Squad Watch 2022/23

[NathStPaul]

Rules 'might' have been quite clear but I doubt that can be said regarding the nature and type of sanctions that would be imposed. It's claimed FFP is about protecting the in financial security of clubs. If that is true, then it clearly isn't fit for purpose. Forcing clubs to let their most valuable assets go for free, forbidding the reinvestment in the squad of any money taken from player sales, and leaving clubs with such weakened squads that they end up at high risk of relegation all works against securing their financial security.

To me it seems that FFP is far more about protecting the big clubs and the status quo from newly rich upstarts and maintaining the ludicrously uneven playing field that allows clubs relegated from the PL to spend beyond their true means (courtesy of parachute payments) ensuring the swift return of most of them to the top level.

But if you don't break the rules then you cannot be punished for anything. I get your point, the sanctions are harsh, but we chanced our arm and are now paying the price. We didn't just break the rules either, we obliterated them.

I think the ‘rules’ were clear enough but the ‘punishments’ do seem a grey area. Am slightly surprised at how harsh our business plan is but guess we’ll have to live with it

And it has at least forced us to stop some of the silly strategies we were following

I think the harshness reflects on the brazeness of our breach. I agree the sanctions are slightly harsh and counterproductive though, there should have been a uniform list of sanctions in place years ago so everyone knew where they stood.

[Franchise FC]

EFL have totally screwed what we can do, yes board screwed up but we should still be able to spend some of money on fees received, I thought you had to put a competitive side out, looks like we won't be.

What fees have we received ?
Have I missed something ?

I knew posting on AE was a mistake

[Hound]

EFL have totally screwed what we can do, yes board screwed up but we should still be able to spend some of money on fees received, I thought you had to put a competitive side out, looks like we won't be.

What fees have we received ?
Have I missed something ?

I knew posting on AE was a mistake

Posting in AE is always a mistake

Think talking about potential fees received rather than ones we already have (ie Puscas and Joao)

[YorkshireRoyal99]

EFL have totally screwed what we can do, yes board screwed up but we should still be able to spend some of money on fees received, I thought you had to put a competitive side out, looks like we won't be.

They may just want us to be compliant with P&S/FFP regulations and by not being able to spend anything, it gives us a better chance of doing that whilst meeting to our agreed Business Plan and it may also help us with some transfers, as any transfer with a fee would have to be approved by the EFL and may take longer to resolve i.e. we want to pay £500k for a player but then the EFL have to look at our accounts, if we are on forecast to pass the regulations/Business Plan etc which may delay transfers even further, leading to players/agents going elsewhere.

Still no evidence we can’t spend money….
Absolutely no reason why getting EFL sign off would add significant delay. They monitor our position regularly, it would be very obvious if we have room in the business plan allowing us to reinvest.
If we don’t have that room then it’s a fair call but we are clearly operating to the plan and it doesn’t appear to be reliant on player sales.

There is no evidence that we can spend money either and there are many reports from various different journalists suggesting that we can't either, that's all I'm going off as that's all we really know at the moment.

It may be very obvious in some cases, but in some other cases, i.e. depending on the value of the transfer, signing on fee, agent fees, clauses etc that will change in negotiations, it may not be as simple as that which may delay transfers further.

Also just because we are operating to our plan doesn't mean we can go and spend anything either because we (as in us as fans) won't know what our profit/loss will be until the next set of accounts.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

But if you don't break the rules then you cannot be punished for anything. I get your point, the sanctions are harsh, but we chanced our arm and are now paying the price. We didn't just break the rules either, we obliterated them.

I think the ‘rules’ were clear enough but the ‘punishments’ do seem a grey area. Am slightly surprised at how harsh our business plan is but guess we’ll have to live with it

And it has at least forced us to stop some of the silly strategies we were following

I think the harshness reflects on the brazeness of our breach. I agree the sanctions are slightly harsh and counterproductive though, there should have been a uniform list of sanctions in place years ago so everyone knew where they stood.

Ultimately it's difficult because every situation is different, which would explain the grey area. But you can spin it other ways, our punishment now may be deemed as harsh now but the direct punishment of points deductions has actually been the most lenient of any side to receive points deductions in the last few seasons, excluding Derby's administration as that's a different point entirely.

[Stranded]

Again, the agreed decision makes no statement on fees being paid, just like there is no mention of length of contracts we can give - yet people were convinced it was still 1 year.

