[Archived] John Williams In Favour Of A Salary Cap.

[CrazyIvan]

Indeed so why did you not suggest that in your earlier post?

Anyway you'd do well to get 14 to agree. The likes of the big 4 would surely be joined by spurs, Villa, Everton, S'land and Newcastle in linking wages to income / attendance.

It would be logical for clubs with a large fan base to vote for their greatest advantage which would be income but would the FA agree with that sentiment? Part of me says surely they would be fairer than that but cynical me says the rich get richer...

[dave birch]

I think there needs to be a better understanding of salary caps.

It doesn't apply to what you pay your players, it applies to the team. You have a limited amount of pounds to spend on the players in your squad.

[CrazyIvan]

I think there needs to be a better understanding of salary caps.

It doesn't apply to what you pay your players, it applies to the team. You have a limited amount of pounds to spend on the players in your squad.

So smaller squads with higher wages? The wage differential between young talented players coming through the youth team and the 'bought in' talent could become interesting. Would make for very interesting transfer windows!

[T4E]

I think there needs to be a better understanding of salary caps.

It doesn't apply to what you pay your players, it applies to the team. You have a limited amount of pounds to spend on the players in your squad.

Exactly. If they want to use this to improve competitiveness then what Dave says above is the type of salary cap we're looking at.

Limiting what players can earn is not the answer, and not what a salary cap is all about.

[dave birch]

So smaller squads with higher wages? The wage differential between young talented players coming through the youth team and the 'bought in' talent could become interesting. Would make for very interesting transfer windows!

You may have misunderstood what I meant. You have so much to buy and pay players. Some may cost "x", others may cost "y", when you add up all their costs, if they are within your salary cap, then ok, but if you exceed the given amount, then you have problems. Players coming from within your system (academy) they don't cost anything, apart from what you pay them.

[[email protected]]

Whils it's a good idea, I really don't think those involved in football can be trusted to implement it properly. See agents, bungs, tevez, anything which has involved any sum of cash etc over the past ten years.

Also I heard an ex West Ham player on Talkshite last night (possibly Alvin Martin?)who said he'd been at the club 12 years, no signing on fees etc, and was turned down 18k policing fees for a tribunal, only ten years ago - fast forward ten years and they are paying Ljungberg 6million to get out.

[OscarRaven]

Football is in better shape than most sports to implement a cap.

Registered agents - I assume with registered trading accounts.

Detailed transfer investigation and spot checks in place.

Largest income stream controlled by one body (premier league)

Multiple 'overseeing bodies' in the FA, UEFA and FIFA

Reasonable chance of relegation (comply or die)

Given the consequences of breaking a salary (squad payment) cap, which would have to be instant relegation and the public scrutinity football is under I see no reason why it wouldn't work.

I would propose a cap of £50,000,000 a year on wages, transfers and most importantly player related expenses (excluding medical).

[Rovers in America]

If there is any linkage between incomes and salary cap it needs to be on a leaguewide basis. Thus, for every 20 pounds the league as a whole makes, then that's say 0.50 or 0.75 pounds of salary cap each team gets. Or something along those lines. That's how the NHL instituted their salary cap in America and it has worked well. I think they agreed to give the players something like 50-55% of revenues the league makes.

The only way you get the players to sign onto something like this would be linking it to revenues somehow, but for a salary cap to be effective it must be even amongst all teams, and can't be set too artificially high. That's the problem with the "luxury tax" system in Major League Baseball. It's set way too high to where only the Yankees and Red Sox pay the tax. It needs to be set at a limit where all the teams have a reasonable shot to run up into salary cap problems.

[Foxxx]

Im probably wrong in thinking this, but isnt the part of problem in getting a more balanced league, is because of the transfer fees involved in buying players? Yes wages are important, but the massive costs of buying players seem to be a large barrier for alot of clubs to improve.

[Rovers in America]

Im probably wrong in thinking this, but isnt the part of problem in getting a more balanced league, is because of the transfer fees involved in buying players? Yes wages are important, but the massive costs of buying players seem to be a large barrier for alot of clubs to improve.

Yeah, but if the big 4 didn't have the wages to give those players under a salary cap, then they wouldn't be pushing the prices up on buying those players, creating a bit less demand for those top players bringing the transfer prices down some for the rest of the league.

