| Wages 16:50 - Aug 14 with 1482 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
Where has this idea come from what we can't, won't or aren't paying anywhere near 100k a week? That's laughable.
Last time our wages bill was the lowest in the league granted but we were just singing EFL players, that is clearly changed. Even then, believe Phillips was on 150k a week at City and we paid 100k of that!
If we go back to our pals Sunderland, they are paying wages
Xhaka $110,00 PW
Mukiele $100,000 PW
Geertruida $80,000 PW
Le Fee $80,000 PW
Guess where they were in total wages last years of PL clubs, a lowly 16th!
Some people are still claiming O'Shea is our highest paid player lol.
Diop was on 70,000 a week at his last 2 clubs! Wake up!
|  |
| |  |
| Wages on 16:55 - Aug 14 with 1425 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
From people who struggle to get their heads around modern top flight football and how the financials work - which I get, but there is so much evidence, and so much that has been discussed on here, that shows these types of wages are totally plausible for us.
And we'll need to pay some at that level to get the right players is to survive and then establish ourselves. |  | | |
| Wages on 16:57 - Aug 14 with 1405 views | hunty21 |
Just ask yourself what mess they would be in if got relegated its a high risk high reward strategy | | | |
| Wages on 17:04 - Aug 14 with 1343 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Wages on 16:57 - Aug 14 by hunty21 |
Just ask yourself what mess they would be in if got relegated its a high risk high reward strategy |
They were 16 out of 20 even with those numbers. Thats my point, you either want to compete or you don’t.
There will be clauses and you’ll take some loses but it takes years of mismanagement and breaking the rules to be a Leicester. | |
| |
| Wages on 17:05 - Aug 14 with 1334 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Wages on 16:55 - Aug 14 by SuffolkPunchFC |
From people who struggle to get their heads around modern top flight football and how the financials work - which I get, but there is so much evidence, and so much that has been discussed on here, that shows these types of wages are totally plausible for us.
And we'll need to pay some at that level to get the right players is to survive and then establish ourselves. |
The information is readily available. | |
| |
| Wages on 17:09 - Aug 14 with 1282 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
I don't disagree (don't you just love a double negative).
However, do you not already have enough evidence from things that some people ask on the forum that many don't do any research for themselves? 
You asked how people didn't know / accept it. It's because many don't do any background investigation. | | | |
| Wages on 17:10 - Aug 14 with 1267 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Wages on 17:09 - Aug 14 by SuffolkPunchFC |
I don't disagree (don't you just love a double negative).
However, do you not already have enough evidence from things that some people ask on the forum that many don't do any research for themselves?
You asked how people didn't know / accept it. It's because many don't do any background investigation. |
Even if you can’t be bothered to do basic research, the idea that O’Shea is our highest paid player after the signings we’ve made is just so nonsensical and I’ve seen it banded around quite a bit! | |
| |
| Wages on 17:13 - Aug 14 with 1230 views | HighgateBlue |
| Wages on 16:55 - Aug 14 by SuffolkPunchFC |
From people who struggle to get their heads around modern top flight football and how the financials work - which I get, but there is so much evidence, and so much that has been discussed on here, that shows these types of wages are totally plausible for us.
And we'll need to pay some at that level to get the right players is to survive and then establish ourselves. |
Yes this is true to a large degree.
We spent a decent amount in transfer fees last time we came up, but that only tells half the story. It seems likely that our wage bill was pretty lowly last time round (and the publicly available data, which admittedly must be taken with a pinch of salt, indicates that).
I think we are right to be pushing the boat out a little further this time with wages. After all, the proposition that we can afford to sign a couple of marquee players on £100k per week is not the same as saying that all of our players are on that amount. If we can afford to spend £12m on McAteer in the Championship, we can afford a couple of star players on £100k in the Prem, and frankly if we don't do that, we're very much behind the 8 ball.
