Current Page: 1 of 3
Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: Bod (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2020 19:23

Thus argues Landsdown


'To continue to drive the commercial growth of the game, we must keep the best players in the Premiership.
'The right high-profile internationals encourage investment, appeal to new audiences and aid team performance. This challenging period should be used as an opportunity to reflect and explore how we can keep developing rugby through bold, innovative ideas.
'Now is not the time to take a step back and stifle progress.'

I think we'll find a few clubs who will object to this position since they patently do not have the strength in depth. However, I tend to sympathise with the Bears position - Landsdown is very committed to all of his projects under the Bristol Sports umbrella, but he is insistent, in every instance, that every entity stands on its own financial feet.
Maybe a discipline that the rest of the Prem should adopt?

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2020 19:31

Well the majority of PRL members wanted to lower the cap in the coming seasons according to various reports in the papers but were opposed by Bristol, Bath and Exeter Chiefs.

It will be interesting to see if it's a vote that could be forced through on a supermajority? My guess is all three of the above would throw copious legal challenges their way if they tried which tbf is at least partially understandable given legal commitments they would already have.

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: John Tee (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2020 19:40

I dont really mind but maybe limit marquee...
I think a fair play scheme is of more use, ie you can only spend a percentage of what you earn... so well supported and efficient clubs would be better placed.
That would also achieve collective sustainability for the RPL imv

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: dcsh (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2020 19:45

Quote:
John Tee
I dont really mind but maybe limit marquee...
I think a fair play scheme is of more use, ie you can only spend a percentage of what you earn... so well supported and efficient clubs would be better placed.
That would also achieve collective sustainability for the RPL imv
Iím told that the way this work with football is that clubs with super rich owners offer incredibly expensive seats (think multiple millions of pounds) for matches that the same very rich owners buy and hey presto the club revenue increases...

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: John Tee (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2020 19:50

And that is why rugby needs to get a grip because that is fundimentally, 'bent' in my view.

If people can think like that, then what other schemes will they come up with to circumvent rules.
Does not auger well....

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: DanWiley (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2020 20:11

Combine the two: have a cap and still say you can't spend beyond your means.

Lansdown just seems upset because he can't buy success.

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2020 20:21

Quote:
dcsh
Quote:
John Tee
I dont really mind but maybe limit marquee...
I think a fair play scheme is of more use, ie you can only spend a percentage of what you earn... so well supported and efficient clubs would be better placed.
That would also achieve collective sustainability for the RPL imv
Iím told that the way this work with football is that clubs with super rich owners offer incredibly expensive seats (think multiple millions of pounds) for matches that the same very rich owners buy and hey presto the club revenue increases...

That was the Man city sponsorship issue that got them in trouble...Arsenal sponsorship by Emirates was £90m over 15 years. Man City through Etihad which is owned by the same people as Man city...£400m over 10 years.



[Adoptee 19 / 20: The High ball and counter attack meister, Tom Homer]

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: dcsh (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2020 20:30

Quote:
BathMatt53
Quote:
dcsh
Quote:
John Tee
I dont really mind but maybe limit marquee...
I think a fair play scheme is of more use, ie you can only spend a percentage of what you earn... so well supported and efficient clubs would be better placed.
That would also achieve collective sustainability for the RPL imv
Iím told that the way this work with football is that clubs with super rich owners offer incredibly expensive seats (think multiple millions of pounds) for matches that the same very rich owners buy and hey presto the club revenue increases...

That was the Man city sponsorship issue that got them in trouble...Arsenal sponsorship by Emirates was £90m over 15 years. Man City through Etihad which is owned by the same people as Man city...£400m over 10 years.
Thanks, crazy money, people that rich seem to think they can do as they please and rules are for others.

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2020 20:59

Quote:
dcsh
Quote:
BathMatt53
Quote:
dcsh
Quote:
John Tee
I dont really mind but maybe limit marquee...
I think a fair play scheme is of more use, ie you can only spend a percentage of what you earn... so well supported and efficient clubs would be better placed.
That would also achieve collective sustainability for the RPL imv
Iím told that the way this work with football is that clubs with super rich owners offer incredibly expensive seats (think multiple millions of pounds) for matches that the same very rich owners buy and hey presto the club revenue increases...