[philipl]

It is not beyond the realms of the possible that clubs like Man U, Liverpool, Newcastle and West Ham would be elated at finding a way that screws Chelsea and Man City moneybags owners and dramatically cuts their wage costs without putting themselves at a competitive disadvantage.

[American]

For a club that recently had wages at over 80% of turnover, I would think a salary cap would not be advantageous.

[dingles staying down 4ever]

For a club that recently had wages at over 80% of turnover, I would think a salary cap would not be advantageous.

It would if the wage cap was set at the minimum wage!

[neekoy]

If it is not going to the players it will just be going to the chairman.

This.

And then the players would have every right to boycott.

Sounds like more of an opportunity for rich businessmen to make more money from the game without having to worry about pesky things like salary negotiations.

[Driftpeasant]

The main problem I see with a salary cap in England (or in most of the footballing world) is the lack of a players' union.

In the US, the sports all have players unions which do collective bargaining with the league for the salary cap. There is no such organization over footballers. So the only groups negotiating a salary cap would be the owners. ...which would rapidly lead to player discontent. With the traditional US salary cap model, there's a union, there are the owners, and the two can negotiate. In England, the only group that could realistically enforce this would be the Premier League, or possibly the FA. And if the Prem decides to go about it unilaterally, what happens when the first QPR comes up, with essentially limitless funds, and challenges it in court? So at that point the FA has to step in. Then the FA has to start capping all leagues (to the extent they're not capped now). That's a gigantic kettle of fish.

And if the rest of the world doesn't follow suit, you'll rapidly start losing players to other nations. The only real solution to the problem would be FIFA or the various confederations setting those limits. But then comes this question: how do you set the cap by nation? It can't be tied to club income, because some clubs clearly outshine others, and you're then entrenching the haves and have nots. You'd have to set it by GNP or GDP per nation, and that seems to open up a whole other set of problems. What if the world's 14th richest man is from Montserrat and wants to buy Ronaldo for his home town side and pay him 500k a week?

I love the concept of a salary cap - I truly do. I think it's made the NFL a great league to follow and watch. I'm just not convinced it can work outside of a closed league with a players' union.

[CrazyIvan]

The main problem I see with a salary cap in England (or in most of the footballing world) is the lack of a players' union.

In the US, the sports all have players unions which do collective bargaining with the league for the salary cap. There is no such organization over footballers. So the only groups negotiating a salary cap would be the owners. ...which would rapidly lead to player discontent. With the traditional US salary cap model, there's a union, there are the owners, and the two can negotiate. In England, the only group that could realistically enforce this would be the Premier League, or possibly the FA. And if the Prem decides to go about it unilaterally, what happens when the first QPR comes up, with essentially limitless funds, and challenges it in court? So at that point the FA has to step in. Then the FA has to start capping all leagues (to the extent they're not capped now). That's a gigantic kettle of fish.

And if the rest of the world doesn't follow suit, you'll rapidly start losing players to other nations. The only real solution to the problem would be FIFA or the various confederations setting those limits. But then comes this question: how do you set the cap by nation? It can't be tied to club income, because some clubs clearly outshine others, and you're then entrenching the haves and have nots. You'd have to set it by GNP or GDP per nation, and that seems to open up a whole other set of problems. What if the world's 14th richest man is from Montserrat and wants to buy Ronaldo for his home town side and pay him 500k a week?

I love the concept of a salary cap - I truly do. I think it's made the NFL a great league to follow and watch. I'm just not convinced it can work outside of a closed league with a players' union.

There is actually a footballers union, it's called the Professional Footballers Association and it's been around since the early 1900's.

[Driftpeasant]

There is actually a footballers union, it's called the Professional Footballers Association and it's been around since the early 1900's.

Right, but it's not quite the same thing as the NFLPA. It doesn't have nearly as much power. Now, conceivably the players could give it such, but without a need for a collective bargaining agreement, what would be the point?

[CrazyIvan]

Right, but it's not quite the same thing as the NFLPA. It doesn't have nearly as much power. Now, conceivably the players could give it such, but without a need for a collective bargaining agreement, what would be the point?

I think you'll find the PFA disagreeing with you there. See here for their own write-up.

