[RMCF]

I know there has been a lot of money sloshing around the game for a while now, but for some reason this summer seems to have really got to me, and the figures getting bandied around are becoming sickening.

Reports that Madrid were willing to pay Ronaldo anywhere between £180K - £200k PER WEEK hit first.

Then we had Frank Lampard (who loves Chelsea) not happy with £120K on a 4 year deal but wanted an extra year when he will be well finished. Reports today suggest they will give him his 5 year deal at £150K PER WEEK.

And latest report today that Kaka will sign for Chelsea probably next summer for £250K PER WEEK, or £1million per month.

Its very sad, and the beginning of the end I believe.

Thoughts?

[sdb123]

Originally Posted by RMCF

Thoughts?

My thoughts...paper talk.

[Chaos]

These players only earn so much as the clubs know it is an investment. The merchandise fans buy because of these players can far outweigh the cost to the club.

[overkill]

Originally Posted by Chaosx

These players only earn so much as the clubs know it is an investment. The merchandise fans buy because of these players can far outweigh the cost to the club.

Err', I think that misses the point so badly it's unreal.

Besides, a club can only earn so much from Merch, gates fee's, sponsorship, TV etc. If every top player starts talking that sort of money, and, once a few get away with it they all do, things are going to get very ugly.

Bearing in mind, and I'm sure RMCF noted this, that a recession is just around the corner.

Besides if I hear one more 'old lag' tell us that footballers 'deserve it' because they have 'short careers' I'm going to scream! Who does have a 'long' career these days?

That line worked (just) in the days of 'jobs for life' but it's old hat now.

[Steven]

Originally Posted by overkill

Bearing in mind, and I'm sure RMCF noted this, that a recession is just around the corner.

When people no longer drive up the M6 and pay the cost in petrol to watch Manchester United (with or without Ronaldo), then we will know we are in a recession

[Chaos]

Originally Posted by overkill

Err', I think that misses the point so badly it's unreal.

Besides, a club can only earn so much from Merch, gates fee's, sponsorship, TV etc. If every top player starts talking that sort of money, and, once a few get away with it they all do, things are going to get very ugly.

Bearing in mind, and I'm sure RMCF noted this, that a recession is just around the corner.

Besides if I hear one more 'old lag' tell us that footballers 'deserve it' because they have 'short careers' I'm going to scream! Who does have a 'long' career these days?

That line worked (just) in the days of 'jobs for life' but it's old hat now.

Why does it miss the point - surely it is exactly the point. The only reason these players get the money is because we as fans pay for it. It's simple economics really. If a player will generate more money than he is costing then he is a good investment.

[overkill]

Originally Posted by Chaosx

Why does it miss the point - surely it is exactly the point. The only reason these players get the money is because we as fans pay for it. It's simple economics really. If a player will generate more money than he is costing then he is a good investment.

@LFC,

No, the point is that these figures are mickey mouse money. No player, 'investment' or otherwise, is worth more than some sponsors pay for an entire football club, per season. At the moment, as many clubs outside the big four mind, are finding, keeping up with the 'joneses' is a game they cannot play for much longer. It's no surprise, in a World where lower down the league, but increasingly reaching higher, players wages are sending clubs to the wall, that clubs are desperate to find 'sugar daddies'.

For precisely that reason - players, without massive extra investment, aren't worth what any club is paying for them, and they won't get it back.

Not to mention the fact that £100,000 a week is a sick joke for some modestly skilled bloke to knock a football about, never mind £150-200,000.

[DJT75]

Is Kaka or Ronaldo worth £8-10million a year? Probably yes.
Is Seth Johnson worth £2million a year? No.

We're talking two different things here - sportsman famous the world over & top of their profession, & very average overpaid sportsman.

I have no problem paying the very top players in Europe a top wage - how much do the top Ice Hockey, Basketball, Baseball, US Football players get paid? Much more on average I would've thought.

It's the fault of clubs paying over the odds to very average individuals that's wrong. I don't think you can cap wages, but you can certainly bring in a tiered system where you have to earn your rewards.


The Lampard situation is laughable though - he's 30, he's definitely not going to improve or even maintain any sort of form for 5 whole years from now so why anyone would offer him that contract is ridiculous. Pay for what you're getting - max 3 year contract with spiralling (downwards) wages.

[overkill]

Originally Posted by DJT75

Is Kaka or Ronaldo worth £8-10million a year? Probably yes.
Is Seth Johnson worth £2million a year? No.

We're talking two different things here - sportsman famous the world over & top of their profession, & very average overpaid sportsman.

