Contract situation at end of 2020/21 season.

[Franconian Royal]

I've read what you have all said and this would be my way of doing it:

Sell Moore and Puscas. Something has happened to Moore. It's as if his agent is whispering sweet nothings into his head. He's not been the same for a while.
Puscas - 9m worth of striker on the bench as someone has already said, no need for him to warm the bench. He's done ok, but for 9m, it's not enough. Not entirely his fault, but it looks as if Bowen had and Porno has no idea how to play the guy. He's not a João.

Keep Morro on for another year. His experience his good. Offer him a coaching position at the end of his contract.

TMac, Holmes, Rhino, Laurent, Swift, Olise etc (we know which players I mean) should be signed up for a longer period (2-3 years).

Tetek etc with a lot of talent - keep!!! This kid could become real quality. He looks confident. Porno knows him (from the U19 WC, I think). Develop the youngsters and really give them belief they can break through.

Aluko, Baldock etc - get rid.

Paunovic did not know Tetek before he came to Reading. Tetek was 12 when Paunovic left Serbia and has only started representing Serbia due to Paunovic discovering him at Reading.

As for Puscas - I’m not sure why we paid the fee we did, but why would his transfer fee have any impact upon whether we sold him? He’s a 1-in-3 striker at this level, exactly what you want on your bench. We’re probably going to lose Joao this summer and we’re definitely seeing the last of Baldock, do we really want to try to build a whole new strike force?

Think Tetek is still eligible for call up by England as well.

Was he born here in the UK? If he was born here, then automatically, yes, due to country of birth. If not, then he'd have to naturalised, wouldn't he? Or would he be class HG (home grown) because he has come through the academy?

[Stranded]

Paunovic did not know Tetek before he came to Reading. Tetek was 12 when Paunovic left Serbia and has only started representing Serbia due to Paunovic discovering him at Reading.

As for Puscas - I’m not sure why we paid the fee we did, but why would his transfer fee have any impact upon whether we sold him? He’s a 1-in-3 striker at this level, exactly what you want on your bench. We’re probably going to lose Joao this summer and we’re definitely seeing the last of Baldock, do we really want to try to build a whole new strike force?

Think Tetek is still eligible for call up by England as well.

Was he born here in the UK? If he was born here, then automatically, yes, due to country of birth. If not, then he'd have to naturalised, wouldn't he? Or would he be class HG (home grown) because he has come through the academy?

He was born in Oxford.

[Royalwaster]

Think Tetek is still eligible for call up by England as well.

Was he born here in the UK? If he was born here, then automatically, yes, due to country of birth. If not, then he'd have to naturalised, wouldn't he? Or would he be class HG (home grown) because he has come through the academy?

He was born in Oxford.

Yes he played against my son at U7/U8 level for one of the Blackbird Leys clubs - was standout player at that level and joined Reading at U9s. We had a similarly good player in our team who joined Southampton at same time and is still there. Have been watching both with interest to see who makes it ...

[Snowflake Royal]

The parachute payments go back to the Premier League so they can all have what is essentially a pittance against what they already get. It used to get redistributed to the EFL but they stopped that several years back.

#solidarity.

Should go
10% to L2
30% to L1
70% to Champ

Going to the lower leagues actually helps redress the imbalance the parachute payments make and strengthens the pyramid.

If you bounce back it makes the rest of the division stronger, if you don't it helps prevent financial armageddon from relegation.

[Stranded]

The parachute payments go back to the Premier League so they can all have what is essentially a pittance against what they already get. It used to get redistributed to the EFL but they stopped that several years back.

#solidarity.

Should go
10% to L2
30% to L1
70% to Champ

Going to the lower leagues actually helps redress the imbalance the parachute payments make and strengthens the pyramid.

If you bounce back it makes the rest of the division stronger, if you don't it helps prevent financial armageddon from relegation.

Agree it should be spread across the 3 EFL divisions. Did you mean 20% to L2 or 60% to Champ - else you've got 110% there.

[URZZZZ]

The parachute payments go back to the Premier League so they can all have what is essentially a pittance against what they already get. It used to get redistributed to the EFL but they stopped that several years back.

#solidarity.

Should go
10% to L2
30% to L1
70% to Champ

Going to the lower leagues actually helps redress the imbalance the parachute payments make and strengthens the pyramid.

If you bounce back it makes the rest of the division stronger, if you don't it helps prevent financial armageddon from relegation.

Agree it should be spread across the 3 EFL divisions. Did you mean 20% to L2 or 60% to Champ - else you've got 110% there.

