Just been reading about a vote by the 72 league clubs agreeing a salary cap "in principle" at the league's annual meeting in Cyprus. What I didn't know was that this is already in place in league 2 set at a level of 60% of club turn over. Even with this there is a movement in place to take this down to 55%.
The question I want to ask is, is this a fair way of doing it??
Clubs like us have a far bigger turn over than a club like Stevenage and so we would have a larger wage budget available, so in turn could offer bigger wages and get the better players, you would think. Now not that I would complain about that at all and I don’t want this to be a we’re a big club no your not argument. Just wanted to see if anyone else thought this was a bit biased towards a ‘bigger attendance club’
Also take the premiership – if they adopt it – surely this totally favours the top 4 over teams like Blackburn, Fulham etc.
Salary Cap
posted on 10/6/11
is that right imbred varadi..
least the hudders dont have to share a city and play second fiddle to a far superior united team...
posted on 10/6/11
hudders have to share a town, and play second fiddle to a far superior rugby team
posted on 10/6/11
To be honest, wage cap or not the bigger teams with bigger attendances are the top teams anyway, we being managed by financial morons, are the exception, along with weeds. Wage cap or not Stevenage just would never get to the prem without incredible growth in attendance and therefore turnover, in which case their wages would rise too. I think what I'm saying is I'm all for wage cap, football club chairmen cannot cope with the job of looking after finances and are in need of stricter rules to ensure they don't ruin anymore clubs.
posted on 10/6/11
silly man ! i forgot that you where called huddersfield city ?
like i said f.......off and if you dont ill send our imre round to kick your f......... teeth in
posted on 11/6/11
Just signed up and see that nothing has changed from 606 to here. Feels like warm apple pie!!!
posted on 11/6/11
Anyone debating the point??
A salary cap is the introduction of sanity into a game which has had little in the last 20 or so years since the formation of the EPL.
Let's face it the EPL is a glorified first division but with oceans of cash for everyone to drown in (except the supporters, who just pay more). Most of the money generated by the pimping of the old Div1 into the media monster it is today has gone to agents and players. Mostly to players. Clubs have stared bankruptcy in the face and supporters have had the real prospect of losing their club for ever because of the unending greed of players. Players are killing the game. A wage cap is long overdue.
posted on 11/6/11
As for the 'unfairness' between big clubs with higher attendances and small clubs . Well there's many ways of generating income aside from clicks at the turnstile and big clubs being able to afford to pay more is no new thing is it? Based on the ability to pay these wages because of higher turnover is much fairer than the ability to pay wages based on the ability to acrue higher and higher risky debt, which is the current situation. I remind you the Glaziers didn't spend one dime of their own money to purchase Manchester United, not one red cent! They mortgaged the club, using the club as collateral. They pay Mr Rooney and Berbatovs unfathomable wages out of a stinking hole of debt of nearly a billion pounds. This bullshit cannot carry on.
posted on 11/6/11
Not just a cap on players salery that is needed though is it. Clubs need to be made to invest any capital left after spend on wages and essentials on facilities and investing in there clubs not just reaping profits like our cofin dodgers did. Agents need to be hounded out of the game also they are a bigger threat to the future of the game than Sepp Blatter
posted on 12/6/11
The main impact is that rich owners will not be able to invest in players wages or build an overly big squad.
The biggest inequity will be between the PL & the Championship. How will relegated sides with lots of players on PL contracts be treated? If they are allowed to break the Wage Cap then it is another edge on top of increased parachute payments. If they are not then they will have to release players on frees just to avoid breaking the wage cap.
Either way, this is not equitable.
posted on 12/6/11
No it isn't equitable, some clubs are bigger than others. They turn over more money so can afford higher wages and maybe as a result better players. Does this guarantee finishing above 'lesser' teams though? not always. It stops money men coming into the game, borrowing on the club to fund a kind of rich boys fantasy football nonsense , then buggering off leaving the club in a mess when they get bored or the 3 year promotion plan goes belly up. So yes maybe clubs will have to use a parachute payment to offload ex prem players who couldn't keep them up. So what , they failed. Players naff off, club stays solvent and rebuilds, and doesn't do what many do, go bust and drop like a stone through the divisions as a result. bring it on. Sanity at last.