|
Post by independent on Apr 19, 2024 10:19:17 GMT
i.imgur.com/73qlGw0.pngThe latest Attendances in the WSL show that 7 of the 12 clubs attendances vary from 1,897 to 4,998. The top 4 inflate their average by playing a few cheap high profile games each year which leaves only Bristol City with 7,384. This seems strange as Bristol have played 18 of their 22 games and currently have 6 points. Seems odd that they have one and a half times the attendance of Liverpool, Villa and Spurs and 3.5 times Everton but that is what the figures show. Average attendances in Europe this season are: Germany 2,894, France 1,089, Spain 1,501. One “big game” against an equally well-followed opposition – such as PSG vs Lyon – is largely responsible for a spiked average attendance. In fact, PSG’s average without their big home clash against Lyon, which drew a 15k attendance, would be nearly 10x smaller, while Lyon’s attendance is set below 1k These ‘Big Games’ – strategically chosen matches that take place in stadiums with a larger capacity than normal, and are promoted with higher marketing efforts – have led to higher average attendance and sustainable growth also for regular games. Arsenal's victory over rivals Tottenham at a sold-out Emirates Stadium on Sunday means that the Women's Super League (WSL) club's average attendance this season (34,997) is now higher than that of 10 Premier League teams.6 Mar 2024 The role of major events and national team success is important, but history shows that – in isolation – it is not yet a guarantee for increased interest and attendances in the respective domestic leagues. Half way into the 23/24 season, Spain’s Liga F stands at 1,501 average attendance per game
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Apr 19, 2024 10:53:53 GMT
i.imgur.com/73qlGw0.pngThe latest Attendances in the WSL show that 7 of the 12 clubs attendances vary from 1,897 to 4,998. The top 4 inflate their average by playing a few cheap high profile games each year which leaves only Bristol City with 7,384. This seems strange as Bristol have played 18 of their 22 games and currently have 6 points. Seems odd that they have one and a half times the attendance of Liverpool, Villa and Spurs, but that is what the figures show. Average attendances in Europe this season are: Germany 2,894, France 1,089, Spain 1,501. One “big game” against an equally well-followed opposition – such as PSG vs Lyon – is largely responsible for a spiked average attendance. In fact, PSG’s average without their big home clash against Lyon, which drew a 15k attendance, would be nearly 10x smaller, while Lyon’s attendance is set below 1k These ‘Big Games’ – strategically chosen matches that take place in stadiums with a larger capacity than normal, and are promoted with higher marketing efforts – have led to higher average attendance and sustainable growth also for regular games. The role of major events and national team success is important, but history shows that – in isolation – it is not yet a guarantee for increased interest and attendances in the respective domestic leagues. Half way into the 23/24 season, Spain’s Liga F stands at 1,501 average attendance per game Bristol are the success story that show how it's done - they've worked their way up from grass roots via a community club and took fans along with way rather than plastic Premier League clubs doing it for ESG points. However, in fairness to Arsenal their women are making money and scoffing at them nearly filling/ filling a 60k stadium a few times is laughable - the money generated from that given their cost base will generate a profit ratio the blokes can only dream of. Their turnover is £7m (tv money is £8m divided by 12 a season) so they seem to be getting it right too - can't imagine they've costs of anywhere near £7m. It's got to be remembered the women's game is starting from ground zero as the FA banned them because they shat themselves the women's game was going to be bigger than the blokes following the war. Dick Kerr's Women were getting crowds of 20-30k a week before they were banned. Seen before you mention this is based on 'fantasy' but so is the blokes - it's only still going out of community and history. The vast majority of clubs would have been wound up yonks ago if this was a serious business as they're absolutely spaffing money all over the shop with no chance of ever being solvent on their own. Turnover/attendance is irrelevant if everyone's losing a shit tonne of money and that was the driver behind the super league anyway - Real Madrid were insolvent until the King/Government massively overpaid on the training ground from memory. Most championship clubs turnover barely covers wages let alone anything else and even with their success in the transfer market Brighton are £375 in debt - that's fantasy land! Don't understand the negativity or why anyone would want them to fail. Maybe accidently it's found it's market and that'll only grow over time - dad's n daughters. If I was down in Stoke and you said I could watch my daughter play football Saturday/Sunday then go and watch Stoke Blokes/ Stoke women play football in the afternoon almost all year I'd bite your fucking hand off mate - absolute no brainer! Add into that girls are going to know girls who they've played grass roots with who're getting a game for semi-pro clubs - what is there not to like in this!
