Wolves Rumours 19536


Use our rumours form to send us wolves transfer rumours.

(single word yields best result)

26 Dec 2021 19:38:49
Arsenal v Wolves match postponed.

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Dec 2021 21:06:33
Yes.not surprised mate

27 Dec 2021 10:23:18
I suspect a lot more will be called off in the next 3 weeks.

27 Dec 2021 11:26:39
Gutted but feel no complaints from me as containing the virus is of paramount importance.

27 Dec 2021 11:54:40
We are getting some flak from all quarters for this,even from some of our own fans,it's alright for these so called big clubs with their 2 or even 3 squads that could compete in the Premier they helped change the rules to their advantage.So now with FFP we can't compete,so let them suck it up and get a fixture backlog (then they can use their huge squads) sorry for rant but it does make me angry it all seems to be one sided.

{Ed002's Note - Squad size rules are the same for sll clubs.}

27 Dec 2021 14:46:19
But not money spent in previous years

29 Dec 2021 08:28:56
So so true Ed002.
But how much better would Premier League football be if squad market values were the same?
Capping (and I’m not talking about proportional on turnover or profits of individual clubs) would take our great league onto another level, create competition and foster an environment for our youngsters to develop quickly.
There again the super-rich are never going to vote for Christmas or a genuinely level playing field are they?

{Ed002's Note - That is simply not possible.}

29 Dec 2021 17:25:25
Whilst I don't disagree with Ed 002 that UK

29 Dec 2021 16:25:56
With all due respect Ed002 it happens in other sports and is even starting to happen in F1.
It IS possible but won’t happen.
Money isn’t ruining the sport but the closed-shop mentality of a few clubs around Europe. As discussed on many threads FFP has been devised and designed to protect a few clubs at the top table trough.
Why on earth have Barcelona been allowed to play in the Champions League with such debts? Had FFP been properly designed that club would have been relegated several divisions and not allowed to play European football for several years. I can love the sport but still recognise the nonsense that is the fear of a few clubs that they might lose a significant revenue stream for the short run and beyond!

{Ed002's Note - It is a great deal easier in Formula 1 to bring in caps when their are only 10 or 11 teams. Even if you take Europe and the ranked sides there are currently 433. What do you suggest, taking the lowest common denominator? Using the lowest of the 30 football leagues in Europe? Using a mid point in Europe and base it on capping the income/spending to Austria or Scotland? How would transfers work? FFP is designed to protect clubs from themselves and overspending. If clubs can service their debts it should not be a problem - so the likes of Barcelona and Spurs (who have by far the highest debt in England) are fine. They are not breaking any FFP provisions because year on year they are sticking within the guidance for FFP. Clubs who are breaching FFP rules and spending beyond their means (such as Everton or abusing the rules such as Aston Villa) will need to provide a solution or suffer penalties like Derby. It is unrealistic to expect a communist approach to football below anything other than the lowest level. Clubs will continue to be wealthy or not, some clubs can afford players others can't - their is no idealistic solution.}

29 Dec 2021 17:43:00
Whilst I don't disagree with Ed 002 that UK law almost certainly makes it impossible to enforce the sort of changes NES is talking about there are obviously numerous interesting examples of systems designed to create a "fair" and competive league available to examine.
Most US sports have salary caps, drafts and different contract controls, (Chelsea as Ed 002 points out may only be allowed the same number of registered senior pros for any one Prem league season as the other teams but they can gave as many players that they wish to have on loan elsewhere still under their "control" and development), that limit the life of dynasties but we don't need to actually go that far to find a genuinely succesful and imaginative control of team domination.
UK speedway has a team points cap that basically means that if your team wins too many games by too many points you have to break up the team getting rid of a succesful rider and bring in a less sucesful one to lower your average point scoring capability.
Of course football is not a statistical game like Speedway, Cricket or indeed many US sport so the only simple soln would be for all the clubs to voluntarily agree ( in which case laws can probably be got round?) to a squad salary cap - al la Rugby Union.
(although it would appear, given the Saracens situation, that even that wasnt as simple as you might imagine).
Sadly to reiterate Ed's comment though for the reasons NES identified "that is simply not possible"

