English football 2024-5

[vanderark14]

3 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

Obscene

Liverpool have agreed a British transfer record fee of £125m to sign striker Alexander Isak from Newcastle United.

Sources close to the deal have told BBC Sport that an agreement for the Sweden international to move to Anfield is now in place.

Newcastle sources claim the deal could be worth as much as £130m with add-ons.

Hope his career takes a nose dive from here. 

[Ally Bongo]

Agreed

[dan cake]

Liverpool have spent 440 million in this transfer window 😳 

Edited September 1, 2025 by dan cake

[Hertsscot]

3 hours ago, dan cake said:

Liverpool have spent 440 million in this transfer window 😳 

No cost of living crisis in the EPL.

[vanderark14]

3 hours ago, dan cake said:

Liverpool have spent 440 million in this transfer window 😳 

 

5 minutes ago, Hertsscot said:

No cost of living crisis in the EPL.

And sky are absoluteky loving it 🤮

[Clyde1998]

On 8/4/2025 at 9:55 AM, ThistleWhistle said:

The Championship is genuinely bonkers and you'd have be off your nut to invest in it.  Stoke's wagebill was £15m last year - Aberdeen's apparently is c.£4m in comparison.  However, Stoke are owned by Bet365 and have a fucking fortune to spend but aren't allowed spend it due to ffp.  A few years back there was a stat that Bet365 spent more on sponsoring at Old Trafford than they did at Stoke because you have to evidence the return so they can't just sponsor the ground for £500m as example.  

They've just sold a 17 year old for £2m with add ons who probably has chance of playing for a decent Champions League club by his early 20s and would have probably got decent first team football at Stoke this season.  As it's pure profit though under ffp it balances the books and forces Stoke's hand.  

Stoke and Newcastle must be the richest skint clubs in the world - farce really and not sustainable.    

[dan cake]

4 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

 

And sky are absoluteky loving it 🤮

 
yet it was disgusting when the Saudi’s done it 

[ThistleWhistle]

15 hours ago, Clyde1998 said:

 

I can't believe the size of Celtic and Rangers wagebill and how shit they are - genuinely think Stoke could give both a game this season.  

Got the Stoke figure off Google AI whereas that £34m is clear as day in Stoke's accounts cheers.  Absolutely off your nut to invest in the Championship as that's essentially 100% of the revenue.  In comparison you could see how a diddy Scottish Premiership side could actually now make money if they have access to the Europa League or Conference group stages.     

[Diamond Scot]

Ive been surprised for years that there wasnt more investment in Scottish football. Especially at clubs with historically big support. Its started to happen now at Aberdeen, Hibs and Hearts.

If you look at those clubs they all have quite low wage bills, have stadiums and support base that can get 20k home crowds and with some smart investment should comfortably be able to distance themselves from the rest of the league minus the OF. That alone should be enough to grow the fanbase (winning more often than not) and getting into Europe would see a return in profit.

[Och Aye]

30 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Ive been surprised for years that there wasnt more investment in Scottish football. Especially at clubs with historically big support. Its started to happen now at Aberdeen, Hibs and Hearts.

If you look at those clubs they all have quite low wage bills, have stadiums and support base that can get 20k home crowds and with some smart investment should comfortably be able to distance themselves from the rest of the league minus the OF. That alone should be enough to grow the fanbase (winning more often than not) and getting into Europe would see a return in profit.

It's Sky money that's made the English Premiership mega rich, the figures are staggering. They are only interested in 2 teams in Scotland (that may change after Sunday's shit show 😄). It's all about the audience figures. If the Old Firm had anything about them they'd be demanding a bigger fee.

 

[Diamond Scot]

1 hour ago, Och Aye said:

It's Sky money that's made the English Premiership mega rich, the figures are staggering. They are only interested in 2 teams in Scotland (that may change after Sunday's shit show 😄). It's all about the audience figures. If the Old Firm had anything about them they'd be demanding a bigger fee.

 

Im not taking about Sky money though. Celtic and Rangers are both profitable clubs (historically) with the same Sky money.

Aberdeen is a one club city. Hibs and Hearts are a 2 club city but that city is the capital with a big population.

Im not suggesting any of these clubs can be the same size as the OF but if you are getting 20k through the door every home game, very good numbers in shirt sales, good corporate sales and combine that with a good player trading model then its not hard to turn these clubs into good profit.

Gone are the days where clubs outside the OF accept peanuts for player sales. 

Given the size of the support and wage bills it shouldnt be hard for these 3 clubs to distance themselves in quality from the likes of Falkirk, Livi, St Johnstone, Motherwell etc who in comparison operate on a shoestring.

[Och Aye]

19 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Im not taking about Sky money though. Celtic and Rangers are both profitable clubs (historically) with the same Sky money.

Aberdeen is a one club city. Hibs and Hearts are a 2 club city but that city is the capital with a big population.

Im not suggesting any of these clubs can be the same size as the OF but if you are getting 20k through the door every home game, very good numbers in shirt sales, good corporate sales and combine that with a good player trading model then its not hard to turn these clubs into good profit.

Gone are the days where clubs outside the OF accept peanuts for player sales. 

Given the size of the support and wage bills it shouldnt be hard for these 3 clubs to distance themselves in quality from the likes of Falkirk, Livi, St Johnstone, Motherwell etc who in comparison operate on a shoestring.

There is clearly a reason for the lack of investment in Scottish clubs when you have all the facts and figures in front of you or it would have been done.

Yes Aberdeen, Hearts and Hibs should have been doing better than they have in recent years. You could say the same about the Dundee clubs compaired Ross County and Livingston. John Boyle tried it at Motherwell and got his fingers well and truly burnt. Business wise it clearly can't be a sensible route to go down.

[Big Ramy 1314]

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1B1fqywLPm/

If Ramy was a Wrexham supporter...🤣🤣🤣🤣

[ThistleWhistle]

2 hours ago, Diamond Scot said:

Im not taking about Sky money though. Celtic and Rangers are both profitable clubs (historically) with the same Sky money.

Aberdeen is a one club city. Hibs and Hearts are a 2 club city but that city is the capital with a big population.

Im not suggesting any of these clubs can be the same size as the OF but if you are getting 20k through the door every home game, very good numbers in shirt sales, good corporate sales and combine that with a good player trading model then its not hard to turn these clubs into good profit.

Gone are the days where clubs outside the OF accept peanuts for player sales. 

Given the size of the support and wage bills it shouldnt be hard for these 3 clubs to distance themselves in quality from the likes of Falkirk, Livi, St Johnstone, Motherwell etc who in comparison operate on a shoestring.

For me if someone with moderate pockets and reasonable acumen invested with the strategy of getting into Europa group stages they could build on the extra income incrementally.  It would put players on a bigger market and potentially sell younger players for bigger profits to reinvest.  The conference league hasn't been open to teams for long and it's defo worth a punt for smaller clubs as the prize money involved is worth them bothering with it.

So long as their budget wasn't dependent on qualifying for it clubs could really grow organically from back to back seasons in the groups and I think we'll see with Hearts it won't really take much to kick start that process. 

Also think if a club can retain a spine of steady pro's with promising youngsters using the club as a stepping stone then there would be the chance they could compete for the league the odd year before getting raided for their best players and starting again with a pot of wedge.  

[scotlad]

5 hours ago, ThistleWhistle said:

 

I can't believe the size of Celtic and Rangers wagebill and how shit they are - genuinely think Stoke could give both a game this season.  

Got the Stoke figure off Google AI whereas that £34m is clear as day in Stoke's accounts cheers.  Absolutely off your nut to invest in the Championship as that's essentially 100% of the revenue.  In comparison you could see how a diddy Scottish Premiership side could actually now make money if they have access to the Europa League or Conference group stages.     

