EFL League One and Two Introduce Salary Cap

Crazy to think that players in these leagues are potentially earning more than that, and a cap is needed in the first place.
 
Who gets the money that football clubs gain, if not the players? You know, the ones making the money, the ones everyone’s paying the money to see. There’s an argument for preventing overspending from external investment, a better version of FFP, but high wages aren't particularly a problem. What would the likes of Bournemouth do with their £100m+, which they earn, if not spending it on players? Sky pay that level not because they love English football, but because they make profit on it, simple as that. If Scottish football even came close or was run by people who could do their job, we would be making more, but it’s not, so we moan about everywhere else and demand a race to the bottom. It’s the same as folk not wanting private schools, it’s pure jealousy because they don’t have it and instead of pushing for their school to be better they want those better off to do worse, for the sake of equality.
 
Commentator said:
Had this vision of you standing there in your Mao jacket, Che t-shirt waving your 'Little Red Book' as you typed this, comrade.
Death to capitalist running dogs.
Click to expand...
Salary caps make leagues more competitive, improving the overall competition and generally makes them more exciting.

If this is implemented well, the protection for clubs is just a bonus.
 
GarMckin said:
Who gets the money that football clubs gain, if not the players? You know, the ones making the money, the ones everyone’s paying the money to see. There’s an argument for preventing overspending from external investment, a better version of FFP, but high wages aren't particularly a problem. What would the likes of Bournemouth do with their £100m+, which they earn, if not spending it on players? Sky pay that level not because they love English football, but because they make profit on it, simple as that. If Scottish football even came close or was run by people who could do their job, we would be making more, but it’s not, so we moan about everywhere else and demand a race to the bottom. It’s the same as folk not wanting private schools, it’s pure jealousy because they don’t have it and instead of pushing for their school to be better they want those better off to do worse, for the sake of equality.
Click to expand...
You should have stopped at the end of the football comment.
After that, it's a pile of shite.
 
What also needs to be considered is who we could sign if a salary cap was in place? Would we have the excitement of the last week? No chance we’d all be fishing in a Hamilton sized pond.
 
This is "communism" according to Keevins.

I called RC about this trying to explain that sport isnt worth watching without competition. In order to get competition and save the game we need to share the limited income evenly AND introduce an affordable and sustainable salary scale for professional footballers.

Re organising leagues might seem like the answer but ultimately the teams hoovering up all the cash will simply buy the best players and kill the competition.

Keevins dismissed the idea claiming it was "communism".

Give it a few more years or decades and eventually the bleeding obvious will sink in.
 
McCoistscoresforRangers said:
They should do it in every league.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The farcical backtrack on man city’s FFP gave the clubs impetus to just spend whatever they want. Salary caps need to be introduced and severe penalties brought in for those who break them.

No ‘special bonuses’ dodgy ‘signing on fees’ gifts of cars or houses, nothing. It all needs to come from the one pot.
 
So a cap in league 1 but not Championship. Means those getting promoted you would think struggle to stay up and those getting relegated will lose all their players as players wont be wanting a massive wage reduction.

But I guess overall will stop clubs going bust but as others say there will be ways around the cap one would think.
 
Rather than a set wage for everyone, I would have the teams wage bill no bigger than 60% of it's turnover.

You would have to caveat everything to prevent workarounds on player payments etc, but it should help safeguard the clubs.
 
johnto said:
Forgive me for maybe getting this wrong, but who the hell decides the maximum someone can earn? It’s a capitalist society. Their skills are much sought after.
Click to expand...

At the same time the EFL is private organisation and can impose whatever restrictions it wants on its members. The players are free to go elsewhere if they're unhappy with it or feel their skills are worth more.

For the record I think it's a mental idea, completely daft, but as long as the cap is above minimum wage they're not breaking any laws.

Not going to do much good for the quality of players (and subsequent product) of the league mind you.
 
Good idea,Make them earn their money with incentive bonuses,More goals,points promotion etc. more money.
 
The Crimson King said:
At the same time the EFL is private organisation and can impose whatever restrictions it wants on its members. The players are free to go elsewhere if they're unhappy with it or feel their skills are worth more.

For the record I think it's a mental idea, completely daft, but as long as the cap is above minimum wage they're not breaking any laws.

Not going to do much good for the quality of players (and subsequent product) of the league mind you.
Click to expand...
Is it really a private organisation though? Isn’t it public? I honestly don’t know.
 
The Crimson King said:
At the same time the EFL is private organisation and can impose whatever restrictions it wants on its members. The players are free to go elsewhere if they're unhappy with it or feel their skills are worth more.

