We pay more than any other club overall. Check the accounts. Thus, it makes no sense to paint IL as a cheapskate.DaveO wrote:Yes IL may not want to match the wages he's been offered hence my comment about a cheapskate chairman above. A bit glib perhaps but if you are right then IL wants to run the club on the cheap because whatever Cats have offered him it's not going to be NRL level of wages. If our chairman is not prepared to dig deep to pay the going rate for top players he's just not wealthy enough to be running the club single handed. He needs other money men who will dig deep into their pockets.thegimble wrote:Ever thought this is not a salary cap issue as such but could be that ST wants more than IL is going to pay him.DaveO wrote: Does not alter the fact that unless the club are paying him less than £75k signing Hardaker makes it harder to retain players as he takes up more of the cap.
If he is on less than £75k there would be no reason not to retain Sam as well. Yes it would cost whatever it costs to do that but so what? I am sure IL is touched by your concern for his wallet why you are I don't know. A cheapskate chairman is not compatible with being chairman of Wigan RL.
There are only two ways to look at this financially. Either Hardaker is on peanuts so we could have both him and Sam or he's earning enough that his increased cost on the cap compared to Sam is what makes it harder for Wigan to retain other players.
It also makes it harder to retain players if we sign a marquee player to replace Sam from outside the club as it would take £150K rather than £75K out of the cap.
And Cas might have won a GF. If's and buts....he took drugs instead.
What if ST wants 300k a season. IL does not want to pay that much as someone has to pay for it. Or put this another way we have 10k season tickets approx. Everyone pays 15 pound more and pay ST the extra through that.
The situation is not as simple as some think I feel. Feeling I have is Catalan has offered him massive money that IL will not bank roll.
IL wanted the marquee rule but apparently either can't afford or doesn't want to take advantage of the freedom that offers. So unless he has another player of equal quality lined up (and I don't mean Hardaker who ought not to be being rewarded with a huge wage for his drug taking) which will cost him as much if not more we are going to go backwards.
As to everyone paying more for tickets, the game long since stopped being financed by gate receipts. The finance comes from TV money, sponsorship and chairmans pockets. The TV money is fixed but it pays virtually the entire first team squads wages which is did not used to. So if money is tight enough not to pay a marquee wage then we are failing on the sponsorship and chairman's contribution front.
At this rate we will be being outspent by Toronto never mind Les Cats.
Plenty of people dislike the salary cap and feel it holds club who can afford to spend back. The marquee rule allows the cap to be "broken" for two players but we can't seemingly afford to take advantage. Ironic if true.
We have put a value on Sam. Based on his 3 yearswith us and our view on his future prospects. Any business in any walk of life has to put a value on its employees. He wants more and for longer, and doesn’t care that his prospects of winning anything with the club he wants to join are zero. That tells you everything we need to know about what sort of person he is,
If we paid him a fortune for the same output over the next 3 years as we have had in the last 2 and a bit then that would rank as terrible business. He might have a good rugby brain but if he is doing his thinking in the gym or on the couch then we may as well have a money bonfire every week.
Sam can stay, if he wants to stay with the club who stood by him, and wants to win things. But he doesn’t want to.
