League One clubs agreed to a stupid American salary cap of £2.5 million, while those in League Two agreed to a stupid American limit of £1.5 million, in August 2020. A cap of £900k was mooted for the English National League at around the same time but I don't think it was agreed upon.
No I could reel off thousands of transfers if you like!? Simple fact is football clubs are sports clubs and a business, there are tens of thousands of them in England functioning perfectly happily, if Sheffield Wednesday go bust because they've spent beyond their means, or Chelsea, or Accrington Stanley, or Tonbridge Angels then there are 'other' (perhaps better run clubs) that can replace them. Why should ANY club get 'bailed' out because they've overstretched? Perhaps 'other' clubs that have been run within their means would (rightly so) be a little bit p*ssed off no? Now Covid of course IS a different matter, this has obviously 'thrown a spanner in the works' of a lot of clubs without it being the clubs fault, the government needs to 'step' in in this instance, however in normal times whatever financial problems clubs put themselves in is really down to the them.
Have you suggested that to Andy Holt yet? Since talk seems to be your only argument, no actual evidence or facts or opinion backing it up, you might as well talk to the person available and see what he says.
How many teams have won the EPL that weren't in it when it was founded? How many teams have won the MLS CUP that weren't in it when it was founded? ... The Jets last won the SuperBowl in 1968 When was the last time Tottenham won the top flight? Actually, no I haven't. I've stated (as I always have) that it is SYNERGISTIC and HELPS create the situations. That isn't the same thing as directly causing. There are several factors and pro/rel is but one, and plays into others.
4 teams have won 25 out of 28 Premier League titles. Another 3 have won one each. 13 teams have won the MLS Cup and 14 the Supporters Shield. 19 have won the MLS Cup or the Supporters Shield.
Andy Holt!? Is he on here then? I'm talking to you! The FACT is there has been over a hundred years of the English league and its worked, another FACT is that NO club is told how much money they have to spend, NO club, not Grimsby nor Manchester United have a 'right' to be in the Premier League (the way it should be) and the Premier League title is open to both of them, how the clubs get to the summit is really up to them, if Manchester United decide to save money and not pay any player more than 25 quid a week then its up to them, if Grimsby decide to go try and buy Messi, its up to them, THAT is the actual whole point of league football, you win as many football matches as you possibly can, easier said than done when there are hundreds of other clubs trying to do exactly the same thing, how they get there is entirely up to them.
So then no, you haven't taken advantage of the free direct link to a EFL owner to show him he's wrong and instead you'd rather just rant here with your empty repetitive talk. I expected nothing less, or more, from you.
Except clubs in League One (£2.5M) and League Two (£1.5M). This must be a real pain for Portsmouth and Sunderland's wealthy owners. Edited: and don't forget there was a maximum weekly wage between 1888 and 1961 of less than £200 ($265) per player in today's money.
In defence of Crawleybus, some of us don't use Twitter because its signal to noise ratio is even worse than this thread.
Sure. But the point I'm making is you can't do a direct comparison of the number of champions in home/away leagues versus those that use playoffs.
I mean, that's fair, but if his defense is that the quoted owners/GMs are wrong because the EFL is still in existence after 100 years (and that is his total defense), and one of those quoted owners is available to give the defense to, for free, then not making that defense to him makes me think Crawleybus doesn't even believe the b.s. he's been been dishing out about the health of the EFL and he doesn't want to be embarrassed by making that case to somebody who literally knows better than him.
Yes! And? Im talking to you right now, why are you trying to sidestep me? The fact is nobody is forcing ANY football club to spend money, like I said Manchester United can salary cap their players to 25 quid a week if they want to, it's up to them, why should Bolton Wanderers (as one example) be 'bailed out' by other (perhaps better managed) clubs that are sticking to their budget?
Which doesn't address the Supporter's Shield numbers (top of combined table like single table leagues) being literally double the EPL winners. It's not a sidestep. It's called DIRECT EVIDENCE and it comes from AN ACTUAL OWNER IN THE VERY SYSTEM YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. Though, with what he's saying I completely understand why you're trying like hell to avoid it.
I'm not sidestepping anything. I made my case, I backed it up with direct quotes from people who are working in the system. I gave you a chance to make your case of "because I said so" directly to one of those people. You then decided to sidestep making that case, probably because you know that its actually a bs case and if you ever tried to make the case in public to people who have all the facts you'd be laughed out of the room. So instead you decide to hide here and repeat your talking points, never changing your views or actually trying to learn anything from the discussion. In the end, the initial claim that started this sub-thread, that the EFL is "fine", is obviously wrong and has been shown so, so there's nothing more to gain by continuing to engage with somebody who doesn't want to have a discussion, they just want to hear themselves talk.
That isn't his total "defence" and you've actually sidestepped addressing a lot of what he wrote. I don't fully agree with him, but I certainly don't agree with Holt completely either. I did go and read his Twitter posts, but they're very light on what he thinks the solutions should be. I'm tempted to respond as such but, as I said, I don't do Twitter.
It is 'fine' it's been working for 100+ years = it's working fine thanks, in fact it's the world's most popular sports league, you can't get more 'working fine' than that. Alternatively we can close of the leagues, tell everyone they 'all get a medal', make sure they take it in turns at having a go at winning and tell the clubs they're not allowed to better themselves and perhaps re-name the Premier League to 'The Communist League'? Or perhaps just MLS!? :-D. Wouldn't be very exciting though would it!
You've said that Bolton don't operate under a salary cap. Bolton operate under the League Two salary cap of $1.5 million. Why are suggesting otherwise?
I think you'll find I was talking about JJ Okocha no? Bolton were, and not that long ago a Premier League club were they not? How long has a salary cap been in place in League Two exactly? Its irrelevent to Bolton Wanderes financial woes is it not? The fact is Bolton Wanderers could be making an awful lot of money right now, all they had to do was stay in the Premier League right? Clearly what they should have done was buy better players than they did for less money than they did no? Still that IS the name of the game isn't it? I mean at the end of the day ALL clubs are trying to buy the best players they can afford arent they? However at the end of the day 3 clubs WILL go down every year and 3 clubs WILL go up, not based on their bank balance, the size of their crowds or how tall the players are, it will be based purely on points tally. Can you see now why the English league is so exciting? Survival of the fittest and all that - lovely stuff!
Burnden Leisure overspent. The current club has nothing to do with Burnden Leisure but is unfortunately saddled by their debts.