Idea - Marquee Salary Cap

[vesh]

Ok so Sydney FC can obviously afford 1mil on a marquee player and 1 or 2 or even more of the other A-League clubs probably could afford that much aswell. So I was thinking, to help bring in some higher profile players and better quality players to the A-League, how about a marquee salary cap where you can have more than 1 marquee if you can afford it or have the maximum amount of marquees under the marquee salary cap?
Obviously this just sounds like a second salary cup but it would be something like this...
The marquee cap would be 1-1.2mil
maximum of 4-6 marquee players in the marquee cap

So for the clubs who can afford more than 1 marquee, or up to the caps maximum, they could bring back current or ex Socceroos (or All Whites to the Phoenix) or good foreign players to the A-League and with more marquees in the squad this would also leave more room in the salary cap so more good players could be signed in the cap or current players like a Mark Milligan or Nathan Burns could get good pay raises and we could keep them in the A-League longer and stop others going back to Europe like a Joel Griffiths or Archie Thompson

This would give the A-League more quality and higher profile players which means higher crowds which means more sponsors and higher sponsorship payments for the A-League and A-League clubs which means more money which means both caps would then be raised higher or eventually be scrapped and also there would be more media exposure aswell with the league being of better quality and more higher profile named players to Australians playing

Some are probably reading this thinking you couldn't get that many good players to fit in that cap, if you are, I'm pretty sure Craig Moore is on 200-300 grand so it definately is possible and if your also thinking if clubs do this there won't be as big profile players like Dwight Yorke or Juninho well there are much cheaper players out there who could probably do even better, e.g Fred and Qu and even though aren't signed with any profile at all to Australian fans would we rather 1 Juninho marquee or 3 or 4 or more not as high profile named marquees who could all do great and make the A-League a better football competition??

I don't see how this could be unrealistic to happen, if there's teams who can't afford more than 1 marquee or even any marquees, then bad luck, may be unfair for them but would be alot more unfair for the league if we couldn't bring in more quality. If one team can't afford the full maximum but can still bring an extra marquee, it's still bringing in extra quality to the A-League

So after all that, what do you think of my idea? Would a marquee salary cap of around 1mil with a certain maximum amount of marquees which could then leave good cap space in the normal cap which would make the A-League much better work? Is it a good idea???

 

[Bear]

Could not be bothered reading that whole post.

Stupid idea. Bring in 4+ marquee players, and a Melbourne VS Perth game would turn into Man United VS Central Coast Lightning, 1 sided and pointless. How will that make the league better?

The league is plenty good for being only 3 years old. Why change whats not broken?

 

[Rowdy]

agree, the $1.0M would be better spent on setting up the Youth League,which is approx. what the CCM have reported,after investigating for themselves (wages, travel, hotels on the cheap, fly same day etc) would cost to run.

After smoking some crack with Whitney Houston we both agreed on where the money should be spent;

'I believe that children are the future,
Set up the League and let them lead the way.
Show them how to unleash all skills  they possess insideeeeee.

 

[adz]

this deserves a video

http://youtube.com/watch?v=E7T5UnipKQQ

 

[vesh]

Could not be bothered reading that whole post.

Stupid idea. Bring in 4+ marquee players, and a Melbourne VS Perth game would turn into Man United VS Central Coast Lightning, 1 sided and pointless. How will that make the league better?

The league is plenty good for being only 3 years old. Why change whats not broken?

How on earth could 3 or 4 better players make that much of a difference??? It would make the league better coz there would be more quality players and for the teams who could afford right up to the maximum and the ones who can afford only 1 or two it wouldn't make a huge difference to the teams quality but overall would make a pretty big difference in the overall quality of the a-league

"agree, the $1.0M would be better spent on setting up the Youth League,which is approx. what the CCM have reported,after investigating for themselves (wages, travel, hotels on the cheap, fly same day etc) would cost to run."

