£18M Salary Cap next season

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

It isn't about the EPL, its about clubs trying to live within their means. There has to be a reckoning for all sport not just football but as we all support NCFC, we should be looking for the game at our level to be financially managed obviously including selling on home grown players.

Your team should not be good just because of the wealth of your owner, especially ones not resident in the UK.

[king canary 7,578]

The main issue is that Championship clubs are too often spending unsustainable %s of turnover to wages. The total championship wage bill was apparently 107% of the total club income in 18/19.

The reality people miss for norwich is that without parachute payments our self funding model really requires we have a wage bill of around £20m max which isn't that high for the championship. An actually proper wage cap for the league would put everyone on a level playing field and reduce the impact of rich owners which can only be a good thing.

[Darth Canary1 91]

The rich owners also benefit as they can make more cash. I would of thought from a business prospective the epl would embrace it. However if it wasn't Europe wide, the best players would chase the cash, though they already do that understandably 

[Bill 1,788]

23 minutes ago, king canary said:

The main issue is that Championship clubs are too often spending unsustainable %s of turnover to wages. The total championship wage bill was apparently 107% of the total club income in 18/19.

The reality people miss for norwich is that without parachute payments our self funding model really requires we have a wage bill of around £20m max which isn't that high for the championship. An actually proper wage cap for the league would put everyone on a level playing field and reduce the impact of rich owners which can only be a good thing.

The only flaw there is that clubs would be obliged to sell players where their contracts take them over the £18m threshold

 However as said earlier, all this is meaningless if there are no real sanctions

If you go bankrupt you lose 12 points

Overspend ..... and nothing really happens

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

5 hours ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Norwich were paying £15m in player salaries when relegated with Alex Neil. It is expected to be considerably lower than that next season - so this wouldn’t affect Norwich. 

£18m is very high so can’t see this catching many teams out. 

Is that really correct?  

Ipswich had a wage bill of £19m in their relegation season (from Championship) and it is claimed that Wigan currently have a wage bill of £19m and need to cut it drastically in this window to attract a buyer. 

An I suppose we don't know if there would be restrictions on bonuses, as that would seem an obvious way of getting around a cap. We dished out £10m upon promotion, what's stopping Luton offering a £2m bonus for 21st or above? Or Derby offering £4m bonus for top 6?

Edited July 17, 2020 by TeemuVanBasten

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

41 minutes ago, king canary said:

The reality people miss for norwich is that without parachute payments our self funding model really requires we have a wage bill of around £20m max which isn't that high for the championship. 

And that £20m would need to include non-playing staff, and it wouldn't leave any room for significant net transfer spend (we'd have to continue to sell to buy). 

[Badger 2,405]

2 hours ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

The problem with a cap as low as £18m is it will make the gulf between the Championship and the Premier League even larger. When Norwich had a £55m salary they were the smallest budget in the Premier League and that was before the larger TV deal. 

This is the dilemma: 18 million would make most championship clubs sustainable, but it would really hard to retain players and the gap between Championship and EPL would just grow larger and larger.

I think that the idea is a non-starter: they should focus on making FFP work!

[City 2nd 191]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

It isn't about the EPL, its about clubs trying to live within their means. There has to be a reckoning for all sport not just football but as we all support NCFC, we should be looking for the game at our level to be financially managed obviously including selling on home grown players.

Your team should not be good just because of the wealth of your owner, especially ones not resident in the UK.

Trouble is, that isnt the case, and we all know it. Many of the EPL sides have wealthy owners not resident in the UK. And money talks and their teams are good because they but the best.

[king canary 7,578]

51 minutes ago, Badger said:

This is the dilemma: 18 million would make most championship clubs sustainable, but it would really hard to retain players and the gap between Championship and EPL would just grow larger and larger.

I think that the idea is a non-starter: they should focus on making FFP work!

FFP is a fundamentally anti competitive rule that locks in pre existing inequalities.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

49 minutes ago, City 2nd said:

Trouble is, that isnt the case, and we all know it. Many of the EPL sides have wealthy owners not resident in the UK. And money talks and their teams are good because they but the best.

Isn't that what I said?

