Jump to content
Ron B

How much should players be allowed to earn?

When should players play for free  

12 members have voted

  1. 1. When should players agree to never get paid again?

    • Once they’ve earned £1million
      0
    • Once they’ve earned £2million
      0
    • Once they’ve earned £5million
      2
    • Once they’ve earned £10million
      1
    • Once they’ve earned enough to buy themself a pub to set themself up for retirement
      6
    • They should all play for free
      3


Recommended Posts

One of the weird things, even on this forum, is the claim that Messi is somehow personally to blame for Barcelona being in such a mess. 
“How much money does he need? He could play for free. He should play for free!”

A bold shout. Does anyone actually believe the is nonsense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Messi is personally responsible for Barca's financial woes? I've not seen anyone suggest this but it is reasonable to suggest that his wage demands are at least partly responsible.

 

How much money does Messi need? Not one penny more.

 

Messi could play for free? He could if he chose to do so, it's a fact.

 

Messi should play for free? I've not seen anyone say that.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumour is Grealish contract is 370k a week

 

 

Per this

story on the Grealish deal, he has signed a 6-year deal worth £115m (in wages), which, at £369,231 per WEEK, would make him the highest paid footballer in the history of English football.

 

Going to be fun for Edwards sitting down with Salah and Virg soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as they can get, but if clubs want to pay them that much, it counts against an annual UEFA-wide salary cap. Only way to regulate the market without creating a disparity between how much owners can earn and win, and how much players are entitled to for generating that cash. 

 

The conversation should be "how much should owners be allowed to earn." Those cunts provide nothing. Mere facilitators.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Lee909 said:

Rumour is Grealish contract is 370k a week

 

 

Per this

story on the Grealish deal, he has signed a 6-year deal worth £115m (in wages), which, at £369,231 per WEEK, would make him the highest paid footballer in the history of English football.

 

Going to be fun for Edwards sitting down with Salah and Virg soon

 

 

Wow, what was he on at Villa? Probably that much a month? City wouldn't have had to pay that much to get him to agree to a contract. Wouldn't surprise me if they deliberately inflated the wages precisely to put the squeeze on the likes of us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real question here is if Grealish is being paid that much, when he basically has no outstanding pedigree to speak of (not first choice for England, never played in Europe, spent a few years in the Championship etc), just how much would Kane be entitled to ask for as England captain and one of the top three goalscorers in Europe over the last five years or so.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the ownership that are the real problem.  Sports washing regimes with billions to waste distorting the market and greedy owners thinking of their own income rather than what's best for the sport.

Basically to sort football out there needs to be:

 

1. Majority fan ownership at all clubs

2. Better sharing of revenue from the champions league into all the leagues in Europe, rather than just into the same top clubs every year.

3. Limits on debt at clubs, this could also be a wages/turnover thing.

 

Then the player wages would pretty much take care of itself. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnnyH said:

Whatever an NHS nurse who died in Iraq earns. 

Assume you'll cancel whatever money you direct to football then (tickets; merchandise; pay-TV) and send it all to nurses in Iraq?

 

If everyone stood by these kind of hyperbolic statements there'd be no money in the game of football and nurses, firemen & the likes would have pockets swelling with gold. As it is, its a world of hypocrites; the salaries that these players generate does not come from thin air, it comes from every man woman & child who chooses to contribute money/time/attention to the sport, while public service workers take a government-funded salary and do not swim Scrooge McDuck style in a bank vault funded by the generosity of words.

 

As for what a player should earn? They should earn what any free agent in any regulated free society should earn: whatever the market deems them worth. Should there be caps & monitoring on market? Of course. But many of those who scoffed at a Super League that would -- at the very least -- have put-paid to the inflationary tactics of the Oligarchs/Sovereign State Funds are happy to get up in arms at the results it yields. C'est la vie.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jose Jones said:

It's the ownership that are the real problem.  Sports washing regimes with billions to waste distorting the market and greedy owners thinking of their own income rather than what's best for the sport.

Basically to sort football out there needs to be:

 

1. Majority fan ownership at all clubs

2. Better sharing of revenue from the champions league into all the leagues in Europe, rather than just into the same top clubs every year.

3. Limits on debt at clubs, this could also be a wages/turnover thing.

 

Then the player wages would pretty much take care of itself. 

But Barcelona are fan owned, arent they? It's the fans who want spend, spend, spend because they see other clubs spending or want the 'best' players to watch. Same with players, all this talk about how much should players earn? Forgive me, how many on here were saying give Gini what he wants (to stay)?

 

Im not convinced by fan ownership. Germany is held up as an example of it being good. But the Bundesliga has been won by one club for the last what, 8, 9 seasons, who poach all the best players from other Bundesliga clubs telling them to sit out their contract then they'll sign them on a free or for a reduced fee.

 

As you say, limiting club debt has to be an underpinning but even there, city can point to them being 'debt free' due to shady dealings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Alex_K said:

Assume you'll cancel whatever money you direct to football then (tickets; merchandise; pay-TV) and send it all to nurses in Iraq?

 

To my knowledge there were no NHS nurses in Iraq, let alone dead ones. Pretty sure it was a joke riffing off the ludicrous populism of the initial question.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

But Barcelona are fan owned, arent they? It's the fans who want spend, spend, spend because they see other clubs spending or want the 'best' players to watch. Same with players, all this talk about how much should players earn? Forgive me, how many on here were saying give Gini what he wants (to stay)?

 

Im not convinced by fan ownership. Germany is held up as an example of it being good. But the Bundesliga has been won by one club for the last what, 8, 9 seasons, who poach all the best players from other Bundesliga clubs telling them to sit out their contract then they'll sign them on a free or for a reduced fee.

 

As you say, limiting club debt has to be an underpinning but even there, city can point to them being 'debt free' due to shady dealings.

Yes, fans are also to blame because they are for the most part horrendously one eyed and only care about their club winning and not what is best for the game in the long run.  Which is why you need to have the debt and or turnover/wages rules in there.  

 

One of the problems with the Bundesliga is that Bayern Munich hoover up all the Champions League money year after year, on top of their other commercial advantages.  If that money is better spread out then the other teams have more chance to compete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

To my knowledge there were no NHS nurses in Iraq, let alone dead ones. Pretty sure it was a joke riffing off the ludicrous populism of the initial question.

That's OK then..

 

RE: Barca - blame Eric Abidal. Continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about what players earn alone its about the whole economy of the sport. If I open a store and pay my staff more than what the store earns and sell my products lower than what I buy them for because I'm wealthy and can do it, sure its great for my employees and customers but it fucks over any and all competition, eventually we are left with business that's run purely on the whims of those rich enough to be bothered. It's a sport that's over a century old it needs protecting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×