If the revenues of Serie A, Bundesliga and Ligue 1 are increasing due to new sponsorships and TV deals (because World Class superstars are at PSG, Juve and Bayern), then they are lifting up the rest in an economic sense.
Should UEFA introduce a salary cap?
- Thread starter Schmeichel's Cartwheel
- Start date
It’s quite hard to prove a negative. Like if you said that the world is coming to an end soon I’d ask you for proof. But I don’t have any proof that it’s not coming to an end either.
You’re saying the sport is not sustainable and about to come crashing down, that’s based on something I am sure. But if it’s just in an isolation that player wages are at an all time high then you need to consider many other factors too like the globalization of the sport. In my knowledge, majority of sports teams are running a profit each year despite the constant wage bill rising.
Ultimately everything is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it.
They control entire economies, so I'd beg to differ. A lot of those who are amongst the wealthiest obtained it outside politics or via underhand dealings whilst in office. Our last PM was worth $300 million odd when he went into politics.
But anyways off topic. I still don't believe any sports person is worth multi millions per year.
What world are you living in? How much time do you dedicate to United in total - via RedCafe, TV, going to matches, etc. And how many millions of United fans are there in the world? Of course they’re worth it.
I'm not saying it's about to happen, but it is inevitable.
Much like the way we live on this planet will also change, another 30/40 years and we could well be in a awful lot of difficulties all of our own making. Plenty of scientific study out there and a dash of common sense that we have limited resources and the planet can only take so much pollution etc.
But it does fix the problem. I'll explain.
1. First of all, having a salary cap in each league, fixed by each national FA, helps prevent the problem of talent congregating in a few teams. Not many players would be willing to take reduced pay at a top club. They can move around to other clubs where they'll get a bigger share of the cut. At the very least, situations like Man City where Mahrez and Jesus won't be able to sit on the bench. They'll go where they can start. This weakens City and strengthens another team.
2. A cap on salary for squads in the CL would also help move talent around. Imagine being told as a player you can't play in the CL and hear that anthem before matchday, because your salary puts the team over the limit. If players love the CL and the anthem as much as the Caf says they do, they won't be content with sitting on the sidelines. They will move to another country or club where they have a higher chance of playing, at a salary commensurate to their abilities.
You can add exemptions for players who came in through the youth system, or may not actually need to. If you find a gem in the academy and sign them on a decent contract, it allows you to surround them with better players. Conversely, you can't go stockpile on a bunch of stars. Or you can... You just won't be able to play them.
They don't and they don't personally generate the bulk of value created by these economies. But on topic, United genreated 590m£ in june 2018, the club had 922 employees. Do you think that the club generates the same amount of money if it fields a random group of 18 players picked from these 922 or a part of these employees have specific skills and public images that led to these revenues?
I live in a world based on greed and growth. A world that has finite resources and a society that generally doesn't care, nor think about what the next generation will be left with.
You may put a value on a sports person as them being entitled to vast fortunes. Good for you, I have a very different opinion. They are entertainers, nothing more nothing less.
Thank you, now I see what you had in mind, I like the second point.
Ill say it again. We should hope UEFA don’t get too many ideas from American leagues. They are built to stifle competition from outside their clubs of 30 owners. They struggle to grow beyond their own borders. They are built only for the benefit of those 30 members.
United, Juve, Barca, Real, City, Bayern, etc. are built yes to benefit themselves but their dominance and popularity lifts up 2nd and 3rd divisions where players and staff are increasingly making above livable wages.
If a salary cap was instituted, owners would immediately move to block off competition from below.
United, Juve, Barca, Real, City, Bayern, etc. are built yes to benefit themselves but their dominance and popularity lifts up 2nd and 3rd divisions where players and staff are increasingly making above livable wages.
If a salary cap was instituted, owners would immediately move to block off competition from below.
A cap would also make the likes of Juventus winning 7 Serie A's on the trot impossible to maintain. As you renew players' contracts, eventually some will have to go. And you'll only be able to sustain that dominance if you are astute in bringing in cheap replacements that can hit the ground running. Otherwise there will be a dip that opponents can take advantage of.
Entertainers have always been among the highest earners of society.
Players do not market the sport to the masses, nor do they facilitate the fans at the ground. They turn up and perform, or as in over the last few season under perform. Our 'best paid player in the league' does not generate much for United I'd guess. The fans turn up out of a sense of loyalty to the club itself, as generally a lot of our players are pretty much disliked by the fans.
What? Players have unions who accept the revenue sharing terms which allow for their salaries to be determined and for most American sports, some type of guaranteed salary. The transparency of American pro sports contracts are awesome.
Owners are worth millions if not billions of dollars, yes. But owning a pro team, especially in America is expensive to operate on the player, staff and operations/logistic side. Players in the top leagues get paid more than enough, usually.
The bolded makes no sense. There is no correlation between the existence of a salary cap, and competition being closed. MLB is a closed system, and has no salary cap as far as I'm aware.