[Tetteys Jig 830]

maybe it's time for the super league... they can take the money and plastic fans with them

[Badger 2,405]

12 hours ago, king canary said:

FFP is a fundamentally anti competitive rule that locks in pre existing inequalities.

It is a rule to try to prevent teams from going bankrupt and maintain a healthy and financially sustainable league system. Without it, I fear that we will see a very different football landscape with far fewer community-rooted clubs. 

[king canary 7,578]

20 minutes ago, Badger said:

It is a rule to try to prevent teams from going bankrupt and maintain a healthy and financially sustainable league system. Without it, I fear that we will see a very different football landscape with far fewer community-rooted clubs. 

A salary cap also does the same thing, without locking in pre existing advantages due to clubs having a higher turnover.

[Badger 2,405]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

A salary cap also does the same thing, without locking in pre existing advantages due to clubs having a higher turnover.

Yes, I agree. It seems silly that a club our size would have the same salary cap as say, Wycombe. That's why I think that sustainability is the key - therefore focusing on a limit to losses rather than on an individual aspect of expenditure. The gap that a wage cap would create between the Championship and Premier League would, in time, ossify the Premier League.

Given that outside the Premier League, the biggest source of income to a club is the local community, it would encourage clubs to engage with the community to maintain and increase its revenue.

[Indy_Bones 441]

In my mind, the only way any sort of financial cap works, if it is implemented globally, thus preventing players from chasing cash, rich clubs spending vast amount of money on players and wages and also making it more likely for players to commit to clubs longer term than currently.

Obviously, this is a total pipedream, not to mention completely unworkable due to existing player contracts etc, but it would be good for the long-term health of the sport in general.

I long for the days when league tables are decided by clever management, excellent team work and committed players who don't just go looking for the next big paycheck every season or two, rather than the likes of Man City and Liverpool spending hundreds of millions (even into the billion mark) to win the league.

We've seen this season just how big the gulf between the PL and Champs is (fair play to Sheff Utd in all this), and it's only getting worse every year.

Football shouldn't be a business first and sport second...

[king canary 7,578]

3 hours ago, Badger said:

Yes, I agree. It seems silly that a club our size would have the same salary cap as say, Wycombe. That's why I think that sustainability is the key - therefore focusing on a limit to losses rather than on an individual aspect of expenditure. The gap that a wage cap would create between the Championship and Premier League would, in time, ossify the Premier League.

Given that outside the Premier League, the biggest source of income to a club is the local community, it would encourage clubs to engage with the community to maintain and increase its revenue.

I don't think its silly at all. As Indy Bones says below, football should be about sport, coaching, canny squad development and assembly. It shouldn't about club revenue.

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

9 minutes ago, Indy_Bones said:

In my mind, the only way any sort of financial cap works, if it is implemented globally, thus preventing players from chasing cash, rich clubs spending vast amount of money on players and wages and also making it more likely for players to commit to clubs longer term than currently.

Obviously, this is a total pipedream, not to mention completely unworkable due to existing player contracts etc, but it would be good for the long-term health of the sport in general.

I long for the days when league tables are decided by clever management, excellent team work and committed players who don't just go looking for the next big paycheck every season or two, rather than the likes of Man City and Liverpool spending hundreds of millions (even into the billion mark) to win the league.

We've seen this season just how big the gulf between the PL and Champs is (fair play to Sheff Utd in all this), and it's only getting worse every year.

Football shouldn't be a business first and sport second...

Football was never equal because  the Liverpools and Man Utds always had bigger fan bases so bigger revenues... It has got bigger with the forming of the premier league. It's not long I reckon before premiership 2 and a closing of relegation and promotions to those two divisions.

[Badger 2,405]

4 minutes ago, king canary said:

I don't think its silly at all. As Indy Bones says below, football should be about sport, coaching, canny squad development and assembly. It shouldn't about club revenue.

I wouldn't disagree with all of IB's sentiments, but the practicality is that if there is an 18 million cap on the Championship, it would lead to a permanent separation from the EPL, which from NCFC's point of view, I think would be a shame. I also fear that it would be damaging to the Championship and I suspect that gates would drop in general.

Focusing on losses rather than one item of expenditure seems to me a far better way to maintain the general health of the community game.