Not sure 120% is allowed either

[Stranded]

#solidarity.

Should go
10% to L2
30% to L1
70% to Champ

Going to the lower leagues actually helps redress the imbalance the parachute payments make and strengthens the pyramid.

If you bounce back it makes the rest of the division stronger, if you don't it helps prevent financial armageddon from relegation.

Agree it should be spread across the 3 EFL divisions. Did you mean 20% to L2 or 60% to Champ - else you've got 110% there.

Not sure 120% is allowed either

Touche. Meant L1 not L2.

[Snowflake Royal]

The parachute payments go back to the Premier League so they can all have what is essentially a pittance against what they already get. It used to get redistributed to the EFL but they stopped that several years back.

#solidarity.

Should go
10% to L2
30% to L1
70% to Champ

Going to the lower leagues actually helps redress the imbalance the parachute payments make and strengthens the pyramid.

If you bounce back it makes the rest of the division stronger, if you don't it helps prevent financial armageddon from relegation.

Agree it should be spread across the 3 EFL divisions. Did you mean 20% to L2 or 60% to Champ - else you've got 110% there.

20% was what I was thinking - added 10 to 20 to check what that was for the Champ then stupidly typed the total.

[Sutekh]

As I understand things, based on the last I heard, was that clubs relegated from the PL from season 2015/16 onwards have been receiving parachute payments based on a percentage of the equally shared broadcasting rights each PL club receives. These payments are paid to relegated clubs for 3 seasons (previously it was 4 seasons) however the 3rd season’s payment is only payable if the club concerned was in the PL for more that 1 consecutive season before relegation

The payments made are 55% of what would have been a club’s broadcasting rights value if they had not been relegated paid in the first season, 45% paid in the second season and 20% for the third season if that club qualified for a payment.

If a club is promoted back to the PL within those seasons then they obviously will no longer receive the payments.

Let us know if any of the above is wrong or has been changes recently.

I do not believe that any parachute payments are redistributed to the FL should relegated clubs be promoted back within those seasons and this would appear to be borne out by the fact that the FL are now in the process of asking the PL to give them a share of the £83m payments that were due to Norwich and Watford had they not been promoted.

Overall I think the whole idea of parachute payments stinks as it can encourage clubs to spend beyond their means and utterly screws over the idea of any level playing field (such that it would be) in the Championship, plus it stops the notion of “salary reduction on relegation” clauses in contracts.

[tidus_mi2]

As I understand things, based on the last I heard, was that clubs relegated from the PL from season 2015/16 onwards have been receiving parachute payments based on a percentage of the equally shared broadcasting rights each PL club receives. These payments are paid to relegated clubs for 3 seasons (previously it was 4 seasons) however the 3rd season’s payment is only payable if the club concerned was in the PL for more that 1 consecutive season before relegation

The payments made are 55% of what would have been a club’s broadcasting rights value if they had not been relegated paid in the first season, 45% paid in the second season and 20% for the third season if that club qualified for a payment.

If a club is promoted back to the PL within those seasons then they obviously will no longer receive the payments.

Let us know if any of the above is wrong or has been changes recently.

I do not believe that any parachute payments are redistributed to the FL should relegated clubs be promoted back within those seasons and this would appear to be borne out by the fact that the FL are now in the process of asking the PL to give them a share of the £83m payments that were due to Norwich and Watford had they not been promoted.

Overall I think the whole idea of parachute payments stinks as it can encourage clubs to spend beyond their means and utterly screws over the idea of any level playing field (such that it would be) in the Championship, plus it stops the notion of “salary reduction on relegation” clauses in contracts.

I think you've got the right figures. It does unbalance the whole thing. Frankly the Premier League should just enforce relegation wage drop clauses for any Premier League player, even the ones who are 99% not going to be relegated, scrap parachute payments. All you get is by in large, clubs go down, spend well over everyone else and either go back up or it fails (like us) and they fall into a financial mire for a bit.

The other issue is that more and more money has been coming into the Premier League and the imbalance has grown between the Premier League and the EFL. Frankly I largely blame the EFL chiefs as they appear to have negotiated deals incredibly poorly, especially when you consider at various times the EFL has always had big teams with big support as a bargaining chip.

[Sanguine]

Overall I think the whole idea of parachute payments stinks as it can encourage clubs to spend beyond their means and utterly screws over the idea of any level playing field (such that it would be) in the Championship

What about in the Premier League? How on earth do promoted clubs ever attempt to survive and compete if they can't get some kind of financial taper following relegation?

