Anyone hear about this being considered?

It’s supposed to be £2.5mill for league 1 and £1.5mill for league 2 with more emphasis on home grown players that have to be in the squad..

Even without the Covid crisis and the severe affect it is having on the finances of all clubs, and not just those at the lower-League level, this has to be the way forward.

There are far more serious things to worry about at this time, but financial sense finally coming to football may be one of the very few positives to come out of this terrible situation.

Personally I don’t agree with a wholesale salary cap. It should be related to income rather than just a one size fits all..

Personally I don’t agree with a wholesale salary cap. It should be related to income rather than just a one size fits all..

In which case the Fleetwood's, Salford's and one or two others will continue to drive a horse and carriage through the financial fair play rules and corrupt the wage structure for lower-League clubs.

You also risk having clubs going in to financial meltdown if their sugar daddy pulls out or are no longer there, e.g. Bolton.

Personally I don’t agree with a wholesale salary cap. It should be related to income rather than just a one size fits all..

In which case the Fleetwood's, Salford's and one or two others will continue to drive a horse and carriage through the financial fair play rules and corrupt the wage structure for lower-League clubs.

You also risk having clubs going in to financial meltdown if their sugar daddy pulls out or are no longer there, e.g. Bolton.

That's why it needs to be tracked to football-related turnover, ie. ticket sales, merchandise, hospitality, player sales, sponsorship etc. Sponsorship would obviously be open to abuse and deals would have to be signed-off by the EFL, but such a system would send a cannonball right through the sails of Sal$ord and Flee£wood.

As for which method would most benefit Argyle, the football-turnover model would give us a big advantage in the lower leagues but not so much in the Championship; while a salary cap would probably be the opposite.

Andy Pilley (with his sister) owns both BES Utilities, an energy company, and Fleetwood Town.

The new Grandstand at Highbury Stadium includes the BES headquarters. BES are Fleetwood's main sponsor.

You cannot see the join between the two, so how do you control the flow of money between them?

How about £2M + gate receipts for League 1 : £1.5M + gate receipts for League 2, this would benefit those clubs with a larger physical income without allowing the sugar daddy pumping £££££ into the tiny clubs.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52738597


If these proposals come in , there will be some big changes in squads and a lot of unemployed footballers . Personally , I think the limits are too low and only income geberated by the club ( rather than the owner) should be included . Squads of 20 too low especially if it has to include 8 home grown players.

I agree that football-generated income must be part of it. The devil will be in the detail there, but if this is to be a once-in-a-generation root-and-branch reform they’d better get it right first time and, preferably, apply proportional restrictions across the pyramid.

A cap that is too low will help clubs coming up - although have they really ever not been able to compete with League Two? - but will be devastating for clubs promoted to the Championship. It’s hard enough as it is, but we will then have a Premier League/Championship-type divide where the promoted clubs are immediately odds-on for relegation before a ball has been kicked.

Much as I like to see the likes of Portsmouth and Sunderland who have frittered away parachute payments still struggling to get out of League One, it is hardly fair on their fan base that they should be capped like Morecambe or Stevenage if they have genuine fan-generated income.

The salary cap proposed would not be fair on clubs like Argyle, which have a much larger football related turnover than many of their rivals in both League One and Two. Why should a club with average home attendances of 10,000 have to keep to the same salary cap as the likes of Morecombe? Surely any salary cap should be based on football related income ?