 

[Indy_Bones 441]

1 hour ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Football was never equal because  the Liverpools and Man Utds always had bigger fan bases so bigger revenues... It has got bigger with the forming of the premier league. It's not long I reckon before premiership 2 and a closing of relegation and promotions to those two divisions.

A bigger fan base in itself is not really a problem, yes they may have derived greater revenues from this (compared to now where TV money makes up the largest chunk, followed by sponsorship deals, with gate revenues much further down), but that meant the additional money could be used for larger grounds (to fit more of those fans in), better facilities etc, instead it became normal to spend increasing amounts of money on player purchases and wages for said players.

If the likes of Man Utd and Liverpool can maintain attendances of 50-80k per week, that's fine, but what shouldn't happen is that they can also spend insane amounts of money well beyond most clubs in the world to basically buy titles.

If all teams had to work within the same financial framework in terms of player/staff acquisitions and wages, then any additional funds they have beyond this would go into infrastructure, youth development/grass roots etc, and the differences on the pitch would be down to how well managed the players were, with a clear development route from the youth side as you wouldn't simply be able to buy the best around, and players could sensibly choose to move clubs based on pure ambition and other factors rather than which club can offer them the biggest paycheck.

Of course, the Man City's, Liverpools et al, would have the best training facilities, the best grounds, the best technology and sports science facilities they could achieve with their extra cash, but on the actual pitch, the same maximum value in cash terms would be technically equal across all teams.

Again, the issue is that you have to do this on a global scale, otherwise players would purely move to the leagues in countries without these restrictions so they can still get 250k a week for kicking a ball around.

This also stops situations where players 'have their heads turned' because another club is happy to double, triple or quadruple their exisiting wage if they sign for them, and instead players would only be moving because they felt it was better for their career, ambitions and possible international options rather than their bank balance.

Let's face it, a situation where sides like Man City can have more money sat on their bench than in most non-PL's entire squad cost is beyond ridiculous, especially when you think they can take off Aguero and bring on Jesus or take off Bernardo Silva and bring on Mahrez, whereas we're relying on free transfer Drmic or youth player Idah if Pukki needs changing!

The whole thing has gone totally bonkers from a finance perspective, but limiting the champs to 18mil a season will change nothing in the grand scheme of things, other than making it even more difficult for promoted clubs when they do get to the PL!

[essex canary 491]

On 17/07/2020 at 15:36, hogesar said:

You say that, but apparently:

1: Stoke City £94.2m

2: West Brom £92.2m

3: Swansea City £90.7m

4: Huddersfield £62.6m

5: Fulham £54.3m

6: Middlesbrough £48.7m

7: Cardiff City £48.4m

8: Derby £40.4m

9: Birmingham £38.5m

10: Reading £35.3m

11: Leeds £31.3m

12: Hull £31.1m

13: QPR £30.6m

14: Sheff Wed £29.3m

15: Nottm Forest £27.7m

16: Bristol City £27.2m

Iots of dodgy numbers here. Stoke's figure quoted here is their Premier League figure which reduced to £56 million last season. That is all Salaries not just Player salaries. When their parachute payments end they will be down to only £28 million income per season. Their wealthy backers won't help that much. £18 million is about what they will be able to afford. Norwich City will doubtless get up to around £65k total wages this season then same issues as Stoke unless we get promoted again. Also no clarity about the £18 million cap definition. Is it first team squad wages, all football wages, total wages? Does it include promotion Bonuses? Clear as mud really though given that non parachute championship teams typically live on £30 million per year it has some logic to it. 

[sgncfc 1,221]

If the Championship go for a salary cap it is just a matter of time before we get Premier League 2. You cannot stop people spending their money and the gap between the current Premier League and the Championship would be completely insurmountable without some kind of halfway house.

The other danger is the removal of promotion/relegation. Our performance this season is a very good argument against having automatic promotion without any kind of financial assessment test. If I was running a Man City, Liverpool, Man Utd etc I might be arguing that allowing a team to take part in the Premier League without adequate means to compete is reducing the overall quality in allowing the already weaker teams to stay up too easily. 