The decision allows for money to be spent but only at the EFL's behest. They are very likely taking a hardline on things at the moment because we deserve to have a hardline taken but the wording allows for this to be loosened if we are doing more than expected or if a fee comes in but and it is a massive but, only if the EFL agree.

It is very likely they are saying, you broke the limits by a country mile so no spending until your house is in order but that can change.

[Snowflake Royal]

But if you don't break the rules then you cannot be punished for anything. I get your point, the sanctions are harsh, but we chanced our arm and are now paying the price. We didn't just break the rules either, we obliterated them.

I think the ‘rules’ were clear enough but the ‘punishments’ do seem a grey area. Am slightly surprised at how harsh our business plan is but guess we’ll have to live with it

And it has at least forced us to stop some of the silly strategies we were following

I think the harshness reflects on the brazeness of our breach. I agree the sanctions are slightly harsh and counterproductive though, there should have been a uniform list of sanctions in place years ago so everyone knew where they stood.

I guess it depends on how you look at it.

The sanction is potentially just the point and suspended point deduction.

Whilst the business plan is the negotiated step on how to bring the club out of breaching the regs again and again. This step is never going to be something that can be laid out in a tariff structure. But it's also essential to stop clubs just taking a 6 and 6, then 12 point deduction and hoping to stay up anyway, rather than sorting their shit out.

Does anyone think we'd have started spending more wisely and within permitted levels if we hadn't had embargos and enforced business plans?

I find it very doubtful.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Again, the agreed decision makes no statement on fees being paid, just like there is no mention of length of contracts we can give - yet people were convinced it was still 1 year.

The decision allows for money to be spent but only at the EFL's behest. They are very likely taking a hardline on things at the moment because we deserve to have a hardline taken but the wording allows for this to be loosened if we are doing more than expected or if a fee comes in but and it is a massive but, only if the EFL agree.

It is very likely they are saying, you broke the limits by a country mile so no spending until your house is in order but that can change.

Yeah agree, but at this moment in time it doesn't seem as if we are at a point where we can spend any money, that seems to be where we are at if reports are to be believed.

If we do end up selling a player for a transfer fee of whatever value, that could then be more telling.

[Snowflake Royal]

Again, the agreed decision makes no statement on fees being paid, just like there is no mention of length of contracts we can give - yet people were convinced it was still 1 year.

The decision allows for money to be spent but only at the EFL's behest. They are very likely taking a hardline on things at the moment because we deserve to have a hardline taken but the wording allows for this to be loosened if we are doing more than expected or if a fee comes in but and it is a massive but, only if the EFL agree.

It is very likely they are saying, you broke the limits by a country mile so no spending until your house is in order but that can change.

Exactly this.

We've already had the one year contract thing proven wrong. And if we shift Moore for free and sell Joao / Puscas etc for multi-millions we'll probably see us able to spend a little in fees... 10% - 20% seems pretty plausible to me.

Until we shift Moore and sell someone for millions, there's no way we should be spending a penny on fees, permitted or otherwise.

[Snowflake Royal]

Again, the agreed decision makes no statement on fees being paid, just like there is no mention of length of contracts we can give - yet people were convinced it was still 1 year.

The decision allows for money to be spent but only at the EFL's behest. They are very likely taking a hardline on things at the moment because we deserve to have a hardline taken but the wording allows for this to be loosened if we are doing more than expected or if a fee comes in but and it is a massive but, only if the EFL agree.

It is very likely they are saying, you broke the limits by a country mile so no spending until your house is in order but that can change.

Yeah agree, but at this moment in time it doesn't seem as if we are at a point where we can spend any money, that seems to be where we are at if reports are to be believed.

If we do end up selling a player for a transfer fee of whatever value, that could then be more telling.

But the reason we can't spend money now, is not because the FL says we can't spend money full stop. But because doing so would put us over, or risk putting us over our business plan. Which would mean breaching FFP again and getting more points deducted... probably about 12 to 18.

[From Despair To Where?]

Something to get you all excited. Just seen this.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Again, the agreed decision makes no statement on fees being paid, just like there is no mention of length of contracts we can give - yet people were convinced it was still 1 year.

The decision allows for money to be spent but only at the EFL's behest. They are very likely taking a hardline on things at the moment because we deserve to have a hardline taken but the wording allows for this to be loosened if we are doing more than expected or if a fee comes in but and it is a massive but, only if the EFL agree.

It is very likely they are saying, you broke the limits by a country mile so no spending until your house is in order but that can change.

