Salary cap confirmed

Status
Not open for further replies.
bazzer9461 said:
This salary cap does not affect the players we already have? Is that correct ? And if so next season will those players have to take a pay cut assuming the cap stays in place?
Click to expand...

The salary cap means that the players we already have will be assigned the 'average wage'. I assume this would cover the length of the contract.
 
m said:
That doesn't really make sense though.

Sunderland now will have the same advantage that a side relegated from the Championship would in the future. And also Ipswich and Portsmouth.

Gambling on those 3 not going up for a couple of seasons to create a level playing field sounds a bit daft to me.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but that was one of the reasons I've seen mentioned.
 
" Payments directly linked to a Club’s progression in cup competitions or promotion are excluded from the Cap"

So what's to stop us bringing in a player on £1300/week with a £250k bonus if we progress through the 1st round if the Oxford Senior Cup?
 
warksox said:
" Payments directly linked to a Club’s progression in cup competitions or promotion are excluded from the Cap"

So what's to stop us bringing in a player on £1300/week with a £250k bonus if we progress through the 1st round if the Oxford Senior Cup?
Click to expand...

I guess because the win bonus from the 1st round of the Oxon senior cup is not large enough to allow it.
 
Eaststandboy said:
So Championship clubs coming down, what happens if the salary total is £10mil? That gives them a huge advantage?
Click to expand...
It’ll be nearer the 18m limit in most cases, while anybody who hasn’t been up there in recent years chases them on less than one seventh of that. Meanwhile the Championship clubs will have also been scooping up and hoarding the best lower league players that the rest of us can no longer afford, because they can now pay them even just £1000 per week more than us (which is still nothing for Championship capabilities but is significantly more than any L1 club can offer), meaning we find it harder to progress in the form of being smart and savvy with transfers. And that’s before you consider what’s going to happen with the U23 teams these clubs have. They all have U23 sides that are classed as separate to the first team as they compete in “our” trophy as development squads, so where’s the line going to be for them? They carry 20+ players in the U23s as well as the main squad, that isn’t going to change, meaning they can hoard players that clubs in L1/L2 would have wanted in their starting lineups. What would be to stop Brentford signing another Baptiste, but because of his age saying “Oh no, he’s an U23 player” so he doesn’t have to go towards their main squad budget and numbers? Meanwhile, we can’t even inflate our budget by an inch to reinvest the millions of pounds we’ve been paid for him?

Come on. Seriously.
 
warksox said:
" Payments directly linked to a Club’s progression in cup competitions or promotion are excluded from the Cap"

So what's to stop us bringing in a player on £1300/week with a £250k bonus if we progress through the 1st round if the Oxford Senior Cup?
Click to expand...
liking your thinking @warksox :sneaky:
 
RyanioBirdio said:
It’ll be nearer the 18m limit in most cases, while anybody who hasn’t been up there in recent years chases them on less than one seventh of that. Meanwhile the Championship clubs will have also been scooping up and hoarding the best lower league players that the rest of us can no longer afford, because they can now pay them even just £1000 per week more than us (which is still nothing for Championship capabilities but is significantly more than any L1 club can offer), meaning we find it harder to progress in the form of being smart and savvy with transfers. And that’s before you consider what’s going to happen with the U23 teams these clubs have. They all have U23 sides that are classed as separate to the first team as they compete in “our” trophy as development squads, so where’s the line going to be for them? They carry 20+ players in the U23s as well as the main squad, that isn’t going to change l, meaning they can hoard players that clubs in L1/L2 would have wanted in their starting lineups. What would be to stop Brentford signing another Baptiste, but because of his age saying “Oh no, he’s an U23 player” so he doesn’t have to go towards their main squad budget and numbers? Meanwhile, we can’t even inflate our budget by an inch to reinvest the millions of pounds we’ve been paid for him?

Come on. Seriously.
Click to expand...

So why do you think a majority voted for it Ryan?
 
I have a few questions, and the answers are probably out there somewhere, but it seems quite a few on here are fairly well informed on the topic so to save myself doing lots of reading here goes:

- I've seen the cap is effective immediately, but what happens if a team is already over the cap (as I imagine quite a few are)? Can they just not sign any new players?

- Do clubs relegated from the Championship have to immediately abide by the cap

- Has a proportional cap ever been discussed/voted on?
 
