Time for an EPL salary cap???

[DaveBond21]

In Australian sports, in particular Rugby League (big in Sydney), Aussie Rules Football (big in Melbourne) and Rugby Union, the major league in each sport enforces a salary cap on each team.

This means that you can’t buy success, like Chelsea. You have to keep the wages under a certain level. This means that the competition is very even. Take the NRL (National Rugby League) for example. Since 2000, there have been 8 different champions! That is great for the fans, as they can all dream of seeing their team at the very top, something anyone outside of Man United, Arsenal and Chelsea hasn’t been able to do for 20 years. Can you imagine if the champions were Everton, then Man City, then Newcastle, then Bolton? It’s virtually the same story with AFL, with lots of different winners of the last 6-7 years?
The only downside to this, is that if you bring up great young players through the ranks, you eventually have to sell them to remain under the cap. But this is a small price to pay for the competitiveness of the league.

Do you think this would work in football, in particular the Premier League?

 

[TX Bill]

I don't only because you'd have to institute it in each country for it to work.

That or a player could go play in Spain or Italy because they weren't constrained by salary limitations.

I'm not saying it's a bad idea however. I just don't know how it could be implemented properly.
​

 

[NeoNaoNeo]

Thought there should be caps ages ago. You can say it has benefited our league in that English teams win the UCL more often now, but I don't see us winning it. If it was a more pound for pound oriented league we might actually be able to challenge for it.

 

[DaveBond21]

Thought there should be caps ages ago. You can say it has benefited our league in that English teams win the UCL more often now, but I don't see us winning it. If it was a more pound for pound oriented league we might actually be able to challenge for it.

Yes, it's a nice idea, but hard to implement, as already mentioned, and also the fact that it would have to be UEFA-wide. I also like the maximunm foreigner rule which will come into European games but should be implemented for all leagues too.

 

[Tennessee Blue Mike]

It will eventually find it's way to the EPL. Just like the number of limited foreign players will. Were there is smoke there is fire.

 

[TX Tiburon]

Rather than a salary cap, I think that the EPL would benefit more from a more equitable profit sharing model within each of the divisions. The current structure is most equivalent to MLB here in the US. Major League Baseball is the least equitable league that we have when comparing small to large market teams. Smalls teams are much less likely to win. The Yankees and Red Socks are the ManU and Chelski of American baseball. Everton has to work with a shoestring budget much like the Oakland A's. We both can put quality teams together, develop some talent, and threaten the big guys on occasion, but our hope of winning the championship is slight and will have difficulty keeping true superstars on the team for the long-haul.

The most thoroughly competitive and successful sports league we have in the US is the NFL, where profit sharing is much more equitable. Granted, the NFL also has a salary cap but Bill's point is well taken. The English league would make themselves uncompetitive with other countries with a salary cap. It's a world market for football/soccer players. American football does not have such competition.

The NFL should be the model in revenue sharing. The competition for players is much more even and the product that is put on the field is more balanced between teams - all without loosing the excitement. For Pete’s sake, the moribund Arizona Cardinals can even jump up and make their way to a championship game.

 

[toffeestillidie]

Rather than a salary cap, I think that the EPL would benefit more from a more equitable profit sharing model within each of the divisions. The current structure is most equivalent to MLB here in the US. Major League Baseball is the least equitable league that we have when comparing small to large market teams. Smalls teams are much less likely to win. The Yankees and Red Socks are the ManU and Chelski of American baseball. Everton has to work with a shoestring budget much like the Oakland A's. We both can put quality teams together, develop some talent, and threaten the big guys on occasion, but our hope of winning the championship is slight and will have difficulty keeping true superstars on the team for the long-haul.

The most thoroughly competitive and successful sports league we have in the US is the NFL, where profit sharing is much more equitable. Granted, the NFL also has a salary cap but Bill's point is well taken. The English league would make themselves uncompetitive with other countries with a salary cap. It's a world market for football/soccer players. American football does not have such competition.

The NFL should be the model in revenue sharing. The competition for players is much more even and the product that is put on the field is more balanced between teams - all without loosing the excitement. For Pete’s sake, the moribund Arizona Cardinals can even jump up and make their way to a championship game.

i don't believe profit sharing can be effective with a relegation system

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Salary caps aren't a good idea and wouldn't work in football because it would require global cooperation. The NRL works because it's pretty much a closed shop. Leading Aussies can't go to England because they'd lose the international jersey. That's the English league where three teams dominate by the way. Just as many football teams have won the PL as RL teams have won super league in recent years.

