Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan
As I've mentioned in the post above high wages is ok on its own if a club retains a cash buffer, which is what your board are doing.
Its arguably actually safer than running a high transfer budget (as otherwise you end up with a huge squad all on low Premiership/high Championship wages who are harder to offload should you be relegated) ... especially if you're sensible in the lengths of contract you offer.
|
I can see the argument, not sure I agree with it (I suppose that's why you've said 'arguably'
) I would qualify the below by saying I am not an expert in the field of economics (depsite having a joint honours History/Economics degree tbh I was good at the first and only got by at best at the economics part) or the running of a football club (although my dad was General Sec at Villa & Leicester for the first 22 years or so of my life (I'm now 32)). So I am in the position of having a little knowledge in each area (which as we all know is a dangerous thing
)
Our own RL plight, that of Derby, Sheff Wed a few years ago, Ipswich, all go against the low fees/high wages scenarios. To take everything to a logical and literal conclusion: if you get relegated, it suggests the players aren't good enough, and therefore I believe you are less likely to be able to get rid of high wage earners off the wage bill - the chances are PL clubs may not want them, and those clubs who who might do so are likely to be on the same level as yourselves and therefore will likely not be able to pay them as much as they are already on (we could only get rid of Scowcroft this year when his contract ran out: his wages were the exact reason he was at Leicester so long: he wouldn't have got that anywhere else, and you can't blame him for not taking a cut. Wise punching Davidson was perfect as nobody else would have paid him the £32.5k a week we were, and we had a case for sacking him, or else we would have had him for three more years. Other examples: Ravanelli, Bakke, Carbone, the Dutch defender at Chelsea - although not relegated same idea, etc)
It would appear to be a question of strategy: the policy you've outlined works if the plan is to offer one year deals to Bosman players to try and stay in the EPL, gain prestige so that the following year you are more likely to get a higher class player for the 2nd PL campaign - but in my eyes this means you are pretty much starting from behind the 8-ball two seasons in a row, having to build a virtually new team every year. The one year contracts are the only way in which you can risk high wages without mortgaging the future of the club
Higher transfer fees/lower wages are still safer in my mind: once you have paid the fee, that's it - no/vastly reduced further future risk if the wages are low. Then you will likely not be financially threatened if relegated as your ongoing costs (i.e. wages) are much much lower, and you might not need to offload players, or certainly to the same degree.
In my mind (and I could well be in a minority) for this reason I prefer to keep wages low first year if possible, but get players who I believe will be able to contribute for 2-3 years minimum at the PL level. If I do get relegated, there is a good chance I will be able to afford to keep the squad together in the Championship (if the players are prepared to stay), if I stay up I can then look at giving these players contracts comparable to other EPL teams with a knowledge they are good enough. This way you have continuity and a gradual consistent building process.
Unfortately I didn't see the negotiation button when budgets were announced (I did in the contract negotiation screen though, so I've banged my head repeatedly and won't forget to look for it next year now!). FWIW I was reckoning I might get £5-6m transfer budget, which is similar to your 'best case' figures: and I'd scouted transfer listed players and those up to £1m maximum value in advance of this expected figure.
As I say I can see the ideas behind what you say, but this being the case, all of the decent Bosmans who would come to Leicester had gone by the time I was allowed to pay a lot of wages, so I'd be stuck with paying inflated salaries for ordinary players (as player demands go drastically up once there is a lot of room in the wage budgets)...
Thanks for the reply: as the post above says, it is fantastic that you take the time out to answer queries/concerns such as this. And I am
very pleased to know there is a 'playing budget' idea within the transfer/salary funds - just wish I'd noticed it