|
|
|
Post by smiler_andy on Apr 19, 2024 11:14:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Apr 19, 2024 11:26:04 GMT
Why will no one even suggest how much money they think that Stoke should put into the Ladies team? To be honest don't really understand the parameters of the question. Are you asking how much Stoke City should spend on Stoke City in order to protect the brand of Stoke City which has rightly been tarnished via the ineptitude and potential negligence of Stoke City with this or; Are you asking how much Stoke City blokes should spend on Stoke City women as a completely separate entity? Parking the moral/ ethical question of whether the sex of the football team representing Stoke City actually matters the answer to the question is zero, nadda, zilch, fuck all. The reason for that is Stoke City blokes have zero, nadda, zilch, fuck all to give to them as we're a business basket case solely remaining solvent through the inordinate sums pumped in via Bet365. Stoke City blokes are in no position either fiscally, or from a competence perspective, to be issuing grants or advice on how to run a successful money making football club to anyone! Now - how much should Bet365 pump into a legacy project with the potential of turning into something monumental? Football is about dreaming and not balance sheets - imagine they pumped a fuck ton into a female academy, brought through a shit hot young team that they had the money to keep and went on a rampage through Europe. Purely for argument sake say we had three or four wonderkids on the books via the best academy in the land and to keep them we pay top WSL wages of £1m a year with the rest of the squad sharing £2m - it's fucking peanuts and Bet365 could fund that out the copper jar without even needing a serious business plan! In comparison Dundee United had a similar wage bill getting relegated out of the SPL was £7m.
|
|
|
Post by independent on Apr 19, 2024 12:36:19 GMT
Why will no one even suggest how much money they think that Stoke should put into the Ladies team? To be honest don't really understand the parameters of the question. Are you asking how much Stoke City should spend on Stoke City in order to protect the brand of Stoke City which has rightly been tarnished via the ineptitude and potential negligence of Stoke City with this or; Are you asking how much Stoke City blokes should spend on Stoke City women as a completely separate entity? Parking the moral/ ethical question of whether the sex of the football team representing Stoke City actually matters the answer to the question is zero, nadda, zilch, fuck all. The reason for that is Stoke City blokes have zero, nadda, zilch, fuck all to give to them as we're a business basket case solely remaining solvent through the inordinate sums pumped in via Bet365. Stoke City blokes are in no position either fiscally, or from a competence perspective, to be issuing grants or advice on how to run a successful money making football club to anyone!
Now - how much should Bet365 pump into a legacy project with the potential of turning into something monumental? Football is about dreaming and not balance sheets - imagine they pumped a fuck ton into a female academy, brought through a shit hot young team that they had the money to keep and went on a rampage through Europe. Purely for argument sake say we had three or four wonderkids on the books via the best academy in the land and to keep them we pay top WSL wages of £1m a year with the rest of the squad sharing £2m - it's fucking peanuts and Bet365 could fund that out the copper jar without even needing a serious business plan! In comparison Dundee United had a similar wage bill getting relegated out of the SPL was £7m. You seem to be very mixed up. The question was : how much money should Stoke City invest in the Ladies team. Stoke City and Bet 365 are two totally different entities. Stoke City's owners choose to spend their own money on a Men's Team and have no interest in a Ladies team and do not wish to spend their own money on one. Bet 365 have no interest in spending money on any football club, except for marketing purposes. The difference at the moment between the men's clubs and the women's clubs are this. 1. The men's clubs are overspending on Wages, Agents, and transfer fees. This will be easily fixed in the future with a wages ceiling, just as happens in American Football, which generates massive profits. 2. The women's clubs can't generate enough income. This is a lot harder to fix. Even with low prices, any week that there is no headline game, between 15,000 and 19,000 in total attend the 6 games played. The financial figures for the WSL will come out in June and will give a better picture of 2022/23 season.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Apr 19, 2024 12:46:02 GMT
To be honest don't really understand the parameters of the question. Are you asking how much Stoke City should spend on Stoke City in order to protect the brand of Stoke City which has rightly been tarnished via the ineptitude and potential negligence of Stoke City with this or; Are you asking how much Stoke City blokes should spend on Stoke City women as a completely separate entity? Parking the moral/ ethical question of whether the sex of the football team representing Stoke City actually matters the answer to the question is zero, nadda, zilch, fuck all. The reason for that is Stoke City blokes have zero, nadda, zilch, fuck all to give to them as we're a business basket case solely remaining solvent through the inordinate sums pumped in via Bet365. Stoke City blokes are in no position either fiscally, or from a competence perspective, to be issuing grants or advice on how to run a successful money making football club to anyone!
Now - how much should Bet365 pump into a legacy project with the potential of turning into something monumental? Football is about dreaming and not balance sheets - imagine they pumped a fuck ton into a female academy, brought through a shit hot young team that they had the money to keep and went on a rampage through Europe. Purely for argument sake say we had three or four wonderkids on the books via the best academy in the land and to keep them we pay top WSL wages of £1m a year with the rest of the squad sharing £2m - it's fucking peanuts and Bet365 could fund that out the copper jar without even needing a serious business plan! In comparison Dundee United had a similar wage bill getting relegated out of the SPL was £7m. You seem to be very mixed up. The question was : how much money should Stoke City invest in the Ladies team. Stoke City and Bet 365 are two totally different entities. Stoke City's owners choose to spend their own money on a Men's Team and have no interest in a Ladies team and do not wish to spend their own money on one. Bet 365 have no interest in spending money on any football club, except for marketing purposes. The difference at the moment between the men's clubs and the women's clubs are this. 1. The men's clubs are overspending on Wages, Agents, and transfer fees. This will be easily fixed in the future with a wages ceiling, just as happens in American Football, which generates massive profits. 2. The women's clubs can't generate enough income. This is a lot harder to fix. Even with low prices, any week that there is no headline game, between 15,000 and 19,000 in total attend the 6 games played. The financial figures for the WSL will come out in June and will give a better picture of 2022/23 season. So if the owners and Bet365 don't want a women's team why have we got one? It has always been, from my point of view, that the owners want the club to be about the community which is why they run holiday kids clubs, inclusion events, walking football etc so it seems stupid to say that they don't want a woman's team when half their potential catchment fan base is female
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Apr 19, 2024 13:45:14 GMT
To be honest don't really understand the parameters of the question. Are you asking how much Stoke City should spend on Stoke City in order to protect the brand of Stoke City which has rightly been tarnished via the ineptitude and potential negligence of Stoke City with this or; Are you asking how much Stoke City blokes should spend on Stoke City women as a completely separate entity? Parking the moral/ ethical question of whether the sex of the football team representing Stoke City actually matters the answer to the question is zero, nadda, zilch, fuck all. The reason for that is Stoke City blokes have zero, nadda, zilch, fuck all to give to them as we're a business basket case solely remaining solvent through the inordinate sums pumped in via Bet365. Stoke City blokes are in no position either fiscally, or from a competence perspective, to be issuing grants or advice on how to run a successful money making football club to anyone!
Now - how much should Bet365 pump into a legacy project with the potential of turning into something monumental? Football is about dreaming and not balance sheets - imagine they pumped a fuck ton into a female academy, brought through a shit hot young team that they had the money to keep and went on a rampage through Europe. Purely for argument sake say we had three or four wonderkids on the books via the best academy in the land and to keep them we pay top WSL wages of £1m a year with the rest of the squad sharing £2m - it's fucking peanuts and Bet365 could fund that out the copper jar without even needing a serious business plan! In comparison Dundee United had a similar wage bill getting relegated out of the SPL was £7m. You seem to be very mixed up. The question was : how much money should Stoke City invest in the Ladies team. Stoke City and Bet 365 are two totally different entities. Stoke City's owners choose to spend their own money on a Men's Team and have no interest in a Ladies team and do not wish to spend their own money on one. Bet 365 have no interest in spending money on any football club, except for marketing purposes. The difference at the moment between the men's clubs and the women's clubs are this. 1. The men's clubs are overspending on Wages, Agents, and transfer fees. This will be easily fixed in the future with a wages ceiling, just as happens in American Football, which generates massive profits. 2. The women's clubs can't generate enough income. This is a lot harder to fix. Even with low prices, any week that there is no headline game, between 15,000 and 19,000 in total attend the 6 games played. The financial figures for the WSL will come out in June and will give a better picture of 2022/23 season. To be honest mate don't think it is me who is confused - you suggest Bet365 are only spending money on Stoke City purely for marketing purposes to strengthen their brand rather than through affiliation. Surely if that were the case they would also be spending money on Stoke City to avoid weakening that brand? Stoke City women are an affiliate/ subsidiary so from a reputational perspective you can't pick n choose the silos you like as they all affect the overall club - it's one brand or it isn't. There's 4 clubs debt free according to Google - PSG; Man City; Chelsea and Leicester. Why would the first three of those agree a wage cap to help a team like Barcelona out to make a more equitable competition at the top table? Equally it's not NFL - who'd want to watch franchises like the London Spunk Trumpets vs Madrid Mavericks fight it out in the super league with presumably a draft system following?
