Not one of these INTK accounts has got our number one target right

Would you say the player would be a marquee signing ?

Would you say the player would be a marquee signing ?

I’d say fans will be happy but I suspect he will end up L1, and that isn’t because Vale are not prepared to pay

4 minutes ago, vale victory said:

Would you say the player would be a marquee signing ?

no the marquee is for more toilets on the paddock!

Personally i THINK Vale are offering more wages than people realise to get the players in,more than we have before

1 minute ago, werstayinup said:

Personally i THINK Vale are offering more wages than people realise to get the players in,more than we have before

Maybe this year. Last season it was a moderately smaller budget than the season before although the Clark signing made it almost equal. Some of the existing players have had significant pay rises.

1 minute ago, JRC said:

Maybe this year. Last season it was a moderately smaller budget than the season before although the Clark signing made it almost equal. Some of the existing players have had significant pay rises.

I fell off my seat when I heard a rumour of what Clark was on last year!!!

Good interview with Askey:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p08myd0v

Talks about:

- Testing

- What trainings been like (very interesting - no contact so no tactical work, mostly fitness; puts us at an advantage as 90% of our squad know how to play this system?)

- Discuss Visser, GK, and Bradbury, ST, specifically Bradbury's qualities

- Talks of signing players he wouldn't normally expect to sign

- Taylor and Clark

- Friendlies (3 booked in, League 1 opposition)

 

We signed an experienced striker who had scored lots of football league goals in Tyrone barnett 3 years ago and he was an absolute donkey for us so I dont mind if we signed another youngster like bradbury could turn into a brooker/mcphee signing. 

6 minutes ago, Andy Proctor said:

We signed an experienced striker who had scored lots of football league goals in Tyrone barnett 3 years ago and he was an absolute donkey for us so I dont mind if we signed another youngster like bradbury could turn into a brooker/mcphee signing. 

Tbf Tyrone Barnett's best season was 13 goals six years before we signed him. He was a slow target man playing alongside a slow target man in a turgid side under two poor managers.

If we're hand-picking past players in order to judge our current signings, I could point to myriad untested forwards who have come in and flopped.

A lad who can come in and effectively guarantee us double figures is what will turn this side from a very effective, top 7 chasing outfit into one that can do battle with the top 3. They're out there, but obviously not cheap.

If Cullen can avoid the injuries that have impacted him for 3 seasons, or if Pope can roll back the years, or if Rodney can hit the ground running, then we'll be fine. Personally, I'd prefer us to have that solid option so if any of the above do encounter problems, we're not at a disadvantage.

The squad is already good, but Askey alludes to wanting another forward in his interview and playing the waiting game for players who usually wouldn't be available due to COVID.

This isn't moaning; just realistic targets and it sounds as if Askey and the club feel the exact same way.

Edited August 6, 20205 yr by Joe B

Interesting point from Garlick - players who are signed before tomorrow's vote on the salary cap WON'T have their wages fully count towards the cap, should it be voted through with the requisite 2/3 majority.

Any player signed before will count for £68,000 towards the cap for the duration of the contract (doesn't specify whether this is just players whose wages are in excess of 68k, or any player who is signed, even if their wage is under 68k).

This is why this week has been so busy in terms of other clubs (looking at you, Bolton and Salford) scrambling to get deals over the line.

https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/port-vale-salary-cap-signings-4402372

Interesting point from Garlick - players who are signed before tomorrow's vote on the salary cap WON'T have their wages fully count towards the cap, should it be voted through with the requisite 2/3 majority.
Any player signed before will count for £68,000 towards the cap for the duration of the contract (doesn't specify whether this is just players whose wages are in excess of 68k, or any player who is signed, even if their wage is under 68k).
This is why this week has been so busy in terms of other clubs (looking at you, Bolton and Salford) scrambling to get deals over the line.
https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/port-vale-salary-cap-signings-4402372

Seems rusehd to just bring it in straight away like that.

