Guthrie - YES PLEASE...he would fit into your style of play excellently.

Denis - NO THANK YOU ... over rated.

7 minutes ago, JRC said:

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

This is true. Now you can see why kids are happy to play at u23 level when they are earning more than 100k a year for doing so. Crazy money. 

9 minutes ago, JRC said:

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.

This is why I'm liking the salary cap. Some proper long-term strategy.

"Can we sign player X? Is he worth 8% of our salary cap? How many minutes will he play? What % of our salary cap is taken up next year? Do we need to leave 5% for January?"

American sports employ it and it largely works well, although there isn't any promotion or relegation. 

If the Big 6 would up sticks and form the European Super League, you could probably implement a salary cap across all professional divisions, with transition periods for relegation. You'd need arbitration to stop silly bonuses/employing relatives etc but I think there's legs in the idea if we genuinely want sustainable, competitive pyramid in the long-term

Would encourage fiscal responsibility and long-term planning, looking for value as opposed to 'let's sign as many players as possible and hope for the best!"

I was against it at first but really coming round to it now.

1 minute ago, PV1973 said:

This is true. Now you can see why kids are happy to play at u23 level when they are earning more than 100k a year for doing so. Crazy money. 

He's a very good footballer but that's madness. Is a fullback ever worth that much?

From his perspective, he'll earn a load of money training at top facilities, earn a few loan spells where he excels, and find himself a nice landing spot in 2 years. Not a bad move.

On 05/08/2020 at 14:28, PV1973 said:

To me sinclairs role is a bit unclear... 

One or two puzzling comments like this one - thank Goodness Frank Sinclair is absolutely crystal clear about his role - listen to his interview. Also I'd suggest that his role is clear to the other people that matter - those who pay his wages? Nobody else needs to concern themselves!

23 minutes ago, Joe B said:

This is why I'm liking the salary cap. Some proper long-term strategy.

"Can we sign player X? Is he worth 8% of our salary cap? How many minutes will he play? What % of our salary cap is taken up next year? Do we need to leave 5% for January?"

American sports employ it and it largely works well, although there isn't any promotion or relegation. 

If the Big 6 would up sticks and form the European Super League, you could probably implement a salary cap across all professional divisions, with transition periods for relegation. You'd need arbitration to stop silly bonuses/employing relatives etc but I think there's legs in the idea if we genuinely want sustainable, competitive pyramid in the long-term

Would encourage fiscal responsibility and long-term planning, looking for value as opposed to 'let's sign as many players as possible and hope for the best!"

I was against it at first but really coming round to it now.

We will see. Think the maximum wage of any signings in league 2 for the remainder of the window from tomorrow will be 2k a week maximum whichever way the vote goes. The clubs who can pay above that have already gone big and probably spent their real and theoretical budgets. The clubs who need to make a lot of signings can't afford those type of wages and in a lot of cases have budgets under 1.5 million. There's a few clubs like us in the middle who probably have a bit of financial power left but 2k a week is probably the upper end of our real budget for a single player. I think the players hoping for the higher salaries will be reconsidering what they are prepared to settle for over the weekend regardless of the vote. The post covid stock market and lower league salary rallies may well have ended in the same week.

Whilst the idea of a salary cap sounds great and appealing I think that there are too many problems with implementing it.

What happens when teams are relegated and have contracted players? They can't terminate contracts. We certainly don't want anything similar to the existing parachute payments lower down the pyramid.

The same for teams promoted from non league with huge wage budgets. They have to be competitive in their league but can't terminate contracts or implement pay cuts if they go up.

Clubs down south particularly in London would also be at a disadvantage due to house prices and living costs.

Are bonuses included. If so what happens if a club win every game scoring a huge amount of goals & keeping a large number of clean sheets & use 2 extra subs each week etc and go over. If not whats to stop clubs just including huge bonuses to get around it.

Last season when Jake Taylor's car was damaged the club arranged a car for him. I'm sure a few years ago someone (possibly the Accrington chairman) said they got in trouble for buying the players a chippy on the way back if they won at away games. Are things like that included?

Often players are provided with temporary accommodation. Is that included?

Will clubs pay kit suppliers more for replica kits and gear that get sold in the club shop but get sponsors to give players individual boot sponsorships etc?

These and many more potential issues, workarounds and potential loop holes that clubs can and will exploit that can't be accounted for in whatever legislation is drawn up mean that for me it can't be practically implemented.

It will also make the national league even more attractive to good players.

1 hour ago, LancyTony said:

One or two puzzling comments like this one - thank Goodness Frank Sinclair is absolutely crystal clear about his role - listen to his interview. Also I'd suggest that his role is clear to the other people that matter - those who pay his wages? Nobody else needs to concern themselves!

Well it’s not puzzling if you take into account that I made that comment before his interview (which I haven’t heard yet btw). 

Edited August 6, 20205 yr by PV1973

A player with his background should extend knowledge and contacts. Aside from being a good coach that is valuable.

Well it’s not puzzling if you take into account that I made that comment before his interview (which I haven’t heard yet btw). 

12 hours ago, wotsyobeef said:

Whilst the idea of a salary cap sounds great and appealing I think that there are too many problems with implementing it.

What happens when teams are relegated and have contracted players? They can't terminate contracts. We certainly don't want anything similar to the existing parachute payments lower down the pyramid.

The same for teams promoted from non league with huge wage budgets. They have to be competitive in their league but can't terminate contracts or implement pay cuts if they go up.

Clubs down south particularly in London would also be at a disadvantage due to house prices and living costs.

Are bonuses included. If so what happens if a club win every game scoring a huge amount of goals & keeping a large number of clean sheets & use 2 extra subs each week etc and go over. If not whats to stop clubs just including huge bonuses to get around it.

Last season when Jake Taylor's car was damaged the club arranged a car for him. I'm sure a few years ago someone (possibly the Accrington chairman) said they got in trouble for buying the players a chippy on the way back if they won at away games. Are things like that included?

Often players are provided with temporary accommodation. Is that included?

Will clubs pay kit suppliers more for replica kits and gear that get sold in the club shop but get sponsors to give players individual boot sponsorships etc?

These and many more potential issues, workarounds and potential loop holes that clubs can and will exploit that can't be accounted for in whatever legislation is drawn up mean that for me it can't be practically implemented.

It will also make the national league even more attractive to good players.

All bonuses and sign on fees included - goals, appearances, clean sheets etc. Sign on fees includes relocation fees (or temp accomodation).

Only bonuses not included are promotion bonuses.

You'd have to run essential replacements, like a car, by some legal people but post-game bonuses would have to be declared I imagine.

Sponsorships can be checked against market value.

Edited August 7, 20205 yr by Joe B

Carlisle have sign Magnus Norman from Fulham - 23yo GK with a few non-league/EFL loans under his belt. Ex-England-18 international too.

This is the type of profile of a backup GK I was hoping we'd recruit this summer, someone to ultimately take over from Brown eventually.

18 hours ago, PV1973 said:

Well it’s not puzzling if you take into account that I made that comment before his interview (which I haven’t heard yet btw). 

You weren't the only one. I read the interview first, then made my comment.

Just now, LancyTony said:

You weren't the only one. I read the interview first, then made my comment.

Where’s the interview that he did?

Ollie Palmer signs for Wimbledon

The squad size limit of 22 and the exemption of under 21s from the squad and salary cap may have an impact on recruitment. We can only bring in 2 more players over 21 this season as we have 20 over 20s already registered. The normal FIFA definition of under 21 is a player who is no more than 21 when the competition starts. That would mean Vale could sign Harvey Bradbury AND 2 more players as he is 22 at Christmas. If this definition is adopted I believe it would also exempt Clark and Taylor from the salary cap rules.