Plus, leagues in the US look at expansion opportunities where available. Talk has gone on about a London NFL franchise or a Seattle NBA franchise for years.
Which is why football executive makes millions too, now these people are the ones that decided to remunerate players that way and it's fairly easy to see why and I'm pretty sure that you know exactly why too.
It’s in in rugby league, one players wife was working in the club tea shop doing something like 3 hours a week. I can’t remember the figures but she earned thousands a week. There’s ways round the salary cap.
Maybe we just aren’t as conniving over here
It’s not conniving though is it? It’s breaking rules to pay someone what they’re worth. Shame trying to stop people being paid what they’re worthMaybe we just aren’t as conniving over here
I’m not sure you know what conniving means.
Not sure how something so pure and genuine can be conniving. But you’re obviously one for more rules so I get it.
The hell is this?Isn't there a story about the Patriots giving money to a company owned by Brady?Maybe we just aren’t as conniving over here
I think it's the worst system (even in the US). A few reasons:
1) Allows larger clubs to entrench their position. You are basically legalizing a monopsony/cartel (in an economic sense), which is what North American franchises are. This would introduce collective bargaining and there is no doubt in my mind the large clubs would use it to their advantage (similar to FFP but FFP has very real benefits)
2) The owners benefit the most. Introducing a price ceiling allows owners to pay player under market value for playing staff
3) This allows richer clubs the ability to stock pile more talent. A team salary cap inevitable leads to player salary cap (NBA) or non-guaranteed contracts (NFL)
4) The potential for work stoppages. The players will need to unionize. I'm unsure if there is already a European players union but regardless it will need to be stronger. With that there is a strong possibility of lockouts (owners side) or strikes (players side).
5) With the current state of the EU, this seems like a mess waiting to happen. All of the federations would need to come to a consensus.
6) UEFA isn't powerful enough to institute this fairly. The large revenue generating leagues would just bully UEFA (like they do now).
No idea. Granted, if there’s any shady shit going down, it’s probably the Pats.
#1 we really don’t see though. We’ve got some of the best parity of any leagues in the world.
#2 respectfully disagree because of player collective bargaining power. Just look at the NBA.
#3 again, we don’t really see except for short lived “super teams” in the NBA, where there’s only 5 guys in the court and 3 stars = “stockpiling”. In leagues that require 11 men on the field, it doesn’t really happen.
#4 I see unionization as a good thing, so obviously a non-starter for me.
#5 sounds like the excuse I get from conservatives telling me why we can’t do universal healthcare in the US.
#6 I see as a legitimate point, but would say I agree with some thoughts @adexkola has given on the issue in this thread.
Sorry. Suppressing the wages of the labor force is conniving. Paying them what they’re worth is not.
1. The sport with probably the most parity (MLB) doesn't have a salary cap. The NBA's salary cap directly led to the formation of the last 2 NBA superteams (Miami Heat, Golden State). The Patriots played in 4/5 last Super Bowls.
2. I don't think the NBA players union is benefiting from the CBA. They get rinsed in nearly every single CBA negotiation, star players are grossly underpaid, and the amount of money players get is relative to the accounting income of the entire league (BRI). Without salary caps I guarantee you the actual percentage of BRI would be significantly higher.
3. You are correct that number of players matters but I would argue that would be the same with or without a salary cap, but like I said in #2 the NBA's CBA directly led to superteams (more so the max player salaries)
4. I'm not against unions, but I am against stronger unions as a result of stronger monopsonies/cartels. It's a terrible cycle of protecting your "share" at the expense of the sport (for example: the NBA players union is incentivized to not fight against the age limit since it protects the wages of it's current players)
5) It's nothing like implementing universal healthcare in one country (which I am 100% in favor btw). We are talking about collective bargaining across international lines. Surely this obviously more difficult.
You’re getting rinsed in here manThis is rich
8 out of 10. Well done.
This is one of the main reasons North American team valuations are so high. Prospective buyers know they will always have a cash cow. There is no threat of being relegation, sugar-daddy owners, or a wage bill spiraling out of control.
However from a North American fan perspective I do understand @Carolina Red 's points. It leads to a lot more stability (no more Blackburns or Pompeys) at the expense of other things.
I don’t think you know what’s even going on in here, man.
I asked why a cap can’t work in Europe. I don’t think you can “get rinsed” by asking a question and having a conversation.
Yes, all the money should go to the owners, the players should know their place. 
I think he meant American leagues are built to stifle competition, which is correct. Not just the salary cap.
No, because then how would we attract players?
What would be good is the introduction of some sort of draft system so bug clubs cant accumlate the best talent.
What would be good is the introduction of some sort of draft system so bug clubs cant accumlate the best talent.
In what way?
I think just giving players the freedom to choose where they want to live and work is pretty perfect.
They’re closed...
And?
You’re really taking the cake here, what with this whole turning a friendly conversation into open hostility.
This is one of my favorite conversations in sports. I didn’t suggest you didn’t know the meaning of words to begin with.
It’s a fun debate and hopefully you’re in the minority for the sake of lower league football across Europe