Why an EPL Salary Cap is a Terrible Idea

By: Martin | July 2nd, 2009

Arsenal Chief Executive Ivan Gazidis came out today and said that the Premiership should consider a salary cap to stabilize itself financially. He didn’t come out and say it, but I think it’s pretty clear this has been brought on by Manchester City’s profligate transfer fees and wages since the new ownership group has been in place.

It is undeniable that the idea has some superficial appeal. Like pretty much everyone else, I suppose, I have an inner 80-year old who thinks “Why, these players today, they make too much money! And these transfer fees are out of control! Why, back in my day….,” etc., etc. A salary cap, the theory goes, would keep player wages in check, and force teams to be more thrifty and thoughtful in their spending instead of simply throwing money at players.

There’s also the notion, which I believe is probably true, that a salary cap would provide more parity in the Premiership. If, for example, Blackburn and Manchester United were to spend the same amount of money in wages, their teams would theoretically be much closer in quality than they are at present (although due to prestige, fan support, etc., you’d have to think United would still be a substantially better team). Specifically, many of the big sides stockpile expensive talent only to have it sit on the bench–I believe at one point last season Spurs fielded a reserve side of quite a few players who had been bought for over £10 million. For example, if there had been a salary cap, it’s doubtful Chelsea would have been able to pay someone like Wayne Bridge such a high wage when he wasn’t even a member of the first team. So those types of players would now be starting at the Aston Villas, Boltons, and Evertons of the league, which would improve those squads and make the league more competitive, and pose a greater threat to the Big 4 monopoly.

So far, so good, right? More reasonable player salaries, which probably result in lower ticket prices; and a more competitive league in which the best players in the league actually play instead of sitting on the big clubs’ benches. So what’s the problem?

There are several, unfortunately. First off, unlike the examples cited by Gazidis, like the National Football League and the National Basketball Association here in the states, the EPL isn’t head and shoulders above any other league in the world. While most believe it is the preeminent league in the world, Spain and Italy both have premier soccer leagues which belong in the conversation, and France, Portugal, and Germany are not too far behind. The NFL and NBA can afford to have a salary cap because there’s really nowhere else for their players to go (although this has started to change a bit recently in basketball)–if they lower salaries 15%, that’s by and large still much more money than the players can make anywhere else, and there’s nowhere else that offers a comparable level of play. So the players just have to accept it.

But that’s not the case with the EPL. If Manchester United and Chelsea had to cut their wage budget by 25%, the fact is that they would have to lose players, and pay players less. But why would someone take less at Chelsea when they could go play for more at AC Milan or Real Madrid? Those leagues offer a comparable quality of play and atmosphere, and you could make more money. The bottom line is that unless every major soccer league in Europe agrees to a salary cap, which will never, ever, ever, ever happen, any league that does institute a salary cap will only be handicapping itself in terms of its quality of play relative to Europe’s other leagues. While English soccer would no doubt survive and still enjoy widespread support, placing artificial limits on salaries would send some of its best players elsewhere, and reduce it to a strong, yet not elite, domestic league, along the lines of Ligue 1 or the Bundesliga.

That also means, of course, that English clubs would become also rans in the Champions League. Since some of the better players would be leaving for greener foreign pastures, and the big clubs would have to get rid of reserve players, who often allow Big 4 managers to rotate their squads to keep people fresh to participate in multiple competitions, EPL teams would be at a major disadvantage to clubs from other nations which didn’t have salary limitations. Spanish and Italian clubs, for example, would be able to field stronger, deeper squads, and would most certainly have the upper hand against English clubs.

For all its benefits, then, I think it’s fairly certain that a salary cap would likely have the effect of stripping the Premiership of its “best league in the world” status. And I, for one, am not anxious to see Premiership players bolting their clubs for Serie A or La Liga clubs, and I’m certainly not anxious to watch Inter, Barca, AC, Real, and Juve take turns lifting the Champions League trophy year after year.

The bottom line is that each club must be responsible for its own financial well-being. As an Arsenal supporter, I am very proud to support a club which has shown that a club can be competitive without a rich moneybags owner pouring his own cash into the club and without taking on massive amounts of debt which it can’t pay off. There’s really no reason a club can’t be self-sustaining and competitive, and it would certainly be nice if other clubs followed our lead. But the bottom line is that if a Mansour or Abramovich wants to operate their club at a loss by pouring hundreds of millions of pounds to satisfy their myriad personal inadequacies by buying a bunch of players who win a trophy and then being able to claim that they themselves won something, hey–it’s their club, and their money. You may think salaries are out of control, but the guys drawing those salaries are world-class athletes with unthinkable talent and skill, whom we’re willing to watch week in and week out, and pay money for tickets, replica shirts, etc. If the market pays it, it necessarily means that that’s what they’re worth. End of story. Obnoxious as they are, Manchester City are assembling an impressive collection of talent and seem primed to make a legitimate challenge to the Big 4, and I for one think it’s going to make this upcoming season very interesting. And I urge you not to pay much mind to all the chicken littles out there who claim otherwise.