Well Mariners got a marquee in Vidmar who's prob on 150-200k then you have Aloisi on 500 grand so your spending around 700 grand on 2 players outside the normal cap plus can afford to run an acedemy and the Mariners are supposingly the poorest club in the league so if you can do that I'm sure the rest of the A-League clubs could put more wages on players and still spend alot of money in youth development

 

[dibo]

the mariners certainly aren't the poorest club in the comp - you'd be looking at perth or newcastle for that i suspect.

for the sustainability of the league, we can't really afford to let the competition's equalisers go loose. it'd be near impossible to maintain a championship winning team across three seasons at the moment, and that's a good thing because other sides are getting a look in.

only perth and the nz clubs have missed the finals in each of the three years and there have been ownership changes and assorted turmoil in both cases.

keeping the level playing field and avoiding those sorts of micro-disasters is vital to the league's survival.

 

[striker]

the mariners certainly aren't the poorest club in the comp

that is absolutely right.  Thanks to Mr Turnbull we have some spare change to get a proper roster next season.

Let's see what McKinna does with the extra cash?

 

[FFC Mariner]

Vesh?? The Troll who felt that Heff's broken leg was Karma???

f**k off Troll

 

[Jesus]

Short version - worst idea ive heard for a while.


Salary cap keeps things even. Which keeps people interested in the league. no one wants a scotish premier league here, and no one would watch. So what if sydney blew 1 mil on whoninho? Their choice. If I owned my own club i would spend a million on bergkamp, and he would probably hardly play, but i would be stoked.

The marquee is to get bums on seats, and raise the leagues profile. Not to make the league better.

The salary cap is there to make the league better by keeping things even. It rises as clubs can afford more. If they were stupid enough to include a 1 mil marquee cap, why not just increase the salary cap by 1 mil? 

 

[brett]

agree, the $1.0M would be better spent on setting up the Youth League

^Jab

If they were stupid enough to include a 1 mil marquee cap, why not just increase the salary cap by 1 mil? 

^Hook

Well done lads.

Also, as best we can tell, players like Yorke, Juninho and Aloisi come out of the rich investors' back pockets, not out of the clubs' turnovers. To sign these players does not make logical financial sense, as there is little direct return and they are high-risk investments (see Juninho).

It's great for everyone that we get to watch them play, but as the clubs make a bit more money it should be invested in the foundations, not on a space race.

 

[vesh]

Short version - worst idea ive heard for a while.


Salary cap keeps things even. Which keeps people interested in the league. no one wants a scotish premier league here, and no one would watch. So what if sydney blew 1 mil on whoninho? Their choice. If I owned my own club i would spend a million on bergkamp, and he would probably hardly play, but i would be stoked.

The marquee is to get bums on seats, and raise the leagues profile. Not to make the league better.

The salary cap is there to make the league better by keeping things even. It rises as clubs can afford more. If they were stupid enough to include a 1 mil marquee cap, why not just increase the salary cap by 1 mil? 

How is it a relaly bad idea to bring in better players and improve the overall quality of the A-League???

Yeah the cap is good for an even comp but really the A-League is fairly crappy and if clubs can afford to add more players and make themselves better, which overall would make the quality of the A-League better then of course that would be good and the biggest difference would be 1 team has 3 or 4 max more higher paid players than the team who didn'r spend as much, doesn't make a huge difference on the park or it does is improve the quality of the a-league and your idea of just raising the cap an extra mil, not bad at all the FFA could do that and scrap the marquee outside that cap the average wage would be around 150-200k and if one team can afford to the full cap limit but another can't well bad luck we can't let the league dumb down coz a few clubs can't afford 2 or 3 extra players like others can

"Vesh?? The Troll who felt that Heff's broken leg was Karma???

f**k off Troll"

wtf does that have to do with this thread? Get over that and stick to the topic I didn't try offend anyone here and you go ahead and do that, childish

 

[dibo]

people have explained why they don't think the idea's any good. get over it.

