- Mar 10, 2005
- 40,215
- 64,058
Source?Those top 3 are significantly distorted by promotion bonuses the players received, which can be as much, or even greater than their base salaries
Source?Those top 3 are significantly distorted by promotion bonuses the players received, which can be as much, or even greater than their base salaries
I didn’t know it was that high in the EFL. Blimey:
Source?
Business as usual for us thenJune 8th and players aren't even kicking a ball in groups yet. Considering they haven't played for two months, there's going to be some very tired and erratic play if it goes ahead.
Unless Amazon buys it and turns the stadium into a massive warehouseWe'll certainly be in the shit - no NFL and it's hard to see Amazon or Nike following through on the naming rights sponsorship if we don't get up and running over the next few months.
I think it's more of a demonstration of the revenue gap between the two leagues. That link you posted puts their revenue at about £17m so the 195% wages spend would mean about £33m on wages.Those top 3 are significantly distorted by promotion bonuses the players received, which can be as much, or even greater than their base salaries
There's enough room, that's for sure.Business as usual for us then
Unless Amazon buys it and turns the stadium into a massive warehouse
Sorry, I rated that funny purely for the thought of Leeds "doing a Leeds".I think it's more of a demonstration of the revenue gap between the two leagues. That link you posted puts their revenue at about £17m so the 195% wages spend would mean about £33m on wages.
It also estimates a boost in revenues of £120m for being in the PL, so even if their total salaries doubled (new signings and existing contract agreements maybe) that could be about £65-70m on a £137m revenue which is more like 50%. Definitely goes to show the lack of parity and why teams in the Championship push the boat out so far.
The thought has just occurred to me that if Leeds are one of the current big spenders in the Championship in terms of wages and if (big if) they don't get promoted or just lose loads of revenue due to the virus, are they most at risk of "doing a Leeds"? Would be a bit awkward!
Listening to Raab today - I think the government will not stop the PL from restarting and now ive changed my mind and think the seasonw ill be restarted
The government need the PL to start i think.
Will there be a 'boo' option?
And I personally hate it. Again going back to the purity of sport. Not a fan however if its a short term fix to get games back fine. Would not be in favour long term though.Just on the idea of shortened playing times - this is a policy already adopted by the Australian Football League (Aussie Rules) and has already had one round played before all sport was cancelled.
Obviously Aussie Rules is a far more "contact sport" than "soccer" but the principle has already been adopted.
Kane scores followed by the rapturous noise of 60000 orgasmsCan't wait until it gets hacked and it produces sex noises instead.
The 2019-20 Premier League season could be cancelled if clubs do not agree to play in neutral venues, says League Managers Association chief executive Richard Bevan.
A vote is set to take place on Monday on proposals for a return to football.
The Premier League has been suspended since 13 March because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Bevan says "time isn't on our side and training needs to be in place very soon" for a return by 12 June.
All 20 clubs are committed to playing the 92 remaining fixtures of the 2019-20 season if and when it is safe to do so.
However, Brighton have said they are "not in favour" of using neutral venues because it may affect the "integrity" of the league.
The neutral stadium proposal needs 14 out of the 20 clubs to vote in favour for it to be adopted.
read more > https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52558225
Villa & West Ham also opposed to neutral venues, so that's 3 out of 7 that would need to reject it for it to effectively bring an early end to the season.