+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Villa spending v our spending

  1. #1

    Villa spending v our spending

    2017/18

    Villa:
    Terry, Samba, Elmohamady, Whelan - 3.5m
    Johnstone, Onomah - loan

    Cardiff:
    Camp, Etheridge, Mendez-Laing, Paterson, Ward, Damour, Tomlin - 5m

    2016/17

    Villa:
    Elphick, Gollini, Tshibola, McCormack, Chester, Jedinak, De Laet, Kodjia, Adomah, Lansbury, Bree, Bjarnason, Hourihane, Taylor, Hogan - 81.85m
    Johnstone - loan

    Cardiff:
    Immers, Fred, Zohore, Richards, Huws, Bennett, Lambert, Murphy, Hoilett, Bamba, Chamakh, Richardson, Halford - 7m
    Amos, McGregor - loan

    _____________

    If today's win didn't seem good enough already, just read the numbers there.

  2. #2
    International TH63's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Thornhill
    Posts
    13,578

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Terry on about 60k a week according to some reports

  3. #3

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Zenith View Post
    2017/18

    Villa:
    Terry, Samba, Elmohamady, Whelan - 3.5m
    Johnstone, Onomah - loan

    Cardiff:
    Camp, Etheridge, Mendez-Laing, Paterson, Ward, Damour, Tomlin - 5m
    So we've spent 1.5 million more than them just to improve our result against them by 2 goals? There was me thinking today's performance was a thing of beauty, a marvel to enjoy and be hugely proud of, but no. We've bought today's win. Budget, my arse.

  4. #4

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee View Post
    So we've spent 1.5 million more than them just to improve our result against them by 2 goals? There was me thinking today's performance was a thing of beauty, a marvel to enjoy and be hugely proud of, but no. We've bought today's win. Budget, my arse.
    Eh?

  5. #5

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Zenith View Post
    Eh?
    Sorry, I was being sarcastic! Should have made that more obvious!

    Agreed, money doesn't count for everything. They've spent all that and have little to show for it.

  6. #6

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    80 million for that shower of shit

  7. #7

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by jamieccfc View Post
    80 million for that shower of shit

  8. #8

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    If you don't bounce back straight away in the first season after relegation, the task becomes exponentially more difficult. I think Villa are going to struggle now, as obviously last season's rebuilding exercise failed to gain them promotion. A similar thing happened to us and many other relegated teams.

  9. #9

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    To be fair it's still only the second game of the season. I still think they'll go up automatically.

  10. #10

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Wales-Bales View Post
    If you don't bounce back straight away in the first season after relegation, the task becomes exponentially more difficult. I think Villa are going to struggle now, as obviously last season's rebuilding exercise failed to gain them promotion. A similar thing happened to us and many other relegated teams.
    Since the first Premier League season there have been 73 relegated teams (4 went down in 1994/5). Here's a list of the number of seasons it took teams to get back to the top flight:

    1 season - 21 (28.8%)
    2 seasons - 7 (9.6%)
    3 seasons - 2 (2.7%)
    4 seasons - 3 (4.1%)
    5 seasons - 3 (4.1%)
    6 or more - 11 (15.1%)
    Never returned - 26 (35.6%)

    I have no idea when "parachute payments" started to be handed out to relegated clubs. Google isn't helpful in finding out this information, either, so I've looked at the fortunes of relegated teams over the last 10 years as a cutoff point. The results are even more stark.

    1 season - 9 (30.0%)
    2 seasons - 0 (0.0%)
    3 seasons - 1 (3.3%)
    4 seasons - 2 (6.7%)
    5 seasons - 0 (0.0%)
    6 or more - 2 (6.7%)
    Never returned - 16 (53.3%)

    It's quite remarkable that, out of the 14 promotion winning teams (out of 30 relegated over the last decade), 9 bounced straight back up while only a third of that amount returned within 2-5 seasons. Over half never returned.

    To compare that with figures taken since the formation of the Premier League slightly skews things as teams have longer to get back to the top flight, so I did a comparison with the first 10 seasons of the Premier League (1992/3 to 2001/2, teams not returning by 2002/3 counted as not returned). The results were similar - 9 teams went straight back up (same as 2007-16), 15 didn't return (16 between 2007-16) though 7 took 2-5 seasons (only 3 between 2007-16 though an additional 2 took 6+ seasons while no teams took that long between 1993-2002).

