We may not have paid wages like that when in the prem but we certainly fell into th trap and paid far too much weekly for too many average players it is the add on's and other payments that cripple just as much
We were In that league for a long period and should never have ended up how we did had we not joined the train of thought on wages
We continued paying too much for too long after it
The problem is that it now can't be stopped because the players and agents have all the power
When you consider that there are players not fit to lace the boots of Walsh bolder hales Flanagan To name a few who will never have to worry about working after football is a crying shame
Probably too serious a question for Christmas Eve , but how do we keep our wage bill under control and yet get decent players in?
Well lets not forget we lose around £5 mill a year, so the answer is probably we can't. We maintain a distinct and clear wages policy, temper our ambitions to that and focus on developing youth who are able to play for lower wages whilst increasing their market value which we cash in on at the right time.
The Arsenal system under Wenger works quite well, discover young prospects from all over the world and slowly turn them in to world class players under a great manager, there fans might not like that they then sell many of there stars but from a being sensible running the club way of thinking, it is a great way of doing business.
Rumour has it that 'arry has persuaded Fernandes to wages of £80k per week for Remy - double the amount offered by Newcastle.
Don't know who to laugh at more - Pardew for missing out on Ba's replacement or Q P R for the desperate "Pompey like" attempt at buying Premier League survival.
Yes Harry at QPR really does make you realise people never learn, only bonus QPR have is that there owner can afford to fund these deal's as long as he stays interested.
I watched a great video the other day of Paul Gascoigne talking about his move from Spurs to Lazio.
Back in 1991 - when Gazza was the standout player of his generation, had starred in a World Cup and was the best player in the country - his wages at Tottenham (in the big four back then) were.......£2,000 per week!!!!
That's right, he was earning about £104,000 per year and he was the best player in the country, when he went to Lazio he increased his wages to £22,000 per week.
Back in 1991 the average annual UK wage was £19,000, meaning that Gazza was getting five times more than the average wage earner.
Fast forward to 2012 and the average annual UK wage was £38,000 whilst the average wage in the Premiership is probably around £30,000 per week, meaning that players now earn more than FOURTY times the average wage.
In fact, Rooney's £200,000 per week wage packet (he is the best comparison to Gazza) means that he earns TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY THREE times the average wage.
Nobody is forcing the clubs to pay the players this money, Ormi. The amount of TV money going into football has probably gone up by an even higher factor over the same period, so it all depends on which statistic you focus on. It always makes me laugh when fans pontificate about players' salaries. Who would we rather gets the cash - chairmen? Sky? Agents? Lawyers? If you accept that the cost of TV football and on the gates isn't going down, the money is flowing somewhere. Football still needs a massive normalisation. I think the imbalance of the Premiership causes clubs to gamble in a ridiculous way - that is probably the most easy bit to fix with players taking automatic cuts in the event of relegation.
I watched a great video the other day of Paul Gascoigne talking about his move from Spurs to Lazio.
Back in 1991 - when Gazza was the standout player of his generation, had starred in a World Cup and was the best player in the country - his wages at Tottenham (in the big four back then) were.......£2,000 per week!!!!
That's right, he was earning about £104,000 per year and he was the best player in the country, when he went to Lazio he increased his wages to £22,000 per week.
Back in 1991 the average annual UK wage was £19,000, meaning that Gazza was getting five times more than the average wage earner.
Fast forward to 2012 and the average annual UK wage was £38,000 whilst the average wage in the Premiership is probably around £30,000 per week, meaning that players now earn more than FOURTY times the average wage.
In fact, Rooney's £200,000 per week wage packet (he is the best comparison to Gazza) means that he earns TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY THREE times the average wage.
2 points.
1. I dispute Spurs were "in the big 4" in 1991. Do me a favour.
2. I dispute that the average annual UK wage in 2012 is £38k pa.
Nobody is forcing the clubs to pay the players this money, Ormi. The amount of TV money going into football has probably gone up by an even higher factor over the same period, so it all depends on which statistic you focus on. It always makes me laugh when fans pontificate about players' salaries. Who would we rather gets the cash - chairmen? Sky? Agents? Lawyers? If you accept that the cost of TV football and on the gates isn't going down, the money is flowing somewhere. Football still needs a massive normalisation. I think the imbalance of the Premiership causes clubs to gamble in a ridiculous way - that is probably the most easy bit to fix with players taking automatic cuts in the event of relegation.
I didn't say anybody was forcing anybody to do anything.
The broader point is that twenty years ago footballers were big earners compared to average working people, but not to an extraordinary degree, whereas now their earnings are absolutely incredible and put them into the super-rich category.
It is true that TV revenues have gone up substantially since the EPL came into being but the fact remains that wage levels are unsustainable and the fact that most EPL clubs are making huge losses despite their TV earnings suggests that wages are far, far too high.
The losses incurred by Chelsea and Man City can be absorbed by their owners but their actions force the price of players up across the board and result in bigger losses at other clubs.
Moreover, one must also look at what we are getting for our money, are we really getting the cream of the global crop? Recent history suggests that we probably are not.
I watched a great video the other day of Paul Gascoigne talking about his move from Spurs to Lazio.
Back in 1991 - when Gazza was the standout player of his generation, had starred in a World Cup and was the best player in the country - his wages at Tottenham (in the big four back then) were.......£2,000 per week!!!!
That's right, he was earning about £104,000 per year and he was the best player in the country, when he went to Lazio he increased his wages to £22,000 per week.
Back in 1991 the average annual UK wage was £19,000, meaning that Gazza was getting five times more than the average wage earner.
Fast forward to 2012 and the average annual UK wage was £38,000 whilst the average wage in the Premiership is probably around £30,000 per week, meaning that players now earn more than FOURTY times the average wage.
In fact, Rooney's £200,000 per week wage packet (he is the best comparison to Gazza) means that he earns TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY THREE times the average wage.
2 points.
1. I dispute Spurs were "in the big 4" in 1991. Do me a favour.
2. I dispute that the average annual UK wage in 2012 is £38k pa.
2] You're right, sorry, the average wage in 2011 was £26,200.
1] In 1991 Spurs had the two of the best players in England playing for them, Gazza and Lineker, and had far more cash than Arsenal, and were paying El Tel more cash than anyone in the country.
Back then you basically had Liverpool as top dogs and Man United second with Arsenal and Spurs making up the big four. Everton were successful but not cash rich.
1] In 1991 Spurs had the two of the best players in England playing for them, Gazza and Lineker, and had far more cash than Arsenal, and were paying El Tel more cash than anyone in the country.
Back then you basically had Liverpool as top dogs and Man United second with Arsenal and Spurs making up the big four. Everton were successful but not cash rich.
Yep, Ormiston's pretty much spot on with that. The Champions League changed everything.
Not "top 4". He means "big 4", the 4 teams with the biggest draw, most money etc. He wasnt referring to league positions. The equivalent of the Sky 4.
Correct, in the early 90's Spurs were on TV every other week and were the biggest club in London in the 80's until George Graham revolutionsed The Arse.
Don't know if anyone on here listened to 606 on Sunday. Jason Roberts was being questioned about footballers' wages and how out of control it had got in the Premiership.
He basically only had one point; that anyone in any industry would ask for the most they can get. Clubs do not have to pay it.
The issue is that football is a unique industry. The employees are more powerful than the employers. Also, most industries have a wage structure or the employees' salary is within a certain bracket.
Football is so disassociated now from the real world that players, and those in the Premiership especially, do not understand how the 'real' world works in terms of pay. Jason Roberts was an example of this. Does he really think that anyone can go to their employer and demand a pay rise and if they do not get it just up and leave for another company or workplace?
Footballers are powerful and they know it and ultimately they are driven by money not loyalty.
Let's be realistic, nothing is really going to happen with footballers wages unless some kind of seismic event takes place and that may not ever happen whilst there are rich oligarchs willing to pay for ego trips.
The defenders of the status quo say "nobody forces clubs to pay these wages" - er, they do actually! Want to know what happens when a club decides to stop paying crazy wages and live within its budget?
Two words: Aston Villa.
The players/agents know they have clubs over a barrel, they play off club A against clubs B and C and hey presto they just doubled their money.
The reason clubs pay the outrageous wages demanded is simple, this time its only one word: Fear.
The defenders of the status quo say "nobody forces clubs to pay these wages" - er, they do actually! Want to know what happens when a club decides to stop paying crazy wages and live within its budget?
i think the fans get the hump and moan at the board ...
