't know how to construct a rule that prevents it without preventing conduct that we would mostly deem ok. Unless you say regardless of who actually pays the transfer fee FFP rules apply based on the total amound and the teams revenue. But I don't know that I like that because that prevents even a modest amount where a player buys out his contract. 

[UKTexans]

3 minutes ago, LeeEvans said:

I highly doubt that FIFA or UEFA do anything to the people would continually line their pockets though unfortunate

There's sadly no end in sight. 

Bottom line is, boycott top clubs, support your local teams. 

[UKTexans]

Just now, mse326 said:

But I don't know that I like that because that prevents even a modest amount where a player buys out his contract. 

Definitely something that would need to be considered. 

Ultimately this summer has further empowered my desire to follow grass roots and lower league football.

[ramssuperbowl99]

14 minutes ago, LeeEvans said:

Ah I see. I thought you were talking more in terms of the sum of the money than a countries involvement. It's definitely a shady dealing and the fact a football team has it's expenses covered by an entire country is pretty crazy but I suppose I would ask where you draw the line. What makes one billionaires investment worse than the other? I do agree that Qatar paying Neymar the entirety of the transfer fee so that his transfer is paid for by him and not PSG so that it doesn't count against FFP would be completely unacceptable. I highly doubt that FIFA or UEFA do anything to the people would continually line their pockets though unfortunately. 

My post tried to note that it's difficult to draw the line.

If Manchester United is in financial trouble and is given a loan with a lower-then-expected interest rate from the UK government, is that materially different than what Qatar just did? On one hand, yes. It's a loan not a gift. On the other hand, eh. It's still a government propping up a club that would have failed otherwise.

Likewise, when the Cobb, GA county taxpayers shell out hundreds of millions in bonds for the Atlanta Braves' new stadium and give the Braves a cushy lease that they can leave in 20 years for another new taxpayer-funded monstrosity, is that a world different? How would having to pay upwards of $50M/year in mortgage payments on their stadium effect the Braves' ability to sign players.

So how do you draw the line? I don't really know. I do know that having a foreign state fund hundreds of millions of dollars to Neymar as a way to circumvent club spending rules is something that has completely divorced transfer limits from the revenue of those clubs and even personal wealth. This isn't Mark Cuban being okay with the Dallas Mavericks running at a loss because he wants to win, this is an entire state.

All I'm trying to say is that it feels like we are on a slippery slope, but slid all the way to the bottom of it immediately.

[LeeEvans]

31 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

My post tried to note that it's difficult to draw the line.

If Manchester United is in financial trouble and is given a loan with a lower-then-expected interest rate from the UK government, is that materially different than what Qatar just did? On one hand, yes. It's a loan not a gift. On the other hand, eh. It's still a government propping up a club that would have failed otherwise.

Likewise, when the Cobb, GA county taxpayers shell out hundreds of millions in bonds for the Atlanta Braves' new stadium and give the Braves a cushy lease that they can leave in 20 years for another new taxpayer-funded monstrosity, is that a world different? How would having to pay upwards of $50M/year in mortgage payments on their stadium effect the Braves' ability to sign players.

So how do you draw the line? I don't really know. I do know that having a foreign state fund hundreds of millions of dollars to Neymar as a way to circumvent club spending rules is something that has completely divorced transfer limits from the revenue of those clubs and even personal wealth. This isn't Mark Cuban being okay with the Dallas Mavericks running at a loss because he wants to win, this is an entire state.

All I'm trying to say is that it feels like we are on a slippery slope, but slid all the way to the bottom of it immediately.

Completely agree that it is definitely a slippery slope. What happens if China, Russia, Germany or any other country starts buying football clubs? As you, @mse326 and I have said though it's insanely hard where to draw the line and then enforce it. Honestly if Man City had done this instead of PSG there would be absolutely losing their mind over it, this aspect is getting less coverage due to the league it is in. I'll admit that I initially enjoyed PSG and Man City rising to power because it shook up the football elite but it has certainly opened the door to all kinds of moral arguments. Even Barcelona being "sponsored" by a country is very sketchy. Again I don't expect anything to happen though, everyone is too busy swimming with their money to care. 

[UKTexans]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40804584

Quote

In March, Barcelona achieved one of the most remarkable comebacks in Champions League history as three goals in the final seven minutes secured a sensational 6-5 aggregate victory over Paris St-Germain.

The chief inspiration on that historic night, without any doubt, was Neymar, who capped a brilliant performance by scoring the first two of those late goalsbefore assisting Sergi Roberto's winner with a perfectly placed chipped cross.

The following day, the high emotions of the unforgettable occasion were encapsulated by the publication of a dramatic image which quickly went viral: Lionel Messi in a Messiah-like pose, standing on the advertising boards to celebrate the victory as awestruck fans hailed his glory.

At that precise moment, Neymar decided enough was enough: he had just delivered the best performance of his career to inspire an amazing victory, and still everyone was talking about Messi.

 

[LeeEvans]

1 minute ago, texans_uk said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40804584

 

Just read the same thing by Sid Lowe on the Guardian. To be fair I'd be going pretty crazy if Messi was standing directly in front of me. Just read that Neymar's father stands to make 36m from his transfer to PSG, that is eye watering. 

[UKTexans]

Completely different scenario, but I get super annoyed at work when the "team" gets commended for a job well done, when I've literally done about 90% of the work. 

[LeeEvans]

Quote

IHEANACHO PASSES FOXES MEDICAL

Man City striker Kelechi Iheanacho has completed his medical and is on the verge of joining Leicester.

SSN understand personal terms have been agreed and the £25m transfer, which gives City the option to buy him back for £50m, is nearing completion.

City believe the 20-year old Nigerian has the potential to become a world-class goal scorer, but presently they are struggling to guarantee him regular first-team football.

Iheanacho, who joined the City Academy as a 17-year old, has played 46 games for City in the past two seasons.

Per Sky Sports, first mention I've seen of a buy back. 

[UKTexans]

1 minute ago, LeeEvans said:

Per Sky Sports, first mention I've seen of a buy back. 

I predicted it on the previous page 

[LeeEvans]

3 minutes ago, texans_uk said:

I predicted it on the previous page 

Ha. Got any other good predictions? I've got a fiver burning in my pocket. 

[LeeEvans]

24 minutes ago, texans_uk said:

Completely different scenario, but I get super annoyed at work when the "team" gets commended for a job well done, when I've literally done about 90% of the work. 

While I agree and could easily see how that could get under his skin it seems a bit ridiculous to sign for a club with the best player in the world and then complain when he is treated like the best player in the world. Neymar has always been a little whiny [blank] and it wouldn't surprise me at all that something like that could make him leave the club. For what it's worth I can completely understand wanting to get out from Messi's shadow and I don't really care one way or the other where he moves to, I just hate Neymar.