 

[king canary 7,578]

4 hours ago, Indy_Bones said:

A bigger fan base in itself is not really a problem, yes they may have derived greater revenues from this (compared to now where TV money makes up the largest chunk, followed by sponsorship deals, with gate revenues much further down), but that meant the additional money could be used for larger grounds (to fit more of those fans in), better facilities etc, instead it became normal to spend increasing amounts of money on player purchases and wages for said players.

If the likes of Man Utd and Liverpool can maintain attendances of 50-80k per week, that's fine, but what shouldn't happen is that they can also spend insane amounts of money well beyond most clubs in the world to basically buy titles.

If all teams had to work within the same financial framework in terms of player/staff acquisitions and wages, then any additional funds they have beyond this would go into infrastructure, youth development/grass roots etc, and the differences on the pitch would be down to how well managed the players were, with a clear development route from the youth side as you wouldn't simply be able to buy the best around, and players could sensibly choose to move clubs based on pure ambition and other factors rather than which club can offer them the biggest paycheck.

Of course, the Man City's, Liverpools et al, would have the best training facilities, the best grounds, the best technology and sports science facilities they could achieve with their extra cash, but on the actual pitch, the same maximum value in cash terms would be technically equal across all teams.

Again, the issue is that you have to do this on a global scale, otherwise players would purely move to the leagues in countries without these restrictions so they can still get 250k a week for kicking a ball around.

This also stops situations where players 'have their heads turned' because another club is happy to double, triple or quadruple their exisiting wage if they sign for them, and instead players would only be moving because they felt it was better for their career, ambitions and possible international options rather than their bank balance.

Let's face it, a situation where sides like Man City can have more money sat on their bench than in most non-PL's entire squad cost is beyond ridiculous, especially when you think they can take off Aguero and bring on Jesus or take off Bernardo Silva and bring on Mahrez, whereas we're relying on free transfer Drmic or youth player Idah if Pukki needs changing!

The whole thing has gone totally bonkers from a finance perspective, but limiting the champs to 18mil a season will change nothing in the grand scheme of things, other than making it even more difficult for promoted clubs when they do get to the PL!

You're right that to be truly effective you need it to be worldwide but I also think it has to start somewhere and it may as well be in the EFL. If it works then it can be a model for other leagues going forward.

Owners should really be be hugely in favour of it- wage control would actually allow clubs to be run as profitable enterprises rather than the massive cash drains they are now. The issues would be with the players/PFA.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

6 hours ago, Kenny Foggo said:

It's not long I reckon before premiership 2 and a closing of relegation and promotions to those two divisions.

I have often thought this would maybe happen. Even though it takes away the dreams of clubs from leagues one, two and below. Is it something you would welcome Kenny?

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

44 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

I have often thought this would maybe happen. Even though it takes away the dreams of clubs from leagues one, two and below. Is it something you would welcome Kenny?

The greed that exists will become the driving force behind football. The ManC verdict made that perfectly clear.

When, in time, one of the big boys is threatened with relegation, we will see the first reaction and change of rules.

Rugby has already done it as the big clubs freeze out the rest.

[essex canary 491]

No easy answers. Just as it is good - or not - to see Norwich in the Premier league, it is good to see Rotherham or Wycombe in the Championship. Then again why should the natural dividing line be assumed to be 72 or 92 clubs? 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

18 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

I have often thought this would maybe happen. Even though it takes away the dreams of clubs from leagues one, two and below. Is it something you would welcome Kenny?

No because I don't think we should deny clubs like Sunderland or Portsmouth the chance to play at a higher level again...I love the strength in depth this country has... It's wrong to deny communities the hopes their clubs give them.

On the other hand there is that small club down the road...

[nutty nigel 7,509]

2 hours ago, Kenny Foggo said:

No because I don't think we should deny clubs like Sunderland or Portsmouth the chance to play at a higher level again...I love the strength in depth this country has... It's wrong to deny communities the hopes their clubs give them.

On the other hand there is that small club down the road...

Agree about the two clubs you mention but it would also take away the dreams of the rest. Before 1972 I could only dream about us playing in the first division. All clubs fans have those dreams. Unfortunately, one way or another, the greed of the PL will close the door in the end.