For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36184
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
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.Prufrock wrote: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.
I mean the Finney out Taylor in scenario did seem to have happened. And did seem to be confirmed by Parky...so....
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36184
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
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.throwawayboltonian wrote: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.BWFC_Insane wrote: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.throwawayboltonian wrote: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.
If the limit is more budgetary then paying them off wouldn't help.
But this is all speculation. Who knows what's happening?
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
- Immortal
- Posts: 28701
- Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
- Contact:
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
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.BWFC_Insane wrote:Amos - no chance. We need two keepers, Parky already said he wants two senior keepers due to loan rule changes.Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Other possible departures, in roughly descending order of likelhiood:BWFC_Insane wrote: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?
Dorian Dervite
Lawrie WIlson
Derik
Tom Walker
Ben Amos
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.Prufrock wrote: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.
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
- Immortal
- Posts: 36184
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
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?Dave Sutton's barnet wrote: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.BWFC_Insane wrote:Amos - no chance. We need two keepers, Parky already said he wants two senior keepers due to loan rule changes.Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Other possible departures, in roughly descending order of likelhiood:BWFC_Insane wrote: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?
Dorian Dervite
Lawrie WIlson
Derik
Tom Walker
Ben AmosSort 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.Prufrock wrote: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.
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.
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.
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 14055
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:27 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
Not sure it matters with Walker - We're making room by releasing players from contracts, not selling them - We'll do the same here.BWFC_Insane wrote:Dervite yes, but he's injured until mid September so I suspect nobody will take him.Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Other possible departures, in roughly descending order of likelhiood:BWFC_Insane wrote: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?
Dorian Dervite
Lawrie WIlson
Derik
Tom Walker
Ben Amos
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.
I think Walker and Derik will be the ones to go, though I think Derik has a bright future
"I've got the ball now. It's a bit worn, but I've got it"
- Dave Sutton's barnet
- Immortal
- Posts: 28701
- Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
- Contact:
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
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.BWFC_Insane wrote: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.
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.boltonboris wrote:Not sure it matters with Walker - We're making room by releasing players from contracts, not selling them - We'll do the same here.BWFC_Insane wrote:Walker is one who I think could go without being missed at all, but whether anyone wants him?
I think Walker and Derik will be the ones to go, though I think Derik has a bright future
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36184
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
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".Dave Sutton's barnet wrote: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.
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.BWFC_Insane wrote: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".Dave Sutton's barnet wrote: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.
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36184
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
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.Worthy4England wrote:All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.BWFC_Insane wrote: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".Dave Sutton's barnet wrote: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.
- Abdoulaye's Twin
- Legend
- Posts: 9234
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
- Location: Skye high
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
But some contracts like Amos don't count towards due to...I forget.Worthy4England wrote:All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.BWFC_Insane wrote: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".Dave Sutton's barnet wrote: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.
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
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.BWFC_Insane wrote: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.Worthy4England wrote:All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.BWFC_Insane wrote: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".Dave Sutton's barnet wrote: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.
It's a cap.
Like a hat with a peak.
It applies to all Clubs under SCMP.
- Dave Sutton's barnet
- Immortal
- Posts: 28701
- Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
- Contact:
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
Think it was something about being signed before the September of the season you went down.Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:But some contracts like Amos don't count towards due to...I forget.Worthy4England wrote:All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.BWFC_Insane wrote: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".
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
- Immortal
- Posts: 36184
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
Thanks. That is interesting.Worthy4England wrote: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.BWFC_Insane wrote: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.Worthy4England wrote:All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.BWFC_Insane wrote: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".Dave Sutton's barnet wrote: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.
It's a cap.
Like a hat with a peak.
It applies to all Clubs under SCMP.
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
- Legend
- Posts: 9234
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
- Location: Skye high
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
Thanks. I knew there was something, just couldn't remember the important detailsDave Sutton's barnet wrote:Think it was something about being signed before the September of the season you went down.Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:But some contracts like Amos don't count towards due to...I forget.Worthy4England wrote:All teams in League 1 and 2 have a "cap" on wage budget. 60% of Revenue.BWFC_Insane wrote: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".
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.
- Dave Sutton's barnet
- Immortal
- Posts: 28701
- Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
- Contact:
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
Bit of a Q&A here on SCMP. Coventry-shaped, and from last summer, but might help.
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
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.BWFC_Insane wrote: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?
Nonetheless, a cap it is. I assume a "well behaved" Club could exceed it under the radar, but then there'd be appropriate penalties...
-
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1713
- Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:53 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
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...
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
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
http://www.efl.com/global/appendix5.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;bristol_Wanderer3 wrote: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...
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....)
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
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!
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.
- Abdoulaye's Twin
- Legend
- Posts: 9234
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
- Location: Skye high
Re: For new signings, ask the man from the Pru
Wasn't it signed in the September before relegation with 3 or more years contract?Prufrock wrote: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!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 183 guests