Liverpool FC Forum

Revealed: The staggering amounts of money Premier League stars actually earn... including a £75,000-a-game bonus on top of £391K-a-week wage

(and Liverpool are included...)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/20 ... tars-earn/

++

When you read the numbers, it's disgusting how desperate managers and clubs agree packages that insult the fans that believe it's about football.

Fans want to win the CL for the football, clearly the players are thinking about their bank accounts and the clubs are desperate to win to break even having agreed to these obscene salaries.

The EPL is out of control and the biggest mugs are the fans.      

And here' some of the tv money that fuels the obscene payments:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... ts-BT.html

Unfortunately, we the fans feed this monster...

The current financial situation will kill football eventually. Listening to Mourinho moaning about the quality of his squad, great example of how bad the situation is. The Sanchez deal to united.

If you want to make the EPL less greedy and more competitive by force, look at this model in my country:

"The Hyundai A-League Salary Cap is $2.928 million for the 2017/18 Season. Clubs must spend at least the Salary Floor which is $2.635 million (representing 90% of the Salary Cap).

The Salary Cap applies to the 20 to 23 Players that Clubs have registered to their Hyundai A-League Player Roster. Unless specifically exempt, all payments and benefits (eg. cars, accommodation, etc) provided by a Club to a Player are included in the Club’s Salary Cap."

Its a low quality of football to watch but it shares none of the issues the bigger leagues have and each team has a reasonable chance to win depending on how each club is run. Change the cap to something reasonable for the EPL and enforce it. Should clubs be caught cheating deduct points or relegate them like Juventus was for match fixing.

Just hope your team is not caught in the cross-hairs 

What happened to the good old days in the 1980's when the likes of John Barnes and Peter Beardsley earned about 5,000-10,000 a week max?

Robbie Fowlers first contract was 3,000 a week.

The wages these days are a slap in the face to the fans who have to fork out over 50 quid now to watch the match.

Sky TV and the formation of the Premier league just encouraged greed, unfortunately,and its just spiralling upwards.

How the fck is Sanchez worth 20m a year?

Man city and Chelsea's sugar daddy billionaire owners are also ruining the game.

Boo

Those are disgusting figures but football has been like that for a good number of years now. The clubs make an obscene amount and naturally the players want pieces of it.

What is fast becoming a trend now is players winding down their deals so that they "Emre Can" cash in themselves to a destination of their own choice. Clubs don't seem that bothered because they haven't tried to stop it as it avoids paying high transfer fees before they even talk to the player.

Anyhow despite all that obscene money they make you can be rest assured that they are paying their taxes in full 

Reg » Sat May 12, 2018 1:28 am wrote:

Fans want to win the CL for the football, clearly the players are thinking about their bank accounts and the clubs are desperate to win to break even having agreed to these obscene salaries.

The EPL is out of control and the biggest mugs are the fans.   :down:   

I get ***** off whenever people like you blame the players for this. This is a situation created by the big clubs in the biggest leagues in europe (including liverpool). Its only natural that the best players want their share of it.

Its the big clubs that have driven up prices for tickets and the TV rights, and the fans that keep paying. Its the big clubs that turned the Champions league into the rich clubs league. If anything blame the big clubs for creating this monster and the fans for beeing stupid enough to follow. It wont take too long before a european rich club superleague is formed that further increases this situation.

People complain that players are greedy, while the truly greedy ones get away with just about anything because of the incredible loyalty of the supporters.

Ghost of Shankly » Sat May 12, 2018 8:12 pm wrote:
Man city and Chelsea's sugar daddy billionaire owners are also ruining the game.

Yes but the sad thing is that all the big clubs including Liverpool made this possible. Liverpool has just not been good enough at finding a sugar daddy.

This is how it will be now and in the future. I can see alot of other clubs owned by "suggar daddys" and begin their own revolution.

Clubs outside top 6 will always need major investment if they want to splash the cash on new players and ridiculous wages.

Sugar daddies show up in an instant but could leave just as fast. I'd say our owners are following a much healthier financial model that will give us much more stability in the long term.

On the same topic, Pep Guardiola signs a new deal this week.. 20m a year! Talk about greed in the game.

Jurgen is probably on about 6m a year (estimate).

Would you lot agree that if the man city manager was offered what our manager is getting, then he would leave Manchester City tommorow, and manage elsewhere at, a more prestigious club in Europe!?

It's all about the ££££!

Man City are so filthy rich probably their cleaners are on 80k a year.

kazza wrote:Sugar daddies show up in an instant but could leave just as fast. I'd say our owners are following a much healthier financial model that will give us much more stability in the long term.

Abramovich 15 years and Mansour is approaching 10 years so other than those two I cant think of anyone else in the prem who fit that category. I suppose they could walk away if the money disappeared but FSG are a LLC so they could also do the same.

If it came down to it and the league went bust and lost say the mega TV deal would it be enough for any of these owners to stick around ?. This season we got close to 150 mil from that deal which is probably half our income so if it was reduced to something like 20 million how would we survive losing that much without someone putting their hand in their pocket to make up the balance.

red till i die!! » Sun May 20, 2018 10:47 pm wrote:

kazza wrote:Sugar daddies show up in an instant but could leave just as fast. I'd say our owners are following a much healthier financial model that will give us much more stability in the long term.

Abramovich 15 years and Mansour is approaching 10 years so other than those two I cant think of anyone else in the prem who fit that category. I suppose they could walk away if the money disappeared but FSG are a LLC so they could also do the same.

If it came down to it and the league went bust and lost say the mega TV deal would it be enough for any of these owners to stick around ?. This season we got close to 150 mil from that deal which is probably half our income so if it was reduced to something like 20 million how would we survive losing that much without someone putting their hand in their pocket to make up the balance.

Abramovich is an individual and seems to have slowed down his spending ( hence the issue with Conte) and Chelsea carry a lot of debt. They will get a new stadium so we will see if that will improve their spending. City are spending Abu Dhabi public money so they will not really need to slow down their spending but at some point surely even their sheiks will get bored. If anything they have underachieved considering the money they spent.

redshade » Fri May 18, 2018 11:30 pm wrote:This is how it will be now and in the future. I can see alot of other clubs owned by "suggar daddys" and begin their own revolution.

This is how it is now, and yes it will only be more of that in the future if we dont do anything to stop it. Imo club football as a sport suffer immensly for it.