"Clubs also agreed to maximum 20-man squads, although players under the age of 21 will be exempt from this and the salary cap, and squads of 22 will be allowed in 2020-21 in a transition season."
So we can have 22 players over the age 21 in total.
George Boyd having his contract cancelled because of the wages cap. The 35 year old ex Charlton youth player and Chatham born, is leaving the Posh.
The new normal is kicking in quickly now.
The Peterborough manager told the club website: "With the new salary cap regulations, we just couldn’t find a way of fitting George into it."
Bit of a weird thing to say imo when the Peterborough owner was one of the people to vote for the cap
The new cap is clearly ageist , otherwise why boot out the old guy. I don't see it wasting. Indeed why vote for it if this happens. Very like Brexit where everyone says "I didn't vote for that" if no deal happens.
At Peterborough last season, the two highest wage earners were Marcus Maddison (what ever happened to him ?) and George Boyd.
The days of Catermole earning 50k a week in League 1 have gone. (He signed in premiership)
Will Griggs leaving Wigan for Sunderland on 31/1/19 deadline day for 4 million !
The above is why the cap was voted in.
Will Griggs knew he made a mistake in leaving (an article in a Wigan paper) 4 goals in 45 matches for the Wearsiders confirmed his loss of form.
I'm not sure Sunderland are the reason why the cap was needed, as their finances and income bear no relation to those of the majority of L1 and L2 clubs.
It's clubs like Salford which are spending money which bears no relation to their income
Sunderland's average home gate last season (pre Covid break) was in the region of 30,000. Salford's was nearer 3,500. If Salford go up then their cap will be the same as that of Sunderland next season. That doesn't seem fair.
Couldn't the cap should be linked to revenue from previous season attendances? That way the cap will reflect actual money through the gate and not be influenced by money coming from the Man United boys and their backers as that will only be sustainable all the time they are around. Equally, you can't just take attendances into account without linking it to ticket sales because of "kids for a quid" type games artificially inflating these. There should still be a "floor and ceiling" to the cap but there has to be a differential.
the ballot in League One for a £2.5m cap was tighter, with 16 clubs in favour, seven against and one withholding their vote
24 votes, 66% for, 29% against, 4% withheld.
I am not sure what the quorum required for passing a resolution is (curtailment of the season was >50% vote, but other votes have been a higher quorum) but just two clubs have held the position of power which has swung it in favour of the cap.
As I have read on here, Charlton were included in the vote as it was post-relegation, so I assume we were one of the 7 against.
El(l)iot(t) claimed to own us then so I think he would be in favour of a cap simply because he is boracic lint in terms if owning a football club.
thats is a good point. I wonder who did vote. Might have been Mikhail?
"Clubs also agreed to maximum 20-man squads, although players under the age of 21 will be exempt from this and the salary cap, and squads of 22 will be allowed in 2020-21 in a transition season."
So we can have 22 players over the age 21 in total.
"Clubs also agreed to maximum 20-man squads, although players under the age of 21 will be exempt from this and the salary cap, and squads of 22 will be allowed in 2020-21 in a transition season."
So we can have 22 players over the age 21 in total.
"Clubs also agreed to maximum 20-man squads, although players under the age of 21 will be exempt from this and the salary cap, and squads of 22 will be allowed in 2020-21 in a transition season."
So we can have 22 players over the age 21 in total.
"Clubs also agreed to maximum 20-man squads, although players under the age of 21 will be exempt from this and the salary cap, and squads of 22 will be allowed in 2020-21 in a transition season."
So we can have 22 players over the age 21 in total.
"Clubs also agreed to maximum 20-man squads, although players under the age of 21 will be exempt from this and the salary cap, and squads of 22 will be allowed in 2020-21 in a transition season."
So we can have 22 players over the age 21 in total.
"Clubs also agreed to maximum 20-man squads, although players under the age of 21 will be exempt from this and the salary cap, and squads of 22 will be allowed in 2020-21 in a transition season."
So we can have 22 players over the age 21 in total.
"Clubs also agreed to maximum 20-man squads, although players under the age of 21 will be exempt from this and the salary cap, and squads of 22 will be allowed in 2020-21 in a transition season."
So we can have 22 players over the age 21 in total.
That's an interesting one, I once played against him in a school game years ago when we both must have been about 15. I went up for a corner and he was marking me so to try and put me of he kept pinching my ass along with a few other dirty tactics lol.
Perhaps it was because you have a really cute arse
"Clubs also agreed to maximum 20-man squads, although players under the age of 21 will be exempt from this and the salary cap, and squads of 22 will be allowed in 2020-21 in a transition season."
So we can have 22 players over the age 21 in total.
Isn't this a loan with an obligation to buy at the end of the season ? Sure I read the loan fee was 5 mill (though it's been dragging on so that may have changed) I assume that's so uddersfield can avoid paying us all that we are due ?
