The Fish

There's a way to keep the style without burning the players out. And I think we've seen that's nascence against Fulham and a more established version against Aston Villa. Bruno making fewer forward runs, fewer forward passes, the leg work being done by Miley (his most aggressive game for us?) and Longstaff too. If the games finished around the 75 minute mark, we'd be 4th.

Motherfuckers act like they forgot about DRE

People saying that it's the same for other clubs fail to realise that other clubs either have more depth to their squad, fewer fixtures or both. Our substitutes are either geriatrics, or infants. Some of them have full internationals kicking their heels on the bench.

They'll get money from whichever advertising provider they've an agreement with and sure there'll be some rules about hate speech and the like. But surely those rules should be enforced by banning people who use hate speech, rather than merely hiding the offenders? Because people who use hate speech shouldn't be given a platform to spew it. Whether it's misdirected partisan horseshit, or a genuinely held belief.

It's definitely that they got sick of the front page of Sunderland biggest message board showing mostly threads about Newcastle United. I don't buy the claim that it's for fear of advertisers pulling funding; a) how much money does it cost to maintain that site? and b) I can't imagine advertisers would much care about content on a messageboard as long as it isn't legally troublesome or wildly offensive.

worse than that, they had to download an app

Not so much in Hassidic Porn

Imagine how he'd be regarded if he'd had nothing but good managers for his time here. He's class and needs a better chant imo.

We'll lose this.

It worked, didn't it? You might question my methods, but you can't question the results.

I wonder if the tv companies will get in the ear of the Premier League to let the reigns loose a little.

Only 10 permanent signings in the Premier League with only 1 day to go. 12 teams haven't done any business so far. Last January there were 51. Brentford Leeds and Spurs were the only teams not to bring anyone in.

If the cap was around£120m a window, that's more than enough for clubs like us, or Man City to use to bolster, improve or restock the squads. It gives a ceiling for clubs like Luton that is so high it not restrictive at all. It stops clubs like Chelsea from splurging and falsely inflating the value of players. And, of course if Man City can offload a youth player for £40m, that goes into the allowance. If it were debt-linked as well, well that would be fantastic. Also, if there were better regulations about the number of homegrown players that must be included in the matchday squad, that'd be great too, but I've no idea how you define homegrown when there are so many clubs that have overlapping catchment areas, or catchments areas where 50% of it is the North Sea?

I don't think it does. Every deal done by the elite become more risky. Committing £80m to one player carries with it a risk now, but if that's 75 of your allowance, it becomes a bigger concern. Those teams fishing in the smaller ponds for less money can afford to swallow the cost of a failed transfer more. That means teams will have to focus more on good scouting, and developing their own players as a more cost effective route to becoming competitive. Don't mind the cap being influenced by the things you mention, but a cap , in my mind, is a fair way of reducing the spending power of the elite, while still letting weaker clubs catch up.

In this font?

Could the prices flux that much if there's a cap, though? Say Chelsea spunk £120m on Sander Berge and he inevitably flops, that's not going to make all bang average midfielders 'worth' £120m, is it? The flex should come from the spending power of the least rich member of the PL, so if Leicester, Southampton and Leeds were to be promoted it could increase, but if Luton, QPR and Plymouth fluked promotion it should contract.

What about a spend cap? Like £120m, say. Would mean the top clubs can buy 1 or 2 toptoptoptoptop players, but the lower teams have the freedom to fill out their squad more. Would prevent a club like Chelsea spending more in 1 window that others have over 5 years, but would allow clubs like Villa, Everton, Nottingham Forest and ourselves could keep things competitive. Coupled with a rolling 3yr limit of £360m loss allowance?

It doesn't even have to be entirely scrapping PSR, just retooling it to better fit it's remit. Stop allowing clubs to spend beyond their means, for sure a club should be protected from bad owners. And we should prevent the megarich clubs from spending without some kind of limit, for the sake of sporting integrity.

They're like a Fop tribute act.