43 minutes ago, Gallifreyan Valiant said:

53 minutes ago, Joe B said:

Interesting point from Garlick - players who are signed before tomorrow's vote on the salary cap WON'T have their wages fully count towards the cap, should it be voted through with the requisite 2/3 majority.
Any player signed before will count for £68,000 towards the cap for the duration of the contract (doesn't specify whether this is just players whose wages are in excess of 68k, or any player who is signed, even if their wage is under 68k).
This is why this week has been so busy in terms of other clubs (looking at you, Bolton and Salford) scrambling to get deals over the line.
https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/port-vale-salary-cap-signings-4402372

Seems rusehd to just bring it in straight away like that.

I think there will be a year's transition, but if you signed a player tonight on a 2 year contract, annual wage of £150,000, for the 2 years of his contract he'd only count towards £68k of the salary cap.

So you'd get a year of saving £82k, which you can then spend on another decent player.

Must say, I'm liking the idea of this salary cap more and more. If only it could be implemented across professional football, with one year transitions (with reduction targets to meet) for relegated clubs. Would make things far more enjoyable/open.

Would have to have an independent auditor to ensure clubs don't cook the clubs, but long-term it would be lovely to wake up on a Saturday morning knowing the opposition aren't paying £5k a week for the flavour of the month in a mad gamble to scrape home in third.

Wishful thinking, though.

Edited August 6, 20205 yr by Joe B

I think there will be a year's transition, but if you signed a player tonight on a 2 year contract, annual wage of £150,000, for the 2 years of his contract he'd only count towards £68k of the salary cap.
So you'd get a year of saving £82k, which you can then spend on another decent player.
Must say, I'm liking the idea of this salary cap more and more. If only it could be implemented across professional football, with one year transitions (with reduction targets to meet) for relegated clubs. Would make things far more enjoyable/open.
Would have to have an independent auditor to ensure clubs don't cook the clubs, but long-term it would be lovely to wake up on a Saturday morning knowing the opposition aren't paying £5k a week for the flavour of the month in a mad gamble to scrape home in third.
Wishful thinking, though.

I think a cap is needed but it shoulf be fone via all divisions including yes the Premier league

1 hour ago, Joe B said:

Interesting point from Garlick - players who are signed before tomorrow's vote on the salary cap WON'T have their wages fully count towards the cap, should it be voted through with the requisite 2/3 majority.

Any player signed before will count for £68,000 towards the cap for the duration of the contract (doesn't specify whether this is just players whose wages are in excess of 68k, or any player who is signed, even if their wage is under 68k).

This is why this week has been so busy in terms of other clubs (looking at you, Bolton and Salford) scrambling to get deals over the line.

https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/port-vale-salary-cap-signings-4402372

It's whatever they are paid or 68k, whichever is lower. I'm guessing our real budget is more than the formula to calculate the budget under the salary cap for the players we already under contract. So there is no rush to make more signings as we still have some flexibility. Probably explains why we've gone cold on Clark and Taylor as they are probably both going to cost more than 68k to loan and we weren't going to get the deal done before any cap came into play. My guess would be we have 12 to 14 players in the squad on 68k or more. So there is a theoretical 200 - 250k we could still spend, assuming other players are on about 45 to 50k on average. My guess is the actual wages are already at or above the salary cap with the players who extended their contracts or who have already signed. Someone like Whitehead was widely reported to be on 2500 a week at Salford. He's clearly not on that with us and did a deal with Salford to end his contract but I'm sure he still comes in above 68k.

Explains why there have been quite a few 2 or 3 year deals handed out. Clubs like Bradford could be left paying real wages for Guthrie and Vaughan for the remainder of their contracts if the vote goes through. I'd imagine both are on double 68k and more. So they become 10% of a total wage budget the minute a vote goes through for a buying club. The only way they will offload is settle a large part of the contract as compensation for a lower wage at a new club. Some clubs will have signed some expensive flops over the last fortnight they may well go on to regret.

There's probably been a lot of work on spreadsheets over the last month balancing actual budgets, existing contracts under the cap formula and working out how much to spend and when. January will be interesting as a lot of clubs will be at their limit and not have the flexibility to bring players in.

3 hours ago, Iron Curtain said:

I fell off my seat when I heard a rumour of what Clark was on last year!!!

I was lead to believe he cost more than Pope per week.