Jump to content
IGNORED

Just wrong, young players wages!


Tipps69

Recommended Posts

You can only be paid what your worth and Chelsea who earn millions upon  millions each week think this kid is worth it to them to pay him a fair wage to keep them earning millions upon millions! It’s not rocket science! And the should defiantly not be a £5k a week limit for young players! The rest of the money would either end up in the owners pocket or one of the stars in the team would go from earning £500k a week to £700k a week!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He held all the cards, so im not suprised in the slightest. 

Wanted by a european giant.

Already played for england.

Last year of his contract. 

Chelsea worried they will lose him.

Chelsea unable to replace him if he does leave due to transfer ban.

In fairness to the lad i honestly believe he wanted to leave for regular football so must of had some assurance that he will play more this season under lampard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, AppyDAZE said:

You know the old one where you used to hear non-football people saying  "But he's just kicking a ball about"

Well, when you see the way it is RAPIDLY going..  I'm sort of coming round to their way of thinking.

I mean, as annoying as the protesters were last week.. we do have climate problems, do have a political balls-up over Brexit etc etc

we do have millions and milions of people suffering in the world

and £100,000 a week as a starting wage for a boy who can "kick a ball about a bit." Sick. End of story.

And it’s all your fault

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

The players are not to blame, nor for that matter are their agents. Those responsible, or irresponsible depending on how you see it are the owners. It is they who allow players to be paid such sums. Its not going to change unless the owners say enough is enough and stop paying the high cost transfers and wages or the football authorities place a squad salary cap. The first wont happen because the desire for success is insatiable, and the second won't because the authorities won't kill the goose that lays the TV sponsorship egg, and because they don't have either the inclination or the balls for change. 

Those of us that are old enough can all remember a time when a players weekly wage was not hugely different from the skilled worker, for example on the car plant at Dagenham (as late as the mid 70s for most players) but those days are long gone, and no amount of righteous indignation on our part will alter the situation, even if it does us good to let off steam.

So market forces then. You've just described not just the world of football, but the world in general. 

Unless we desire a Marxist utopia (do we?), this is how it will be until we implode, or the revolution comes and we all end up having to watch our football at Bristol Manor Farm or Mangotsfield Utd. 

Incidentally I wonder how this kind of wage for first year pros  translates to our level. Only five years or so ago (admittedly we were in L1 then) the likes of Wes Burns were on way under 500 quid a week. I suspect our youngsters now are rather rich compared to poor Wes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might be just playing Devils Advocate but if Chelsea don't pay the wages he goes to Bayern and everyone accuses Chelsea of not investing in English talent, so they're damned if they do and damned if they don't. It's a free market and he's getting what they will pay, albeit with a transfer embargo and a youth-friendly manager they were always going to pay a premium.

The real issue for me is the structure of salary at that age. As per the OP easy for young players to be complacent. No issue with the total value IF that is what the market values a player at, but sub-21 without first team appearances there is not enough long term incentive in that base salary and it's the one stage that PARTICULARLY deviates from successful peer groups.

An entrepreneurial 18-21 year old makes sacrifices to build equity in a venture where if they get transformative money it comes with an exit (business sale) within 5-10 years. A doctor or a lawyer earns a premium having spent disproportionate time studying.  All of it is about commitment and reward. A young footballer should be forced to earn reward with investment or time.

If I was running football while I"m not sure a universal wage cap is possible, I would insist under 23s (in line with development rules) do have a wage cap and only earn their total committed salary in club equity value (share options) that must be linked to success and are only vested either at completion of contract or when the club sells or terminates deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

Being reported that 18 year old Callum Hudson-Odoi is about to sign a new contract at Chelsea for an initial £180,000 PER WEEK!! Possibly raising to £200,000 PER WEEK once bonuses have been added!! What the hell is going on with the game? In just over a month he'll have earned £1,000,000! It's obscene!

It's long been stated by just about anyone involved in football that youngsters are being given too much too soon & it leaves them with little reason to actually push themselves, when will this madness stop?

 

2 hours ago, AshtonGreat said:

It's disgusting. Callum Hudson who? 

 

2 hours ago, RUSSEL85 said:

I was about to start a thread on this and saw your title and knew what it was about, it’s absolutely madness, can’t get in the squad and now earning 180k a week. Nobody here would turn it down but it’s a sad state of affairs the sport has got itself in to.

