Would a salary cap make the Prem fairer?

[OLDBLADE43]

This is exactly what would happen, anyway look at City, they have got around money caps, and will have the EPL tied up in court for years.

Let's face it, the way it works now always makes sure that the top teams always earn (?) or is it just GET more money dependant on where they finish in the league or cup competitions. Most of this money comes from SKY or the other companies that have since started to show games on TV. It will NEVER happen but the way it could be made a little bit fairer would be to distribute the money so that more of it went down the football pyramid , starting with much less in total to the premier league. I know this will not happen, but it would make things better. One other thing that could work even better would be to relegate ANY club caught financially cheating and don't give them the usual 3 years of money whilst they are still in the league below - NO MATTER WHO THEY ARE!

 

[Selly]

I've posted this before - but I'll post it here again:

Personally I'd like to see (and again, they won`t ever be agreed by the PL):

• 50/50 gate splits
• TV money distributed completely evenly - you shouldn't get more cash simply by being on TV (perhaps a token amount to make up for lost revenue)
• some form of regulation to prevent clubs from hoarding players - limits to the number of players you can have registered to your club at each age range up to 21 - and a limit for over 21's as well - no more 70/80 player "squads" - if you can`t get by on 24 players (plus your under 21's) then tough.
• regulation to prevent abuse of the above by moving players between clubs in the same "group"
• regulation to prevent "odd" transfer fees between clubs in the same group especially where one of the clubs isn`t covered by PSR etc*
• limits to the number of players that a club can have out on loan
• removal of B teams from the EFL trophy

Those last three seek to reduce the desirability of the current system of just hoovering up everyone, and then using the loan system to develop them

*for instance "Dodgy" group own both PL team A and a team in the Chinese Super league. PL team A sell a player to the Chinese Super League team for a value far in excess of the players true value - but now they have made a fortune on the books and have successfully manipulated PSR. Bonus points if they then Loan him back, or even buy him back a year laters for half the cost.

 

[Maidenhead]

Absolutely.

Jimmy Hill had the wrong idea to abolish the maximum wage way back when.

Exactly my thought.

There's no going back from that ruling because those that have the most to lose hold all the cards.

 

[Grey Blade]

Afraid it is a losing battle for many years to come unless the top 6 join a breakaway.league

Likewise. The top teams will always find a means of circumnavigating the rules. I do wonder what the fans of these top teams in a breakaway league would think though - they aren't all armchair supporters

 

[Gordon Freeman]

Simple answer NO

Because when there’s multiple millions at stake then it’s obvious the more powerful clubs will think of every legal or illegal way to get around the system.

The way US sport (I'm thinking specifically NBA, but maybe others) have got around this, is to have a luxury tax. It works something like:

1. Salary cap is X
2. Any team is free to spend >X, but for every $1 you spend above the threshold you pay $2/3 (whatever) in luxury tax. At the end of the season, the luxury tax is distributed amongst all the teams that stayed below the luxury tax limit.

This works incredibly well (NBA teams are generally limited to 3 superstars on a team because of this rule). The reason it work well, is because as well as amplifying the amount of money required to buy a title, any team who wants to splash out has to effectively strengthen the rest of the league alongside themselves. Buying yourself a superstar player means other teams can improve their squads/training facilities/coaching (etc) due to the tax they receive, keeping things competitive.

In the US, you tend to get teams splashing out for a season or two when in 'win mode', then drawing back again for a few seasons while rebuilding. There's no way Man City could do what they've done for such a prolonged time under such a system, at least, not without giving teams like us (and every other small team in the Prem) 10s, maybe even 100s of millions per season.

 

[NuddysGloves]

I'd like to see a system where there is a salary cap based on the league you're in, so every Premier League player is paid for instance £25,000 a week. But there would be no limit on the performance related bonuses that a club could offer. So they could offer Player A a £50,000 appearance fee if they wanted to and if he plays every week he's suddenly earning £75,000.

