You're not always right either (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Why don't we just wait until he actually plays for us before we start judging whether the price tag has effected his performances or not



The deal for Lucas Biglia has been unlocked. The deal could be finalized in the next hours. No player involved in deal. [@MilanNewsit]

I just think it gives the advantage to the 2 big Spanish sides and EPL teams who have huge TV money coming in. While teams in other leagues suffer because they don't have that kind of revenue to fall back on.

If it was really financial fair play, it would really provide a more level playing field for clubs, but it generally hinders rather than helps clubs who are not Real/Barca or EPL teams

I agree that clubs shouldn't run into so much dept that they end up bankrupt, but that really shouldn't have any bearing on Europe and should be something the respective leagues should look into rather than UEFA, which let's face it, isn't the most upstanding institution out there

Rudiger has been announced by Chelsea btw.

If Roma sell Manolas as well, we could really have a decent shot at 3rd/4th. We just need to get that one difference maker in the squad

I whole heartedly agree with you on the leagues implementing it rather UEFA. However, this was something agreed with teams participating in Europe (Milan being one of them) at the time. They agreed to a time frame where they all comply with FFP. They even requested more time and got it. Some clubs, Milan and inter inclusive were granted more time to reduce losses. So it is not something that came into affect spontaneously nor is it something imposed; rather a dialogue occured with the clubs in Europe at the time.

Now on implementation. It is by no miracle that Madrid/Barca and most EPL teams are the teams most likely to comply with FFP off the bat. As you stated their topline from TV and other dwarfs the competition.

With that in mind let us contemplate the following case: Team A from the EPL and Team B from Serie A. Team A has enormous revenue when peered to Team B's revenue. Meaning Team A could outbid Team B to any player. So Team B has two options to choose from in order to compete with Team A; (1) increase capital/equity or (2) borrow from a bank. (Note: borrowing from a bank is much cheaper cost and easier formality.

If Team B takes the option of increasing equity they have three routes; (1) owner puts up funds, (2) sell shares as private placement or (3) list on the stock exchange. All three require a HIGH return to the investor. Regardless of the options Team B chooses to increase equity, it fully complies with FFP.

If Team B takes the option of borrowing from the bank. A process which takes at most three months and bears interest that is cheap as compared to the other option available to Team B.

In both options, Team B would not have an increase in revenue. So how would Team B repay the bank if it chose to borrow from the bank? And this is where FFP comes in, to assure that all the teams qualifying to its competitions are strong financially and have the means to meet their dues be that salaries, the banks, etc.

Does that restrict competition to Barca/Madrid and most EPL teams? In the short term f2ck yeah it does! but what of the Bundesliga teams? They do rather well and they dont have Barca or Madrid's revenue. Juventus also come to mind. But just as you had Serie A at the top in the 1980s and late 90s which later transferred hands to the EPL, rest assured the same will change in the coming years (brexit being a curve ball i would throw in here). So in the medium to long term it definitely will change.

FFP is imho one of the better initiatives from UEFA. (Disclaimer: I do question UEFA's credibility and FIFA to a larger degree)

With regards to Team B's increase in capital/equity, isn't it against FFP rules for the owners of clubs to inject cash into their clubs? I remember this was one of the excuses for why we wouldn't be spending big money back in the day, then we fell out of Europe and it wasn't used anymore

As for German teams, well first off they're very well run, unlike Italian teams, and I think this is just a general culture phenomenon that you can't really work around. As far as I know they also own their own stadiums, which as we can see has done a world of good for Juve. That being said, all the Bundesliga sides, aside from Bayern all generally sell their best players at some point as well, I think that helps in terms of keeping revenues high. The one great thing they've got going for them is that German talent atm is limitless add to that a good scouting network in other leagues and you have teams like Dortmund who always seem to have a group of players that will be going for astronomical fees. It's like they have an unending conveyor belt of talent. Let's not forget they've been selling their best players for years now, Sahin, Kagawa, Gundogan, Goetze, Lewandowski, Hummels, Mkhitaryan. Now it's Auba, Dembele, Weigl, Pulisic, Sokratis (nice one Galliani), Reus and Dahoud, who they brought in for peanuts and will most liekly sell for a huge fee in 2 to 3 years

Yeah, I'd rather not turn into a German team or the Bundesliga. Don't get me wrong, Han is right, the league is filled with talents that seem just popping up in an endless string and clubs are generally being managed with shrewd (financial) thinking. But look at the league itself. No real competition for Bayern for years. Strong players like for example Griezmann or Sanchez usually think twice before moving to this league, not to speak of potential targets set by any other team then Bayern. Look at the league itself: can you imagine a Serie A with, say, Juventus winning on and on, Vis Pesaro and Cremonese being contenders along with say Milan, while clubs like Inter, Roma, Lazio and Fiorentina play Serie B football with the occasional jump to Serie A or Serie C? Cause that's what the Bundesliga is now. A bunch of new clubs without identity, old traditional clubs run to the ground, one superpower that dominates everything and a few old dinosaurs running on life support and trying to offload a few kid talents to broker another financially successful season.

Well, I'd rather we find our own way then dream of the German one.

Auba too was a Milan player, nice one Galliani on him too.

Oh not this again! Really??!! I posted a long one on why this shouldn't be put on us at all. Just look at his stats and you'll see why. There was no way at the level which he was at, we could have justified the 5 years of regular game time it took for him to shine. We were a big club then (the downfall of 2013 hadn't yet started). Aubameyang was NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

Meanwhile we had players like Zlatan, Robinho and Cassano in our lineup. Aubameyang in there? Honestly?

He didn't break out till 2013 a full 2 years AFTER we sold him outright. We've been loaning him out since 2008, when he did nothing to suggest he would start for us.

I know this because there was a time in the forum, when you guys joked around saying Aubameyang looks a lot like me (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif) . So I did study this guy a lot. Also it's been over 10 years on this forum.HOLY ****!

The fact is there are some players who take a long time to mature. And not every club can continue to start them with no results, and wait for that breakout to happen.

Our downfall started summer 2011 and accelerated wildly with 2012's exodus. Where you getting 2013 from?

I'd like to put our transfer window in some perspective. We're all happy we're bringing in what seems like fine players at the level of budget we wanted.

Problem is, we are doing barely any better than Everton in terms of incoming and they've had the bonus of 100M for Lukaku.

I was looking at their window, and it makes for familiar reading:

(£)

Klassen - 23M
Pickford 25M
Keane 25M
Onyekuru 7M
Ramirez 5M
Rooney (undisclosed)

Approaching 100M and that excludes the frees.

Us:

Silva: 35M
Musacchio 15M
Rodriguez - 12M
Calhanoglu - 16M
Conte 20M
Kessie - 6M with 20M obligation to buy

About the same amount as Everton.

What I'm asking is are our expectations too high? We're in the same market as Everton and spending the same on a similar amount of players - is top four realistic? I'd be surprised if Everton expect top four.

I was referring to the 2013-14 Serie A season where we finished 8th. That summer we sold Ibra and Silva. That season we sacked Allegri.

In 2012-13 we finished 3rd. It wasn't a disaster.

In 2011-12 we finished 2nd, with that Muntari ghost goal.

You could argue the rot had set in early, but I'd say the descent began in 2013 and we were in freefall till last season.

Fair points. I would say our transfers are of a slightly higher quality since we have the benefit of the project's attractiveness. Everton are an unfashionable club in an unfashionable city. More difficult for Europe's talent to find interesting to move to.

Plus competing for top 4 in Italy is a lot easier than completing for top 4 in England. Teams are a different level of quality.

I thought someone might make that argument. Yet last season Italian clubs did better than English in Europe overall, Man Utd's UEL win aside.

English teams really aren't very good. Leicester won the league FFS! Conte's Chelsea are the closest they've had to a team who can realistically expect to win the league and seriously contend for UCL in the past five years.

I honestly wouldn't say the gap between say both leagues' top 4's is actually that wide overall.

English football has been poor for a while now. I really think that Spain aside, Germany, England and Italy are equally competitive.

You can't compare prices in England with prices in Italy. Kessie would have cost double that amount had he played for an English club.

I think we've spent wisely and on the right players. CL football is a realistic objective for next season.

PS: Calhanoglu cost 24M (including bonuses).