Plymouth Argyle opposing salary cap proposals

Newly promoted Plymouth Argyle join Portsmouth and Sunderland in opposing salary cap proposals

The Pilgrims' chief executive has moved to support Portsmouth and Sunderland's calls that the proposed salary cap plans would not be a good idea

League One newbies Plymouth Argyle have joined Portsmouth, Sunderland and Ipswich Town in opposing the salary cap proposals in the EFL.

The Pilgrims, who won promotion to League One after finishing third in League Two last season, have voiced their concerns over the proposed salary cap, which clubs are set to discuss in the coming weeks.

Current proposals suggest a salary cap of £2.5 million in League One and £1.25 million in League Two, but Pompey have now been joined by more teams as they continue to fight against the plans.

Portsmouth CEO Mark Catlin told the News: “Should salary caps come in, those clubs with a 40,000 average attendance and generating huge commercial revenues will be only allowed to spend the same as clubs with a 2,000 attendance and no commercial income. How can that be right?

“It is an absolute disgrace. I have been fighting this behind the scenes and will be fighting it even more strongly over the coming weeks and months.

“Outline proposals have been sent out, although there has not been a formal document. There are a few clubs, including ourselves, that are totally against restricting salaries."

Catlin himself believes a salary cap based on a club's turnover would be a more fair way of policing wages in the EFL, but so far the majority of clubs seem to back the proposals, which are yet to be finalised.

And although Argyle chief executive Andrew Parkinson has said wages do need to be monitored, he wants to see stricter policing of current regulations under the Salary Cap Management Protocol (SCMP).

Under current protocols, clubs in League One and League Two are restricted to spending no more than 60 per cent of their turnover on wages, however Parkinson said this needs to be more robust.

taken from Portsmouth live

So that's us in the P&D next season according to Rickler

This move by Argyle won’t go down well with the two or three on here that still think Hallett loves a bit of austerity.

Grovehill wrote:

So that's us in the P&D next season according to Rickler

Not according to me at all. Make up all the shit you like, nothing can hide the fact you can't seem to comprehend the idea behind the wage cap.

Rickler wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

So that's us in the P&D next season according to Rickler

Not according to me at all.  Make up all the shit you like, nothing can hide the fact you can't seem to comprehend the idea behind the wage cap.

rickler, your wasting your time explaing things to groovy he simply wont accept the truth if he doesnt fit his narrative.

Czarcasm wrote:

This move by Argyle won’t go down well with the two or three on here that still think Hallett loves a bit of austerity.

Sorry I must have missed the bit where he said anywhere at all that he is willing to invest in the team? I agree with him and Pompey about the wage cap, in principle it looked fine at first glance but the why shouldn't Pompey invest £5m p/a in their squad IF they can pay that via their frankly fantastic support? On the other hand Hellett hasn't said anywhere he's worried about only having £2.5m p/a to play with. I do understand that we need investment in the prawn sandwich side of things but I also think another investment made into the team budget would give us a huge advantage to compete in league 1. If he hasn't got the cash then fine we will do our best on limited resources but I'd be amazed if that leads to us charging up lge 1 with a team that I believe was very very lucky to not end up back in lge 2 with City minus Sarcs, Mcfazdean and Hardie.

More bemusing is the claim the EFL will discuss these caps in the coming weeks. Time is marching on here how can any club sign players not knowing what the limit is in the interim

harvetheslayer wrote:

More bemusing is the claim the EFL will discuss these caps in the coming weeks. Time is marching on here how can any club sign players not knowing what the limit is in the interim

I dunno. Ask Grovy and Ears.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

This move by Argyle won’t go down well with the two or three on here that still think Hallett loves a bit of austerity.

Sorry I must have missed the bit where he said anywhere at all that he is willing to invest in the team? I agree with him and Pompey about the wage cap, in principle it looked fine at first glance but the why shouldn't Pompey invest £5m p/a in their squad IF they can pay that via their frankly fantastic support? On the other hand Hellett hasn't said anywhere he's worried about only having £2.5m p/a to play with. I do understand that we need investment in the prawn sandwich side of things but I also think another investment made into the team budget would give us a huge advantage to compete in league 1. If he hasn't got the cash then fine we will do our best on limited resources but I'd be amazed if that leads to us charging up lge 1 with a team that I believe was very very lucky to not end up back in lge 2 with City minus Sarcs, Mcfazdean and Hardie.

How many times does it need explaining to you before it finally sinks in about investing in the team?

The whole idea of the "prawn sandwich side of things" is to provide money to bake a big Argyle cake every year.  ..and yes, Hallett has said he spent all the money he has available on the ingredients, and so the cake can only be so big.  

The first slice of the cake cut and eaten is 'the running of the club' - expenses that have to be paid for the club each year for the club to survive.  

The remaining piece of cake can be (and is) used for the playing budget - however big that may be?  

Sometimes, a bite or two is taken from this piece and used to improve training pitches or invest in youth etc

There are no crumbs left over.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

This move by Argyle won’t go down well with the two or three on here that still think Hallett loves a bit of austerity.