Isn't this a loan with an obligation to buy at the end of the season ? Sure I read the loan fee was 5 mill (though it's been dragging on so that may have changed) I assume that so uddersfield can avoid paying us all that we are due ?
Like to see em try, we'd send Ryan round to "av a word in their shell like"
Everton have just released Shani Tarashaj. Strange one that. Was thought to be a real prospect four years ago and then seems to have played progressively fewer games since then, culminating in not playing a single game on loan at an Eredivisie club who cut it short. I wonder if we would have a look at him, no idea if he's completely gone to pieces or just needs a fresh start. Striker/winger
If was still championship possibly yes. But A lot of people seem to keep forgetting about this cap or are being completely unrealistic. The guy would fit with Charlton as he has basically been injured almost 90% of his time out on loan which is why he was sent back one year yes one year early. He also was on 17,500 a week so don’t think he would sign for 2k a week somehow to a league one club. We need to focus on a striker in league 2 on bottom end of league one who may sell to us and be able to not have issues with salary cap. Or a loan for an unproven but talented prem 2 striker would be a much more realistic option.
Just depends on the player really and what they want to achieve. We're definitely not paying Williams what he was on at Palace (£20,000 pw), or Amos what he was on at Bolton (£16,000 pw). Even Pratley was on £14,000 pw at Bolton. Sure they signed before the cap, but Chris Gunter was on £20,000 pw at Reading and you can bet he's not on that now. If a player wants to make a fresh start and prove himself then he'll take a decent pay cut if that's what he wants to do. The fact he's cancelled his contract with Everton implies he wants to play somewhere. I don't know if he's fit to play or if we'd be interested in him, or if he just wants to sit on a pile of money like a dragon, but just ruling players out because they earned more money off their last contract isn't wise. The only way we're getting anywhere with this cap is uncovering players at a lower level on lower wages than what we can offer, or finding players who played at a higher level and have foundered or reached an age where they need to take a cut to keep playing. Rule no-one out
Said this the other day, come the close of the window there could be a lot of players out of contract that we couldn't afford to pay their demands but all of a sudden 100k a year might be preferable to fuck all. Problem is do we scrape the barrel just to get numbers in or wait & hope to pick some up who's out of contract.
Everton have just released Shani Tarashaj. Strange one that. Was thought to be a real prospect four years ago and then seems to have played progressively fewer games since then, culminating in not playing a single game on loan at an Eredivisie club who cut it short. I wonder if we would have a look at him, no idea if he's completely gone to pieces or just needs a fresh start. Striker/winger
If was still championship possibly yes. But A lot of people seem to keep forgetting about this cap or are being completely unrealistic. The guy would fit with Charlton as he has basically been injured almost 90% of his time out on loan which is why he was sent back one year yes one year early. He also was on 17,500 a week so don’t think he would sign for 2k a week somehow to a league one club. We need to focus on a striker in league 2 on bottom end of league one who may sell to us and be able to not have issues with salary cap. Or a loan for an unproven but talented prem 2 striker would be a much more realistic option.
Just depends on the player really and what they want to achieve. We're definitely not paying Williams what he was on at Palace (£20,000 pw), or Amos what he was on at Bolton (£16,000 pw). Even Pratley was on £14,000 pw at Bolton. Sure they signed before the cap, but Chris Gunter was on £20,000 pw at Reading and you can bet he's not on that now. If a player wants to make a fresh start and prove himself then he'll take a decent pay cut if that's what he wants to do. The fact he's cancelled his contract with Everton implies he wants to play somewhere. I don't know if he's fit to play or if we'd be interested in him, or if he just wants to sit on a pile of money like a dragon, but just ruling players out because they earned more money off their last contract isn't wise. The only way we're getting anywhere with this cap is uncovering players at a lower level on lower wages than what we can offer, or finding players who played at a higher level and have foundered or reached an age where they need to take a cut to keep playing. Rule no-one out
Said this the other day, come the close of the window there could be a lot of players out of contract that we couldn't afford to pay their demands but all of a sudden 100k a year might be preferable to fuck all. Problem is do we scrape the barrel just to get numbers in or wait & hope to pick some up who's out of contract.
If needs must, then you let Dills walk after the window shuts and use his wages. Technically its a swap deal anyway.
That's an interesting one, I once played against him in a school game years ago when we both must have been about 15. I went up for a corner and he was marking me so to try and put me of he kept pinching my ass along with a few other dirty tactics lol.
Perhaps it was because you have a really cute arse
Comments
So we can have 22 players over the age 21 in total.
How many do we currently have?
Amos, Phillips, Gunter, Inniss, Oshilaja, Pearce, Purrington, Forster-Caskey, Lapslie, Pratley, Gilbey, Watson, Oztumer, Williams, Maddison, Washington, Aneke, Bogle
Magennis
So Alfie, Albie, Ian and Charlie all under 21 so don't count and we could, leaving money aside for a moment, sign three more over 21 aged players.