I’m sure there are plenty more I could have quoted, so certainly not aimed at you guys specifically... but have you got a Sky Sports subscription..?

If so, then there's only yourselves to blame for this type of situation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nibor said:

Your options are basically to convince everyone to stop putting money in or to start a revolution.  Problem is, the capitalists own all the guns.

Couldn't the football authorities look at options to introduce salary/ spending caps regardless of the money brought in to the game? Perhaps they could distribute the money more widely across the football pyramid or grass roots football. Do they not have any control over the rules of the sport? 

There must be options to consider rather than fall back on the usual excuse (not aimed at you) that fans need to stop spending money of Sky subscriptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, steviestevieneville said:

Don’t blame the players it’s a short career of possibly 10-15 years so earn what you can. 

The problem lies in the gap between the prem and football league. Look how championship wages have sky rocketed in recent years and it’s only going to end one way and that’s clubs going out of business . 

Have been hoping the bubble would burst for 20 years, have given up now aint going to happen in my lifetime.

I don't blame any player or anyone getting what they can, hell we all would.

But I can never get my head around this short career thing. What do you think they should do when they finish playing football? 

Retire at 35? Lets face it a normal job they will never do. But putting something back into society with the skills they have would be great.

Any players (these 35yos) that do must give them self worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nibor said:

Don't see why it wouldn't be, as a sellable commodity he'd probably command a transfer fee of £60-80m and he's in the last year of his deal.  It's a strong negotiating position.

This - Chelsea can pay him 200k a week and still make a decent profit on him. 

I must be the only one who doesn’t give a shit how much these players are paid, sky pay 10m per game so why shouldn’t the players earn a fortune?

When your at the top or your profession in the entertainment business you get big bucks, no different to movie stars or bands 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Henry said:

Why should what Chelsea pay their players have anything to do with Bolton?

equally, as often mentioned, why should players be paid less because someone who chooses to join the army, is paid a low wage.

Give it to the nurses! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said:

 

 

I’m sure there are plenty more I could have quoted, so certainly not aimed at you guys specifically... but have you got a Sky Sports subscription..?

If so, then there's only yourselves to blame for this type of situation.  

Similarly, you don't watch any football or sport on a satellite channel then?

I haven't got so much of an issue with it for players that have proven themselves & done it regularly at the top level but how long have we heard pundits & ex-pros saying that the youngsters don't have any reason to have any desire because they're already driving around in their Bentley's & already owning their multimillion pound houses etc.

In a way, look at the situation that Gareth Bale is in at Real Madrid, earning over half a million a week but no longer deemed as required but with 3 years on his contract, why should he leave? He doesn't have to 'earn' his money ever again, he's looking at £78m for just turning up to training!

As for Odoi, he's played a blinder (or his agent has), Chelsea can't waste millions in the transfer market so they have money sat around doing nothing so let's give it someone who is only just legally allowed to bet, drink & vote, what can possibly go wrong with an 18 year old earning £1m in a month?

Look at the blame that Steven Caulker put on having too much money & too much time on his well documented troubles at such a young age! And as if £180,00 per week isn't enough for this teenager, let's give him some added bonuses as well because he needs that extra money!

And those that blame Sky subscriptions, do you guy's have any vices? Drink, smoke, gamble? I spend my money on enabling me to watch sport that I have grown up playing & watching since I was a kid, I'm now in a physical position where I'm unable to partake in these sports & I'm likely to struggle to watch my team live for every game because of the physical pain I will be in, despite me having a season ticket! And for the record, I don't smoke or very rarely drink alcohol so should I blame everyone who drinks & / or smokes to be held accountable for the drain that these vices cause on our NHS? Of course not!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nibor said:

 ..... better than most industries where it goes to shareholders who don't provide anything.

other than the money to be used as

 

capital to build factories or offices

buy machines and equipment to put in those places 

provide jobs for people to work using that equipment 

giving holiday, sick pay, maternity pay, severance pay and a pension for those workers to go and spend on cider or football!

Other than that I guess those pesky shareholders (or pension funds!) can keep their filthy money and put it back under the floorboards. Or they could spend it on building roads for the Romans to go straight back home right now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Loco Rojo said:

Couldn't the football authorities look at options to introduce salary/ spending caps regardless of the money brought in to the game? Perhaps they could distribute the money more widely across the football pyramid or grass roots football. Do they not have any control over the rules of the sport? 