29 Dec 2021 23:27:59
Gosh Ed002 you’d make a great politician sticking to the FFP party line. Thanks for describing FFP (I trust you are spot on with all you say but in my humble opinion FFP isn’t fit for purpose). Also thanks for your insight TFIOG, fully explained and reasoned as usual.
Sadly I have no in depth knowledge of what UK or European laws apply to our clubs or the Premier League as an entity or many of the rules that binds the 20 clubs or their interface with the other European leagues governed by EUFA.
However every one of the contributors to this forum could come up with a fairer system.
My proposal would govern individual leagues around the continent. Each club in the Premier League would be given a budget based on the mean average salary expenditure of the 20 clubs for the preceding season (this could be based on known player contract salary values as adjusted for bonuses for players and could be audited). In fact this is where there could be national variations to inflate average wages by a triple lock (CPI growth at a given date or national average earnings growth for a given period or 2.5%. Ha Ha). This average could be based on a squad of 25 players and would encourage young low-paid players bulking out a squad to facilitate some high earners.
OK some leagues would have substantially higher mean wages but that is the case now so not a reason not to start afresh. Managing player resources / budgets would truly be tested rather than having a huge variation in squad values.
Possibly some transfer fees would come down as the richest clubs couldn’t fill their squads with high earners.
Of course there should be leveraging constraints and ownership tests but genuine tests rather than barriers to competition.
Last year’s ‘Super League’ debacle demonstrates where the so called ‘elite’ clubs want to take OUR sport.
My support would go to any proposals that create a more level playing field in a great sport rather than pander to the greedy and their monopoly of the trough.

{Ed002's Note - The problem is that clubs earn money at different rates. Manchester City earned considerably more than Wolves in the league through gate money, sponsorship and winnings as they won the league. On top of that is the broadcast income which is split on a different basis but brings significant income to those clubs toward the lower end of the table who do not get as much in terms of winnings nor sponsorship which is harder to attract. Chelsea won the Champions League which brings very significant income from gate, broadcast, winning and attracts additional sponsorship. Add to that that Chelsea have funded the last two season incoming transfers through sales. Other clubs are not set up to do that. So short of removing all sponsorship, winnings and gate income, clubs cannot work to a flat-lined budget. So even within one league like the PL, there will always be a huge disparity. Then you have European competition and the vastly diff ent income across different leagues that clubs have.

I don’t understand why you think FFP is not fit for purpose. The desire is it will encourage clubs to work within their means.}

30 Dec 2021 00:36:49
As always I do get what Ed002 is saying cause if nothing else she's knows her FFP. But I suppose the problem is what constitutes fair play? Look at the US how often do the same teams win titles year on year? Cause currently we've had 28 seasons of the Prem and ONLY 7 different winners (add to that Lec and Blackburn won one each!), does THAT sound like a fair league?! And before you say it Ed, I agree US sport is fundamentally different so it's apples and pairs so it's not that simple. But as we read about more and more amature leagues dissappearing I feel the WHOLE of football needs to hit a brick wall before they will truly address the problem. But however you dress it up the younger generations seem bored with football and is it any wonder when unless you support (realistically) one of 3/4 Prem/Serie A/La Liga teams you will never see your team win/or EVEN just compete for a league in your lifetime? I'm not saying there's an easy answer but I am saying that it seems all too easy just to say 'well it's a broken system but that's all we have'!
As we've seen, football has limitless potiential when it appeals to the masses but with every year that this sport takes that for granted that potiential dwindles! I REALLY do get what your saying Ed (that it's about as fair as they can make it from the start point FFP had) but shouldn't we all still want a bit more than that?! Should it REALLY be beyond the realities of the game that the leagues offer a genuine chance to win something to most clubs that compete in them?! I can only speak for myself but I've lost the love, I'll watch my team cause its the Wolves but I don't look at the league these days unless I'm worried about where we are in it cause frankly what's the point?! ?

{Ed002's Note - The thing is BBII, FFP is not there to try and spread out the titles amongst the teams but th try and ensure that teams to not spend beyond what they earn through broadcast, gates, winnings and sponsorship (with the wiggle room for what the owners can top it up by - which is not very much). The idea is to keep clubs afloat rather than have the problems that have been faced by clubs like Portsmouth who were living well beyond their means and have dropped down through the leagues. This means that the club income is largely transparent to the authorities - any excessive sponsorship (which Manchester City have been accused of) or any out of balanced income (which Deby and Aston Villa with the value of their ground sales have been accused of) can be questioned and substantiation requested. Rules are in place to ensure that clubs pay their debts in a timely manner. The bottom line is that the clubs shoub be substainable as businesses and any chance of them going under should be reduced (Bury is an example where it failed, largely due to ownership issues). One of the big issues that you have touched on is the amateur leagues. And this is where we start seeing issues. With 92 professional clubs and x semi-professional clubs it is likely it cannot be sustained and something much bolder will need to be done. Nobody wants to go back to a region-based system at the higher levels than it is now, but it may be necessary. In Spain and a number of other countries the "B" squads are integrated in to the same league structure but promotion is capped (so Real Madrid B winning La Liga 2 cannot be promoted to play in the same league as their first team. It is not ideal but rather better than the Premier League 2 which many fans don't even know exists in England. You are right that there are problems, I completely agree, but FFP is not causing them although I agree it needs a shake up. With any future breakaway league on a pan-European basis, it would likely be addressed as part of the fall out - but something will happen at some point.}



Log In or Register to post

Remember me

Forgot Pass