For the record I think it's a mental idea, completely daft, but as long as the cap is above minimum wage they're not breaking any laws.

Not going to do much good for the quality of players (and subsequent product) of the league mind you.
Click to expand...
Where are EFL League One and Two players going to go exactly?
 
TheEgg said:
National league teams will now be able to and will pay more lol
Click to expand...

Some of them that have come through already were and it makes you wonder what the rules are for that. Ebbsleet took Gillinghams top goal scorer a few years ago despite being like 3 divisions lower. Salford, Fleetwood, Crawley were all at it as well.

If you come up are you allowed to be over?
 
Last edited:
From what I can gather it is a salary cap for each club rather than each individual player.

For example, if the cap is £10 million per club, the club can choose to pay their star player £5m per year but only have £5m left over for the rest of the squad
 
MurtyMania said:
Transparency doesn't work?
Click to expand...
Too easy to fiddle.

eg gold Britannia coins are legal tender and have a face value of £100 but in reality they are worth £1600. Payments can be made to look like anything you want. Rules get bent every day in business.
 
ibroxbound said:
You should have stopped at the end of the football comment.
After that, it's a pile of shite.
Click to expand...

I see it as the same, I dont particularly like private schools, just like I dont like Bournemouth being able to outspend us. But, the folk moaning about both are the same, its a dislike of what others have and they would rather take that away than improve what they do control. The simple fact is, state schools could be brought to the same level as private schools with the same investment, just the same as a football club can outperform a bigger club with more investment. Why else are people against private schools, if not because they see it as unequal? They see it as getting rid of them would make it fairer for everyone else, when it wouldn't, there would still be the best schools where the top jobs in society are filled by. Same as even with a salarly cap we will never be able to compete with the likes of Bournemouth due to the money they can bring in through a much larger audience. The cap doesnt get rid of the problem, just the same as abolishing schools doesn't, it just shifts it elsewhere.
 
Alvor said:
Too easy to fiddle.

eg gold Britannia coins are legal tender and have a face value of £100 but in reality they are worth £1600. Payments can be made to look like anything you want. Rules get bent every day in business.
Click to expand...
In a salary cap system, all details of a contract are declared to the league and are made public.

It is made to work in the US, which has similar rules to us.
 
I’m not sure they will achieve what they want.

For example Portsmouth are a profitable club, paying sustainable wages. Fleetwood are not.

The way this cap is structured means that the Fleetwood owner can continue to pay players amounts the club couldn’t afford, whereas Portsmouth will be banned from paying at their current levels that are sustainable.

If you want a cap I think making it a % of turnover would make more sense and led clubs to being sustainable rather than making a cash amount cap.
 
The numbers seen mentally high - 2.5m in League 1 is 48k a week ?!? Surely there are not players in league one earning that money ?
 
MurtyMania said:
It's to protect the clubs from rogue capitalist owners, who have often vandalised these community institutions and thrown them away like a used scud book.
Click to expand...

Yeah that doesn't make any sense. The clubs revenue will remain the same only their costs will be lower. If anything they'll be more appealing to capitalist owners.

It's more about making the game more competitive for clubs that don't have the same resources to spend on wages.

Not sure how well it would work In European leagues when star players can just piss off to China for silly money.
 
If it makes the game more competitive then it can only be for the best. Teams like Bournemouth dwarfing us financially is sickening tbh.
 
Mickey Donovan said:
Yeah that doesn't make any sense. The clubs revenue will remain the same only their costs will be lower. If anything they'll be more appealing to capitalist owners.

It's more about making the game more competitive for clubs that don't have the same resources to spend on wages.

Not sure how well it would work In European leagues when star players can just piss off to China for silly money.
Click to expand...
It makes perfect sense. Owners land the club with a shitload of debt in order to buy players. When that fails, they %^*& off and leave the club under a mountain of debt and that's when they struggle. These rules will prevent that.
 
Apparently Bury have been knocked by the Football League even after everything they have gone through because of the Spiv Owner.
 
Alvor said:
Too easy to fiddle.

eg gold Britannia coins are legal tender and have a face value of £100 but in reality they are worth £1600. Payments can be made to look like anything you want. Rules get bent every day in business.
Click to expand...

That's why the individual leagues should employ the players and pay the wages rather than individual clubs. It's the league that runs the show after all, and they should collect the cash from all ticket sales. Players sign contracts to play with clubs for a pre- determined period. They can transfer to a different club during a transfer window just as they can now but they wont be getting more cash, unless its to a higher league.

In addition to this bringing back competition and allowing "diddy clubs" to compete, it would cut the cost of football for fans and encourage more people to go to matches. Hamilton might actually be able to fill their ground and ditch the bus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top