Yeah agree, but at this moment in time it doesn't seem as if we are at a point where we can spend any money, that seems to be where we are at if reports are to be believed.

If we do end up selling a player for a transfer fee of whatever value, that could then be more telling.

But the reason we can't spend money now, is not because the FL says we can't spend money full stop. But because doing so would put us over, or risk putting us over our business plan. Which would mean breaching FFP again and getting more points deducted... probably about 12 to 18.

Yeah, that is what I've said. Never suggested it was a case of we couldn't spend money full stop.

[Nameless]

They may just want us to be compliant with P&S/FFP regulations and by not being able to spend anything, it gives us a better chance of doing that whilst meeting to our agreed Business Plan and it may also help us with some transfers, as any transfer with a fee would have to be approved by the EFL and may take longer to resolve i.e. we want to pay £500k for a player but then the EFL have to look at our accounts, if we are on forecast to pass the regulations/Business Plan etc which may delay transfers even further, leading to players/agents going elsewhere.

Still no evidence we can’t spend money….
Absolutely no reason why getting EFL sign off would add significant delay. They monitor our position regularly, it would be very obvious if we have room in the business plan allowing us to reinvest.
If we don’t have that room then it’s a fair call but we are clearly operating to the plan and it doesn’t appear to be reliant on player sales.

There is no evidence that we can spend money either and there are many reports from various different journalists suggesting that we can't either, that's all I'm going off as that's all we really know at the moment.

It may be very obvious in some cases, but in some other cases, i.e. depending on the value of the transfer, signing on fee, agent fees, clauses etc that will change in negotiations, it may not be as simple as that which may delay transfers further.

Also just because we are operating to our plan doesn't mean we can go and spend anything either because we (as in us as fans) won't know what our profit/loss will be until the next set of accounts.

The agreed plan makes it clear there is an avenue that allows us to spend money.
Just cause a poor journalist doesn’t know what he is talking about doesn’t change that.
As for not being able to spend because ‘we’ don’t know what is in the accounts, what does that even mean ? The club and FA will know on a daily basis what is in the accounts, and it’s irrelevant whether we know or not. As a club we will know what criteria the EFL will use to decide if we can spend money. It may well dictate what out going business we do, if we need to raise 5 million to be able to spend a million it may not be worth selling anyone.

[karbota]

Something to get you all excited. Just seen this.

Along with all the other flotsam and jetsam shite in your head!.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Still no evidence we can’t spend money….
Absolutely no reason why getting EFL sign off would add significant delay. They monitor our position regularly, it would be very obvious if we have room in the business plan allowing us to reinvest.
If we don’t have that room then it’s a fair call but we are clearly operating to the plan and it doesn’t appear to be reliant on player sales.

There is no evidence that we can spend money either and there are many reports from various different journalists suggesting that we can't either, that's all I'm going off as that's all we really know at the moment.

It may be very obvious in some cases, but in some other cases, i.e. depending on the value of the transfer, signing on fee, agent fees, clauses etc that will change in negotiations, it may not be as simple as that which may delay transfers further.

Also just because we are operating to our plan doesn't mean we can go and spend anything either because we (as in us as fans) won't know what our profit/loss will be until the next set of accounts.

The agreed plan makes it clear there is an avenue that allows us to spend money.
Just cause a poor journalist doesn’t know what he is talking about doesn’t change that.
As for not being able to spend because ‘we’ don’t know what is in the accounts, what does that even mean ? The club and FA will know on a daily basis what is in the accounts, and it’s irrelevant whether we know or not. As a club we will know what criteria the EFL will use to decide if we can spend money. It may well dictate what out going business we do, if we need to raise 5 million to be able to spend a million it may not be worth selling anyone.

Possibly some wires being crossed here, I'm suggesting at this moment, it doesn't appear as if we can spend money given by what the reports are, whether you think they are poor or not is subjective ultimately, but that's what has been reported in our current situation.

I'm not suggesting as us fans have a right to know, but I'm saying that we won't know unless the club says otherwise and wouldn't be able to have any idea until our accounts are published. Of course I know the club and EFL will know, but they won't make that public knowledge, which was my point.

[Hendo]

Something to get you all excited. Just seen this.

You're looking for the squid watch thread

[morganb]

Something to get you all excited. Just seen this.

You're looking for the squid watch thread

Nice

[From Despair To Where?]

More interesting than our squad.

[Snowflake Royal]

Not far off having more arms than our squad.

[NathStPaul]

Are they arms or legs?