 

[Bear]

Mariners midfield... Joe Cole, Christiano Ronaldo, Kaka, Robben
perth midfield... Bertos, Colosimo, Rizzo, Sekulovski

Its a bit extreme, but relevent.

Vesh, I believe your talking about the a-league standard, as in the standard of play, yes? How is a team with no cash like Perth going to benifit, or "raise there standard" by getting crushed 10-0 every week by clubs with more money, hence better players?

How in turn dose that raise the overall standard of the league?

 

[Andy]

I actually don't think it is that bad of an idea.

The only problem would be the smaller teams being unable to cope with the money that teams such as Sydney and Melbourne have and the financially weaker teams would struggle.

 

[Bex]

The only problem would be the smaller teams being unable to cope with the money that teams such as Sydney and Melbourne have and the financially weaker teams would struggle.

And that is why the existing salary cap is necessary whilst the competition develops a larger supporter and sponsership base.

 

[Bear]

I actually don't think it is that bad of an idea.

The only problem would be the smaller teams being unable to cope with the money that teams such as Sydney and Melbourne have and the financially weaker teams would struggle.

Thats why it is such a BAD idea. He agrues that his idea is to improve the league, so how does 2-3 teams dominating the league improve it?

FARK this place is frustrating sometimes

 

[vesh]

Yes it is frustrating coz you think one team who can pay more for an extra 3 or 4 players more than another team is gonna make such a huge difference WHEN IT WON'T but overall BETTER PLAYERS would be coming to the league better players = better QUALITY of the league. Teams won't dominate frmo other teams in the ways most of you are thinking no way at all I mean even with this even cap Melbourne by far have the best squad in the league and are very unlikley to miss the finals and can still end p finishing 7th, sure everyone has the same cap but they do have a much better squad than everyone else and they aren't dominating like your claiming teams would do

 

[Bear]

Your opinion is your opinion. Most people on here dont agree with you opinon because they see it for what it is, a silly idea. Jesus said it all when he said "If they were stupid enough to include a 1 mil marquee cap, why not just increase the salary cap by 1 mil?"

Keep going with this idea though if you like. Why not email the FFA, im sure they will be interested.

 

[Part_Timer]

troll....troll....troll troll......troll....troll....troll troll......troll....troll....troll troll......troll....troll....troll troll......troll....troll....troll troll......troll....troll....troll troll......troll....troll....troll troll......troll....troll....troll troll......

 

[Rowdy]

I mean even with this even cap Melbourne by far have the best squad in the league and are very unlikley to miss the finals and can still end p finishing 7th, sure everyone has the same cap but they do have a much better squad than everyone else and they aren't dominating like your claiming teams would do

I think you mean't to type 'likely' rather than 'un'

Soooooo if Melb have 'the best squad' BY FAR! as you say, and they have performed so badly this season, doesn't logic tell you that perhap's, just maybe, quite possibly  : that they DON'T in fact have 'the best squad'.  :-\

"yeah, yeah....results aren't a good indicator of whether the 'squad' is a good one or a bad one" I hear you say.

But, Coaches, both poor ones and having one replaced mid season, injuries, suspensions etc all come into play when it boils down to the results and this in turn comes back to the DNA of a teams 'squad'. A manager relies on the bloodstock he has on hand or what he can purchase temporarily.

My point is, the genetic pool is pretty even in the comp. I wouldn't say one team has had it worse than any other this year. We've had injuries + suspensions, like everyone else, on the flip, Perth have had the coaching saga.

But if we follow your logic, that Melb, the team with the 'best squad' in the league (& because they have the $$) and then go out and buy better os players, this will make the BEST even BETTER!  ???

If Melb are the best NOW, then it's NOT them who should need more marq. players but the ALLl those beneath them, which.........hang on a minute...... are some how above them, when you look at the table.  ;D

When it comes to your argument, "there's a hole in your bucket, dear liza, dear liza"