 

[Cahill's Metatarsal]

No, I don't see why everyone keeps looking to rugby as the example that football should always follow. Yes, something may have worked for rugby but football is a far bigger sport both in this country & worldwide, so to say "Oh, it's worked for rugby so that means it would work for football" is a bit naive.

While nowadays teams are just getting stupidly rich owners who can afford to throw vast amounts of cash around, teams like Man Utd have built success with excellent long-term planning & management. Creating a salary cap would take away the advantage that they've earned by right & while it may be exciting for the crap teams to all of a sudden be on a level playing field, you can bet your last penny that that vast majority of United fans wont be happy with the idea.

Why should their fans be starved of the success that they've earned over time just because they've been good enough to get so far away from other teams that it's really difficult for them to be caught? If Everton had got to that level & someone tried to change the rules because we were better than everyone, I'd be absolutely fuming. Just because the majority of fans aren't in that situation & see it as their only chance of winning something, does that make it a good idea? No it doesn't.

 

[evilwebby]

As discussed, I'm not sure how workable a salary cap would be, but I would be in favour of such a move. No football club should be allowed to continuously spend more than they can generate.

I also think there MUST be a maximum number of foreign players allowed - say, 3 or perhaps 4 of the starting 11 must be English/British. I look at Arsenal or Liverpool's starting teams and despair - it cannot be good for the health of the national game.

These two ideas would compliment each other well, and encourage clubs to invest in their own youth policies.

 

[DaveBond21]

As discussed, I'm not sure how workable a salary cap would be, but I would be in favour of such a move. No football club should be allowed to continuously spend more than they can generate.

I also think there MUST be a maximum number of foreign players allowed - say, 3 or perhaps 4 of the starting 11 must be English/British. I look at Arsenal or Liverpool's starting teams and despair - it cannot be good for the health of the national game.

These two ideas would compliment each other well, and encourage clubs to invest in their own youth policies.

I like the idea because to me, it's ridiculous that people talk about "the race for 4th place", or that the relegation battle is more exciting than the Championship race. That is crazy. Of course, it's true but it shouldn't be the case. Look at the last 10 winners of the Premier League - Man Utd, Man Utd, Man Utd, Arsenal, Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea, Chelsea, Man Utd, Man Utd.

Compare the same decade in Australian Rugby League:- Melbourne, Brisbane, Newcastle, Roosters, Penrith, Bulldogs, Wests, Brisbane, Melbourne, Manly. Manly are the current champions, and are languishing in 14th place (3rd from bottom). Imagine Man United in 14th place and you've just imagined the Premier League with a salary cap.

If it could work, it would be great...

 

[coolblue007]

I agree with the many statements against a Salary Cap. I, too, don't think it would work unless all UEFA leagues do it too. I would, however, like to see some sort of rule in place to keep teams from going further and further into debt just so they can buy any player they want. I don't mind it when I see one club outspend another ... but it irritates me when I see one club out-borrow all the rest. That's not really reaping what you sew. That's just irresponsible.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

As I said (not very well it would seem) the NRL works because its a closed shop. There is no real labour movement. Greg Inglis isn't going to play in Super League for more money because he'd lose SoO and his Aussie jersey.

Look at the last ten winners of Super League:
Wigan; Saints; Saints; Bradford; Saints; Bradford; Leeds; Bradford; Saints; Leeds; Leeds.

Kinda blows the salary cap argument out of the water doesn't it?

 

[Cahill's Metatarsal]

Manly are the current champions, and are languishing in 14th place (3rd from bottom). Imagine Man United in 14th place and you've just imagined the Premier League with a salary cap.

If it could work, it would be great...

Why is that such a great thing though? As I've said, United have earned that success & they've got to the point where every club in football would love to be. Why should we just change the rules because they're got themselves in a position where they're better than the vast majority of teams? Isn't that unfair on them? It's a competitive sport, changing the rules solely because some team is the best defeats the object of competing in the 1st place

 

[steevie]

Why is that such a great thing though? As I've said, United have earned that success & they've got to the point where every club in football would love to be. Why should we just change the rules because they're got themselves in a position where they're better than the vast majority of teams? Isn't that unfair on them? It's a competitive sport, changing the rules solely because some team is the best defeats the object of competing in the 1st place

The thing is, all this money that the Big Clubs have is slowly killing the game. Once this European Super League eventually materializes which will happen one day, where will that leave us? Playing in a second rate, second tier competition, that's where. I am not saying the richest clubs should give up what they have built up over the years, that would just be unfair, but having a salary cap in place would be a good idea. Tranfer fees have gone through the roof and could have spiraled out of control if Manchester City had have been successful in their pursuit of Kaka.