I have no problem paying the very top players in Europe a top wage - how much do the top Ice Hockey, Basketball, Baseball, US Football players get paid? Much more on average I would've thought.

It's the fault of clubs paying over the odds to very average individuals that's wrong. I don't think you can cap wages, but you can certainly bring in a tiered system where you have to earn your rewards.


The Lampard situation is laughable though - he's 30, he's definitely not going to improve or even maintain any sort of form for 5 whole years from now so why anyone would offer him that contract is ridiculous. Pay for what you're getting - max 3 year contract with spiralling (downwards) wages.

That is one of the biggest myths of all time m8. A recent, and excellent programme on US sport proved that and for all. Yes, with tons of advertising to the point of wondering if you are a person or a prop, and during the season US sports stars can make a lot of money. But here's the catch - they ain't contracted during the close season. As such they either live on what they earn during the season or do other work. Only the really huge stars make megabucks. Even then the same rule applies.

Which means EPL footballers earn miles more than they do over a whole fiscal year.

I cannot justify spending more on wages than a club can afford, and, with clubs ever more desperately searching for 'sugar daddies' it's clear that TV revenue, and what's coming through the gate/merch cannot cover that chunk of outgoings for much longer.

As such no matter how 'good' any player is, they cannot surely be worth seeing the club become a rich man's plaything?

Besides, I still cannot justify paying a footballer more in a week than a top surgeon will earn in a year.

It's BS, simple as.

[DrWise]

No player is worth 100k+ a week
not ronaldo, not kaka not lampard nobody

[Chaos]

Originally Posted by wiser1

No player is worth 100k+ a week
not ronaldo, not kaka not lampard nobody

Back up that argument. I bet that the money Ronaldo earns for Man Utd far outweighs his wages.

[Steven]

Morally? Yes we all agree nurses should be paid more but society seems to value footballers more. Remember at the end of the day the money comes from us: the consumer. Whether directly or indirectly through merchandising, TV subscriptions or buying products and services of sponsors

From a self-sustaining point of view, see the above paragraph for why RM are reportedly willing to pay Ronaldo per week

[overkill]

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

Morally? Yes we all agree nurses should be paid more but society seems to value footballers more. Remember at the end of the day the money comes from us: the consumer. Whether directly or indirectly through merchandising, TV subscriptions or buying products and services of sponsors

From a self-sustaining point of view, see the above paragraph for why RM are reportedly willing to pay Ronaldo per week

I think not. Hence why RMCF is so nervous. Real bought a barrowload of stars a few years back, and, according to the 'they'll make it all back through marketing etc' line they should therefore have been minted. They weren't, they got hugely into debt and had to start selling, racking up prices, and calling in all the shots to get out of trouble.

If that can happen to Real with their lineup, with their fanbase, with their markets around the World, it can happen to anyone.

I'm afraid we all tend to live in cloud cuckoo land (like the clubs themselves) when it comes to football. The game is waiting to fall flat on it's face, just as it did last time it spent, and spent, and spent while thinking the bubble couldn't burst and that we'd keep on digging deep to fund it.

The only problem was, it did.

Burst that is.....................

The warning signs (just as they were in the early 80's) are there to be seen, but no one cares to notice.

[dablk]

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

Morally? Yes we all agree nurses should be paid more but society seems to value footballers more. Remember at the end of the day the money comes from us: the consumer. Whether directly or indirectly through merchandising, TV subscriptions or buying products and services of sponsors

From a self-sustaining point of view, see the above paragraph for why RM are reportedly willing to pay Ronaldo per week

Could not agree more...are these muppets worth 150k a week.. not a chance..is a nurse/fireman/home carer...utterly...sadly none of them sell shirts/shoes/tv rights. We know that their salarys dont really come from just ticket sales...man utd (biggest stadium) probably bring in around 4 million per home match. I bet that doesnt even come close to their out gongs for the week.

La Galaxy made Beckham one of the richest sportsmen on the planet. And recent figures suggest that they sold more shirts than any other team in the world last season.

It just a shame they could not be more humble with their ludicrous earnings. I once worked out Rio Ferdinand did my yearly wage by 4pm on monday..thats one maybe two trainning sessions and a free lunch...I think i could cope.

The sad truth is "the working mans game" has nothing to do with the man in the stand anymore.

[Steven]

Read this interesting American take on the English game

Conclusion: only accountants are ever happy in the world of football

[overkill]

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

Read this interesting American take on the English game

Conclusion: only accountants are ever happy in the world of football

Can't argue with that.

Sadly.