I notice Rangers have just spent £10m on a striker who hasn't scored a goal in professional football for two years.

I only hope for their sakes that Lucy is in charge of doing the messages in the Martin-Pinder household, because based on that transfer I wouldn't trust Russell not to return from Waitrose with nothing but a bag of magic beans.

[Fairbairn]

1 hour ago, scotlad said:

I notice Rangers have just spent £10m on a striker who hasn't scored a goal in professional football for two years.

I only hope for their sakes that Lucy is in charge of doing the messages in the Martin-Pinder household, because based on that transfer I wouldn't trust Russell not to return from Waitrose with nothing but a bag of magic beans.

I think that one’s more Thelwell than Martin given the former spent £15M to bring him to Everton when he was Sporting Director there. 

[ThistleWhistle]

17 hours ago, scotlad said:

I notice Rangers have just spent £10m on a striker who hasn't scored a goal in professional football for two years.

I only hope for their sakes that Lucy is in charge of doing the messages in the Martin-Pinder household, because based on that transfer I wouldn't trust Russell not to return from Waitrose with nothing but a bag of magic beans.

I can semi see the sense in it as he's still young and if he scores in Europe then potentially they can sell him for a profit especially if they get quite far.  If they don't get very far in Europe, struggle in the league then this will be another nail in Martin's eventual coffin.   

Would be interesting though if they finish second the next two seasons, do ok in Europe but he bangs in 20-25 goals in the league for argument sake - what sort of profit on £10m they looking at with 2 years left on his contract?  

 

[Fairbairn]

1 minute ago, ThistleWhistle said:

I can semi see the sense in it as he's still young and if he scores in Europe then potentially they can sell him for a profit especially if they get quite far.  If they don't get very far in Europe, struggle in the league then this will be another nail in Martin's eventual coffin.   

Would be interesting though if they finish second the next two seasons, do ok in Europe but he bangs in 20-25 goals in the league for argument sake - what sort of profit on £10m they looking at with 2 years left on his contract?  

 

Celtic got £10M for a 30 year Kyogo who banged them in domestically but didn't really set the heather on fire in European competitions.  Based on that if Chermiti can score 20-25 in the league and have similar European return to Kyogo I'd hope at the very least we'd be able to get our money back given he'd still be in his early 20s.  The questions is does he have 20 domestic goals in him?!

[ThistleWhistle]

21 minutes ago, Fairbairn said:

Celtic got £10M for a 30 year Kyogo who banged them in domestically but didn't really set the heather on fire in European competitions.  Based on that if Chermiti can score 20-25 in the league and have similar European return to Kyogo I'd hope at the very least we'd be able to get our money back given he'd still be in his early 20s.  The questions is does he have 20 domestic goals in him?!

I'd imagine the transfer strategy is speculate to accumulate but £8m-£10m seems a pretty ballsy gamble.  Unless he produces decent numbers in league then it's difficult to see you getting your money back and without decent numbers in Europe it's difficult to see how he generates much profit unless the domestic numbers are absolutely ridiculous - even then though the strength of the league would be held against him.  

The only way I can see him going for £13m upwards is with a good European run that he's key in backed up with a decent domestic return.  Seems a real gamble this one like but maybe the guy who took him to Everton knows his potential and just needs confidence as can't be easy being a striker in a sh!te Everton side scrapping relegation aged 19/20.  

[Fairbairn]

47 minutes ago, ThistleWhistle said:

I'd imagine the transfer strategy is speculate to accumulate but £8m-£10m seems a pretty ballsy gamble.  Unless he produces decent numbers in league then it's difficult to see you getting your money back and without decent numbers in Europe it's difficult to see how he generates much profit unless the domestic numbers are absolutely ridiculous - even then though the strength of the league would be held against him.  

