25 Jun 2015 22:58:18
Mark Lawrenson is right young players get far too much money far too soon for their own or the games sake.
I think clubs across europe should come to an agreement not to pay player money than say £2000 a week up until the age of 21 and then they would be free to earn as much as they can get.
This would give them a better grounding and allow the likes of Raheem Stirling to concentrate on his football rather than his finances I'm sure he would have a better career for it long term.
Undoable? Not at all it just wouldn't be easy to implement it or enforce it but with uafa and all the clubs backing it could and should be done.

1.) 26 Jun 2015
25 Jun 2015 23:32:04
Totally agree.

I'm all for player development, if you are old enough, than you are good enough, but years ago, players like Sterling would be earning £1000 per week and cleaning the boots of players like Dalglish.

Now, they all have 5 bed mansions, drive Ferrari's, earn £30,000 per week and haven't even played for the first team yet.

2.) 26 Jun 2015
26 Jun 2015 00:48:39
How is a young player ever going to manage on £2000 a week. They will end up begging after training and get into a life of crime, all because you want to deprive them of 100 000 a week, which they might just manage to survive on until they reach 25 and can then earn a more comfortable 300 000.

3.) 26 Jun 2015
26 Jun 2015 02:44:59
G62,

I think that is too simple an argument.

(Leaving aside whether the fans and advertisers should pay the insane amount of money into the game)

There is x amount of money in the game. It goes either to the players or the owners. It is just a question on how the pie is split up.

Why should Arsenal or any other club get a free ride from a player just because he is young? (See the problems that result from that exploitation in US College Sports).

I think that players get paid very well for their job, but I am not more inclined to see the owners get more of the football money (it is not coming back to the fans or the advertisers, so I wish people would stop blaming the players for being greedy - no both the owners and the players are greedy it is about finding a balance that works for both sets of greed).

How much the players gets paid should be purely market driven - regardless of age.

The homegrown rule has only made the wages issue worse for young players. A young player because he does not count towards the squad number and may potentially be homegrown (by training, birth, or both) is in a privileged position if he is skilled, because the team gets a player that does not count towards their squad number and can help them win games and when he does count towards their squad number he is probably homegrown and not in the foreign quota.

Of course, the top clubs want a young player like that - and if the big boys want you. You get paid more.

The other issue is footballers do not have what we consider full careers. They are always a horror tackle away from their last contract (except at Arsenal). Best case scenario they play from their late teens to early - mid thirties. They want to earn as much money as they can as anyone would.


Now I agree he has gone about it like a jerk and you can call him on that, but not at wanting to get paid what he is worth. Show me the money!!!!

Now do not get me wrong, I think that the players union should set up a pension plan so that some of the wages are saved up for players, who may not otherwise do it themselves.

4.) 26 Jun 2015
26 Jun 2015 09:36:22
James R,

I'm a United fan and come in peace.
Love reading through all the rumours and banter pages as it's great to hear everyones view on this so and so and that so and so.
I have to say, your post above is top notch. Wish people would entertain what you're saying a bit more before blaming the players. My best friend who i've known since i was 11, has graduated from a said accademy and plays in the highest tier of English football. He has told me a few snippets and things over the years that make you open your eyes up that little bit more with regards to the football off the pitch.
Anyways, thanks for the read.

5.) 26 Jun 2015
26 Jun 2015 09:42:30
Personally James I think all players wages should be paid over over a 40 year period on anything above £10,000 a week.
Let's take a player on 40k a week 10k now plus 30k week spread throughout a normal working life time, they could never go skint and would have security for life but just wouldn't be able to pay 20k for a bottle of champagne every week they'd be limited to one a fortnight :-).
Its too much to young that's the problem and as a Brazilian coach said during the world cup a lot of players work tirelessly to get them self's out of poverty but then when they reach a level financially they just stop progressing because they lose that drive one they've got the money.

6.) 26 Jun 2015
26 Jun 2015 13:43:21
G62,

Firstly, elite players have worked hard and made a lot of sacrifices. Sacrifices that we did not have to make at that age. The pay off is the ability to earn considerable amounts of money they do if they make it (which most players do not).

I do not disagree that young players can be led astray and great careers ruined by poor choices or lack of hunger to succeed / thinking you have already succeeded; along with a myriad of other issues.

BUT after 18 we are all free to make those mistakes.

A footballer is not any different than you or I, except their mistakes are constantly under a microscope and because of the wages paid, we think they ought to have done better. That is unfair to a footballer.


The players union and the older players in the dressing room need to take responsibility and look out for these young players to make sure that the young players have the right attitude, put them in touch with reputable money managers, make sure to warn the young players about the various hangers on, the shady agents, the short career, and pitfalls of the lavish lifestyle.

I think that the Player's Union should set up a plan for all players to see for their retirement, but that is for the Union and the members to agree upon not for the owners to force upon the players. Also the PU should have some mandatory meetings with reputable money managers (or money management courses for the players), post career planning, counselling for troubled players, and quite simply the PU is not doing enough for its members.

I think a lot of players will benefit from this type of support from the Players' Union, but some players will not want the support and some of those players will make mistakes. We will always be focussed on the players that make the wrong choices not the many that make the right choices.

BUT even the players that make mistakes those are their mistakes to make.

I do not think you can force someone, who is competent in the eyes of the law to take payment earned in 14 years in payments over 40 years. That is a choice for the player to make - if he thinks that is wise he can do it, if he does not he can take the money as it comes due.