The interesting thing is, is that a guy I know online from the US (by know I mean we send each other gifts for our kids and speak on the phone) is high up in a sports firm. I asked him what his take on Beckham was, given that he's a football fan himself. Note 'football', he never calls it 'soccer'.

His view is that US football, while being a patriot he'd love to see it take on the best, and have a strong league, hasn't benefited one iota from Beckham's presence. He may draw in the crowds to see him, and sell a load of shirts of his name, but that's not helping US football long term.

His company have seen no fiscal improvements for the other clubs, bar when LA are in town, and predict no long term boost for the game once Becks retires.

The reason for such gloom? The US loves a celebrity, and that's what Becks is. However, fame, they also conclude, is a fleeting thing.

Experts in the US game are commenting on the lack of quality in the game, quality that is so lacking a certain European coach recently commented on his arrival, that players don't need to be working on tactics, they need to be working on basic skills! As one English pundit said, he's never heard that said about a supposedly 'major' club before in his life.

It's this, the lack of 'trickle down', the lack of talent across the board, that's worrying those, like my friend who really knows the US game, not how much 'money can be generated'. It is, after all, only money. Unless, and the evidence suggests it isn't, it goes back into improving the game. An all too familiar situation even to us Europeans.

Frankly I'd rather take his view, someone working at grass roots level in the US, who loves the game, than what someone working with figures alone predicts.

[Steven]

Well for anyone to think for one second that they could compete with the triple force of baseball, NBA and the NHL was in cloud cuckoo land

Or they knew this but put up a united front for the press

[the.godfather]

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

Well for anyone to think for one second that they could compete with the triple force of baseball, NBA and the NHL was in cloud cuckoo land

Exactly.
Even if every single Premiership player moved to the MLS, I still don't think the US would care all that much.

When up against the NFL and the NBA? lol, no chance.

[davepuma]

I don't think its the other sports (NFL/NHL/NBA/NASCAR ) etc. that are holding soccer football back in the US. Its the TV and advertising companies. I attended a NBA game at MSG once and witnessed how they call time outs etc. based around live TV. It was pathetic (although I enjoyed the game). American team sports are based around small timeslots simply to accommodate commercials and as football is 45mins a half, the yanks will never put up with it, or maybe they have short attention spans?

I can't believe that Beckham joined LAG and especially not for that much money. His contract must tower above everyone else's and how can that be? He's a has been and its obvious he's only there to sell shirts and fit in with the celebrity culture and Hollywood set (or maybe that's just his wife, I never have worked out what she does).

I totally agree with the comments, we're being priced out of the game and in the current climate, its simply not on that these guys are commanding these wages. Governments constantly strive to keep inflation in check by limiting wage increases so why should these guys be different? Pretty soon, noone will be able to afford to attend the games and football will be purely a televised sport and we'll end up with smaller leagues (or just one) with just massive clubs ala NFL. Sky are to blame, they've corrupted our game, chucking money at clubs and we're being lulled into a false sense of security. Eventually the bubble will burst. However its big business and once greed takes over, it can only go one way. I stayed in a hotel once with the sky tv crew the night before a live televised game and gave them both barrels over several whiskies (they were buying). All I got back was look at how the big clubs are full of (overpaid) superstars and that sky's money had brought football on. It has to a certain degree, I don't think anyone can argue with the quality of general broadcasting and the upper tier of games are reasonably entertaining but you can't say the same for Stoke v Hull on a wet Wednesday night in November can you?

[overkill]

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

Well for anyone to think for one second that they could compete with the triple force of baseball, NBA and the NHL was in cloud cuckoo land

Or they knew this but put up a united front for the press

Agreed.

But it also proves the point that simply pouring money in does not make for better quality. It takes a lot more than that, and it's a point many modern fans seem to either fail to understand or simply follow Sky's line that if you throw enough money at something it'll come good.

It won't.

[Chrisoldinho]

I think the difference in class (money) has started and will continue to get worse, the gap between the top 4 now and 5th is £50m, you can pretty much tell who will win the league, who will be 2nd and so on. It's the same at the bottom, any team who comes up is destined to go straight back down. With the exception of WBA I think this years promoted teams really aren't prepared and I full expect stoke and hull to be relegated probably with WBA thinking about it.

And there lies the problem, you get the same teams in the top flight time and again creating more and more money for themselves which in turn wrecks lower league teams as they cannot compete.

Unless some big player comes in with a few £ billion then I think football is destined to be down right boring and will all the foreign talent we have our national side will never improve either.

Oh and only the Captain should be able to speak to the referee & any chat back should be an instant red card. Finally teams should be made to field a set number of english players / have a dedicated english academy.

[addyb]

Originally Posted by wiser1

No player is worth 100k+ a week
not ronaldo, not kaka not lampard nobody

Totally agree, its absolutely stupid money. Short careers? Jeez i wish when i retire at 55-60 i could have millions in the bank, fleets of cars, houses etc oh and then maybe get a management type role to last me another 20 years.

[Chrisoldinho]

There are millions of people who play football and only a few thousand ever make it. Yes the money is a lot, but I personally know people who had trials for several clubs. One of them played for Man City Reserves, then Ipswich before finally being released and now he gets £80 a week playing for Farsley Celtic. A bit of a come down, and he'd put his entire life into football, meaning he had no other qualifications.

Yes at the top the money is ridiculous, but below the top flight the money soon dries up and thousands upon thousands of people never make it / only make a medicore income from the game.

Prehaps alongside the ridiculous wages, every club should be made to pay into a fund to help those who don't make it retrain so that they can have a career outside of football.

[Kdot]

Don't talk to me about money in football...I'm off to Kenilworth Road to see Luton Town (versus Port Vale) today.

Proper football - none of this over paid prima donna b.s.

[Nebby]

Originally Posted by RMCF

I know there has been a lot of money sloshing around the game for a while now, but for some reason this summer seems to have really got to me, and the figures getting bandied around are becoming sickening.

Reports that Madrid were willing to pay Ronaldo anywhere between £180K - £200k PER WEEK hit first.

Then we had Frank Lampard (who loves Chelsea) not happy with £120K on a 4 year deal but wanted an extra year when he will be well finished. Reports today suggest they will give him his 5 year deal at £150K PER WEEK.

And latest report today that Kaka will sign for Chelsea probably next summer for £250K PER WEEK, or £1million per month.

Its very sad, and the beginning of the end I believe.

Thoughts?

This from a Real Madrid fan

[McFaber]

Originally Posted by Nebby

This from a Real Madrid fan

Yeah, I'm a RM fan also and like RMCF I'm appalled with the amounts being sloshed about for quite frankly from what I've seen over the years an over-rated talent....

[Nebby]

Just to clarify, I wasn't having a pop at RMCF.

I just found it funny / ironic that a Real Madrid fan was complaining about the money spent on players, what with the Club's Galactico transfer policy and all.

IMHO, clubs are perfectly entitled to spend what they want on a player.

Also, players such as Frank Lampard are pefectly entitled to reject any contract offer made, and shouldn't be criticised for doing so.

He's a very lucky man in that he happens to be at the top of his professional tree; a professional tree that also happens to pay extremely well!

It makes me want to scream when I hear people bleating on about underpaid nurses and that footballers shouldn't be paid as much as they are.

There are hundreds of other professions that pay better than nursing, and hundreds of other that pay less then nurising too. What should either have any bearing on what a sportsman earns?

[RMCF]

Originally Posted by Nebby

Just to clarify, I wasn't having a pop at RMCF.

I just found it funny / ironic that a Real Madrid fan was complaining about the money spent on players, what with the Club's Galactico transfer policy and all.

IMHO, clubs are perfectly entitled to spend what they want on a player.

Also, players such as Frank Lampard are pefectly entitled to reject any contract offer made, and shouldn't be criticised for doing so.

He's a very lucky man in that he happens to be at the top of his professional tree; a professional tree that also happens to pay extremely well!

It makes me want to scream when I hear people bleating on about underpaid nurses and that footballers shouldn't be paid as much as they are.

There are hundreds of other professions that pay better than nursing, and hundreds of other that pay less then nurising too. What should either have any bearing on what a sportsman earns?

Nebby, I appreciate that you weren't having a go at me, but you will notice that the first example I gave was Madrid and what they were willing to pay Ronaldo weekly.

I was one of the few Madrid fans who DIDN'T want them to sign Ronaldo, and am happy he's staying at Utd. Firstly, I think he might make us more exciting to watch, but despite winning 2 consecutive La Liga's I know that he wasn't the entire answer to the clubs problems. We are not a great side at present, and I believe spending all the funds on 3 or 4 players would make better football sense. OK Ronnie would have sold kit and raised our profile back to the Beckham days, but I don't think we would have won the CL again with him while the rest of the team has deficiencies.

Madrid is also a notorious club for in-fighting, and the arrival of a guy on £150k per week would have put a lot of noses out of joint.

So I think its good for football that Utd made a stand against Ronaldo, and won.