Question there is, can he do that within the framework of the squad cost rules? I see/hear a lot of the 'we must spend more' argument, and I understand the reasoning, but I don't see much in the way of 'and this is how we should do it' analysis that factors in the rules. - ThreadSky

hallenbeck.thelastboyscout.uk • 74 days ago

Question there is, can he do that within the framework of the squad cost rules? I see/hear a lot of the 'we must spend more' argument, and I understand the reasoning, but I don't see much in the way of 'and this is how we should do it' analysis that factors in the rules.

Comments

horgsim.bsky.social•74 days ago

Note we recently offloaded high earners like Kane, Ndombele, Lloris, Perisic. That was close to £1m per week in wages. The likes of Bergvall, Johnson, Odobert, Yang, Dragusin, Gray, etc. don’t earn a 1/3 of that collectively .

horgsim.bsky.social•74 days ago

Easily. Some basic research will show we are best placed amongst all teams in Europe financially. We spend ~40% of revenue on player salaries. Liverpool spend 69%. Player salaries wages best indicator of league position. Spend less than rivals you finish lower.

hallenbeck.thelastboyscout.uk•74 days ago

Last published figures were that our wage to revenue was 49%, but that was based on 22/23 and our wages have decreased. Given max ratio is 70% under SCR for clubs playing in Europe, we have some headroom to play with, while other clubs do not, which is a position we can exploit. Let's hope we do.

hallenbeck.thelastboyscout.uk•74 days ago

To make more concrete, going by the above figures (accepting they will have changed since publication) some simplistic calculations:

70% of £549m is £416m.

Diff between £416m cap and current £251m wage bill is £165m.

That's how much we can spend on extra wages and transfers under new rules.

hallenbeck.thelastboyscout.uk•74 days ago

Chelsea on the other hand need to lower their wage burden by 9% to £358. In other words, before they can make further transfers, or add further wages, they need to either lower their wage bill by £46m or raise their revenue by £173m so that £404 is 70% wage to revenue.

hallenbeck.thelastboyscout.uk•74 days ago

Lowering a wage bill by £46m isn't a trivial task. Their avg. annual salary is ~£5.2m. So they'd need to offload ~8 players to reduce by £46m. Again, that's just so they can comply with the 70% cap. It gives them no room to bring anyone else in. That's the theory, anyway.

hallenbeck.thelastboyscout.uk•74 days ago

Back to Tottenham, seeing as we typically spend £120m on transfers each year, that gives us an extra £45m to add to our wage bill. That's approximately 4 x 200k players.

ikiturska.bsky.social•73 days ago

I think the big question is, will anything happen to them if they just cheat or at least bend the rules (as they have already)? We won't know for a long time if they can get away with it or not but in the meantime they may well enjoy footballing success.

kevjc.bsky.social•74 days ago

This is honestly the type of analysis I come here for. Thank you for the research and data rather than ‘takes’

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply