[Football] Proposed salary cap for Leagues One & Two

[Lady Whistledown]

It's mostly worked in rugby. It's how Exeter, under outstanding leadership, found their way to the title and the latter stages of European competition.

Saracens were breaking it for years and dominating. We all knew there was no way they could bring so much talent in without breaking the rules. English rugby was suffering for it.

Then came the reckoning and next year they will be playing in the second flight.

Football would have been so much more exciting if this had been done a long time ago. It's too late now.

Indeed. Though what it would mean for clubs promoted to the Championship, I don't know. Would there be any hope for them at all? Could they risk massive salary increases to compete, in the knowledge that they'd be up shit creek if they went straight back down? As it is, the three promoted sides from last season (Charlton, Barnsley & Luton) have all struggled all season, and may yet be the three to go down.

I suppose on the one hand, I love the idea of teams like Accrington being on a level-ish playing field with Ipswich, Sunderland and the Bell-bashers, but equally it wouldn't be much fun if the Championship bottom three was occupied by the previous year's promoted teams, season after season. Where's the schadenfreude-laden hope of a Sheffield Wednesday falling through the trapdoor then? It mostly happens in the Premier League year after year, the odd anomaly like Wolves & Sheffield United notwithstanding.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Be interesting to see what the deal is for clubs relegated from the Championship. While I'm sure they must have had some sort of relegation contingency built in, Alex Pritchard (for example) was on at least £20k/wk in Huddersfield's previous PL season, and at least three or four others on £25k/wk. Two of those players would use up the entire budget for a L1 side.

I can't imagine a club like Stoke would easily get themselves down to £2.5m either. Or Hull, no matter how badly they've cut their squads.

If it has to be in all contracts it might stop these players believing they're too good to go down.

 

[studio150]

While there is a need to ensure clubs don't go down the Bury route, a salary cap is not the answer.

We already have FFP which was brought in to try and achieve this. I would have thought that the answer would be to ensure that FFP was fully adhered to, with any breaches such as inflated ground sales to owners, or late filing of accounts being dealt with swiftly and robustly so that there is a clear deterrent if FFP is breached.

If a salary cap is brought in, I just wonder how many players will suddenly find that they have 2nd and 3rd jobs to boost their salary which involve minimal actual work, but the companies employing them have links with the chairman and/or club.

What transition leeway will be provided to Championship teams relegated to League One, as clearly moving from an £18m cap down to £2.5m is only possible with wholesale sales as I can't see players accepting an 85% pay cut.

 

[Chicken Run]

I don't understand why people on that Pompey forum are talking about it being illegal - although none of them can suggest what law is being broken. Nor do any of them point out that the Premiership has had a salary cap for more than 20 years without anyone questioning the legality of it. The EFL is a private organisation and can set its own rules, if Pompey doesn't want to be a part of it, it can always resign and join the National League.

Some of those supporters seem to be, shall we say, slightly mentally challenged #twats

Do they have a proper fan forum, that one is shit in all departments!

 

[Gwylan]

Should be based on declared turnover from previous year plus allowance for relegation/promotion and a percentage figure for investment.

Agree with this, surely has to be set against the individual turnover of each club only allowing them to spend an agreed % on wages

The problem with percentages is that it's easy to fiddle the books: an over-inflated sponsorship deal here, a stand naming there and before you know it, a team has a salary cap five times higher than the rest of the division

 

[portslade seagull]

That could be negated if strict no appeal pts deductions are implemented for false accounts like Palarses

 

[Arthur]

Why is this needed?

 

[Acker79]

There are a lot of clubs where you can understand where they're coming from with their arrogance. Whether it be previous success/standing in football, or geography. But I really don't understand where the Portsmouth arrogance comes from. Their most recent success was built on tissue paper and collapsed under them almost destroying the club, and cheapening the fact they were in the premier league for a while and won an fa cup when no one was looking. Their city is a naval area so will involve a larger proportion of temporary residents who don't really identify with the club. It isn't an iconic city that people around the world associate when they think of England. There is almost nothing about the club in it's entire history that you can point to and say 'ah, that must be why they think so much of themselves'. It shares its county with at least one over notable sized club.

I mean, Brighton doesn't have a lot more to cling to, but there isn't another club in sussex that has historically been there, sometimes above us, sometimes below us, always there fighting for out fans. Crawley are quite new to the football league. Brighton is a tourist destination, has historical links to London that make it more recognisable to a global audience. Plus we have the current status of a premier league club. A lot of the clubs with arrogant fans you can see what it is based on.

But I just can't with pompey.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

The problem with percentages is that it's easy to fiddle the books: an over-inflated sponsorship deal here, a stand naming there and before you know it, a team has a salary cap five times higher than the rest of the division

I do agree but that figure would then be in the turnover of the business. A sustainable club would not be an issue it's when the business model becomes unsustainable. Declaration of contract lengths and projected costs would show sustainability. A one off payment of stand sponsorship would only be allowed over a certain period. Any system is corruptible but a demand for transparency is the only way forwards. Currently the fit for purpose is rubbish.

Part of our takeover by Dick was a bond paid to the FA (maybe league can't remember) this was to ensure that we could complete the season, perhaps that needs to put in place. Maybe set a limit on wages but if a club wishes to invest more they are allowed to, they must place a bond with the league for x amount as security. That would allow a serious board who wanted to invest properly to show they have the funds and intent to run the club in the correct manner.

Wage caps and therefore investments could cause an issue with restriction of trade.

 

[father_and_son]

When you earn £100-£200k a MONTH, is the increased cost of living in the South *really* that much of a disincentive? Really??

Because buying at house at the end of your first season is so inconvenient when you could play for some Northern club and buy the same sized house before Christmas of your first season.

Deluded? And some!!

 

[Gwylan]

I do agree but that figure would then be in the turnover of the business. A sustainable club would not be an issue it's when the business model becomes unsustainable. Declaration of contract lengths and projected costs would show sustainability. A one off payment of stand sponsorship would only be allowed over a certain period. Any system is corruptible but a demand for transparency is the only way forwards. Currently the fit for purpose is rubbish.

Part of our takeover by Dick was a bond paid to the FA (maybe league can't remember) this was to ensure that we could complete the season, perhaps that needs to put in place. Maybe set a limit on wages but if a club wishes to invest more they are allowed to, they must place a bond with the league for x amount as security. That would allow a serious board who wanted to invest properly to show they have the funds and intent to run the club in the correct manner.

Wage caps and therefore investments could cause an issue with restriction of trade.

Saracens made the restriction of trade argument and it was chucked out of court.

But, yes, if you're going down the percentage route it has to be more sophisticated than turnover. The bond is a good idea. I also like El Pres's suggestion that all clubs have an EFL-approved non-exec director to help ensure transparency.

 

[father_and_son]

I do agree but that figure would then be in the turnover of the business. A sustainable club would not be an issue it's when the business model becomes unsustainable. Declaration of contract lengths and projected costs would show sustainability. A one off payment of stand sponsorship would only be allowed over a certain period. Any system is corruptible but a demand for transparency is the only way forwards. Currently the fit for purpose is rubbish.

Part of our takeover by Dick was a bond paid to the FA (maybe league can't remember) this was to ensure that we could complete the season, perhaps that needs to put in place. Maybe set a limit on wages but if a club wishes to invest more they are allowed to, they must place a bond with the league for x amount as security. That would allow a serious board who wanted to invest properly to show they have the funds and intent to run the club in the correct manner.

Wage caps and therefore investments could cause an issue with restriction of trade.

Follow the lead of banks and insurers who have to hold "solvency capital" in case investments go bad or loads of claims come in

Want to pay a player £10m a year...? Fine. But you have to show that you have £10m in liquid assets in the business and you cannot remove those assets until the end of the contract. Assets would need to be cash, stocks, bonds, etc so the owner of the club can still invest the money but the club has preferential rights in the event of solvency problems.

Really easy to do and the structure is there because other industries have had this for years.
Would have to be phased in so the solvency capital is gradually built up over, say, 5-10years but creates stability and also allows for rich owners to pump £1bn of his own money in to grow a club (they just cannot have that money back while contracts it funded are active).

Certain fixed assets, such as ground, training facilities, etc must be ringfenced and cannot be used as solvency to ensure no club is pillaged (to death) again.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

When you earn £100-£200k a MONTH, is the increased cost of living in the South *really* that much of a disincentive? Really??

Because buying at house at the end of your first season is so inconvenient when you could play for some Northern club and buy the same sized house before Christmas of your first season.

Deluded? And some!!

Pompey fans deluded? The very notion.

 

[Justice]

Salary caps would have made football a far more appealing pastime and a level playing field had they been introduced many years ago. It would have kept ownership local and warded off all this absurd turmoil of leadership, buying and selling. It may have even brought more of the game to mainstream television. I fear the horse has bolted.

I don’t think it would, the guy that I worked with when I was an apprentice was a real quality footballer. He was offered pro contracts in the lower leagues. As he had a mortgage etc he was earning more as an electrician and although he wanted to he never signed. Plumbers/electricians these days can earn way more than the proposed £50k a year it’s also a career for life with endless possibilities.

What will we be left with turgid football every weekend? We will be watching bang average players worrying about the mortgage with a career that ends in a few years and ultimately bad for the game. I write this as a life long Albion fan and know we have the possibility of returning to the lower leagues.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

I don’t think it would, the guy that I worked with when I was an apprentice was a real quality footballer. He was offered pro contracts in the lower leagues. As he had a mortgage etc he was earning more as an electrician and although he wanted to he never signed. Plumbers/electricians these days can earn way more than the proposed £50k a year it’s also a career for life with endless possibilities.
.

True. But nobody ever got to fifty after even the most average lower league football career and wished they'd spent their younger years rewiring semi-detached houses for pensioners.

Depends on how much you fancy your chances, doesn't it? You can retrain as an electrician at any point. Your chance to become a footballer only exists for a very short window.

 

[Poojah]

As a fan of an unfashionable League Two club, I can see both pros and cons to this. I dislike the notion of clubs with relatively little by way of fan base or pedigree rising up the divisions and taking the place of clubs with long standing histories in the football league, simply as a bit of light entertainment for their wealthy backers. Yes, the likes of Fleetwood and Salford have done it on footballing merit, but that merit in and of itself was bought rather than earned.

I also dislike the fact that clubs with great histories can be effectively destroyed by reckless owners blindly chasing success out of ego, only to leave the clubs saddled with massive, unsustainable debts. There have already been stories like Darlington and more recently Bury, and I can only see more to come.

A salary cap that stops these things from happening sounds good - at least in theory. The implementation of what's being proposed seems clunky at best however. Firstly, I do believe that caps should be based on turnover - I think it's a valid argument that its unfair that the likes of Pompey and Sunderland should have to work to the same budget as Accrington on a fraction of the crowds and therefore revenue. If clubs are able to generate more income through good business practice, they should be entitled to benefit from that.

Then what happens when clubs come down from the Championship? Presumably they'll be given time to bring their salaries in line with the cap, meaning they're going to have a massive advantage over everyone else in the short-term. Similarly, it's hard to take a squad promoted to the Championship from a £2.5m budget to Championship-level wages in one window, so it's going to be nigh-on impossible to compete. All you achieve is an endless yo-yo between the Championship and League One.

Competition needs to be made fair and reflective of a club's natural fighting weight; we need to put a stop to 'financial doping' (yeah, I know that's unlikely). Similarly, we need to save clubs from themselves (and their owners). Could a well implemented salary cap do that? Potentially. Is the proposed salary cap the right way to go about it? Fundamentally not IMHO.

 

[Acker79]

https://www.theargus.co.uk/sport/18583934.albion-left-back-alex-cochrane-eyed-portsmouth/

Portsmouth are eyeing a loan move for emerging Albion left-back Alex Cochrane.

It is understood Pompey head of recruitment Phil Boardman is an admirer of the 20-year-old, who captained the Seagulls in last season’s Leasings.com Trophy.

But their ongoing League One status might count against them.

Albion's policy last season was to loan out more senior members of their development squad to teams in the Championship or equivalent if possible.

Ha!

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Some clubs will find a way round it with loopholes, no doubt.

Pompey, the Manchester City of division 3.