City to offer 164m for Messi!

No way they could insure such an asset while Stoke City are still in the Premier League.

I see the threat of a £50 million pound fine has really taught them a lesson

do you think that fifa boys realy care about this FFP
they invented this only to calmd down Arsenal ,Shalke and others that dont have enough money to spend big

No way they could insure such an asset while Charlie Adam is still in the Premier League.

I've fixed it for you !

City's annual turnover in the last accounts was 271 million and that included the over inflated sponsorship deals.
They were already making a loss on that.
Their wage bill is already over 200 million annually.
As part of the sanctions for breaking FFP rules they're likely to have a wage cap imposed on the CL squad meaning they can't spend any more on wages than this season.

The maths is simple enough.

City can't make enough money to pass FFP. They have about 20 fans.

Will never happen.

As part of the sanctions for breaking FFP rules they're likely to have a wage cap imposed on the CL squad meaning they can't spend any more on wages than this season

and if they break that wage cap ? Another fine ?

ban them from Europe ffs. They are ****g useless in it anyway. Might aswell put Everton in there.

toffee the fine isn't the issue for them.

As I've said on other threads if their CL squad is reduced to 21 with 8 homegrowns nobody should underestimate the impact that will have. The big worry for them is that this is FFP at it's loosest for compliance in terms of the losses clubs can make and this will be the sanction for a first offence.

To carry on regardless would be a big mistake I think and what's more I also think they know this. The thing is with this Messi story it completely goes against their transfer policy of the past couple of seasons. 2 years ago they were signing the likes of Scott Sinclair and Jack Rodwell and last summer's signings were pretty much in the 70 grand a week bracket. It's a long way removed from the days of 200 grand a week for Yaya

As I've said on other threads if their CL squad is reduced to 21 with 8 homegrowns nobody should underestimate the impact that will have

do you think that will have a big impact ?

Liverpool have almost won the league only using 20 players and one of those players played 1 game

21 players is plenty, isn't it - its 2 players for every position and one goalkeeper

FFP is a joke. Always has been and always will be. UEFA benefit to the tune of £50 million (that is just City's if we believe the press so add in all the others and you have a significant chunk of cash!). City, if we believe the press, then have to field a weakened team in Europe's biggest club competition shortchanging football fans of watching the best clubs, and possibly players, in Europe. Who wants to watch a competition where potentially we could have several clubs fielding second string teams? Ridiculous, even if it would stand up in court!

Paris St Germain have been a great addition to the Champions League and what they are doing for French football in general...UEFA have lost the plot on this one!

50m would buy a lot of bubbly and prawn sandwiches at uefa hq

toffee no it isn't. It appears it will be 21 players with the 21 needing to contain 8 players qualifying as homegrown i.e. registered under their current association for 3 years up to the age of 21.

This season City had 7 players in their CL squad qualifying as homegrown. Only 2 of those, Hart and Clichy have claims to be in their best starting eleven.

It either means they'll go into the CL with a significantly weakened squad compared to the PL or they need to start buying players complying with homegrown status. Could be a bit of a rush on for Fabregas this summer

The irony there of course is that any half-decent homegrown player is going to cost upwards of £30 mill!!!!!!!

I think its great. Should ensure clubs take their acadmies seriously as like it or not they will be playing those players in one form or another. Also means young English players will go up in value, which can only reward clubs who have bothered looking after their young pros.

If it sticks another couple of hundred grand on the price of every player Crewe sell that's fine by me. Even finer if it sticks another mill or so on players like Luke Murphy and Ash Westwood when they inevitably get sold for big money if our sell on gets bigger

City have already spent £200 mill on a new academy...isnt that serious enough?

Crewe will end up with a smaller base of talent coming through because they will end up at the big club academies...as in Spain with Real and Barca

uefa have to be careful with this or there could be a breakaway eventually

it seems to me that ffp plays into the hands of two european clubs. barca and real madrid. the tv deal that they've got by far surpasses any other clubs, so it gives them an inbuilt monetary advantage.

dont think so lurka. all the "big" clubs seem to be onside.

lurka this has been brought in primarily to limit the chances of a breakaway. The established clubs and therefore the most powerful voices are happy with FFP.

themover 07 May 14 15:24 Joined: 25 Apr 03
Crewe will end up with a smaller base of talent coming through because they will end up at the big club academies...as in Spain with Real and Barca

Why will they? We've always been competing against United, Liverpool, Everton, City, Villa, Birmingham, Stoke  etc for the same pool of kids and the selling points for kids and parents alike of going to Crewe remain the same: you'll get excellent coaching, you'll be looked after, and unlike elsewhere if you're good enough you'll get your chance in the first team.

In fact, that's even more true now than it ever was. So many young Scousers, Mancs and Brummies in our academy that turned down Prem clubs to come to Crewe for exactly those reasons.

your'e not permitted a Related Party Transaction but you are allowed to get more TV money than all the other clubs in the competition....go figure

themover that also exists to a degree in this country where there's individual sums for tv appearances. Those on tv the most get the most money. Not to the same kind of disparity there is in Spain admittedly though there's now a rival to Sky so the tv monies over here can only increase further.

I also tend to agree with marychain re the kids. The bigger clubs are casting the net worldwide for young talent and as the homegrown requirements are 3 years registered with a national association it doesn't have to be young English players they unearth.

More money than sense.  Will be the biggest flop in football history

Mover
I'm intrigued by this academy what the fxck cost 200m. Think people see city coming big style

http://www.mcfc.co.uk/academy

forget todays team the Under 18's are the dogs bollox

http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/matchday/barclays-u18-premier-league-tabl...

http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/matchday/
barclays-u18-premier-league-tables.html?paramYouthStage=NATIONAL

Not as good as these

http://www.thefa.com/news/competitions/fa-youth-cup/2014/may/chelsea-v-fulham-final-second-leg-report

Actually before you spend 164 million on Messi maybe you should look at Patrick Roberts of Fulham. Looked like Messi in this game.

Patrick Roberts was genius in the game of FM2014 I played a few months ago. Superb on either side of a front 3, got loads of England caps and scored and created goals as he liked.

Never seen him play in real life though.

Arsenal sniffing around him

There's highlights of the game in that report marychain.

First time I'd seen him the other night and he looked real quality. He made it look like a play station game most of the night!

themover don't you know Arsene was on the verge of signing just about every player that's played the game at the age of 17. .

Arsenal want him. But city will no doubt offer 75 m