Players wages

[jono]

14 minutes ago, Alpha said:

I don't think footballers earn too much money anyway do they? We pour our money into the game and know where it goes. 

Every shirt you buy, every TV subscription, every ticket. Why do clubs have such huge sponsorship deals? Because the game is watched by millions. 

 

Sort of. They are in a competitive market and that’s what the market pays for what they have.

My only feeling is that the balance is skewed too high up which creates an imbalance. A lot of folk watch the second tier, and pay their TV subs. The gap between level 1 and level 2 is particularly exaggerated and I doubt in proportion to spen per fan. 

In my opinion the premier league needs to institute play off payments that are similar in size to the so called parachute payments other wise we will continue to see we’ll supported level 2 clubs continuing to struggle in the face of sums that just don’t add up

[Alph]

3 hours ago, RamNut said:

Yes mate, they do.

wages in the championship are leaving clubs with significant debts. 

Strange society where hundreds of thousands of people are on minimum wage and zero hours contracts, whilst others are paid millions for doing bugger all.

They're paid millions because football generates billions. 

The clubs don't have to pay wages they can't afford. They choose to. 

Everyone knows what you can earn as a footballer and you don't to pay for the best education to do it. You just have to be good at doing bugger all so what does that say about us. 

Everyone chucks fortunes into football but doesn't like what the top players earn. Sponsors only chuck fortunes into football because billions watch it. 

How badly do people really want to see players wages go down? 

It's the same as ticket prices. There's an easy way to reduce the costs. But people don't. And yes a club not making money can't afford to pay high wages to get the best players and will probably sink to a lower level. Which begs the question how badly do fans want cost down? 

I bet many football fans that moan about players wages also moan about a lack of investment from their chairman. 

I personally don't think footballers are paid too much. I'd rather see the stars of the show get the income than agents. 

[Alph]

3 hours ago, jono said:

Sort of. They are in a competitive market and that’s what the market pays for what they have.

My only feeling is that the balance is skewed too high up which creates an imbalance. A lot of folk watch the second tier, and pay their TV subs. The gap between level 1 and level 2 is particularly exaggerated and I doubt in proportion to spen per fan. 

In my opinion the premier league needs to institute play off payments that are similar in size to the so called parachute payments other wise we will continue to see we’ll supported level 2 clubs continuing to struggle in the face of sums that just don’t add up

I kind of think though that if the pie is there then it's up to football to decide how to cut it. 

If you pay for Sky football then whether you are watching Coventry or Chelsea then most your money will go to Chelsea. The PL is footballs main attraction and why would the PL and its clubs kindly agree to boost their competitors. For the good of the game? Would Mel Morris?

Mel has tried a way in. He has tried to force a way to show that a fan is paying his Sky subscription to watch Coventry play. But why just Mel and a couple of others? Why has it taken so long? 

I think there's a line of thought that the PL is stealing off the other divisions. It probably is. But I don't think it goes as far as some would suggest where clubs like Leeds, Derby, Forest, Villa etc could dream uniting the lower divisions and carving a big slice off the football pie. The PL makes its money across the world. It goes to the middle east and China. The players are providing entertainment for billions of people. Harry Kane is probably the idol of some 6 year olds in Thailand. So Adidas, Nivea, Lynx, Under Armour etc. all want Kane covered in their logo. So when Kane wants a new contract he's seen almost as a brand. He's not just a bloke kicking a ball. He's a walking billboard. He's part of Spurs who are part of an elite group of gentlemen selling their wares to Saudi Princes. 

I think the football league needs the PL more than most think. 

I'm not saying I like it. But my doctor isn't famous in China. Nobody sponsors him. People would say he has more to give than Harry Kane but there's nobody subscribing to a live stream of him doing prostate exams. 

[jono]

@Alpha

well argued, and I think in essence you're spot on.

The only counter I could give is that it is competition that makes sport so enjoyable. There has to be a way of tweaking the money so that everyone below 6th place in the premier league isn't just cannon fodder or plucky also rans. I am willing to bet that Leicester's bit of history making enthused all fans worldwide. Wouldn't some mechanism to drip a bit more down to the championship, enrich the game and at the same time increase its global appeal ? its tish or bust and even if you make it to the promised land the playing field is no where near level.

I get that the prem is the driver but balancing the money will, I think,  improve the prem in the long term. Then again maybe the super global clubs need to remain super and having sacrificial victims or ready cannon fodder suits that agenda ?

[BathRam72]

1 hour ago, Alpha said:

I kind of think though that if the pie is there then it's up to football to decide how to cut it. 

If you pay for Sky football then whether you are watching Coventry or Chelsea then most your money will go to Chelsea. The PL is footballs main attraction and why would the PL and its clubs kindly agree to boost their competitors. For the good of the game? Would Mel Morris?

Mel has tried a way in. He has tried to force a way to show that a fan is paying his Sky subscription to watch Coventry play. But why just Mel and a couple of others? Why has it taken so long? 

I think there's a line of thought that the PL is stealing off the other divisions. It probably is. But I don't think it goes as far as some would suggest where clubs like Leeds, Derby, Forest, Villa etc could dream uniting the lower divisions and carving a big slice off the football pie. The PL makes its money across the world. It goes to the middle east and China. The players are providing entertainment for billions of people. Harry Kane is probably the idol of some 6 year olds in Thailand. So Adidas, Nivea, Lynx, Under Armour etc. all want Kane covered in their logo. So when Kane wants a new contract he's seen almost as a brand. He's not just a bloke kicking a ball. He's a walking billboard. He's part of Spurs who are part of an elite group of gentlemen selling their wares to Saudi Princes. 

I think the football league needs the PL more than most think. 

I'm not saying I like it. But my doctor isn't famous in China. Nobody sponsors him. People would say he has more to give than Harry Kane but there's nobody subscribing to a live stream of him doing prostate exams. 

Some would pay good money to watch that.

[ThePrisoner]

5 minutes ago, BathRam72 said:

Some would pay good money to watch that.

Pull your finger out then!

[cheron85]

2 hours ago, Alpha said:

I think there's a line of thought that the PL is stealing off the other divisions. It probably is.

Before the PL the FA split the TV revenue 50% top league, 25% second tier and 25% between the third and fourth tier

When the PL started they deigned to grace the FL clubs with 5% of TV revenue between them - That includes the amount given to teams dropping out of the PL as parachute payments for 3 seasons

The original argument was it allowed the top PL sides to compete in Europe against the giants like Juve and Real Madrid - But now Bournemouth get more than Juve do when they finish mid table

[The Key Club King]

3 hours ago, BathRam72 said:

If you pay for Sky football then whether you are watching Coventry or Chelsea then most your money will go to Chelsea. The PL is footballs main attraction and why would the PL and its clubs kindly agree to boost their competitors. For the good of the game? Would Mel Morris?

The PL does boost its competitors with solidarity payments to EFL clubs that outstrip the amount that EFL generate themselves in TV money.

You are certainly correct in saying that people across the world want to watch the PL clubs but it is really probably only 6 or so clubs people really want to watch. I certainly feel this way about watching Spanish or Italian football. This means that 16 clubs in the PL are living off the top 6. 

What irks me is that the PL as an entity is the clubs who are in it any given point and probably half of the 20 clubs are happy to avoid relegation every season. However, probably all of these clubs will be relegated at some point in the not too distant future and will become hugely unprofitable in trying to get back up. This is easily changed by paying those at the top exactly what they get now but paying those at the bottom less and reducing the gap between bottom of the PL and top of the EFL. Currently this gap is 90million for one place in the football pyramid. 

We used to run a system like this in before 1992 and it was called the Football League - Division 1, 2, 3 & 4. 

And before anybody mentions that Sky made English football a success I would point out that before football Sky had repeats of Mr Ed  and competitive arm wrestling. Football made Sky, not the other way round. Sky were just smart enough to get on it at the start. 

[WoollyJumper]

14 hours ago, ThePrisoner said:

Pull your finger out then!

Look mum, no hands.

[BathRam72]

17 hours ago, Alpha said:

I kind of think though that if the pie is there then it's up to football to decide how to cut it. 

If you pay for Sky football then whether you are watching Coventry or Chelsea then most your money will go to Chelsea. The PL is footballs main attraction and why would the PL and its clubs kindly agree to boost their competitors. For the good of the game? Would Mel Morris?

Mel has tried a way in. He has tried to force a way to show that a fan is paying his Sky subscription to watch Coventry play. But why just Mel and a couple of others? Why has it taken so long? 

I think there's a line of thought that the PL is stealing off the other divisions. It probably is. But I don't think it goes as far as some would suggest where clubs like Leeds, Derby, Forest, Villa etc could dream uniting the lower divisions and carving a big slice off the football pie. The PL makes its money across the world. It goes to the middle east and China. The players are providing entertainment for billions of people. Harry Kane is probably the idol of some 6 year olds in Thailand. So Adidas, Nivea, Lynx, Under Armour etc. all want Kane covered in their logo. So when Kane wants a new contract he's seen almost as a brand. He's not just a bloke kicking a ball. He's a walking billboard. He's part of Spurs who are part of an elite group of gentlemen selling their wares to Saudi Princes. 

I think the football league needs the PL more than most think. 

I'm not saying I like it. But my doctor isn't famous in China. Nobody sponsors him. People would say he has more to give than Harry Kane but there's nobody subscribing to a live stream of him doing prostate exams. 

 

11 hours ago, The Key Club King said:

The PL does boost its competitors with solidarity payments to EFL clubs that outstrip the amount that EFL generate themselves in TV money.

You are certainly correct in saying that people across the world want to watch the PL clubs but it is really probably only 6 or so clubs people really want to watch. I certainly feel this way about watching Spanish or Italian football. This means that 16 clubs in the PL are living off the top 6. 

What irks me is that the PL as an entity is the clubs who are in it any given point and probably half of the 20 clubs are happy to avoid relegation every season. However, probably all of these clubs will be relegated at some point in the not too distant future and will become hugely unprofitable in trying to get back up. This is easily changed by paying those at the top exactly what they get now but paying those at the bottom less and reducing the gap between bottom of the PL and top of the EFL. Currently this gap is 90million for one place in the football pyramid. 

We used to run a system like this in before 1992 and it was called the Football League - Division 1, 2, 3 & 4. 

And before anybody mentions that Sky made English football a success I would point out that before football Sky had repeats of Mr Ed  and competitive arm wrestling. Football made Sky, not the other way round. Sky were just smart enough to get on it at the start. 

While I agree with you. I didn't post the paragraph you quoted. As you can see @Alpha did  ?