    It appears that parachute payments haven't made much, if any impact, on teams winning promotion back to the top flight. If anything, the number of teams winning promotion while still receiving the payments is slightly lower than winning promotion in a similar timescale during the first decade of the Premier League.

  11. #11

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    The stats seem to back up what I was saying. I think the relegated teams lose momentum if they don't go straight back up. Also they usually have a masterplan for a swift return, and when that plan fails people become despondent and they basically have to start rebuilding the team again. We are only starting to recover now after our relegation, and it took a few iterations of the playing staff to turn things around. Are there even any players left from our first season after relegation? We are also on manager number 4.

  12. #12

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Wales-Bales View Post
    Are there even any players left from our first season after relegation? We are also on manager number 4.
    Morrison, Manga, Ralls, Pilkington, Connolly, Gunnarrson and John.

  13. #13

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by The Bob Banker Spanker View Post
    Morrison, Manga, Ralls, Pilkington, Connolly, Gunnarrson and John.
    Peltier, Noone, Kadeem, O'Keefe are all still here as well.

  14. #14

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Zenith View Post
    Peltier, Noone, Kadeem, O'Keefe are all still here as well.
    Yup

  15. #15

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Wales-Bales View Post
    The stats seem to back up what I was saying. I think the relegated teams lose momentum if they don't go straight back up. Also they usually have a masterplan for a swift return, and when that plan fails people become despondent and they basically have to start rebuilding the team again. We are only starting to recover now after our relegation, and it took a few iterations of the playing staff to turn things around. Are there even any players left from our first season after relegation? We are also on manager number 4.
    With us, we needed to start selling players to balance the books, even with parachute payments. That's another problem, especially with FFP.

  16. #16
    First Team
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Baku, Azerbaijan
    Posts
    4,840

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    My understanding of the initial purpose of parachute payment as to help clubs pay the inflated wages of players which were written into Premier level contracts without going bankrupt.

    It is that ability to keep expensive players that as a spin off helps them go back up again.
    just my understanding.

  17. #17

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by xsnaggle View Post
    My understanding of the initial purpose of parachute payment as to help clubs pay the inflated wages of players which were written into Premier level contracts without going bankrupt.

    It is that ability to keep expensive players that as a spin off helps them go back up again.
    just my understanding.
    I think it was as much to allow teams to be able to compete in the PL without the fear of the financial effect of relegation.

    Lots of fans think that these parachute payments give teams the upper hand in the Championship, yet teams have been marginally less likely to go up with parachute payments than they were when they weren't handed out.

  18. #18

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee View Post
    Since the first Premier League season there have been 73 relegated teams (4 went down in 1994/5). Here's a list of the number of seasons it took teams to get back to the top flight:
    How many of the teams relegated from the Premier League made it down to League 1?

  19. #19

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Villa losing 2-0

  20. #20

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Wales-Bales View Post
    Villa losing 2-0
    John Terry

  21. #21

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by TH63 View Post
    Terry on about 60k a week according to some reports
    Looking mighty fine value too ...

  22. #22

    Re: Villa spending v our spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Wales-Bales View Post
    How many of the teams relegated from the Premier League made it down to League 1?
    I make it, of 73 relegations, 22 teams ended up in League 1. That means more teams eventually ended up in League 1 than went straight back up.

    Of those 22 teams, 4 are currently in the Premier League (Man City, Watford, Leicester and Southampton) and 8 are in the Championship (Barnsley, Bolton, Leeds, Norwich, Forest, QPR and both Sheffield clubs). 9 are currently in League 1 (Blackpool, Blackburn, Bradford, Charlton, Oldham, Portsmouth, Swindon, MK Dons (as Wimbledon) and Wigan), with long-time first tier side Coventry in the bottom division.

    In total, 38 teams have been relegated from the top division. 14 of those have never returned to the Premier League (us, Villa, Barnsley, Blackpool, Bradford, Coventry, Fulham, Leeds, Oldham, Portsmouth, Sheff Wed, Swindon, Wigan and MK Dons (Wimbledon). Southampton are the only side to have been relegated from the PL on only one occasion and return.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •