Yaya Toure - £221,000 A WEEK!

Tummy said:
Maybe, just maybe, football clubs should look after their money and balance their books a little better.

Manchester City, paying over the top odds for players and paying them lots of money isn't going to send the footballing world to the dogs. City can throw money at things until they get what they want, cool, it didn't work last season.

Maybe, it's time for clubs to stop spending beyond their means and not feel forced to splash out on players and use the sky money as a constant source of income, maybe this whole thing will teach them to use their youth system better and give younger players a chance.
Click to expand...

It didn't work last season because they had Hughes as manager until December and he didn't know his arse from his elbow, had hardly any money at any other club he managed and made crap signings. Then Mancini came in and they had half the season left to adjust to a new manager, new training methods, new tactics and so on. The point is if the owners don't really care about splashing stupid amounts on only slightly above average players then the kind of money they will chuck around for top players is something no other team can compare with. Players like David Silva coming out with garbage such as he dreamed of playing for Manchester City is absolutely laughable. Would he have dreamed of playing for them before their sugar daddies rolled in from the Middle East?

Money talks.
 
Moses99p said:
I'd favour that kind of system... and having national academies (funded by the league) which would take over from club academies, then there would be a draft system whereby each year clubs could take players from said state acadamies...

Buttttt too many clubs would vote to block such an idea.
Click to expand...

Iv'e said near the exact same in the past.

Problem you have is a conflict of interests, the premier league is a goldmine, even if the fa tried to roll up it's current do as you like model, the premier league would probaly go it alone with what they have.

Every club in the current club would vote in, the global goldmine wins.

The game and it's structure has become 2nd fiddle to the money.

I know the american leagues are entirely different in their closed structure, but thats one thing they can be proud of, they never allowed the dollar to overtake the game. Certainly in the nfl, you can go for broke on big wage players, but it will bite you in the jackside down the line if thats all you have, you need the mix of drafted tallent, good scouting and trades to succeed.

Quick one from the top of the head, if only fifa would/could say, worldwide every league.. no club could spend a budget of over say 50-60 million in a year.
 
Moses99p said:
Isn't a ridiculously high proportion of turnover spent on wages, though? Unmatched by any other sort of business?

Wouldn't it be better to have cheaper season tickets/greater corporate social responsibility/more money pumped into national academies/etc?

Obviously sports careers are relatively short, and they deserve to earn quite a lot of money, but sums such as £200 000 per week are pretty crazy... even after paying 50% on £80k a week a player would earn £2m a year + private endorsements. I'd prefer wages to be reduced IF the money went into reducing ticket prices, or doing other things like I mentioned... obvs I don't just want club owners to make insane profits (although there's nothing wrong with them making money).

Also, with wage caps/draft systems/etc, the playing field is levelled so that any team can actually do well, after a number of years of buildup, whereas in our footballing world you can could the number of potential league champions with one hand.
Click to expand...

So?

I mean if people are daft enough to keep paying XXXX for season tickets clubs can charge that? They know people will pay so a little raise each year.

Footballers do have quite short lifespans, but film stars are earning millions over short periods of time and over a long time?

I agree that clubs should put more money in to youth development and coaches (England have under 3'000 coaches with the top UEFA badge compared to Spain / Germany / Italy whom all have 30'000 ish) but why should that be a clubs motivation? They can just buy in cheap players from over seas or buy some expensive better ones?

If Sky keep putting billions in to English football, clubs keep spending above and beyond their means, and rich owners and paying players XXXX are the least of the problems facing English football.

@ Kill.

Yep, money talks. Always has done and always will do. Don't blame the players. Most people would do the same :)
 
Don't forget that England is a much smaller country than Italy, Germany and Spain mind you. In the next 5 or 6 years Man City are going to end up winning everything if they can get a decent manager in and sustain the spending power that they are demonstrating right now.
 
K1LLSW1TCH said:
Don't forget that England is a much smaller country than Italy, Germany and Spain mind you. In the next 5 or 6 years Man City are going to end up winning everything if they can get a decent manager in and sustain the spending power that they are demonstrating right now.
Click to expand...

Chelsea still haven't cracked Europe ;) for all their money spent.

iirc, England have a higher population then Italy with Germany/Spain having about the same?

So what if they are "bigger" ? Does that some how mean we should have 25'000 less coaches with the top UEFA badge?
 
Tummy said:
Chelsea still haven't cracked Europe ;) for all their money spent.

iirc, England have a higher population then Italy with Germany/Spain having about the same?

So what if they are "bigger" ? Does that some how mean we should have 25'000 less coaches with the top UEFA badge?
Click to expand...

Spain: 46,000,000

Germany: 81,757,000

Italy: 60,231,000

England: 51,000,000

According to Wiki so not as big a gap as I thought apart from Germany. Chelsea and Man City aren't even on the same level spending power wise, Chelsea also made it to a final and lost in a penalty shoot out in case you forgot.

The point was that it isn't going to be shocking if Germany have thousands of more top coaches than England when their population is 30 million more.
 
Spain and Italy have a much close population / within 10 million and have 25'00 coaches more?

Chelsea haven't won anything in Europe though?

For all the money they spent it's only got them domestic glory.

Manchester City haven't won anything yet, they could be brilliant or awful this coming season. I don't see them paying players quite a bit is somehow dooming all of football though :p
 
Moses99p said:
People will pay x amount a year for a season ticket, out of loyalty, but that doesn't mean a club should milk a hard-working family of loads of its disposable income, just because it can. Clubs should be part of a community, not a cancer sucking what it can out of it, to fund the über lifestyles of a group of players.

It'd be interesting to see what film stars get paid a lot, but what proportion of a film's revenue do they take? Don't footballers take a higher percentage? The headline figure isn't the important one, imo... the important on is percentage of revenue.

Again, just because they can, doesn't mean they should.

Okay, so billions are pumped in, but clubs still run themselves in a retarded way. Doesn't that say to you that regulation is needed, and that clubs obviously can't be trusted to run themselves in a realistic fashion? You can't rely on market forces when you always have clubs artificially pumping in additional funds to keep up with the Joneses!



We're smaller geographically, but our population is the same as Italy's, bigger than Spain's, the same as France's and a bit smaller than Germany's.

*Actually, that's based on Wiki's figures... and it had the UK in the list, rather than just England. Even so, we're really don't have a small population compared to the big European nations, we're on a level with them!
Click to expand...

If you can get more money out of people, you do.

Doesn't mean it's the right thing to do, I'm all for cheaper tickets / season tickets (my Sheffield Wednesday one was a lot more then I expected) but fans pay these, it's almost a steady income for a half decent sized football club.

England is very much on a level with the bigger European footballing nations, we just lack in coaching and as a result our players aren't as good.
 
Tummy said:
Spain and Italy have a much close population / within 10 million and have 25'00 coaches more?

Chelsea haven't won anything in Europe though?

For all the money they spent it's only got them domestic glory.

Manchester City haven't won anything yet, they could be brilliant or awful this coming season. I don't see them paying players quite a bit is somehow dooming all of football though :p
Click to expand...

I never said it was dooming football but it certainly won't be healthy for it a few years down the line. Abramovich tightened the purse strings a bit at Chelsea over the past few years, before he arrived they were nobodies, they won a few cups, big deal, he arrived and injected a lot of cash and then they started winning things, not really a coincidence in my opinion, without his millions they'd still be getting 5th, 6th and 11th year after year like they used to.
 
I agree.

I just don't think it will happen :)

I'd love to see more home grown players, cheaper tickets, more games on the BBC and more coaches / managers that are English :)

Will take yonks to come in to effect, given the foothold sky / results / money have in the game and the F.A. who are willys.
 
im all in favour of wage caps. its ruining football and has been since the late 90s

the poorer sides just dont have a chance. and when they do try it can backfire and leave them ruined like leeds or half ruined like boro

its not right that to keep up with the chelseas and the citys that teams have got to spend money that they dont have and then when it all goes wrong pass on the costs to the fans

Tummy said:
If you can get more money out of people, you do.

.
Click to expand...

with nearly all teams IF is not even a factor. they HAVE to charge more money because to keep up with the teams backed by billionaires they have to spend more on wages/fees. theyre not trying to make more money they are trying to break even. just look how many teams are making losses every year
 
Last edited:
To be fair, on PAYE it is nigh on 50%, as the yearly amount is so wildly above the boundries the differing tax rates make next to no difference and the majority is taxed at 50%
 
People always make a fuss about how much footballers get paid but it's only the few elite players at the top clubs who are at the peak of their careers, which is only what - 5 years at most?
 
I welcome all these greedy footballers. If enough come over and play for City we will soon be out of debt as a nation with the tax they pay.

Hopefully the next gets paid £300k :D
 
bloodline76 said:
I welcome all these greedy footballers. If enough come over and play for City we will soon be out of debt as a nation with the tax they pay.

Hopefully the next gets paid £300k :D
Click to expand...

lol - the national debt is so big it would take 100 million yaya toures to clear it.



National Debt - how Britain owes over £900 billion

It's a truly frightening figure. Why is the world's sixth richest country so deeply in debt?

Every year the UK runs a large budget deficit. The Government spends more money than it can tax, so we plug the gap by selling bonds to investors at home and abroad. These bonds - known as gilts - have to be repaid in full, with interest. Added together, our unpaid loans make up the UK's national debt.

Right now, that debt is growing violently. The Government forecasts it will soar to an eye-watering £1.1 trillion by 2011. To put that in perspective, the UK went bust in 1976 running a budget deficit of 6% of GDP. In 2010 that deficit is going to top 11%.

Historically, our debt burden was heavier after World War II. But like any loan, if the money isn't invested wisely we end up borrowing even more. When the Government runs up huge debts and produces nothing to show for it, we're the ones that shoulder the burden. This year that burden will grow by £167.9 billion.

The state has been wasting our money for decades. Weak politicians have bribed voters with endless amounts of borrowed cash. As a result, in 2010 the interest on the national debt will cost £42.9 billion a year. That's more than we spend on defence, and not much less than the entire education budget.

Future generations won't thank us for mortgaging their future. At best, national debt will be a millstone around our children's necks. But if lenders lose faith in Britain there could be profound consequences for our currency, our country and our lives.
 
Mikey said:
Ridculous and I bet it'll be tax free or some scam.
Click to expand...

It's not going to be tax free, because the earnings are generated/earned in the UK. So even if he was a non-dom he'd still pay tax on all earnings in the UK (just wouldn't on any earnings from abroad - perhaps the image rights would be farmed out to a tax haven based subsidary company of City and the funds would be held in trust until the contract is over, but that would just be image rights).

The only thing that might be questionable is whether employer's NI is due (depending on how the employment is arranged)...

Whether he's worth it or not is an interesting question. One player can make the difference between a championship/champions league winning side and also rans. One player can be the key to allowing the rest of the team to reach their true potential. If Yaya is able to take Man City to the next level, then he'll almost certainly be worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom