Are Parachute Payments fair?

[Doc Lynam]

Any business that fails to live within sustainable means goes to the dogs! These payments are a massive advantage in our league.

 

[sparkie]

No. Biggest unfairness in the game. Makes a mockery of financial fair play.

 

[severnside gull]

trouble is that to compete with the big boys you need to offer mega contracts to players so when you go down you are stuck with choices of releasing them all or going tits up financially. And if someone decides not to leave (Ben Haim at Portsmouth?) the mucky brown stuff is headed directly for the fan before you know it.

The clubs need the parachute payments at least for the first year, and maybe justifiably, the second. After that to be honest they are blatantly unfair to everyone else in the competition and hard to justify.

 

[Rugrat]

The whole distribution of TV money is totally "unfair". Provocative maybe but the day Prem split from the FL was the biggest negative in Football history in my opinion. They should have just ousted the old farts and recruited the suits to represent all of footaball

 

[leigull]

I definitely agree there should be parachute payments for relegated clubs with the system set up how it current is, but just not with the same amount or duration. 2 years seems fair rather than 4 and probably reduce them down from £16m.

 

[Wozza]

The money should be available to pay the wages of existing players only - not new transfers etc.

 

[El Presidente]

Yes, it is the only way promoted clubs can hope to compete with the other also rans in the PL.

Players will not sign on a one year contract, so the clubs need parachute payments to help mitigate the relegation loss of revenue risk.

 

[Doc Lynam]

Yes, it is the only way promoted clubs can hope to compete with the other also rans in the PL.

Players will not sign on a one year contract, so the clubs need parachute payments to help mitigate the relegation loss of revenue risk.

Agree with this in principle but what appears to happen is they gamble for a couple of years and use the money as a war chest to get back up, blowing other clubs out of transfers, Blackburn being the most recent example. One team that didn't was Blackpool who from the outside looking in, seem to be a far more stable club, investing instead in the infrastructure of the club. If clubs gamble beyond their means why should they be backed up?

 

[leigull]

Yes, it is the only way promoted clubs can hope to compete with the other also rans in the PL.

Players will not sign on a one year contract, so the clubs need parachute payments to help mitigate the relegation loss of revenue risk.

Do you think the amount and duration of them is right?

 

[gazingdown]

Put reduction (or renegotiation) of wages clause in contract if you get relegated. This is not the same as a 1 year contract, it's an X year contract with Y amount p/a if in the PL, Z amount (or renegotiation) if in CS. Part of the renegotiation can be early release from contract etc.

If all clubs do this (which many will HAVE to if parachute payments are dropped) players WILL sign up as where else are they going? Not every player can pay for a top 10 team that is "safe" from relegation.

 

[Aadam]

No. They're not fair.

Players should have it stipulated in their contracts that if you're not good enough to keep the team up, you're taking a pay cut when we go down. They have to all be in it together and culpable for their poor performance.

Although, Blackpool kept their wage cap of £10,000 during their short stay in the Premier League. Fortunately for them, when they came back down they didn't do a Pompy and disappear. However, they are in receipt of huge parachute payments now. If the money was distributed more evenly, the FL would be a fairer competition.

 

[Doc Lynam]

Put reduction (or renegotiation) of wages clause in contract if you get relegated. This is not the same as a 1 year contract, it's an X year contract with Y amount p/a if in the PL, Z amount (or renegotiation) if in CS. Part of the renegotiation can be early release from contract etc.

If all clubs do this (which many will HAVE to if parachute payments are dropped) players WILL sign up as where else are they going? Not every player can pay for a top 10 team that is "safe" from relegation.

I think that's an excellent idea. Reduces player power and money, giving them more to play for personally and doesn't allow the club to held to ransom.

 

[Notters]

No. They're not fair.

Players should have it stipulated in their contracts that if you're not good enough to keep the team up, you're taking a pay cut when we go down. They have to all be in it together and culpable for their poor performance.

Although, Blackpool kept their wage cap of £10,000 during their short stay in the Premier League. Fortunately for them, when they came back down they didn't do a Pompy and disappear. However, they are in receipt of huge parachute payments now. If the money was distributed more evenly, the FL would be a fairer competition.

This, surely variable contracts are the answer. Unless they're not possible [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION]?

 

[ManxSeagull]

I totally agree that players wages should decrease if the team doesn't perform and gets relegated.

I am a great believer in incentives within the work place. The harder you work/better you perform the higher the reward.

 

[beorhthelm]

No. They're not fair.

Players should have it stipulated in their contracts that if you're not good enough to keep the team up, you're taking a pay cut when we go down.

no players would sign so these clubs wouldnt have a hope of competing and come straight back down.

 

[El Presidente]

Agree with this in principle but what appears to happen is they gamble for a couple of years and use the money as a war chest to get back up, blowing other clubs out of transfers, Blackburn being the most recent example. One team that didn't was Blackpool who from the outside looking in, seem to be in a far more stable club. Investing instead in the infrastructure of the club. If clubs gamble beyond their means why should they be backed up?

Clubs can gamble and do a Cardiff too, so I think parachute payments are an irrelevance.

If you look at the last few seasons in terms of who has been relegated

2010-11: Birmingham, Blackpool and West Ham
2009-10: Burnley, Hull, Portsmouth

Only one of those six teams has gone back up, and that was on the basis of the support of their dildo salesmen owners, who underwrote £20 million of losses last season DESPITE WHU receiving parachute payments.

 

[El Presidente]

No. They're not fair.

Players should have it stipulated in their contracts that if you're not good enough to keep the team up, you're taking a pay cut when we go down. They have to all be in it together and culpable for their poor performance.

Although, Blackpool kept their wage cap of £10,000 during their short stay in the Premier League. Fortunately for them, when they came back down they didn't do a Pompy and disappear. However, they are in receipt of huge parachute payments now. If the money was distributed more evenly, the FL would be a fairer competition.

Define fair.

 

[El Presidente]

This, surely variable contracts are the answer. Unless they're not possible [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION]?

Many contracts do have relegation clauses in them, (the Albion did for example when we were promoted under Magoo) but some players may choose to go to a different club that does not contain such a clause.

 

[Doc Lynam]

Many contracts do have relegation clauses in them, (the Albion did for example when we were promoted under Magoo) but some players may choose to go to a different club that does not contain such a clause.

That would be the players prerogative, but if there were no parachute payments the majority of clubs that want to run on a sound business model would have to go for this option Shirley!?

 

[Tricky Dicky]

Put reduction (or renegotiation) of wages clause in contract if you get relegated. This is not the same as a 1 year contract, it's an X year contract with Y amount p/a if in the PL, Z amount (or renegotiation) if in CS. Part of the renegotiation can be early release from contract etc.

If all clubs do this (which many will HAVE to if parachute payments are dropped) players WILL sign up as where else are they going? Not every player can pay for a top 10 team that is "safe" from relegation.

Won't happen because it need all the clubs to work together and they won't.