The only way I can see him going for £13m upwards is with a good European run that he's key in backed up with a decent domestic return.  Seems a real gamble this one like but maybe the guy who took him to Everton knows his potential and just needs confidence as can't be easy being a striker in a sh!te Everton side scrapping relegation aged 19/20.  

Yeah I think we're kinda saying the same thing.  It's definitely a gamble, our second highest transfer fee (and highest for 25 years) on a lad with 3 goals in his career and none in the last 2 years is hard to wrap the head around.  As is the fact he now has £25M of transfers behind him.  Thelwell is responsible for both of them so he obviously seems something in him, I just hope he's right (and I'm wrong....)

[Clyde1998]

20 hours ago, Och Aye said:

It's Sky money that's made the English Premiership mega rich, the figures are staggering. They are only interested in 2 teams in Scotland (that may change after Sunday's shit show 😄). It's all about the audience figures. If the Old Firm had anything about them they'd be demanding a bigger fee.

Looking at the numbers, in the 2023-24 season:

Non-broadcasting revenues (Premier League clubs unless stated):

1. Man Utd - £440m
2. Man City - £425m
3. Liverpool - £410m
4. Tottenham - £361m
5. Arsenal - £351m
6. Chelsea - £305m
7. Newcastle - £137m
8. West Ham - £103m
9. Aston Villa - £91m
10. Celtic (Scotland) - £88m
11. Leeds (Championship) - £74m
12. Rangers (Scotland) - £64m
13. Leicester (Championship) - £64m
14. Nottm Forest - £60m
15. Brighton - £59m
16. Everton - £58m
17. Fulham - £47m
18. Wolves - £45m
19. Crystal Palace - £45m
20. Brentford - £39m

Broadcasting revenues will include league prize money and direct UEFA money. The figures listed are essentially each club's matchday and commercial revenues combined.

Premier League clubs benefit from massive international exposure, so will be able to generate larger commercial deals than Scottish or lower league English clubs. If Celtic and Rangers were both in the Premier League, there's no reason their revenues couldn't be comparable to Newcastle.

Aberdeen (£16m) and Hearts (£15m) were around West Brom, Sheff Wed and QPR (£17m each); Luton (£16m) and Plymouth (£15m). They both have greater non-broadcasting revenues than at least nine Championship clubs: Cardiff (£13m); Watford (£13m); Swansea (£12m), Blackburn (£12m); Hull (£12m); Millwall (£11m); Huddersfield (£10m); Preston (£7m); Rotherham (£7m).

Hibernian don't breakdown their revenues by source, so I can't calculate for them. I didn't look at the smaller sides.

In terms of broadcasting revenues: Burnley were the lowest Premier League club with £111m (Celtic's total revenue was £125m; Rangers £88m).

Southampton; Leicester; Leeds; Watford and Norwich all received parachute payments and had broadcasting revenues of £56m; £54m; £54m; £45m; £45m respectively. West Brom; Millwall and Plymouth each had £11m as the best non-parachute payment Championship sides; Hull and QPR had £9m as the worst. Aberdeen and Hearts were £7m and £6m respectively.

The English Football League's TV revenues grew massively in the 2024-25 season - so that gap between our non-Old Firm sides and Championship clubs will increase in the next accounts.

[Big Ramy 1314]

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1BVFtnTe1t/

Good times ahead !! 👊👊👊😂😂

[Och Aye]

West Ham sack Potter. I've cashed out on my West Ham to be relegated bet. Nuno will get them out of trouble.

[dan cake]

3 hours ago, Och Aye said:

West Ham sack Potter. I've cashed out on my West Ham to be relegated bet. Nuno will get them out of trouble.

Potters last big job surely, a seat on Sky’s (midweek) panel awaits 

[dan cake]

4 hours ago, Och Aye said:

West Ham sack Potter. I've cashed out on my West Ham to be relegated bet. Nuno will get them out of trouble.

Can’t believe Man Utd continue to stick with Amorim, he’s utterly clueless