FFA: Expenses more than revenue = disaster. Get it?

Salary Cap approaches $5 million for cashed up clubs! (Can't find one under my bed)

More money for another Marquee announces the FFA. Fantastic but hasn't someone told them the Fury, Gold Coast, Brisbane, Phoenix, Adelaide, Sydney and more are all in some sort of financial woe.

Make that basket cases!

So our A-League clubs struggling for revenue has the opportunity to spend more money...on players. And what football club can resist that overspend. History shows, in Australia, and indeed in the EPL, not one!

So our resource stretched clubs can now spend:

$2.5mill (approx) on salaries etc.
$150,000 on an Under 23 Marquee
$1 million or more on Marquee, Fowler-esque.
$1 million on an Aussie Marquee. Kewell-esque...but wait will they spend it on Chippers or Carney or Sterjovski, oh they already did!
And of course the Youth budget, can't call $5,000 a salary can you?

It sounds great, almost a plan. But which club can take the plunge, actually use it and make it sustainable.

The FFA announced the W-League with a salary cap of $150,000 when it was launched; total bollocks of course, that is never used. Surely this will be the same in the A-League.

If Melbourne Victory can't put a team together worthy of Asia with their crowd base over the last five years, what chance any other club (bar one with a one-off spend big investor do we still have any of them?) utilising the full options of our salary machinations.

Aren't the FFA supposed to be trying to assist the clubs, ensuring they survive?

Any evidence of a football club keeping within it's revenue restrictions in the history of the game? Maybe but not in Australia.

Are the FFA finally embracing the games history!