|
|
|
Post by independent on Apr 19, 2024 14:35:48 GMT
You seem to be very mixed up. The question was : how much money should Stoke City invest in the Ladies team. Stoke City and Bet 365 are two totally different entities. Stoke City's owners choose to spend their own money on a Men's Team and have no interest in a Ladies team and do not wish to spend their own money on one. Bet 365 have no interest in spending money on any football club, except for marketing purposes. The difference at the moment between the men's clubs and the women's clubs are this. 1. The men's clubs are overspending on Wages, Agents, and transfer fees. This will be easily fixed in the future with a wages ceiling, just as happens in American Football, which generates massive profits. 2. The women's clubs can't generate enough income. This is a lot harder to fix. Even with low prices, any week that there is no headline game, between 15,000 and 19,000 in total attend the 6 games played. The financial figures for the WSL will come out in June and will give a better picture of 2022/23 season. So if the owners and Bet365 don't want a women's team why have we got one? It has always been, from my point of view, that the owners want the club to be about the community which is why they run holiday kids clubs, inclusion events, walking football etc so it seems stupid to say that they don't want a woman's team when half their potential catchment fan base is female That is a very good question. Actions speak louder than words. From their apparent lack of knowledge of the conditions at Norton and their apparent ignorance of the Player's injury it seems obvious that they are disinterested. Only for the publicity last year Stoke Ladies would still be an Amateur team playing in the 5th tier. Anything they have done for the team has been in response to pressure.Of course I may be wrong and my comment stupid but I have seen nothing over the last 4 years to suggest that they have any interest. I repeat Stoke City and Bet365 are two totally different bodies. Bet 365 ,I would bet , have zero interest in a Ladies team.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Apr 19, 2024 14:58:02 GMT
Bet 365 ,I would bet , have zero interest in a Ladies team. See what odds they’re offering
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Apr 19, 2024 15:03:59 GMT
Bet 365 ,I would bet , have zero interest in a Ladies team. See what odds they’re offering The average attendance is 237
|
|
|
Post by independent on Apr 19, 2024 15:18:27 GMT
You seem to be very mixed up. The question was : how much money should Stoke City invest in the Ladies team. Stoke City and Bet 365 are two totally different entities. Stoke City's owners choose to spend their own money on a Men's Team and have no interest in a Ladies team and do not wish to spend their own money on one. Bet 365 have no interest in spending money on any football club, except for marketing purposes. The difference at the moment between the men's clubs and the women's clubs are this. 1. The men's clubs are overspending on Wages, Agents, and transfer fees. This will be easily fixed in the future with a wages ceiling, just as happens in American Football, which generates massive profits. 2. The women's clubs can't generate enough income. This is a lot harder to fix. Even with low prices, any week that there is no headline game, between 15,000 and 19,000 in total attend the 6 games played. The financial figures for the WSL will come out in June and will give a better picture of 2022/23 season. To be honest mate don't think it is me who is confused - you suggest Bet365 are only spending money on Stoke City purely for marketing purposes to strengthen their brand rather than through affiliation. Surely if that were the case they would also be spending money on Stoke City to avoid weakening that brand? Stoke City women are an affiliate/ subsidiary so from a reputational perspective you can't pick n choose the silos you like as they all affect the overall club - it's one brand or it isn't. There's 4 clubs debt free according to Google - PSG; Man City; Chelsea and Leicester. Why would the first three of those agree a wage cap to help a team like Barcelona out to make a more equitable competition at the top table? Equally it's not NFL - who'd want to watch franchises like the London Spunk Trumpets vs Madrid Mavericks fight it out in the super league with presumably a draft system following? Bet365 pay money to Stoke City for Naming rights to the Stadium and for Shirt sponsorship. Both of these are for marketing purposes. Bet365 are concerned with their own brand not Stoke City's. Last year for example Bet365 donated £100 million to the Denise Coates Foundation (a charitable body). That is a lot more money than Stoke received as Stoke only have an income of about £32M including Gates, TV money etc. That should tell you where their priorities lie. I don't know where you magic your figures from. English second-tier soccer club Leicester City have reported a loss of UK£89.7 million (US$112.8 million) for the 2022/23 season, despite making a profit