Yes but, should the limits be based on inflation, because PL wages and transfer fees have had nothing to do with inflation for years/decades.
if team A wants player A they'll pay what is required, that then inflates the price of the also rans who get higher fees and wages pricing poorer clubs out of good players.
what is a reasonable base and a reasonable year on year increase.
Personally i think a spending and salary cap is the way to go not based on turnover but fixed for all 20 clubs, it works in US sports because for the most part there's nowhere else to go, and to implement it in football you'd have to do it worldwide or the players would just bugger off to the country paying the most. The NFL's current salary cap is $255m per team, no exceptions.
A spending and salary cap would not require retroactive financials if when you sign a player that info is given to the league and tallied up, and all transfers are completed before the season starts. At any point in the season you'll know how much they've spent, how much they've sold and what their current wage bill is. If you're close to the limit then the league can just prevent the transfer in the jan window or from other leagues.
Sure but a measure of inflation doesn't have to be RPI or CPI, the football authorities would be able to define their own index based on a measure of inflation in football should they so wish. But...
As I said before though I believe that the concepts of sustainability & Financial Fair Play need to be separated (profitability can obviously be linked with sustainability - you would think that a profitable club is inherently sustainable but so might an unprofitable one be but ultimately the rules were supposed to be about sustainability).
So, for sustainability look at what the danger signs are. Whilst continually making losses is obviously a a danger sign it isn't necessarily so with the backing of good owners so a) ensure fit and proper owner tests are given the appropriate focus and diligence when clubs are changing hands b) any owners must agree to cover any net liability (not net debt) on the annual balance sheet with an injection of investment. Refusal to cover them? Transfer embargo put in place until they are either covered or the club otherwise return to a net asset situation (i.e. so that the position isn't further worsened through new discretionary spend).
I'd argue selling off of fixed assets can be a huge red flag too. Clubs need to have the opportunity to do so so it isn't a case of not allowing it but that the league(s) could set up appropriate expert bodies for reviewing and approving any attempt to dispose/sell assets that, say, comprise more than 10% of a club's total assets. No sanction needed, if it looks fishy or would obviously jeopardise a club's stability it just isn't approved.
For true financial fair play, I agree with you that that can only truly be achieved with set limits for net transfer fees & player benefits. I also agree that in regards to football sanctions for non-compliance such limits also largely allow for in-season compliance monitoring & punishment as by the end of the 2nd transfer window squad spending for the season (NOT the financial year) will be largely known (aside from wages for any non-contract players added after this time, the only major variable will be performance related bonuses so something would be needed to take them into account to prevent clubs circumnavigating with late season additional payments but, again, all potential bonuses should be specifically included in contracts so can be done).
The Premier League will, with some justification (and as you allude to), claim that such steps would reduce its attractiveness to the best players and damage the brand but I feel that such things can be addressed (even if against the spirit of FFP) with a clearly defined formula that for any variable element, for example, sets the limit for the current season basis the prior season.
Either way what is key is a) knowing the limits at the start of the season, b) making compliance or otherwise independent of footballing success (so as it is a spending limit no budgeting for 6th and being f**ked because you finished 12th) and c) having clearly defined sporting penalties for non-compliance that are applied in season and, because they are clearly defined, cannot be appealed against.
