The Wage Structure

[Mod]

Other than what we read or rumoured, we don't really have concrete proof of what our players earn do we.

While I think we can all agree players are overpaid, I think it unfair that some get more than others depending on who they are.

This isn't a 'let's bash Michael Ballack' thread by any means (I think he has had some great games for us), but I get confused how we (apparently) stall contracts on players like Joe Cole and Anelka because they want a dollop more on top of their earnings, but yet Ballack sits on a rumoured £130,000 a week.

Players get too much as it is, but this isn't about that. Isn't it better to sort out a better structure within the club to keep everyone happy. Does Ballack really need a wage higher than Drogba or Anelka?

I'd be interested to see what our players get individually.

[Alex]

I think the reason it got like this was because in the first 3 years of Ambramovich's era (upto when Ballack signed) we were handing out contracts on ridiculous wages. Now the club and specifically Ambramovich realise you cant do that, and so we are stuck with players in the squad on too much money. These players are then used by other players such as Joe Cole to negotiate their contracts around. So Joe cole probably goes in and says "why does ballack deserve more than me, i want this much" and the club (rightly but too late) refuse to give it.

So until the likes of Ballack are gone from the wage structure it will remain the case. But then why would you leave a 130 000 a week contract?

[Mod]

Ah yea, good point. They wouldn't reduce wage if under a contract. When does Ballack's contract run out? Didn't he sign another not long ago?

[sweet waffle]

Other than what we read or rumoured, we don't really have concrete proof of what our players earn do we.

While I think we can all agree players are overpaid, I think it unfair that some get more than others depending on who they are.

This isn't a 'let's bash Michael Ballack' thread by any means (I think he has had some great games for us), but I get confused how we (apparently) stall contracts on players like Joe Cole and Anelka because they want a dollop more on top of their earnings, but yet Ballack sits on a rumoured £130,000 a week.

Players get too much as it is, but this isn't about that. Isn't it better to sort out a better structure within the club to keep everyone happy. Does Ballack really need a wage higher than Drogba or Anelka?

I'd be interested to see what our players get individually.

I might be wrong but I think that Ballack's wages are down to the fact that as a major face of Adidas he plays a large part in our clubs "international branding" therefore he's seen not only as a player but as a marketing asset.

[Sheva]

I might be wrong but I think that Ballack's wages are down to the fact that as a major face of Adidas he plays a large part in our clubs "international branding" therefore he's seen not only as a player but as a marketing asset.

Ye, i agree with this. Ballack has a massive german fanbase which means more sales for Chelsea. Same could be said for Deco and portugal, but ballack being the captain of germany i can see him selling quite a bit of shirts!

[Cam]

I think part of the reason (but by no means all) of the high wages of Ballack in particular is that we signed him on a free, and undoubtedly there would have been many clubs after his signature...

We probably thought we would be getting a world class midfielder for nothing on a transfer fee, so we were willing to pay him excessive wages, and what I'm sure was an immensely large signing on fee. There's no way he deserves anywhere need 100,000 on what he offers, or has offered over his stay, but we probably took a chance that he would star. I believe his contract runs out at the end of the season though? I remember reading that we were going to offer him an extension, which I peronally believe is a mistake. Let him go on a free, because there's no point offering another contract. If he got a new contract and we sold him, we wouldn't get much if we found a seller, and if we didn't find a seller, there we would have an increasing liability of a player on the books for another year on more than 100k a week.

Deco is another one. Seriously, what a waste of money. Again, he signed for relatively cheap, and for about 2 weeks looked like he would be an inspired signing. Gone downhill. We won't get much for him, but I think he's still contracted, so try to find a buyer, because his footballing output clearly doesn't warrant his wages.

Based on Frank Lampard's performances lately, he doesn't deserve what he's getting, but at least he has earnt his high wages with years of brilliance and Chelsea service, and still has a lot to offer. Same with Terry. Those two, and probably Ashley Cole are the only players at Chelsea that have earnt over 100k a week contracts.

Unfortunately there's no concrete solution, because how likely are our top earners to take a pay cut? Unlikely, and with those players earning more, shifting the wage structure back won't work, because there will always be jealousy and feeling of unjustness amongst the other players.

[TheWestwayWonder]

I think part of the reason (but by no means all) of the high wages of Ballack in particular is that we signed him on a free, and undoubtedly there would have been many clubs after his signature...

