It's still more than £1.8m a year mate, and that is an awful lot of money no matter how you put it. And if you tie that in with appearances, sponsorship etc its going to be beyond £2m a year. For me nobody is worth that kind of money in football no matter who they are. Though I can understand performance related pay as I am on that, it makes people go the extra mile to get it done.
But thats the going rate for Premiership footballers. If the money wasn't dustributed to the footballers it would be kept by fat cat TV executives and their shareholders - so I would rather the players have it! As to £35,000 per week for Swans players, in the big picture that is not a lot. If we didn't pay the players a certain amount they would ply their trade elsewhere - and who could blame them. The only thing that annoys me is the price that the punter has to pay to attend certain live matches.
You'd be dangerous if you had half a brain Dai! Show me where I was comparing income?? Think you'll find I was comparing player wages!! Obviously in an attempt to give a Rhys a perspective on his issue at what we pay! Do try and follow the reasoning Dai, there's a good boy...........
But don't forget these TV executives pay billions to have the right to broadcast. What I mean the distribution should go to the club as they are the employers, agents should be crucified and buried upside down with their balls in their mouths , and money should be invested in grass roots football. Can you imagine what a £100m a year for example would do for the sport in bringing kids through if all clubs had to invest say 10% of their income into that ? I know it's a pipe dream but its the reason why none of the home nations are any good and have never won anything, well England 1966 besides.
The money does go to the Clubs - and they decide how much they want to pay the players. The Swans are obviously paying lower wages, but willtop up players rewards if successful. If we payed any lower, the player wouldn't come here and we'd be relegated. I totally agree with you about agents. The majority are parasites. There is one who occasionally appeas on Sky - he makes me want to spew every time I see him.
The clubs with all that money have a moral duty to make sure their fans are looked after and not spend all the bonuses on just the players and themselves....
Why? Can you see Tesco or ASDA et al sharing out their profits to their customers? They make billions every year between them do they have a moral duty to therefore do as you suggest?
Yes I realise that, but I should have worded it better, a company say like asda spends a certain amount of money on their staff, that business probably pays about 10% of that income on those overheads, football clubs spend about 90% or more on players. What I mean is that there should be a cap on wages based on overheads and running costs, anymore than 50% spent on wages is to much. I still say that 10% of income from like broadcasters should be put into the grass roots of football.
Now is that your limited answer jager. relating the bonuses of sport to tesco and asda are you serious or what???No you cant be surely....
Now is that your limited answer jager. relating the bonuses of sport to tesco and asda are you serious or what???No you cant be surely to god....
Now is that your limited answer jager. relating the bonuses of sport to tesco and asda are you serious or what???No you cant be surely to god....
Dai a football club is a business, and like supermarkets their job is to make money first! You haven't explained why a football club has a moral duty to what you suggest, but other businesses don't! You say you are a business man, would you be happy that clients of yours would be saying hey, you make all this money, as a customer of yours you have a moral duty to give me some of that money back?
This is why I really don't post anymore how many more thread are going to be side lined by this numpty?