That was the Man city sponsorship issue that got them in trouble...Arsenal sponsorship by Emirates was £90m over 15 years. Man City through Etihad which is owned by the same people as Man city...£400m over 10 years.
Thanks, crazy money, people that rich seem to think they can do as they please and rules are for others.

Breaking news. They can and they are.



... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: Banachek (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2020 23:59

looking at what average players earn , I can't see why we need Marquees outside the cap ?...
What about keeping marque players and the salary cap including marques at 7 mill ...
To do it the clubs need a salary band formulae with a max of two (marquees) players on top salary of £400,000.

So for example - a club could adopt a 4 band formulae , if you want a player to get more someone else has to leave and be replaced by a cheaper player

So you could have 2 players on £400,000 £800,000 ( lets say the marquees)
4 players on ave £250,000 £1,000,000 (regular 1st team/ internationals )
6 players on ave £200,000 £2,000,000 (regular 1st team )
10 players on ave £150,000 £1,500,000 ( occasional 1st team/injury/bench cover )
18 players on ave £94,000 £1,692,000 ( promotion from academy/ young talent)
---------------
Total £6,992,000
Don't know if these figures are unrealistic (looking at stats from rugby pass these are pretty good salaries compared to the typical, excluding marquees) but sound pretty good salaries to me and would work if system adopted by all clubs and no marquee paid more than £400,000 and a max squad of 40 players .
A club could decide not to have players in the top band (or maybe 1) so have even more cash to pay players in the lower bands,any combination as long as no one paid over £400,000.

So firstly don't see why marquees should get ridiculous salaries compared to other players, are they really that much more entertaining and guarantee winning ? Maybe..maybe not Would they leave our shores in droves if they were to know to play in the Prem you will earn a max of 400K ?

Also why do clubs struggle with the cap, the salaries I've given are a higher than I;ve seen when googled. I think its paying marquees silly money which is the biggest problem for sustainability

Just some thoughts..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 19/05/2020 00:48 by Banachek.

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 19 May, 2020 06:14

I think that most prem squads are bigger than 40 players, considerably so in a couple of cases, so that would skew the maths. The 40 player cap would be a squeeze when you throw in some injuries and international windows I think.

Take this Quins example from this year:

[www.quins.co.uk]



[Adoptee 19 / 20: The High ball and counter attack meister, Tom Homer]

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)
Date: 19 May, 2020 07:33

Quote:
DanWiley
Lansdown just seems upset because he can't buy success.

BC is rich and he hasnít managed any success, Lansdown must be aware of that.

Those wanting financial fair play schemes for rugby are in dreamland if they think it will work. Football is dominated by rich owners and the fair play scheme hasnít had any real impact on their ability to buy trophies.

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: DanWiley (IP Logged)
Date: 19 May, 2020 07:52

The cap stops BC and others just buying the league and it's been pretty effective. I'm not proposing dropping that, I'd reduce it.

However, it's too high. The game isn't sustainable with our current wages. That's a bad thing.

I think we'd be better off showing the game CAN break even before we crank up the costs in the hope of, somehow, making money.

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)
Date: 19 May, 2020 08:01

Probably not a bad idea to reduce the cap, although will mean no English club can compete in Europe though.

Perhaps reduce marquee to 1 player initially then remove altogether. Cap reduced to say £5m

Risk is any reduction in salary could drive playerS abroad. How would we feel if a number of high profile England players decide that family financial security matters more than international caps?

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: John Tee (IP Logged)
Date: 19 May, 2020 08:07

Quote:
Banachek
looking at what average players earn , I can't see why we need Marquees outside the cap ?...
What about keeping marque players and the salary cap including marques at 7 mill ...
To do it the clubs need a salary band formulae with a max of two (marquees) players on top salary of £400,000.

So for example - a club could adopt a 4 band formulae , if you want a player to get more someone else has to leave and be replaced by a cheaper player

So you could have 2 players on £400,000 £800,000 ( lets say the marquees)
4 players on ave £250,000 £1,000,000 (regular 1st team/ internationals )
6 players on ave £200,000 £2,000,000 (regular 1st team )
10 players on ave £150,000 £1,500,000 ( occasional 1st team/injury/bench cover )
18 players on ave £94,000 £1,692,000 ( promotion from academy/ young talent)
---------------
Total £6,992,000
Don't know if these figures are unrealistic (looking at stats from rugby pass these are pretty good salaries compared to the typical, excluding marquees) but sound pretty good salaries to me and would work if system adopted by all clubs and no marquee paid more than £400,000 and a max squad of 40 players .
A club could decide not to have players in the top band (or maybe 1) so have even more cash to pay players in the lower bands,any combination as long as no one paid over £400,000.

