For new signings, ask the man from the Pru

[BWFC_Insane]

Not that this means it isn't true, because, you know, the FA, but it would f*cking insane if we could get sound a rule in place over worries about our finances limiting us to one in one out by paying up f*cking contracts.

It is the Football League, and I agree. Though there is the possibility that they are keen to see us run without amassing a huge first team squad.

I mean the Finney out Taylor in scenario did seem to have happened. And did seem to be confirmed by Parky...so....

[BWFC_Insane]

I can't see Walker's contract being terminated as he gives us width that we lack, although I don't rate him as a player. I can see it for Wilkinson if we reach a mutual deal that is cheaper than him remaining.

Walker is shit. And the premise is we want to bring in another winger. I think that if we are limited by numbers paying off Wilkinson and Walker makes sense.

If the limit is more budgetary then paying them off wouldn't help.

I didn't say he wasn't, but given that we have two(?) wide players at the club in Walker and Taylor, I can't see us terminating Walker to bring in another winger. We'd have no cover. It's why I think we'd get rid of Wilkinson as we have a few forwards and could probably afford in terms of ability/numbers to get rid of him.

But this is all speculation. Who knows what's happening?

There isn't any point keeping Walker if it means he's all we've got. So if the option is replacing him with someone better we take it, in my view.

I don't think we'll have cover everywhere and it is clear we won't always play with a winger anyway.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Wonder who will leave then to make way for new signings? Iles still believes we have to move some out to bring some in.

Guess Conor Wilkinson as one, but then who would want him?

Other possible departures, in roughly descending order of likelhiood:
Dorian Dervite
Lawrie WIlson
Derik
Tom Walker
Ben Amos

Amos - no chance. We need two keepers, Parky already said he wants two senior keepers due to loan rule changes.

That's why he's bottom of my probability list . I know PP would rather have two senior keepers but there's a spectrum with "football" at one end and "finance" at the other. Let's not forget that if the wage quoted by The Sun and The Telegraph is true, Amos is on £16kpw basic until summer 2019: we still owe him well north of £2m. If, and it's an "if" the size of Blackpool Tower, someone came along offering to remove that debt, Ken would be leaning very hard on Parky, saying things like "cut this debt and you might actually be buying players in January". It would have to be considered: at the moment we're paying someone £832,000 a year to take corners in the warm-ups.

Not that this means it isn't true, because, you know, the FA, but it would f*cking insane if we could get sound a rule in place over worries about our finances limiting us to one in one out by paying up f*cking contracts.

Sort of insane, sort of sensible. Paying someone a lump sum now is a very different financial proposition to owing a regular income over the next x years. Say we owe, I dunno, Wilson £5k pw for two years, and we want to sign someone else on £5kpw. Instead of an overhead of £10kpw, paying Wilson off now means we've only got the £5kpw overhead, having 'realised' the debt to him in one lump sum.

I dunno. Guess it depends whether the FL worry we don't have the money now, or we do now but won't have it for long. The league and club are understandably opaque/quiet about the details.

[BWFC_Insane]

Wonder who will leave then to make way for new signings? Iles still believes we have to move some out to bring some in.

Guess Conor Wilkinson as one, but then who would want him?

Other possible departures, in roughly descending order of likelhiood:
Dorian Dervite
Lawrie WIlson
Derik
Tom Walker
Ben Amos

Amos - no chance. We need two keepers, Parky already said he wants two senior keepers due to loan rule changes.

That's why he's bottom of my probability list . I know PP would rather have two senior keepers but there's a spectrum with "football" at one end and "finance" at the other. Let's not forget that if the wage quoted by The Sun and The Telegraph is true, Amos is on £16kpw basic until summer 2019: we still owe him well north of £2m. If, and it's an "if" the size of Blackpool Tower, someone came along offering to remove that debt, Ken would be leaning very hard on Parky, saying things like "cut this debt and you might actually be buying players in January". It would have to be considered: at the moment we're paying someone £832,000 a year to take corners in the warm-ups.

