Ian Lenagan and The Salary Cap

[sheepsteeth]

firstly IL has done some great things since taking over.

but with regards to the cap could he not be as bad as some of those he has accused of holding the game back?

He wants a team full of locally produced talent but won't pay them a decent enough wage to keep some of them.

He claims that it is salary cap restraints which are stopping us from retaining players we don't want to lose yet he openly campaigns against an increase in the cap.

I'm not saying abolish the cap but an increase of £100000 would give clubs room to manoeuvre.

it appears he can't have it both ways, either we increase the cap or we won't ever have a team full of our best own talent.

[DaveO]

He has voted against an increase in the cap and even said something along the lines of why on earth would we want increase it (!) but at the same time he was in favour of the marquee player idea.

Maybe he feels he could afford one wage large enough to give to a marquee player but the club can't fund a significant increase in the cap.

[sheepsteeth]

that's why i said £100000 extra on the cap. That would surely be less than we would pay a marquee player but is enough to give 4 or 5 players an extra £20000 or so a year which might mean we could have kept the likes of Goulding.

This is obviously on the assumption the salary cap is the issue and not that IL is trying to play hard ball to run us on the cheap.

Also the cap hasn't moved in line with inflation for years so players are worse off. I can't think of another "top" professional sport where salaries have stagnated.

You pay peanuts you get monkeys!

[Wigan_forever1985]

As ive said before, for me, IL loves the salary cap as its the perfect way of him owning his cherished team and us being successful without him having to shell out for much.

Wigan are in a privileged position to have an awesome youth set up, players 17-21 are the cheapest as their contracts are usually modest regardless of the talent they show. For example take Budgie id hazard a good guess that despite being one of if not the best winger in the comp this season but compare his cost to someone like joel at wire. They tend to lock in for 4-5 years at 18 this gives them up until 23 ish before they have to deal with increasing their wage.

this way IL can keep the wage bill low, imagine the other night when we fielded a team where the majority of the players where under 23 how little that "team" cost and it was still competitive, because the teams that don't have the luxury of our setup cannot afford to buy in talent as they are limited by the cap

its win win for il if the cap remains low

[No straw damn us]

As ive said before, for me, IL loves the salary cap as its the perfect way of him owning his cherished team and us being successful without him having to shell out for much.

Wigan are in a privileged position to have an awesome youth set up, players 17-21 are the cheapest as their contracts are usually modest regardless of the talent they show. For example take Budgie id hazard a good guess that despite being one of if not the best winger in the comp this season but compare his cost to someone like joel at wire. They tend to lock in for 4-5 years at 18 this gives them up until 23 ish before they have to deal with increasing their wage.

this way IL can keep the wage bill low, imagine the other night when we fielded a team where the majority of the players where under 23 how little that "team" cost and it was still competitive, because the teams that don't have the luxury of our setup cannot afford to buy in talent as they are limited by the cap

its win win for il if the cap remains low

How much money do you think Wigan invest in their youth development system? More than most? Young players get contract increases midway through their contracts IF Wane, Radlinski think they deserve it and IF it can be done under the salary cap rules. The major problem is that there is no place for the young players to go when they come out of the U19's if they are not ready for regular 1st team duty. Wigan under IL have paid out transfer fees for more players than any other club.

[markill]

I think IL and some othe rinfluential club owners want reformation rather than removal of the cap, and I think that is sensible. We wouldn't have a chance retaining a lot of people if you let Koukash and maybe a Nahaboo or similar take over a club and just buy the best players with no cap controls.

People seem to forget NRL and RU Premiership also have fully functioning salary caps. The problem isn't having a cap, its where to set it. Maybe it could be a little higher and it definitely could be tweaked with marquee player or more exepmtions for players who are home grown/long service/called to rep squads. I would think based on previous statements and actions that IL wouldn't oppose this type of thing.

Maybe there is an element of him trying to avoid bankrolling the club, but at the same time I don't imagine he would ever be taking money from the club. So anything he sees as a revenue booster to the club will get his agreement.

[DaveO]

I think IL and some othe rinfluential club owners want reformation rather than removal of the cap, and I think that is sensible. We wouldn't have a chance retaining a lot of people if you let Koukash and maybe a Nahaboo or similar take over a club and just buy the best players with no cap controls.

People seem to forget NRL and RU Premiership also have fully functioning salary caps. The problem isn't having a cap, its where to set it. Maybe it could be a little higher and it definitely could be tweaked with marquee player or more exepmtions for players who are home grown/long service/called to rep squads. I would think based on previous statements and actions that IL wouldn't oppose this type of thing.

Maybe there is an element of him trying to avoid bankrolling the club, but at the same time I don't imagine he would ever be taking money from the club. So anything he sees as a revenue booster to the club will get his agreement.

I forget the exact amount but at the moment the Sky money means clubs have to find circa £700K to pay right up to the cap(or maybe that's the figure for how much the Sky money gives club, can't remdemer).

Next season the cap will be a flat £1.825m with all the odd bits such as the money for long serving players scrapped an rolled into one figure but crucially the Sky money will fully fund the wagesof those teams in SL.

So that says to me there is plenty of scope to raise the cap. If Wigan have to find £700K to pay the cap and do so them they could still do it in 2015 which would give us the potential to have a cap of £1.825m + £700,000k without IL having to personally bank roll the club.

Now when he previously rubbished increasing the cap that wasn't the situation but now it is, I'd like to see him proposing an increase and actively pursuing it.

[markill]

I agree now is a time to look at a higher cap amount but the clubs have to be sensible about it too. Marquee player first then the wider cap. They should have a strategic plan A, B and C for implementing over the next few years depending on how the bigger picture financial picture and revenues go for clubs.

[Dobby]

I agree now is a time to look at a higher cap amount but the clubs have to be sensible about it too. Marquee player first then the wider cap. They should have a strategic plan A, B and C for implementing over the next few years depending on how the bigger picture financial picture and revenues go for clubs.

]

Why have a marquee player rule for one player when there are other paid peanuts due to the salary cap? Salaries across the board need to increase, not just the salary of one individual.

[markill]

I agree now is a time to look at a higher cap amount but the clubs have to be sensible about it too. Marquee player first then the wider cap. They should have a strategic plan A, B and C for implementing over the next few years depending on how the bigger picture finan thecial picture and revenues go for clubs.

]

Why have a marquee player rule for one player when there are other paid peanuts due to the salary cap? Salaries across the board need to increase, not just the salary of one individual.

Sadly, a higher cap doesn't necessarily mean higher paid players. It may mean more low paid players per squad or just not spending to cap, like some clubs don't already. Which is a shame.

The marquee rule potentially has other commercial benefits than just upping the cap and maybe paying each player a little more. It allows the purchase or retention of a real star without the whole wage structure stepping up all in one go. Of you then grow revenues you can apply a bigger increase, but if, for example, the marquee player meant your top paid player is off cap that in itself means the others players could get a bit more as it will release space from that marquee guy, should clubs choose to us the cap space of course.