The defenders of the status quo say "nobody forces clubs to pay these wages" - er, they do actually! Want to know what happens when a club decides to stop paying crazy wages and live within its budget? blockquote>
i think the fans get the hump and moan at the board ...
Very true, "You're not bankrupting the club, where's your ambition?"
Comments
We were In that league for a long period and should never have ended up how we did had we not joined the train of thought on wages
We continued paying too much for too long after it
The problem is that it now can't be stopped because the players and agents have all the power
When you consider that there are players not fit to lace the boots of Walsh bolder hales Flanagan To name a few who will never have to worry about working after football is a crying shame
Also brings this up http://www.charltonlife.com/discussion/50822/footballs-life-expectancy#latest
Don't know who to laugh at more - Pardew for missing out on Ba's replacement or Q P R for the desperate "Pompey like" attempt at buying Premier League survival.
The bloke's such a hypocrite.
How can QPR offer 80k a week plus large add ons if they stay up.
Seriously they are likely to go down and Harry is spending money like crazy.
Fernandes is doing the Apprentice Asia over here, I would love to go on and tell him the best way to make money is to get rid of redknapp!!
Back in 1991 - when Gazza was the standout player of his generation, had starred in a World Cup and was the best player in the country - his wages at Tottenham (in the big four back then) were.......£2,000 per week!!!!
That's right, he was earning about £104,000 per year and he was the best player in the country, when he went to Lazio he increased his wages to £22,000 per week.
Back in 1991 the average annual UK wage was £19,000, meaning that Gazza was getting five times more than the average wage earner.
Fast forward to 2012 and the average annual UK wage was £38,000 whilst the average wage in the Premiership is probably around £30,000 per week, meaning that players now earn more than FOURTY times the average wage.
In fact, Rooney's £200,000 per week wage packet (he is the best comparison to Gazza) means that he earns
TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY THREE times the average wage.
1. I dispute Spurs were "in the big 4" in 1991. Do me a favour.
2. I dispute that the average annual UK wage in 2012 is £38k pa.
The broader point is that twenty years ago footballers were big earners compared to average working people, but not to an extraordinary degree, whereas now their earnings are absolutely incredible and put them into the super-rich category.
It is true that TV revenues have gone up substantially since the EPL came into being but the fact remains that wage levels are unsustainable and the fact that most EPL clubs are making huge losses despite their TV earnings suggests that wages are far, far too high.
The losses incurred by Chelsea and Man City can be absorbed by their owners but their actions force the price of players up across the board and result in bigger losses at other clubs.
Moreover, one must also look at what we are getting for our money, are we really getting the cream of the global crop? Recent history suggests that we probably are not.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/8909797/Average-salary-falls-3pc-in-face-of-high-inflation.html
Although that only proves my point even further!
1] In 1991 Spurs had the two of the best players in England playing for them, Gazza and Lineker, and had far more cash than Arsenal, and were paying El Tel more cash than anyone in the country.
Back then you basically had Liverpool as top dogs and Man United second with Arsenal and Spurs making up the big four. Everton were successful but not cash rich.
Spurs big 4 ?
90/91 10th
91/92 15th
92/93 8th
93/94 15th
Liverpool have two of the best players in England playing for them now. Suarez and Gerrard, big 4 they ain't.
He basically only had one point; that anyone in any industry would ask for the most they can get. Clubs do not have to pay it.
The issue is that football is a unique industry. The employees are more powerful than the employers. Also, most industries have a wage structure or the employees' salary is within a certain bracket.
Football is so disassociated now from the real world that players, and those in the Premiership especially, do not understand how the 'real' world works in terms of pay. Jason Roberts was an example of this. Does he really think that anyone can go to their employer and demand a pay rise and if they do not get it just up and leave for another company or workplace?
Footballers are powerful and they know it and ultimately they are driven by money not loyalty.
The defenders of the status quo say "nobody forces clubs to pay these wages" - er, they do actually! Want to know what happens when a club decides to stop paying crazy wages and live within its budget?
Two words: Aston Villa.
The players/agents know they have clubs over a barrel, they play off club A against clubs B and C and hey presto they just doubled their money.
The reason clubs pay the outrageous wages demanded is simple, this time its only one word: Fear.
i think the fans get the hump and moan at the board ...