of UK£74.8 million (US$94.1 million) from player sales. As well as being charged by the Premier League, Leicester were placed under a transfer embargo by the English Football League (EFL) and responded by issuing ‘urgent legal proceedings’ against the governing bodies. Chelsea FC has reported a pre-tax loss of £90.1m for the 12-month period ending on 30th June 2023, the club's annual financial accounts revealed. Although this figure marks a reduction from £124m last year, and £156m the year previous, Chelsea has now recorded overall losses for each of the last three seasons Regarding a wage cap, once 14 0f the 20 Premier Clubs vote for it, it will go through. Who has suggested that Football clubs should become Franchises that can be moved from city to city, other than yourself.
|
|
|
Post by independent on Apr 19, 2024 15:20:18 GMT
Bet 365 ,I would bet , have zero interest in a Ladies team. See what odds they’re offering even 500,000 to 1 on, I would take.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Apr 19, 2024 16:41:01 GMT
To be honest mate don't think it is me who is confused - you suggest Bet365 are only spending money on Stoke City purely for marketing purposes to strengthen their brand rather than through affiliation. Surely if that were the case they would also be spending money on Stoke City to avoid weakening that brand? Stoke City women are an affiliate/ subsidiary so from a reputational perspective you can't pick n choose the silos you like as they all affect the overall club - it's one brand or it isn't. There's 4 clubs debt free according to Google - PSG; Man City; Chelsea and Leicester. Why would the first three of those agree a wage cap to help a team like Barcelona out to make a more equitable competition at the top table? Equally it's not NFL - who'd want to watch franchises like the London Spunk Trumpets vs Madrid Mavericks fight it out in the super league with presumably a draft system following? Bet365 pay money to Stoke City for Naming rights to the Stadium and for Shirt sponsorship. Both of these are for marketing purposes. Bet365 are concerned with their own brand not Stoke City's. Last year for example Bet365 donated £100 million to the Denise Coates Foundation (a charitable body). That is a lot more money than Stoke received as Stoke only have an income of about £32M including Gates, TV money etc. That should tell you where their priorities lie. I don't know where you magic your figures from. English second-tier soccer club Leicester City have reported a loss of UK£89.7 million (US$112.8 million) for the 2022/23 season, despite making a profit of UK£74.8 million (US$94.1 million) from player sales. As well as being charged by the Premier League, Leicester were placed under a transfer embargo by the English Football League (EFL) and responded by issuing ‘urgent legal proceedings’ against the governing bodies. Chelsea FC has reported a pre-tax loss of £90.1m for the 12-month period ending on 30th June 2023, the club's annual financial accounts revealed. Although this figure marks a reduction from £124m last year, and £156m the year previous, Chelsea has now recorded overall losses for each of the last three seasons Regarding a wage cap, once 14 0f the 20 Premier Clubs vote for it, it will go through. Who has suggested that Football clubs should become Franchises that can be moved from city to city, other than yourself. Not withstanding the affiliation between the Bet365 owners (there's absolutely no other reason to pick Stoke otherwise) and the club there is no way the money they've pumped in is being recouped from a business perspective so at best its a stupid investment from a business/marketing perspective. Are you genuinely suggesting the owners of Bet365 wouldn't give a shit if there's a picture of a Stoke City female player crumpled in a heap in a strip emblazoned in their logo with a headline of her being uninsured and having to fund her own medical whilst being on statutory sick pay - of course they fucking would as the optics would be terrible! That they are so closely linked to the club makes it even more so. Got the figures off Google - just type it in and those come up from an article in 2022 and there's a more up to date version for 2023 where it's Villa, Fulham, Chelsea and can't remember the other one from the premier league. The point though was the blokes game is 100+ years older than the women's but its a complete basket case financially yet we're after the women to prove theirs is a going concern within the first decade of being taken seriously! You've suggested a wage cap which is never going to happen in a million years but if it did what do you see as the next logical step - a) the big boys vote for something that allows them to be able to spend the same wages on a player as Stoke could moving forward so the league can continue in a more competitive format or for me more likely b) part of the set-up for an invitational super league to make sure everyone has a chance in a cycle like NFL and to save the next Newcastle/ Man City/ PSG just blowing old money clubs out the water?