Not that this means it isn't true, because, you know, the FA, but it would f*cking insane if we could get sound a rule in place over worries about our finances limiting us to one in one out by paying up f*cking contracts.

Sort of insane, sort of sensible. Paying someone a lump sum now is a very different financial proposition to owing a regular income over the next x years. Say we owe, I dunno, Wilson £5k pw for two years, and we want to sign someone else on £5kpw. Instead of an overhead of £10kpw, paying Wilson off now means we've only got the £5kpw overhead, having 'realised' the debt to him in one lump sum.

I dunno. Guess it depends whether the FL worry we don't have the money now, or we do now but won't have it for long. The league and club are understandably opaque/quiet about the details.

Aye but still the same expenditure from this year's budget either way. Which is what makes it a bit odd, if that route would indeed be allowed. Though of course we don't know what Finney was paid and how much we are paying for Taylor so that may have been a one off mechanism to particularly fit that scenario. I can't imagine Wilkinson and Walker would free up much budget so who knows?

The club have been put in a nice, but tough all the same, position after a good start. A few weeks back I'm sure they'd have snatched the hands off anyone bidding for high earners like Spearing, possibly even a bid for Vela too. But now....they've started well, Spearing looks essential, Vela has progressed....but we're still not balanced in other areas. The difficulty is that I can't see us getting quality out wide and up top without some sort of sacrifice (unless of course there is something else going on we don't know about). Parky will get it right I'm sure.

[boltonboris]

Wonder who will leave then to make way for new signings? Iles still believes we have to move some out to bring some in.

Guess Conor Wilkinson as one, but then who would want him?

Other possible departures, in roughly descending order of likelhiood:
Dorian Dervite
Lawrie WIlson
Derik
Tom Walker
Ben Amos

Dervite yes, but he's injured until mid September so I suspect nobody will take him.

Wilson - be surprised if they wanted him out, useful sqaud player. Though rather he want than Derik.

Same with Derik. - I actually think Derik covers CB, RB and CM. I think in time he may be a very useful defensive midfield option.

And Amos - no chance. We need two keepers, Parky already said he wants two senior keepers due to loan rule changes.

Walker is one who I think could go without being missed at all, but whether anyone wants him?

Bit of a conundrum. Were Pratley fit then I'm sure Trotter would be an ideal one to shift, but as that isn't the case....

Wonder if having brought Taylor in they might consider offers for Moxey? I think Moxey is ok, but presumably one of the higher earners and for me certainly not good enough to justify that status.

Not sure it matters with Walker - We're making room by releasing players from contracts, not selling them - We'll do the same here.

I think Walker and Derik will be the ones to go, though I think Derik has a bright future

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Aye but still the same expenditure from this year's budget either way. Which is what makes it a bit odd, if that route would indeed be allowed. Though of course we don't know what Finney was paid and how much we are paying for Taylor so that may have been a one off mechanism to particularly fit that scenario. I can't imagine Wilkinson and Walker would free up much budget so who knows?

The club have been put in a nice, but tough all the same, position after a good start. A few weeks back I'm sure they'd have snatched the hands off anyone bidding for high earners like Spearing, possibly even a bid for Vela too. But now....they've started well, Spearing looks essential, Vela has progressed....but we're still not balanced in other areas. The difficulty is that I can't see us getting quality out wide and up top without some sort of sacrifice (unless of course there is something else going on we don't know about). Parky will get it right I'm sure.

Yeah it's hard to know really. Club and Iles have said it's not "one in one out", but that was the case with Finney/Taylor. It may be that the FL would be particularly pernickety about us spending on a position we're well covered for – say, central midfield – in which case we might be able to make a case for a right-winger, as our only options there are Chris Taylor or Kaiyne Woolery, each out of position.

Walker is one who I think could go without being missed at all, but whether anyone wants him?

Not sure it matters with Walker - We're making room by releasing players from contracts, not selling them - We'll do the same here.

I think Walker and Derik will be the ones to go, though I think Derik has a bright future

I think we might well release Walker, who's in the last year of a presumably low contract. Much less likely with Derik, who (according to the Sun list) is on £10kpw to 2017, so we still owe him £440,000 basic. More likely in his case to be frantically arranging him a loan to a lowish La Liga club.