[Snowflake Royal]

Overall I think the whole idea of parachute payments stinks as it can encourage clubs to spend beyond their means and utterly screws over the idea of any level playing field (such that it would be) in the Championship

What about in the Premier League? How on earth do promoted clubs ever attempt to survive and compete if they can't get some kind of financial taper following relegation?

That question just shows how fundamentally broken the PL is.

[linkenholtroyal]

As a side not Liam Kelly’s contract is up at Feyenoord and he is a free transfer again. Would you take him back as cover for Laurent / Rinhomota. He has spent the last 2 seasons on loan at Oxford. Cheap option who would know the club and only 25 still.

[Snowflake Royal]

As a side not Liam Kelly’s contract is up at Feyenoord and he is a free transfer again. Would you take him back as cover for Laurent / Rinhomota. He has spent the last 2 seasons on loan at Oxford. Cheap option who would know the club and only 25 still.

Not really.

He's not tough enough to cover Rino / Laurent... be more Swift / Olise / Ejaria. He'd block Tetek and I just don't see it as the right move.

[Sutekh]

Overall I think the whole idea of parachute payments stinks as it can encourage clubs to spend beyond their means and utterly screws over the idea of any level playing field (such that it would be) in the Championship

What about in the Premier League? How on earth do promoted clubs ever attempt to survive and compete if they can't get some kind of financial taper following relegation?

That question just shows how fundamentally broken the PL is.

Agree promoted clubs couldn’t live with the top half of the PL but the rest of that league isn’t so hot, esp. as no parachute payments will have a lot of that half panicking almost as much. I mean promoted clubs should be able to compete with the likes of Brighton, Palace, Norwich, WBA, Fulham or whichever 2 or 3 of the perennial strugglers are in the league that season.

Agree totally with the second comment that the PL is fundamentally broken, it’s now no more than a glorified cash-cow for the big clubs all thanks to the failure of the authorities to stand up to those big clubs 30 years ago (and more or less at every opportunity since).

[Sutekh]

As a side not Liam Kelly’s contract is up at Feyenoord and he is a free transfer again. Would you take him back as cover for Laurent / Rinhomota. He has spent the last 2 seasons on loan at Oxford. Cheap option who would know the club and only 25 still.

Not really.

He's not tough enough to cover Rino / Laurent... be more Swift / Olise / Ejaria. He'd block Tetek and I just don't see it as the right move.

Bring him back, then when Reading play Coventry both sets of supporters can sing “there’s only 2 Liam Kellys”. There that’s my bit for inclusivity done.

[linkenholtroyal]

As a side not Liam Kelly’s contract is up at Feyenoord and he is a free transfer again. Would you take him back as cover for Laurent / Rinhomota. He has spent the last 2 seasons on loan at Oxford. Cheap option who would know the club and only 25 still.

Not really.

He's not tough enough to cover Rino / Laurent... be more Swift / Olise / Ejaria. He'd block Tetek and I just don't see it as the right move.

Bring him back, then when Reading play Coventry both sets of supporters can sing “there’s only 2 Liam Kellys”. There that’s my bit for inclusivity done.

QPR have a keeper called Liam Kelly as well so there's 3. maybe we should sign all 3 would make the shirt guy go loopy. also make commentary interesting Liam Kelly has hit the ball down the field to Liam Kelly who slides it through to Liam Kelly and it scores. Would break Tim Dellor.

[Snowflake Royal]

Not really.

He's not tough enough to cover Rino / Laurent... be more Swift / Olise / Ejaria. He'd block Tetek and I just don't see it as the right move.

Bring him back, then when Reading play Coventry both sets of supporters can sing “there’s only 2 Liam Kellys”. There that’s my bit for inclusivity done.

QPR have a keeper called Liam Kelly as well so there's 3. maybe we should sign all 3 would make the shirt guy go loopy. also make commentary interesting Liam Kelly has hit the ball down the field to Liam Kelly who slides it through to Liam Kelly and it scores. Would break Tim Dellor.

Break him.... he'd be three times more likely to be right!

[Zip]

As a side not Liam Kelly’s contract is up at Feyenoord and he is a free transfer again. Would you take him back as cover for Laurent / Rinhomota. He has spent the last 2 seasons on loan at Oxford. Cheap option who would know the club and only 25 still.

Definitely not. One of the most over-rated in our recent history.

[Delboy]

Who is behind the scenes negotiating contracts , Nigel Howe or are the Chinese doing it , FFP a big influence