This way it would become far more attractive for a player to be playing for a bottom half Prem team week in week out than just sat on a subs bench or in the reserves for the big boys so you'd find better quality players filtering down the league. Some would leave and go abroad but there's only so many spaces at elite European clubs so they can't all leave without taking massive pay cuts anyway.

It would need a full system in place as you go down the leagues otherwise some Championship players might find themselves losing out on money through being promoted! But if a Prem player is paid maximum £25,000 then Championship could be maximum £15,000 per week and League One maximum £10,000 per week and League Two maximum £5,000 per week and this could help stabilise the finances of a lot of football clubs throughout the pyramid.

 

[Blades1971]

Get rid of the top 6 in Premiership. Let them go and play in a European Super League.
They are the ones causing all the wage problems

 

[LS5 Blade]

Stop letting teams have a bench with 9 players on and 5 subs and go back to 5 and 3. That would stop all the hoarding and give the teams with seemingly unlimited budgets multiple chances to swap out players not performing. More chance of teams going up getting results then etc

 

[loyalblade95]

I've posted this before - but I'll post it here again:

Personally I'd like to see (and again, they won`t ever be agreed by the PL):

• 50/50 gate splits
• TV money distributed completely evenly - you shouldn't get more cash simply by being on TV (perhaps a token amount to make up for lost revenue)
• some form of regulation to prevent clubs from hoarding players - limits to the number of players you can have registered to your club at each age range up to 21 - and a limit for over 21's as well - no more 70/80 player "squads" - if you can`t get by on 24 players (plus your under 21's) then tough.
• regulation to prevent abuse of the above by moving players between clubs in the same "group"
• regulation to prevent "odd" transfer fees between clubs in the same group especially where one of the clubs isn`t covered by PSR etc*
• limits to the number of players that a club can have out on loan
• removal of B teams from the EFL trophy

Those last three seek to reduce the desirability of the current system of just hoovering up everyone, and then using the loan system to develop them

*for instance "Dodgy" group own both PL team A and a team in the Chinese Super league. PL team A sell a player to the Chinese Super League team for a value far in excess of the players true value - but now they have made a fortune on the books and have successfully manipulated PSR. Bonus points if they then Loan him back, or even buy him back a year laters for half the cost.

Man City owners also own Girona FC don't they, it's how they got Savinho. Watford owner still owns Udinese, same with Forest owner and Olympiacos.

Youth/B teams should never have been added to the EFL trophy in the first place, get them out and let that trophy serve it's intended purpose.

Saw something earlier this season about money distribution throughout the pyramid, with Simon Jordan and that finance guy that used to work for Man City, SJ claims that the PL will never agree to give more money to EFL clubs as it doesn't benefit them, sadly he's probably right.

Adding a few other unlikely changes that should but won't be made.

Would also add that they need to stop voting for rule changes mid season, any changes should be made before the season starts.

Stop this FA voting system where only the current PL clubs get to vote for the entire 92, like the FA Cup replays, where you only need a majority vote of 14/20 to pass or reject something.

Increase the financial rewards of the Cup competitions, it doesn't have to be anywhere near the PL reward money but the financial rewards should be more substantial.

A team who wins their FA Cup first round game deserve more than £30k (rough example) prize money, especially as those clubs don't make much money in the lower leagues.

 

[loyalblade95]

Stop letting teams have a bench with 9 players on and 5 subs and go back to 5 and 3. That would stop all the hoarding and give the teams with seemingly unlimited budgets multiple chances to swap out players not performing. More chance of teams going up getting results then etc

Should be back to 3 subs from a 7 sub bench, the 5 subs rule was only made for COVID season as it was necessary due to the amount of games in quick succession.

But it should have been changed back to 3 subs from 7 bench as soon as that season was over, and if you have to play with 10 men due to a late injury, like we did for extra time against Blackburn when Seriki went off, you just get on with the game.