Wenger was spot on

[JPRouve]

I guess what could happen if it becomes widespread is a balance where transfer fees come down as clubs won’t want to pay huge money for someone who might run a contract down.

I don't think so. I really think that people are reading this one wrongly, the current logic benefits wealthy clubs, these clubs make more and more money and the financial gap keep increasing, it's perfect for them that less clubs can afford transfer fees and it's better for them to just pay higher wages(signing bonuses included). Midsize clubs will still sell players, they can't afford not to and wealthy clubs will keep paying what they deem reasonable in that context because it's to some extent the fee for negotiating exclusivity. What we are less likely to see over time is big transfers between wealthy clubs but that was always a rare occurrence.

 

[acnumber9]

Players may start doing it more. They may find however that more clubs will start offering them less money to sign to begin with when they are losing valuable assets for nothing.

 

[Botim]

It certainly makes sense from the players point of view to not get tied up in long restrictive contracts anymore. Sure you have some job security, but the clubs can easily hold you hostage (just look at Kane, who will probably waste his prime years at a hopeless club).

 

[BetRed]

I think the answer to this will be performace based clauses on the first contract which will automatically extend and level-up a players contract based on performances. I think we will see it in younger players. If that doesn't help clubs will sign longer contract (like american sports, NHL in particular). That's how they get round the salary cap if that happens.

I think that we will see something like below for say 18-21 big talents in the future.

- 30-50k per week
- 5 + 1 years

New contract if following happens:
- Involved in 30 games or more
- 10 goals
- International call-up
- 60-75k per week

and so on...

 

[Sandikan]

A few years back, as commentary on the spiralling spending, Wenger said it would be much more common that players just run their contracts down and get the move they want, with much more lucrative agent and player contracts probably being a part of it.

We have seen this come to the fore this summer with mbappe and pogba, and clearly with Messi although a more nuanced situation.

A poster said in the pogba thread that we should pay him any wages because of the cost of replacing him... And this has a lot of truth to it.

I could see a very near future where players sign contracts with the expectation that they will run it down and move on for a huge sign on fee, in the tens of millions.

I don't think we will see players signing contracts only two years into their current deal anymore. Their leverage is weak at this stage, and can get so much stronger. The only offset is the risk of injury, which seems to reduce over time in the top leagues.

Any view on this? If this is the case, how should it change a clubs approach to the market? Does it just increase the concentration of top players and play into the inevitability of a Super League ...

You've quoted 2 examples. Hardly "much more common", in fairness.

 

[Drainy]

Why is this a problem?

Outside of it creating an unfair advantage to the oil clubs without FFP it doesn't seem to be a big deal

 

[The Firestarter]

I really want someone to seriously say how? I see it in every similar threads and people always fail to even come close to an actual response, how do you mirror the NFL. I will just highlight a few points:

- The NCAA has an exploitative system where future NFL players are developed for free and can't be legally paid even though the organization(NCAA) makes billions.
- The NFL benefits from it because they don't finance the development of these players and then get them for free through the draft.
- They get top prospects on grossly undervalued contracts.
- The NFL is a small league where owners share a large portion of total revenue equally.
- Contrats are non-guaranteed, in most cases franchises do not have to pay players fully and can cut them for a multitude of reasons.
- Players have no say in their destination outside of free agency, they can be sent anywhere without their will which is part of salary cap manipulation in american sports.

This. I really wish people would stop putting the NFL on a pedestal of fairness, the US system is extremely exploitative towards the players.

 

[JPRouve]

I think the answer to this will be performace based clauses on the first contract which will automatically extend and level-up a players contract based on performances. I think we will see it in younger players. If that doesn't help clubs will sign longer contract (like american sports, NHL in particular). That's how they get round the salary cap if that happens.

I think that we will see something like below for say 18-21 big talents in the future.

- 30-50k per week
- 5 + 1 years

New contract if following happens:
- Involved in 30 games or more
- 10 goals
- International call-up
- 60-75k per week

and so on...

That's a terrible deal for top talents, I don't see how any of them would accept those terms, particularly when they are most likely not in a top club. In the NHL top talents under rookie contracts are underpaid but the end of their ELC lead them to restricted free agency* where there are two main options either the player outperformed his contract and may get a long contract, generally one that ends when they hit UFA status or they get a bridge contract that gives them the opportunity to pursue their development at a reasonable fee but his team will most likely pay for it later because the player will ask for an inflated wage during the negotiations for his second extension, particularly if the contract eat several UFA years.

*The player is a free agent but his team keep his rights and has the ability to match any offer.

 

[Zen86]

It was always going to happen. We’ll probably see a few more clubs go bankrupt as a result, as clubs tie themselves into even larger contracts with players to stay competitive.

 

[ivaldo]

That's not how it works buddy. No business is going to ever spend £70m extra one year than the previous whilst the income is the same amount.

Yes, that's my point? Invariably, that cost will be passed on to the customer.

 

[JPRouve]

Yes, that's my point? Invariably, that cost will be passed on to the customer.