Sorry I must have missed the bit where he said anywhere at all that he is willing to invest in the team? I agree with him and Pompey about the wage cap, in principle it looked fine at first glance but the why shouldn't Pompey invest £5m p/a in their squad IF they can pay that via their frankly fantastic support? On the other hand Hellett hasn't said anywhere he's worried about only having £2.5m p/a to play with. I do understand that we need investment in the prawn sandwich side of things but I also think another investment made into the team budget would give us a huge advantage to compete in league 1. If he hasn't got the cash then fine we will do our best on limited resources but I'd be amazed if that leads to us charging up lge 1 with a team that I believe was very very lucky to not end up back in lge 2 with City minus Sarcs, Mcfazdean and Hardie.

Pompey, Ipswich and Sunderland do have 'fantastic support' compared with other lower league clubs.

We'd have the same as the first two named clubs, if we also had a top flight history.

Hallett's 5 year plan of being a 'sustainable championship club ' will not achieve a much larger fanbase, unless the wider public 'believe' that the owners have what it takes financially, to go all the way .

Only Liverpool, Man Utd etc etc coming to town achieves that.

Back in the 60's we were on a par, support wise, with Norwich and Southampton. Now look at the difference.

Portsmouth CEO Mark Catlin told the News: “Should salary caps come in, those clubs with a 40,000 average attendance and generating huge commercial revenues will be only allowed to spend the same as clubs with a 2,000 attendance and no commercial income. How can that be right?


Because it would return football to being a competitive sport.

Rickler wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

This move by Argyle won’t go down well with the two or three on here that still think Hallett loves a bit of austerity.

Sorry I must have missed the bit where he said anywhere at all that he is willing to invest in the team? I agree with him and Pompey about the wage cap, in principle it looked fine at first glance but the why shouldn't Pompey invest £5m p/a in their squad IF they can pay that via their frankly fantastic support? On the other hand Hellett hasn't said anywhere he's worried about only having £2.5m p/a to play with. I do understand that we need investment in the prawn sandwich side of things but I also think another investment made into the team budget would give us a huge advantage to compete in league 1. If he hasn't got the cash then fine we will do our best on limited resources but I'd be amazed if that leads to us charging up lge 1 with a team that I believe was very very lucky to not end up back in lge 2 with City minus Sarcs, Mcfazdean and Hardie.

How many times does it need explaining to you before it finally sinks in about investing in the team?

The whole idea of the "prawn sandwich side of things" is to provide money to bake a big Argyle cake every year.  ..and yes, Hallett has said he spent all the money he has available on the ingredients, and so the cake can only be so big.  

The first slice of the cake cut and eaten is 'the running of the club' - expenses that have to be paid for the club each year for the club to survive.  

The remaining piece of cake can be (and is) used for the playing budget - however big that may be?  

Sometimes, a bite or two is taken from this piece and used to improve training pitches or invest in youth etc

There are no crumbs left over.

I really shouldn't try and explain but here goes. I do understand salary caps and maths and business in general. Where we fail to agree is that I think Hallett is unwilling or unable to put money into the playing budget and that puts us at a massive disadvantage to a lot of other lge 1 teams when it comes to competing at lge 1 level.
If this as far as it is likely to get with Hallett ie lge 1 lge 2 Yoyo club then the club is in a great position to attract someone who wouldn't mind buying players like Eion Doyle for us and as a much better Argyle fan than me I'm sure he'd look to do that if possible.

PatDunne wrote:

Portsmouth CEO Mark Catlin told the News: “Should salary caps come in, those clubs with a 40,000 average attendance and generating huge commercial revenues will be only allowed to spend the same as clubs with a 2,000 attendance and no commercial income. How can that be right?


Because it would return football to being a competitive sport.

Bleddy Commie.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

This move by Argyle won’t go down well with the two or three on here that still think Hallett loves a bit of austerity.

Sorry I must have missed the bit where he said anywhere at all that he is willing to invest in the team? I agree with him and Pompey about the wage cap, in principle it looked fine at first glance but the why shouldn't Pompey invest £5m p/a in their squad IF they can pay that via their frankly fantastic support? On the other hand Hellett hasn't said anywhere he's worried about only having £2.5m p/a to play with. I do understand that we need investment in the prawn sandwich side of things but I also think another investment made into the team budget would give us a huge advantage to compete in league 1. If he hasn't got the cash then fine we will do our best on limited resources but I'd be amazed if that leads to us charging up lge 1 with a team that I believe was very very lucky to not end up back in lge 2 with City minus Sarcs, Mcfazdean and Hardie.

How many times does it need explaining to you before it finally sinks in about investing in the team?

The whole idea of the "prawn sandwich side of things" is to provide money to bake a big Argyle cake every year.  ..and yes, Hallett has said he spent all the money he has available on the ingredients, and so the cake can only be so big.  

The first slice of the cake cut and eaten is 'the running of the club' - expenses that have to be paid for the club each year for the club to survive.  

The remaining piece of cake can be (and is) used for the playing budget - however big that may be?  

Sometimes, a bite or two is taken from this piece and used to improve training pitches or invest in youth etc

There are no crumbs left over.

I really shouldn't try and explain but here goes. I do understand salary caps and maths and business in general. Where we fail to agree is that I think Hallett is unwilling or unable to put money into the playing budget and that puts us at a massive disadvantage to a lot of other lge 1 teams when it comes to competing at lge 1 level.
If this as far as it is likely to get with Hallett ie lge 1 lge 2 Yoyo club then the club is in a great position to attract someone who wouldn't mind buying players like Eion Doyle for us and as a much better Argyle fan than me I'm sure he'd look to do that if possible.

Thing is, short of Hallett shouting out loud “I’m going to spend a shedload on wages this year, come and get your inflated salary here bheys”, then the way you understand what our financial position is, is to listen to what people are actually saying at the club. Ryan Lowe said a couple weeks back that he thought Argyle would be in a healthier position to acquire players than most league 1 clubs. That’s the manager speaking. Then, when the CE comes out with statements about NOT wanting the salary cap....it shouldn’t take much thought to realise exactly why he’s saying that. Shorely?

Rickler wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

So that's us in the P&D next season according to Rickler

Not according to me at all.  Make up all the shit you like, nothing can hide the fact you can't seem to comprehend the idea behind the wage cap.

If someone is too thick to understand that introducing a wage cap will not result in Clubs like Pompey Sunderland and Ipswich immediately getting rid of half their players, there's not a lot anyone can do.

I think SH would rather put money into bricks and mortar as that's one way of increasing the value of his asset.

Buy a player and he usually loses value. Maclean and Walton being to prime examples of a "let's go for" attitude backfiring.

Grovehill wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

So that's us in the P&D next season according to Rickler

Not according to me at all.  Make up all the shit you like, nothing can hide the fact you can't seem to comprehend the idea behind the wage cap.

If someone is too thick to understand that introducing a wage cap will not result in Clubs like Pompey Sunderland and Ipswich immediately getting rid of half their players, there's not a lot anyone can do.

Duh.

Effin unbelievable. You've just spent the last two days arguing that isn't going to happen because the players already have contracts.

Grovehill wrote:

I think SH would rather put money into bricks and mortar as that's one way of increasing the value of his asset.

Buy a player and he usually loses value. Maclean and Walton being to prime examples of a "let's go for" attitude backfiring.

It will have escaped you, but it's also a way of starting to make 'the bricks and Mortar' produce some money. ..and guess where that money goes.

You won't get the answer so I'll help you... It goes towards that infamous "Playing Budget". But hey... What's the point in that? According to you. if we buy a player he "usually loses value".

Grovehill wrote:

I think SH would rather put money into bricks and mortar as that's one way of increasing the value of his asset.

Buy a player and he usually loses value. Maclean and Walton being to prime examples of a "let's go for" attitude backfiring.

So you're now saying Hallett shouldn't risk money on ambitious player acquisition in case a Maclean or Walton situation comes round again?

Apart from haplessly searching, trying to find justifiable grounds to slag the owner, what else do you actually want, ffs?

Read my post. It's about what I think SH would rather do. That's why it starts "I think SH would rather......"

Where does it say that I am against signing good players?

I do, however, point out the fact that most players lose value, especially if they are rushed signings like the two named-Walton was never scouted in the proper way but was signed purely on the recommendation of the Manager who was selling him!

As I've said before, Argyle should be looking for young players who improve in value-like Jamie Mackie or Akos B, who the Chairman at the time was against signing because he was "expensive" but he doubled in value in two years. Sadly, I can't see any recent signings doing the same.

Grovehill wrote:

Read my post. It's about what I think SH would rather do. That's why it starts "I think SH would rather......"

Where does it say that I am against signing good players?

I do, however, point out the fact that most players lose value, especially if they are rushed signings like the two named-Walton was never scouted in the proper way but was signed purely on the recommendation of the Manager who was selling him!

As I've said before, Argyle should be looking for young players who improve in value-like Jamie Mackie or Akos B, who the Chairman at the time was against signing because he was "expensive" but he doubled in value in two years. Sadly, I can't see any recent signings doing the same.

Geez, isn't every club in the land trying to do that? And isn't the complete root and branch overhaul of the Academy overseen by Dewsnip a prime example of Argyle doing just that?

If you're saying Argyle shouldn't ever try and sign a Danny Mayor because he may not improve in value, then God help us.

Grovehill wrote:

Read my post. It's about what I think SH would rather do. That's why it starts "I think SH would rather......"

Where does it say that I am against signing good players?

I do, however, point out the fact that most players lose value, especially if they are rushed signings like the two named-Walton was never scouted in the proper way but was signed purely on the recommendation of the Manager who was selling him!

As I've said before, Argyle should be looking for young players who improve in value-like Jamie Mackie or Akos B, who the Chairman at the time was against signing because he was "expensive" but he doubled in value in two years. Sadly, I can't see any recent signings doing the same.

Argyle should be looking to produce younger players rather than buying and investing in “bricks and mortars” will in time create the funding to do so, meanwhile we are where we are and it would seem from recent comments from Lowe and the CE that a budget has been agreed and we’ll realise in the next week or so how good that budget is.