We probably thought we would be getting a world class midfielder for nothing on a transfer fee, so we were willing to pay him excessive wages, and what I'm sure was an immensely large signing on fee. There's no way he deserves anywhere need 100,000 on what he offers, or has offered over his stay, but we probably took a chance that he would star. I believe his contract runs out at the end of the season though? I remember reading that we were going to offer him an extension, which I peronally believe is a mistake. Let him go on a free, because there's no point offering another contract. If he got a new contract and we sold him, we wouldn't get much if we found a seller, and if we didn't find a seller, there we would have an increasing liability of a player on the books for another year on more than 100k a week.

You have the first part of that right, but the second is load of rubbish. No way is he a 100k a week player this season, but this guy was the the driving force behind us nearly coming back to win the title under Avvy Grant. At that time, he was probably our best player week in and week out and nearly salvaged a nightmare season for us. He was brilliant in the CL that year as well. The only problem is he runs hot and cold, and when the team looks off, he looks bad. When we have a great performance, Ballack is usually involved, but not in the most obvious ways.

I dont wanna see Ballack extended beyond his current deal, and certainly not at whatever his current salary is, but he has offered alot while here and has been involved in some crucial moments in the club's recent history. It would be a fitting reward for him to finally get his hands on the champions league trophy before he leaves Chelsea.

Deco on the other hand we should sell. In my opinion, once the current "old guard" of the club have moved on, there will be a dramatically lower wage bill because, when they were signed, we needed to overpay to lure them away from the likes of Madrid, Man U, Arsenal or whoever else. Now that we have established ourselvs as a perrennial contender every year, and are linked with a ton of top players, the need wont be so great to offer gobs of money to turn heads. You see this all the time in the gutter press's rumor columns.

Four or five years ago, it was Arjen Robben's dad saying "My son will never play for Chelsea, he wants to go to a top club like Barcelona".

Now, their players, and youngsters from South America and Spain are saying they are flattered by our interest, but are under contract i.e. "I wouldnt say no if they came calling"

Edited March 1, 2010 by TheWestwayWonder

[Cam]

I may have exaggerated a little bit, because I know that every now and then, Ballack has managed to string some performances together, but not enough for my liking.

[Nibs]

I might be wrong but I think that Ballack's wages are down to the fact that as a major face of Adidas he plays a large part in our clubs "international branding" therefore he's seen not only as a player but as a marketing asset.

I think there is a lot of substance to that. This was a time when we were in the thick of the Kenyon era and the much talked about “Global Brand†and our links with Adidas. That and the reporting that Roman was desperate to win the Champions League so the signing of two “World stars†would hopefully help achieve this.

I still rue the day we decided to sign Ballack & Sheva. If we had signed a couple of decent younger players back then for a fraction of the overall cost, they could now be firmly established first 11 players and still with their peak to come. But we sold out for the “quick fix†and the Global Brand. I wonder just how close the powers that be were to signing Beckham for the same reason?

I think Westway is right, when a lot of this current squad is replaced, we will see a return to much more sensible wages and hopefully that will be the case throughout football. It HAS to be if clubs are to survive. I’ve often slated Wenger in the past but you have to say he probably has it right in not rewarding older players long term contracts on big money.

By getting rid of the likes of Vierra and Petit and Pires when other clubs would have held onto them (Us!!!), it has meant the likes of Fabregas come through and develop. We keep playing the Ballacks, Deco’s (and now perhaps Lamps for another 3 seasons or so?) and all on HUGE wages and long-term we shoot ourselves in the foot.

Hopefully that is about to change.

[mad_mac]

I wouldn't be suprised if Kenyon figured something out with Adidas that has them paying for part of Ballacks wages.

Also, didn't we make the switch to adidas right around the same time we signed Ballack and Sheva?

[Barry Bridges]

.

I still rue the day we decided to sign Ballack & Sheva. If we had signed a couple of decent younger players back then for a fraction of the overall cost, they could now be firmly established first 11 players and still with their peak to come. But we sold out for the “quick fix†and the Global Brand. I wonder just how close the powers that be were to signing Beckham for the same reason?

Yet I still worry that quick fix mentality exists. Look at how we handled the transfer ban.....we signed everyone we could to ludicrous contracts asap....... Quick fix at its worts, when you look at the big picture and a big reason for some of those huge extensions/resignings done this season/preseason.

We have trophies, world class facilities, european football, and somewhat of a reputation....we dont need to rely on bumper contracts to sign quality players anymore.

They need to take a fast hard stand, or else its a slippery slope.