[den]

Arsenal urge a look at Salary caps.

A bit of sense coming to the top people in football?

Although, the cynic in me might believe that Arsenal aren't really concerned with levelling out the playing field for all, - more like levelling it out to the level that they can afford. Could it be that after years of them being cemented in the top four, they can now see Manchester City about to help themselves to the regular Champions League stash? Could it be that they can also see that any prolonged period of them being out of the Champions League cash will cause them huge financial problems?

Arsenal being concerned about the future of football, or Arsenal being concerned about their own future?

[Scotty]

The latter.

[FourLaneBlue]

And if the rest of the world doesn't follow suit, you'll rapidly start losing players to other nations. The only real solution to the problem would be FIFA or the various confederations setting those limits. But then comes this question: how do you set the cap by nation? It can't be tied to club income, because some clubs clearly outshine others, and you're then entrenching the haves and have nots. You'd have to set it by GNP or GDP per nation, and that seems to open up a whole other set of problems. What if the world's 14th richest man is from Montserrat and wants to buy Ronaldo for his home town side and pay him 500k a week?

This is why the examples of sports in the US do not work. Those sports are not anywhere even approaching the international scope of football. Whether it be the NBA or the NFL or the MLB does not matter...the competition they face from rival leagues compared to football is minuscule in comparison as they represent the pinnacle of each sport. Yet in football it is arguable that the EPL is really the best league. The clubs have done well in the Champions League in the last 5 seasons but that can soon change and besides that "dominance" has lead to a grand total of just 2 wins out of 5. Add Kaka, Ronaldo, Bezema to La Liga and it becomes very debatable.

Therefore would the Prem really weaken itself in comparison with the other rival leagues? Not likely to happen. Therefore can we hope for a European-wide agreement? That kind of thing takes years just to reach the drawing board.

[RoversSG]

I do like the idea of a salary cap but that depends on how it works. Is it going to be cap based on a club turnover?

Based on the division eg Premier League clubs can spend X amount while Championship clubs can spend Y amount?

Or something like the higher the profit, the higher your cap? This will encourage financial prudence.

Of the 3, i think the 2nd idea would be the best for Rovers.

Or alternatively, i would like to see something like the american sports draft systems where the lower placed clubs gets first priority in selecting players in the off-season.

[malk]

Another issue with an NFL style salary cap is revenue sharing. One of the major crutches is that they realised that the rich franchises wouldn't make any money if they didn't have teams to play. Because of this you get the Cowboys paying out part of their attendance (amongst many other things) money to the Browns. I can't see big teams in the UK doing this as they know there will be hoards of other teams willing to take the place of any Premiership club that goes to the wall.

This means you can't set the salary cap on a league income basis which leads to an arbitrary figure which I wouldn't imagine the players would like. Would you also bring in minimum and maximum squad limits as in the NFL? Transfer fees would make a difference too, you don't get those in the NFL...

I'd be ecstatic to see one implemented into football but the chances of any kind of cap of slim and even then the chances of getting one that made the league competitive are even slimmer.

[joey_big_nose]

Arsenal urge a look at Salary caps.

A bit of sense coming to the top people in football?

Although, the cynic in me might believe that Arsenal aren't really concerned with levelling out the playing field for all, - more like levelling it out to the level that they can afford. Could it be that after years of them being cemented in the top four, they can now see Manchester City about to help themselves to the regular Champions League stash? Could it be that they can also see that any prolonged period of them being out of the Champions League cash will cause them huge financial problems?

Arsenal being concerned about the future of football, or Arsenal being concerned about their own future?

Yup. Its true Arsenal would want it set at the level which would maximise their competitiveness over the likes of Wigan and Fulham but minimise their exposure to the likes of Utd, Chelsea and City. However we would probably be flattering ourselves if we said our desire to create a salary cap would be for any reason more noble.

We would want it at a level that allows us to outspend Burnley but leave Utd, Chelsea, Asenal within reach.

[dazmaz]

but clubs will get around a cap but just giving players a HUGE signing on fee. so in that case there would have to be a salary cap, a xfer cap and a sign on fee cap, and it would have to be inmplimented (sp?) in such a way that teams in lower leagues can cope with it.