So firstly don't see why marquees should get ridiculous salaries compared to other players, are they really that much more entertaining and guarantee winning ? Maybe..maybe not Would they leave our shores in droves if they were to know to play in the Prem you will earn a max of 400K ?

Also why do clubs struggle with the cap, the salaries I've given are a higher than I;ve seen when googled. I think its paying marquees silly money which is the biggest problem for sustainability

Just some thoughts..

On those figures it is no wonder people are over cap..
A club might not have too many players over 400k, but I'd think most internationals would be 250 plus.

I think a maquee player is going to be around 650/700 so I'd cap that combined as 1.2m ish.
But then again i havent got a problem with 8m in total, for example.

No one is going to like reducing wages, least of all RFU, because they could lose players.

I think the elephant in the room in regards to some sort of reform and sanction is the RFU which is why i also think not much will change.

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 19 May, 2020 08:19

Cap reductions / marquee removals would take 2 - 3 years to work through the system anyway so its no quick fix for those currently really in trouble.



[Adoptee 19 / 20: The High ball and counter attack meister, Tom Homer]

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: Banachek (IP Logged)
Date: 19 May, 2020 08:28

Quote:
BathMatt53
I think that most prem squads are bigger than 40 players, considerably so in a couple of cases, so that would skew the maths. The 40 player cap would be a squeeze when you throw in some injuries and international windows I think.
Take this Quins example from this year:

[www.quins.co.uk]

Wow ! Can't believe the size of the squads, from 51 at London Irish to 64 at Wasps, including senior academy players. Bath have 63 players on the roster for 19/20 ,second to Wasps (from rugbypass). Yep that makes a big difference to salary costs.
But doesn't that mean even more reason for clubs to think about capping marquee salaries and use that money to pay solid experienced players in the lower wage bracket who can do a good job at prem level when the club is hit by a rash of injuries ? I'm just a bit uncomfortable with a very few players earning 2-4 or maybe 5 times other players I'd guess in a few cases, when clubs are financially unsustainable without a sugar daddy to keep it going. .

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: Sarriebone (IP Logged)
Date: 19 May, 2020 12:04

Quote:
Banachek
Quote:
BathMatt53
I think that most prem squads are bigger than 40 players, considerably so in a couple of cases, so that would skew the maths. The 40 player cap would be a squeeze when you throw in some injuries and international windows I think.
Take this Quins example from this year:

[www.quins.co.uk]

Wow ! Can't believe the size of the squads, from 51 at London Irish to 64 at Wasps, including senior academy players. Bath have 63 players on the roster for 19/20 ,second to Wasps (from rugbypass). Yep that makes a big difference to salary costs.
But doesn't that mean even more reason for clubs to think about capping marquee salaries and use that money to pay solid experienced players in the lower wage bracket who can do a good job at prem level when the club is hit by a rash of injuries ? I'm just a bit uncomfortable with a very few players earning 2-4 or maybe 5 times other players I'd guess in a few cases, when clubs are financially unsustainable without a sugar daddy to keep it going. .

From the various teams' websites their squads are:
Bath: 48
Bristol: 47
Chiefs: 67
Harlequins: 47
Gloucester: 40
Tigers: 48
Irish: 44
Saints: 54
Sale: 33
Saracens: 41
Wasps: 45
Warriors: 45

Chiefs and Northampton I believe include their senior academy players on their squad pages



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 19/05/2020 12:43 by Sarriebone.

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: DanWiley (IP Logged)
Date: 19 May, 2020 12:21

ouch, Sale. I'm a fan of the smaller squad (yes with plenty of caveats), but even I'm thinking, pretty much, two players per position is quite trim.

Re: Existing Salary Cap and Marquee Players must be retained
Posted by: dcsh (IP Logged)
Date: 19 May, 2020 12:46

If that Sale figure is correct and they are spending up to the cap as reported there are some big salaries there! So one can see why they are managing to sign players.

Current Page: 1 of 3
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net