Salary Cap  ?

Some players are receiving over £100,00 - £200,00 per week,

That is stupid money, no matter how good they are,

Do you think it is time for the players's salary should be capped,

If so,  How much ?

My thoughts are, if they are in the prem £1 million a year is plenty , that =  about £20,000 pw ,

Championship players no more than £10.000 pw,

L1 £5000 max

L2 £2,500

It will not happen , but what do you think they should be earning ?

It's the only solution to the ridiculous state Football is in. There will always be extraneous payments to top up the cap though. Brown envelopes and "sponsorship" deals. Sad isn't it.

This is of course at the root of clubs going under because of overspending. They are getting simply perverse amounts of money for playing a sport, when there are nurses etc working fckin hard for peanuts.

I firmly believe clubs should only be allowed to spend what they get from gate receipts. Then they can pay their players whatever they like so long as their squad's wages are collectively within budget.

Quoted from upthestripes

This is of course at the root of clubs going under because of overspending. They are getting simply perverse amounts of money for playing a sport, when there are nurses etc working fckin hard for peanuts.

I firmly believe clubs should only be allowed to spend what they get from gate receipts. Then they can pay their players whatever they like so long as their squad's wages are collectively within budget.

Average gate at BP last year was 3308, average price for those attendees would be *about* £15 (Taking into account kids tickets & concessions and pre-paid STH) means £49,620 per game. Multiply that by the 23 games £1,141,260. If you then divide that by 20 players, you get £57,000 on average for the playing staff alone. That's enough for any player at this level.

The trouble comes when you start thinking about the ancilliary staff such as the managers, training staff, office staff, ground staff, heating & electricity bills, bar staff, stewards, waiting staff in Mcmenemy's, the list goes on and on! We certainly need to take stock of the number of people working at BP throughout the year, not just on match days.

Wasn't our playing budget rumoured to be £1.2m last year? When you consider cup games, it is probably total gate receipts.

I wonder how much the club makes from merchandise and Mariners World subscriptions?

At current we are spending £900k extra!

Quoted from Biccys

Average gate at BP last year was 3308, average price for those attendees would be *about* £15 (Taking into account kids tickets & concessions and pre-paid STH) means £49,620 per game. Multiply that by the 23 games £1,141,260. If you then divide that by 20 players, you get £57,000 on average for the playing staff alone. That's enough for any player at this level.

The trouble comes when you start thinking about the ancilliary staff such as the managers, training staff, office staff, ground staff, heating & electricity bills, bar staff, stewards, waiting staff in Mcmenemy's, the list goes on and on! We certainly need to take stock of the number of people working at BP throughout the year, not just on match days.

But a theatre for example manages to do this Biccys - they only have ticket sales to pay for the actors and all other extras (no pun intended).
If they can't afford to do this they either go out of business or employ cheaper actors. Simple supply and demand, and to my mind is the abloslute fairest way of doing things. As has been said though, it's all a pointless discussion as there is far too much (financial) vested interest in the game now. I really hate how money-oriented the game is now but love it too much to stop following it. I commented in the Olympics thread how boring I thought the events were, but at least a runner triumphs through effort and perceverance(sp) and not just because someone bunged them a excrement load of money to buy a race-winning set of pegs with.

Salary cap will only work if its worldwide. If was just England the best players would just go to another country.....maybe not a bad thing

The Premier League clubs would never support it, because it would stop them recruiting the best players - limiting their hopes of winning the Champions League. The government would never push for it because it would reduce their tax intake.

[IMG]http://i46.tinypic.com/uof1w.jpg[/IMG]

Quoted from grimsby pete

Some players are receiving over £100,00 - £200,00 per week,

That is stupid money, no matter how good they are,

Do you think it is time for the players's salary should be capped,

If so,  How much ?

My thoughts are, if they are in the prem £1 million a year is plenty , that =  about £20,000 pw ,

Championship players no more than £10.000 pw,

L1 £5000 max

L2 £2,500

It will not happen , but what do you think they should be earning ?

This would not be allowed by European Law, limiting a person to a maximum wage. What I would like to see is a wage cap for a team, so a team is allowed x amount a week to spend on wages, that way it might get through the legal system and it would make football a more level playing field (so certain teams won't want that !!).

I couldn't care less what players earn, it's not really any of my business! If a club can't look after itself they should be punished (properly).

The Welsh clubs in the PRO12 League in Rugby Union have a self-imposed salary cap as a result of reduced assistance from the WRU and consistently low gates. The direct result is that the big name Grand Slam and international players are leaving their local teams (even current champions The Ospreys) in favour of big money contracts at French clubs. There's no way the chairmen of the Premier League clubs would sanction a cap, especially as the majority of their income is from media rights. Lower league teams may well be forced to limit their wage spend in the same way as any business has a budget, but an official / regulated cap will never be enforced.

As another example, Arsenal have maintained a strict salary ceiling for as long as Wenger's been there, and they have struggled to attract / keep hold of big name players recently.

Isnt this all to do with Platini and his financial fair play.

Anyway clubs, players agents will always find ways round things look at city sponsoring their stadium at £400m and how all this imagine rights thing started though this was due to players trying to reduce their tax liability  

Too many clubs decide to pay big wages because they're chasing the same pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
But in a way they have to because of the gap in prizemoney between the leagues - if they stand still they could be swallowed up and lose income anyway.
Ineveitably when so many clubs are chasing the same prize at the sharp end there are gonna be losers like Portsmouth.

If the gap in prizemoney wasn't as big between the leagues, would clubs feel the need to take unnecessary risks ?
Too many clubs pin their hopes on promotion/survival without a plan B IMO.

But I don't think you can really blame players for chasing money if clubs are doing the same.
I blame the FA for allowing the gap between rich and poor to grow and the structure of English football which is completely short-term money-orientated.
You only need to look at the national team for proof.

Does anyone think that if there were a salary cap, the Premiership would remain the best league in the world? Players go where the money is, there is no loyalty in football whatsoever.

Quoted from upthestripes

But a theatre for example manages to do this Biccys - they only have ticket sales to pay for the actors and all other extras (no pun intended).
If they can't afford to do this they either go out of business or employ cheaper actors. Simple supply and demand, and to my mind is the abloslute fairest way of doing things. As has been said though, it's all a pointless discussion as there is far too much (financial) vested interest in the game now. I really hate how money-oriented the game is now but love it too much to stop following it. I commented in the Olympics thread how boring I thought the events were, but at least a runner triumphs through effort and perceverance(sp) and not just because someone bunged them a excrement load of money to buy a race-winning set of pegs with.

True, but a theatre isn't only open for business 23 times a year. A theatre doesn't employ upwards of 50 "ushers", a team of people to polish the boards, train actors etc. I get your point but your analogy is flawed.

Quoted from Biccys

True, but a theatre isn't only open for business 23 times a year. A theatre doesn't employ upwards of 50 "ushers", a team of people to polish the boards, train actors etc. I get your point but your analogy is flawed.

Ok, fair points.

Quoted from jackfoster

Does anyone think that if there were a salary cap, the Premiership would remain the best league in the world? Players go where the money is, there is no loyalty in football whatsoever.

Is the Premier League the best league in the world? Probably not.

Would it be the best league in the world if it introduced a salary cap? Almost certainly not.

Is there any reason at all why any self-respecting fan of Grimsby Town, or any other club for that matter, should care very much about whether the Premier League is better or worse than Serie A, La Liga, or any other league in the world? Definitely not.

i think you will find that many theatres are subsidised often from the lottery fund so not a fair comparison, although i do agree with a salary cap