Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Parachute money

After yesterday’s Blackburn v Barnsley match a very frustrated Keith Hill blamed the difference between his Barnsley side losing the match 2-1 on the parachute payment money used to fund the Blackburn team, in particular Jordan Rhodes. Sour grapes or not? This made me think, so I scanned the Championship table to see what other teams have the parachute advantage. Obviously Wolves and Bolton also share the magical 4 years whereas Blackpool and Birmingham still have 3 years to go. However you also have Burnley and Hull with 2 and even Boro have this final year to go. So that’s 8 teams with Sky funding. Of the remainder a number of teams have rich backers: Massives, Forest, Watford, Leicester, Cardiff, Udders and Brighton. Even Bristol City despite low crowds can afford Baldock. So that leaves Palace, Millwall, Derby, Ipswich, Barnsley, Leeds, Peterboro and us in a league of our own. As salary levels go I’m not sure where we line up but when we were competing with Peterboro for Wilson I think that does give some idea although Fuller does negate this to a certain extent. Never more so does it seem to me that the fabled Premier League 2 has come into play. Is it good for the league, I’m not so sure. I do remember Olly being very upset about it when he was Plymouth manager playing Charlton but now would he turn it down? Looking at the crowds so far this season I would think that of the teams with money we can match most of them for filling a ground with the exception of Brighton/Wolves/Brum/Cardiff/Massives/forest/Hull. So whereas in the 90s we struggled to match teams in the Championship due to attendances creating less resources, we now struggle due to this inbalance of funds. So if we do finish outside the bottom 3, and I think we will, it will be a great achievement.

Comments

  • I believe in the ned for parachute money but it should be there to prevent financial melt down whereas the four seasons and rthe amount seem to support the clubs over and above oithers in the league. Of course our financiual meltn down was parlty due to dropping out of the prem but also profligacy in the transfer market
  • Ideally the paracute payments should be scrapped. But I guess the idea is that teams promoted to the Premier can be encouraged to invest in players to achieve even a small measure of parity with the big clubs, without the fear of going broke if/when they are relegated.
    As you say, in the longer term it will create eight or so yoyo clubs who survive on parachute payments and/or a rich man's largesse, and the poor scratching around on the floor for scraps, clubs like us.
    What's the answer ? The rich(ish) will get richer and the poor will go under
  • No amount of parachute money will cover up managers inability to pick the right team or formation.
  • We had the advantage of parachute money & blew it.
  • Tutt-Tutt said:

    We had the advantage of parachute money & blew it.

    not as big an advantage as these teams. Dont they get something like 4 years worth of money when we only had 2?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!