Town sides in the Premier League era who have done brilliantly or reasonably well have succeeded because of our strengths at the time, namely bringing some players through our own system, really good man management, great support, and team spirit and cohesion. Particularly in the absence of homegrown stars, it's becoming harder and harder to succeed in this way without money. Even 2 years ago, when we didn't come close to staying up, we changed the squad a fair bit going into the Prem season. This year it will be even more. Having picked that route (which is totally understandable - it's hard to live off squad cohesion and continuity alone in the Prem in 2026), we really have to bring in as much quality as we can at all responsibly bring in. If we're tearing up the squad and starting again, and wanting them to hit the ground running with results in week one, we're going to have to stump up the cash on wages. |  | | |
| Wages on 17:17 - Aug 14 with 1207 views | ITFC_Essex |
| Wages on 16:55 - Aug 14 by SuffolkPunchFC |
From people who struggle to get their heads around modern top flight football and how the financials work - which I get, but there is so much evidence, and so much that has been discussed on here, that shows these types of wages are totally plausible for us.
And we'll need to pay some at that level to get the right players is to survive and then establish ourselves. |
If you explain to the over 45's that a 17-25million signing is the equivalent of about a 1.5-2mil signing back at the turn of the century they often struggle with that, in terms of the player quality we are getting, the tippy top players cost buckets more than what we have paid for our team. [Post edited 14 Aug 17:18]
|  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Wages on 17:20 - Aug 14 with 1182 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Wages on 17:13 - Aug 14 by HighgateBlue |
Yes this is true to a large degree.
We spent a decent amount in transfer fees last time we came up, but that only tells half the story. It seems likely that our wage bill was pretty lowly last time round (and the publicly available data, which admittedly must be taken with a pinch of salt, indicates that).
I think we are right to be pushing the boat out a little further this time with wages. After all, the proposition that we can afford to sign a couple of marquee players on £100k per week is not the same as saying that all of our players are on that amount. If we can afford to spend £12m on McAteer in the Championship, we can afford a couple of star players on £100k in the Prem, and frankly if we don't do that, we're very much behind the 8 ball.
Town sides in the Premier League era who have done brilliantly or reasonably well have succeeded because of our strengths at the time, namely bringing some players through our own system, really good man management, great support, and team spirit and cohesion. Particularly in the absence of homegrown stars, it's becoming harder and harder to succeed in this way without money. Even 2 years ago, when we didn't come close to staying up, we changed the squad a fair bit going into the Prem season. This year it will be even more. Having picked that route (which is totally understandable - it's hard to live off squad cohesion and continuity alone in the Prem in 2026), we really have to bring in as much quality as we can at all responsibly bring in. If we're tearing up the squad and starting again, and wanting them to hit the ground running with results in week one, we're going to have to stump up the cash on wages. |
We are certainly at a point where the PL has left other top European leagues for dust and our annual wages on one player would have broken our record transfer fee just a few years.
The Parachute cycle is now established enough in the Championship where mutiple 20M+ deals for relegated clubs may well become the norm.
The money will just grow and grow on the base of global TV contracts. [Post edited 14 Aug 17:24]
| |
| |
| Wages on 17:21 - Aug 14 with 1177 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Wages on 17:17 - Aug 14 by ITFC_Essex |
If you explain to the over 45's that a 17-25million signing is the equivalent of about a 1.5-2mil signing back at the turn of the century they often struggle with that, in terms of the player quality we are getting, the tippy top players cost buckets more than what we have paid for our team. [Post edited 14 Aug 17:18]
|
Yeah, I think it's generational thing to be honest! That and the fact were out for so long. | |
| |
| Wages on 17:26 - Aug 14 with 1139 views | ITFC_Essex |
| Wages on 17:21 - Aug 14 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
Yeah, I think it's generational thing to be honest! That and the fact were out for so long. |
It insanity that we can even talk about a £15-20 million fee being cheap these days, but give it a few more years and that's what we'll be paying for just the broadband haha | |
| |
| Wages on 17:48 - Aug 14 with 1045 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| Wages on 17:13 - Aug 14 by HighgateBlue |
Yes this is true to a large degree.
We spent a decent amount in transfer fees last time we came up, but that only tells half the story. It seems likely that our wage bill was pretty lowly last time round (and the publicly available data, which admittedly must be taken with a pinch of salt, indicates that).
I think we are right to be pushing the boat out a little further this time with wages. After all, the proposition that we can afford to sign a couple of marquee players on £100k per week is not the same as saying that all of our players are on that amount. If we can afford to spend £12m on McAteer in the Championship, we can afford a couple of star players on £100k in the Prem, and frankly if we don't do that, we're very much behind the 8 ball.