[BWFC_Insane]

Yeah it's hard to know really. Club and Iles have said it's not "one in one out", but that was the case with Finney/Taylor. It may be that the FL would be particularly pernickety about us spending on a position we're well covered for – say, central midfield – in which case we might be able to make a case for a right-winger, as our only options there are Chris Taylor or Kaiyne Woolery, each out of position.

I think it was suggested by Iles that whilst it was never a "1 in 1 out" scenario that we had a cap on either squad size or wage budget and as we'd filled that it was in effect "Some/one out one/more in".

[Worthy4England]

Yeah it's hard to know really. Club and Iles have said it's not "one in one out", but that was the case with Finney/Taylor. It may be that the FL would be particularly pernickety about us spending on a position we're well covered for – say, central midfield – in which case we might be able to make a case for a right-winger, as our only options there are Chris Taylor or Kaiyne Woolery, each out of position.

I think it was suggested by Iles that whilst it was never a "1 in 1 out" scenario that we had a cap on either squad size or wage budget and as we'd filled that it was in effect "Some/one out one/more in".

All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.

[BWFC_Insane]

Yeah it's hard to know really. Club and Iles have said it's not "one in one out", but that was the case with Finney/Taylor. It may be that the FL would be particularly pernickety about us spending on a position we're well covered for – say, central midfield – in which case we might be able to make a case for a right-winger, as our only options there are Chris Taylor or Kaiyne Woolery, each out of position.

I think it was suggested by Iles that whilst it was never a "1 in 1 out" scenario that we had a cap on either squad size or wage budget and as we'd filled that it was in effect "Some/one out one/more in".

All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.

Aye but it isn't a hard cap, it is monitored via annual accounts. Presumably we are being monitored on that prior to being allowed to register a new player.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Yeah it's hard to know really. Club and Iles have said it's not "one in one out", but that was the case with Finney/Taylor. It may be that the FL would be particularly pernickety about us spending on a position we're well covered for – say, central midfield – in which case we might be able to make a case for a right-winger, as our only options there are Chris Taylor or Kaiyne Woolery, each out of position.

I think it was suggested by Iles that whilst it was never a "1 in 1 out" scenario that we had a cap on either squad size or wage budget and as we'd filled that it was in effect "Some/one out one/more in".

All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.

But some contracts like Amos don't count towards due to...I forget.

[Worthy4England]

Yeah it's hard to know really. Club and Iles have said it's not "one in one out", but that was the case with Finney/Taylor. It may be that the FL would be particularly pernickety about us spending on a position we're well covered for – say, central midfield – in which case we might be able to make a case for a right-winger, as our only options there are Chris Taylor or Kaiyne Woolery, each out of position.

I think it was suggested by Iles that whilst it was never a "1 in 1 out" scenario that we had a cap on either squad size or wage budget and as we'd filled that it was in effect "Some/one out one/more in".

All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.

Aye but it isn't a hard cap, it is monitored via annual accounts. Presumably we are being monitored on that prior to being allowed to register a new player.

No. It's a hard cap. It's monitored by Pre-Season and Mid-Season Accounts (reactive check). But Clubs have an obligation to notify (called a Notifiable Event - proactive check) if they're likely to exceed 95% of the cap.

It's a cap.

Like a hat with a peak.

It applies to all Clubs under SCMP.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I think it was suggested by Iles that whilst it was never a "1 in 1 out" scenario that we had a cap on either squad size or wage budget and as we'd filled that it was in effect "Some/one out one/more in".

All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.

But some contracts like Amos don't count towards due to...I forget.

Think it was something about being signed before the September of the season you went down.

Also according to this page (which seems to have the right raison d'être), in 2015/16 clubs newly relegated from the Championship could spend 75% (not 60%) of turnover on wages. And owners could donate cash and include that in the turnover figure, which seems a circumvention of the whole point.