I'd rather lose 1-3 players over contract rows, than to be looking at an ugly finiancial situation when either A)finiancial fair play rules are implemented B)Roman sells to someone less "generous"

It might not be pretty setting the new precedent on wage structure, but if we let the problem continue its going to look much much much worse.

[Barry Bridges]

Speaking of branding, this link has a clip with Drogba and Lamps in a somehwat cute Pepsi commerical (Messi Kaka Henry and Arshavin aswell)

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/bl...icle341909.html

[TheWestwayWonder]

Speaking of branding, this link has a clip with Drogba and Lamps in a somehwat cute Pepsi commerical (Messi Kaka Henry and Arshavin aswell)

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/bl...icle341909.html

Alright, i clicked on that expecting to roll my eyes, and it was cheesey but I enjoyed it. Great to see Frank and Didi among those top players, finally getting their due.

And I liked the bit at the end with Messi. "Theirry?" :D

I may have exaggerated a little bit, because I know that every now and then, Ballack has managed to string some performances together, but not enough for my liking.

Fair enough, mate, wasnt trying to have a go at you or seem rude, but im just saying before this season when he has looked off the pace way too often, he has had some very good spells for us. The problem is he has the stigma of being the first "superstar"we signed and thus the hallmark of our downfall in England.

Add to that the fact that Ballack's game now is as a stabalizing two way midfielder, so when he does his job well we rarely notice it because someone else usually cashes it in for a scoring chance or goal, but when he is lost out there or f**ks up we all tend to jump on him.

[TheWestwayWonder]

I think there is a lot of substance to that. This was a time when we were in the thick of the Kenyon era and the much talked about “Global Brand†and our links with Adidas. That and the reporting that Roman was desperate to win the Champions League so the signing of two “World stars†would hopefully help achieve this.

I still rue the day we decided to sign Ballack & Sheva. If we had signed a couple of decent younger players back then for a fraction of the overall cost, they could now be firmly established first 11 players and still with their peak to come. But we sold out for the “quick fix†and the Global Brand. I wonder just how close the powers that be were to signing Beckham for the same reason?

I think Westway is right, when a lot of this current squad is replaced, we will see a return to much more sensible wages and hopefully that will be the case throughout football. It HAS to be if clubs are to survive. I’ve often slated Wenger in the past but you have to say he probably has it right in not rewarding older players long term contracts on big money.

By getting rid of the likes of Vierra and Petit and Pires when other clubs would have held onto them (Us!!!), it has meant the likes of Fabregas come through and develop. We keep playing the Ballacks, Deco’s (and now perhaps Lamps for another 3 seasons or so?) and all on HUGE wages and long-term we shoot ourselves in the foot.

Hopefully that is about to change.

Agree with most every word Nibs. I think Wenger takes it to the ultimate extreme at the other end, and should hang on to many of his older stars longer than he tends to, but the idea is certainly a good one.

I think youre right about the purpose of the Sheva/Ballack signings. But unlike Ballack, who we didnt really need for our midfield, I will defend the Sheva signing all day. True, he was a big name with a big pay packet, and possibly injuries had diminished his ability or he was past it. But at the time Didier was not the striker he is today, and we wanted a ready made world class guy to stick up front. At the time it was either him, Eto'o or Torres, and they all had differing advantages. I dont buy any of this stuff about Roman listening to his son who wanted him here. A man with x-billions of dollars does not get anywhere basing business decisions on info like that. In terms of what it meant to the team, and the damage it caused to the club and the locker room though, I too rue that decision.

I think longterm those buys (and the current financial climate) have screwed us bigtime. Roman realizes he got burned signing top drawer talent, wrote the money off, and now I think he is afraid to make the same comittement again. Outisde of Zhirkov, Anelka and Deco (debatable) there have been no real high profile arrivals at the club since that summer four years ago. Now we are getting to the point where the squad has several glaring weaknesses that have got to be fixed. I know we were prepared to splash the cash over Robinho, but clearly (and thankfully) that deal never materialized over a small amount of money (compared to the transfer fee overall)

Not to get dramatic, but the whole situation reminds me of the last stand of the Old Guard at Waterloo. They had fought for their emperor for years all over Europe and developed a fierce reputation. But as things were getting desperate they were thrown into battle and experience and courage alone could not carry them to victory despite their reputation. Its too much to expect this squad to compete every year against domestic and continental teams that are constantly retooling and improving.

To me it makes little sense to let this team fight on with minimum reinforcements, and then invest heavily when and if they need replacing. Echoing your comments, hopefully that too is going to change soon.