Town sides in the Premier League era who have done brilliantly or reasonably well have succeeded because of our strengths at the time, namely bringing some players through our own system, really good man management, great support, and team spirit and cohesion. Particularly in the absence of homegrown stars, it's becoming harder and harder to succeed in this way without money. Even 2 years ago, when we didn't come close to staying up, we changed the squad a fair bit going into the Prem season. This year it will be even more. Having picked that route (which is totally understandable - it's hard to live off squad cohesion and continuity alone in the Prem in 2026), we really have to bring in as much quality as we can at all responsibly bring in. If we're tearing up the squad and starting again, and wanting them to hit the ground running with results in week one, we're going to have to stump up the cash on wages. |
The wage bill is public record, as the accounts are available. The lowest in the PL that year at (from memory) circa £70M, and only 50% ratio to revenue (also lowest in the PL, and way off the likes of WHam 275% and Wolves 240% from last year's relegated clubs). | | | |
| Wages on 17:57 - Aug 14 with 1007 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
Another thought (and one of my pet hates).
The way the form is built / used doesn't help. There is LOADS of good information posted on here but, unlike most other forms, there is no consolidated threads. This place spawns threads faster than breeding rabbits, and the search function is (being very kind with my words) poor. No subsections beyond Football or General, and a thread can drop off the front page in an hour, never to be seen again!
So subjects get repeated multiple times, and it's never easy to find if information has already been discussed with searching.
I'll get off my soapbox now ... | | | |
| Wages on 17:59 - Aug 14 with 993 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Wages on 17:57 - Aug 14 by SuffolkPunchFC |
Another thought (and one of my pet hates).
The way the form is built / used doesn't help. There is LOADS of good information posted on here but, unlike most other forms, there is no consolidated threads. This place spawns threads faster than breeding rabbits, and the search function is (being very kind with my words) poor. No subsections beyond Football or General, and a thread can drop off the front page in an hour, never to be seen again!
So subjects get repeated multiple times, and it's never easy to find if information has already been discussed with searching.
I'll get off my soapbox now ... |
Or you could just listen to the more clued-up posters! | |
| |
| Wages on 18:07 - Aug 14 with 954 views | Cheera |
We were paying nothing like 100k a week for Phillips.
Our wage bill in 2024/25 was 20th out of 20. | | | |
| Wages on 18:11 - Aug 14 with 931 views | Europa |
| Wages on 17:17 - Aug 14 by ITFC_Essex |
If you explain to the over 45's that a 17-25million signing is the equivalent of about a 1.5-2mil signing back at the turn of the century they often struggle with that, in terms of the player quality we are getting, the tippy top players cost buckets more than what we have paid for our team. [Post edited 14 Aug 17:18]
|
I think you underestimate us. I read somewhere that Trevor Francis's one-million transfer, taking all factors into account (including spending power etc.) would be the equivalent of 170 million today, and I find that reasonably credible. |  | | |
| Wages on 18:24 - Aug 14 with 862 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Wages on 18:07 - Aug 14 by Cheera |
We were paying nothing like 100k a week for Phillips.
Our wage bill in 2024/25 was 20th out of 20. |
Of course we were 20th out of 20, did you see our signings!
Did you see the 4 Sunderland players I listed and they were still 16th... | |
| |
| Wages on 19:29 - Aug 14 with 674 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| Wages on 17:59 - Aug 14 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
Or you could just listen to the more clued-up posters! |
That seems uncalled for, and I don’t even really understand where it came from or how it relates to the post I made, and you replied to.
Care to explain the dig? | | | |
| Wages on 19:34 - Aug 14 with 629 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Wages on 19:29 - Aug 14 by SuffolkPunchFC |
That seems uncalled for, and I don’t even really understand where it came from or how it relates to the post I made, and you replied to.
Care to explain the dig? |
It was a joke! | |
| |
| Wages on 19:45 - Aug 14 with 579 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
Ok, but not very well conveyed. Using emotes helps cover what is lost with no tone or body language. | | | |
| Wages on 19:47 - Aug 14 with 567 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Wages on 19:45 - Aug 14 by SuffolkPunchFC |
Ok, but not very well conveyed. Using emotes helps cover what is lost with no tone or body language. |
It’s really not that deep! | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
- I'm into my 60s, and I don't struggle to grasp it. 