But in that context the main customer you are talking about is actually sponsors and broadcasters who are the main reason behind the inflation of transfer fees and wages. It's their battle for exposure that added money in Football.

 

[ivaldo]

But in that context the main customer you are talking about is actually sponsors and broadcasters who are the main reason behind the inflation of transfer fees and wages. It's their battle for exposure that added money in Football.

They are in addition to the fans and not in place of them. Broadcasters won't just accept an increase without passing that cost onto the consumer.

 

[Revan]

In theory lower wages would mean more savings for the clubs and so things like merchandise, ticket prices would be reduced.

Either that or tranfer fees would be extorniate.

Anyhow, Wenger is only correct in this due to Covid, without Covid transfers would be ten fold what they are now in terms of quantities, and the likes of Pogba would be gone already.

Or the owners get more money. I can see all the American owners being very excited about the idea of a wage cap.

 

[harms]

Paying huge transfer fees after Bosman was always ludicrous. Look at PSG and Mbappe. They're about to lose a €200m player for nothing at age 23.

They’ve still got the option of selling him for the same money with 1 year left on his contract (they’ve just refused to entertain it).

 

[adexkola]

Why is this a problem?

Outside of it creating an unfair advantage to the oil clubs without FFP it doesn't seem to be a big deal

It's not a problem. It's just a dynamic that clubs need to be aware of going forward.

 

[adexkola]

@JPRouve on point to detail why nothing but the current system is possible at all, and nothing can be learned from more egalitarian systems because football is soooo complicated, which is why he will have a front seat to all my reforms and executions after I seize power

 

[Gehrman]

Paying huge transfer fees after Bosman was always ludicrous. Look at PSG and Mbappe. They're about to lose a €200m player for nothing at age 23.

Well they could have accepted Real Madrids offer.

 

[fishfingers15]

Class act, Wenger.

Deserved to manage a much better team than that circus of a club.

Is trying real hard to get the world cup every couple of years with the entire qualifying games played in october.

 

[Lynty]

Is trying real hard to get the world cup every couple of years with the entire qualifying games played in october.

If that means less international breaks and nonsense friendlies, I'm all for it.

 

[JPRouve]

@JPRouve on point to detail why nothing but the current system is possible at all, and nothing can be learned from more egalitarian systems because football is soooo complicated, which is why he will have a front seat to all my reforms and executions after I seize power

You can learn from it but people make proposition that don't fix the problem they mention and generally create a serie of obvious issues. You can't have everything, you can't have an open and atomized system of clubs and also expect uniformity. When you use american sports as an example, you need to first look at the framework and the context, then ask yourself if it matches with what you want in European football.

What are we targetting, what is it that we want to see on a weekly basis, what kind of product? And for me the most important is does it include the thousands of clubs that are not top clubs because to me it's clear that these conversation come from fans of top clubs that have no care for smaller clubs, leagues and players.

American sports have a goal which is to make lots of money for the owners through advertisement and to do that they need to create exciting broadcasted shows every weeks.

 

[bond19821982]

They’ve still got the option of selling him for the same money with 1 year left on his contract (they’ve just refused to entertain it).

How exactly ?

 

[bond19821982]

You've quoted 2 examples. Hardly "much more common", in fairness.

To be fair, point is still valid. Players are running their contract down so that they either get a bosman or a transfer at low fees.

I like it.

 

[The Firestarter]

How exactly ?

Did you miss the bids from Madrid?

 

[R'hllor]

Well there could be also cases where clubs on purpose delay offering new contracts to players so they could milk as much of possible current one thats on way way less wages, then they wait to long and scale shifts and suddenly players hold most of the power.

Wasnt Sterling on some low wages at Liverpool and then he was offered a new one around 2 years before exp. date, then City started sniffing etc. There is some shit in between.

 

[Champ]

Do you think that the Glazers would allow a reduced price on merchandise and ticket prices, or would they pocket extra money in dividends?

In an ideal world, the saving would be put towards upgrades towards OT.


That's not how it works buddy. No business is going to ever spend £70m extra one year than the previous whilst the income is the same amount.

Never said the Glazers would reduce prices, but for what it's worth yes I think they would.

I said in theory reduced overheads for football clubs should then mean lower prices for fans, which is true.

Doesn't mean that will happen, just that it should happen

 

[Champ]

Or the owners get more money. I can see all the American owners being very excited about the idea of a wage cap.

Indeed.

But then that's up to the fans to voice their opinion if it ever were to happened, we saw what impact fans can have during the Super League farce.

 

[bond19821982]

Did you miss the bids from Madrid?

Did you actually read the post and my response? Or just blindly quoted me ?

 

[The Firestarter]

Did you actually read the post and my response? Or just blindly quoted me ?

Oh I see you misunderstood the post you replied to.

 

[Stookie]

I don't know why UEFA or FIFA don't bring in a wage cap.

There’s way round it. Didn’t the rugby league have a wage cap? I’m sure I read a story that Bradford Bulls had a player on maximum wage so they employed his wife or some family member to work in the club shop for an hour a week or something on the same wages as him.

 

[Deery]

Players are dicks nowadays it’s getting harder and harder to respect them, it’s all money now..

 

[JPRouve]

Never said the Glazers would reduce prices, but for what it's worth yes I think they would.

I said in theory reduced overheads for football clubs should then mean lower prices for fans, which is true.

Doesn't mean that will happen, just that it should happen

Why? Around 85% of top clubs revenues come from broadcasting and commercial deals, in both cases the vast majority of the money come from multinationals who have no intention to lower the price of their products based on how much a football club spend. Your adidas shoes will cost the same price regardless and same applies for your Visa card. And there is no reason for a club to reduce its tickets fees when they have high attendancy rates, if they want they can already do it without it being that much of an issue particularly in England where ticket fees are higher than in the rest of the world.

 

[BetRed]

That's a terrible deal for top talents, I don't see how any of them would accept those terms, particularly when they are most likely not in a top club. In the NHL top talents under rookie contracts are underpaid but the end of their ELC lead them to restricted free agency* where there are two main options either the player outperformed his contract and may get a long contract, generally one that ends when they hit UFA status or they get a bridge contract that gives them the opportunity to pursue their development at a reasonable fee but his team will most likely pay for it later because the player will ask for an inflated wage during the negotiations for his second extension, particularly if the contract eat several UFA years.

*The player is a free agent but his team keep his rights and has the ability to match any offer.

I wouldn't say terrible as the will have a deal that gives them more money every time they reach a new level.

The difference between the elite and the up and coming players is highly dependent on who is in the drivers seat. Amad and Pogba don't have the same options whether they are on free transfer or not. Someone like Pogba has already made it and will not look at clubs who aren't Elite. With Amad we have to wait and see.

Clubs are in control of most of their player but then you have a few, elite ones where every club that can, will give them a top contract.

In US sports, the league owns every contract. There's only one league and they draft players to the league. I do think the contracts will change in time as well. NCAA changed their way of earning money through college recently, and so will the pro leagues. We will just have to wait and see how it develops.

 

[Real Madras]

Suspect we'll just see longer contracts. Six and seven year contracts will become the norm for more expensive players.

Expensive players aren’t signing contracts for that long though because they know it will come back to bite them.

 

[Oranges038]

This. I really wish people would stop putting the NFL on a pedestal of fairness, the US system is extremely exploitative towards the players.

 

[MattyLT]

Maybe, just maybe, over time the market will adjust for this way of doing business. If clubs can't expect outgoing transfer fees, they'll be less inclined to spend on ingoing fees as well. That means the market for free players will increase, which means more competition for both clubs and players, and less flexibility for players already under contracts they want out of. So player power remains the same: Top players have a lot of bargaining power, poorer players not so much.

Seems to me that it's just moving money around through different channels. Clubs will spend on wages rather than fees, but the financial hierarchy remains the same. Clubs that today can compete for transfer fees will still be able to compete for wages. And clubs that today are being left behind in the transfer market will still struggle to compete in the wage market. Top players will negotiate in a seller's market, and poorer players will be negotiating in a buyer's market.

All in all, I can't really see it changing much.

 

[redrobed]

I’m old enough to remember when Arsenal were almost good enough to be considered rivals to us and he was in charge. I do think he’s got some points but as a die-hard Utd fan I could never bring myself to support anything he’s behind.

That being said change is definitely, clearly, needed just as it was at the time the Bosman ruling was brought in. Football needs to adapt.

 

[harms]

How exactly ?

Madrid offered them that sum.

 

[Dunkelheit]

There is an easy solution: You just calculate "(wage+transfer fee+agent+other expense)/years of contract = yearly expenses" and you will never be wrong. After the first contract ends, you just pay a shitload of wages and agent fees and they stay with you, because if they transfer they have to subtract their transfer fee and it can be a lot. Aren't you super happy for guys like Raiola? Golden times for him... maybe he can even feed his family if it comes to my approach.

 

[JPRouve]

I wouldn't say terrible as the will have a deal that gives them more money every time they reach a new level.

The difference between the elite and the up and coming players is highly dependent on who is in the drivers seat. Amad and Pogba don't have the same options whether they are on free transfer or not. Someone like Pogba has already made it and will not look at clubs who aren't Elite. With Amad we have to wait and see.

Clubs are in control of most of their player but then you have a few, elite ones where every club that can, will give them a top contract.

In US sports, the league owns every contract. There's only one league and they draft players to the league. I do think the contracts will change in time as well. NCAA changed their way of earning money through college recently, and so will the pro leagues. We will just have to wait and see how it develops.

It's absolutely terrible for the player because he is most likely stuck in a club that is going nowhere and you also expect a player to negotiate a deal that is based on forecasting wage values which is difficult enough for a financial analyst. Apply that contract to someone that is playing for Lech Poznan or to someone that plays a position that is not accurately evaluated with tangible stats. And that's without considering the fact that 99% of clubs can't afford the wage of a top player, so even if you negotiated it well, most club wouldn't have the money.

 

[Syphon Wallet]

Some players are going to get caught by letting their contract run down.

Form or injury could see them losing a fortune, all very well waiting it out to get a better contract, but it comes with less security.