Arsenal EPL Match ScheduleBet on Arsenal games Travel to soccer games Discount Travel to London & Arsenal
Arsenal ScoresBuy arsenal TicketsEmirates Stadium information & hotels


Category Category: Rants

Subscribe
 

rss_icon The Offside RSS Feeds

Print
Print article
Share
del.icio.us:Why an EPL Salary Cap is a Terrible Idea digg:Why an EPL Salary Cap is a Terrible Idea reddit:Why an EPL Salary Cap is a Terrible Idea fark:Why an EPL Salary Cap is a Terrible Idea Y!:Why an EPL Salary Cap is a Terrible Idea stumbleupon:Why an EPL Salary Cap is a Terrible Idea

Comments   |  Add your comment

  • Martyn |  July 2nd, 2009 at 7:13 am

    cornercorner

    Some interesting points, near-namesake! Any semblance of a salary cap that offers potential parity would take years, maybe decades to implement, and it’d have to be a blanket notion smothered on all leagues by UEFA.

    Posted from United Kingdom United Kingdom

    cornercorner
  • adimente |  July 2nd, 2009 at 7:19 am

    cornercorner

    Let’s say there were a salary cap in EPL.

    Then, if yo ask me, it wouldn’t change the fact that the big four would still dominate the league. Foreigners and young talent would play for prestigious club and under mastermind manager. It would certainly help weaker club to get stronger, but, the big clubs attract foreigners because they not got the money, but they have “history”, “fame” and they are so known internationally that every new-comers would say: It was my dream to play for such a club!

    When there is a war between the big four to obtain the services of a certain player, ultimately, what will drive the player to choose one club over the three other? Money? They can all offer him the same amount of money! It will be prestige. A player might want to play for Blackburn, but if he has the choice to go somewhere else, as example Liverpool, I doubt that he’ll choose Blackburn.

    Posted from United States

    cornercorner
  • Homey |  July 2nd, 2009 at 8:10 am

    cornercorner

    Interesting points you make. I’m still a fan of a salary cap though, but only if it’s throughout Europe. Which, as you point out, will likely never happen. I can dream anyway.
    I first started following the EPL in about 97-98, when Arsenal came from way back to win the title from MU. And they had a couple of Dutch players I really liked. So I got hooked on them since then. But what if I grew up a West Ham fan? What reason would I have to watch the league? I’d never be interested – ever. It makes most of the league quite dull and boring, really. I do enjoy the Champions League a lot more, since it pits fairly equal teams against each other. And of course since my team is in the running for some of the top prizes most of the time, I can stay interested.
    As a lot of American boys, I grew up watching baseball, among other sports. I was a Pittsburgh Pirates fan. They had some really good teams in the early 90s. Then all the great players left for bigger paychecks in other cities, and the Pirates have stunk ever since. Whenever they develop a player, he leaves for bigger money elsewhere. Kinda like developing Wayne Rooney, and then seeing him leave. Why continue to support Everton? And why should I watch the Pirates? Well, I don’t.
    In an ideal world, either FIFA or UEFA would mandate salary caps and revenue sharing. If it were done throughout Europe, a lot more teams would have a chance. And that means more fans of games. Just look at the NFL right now. Every teams has a chance to compete, and it’s become by far the biggest American sport. And it’s happened while baseball has crumbled.
    It’s true that the bigger name clubs will still have some advantages. It will never be totally even. For instance, bigger clubs can pay more to top managers. But still, I’ll dream of a day when there’s reason to hope for the Boltons and West Hams of the world.

    Posted from United States

    cornercorner
  • Lord Quas |  July 2nd, 2009 at 8:39 am

    cornercorner

    salary cap only takes money away from the players and puts it in the pockets of the owners… there would be no incentive for the owners to lower ticket prices when they could just make more money… basic economics

    Posted from United States

    cornercorner
  • citeh#1 |  July 2nd, 2009 at 9:01 am

    cornercorner

    enjoy your last year in the champions league

    Posted from United States

    cornercorner
  • Martin |  July 2nd, 2009 at 9:19 am

    cornercorner

    Hey everyone, good points, and thanks for stopping by and commenting.

    As a side note, I love how Citeh fans think they’re going to make the Champions League just because they keep buying strikers. I definitely look forward to Mark Hughes trotting out a revolutionary 1-1-9 formation this year….

    Posted from United States United States

    cornercorner
  • Homey |  July 2nd, 2009 at 12:07 pm

    cornercorner

    One other point that hasn’t really been addressed, but needs to be. A salary cap is probably separate from transfer fees. So even if salaries were capped, transfer fees might still keep the rich at the top and poor at the bottom. And I have no idea what proposal would cap transfer fees.

    Posted from United States

    cornercorner
  • Nick |  July 3rd, 2009 at 2:49 am

    cornercorner

    @ Homey- And don’t players generally receive 10% of their transfer fees?

    Posted from United States United States

    cornercorner
  • citeh#1 |  July 3rd, 2009 at 2:38 pm

    cornercorner

    laugh while you still can

    Posted from United States

    cornercorner
  • g |  July 3rd, 2009 at 3:17 pm

    cornercorner

    i appreciate the sentiment, but it sounds more like “id rather MY team dominate every year ad nauseum than see anyone else get to win something.”
    a better fix would be reverting to something more like the old european cups system, even if itll never happen.

    Posted from United States United States

    cornercorner
  • third eye |  July 4th, 2009 at 6:16 am

    cornercorner

    Could someone explain me this:

    http://goal.com/en/news/10/italy/2009/07/04/1363424/fiorentina-we-are-in-negotiations-to-sell-felipe-melo-to

    According to goal.com, Felipe Melo is on the verge of signing for Arsenal unless we accept to give them in return Emmanuel Eboue. The previous gossips linking Felipe Melo and Juventus appeared to be false. In fact, the offical site of Fiorentna has denieded thoses gossips by saying the only bidder in this story were Arsenal.

    >Martin said previously that Melo had extended his contract with Fioretina ad tha, even thought it wasn’t impossible for us to sign him, it would be very hard for us to get his services. How can they consider, now, to do such a exchange? Unless they really need a right-back or some sort of a utility man, I don’t see why they would let him go.

    >It might be because Fiorentina are afraid to see him go to one of their direct rivals. Why would he go? Probably to have a better chance of winning the champions league. Who knows?

    Stay tuned!

    Posted from United States

    cornercorner
  • Homey |  July 4th, 2009 at 6:50 am

    cornercorner

    Third Eye, I read the same thing. It sounds like a double blessing – bringing in Melo and dumping Eboue. Hopefully the rumors are true.

    Posted from United States

    cornercorner
  • third eye |  July 4th, 2009 at 7:53 am

    cornercorner

    lol Homey! normally, I’d say: Eboue is useful. Unloading him will have serious consequences for the up-coming season. He gives so much for the rotational system.

    However, with the up-coming talent plus the need of a central midfielder. Let’s not forget about the fact that Melo is is highly regarded after the Confedertion cup, then I’ll say: why not?

    Posted from United States

    cornercorner
  • third eye |  July 4th, 2009 at 8:58 am

    cornercorner

    Apparently, Melo has to decide between Juventus ad Arsenal.

    If Melo was wise, he would choose Arsenal. At the north London outfit, he would be more instrumental if we were to win some silverware next season. He would give some word of advice to Denilson, and would create an immediate partnership with Fabregas.

    However, Diego presence at Juventus might be a factor for him to leave Fioretina for Juventus. In the other had, the Gunners have a “spokesman” that can persuade Melo to join our jersey. None other than Gilberto Silva. The man plays with Melo in la seleccao (Pardon me for the incorrect spelling) and knows Melo.

    More to come…

    Posted from United States

    cornercorner
  • alessio |  July 5th, 2009 at 11:56 am

    cornercorner

    Well written.

    I think it’s pretty clear this has been brought on by Manchester City’s profligate transfer fees and wages since the new ownership group has been in place.

    Chelsea, anyone?

    Posted from United States United States

    cornercorner

Leave a Reply

If you have not commented here before, please take a moment to peruse our
Commenting Guidelines.


England National Team News

Tickets to upcoming games


Offside RSS Feeds

Search The Offside


 

rounded_corners









Categories


rounded_corners

Send Your Tips!

Found a great story, photo or video that's perfect for The Offside?
Email arsenal[at]theoffside[dot]com

Related Links


Write for The Offside

LATEST COMMENTS


Archives