There must be options to consider rather than fall back on the usual excuse (not aimed at you) that fans need to stop spending money of Sky subscriptions.

Against employment law isn’t it? Restriction of trade etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing there’s so many about that wouldn’t ever dare indulge in Sky or watch a game on Sky

They don’t drink and support pubs subscriptions for sky , or gamble with any of the firms that pay massive amounts into football , and to Sky in advertising ......

and so on.....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Against employment law isn’t it? Restriction of trade etc

Dont know. Is it really? Dont companies have wage structures today with salary caps at certain grades? There would surely be ways to legally implement caps to limit the amount of crazy spending or limit the amount of money clubs can spend each season and that budget has to be spent on a balance of wages and transfers/fees.  Surely something drastic has to change what is fast spiralling. Giving £100k per week to an 18 year old child is just wrong. Football hasn't even got itself in order to support these young kids of the impacts it. Crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Loco Rojo said:

Couldn't the football authorities look at options to introduce salary/ spending caps regardless of the money brought in to the game? Perhaps they could distribute the money more widely across the football pyramid or grass roots football. Do they not have any control over the rules of the sport? 

There must be options to consider rather than fall back on the usual excuse (not aimed at you) that fans need to stop spending money of Sky subscriptions.

In this country it seems that since the formation of the premier league the simple answer is no. The power in the game is where the money is and that is with big clubs. 

Any attempt to restrict or limit players salaries would be seen as limiting  their ability to be competitive by the biggest clubs and they would make sure the status quo would prevail.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say good luck to him. Anyone who says they wouldn’t grab what he’s getting with both hands is kidding themselves. He’s just 1 player amongst hundreds in the PL being paid ‘obscene’ amounts by clubs who still make profits over and above this, and will continue to do so as long as the tv/betting sponsors  can use football to peddle their wares. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, downendcity said:

All this while Bolton's players and staff haven't been paid a penny for over 5 months. 

One month of his salary would probably cover all of Bolton's staffs' outstanding wages!

Football's moral compass was sold at a car boot sale 20 years ago I'm afraid.

 

 

 

Bolton's situation is not just down to their last owner, it is also a consequence of them overspending when they were in the Prem and racking up massive debts. I don't recall their fans protesting at the time.

Gartside wanted to pull up the drawbridge precisely because he knew this kind of thing could happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Loco Rojo said:

Couldn't the football authorities look at options to introduce salary/ spending caps regardless of the money brought in to the game? .

No the EPL runs itself.

 

1 hour ago, Loco Rojo said:

Perhaps they could distribute the money more widely across the football pyramid or grass roots football. Do they not have any control over the rules of the sport? 

 

Money from the EPL's income (from tv?? ) is distributed through football,

The FA control the rules of the game played in the EPL not the governance of its coffers.  

1 hour ago, Loco Rojo said:

 

There must be options to consider rather than fall back on the usual excuse (not aimed at you) that fans need to stop spending money of Sky subscriptions.

What you are desiring goes against the nature of the EPL. Its a success. Its success is based on having the biggest tv revenue in the World of league football, which surpasses Germanys and Spains put together, the EPLs sponsorship and commercial revenue is again the biggest in football and that is fed into the wages to keep that cycle going. 

Huge wages are the players slice of the pie. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kodjias Wrist said:

People keep saying the bubble will burst etc etc but why would it? Just gonna get worse. 

Ask yourself why the Premier League are struggling to attract a high quality replacement for Scudamore. Or indeed why Scudamore left.

Chances are they know that they would find it hard to continue delivering growth in TV revenue, especially domestically, as the market might be approaching saturation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AppyDAZE said:

You know the old one where you used to hear non-football people saying  "But he's just kicking a ball about"

Well, when you see the way it is RAPIDLY going..  I'm sort of coming round to their way of thinking.

I mean, as annoying as the protesters were last week.. we do have climate problems, do have a political balls-up over Brexit etc etc

we do have millions and milions of people suffering in the world

and £100,000 a week as a starting wage for a boy who can "kick a ball about a bit." Sick. End of story.

Why don’t you stop paying to watch city, stop your pint, stop buying shirts etc and give it to the poor?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...