Salary Cap

O O

oman0115

Well-Known Member
Joined
9 Dec 2012
Messages
2,743
so, in the interest of fairness, if certain clubs are going to have their potential earnings clipped would it be fair to initiate a salary cap?

We’ve seen the wages the rags and other clubs are throwing at players, so ensure fairness across the board, why has a salary cap never been discussed?
 
oman0115 said:
so, in the interest of fairness, if certain clubs are going to have their potential earnings clipped would it be fair to initiate a salary cap?

We’ve seen the wages the rags and other clubs are throwing at players, so ensure fairness across the board, why has a salary cap never been discussed?
Click to expand...
I think you've answered your own question there pal.
 
Clubs, players and agents will never go for it.

Limits clubs ability to get an edge on competition, they can't just do a Utd and pay more wages to attract players.

Limits agents and players earning potential.

I'd personally be in favour but it won't get enough traction.
 
It'd be great, but yeah, it'll never happen. The established clubs (and I include us in that) will never give up their dominant position in the market for greater competition. There's too much money to be made. It'll be interesting to see what happens to football because even before FFP, all of the direction of travel has been in one direction, starting in the early 80s(?) when the big clubs refused to share their gate receipts with the visiting team, and basically every change made to football's finances since then. The only slight exception was when La Liga stopped allowing Barcelona and Real Madrid to take all of the TV money because they realized the damage it was doing to their league. There's a very real risk that football will end up destroying itself. The Champions League has basically destroyed a good number of national leagues, particularly in poorer leagues, because of the massive discrepancy in incomes for any club that regularly qualifies (which very quickly becomes a self-fulfilling cycle). Arguably us and Chelsea are the main reason the Premier League hasn't fallen into the same pattern as the Bundesliga, Serie A and to a lesser extent La Liga. That and the fact that the Premier League's TV deal is worth so much more than any other competition.

It's why I always laugh when people say that football is fixed, meaning that referees are being told to make particular decisions. It doesn't need to be fixed on the pitch. It was fixed off the pitch a long time ago, and it's not even a secret.
 
I would totally be in favour of it. It's the only way to have complete FAIRNESS - none of this bullshit half assed stuff.

Either go all the way with it, or don't bother at all.
 
oman0115 said:
so, in the interest of fairness, if certain clubs are going to have their potential earnings clipped would it be fair to initiate a salary cap?

We’ve seen the wages the rags and other clubs are throwing at players, so ensure fairness across the board, why has a salary cap never been discussed?
Click to expand...

Because it would apply to everyone including the Uefa-preferred clubs, whereas with sniper-level FFP it can be rather selective!
 
We'd just see Mr Noodle paying J7Lingz directly for holding a noodle pot and chopsticks as a way of getting around any restrictions.

Or slabhead taking a turn as a celebrity cabin steward on an aeroflot flight.

Or donut thief riding a boat powered by a yamar engine.

And we all know that any investigation would find nothing to see, move along.
 
Best way to do it is let clubs spend as much as they want 260m on Neymar fine but every club in Europa can only have a squad value of a certain amount so 25 player squad can only be worth the max of say 350m! Said 25 man squad because if it was only the 11 on the pitch it wouldn’t change anything! So you can buy the 200m pound player but the rest of your squad has to add up to 150m.
 
TheBlueDune said:
We'd just see Mr Noodle paying J7Lingz directly for holding a noodle pot and chopsticks as a way of getting around any restrictions.

Or slabhead taking a turn as a celebrity cabin steward on an aeroflot flight.

Or donut thief riding a boat powered by a yamar engine.

And we all know that any investigation would find nothing to see, move along.
Click to expand...
Yeah that twat Stone there looking at his Tag watch telling us there's nothing to see.
 
waspish said:
Best way to do it is let clubs spend as much as they want 260m on Neymar fine but every club in Europa can only have a squad value of a certain amount so 25 player squad can only be worth the max of say 350m! Said 25 man squad because if it was only the 11 on the pitch it wouldn’t change anything! So you can buy the 200m pound player but the rest of your squad has to add up to 150m.
Click to expand...
Problem here is what is the true value of each player? Bought price? current market value? reducing book value?
Sterling bought for around £40M but now worth 2 or 3 times that. Or like Kun, worth now a lot less then we paid for him.
 
Fiftyyearsandcounting said:
Problem here is what is the true value of each player? Bought price? current market value? reducing book value?
Sterling bought for around £40M but now worth 2 or 3 times that. Or like Kun, worth now a lot less then we paid for him.
Click to expand...
Well yeah, you'd end up in a ridiculous situation where you build a great team and then you'd have to sell them because they became too good and their value would rise.

It'd have to be a salary cap, and you could easily argue that the players' earnings aren't capped because they'd still be able to do as many sponsorship deals as they want. And that would have the double effect of making players less reliant on the club for income. You could make it the rule that every contract is rolling, which would basically destroy the idea of transfer fees. And of course you might think that that would enable the big clubs to just mop up all of the best players, but they wouldn't have the same financial advantage to do so. Another idea would be that whatever the salary of the player, the club has to pay a development fee to any club that helped develop the player (the fee being tied to how long the player spent at the club). And yeah, if Raheem Sterling went to Real Madrid, we'd miss out on a huge transfer fee, but then we wouldn't have to pay out a huge transfer fee to replace him either. Obviously what it would do is harm the ability of teams to do long-term planning by tying players down, but then is that really any different to other areas of work. If you want to create a long-term project, then you have to convince talented people that it's worth their time to stay.
 
would have thought it would break employment legislation?

and why would any player agree to having their income restricted?
 
flook said:
would have thought it would break employment legislation?

and why would any player agree to having their income restricted?
Click to expand...

It might actually be OK.

Saracens tried to challenge the Premiership Ruby salary cap as against EU law but it got slapped down.
 
Fiftyyearsandcounting said:
Problem here is what is the true value of each player? Bought price? current market value? reducing book value?
Sterling bought for around £40M but now worth 2 or 3 times that. Or like Kun, worth now a lot less then we paid for him.
Click to expand...

Good point but is was just a suggestion it’s how you could apply well that be the powers that be to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top