|
|
|
Post by independent on Apr 19, 2024 18:18:11 GMT
Bet365 pay money to Stoke City for Naming rights to the Stadium and for Shirt sponsorship. Both of these are for marketing purposes. Bet365 are concerned with their own brand not Stoke City's. Last year for example Bet365 donated £100 million to the Denise Coates Foundation (a charitable body). That is a lot more money than Stoke received as Stoke only have an income of about £32M including Gates, TV money etc. That should tell you where their priorities lie. I don't know where you magic your figures from. English second-tier soccer club Leicester City have reported a loss of UK£89.7 million (US$112.8 million) for the 2022/23 season, despite making a profit of UK£74.8 million (US$94.1 million) from player sales. As well as being charged by the Premier League, Leicester were placed under a transfer embargo by the English Football League (EFL) and responded by issuing ‘urgent legal proceedings’ against the governing bodies. Chelsea FC has reported a pre-tax loss of £90.1m for the 12-month period ending on 30th June 2023, the club's annual financial accounts revealed. Although this figure marks a reduction from £124m last year, and £156m the year previous, Chelsea has now recorded overall losses for each of the last three seasons Regarding a wage cap, once 14 0f the 20 Premier Clubs vote for it, it will go through. Who has suggested that Football clubs should become Franchises that can be moved from city to city, other than yourself. Not withstanding the affiliation between the Bet365 owners (there's absolutely no other reason to pick Stoke otherwise) and the club there is no way the money they've pumped in is being recouped from a business perspective so at best its a stupid investment from a business/marketing perspective. Are you genuinely suggesting the owners of Bet365 wouldn't give a shit if there's a picture of a Stoke City female player crumpled in a heap in a strip emblazoned in their logo with a headline of her being uninsured and having to fund her own medical whilst being on statutory sick pay - of course they fucking would as the optics would be terrible! That they are so closely linked to the club makes it even more so. Got the figures off Google - just type it in and those come up from an article in 2022 and there's a more up to date version for 2023 where it's Villa, Fulham, Chelsea and can't remember the other one from the premier league. The point though was the blokes game is 100+ years older than the women's but its a complete basket case financially yet we're after the women to prove theirs is a going concern within the first decade of being taken seriously! You've suggested a wage cap which is never going to happen in a million years but if it did what do you see as the next logical step - a) the big boys vote for something that allows them to be able to spend the same wages on a player as Stoke could moving forward so the league can continue in a more competitive format or for me more likely b) part of the set-up for an invitational super league to make sure everyone has a chance in a cycle like NFL and to save the next Newcastle/ Man City/ PSG just blowing old money clubs out the water? 1. Of course it's wasted money, but it's small beer compared to £100M 2. How many clubs have Bet365 on their jerseys? How many Bet365 ads surround the grounds that injured players are lying on. Who cares? It would be a very strange person who would blame it on Bet365.Anyway she is sorted,so,so what? 3. I wouldn't even bother looking up Chelsea if I was you, I'd just read my last reply to you. 4. Who said it's being taken seriously. Women's football started in the USA at about the same time that the FA did away with it's ban here. Without any Premier Clubs money they have made it viable over there.At the same time here we haven't even begun to make progress. At the moment about 18,000 people attend a WSL game on a regular basis, despite cheap tickets and all the hype and promotion. All I hear is childish demands for more investment in the game here.For what, to provide a living for foreign players? You can't force people to attend games.But you can give the Women's game a decent slice (say £50m) of the TV money each year or put a £1 levy on the ticket price to all Men's games. 5. A wage cap will come okay,that's for sure. Yes,the big stars will be paid astronomical sums but the club's overall wage bills will be capped. Even a Super League would only delay a wage cap, not prevent it.
|
|