[BWFC_Insane]

Yeah it's hard to know really. Club and Iles have said it's not "one in one out", but that was the case with Finney/Taylor. It may be that the FL would be particularly pernickety about us spending on a position we're well covered for – say, central midfield – in which case we might be able to make a case for a right-winger, as our only options there are Chris Taylor or Kaiyne Woolery, each out of position.

I think it was suggested by Iles that whilst it was never a "1 in 1 out" scenario that we had a cap on either squad size or wage budget and as we'd filled that it was in effect "Some/one out one/more in".

All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.

Aye but it isn't a hard cap, it is monitored via annual accounts. Presumably we are being monitored on that prior to being allowed to register a new player.

No. It's a hard cap. It's monitored by Pre-Season and Mid-Season Accounts (reactive check). But Clubs have an obligation to notify (called a Notifiable Event - proactive check) if they're likely to exceed 95% of the cap.

It's a cap.

Like a hat with a peak.

It applies to all Clubs under SCMP.

Thanks. That is interesting.

I still feel we've probably got less wiggle room than most, since presumably others might sign people before letting others go. Or may I assume be able to adjust their revenue forecast, at least marginally?

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

I think it was suggested by Iles that whilst it was never a "1 in 1 out" scenario that we had a cap on either squad size or wage budget and as we'd filled that it was in effect "Some/one out one/more in".

All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.

But some contracts like Amos don't count towards due to...I forget.

Think it was something about being signed before the September of the season you went down.

Also according to this page (which seems to have the right raison d'être), in 2015/16 clubs newly relegated from the Championship could spend 75% (not 60%) of turnover on wages. And owners could donate cash and include that in the turnover figure, which seems a circumvention of the whole point.

Thanks. I knew there was something, just couldn't remember the important details

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Bit of a Q&A here on SCMP. Coventry-shaped, and from last summer, but might help.

[Worthy4England]

Thanks. That is interesting.

I still feel we've probably got less wiggle room than most, since presumably others might sign people before letting others go. Or may I assume be able to adjust their revenue forecast, at least marginally?

That's probably true - some Clubs may be a long way from spending 60% (or 55%) of their Revenue on salaries - we might be right on the edge. In which case they'd be looking at us a whole lot closer than a Club who isn't. There is a different cap for former Chump Clubs in the first year (it's 75% - broadly), and the FL can subject a Club to an "Additional Reporting Threshold" if they've got a Notified Event (which we probably have) - whereby a Club has to notify FL of any proposed player registrations and if in their opinion it would lead to a breach, they can refuse the registration.

Nonetheless, a cap it is. I assume a "well behaved" Club could exceed it under the radar, but then there'd be appropriate penalties...

[bristol_Wanderer3]

All very very interesting. First observation is that essentially we could sign whoever we liked and keep whoever we liked at this level if Ken was prepared to put the money in. Of course he is well within his rights not to do that.

After an initial scan I can't see where SCMP results in the one in, one out scenario we seem to have. It seems to be about the wages/turnover ratio? Going to read further...

[Worthy4England]

All very very interesting. First observation is that essentially we could sign whoever we liked and keep whoever we liked at this level if Ken was prepared to put the money in. Of course he is well within his rights not to do that.

After an initial scan I can't see where SCMP results in the one in, one out scenario we seem to have. It seems to be about the wages/turnover ratio? Going to read further...

http://www.efl.com/global/appendix5.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Clause 10.2.1

Edit: I'm not sure that we're in a one in, one out situation or whether to get one player in, we'd just have to move someone out to make some headroom so we didn't breach the cap...So if we got rid of Mavies, Pratley and Amos, I'm not sure we could only bring three players in...because that would allegedly release quite a lot of salary...(although in our situation I don't think they count anyhow as they were signed prior to 1 Sept last season....)

[Prufrock]

Think it was more complicated than just signed before Sept wasn't it? Otherwise given or state last year the only people who *would* count would be this summer's signings, and if they are pushing the wage cap on their own we really are screwed!

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Think it was more complicated than just signed before Sept wasn't it? Otherwise given or state last year the only people who *would* count would be this summer's signings, and if they are pushing the wage cap on their own we really are screwed!

Wasn't it signed in the September before relegation with 3 or more years contract?