Forgive my ignorance but i don't really get why this is such a big deal. Yes i would rather have the rule that every club should make a profit but surely with the amount of money clubs loose each year and the repeated financial difficulties they find themselves in (our own club included) they have proven they aren't able to be sensible and live within their means so now have to be regulated more tightly.
 
m said:
So why do you think a majority voted for it Ryan?
Click to expand...
Because they’re worried about merely surviving in the same way that people use pawn shops, and in some cases also think it’ll somehow close the gap with the Sunderland’s and the Ipswich’s of the world, because they haven’t actually thought it all through and scrutinised the detail. The PFA have said that just this morning. The speed at which this thing has been shoved through is positively Withdrawal-agreement-esque. And as we know, a lot of the people campaigning for that have only just realised what it says and that they don’t like it.

Desperation, meet opportunism.
 
I don't know why Peterborough voted for it. They're selling Toney this summer I'm assuming. So will that only knock £1,500 off their wage total that they can reinvest, effectively? Doesn't seem like they're going to be able to spend much of the millions they're expecting to get for him.
 
m said:
So why do you think a majority voted for it Ryan?
Click to expand...

Well, let's say you're Accrington Stanley.

You only get 2,000 through the gate, so you can only afford a total playing budget of one million or so.

You're competing in League One against clubs like Sunderland who are spending 10m+, and clubs like Pompey, Ipswich etc. whose wage bills are in the 4-6m range.

Suddenly you have a vote which says that their wage bills are going to be capped at something much closer to yours. It's not going to impact you whatsoever, because there's no chance you ever spend 2.5m on wages in a season. But it will hurt a lot of your competitors. Why wouldn't you vote in favor?

What the vote has shown is that apparently League One has more teams - by a 2:1 ratio in fact - that view themselves as more like Accrington than Sunderland.

Which does surprise me. I thought there would be more club about our size who were more aspirational than that.
 
Plus i would insist that championship clubs would need it to enter league 1. I.e effectivly insist in the contracts of current championship players include a pay cut/release on relegation and that championship players cannot play a squad of players that break the wage cap.
 
I am so, so angry with any club in our league that voted for this. It’s staggeringly narrow minded and selfish. I really hope the voting records are published, so we can see which clubs prioritised limiting Sunderland and Ipswich’s spending power for a season over the entire future of the Football League as a competitive institution.
 
tonyw said:
Well, let's say you're Accrington Stanley.

You only get 2,000 through the gate, so you can only afford a total playing budget of one million or so.

You're competing in League One against clubs like Sunderland who are spending 10m+, and clubs like Pompey, Ipswich etc. whose wage bills are in the 4-6m range.

Suddenly you have a vote which says that their wage bills are going to be capped at something much closer to yours. It's not going to impact you whatsoever, because there's no chance you ever spend 2.5m on wages in a season. But it will hurt a lot of your competitors. Why wouldn't you vote in favor?

What the vote has shown is that apparently League One has more teams - by a 2:1 ratio in fact - that view themselves as more like Accrington than Sunderland.

Which does surprise me. I thought there would be more club about our size who were more aspirational than that.
Click to expand...

Yup.

It's the last paragraph that jars.

We were 10th by attendance. <3K difference separating 6th & 16th.

I'm struggling to get it.
 
werthersoriginal said:
The cap has been voted through, but presumably the exact figures can be changed each season by the EFL?
Click to expand...
when have EFL ever done anything positive for L1 & L2 clubs? cant see that changing under Baldwin, his predecessor was absolutely crap , seems to me like Baldwin is right out of the same mould
 
tonyw said:
Well, let's say you're Accrington Stanley.

You only get 2,000 through the gate, so you can only afford a total playing budget of one million or so.

You're competing in League One against clubs like Sunderland who are spending 10m+, and clubs like Pompey, Ipswich etc. whose wage bills are in the 4-6m range.

Suddenly you have a vote which says that their wage bills are going to be capped at something much closer to yours. It's not going to impact you whatsoever, because there's no chance you ever spend 2.5m on wages in a season. But it will hurt a lot of your competitors. Why wouldn't you vote in favor?

What the vote has shown is that apparently League One has more teams - by a 2:1 ratio in fact - that view themselves as more like Accrington than Sunderland.

Which does surprise me. I thought there would be more club about our size who were more aspirational than that.
Click to expand...
Enjoy your posts on this Tony, certainly find them to be well reasoned and considered.

One think I'd suggest on the final paragraph - if we are surprised by the conclusion, does that not suggest we look at the assumptions again?

Maybe the clubs voting like this weren't purely trying to get one over on Sunderland, they were worried about going out of business, about business models that often don't add up even with fans attending games, about a need to keep spending just because everyone else did - and saw the opportunity for a reset?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
Matches OUWFC pre-season fixtures confirmed
Replies
2
Views
1K
mooro
mooro
Back
Top Bottom