Transfer/wage caps - Are they needed?

Mgoraf

Platini said in The Sun, “How can a guy cost €150 million? For me it’s ridiculous — from a football, social and financial point of view.
“If you want to buy a plane for €150m or a boat, you can do. But for a man? For me it’s bad. It’s not possible. But it’s why we have to do something.
“I’m finding a system where you can spend what you have. If one Sheikh brings €150m for Kaka then you have to put his salary on top of the transfer fee.
“If the club go over their income with the player’s salary plus fee, they can be banned from our competitions because they don’t respect their budget. It’s about a licensing system where clubs spend within their income.
“Clubs who are banned will be replaced by those further down the table of that country who meet the criteria. It’s not to disturb football but to protect it. Many owners have asked me to find a system. I have to do that as president of UEFA.”

I think they probably are needed, but I find it hard to seem them every coming into place. And clubs will probably work their way around it with signing on fees or whatever.

Neil3030

This has been debated here before. I'm all for a cap on the overall wagebill of a club, as this is would restrict clubs from having more than a handful of high earning players and encourage them to put more emphasis on youth players and development. However in order for any restriction based system to come in (be it transfer caps or wagebill limits), it would need to be implemented across every league in every country, or else players will just gravitate towards the money and the leagues who trial any such idea will lose most of their good players.

Spud83

Ridiculous suggestion IMO. The big clubs generate the most income and therefore will stay as the big clubs.

As you said clubs will come up with ways to get around this. Plus European law might now allow this.

Also his proposed punishment is stupid. Imagine one or two of the big four receive this punishment we then see the 5th and 6th place teams go into the Champions league. That would really de-evaluate the competition IMO. The if the 5th and 6th place teams also break this rule we go even further down the league.

A non-runner for me.

Neil3030

Forgot to mention there might be an alternative - the eveness of this year's league should really wake Sky Up to the merits of shelling out big TV revenue to all the clubs. I suppose they will only do this if the extra competitiveness in the league is causing higher viewer numbers, but if you look at what an extra few million per club has done to the standard of competition this year it's really promising.

anladmór

its already inthe LOI isn't it?

SantryRed

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Also his proposed punishment is stupid. Imagine one or two of the big four receive this punishment we then see the 5th and 6th place teams go into the Champions league. That would really de-evaluate the competition IMO. The if the 5th and 6th place teams also break this rule we go even further down the league.

The Competition's already devalued letting all them clubs in it!

Seaneh

Wage Caps are needed.

Look at major sports in the US, they are ALL porfitable because there are wage caps, espically AFL, also in the AFL there are always like 5-6 teams each year who could win and there is usually a different winner every year because nobody can just sign the best players all the time and dominate.

Wage caps FTW.

redout

Seaneh wrote: »

Wage Caps are needed.

Look at major sports in the US, they are ALL porfitable because there are wage caps, espically AFL, also in the AFL there are always like 5-6 teams each year who could win and there is usually a different winner every year because nobody can just sign the best players all the time and dominate.

Wage caps FTW.

What bloody wage caps ? The US is an awful example. NFL players earn mountains of cash as do NBA and MLB players. MLS has a wage cap as far as I know but Becks stills makes mountains out of advertising. Didnt A-ROD just sign like a $235 Million deal back last summer ?

Bounty Hunter

redout wrote: »

What bloody wage caps ? The US is an awful example. NFL players earn mountains of cash as do NBA and MLB players. MLS has a wage cap as far as I know but Becks stills makes mountains out of advertising. Didnt A-ROD just sign like a $235 Million deal back last summer ?

the US system could never be emlated here anyway because College sport is almost non-existant here in comparison. Its huge there and players get drafted after college to teams with the team who came last getting the top draft and the winner last draft in the hope thigs even out and as that guarantees the young stars get a chance to develop. It also cuts out Fabergas/Pancheo style grabbing of youngsters before their stars and eliminates big transfer fees on players under a certain age. No college sport, no drafts, no similarities in how either are run really

think ive gone ot tbh

everdead.ie

Should be a wage cap on players bought into the club and say over 21 but players brought through the club from youth and players under 21 shouldn't be included in the cap. I think that would put much better emphisis onn youth developement and only included in the cap would be a handful of top class players from outside of the club.

redout

Performance related contracts are the way to go in my opinion. How many below par performances did Ronaldo put in this season yet still pocketed over a £100,000 a week. Not just Ronaldo, he was just an example many players are guilty of this. I really believe if you dont perform then your pay should be adjusted to reflect what you done. This can be applied to footballers I think as they earn vast sums on a weely basis unlike other professions.

heyjude

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

the US system could never be emlated here anyway because College sport is almost non-existant here in comparison. Its huge there and players get drafted after college to teams with the team who came last getting the top draft and the winner last draft in the hope thigs even out and as that guarantees the young stars get a chance to develop. It also cuts out Fabergas/Pancheo style grabbing of youngsters before their stars and eliminates big transfer fees on players under a certain age. No college sport, no drafts, no similarities in how either are run really

think ive gone ot tbh

NFL teams also pool all merchandising income, which is then shared evenly among the teams. There is no way that would happen in the Premier League, can you imagine Man Utd agreeing to pool their income from jersey sales etc with the likes of Hull City and Stoke ? Not a chance. A salary cap based on a percentage of turnover would increase the gap between Utd and the smaller clubs and a salary cap based on a set figure per club, would just make United astonishingly profitable(as the cap figure would be set to suit the smaller clubs) and would eventually lead its best players to leaving the club to go to a league without salary caps, where TV money would again restore their huge salaries.

Mgoraf

The European Clubs' Association will on Tuesday decide whether clubs in the Champions League should have their spending on wages restricted.

The ECA are meeting in Geneva where they are expected to come up with proposals to limit the proportion of a club's income that they can spend on salaries.

Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, the chairman of Bayern Munich who heads the new clubs' body, is pushing for a 50 per cent limit of turnover going on wages.

Among English clubs, Chelsea would have the most to fear from such a ruling - they spend 71 per cent of their turnover on salaries. Liverpool, according to the most recent figures available from 2006, would also be affected with 57 oer cent of turnover going on salaries.

Manchester United would have least to fear - they have made a policy of prudent spending on wages, and their current level is 43.6 per cent. Arsenal's proportion is also comparatively low at 45.4 per cent, although this rises to 49 per cent if the income from property sales at the old Highbury stadium is discounted.

Rummenigge said of his plan: "The 32 participants [in the Champions League] would have to meet certain conditions. Only 50 per cent of the club's total revenues could be invested in wages."

Chelsea chief executive Peter Kenyon is on the ECA board, as is his Liverpool counterpart Rick Parry, and they are likely to argue for a less drastic limit such as 60 per cent or even an initial 70 per cent with clubs being given several years to cut their wage bills.

A 50% ruling would not trouble the Old Firm in Scotland too much - Rangers only spend 43 per cent of turnover on wages, while Celtic's figure is a less comfortable but still acceptable 50 per cent.

Rangers vice-chairman John McClelland is also on the ECA board.

UEFA president Michel Platini is keen on imposing limits and he has already met with Rummenigge for talks on action.

Speaking in London last week, Platini used Manchester City's £100million bid to sign Kaka as an example of why some restraints were needed.

Platini said: "Clubs have to operate within their income.

"How one guy can cost 150million euro is ridiculous from a social, football and financial point of view.

"It's why we have to do something to have a transparency and a fairness in football. It's not good for the popularity of football."