Mellsblue wrote:To win stuff and join that culture, then plenty might. Swinson is on record as saying he had decided to retire until the call came from Sarries and that he’s not on much money. Brits has stated he turned down bigger contracts to stay.
Ford took less money to leave Leicester for Sale.
Iirc, which is doubtful, they were £1.2mil-ish over the cap in a couple of seasons and just under £2mil over in the season they were caught.
Get rid of Williams, Skelton and Spencer and you wouldn’t be too far off.
For the £2ish mil season that included the over valuation Itoje’s image rights by £800k which was PwC’s fault.
Brits was there during the salary cap scandal, I'd not take his word for anything. We have no idea just how far over they were during that time, because it was all brushed under the carpet.
As a last hurrah, getting to join a team like Sarries/Toulouse etc isn't bad, he might be on less than he was, but at the same time, it may be more than anyone else was offering (if anyone was). And who knows what business help he's going to be getting from them after.
How much less money did Ford take? And I thought that was at least partially related to his dad's departure. Not many players are going to have parents also in the circuit.
If we don’t take players at their word then this debate won’t go far. Especially when the rest of the debate is people with literally no experience of pro rugby stating they wouldn’t take such a large pay cut or stating that Sarries just can’t be under the cap cos I just don’t believe it.
Ford accepted approx 10% less, from I’ve read. He did so to move closer to home. My point is players will accept less money for various reasons.
Mellsblue wrote:To win stuff and join that culture, then plenty might. Swinson is on record as saying he had decided to retire until the call came from Sarries and that he’s not on much money. Brits has stated he turned down bigger contracts to stay.
Ford took less money to leave Leicester for Sale.
Iirc, which is doubtful, they were £1.2mil-ish over the cap in a couple of seasons and just under £2mil over in the season they were caught.
Get rid of Williams, Skelton and Spencer and you wouldn’t be too far off.
For the £2ish mil season that included the over valuation Itoje’s image rights by £800k which was PwC’s fault.
Brits was there during the salary cap scandal, I'd not take his word for anything. We have no idea just how far over they were during that time, because it was all brushed under the carpet.
As a last hurrah, getting to join a team like Sarries/Toulouse etc isn't bad, he might be on less than he was, but at the same time, it may be more than anyone else was offering (if anyone was). And who knows what business help he's going to be getting from them after.
How much less money did Ford take? And I thought that was at least partially related to his dad's departure. Not many players are going to have parents also in the circuit.
If we don’t take players at their word then this debate won’t go far. Especially when the rest of the debate is people with literally no experience of pro rugby stating they wouldn’t take such a large pay cut or stating that Sarries just can’t be under the cap cos I just don’t believe it.
Ford accepted approx 10% less, from I’ve read. He did so to move closer to home. My point is players will accept less money for various reasons.
Brits got a £700k house to co-own and live in. So maybe the monthly figure going into his bank account was lower than other sides offered, but clearly he was getting some significant benefits elsewhere.
EDIT - And yes, when the team is engaging in massive salary cap infringements, I'm not expecting the players to be telling the truth.
Raggs wrote:
Brits was there during the salary cap scandal, I'd not take his word for anything. We have no idea just how far over they were during that time, because it was all brushed under the carpet.
As a last hurrah, getting to join a team like Sarries/Toulouse etc isn't bad, he might be on less than he was, but at the same time, it may be more than anyone else was offering (if anyone was). And who knows what business help he's going to be getting from them after.
How much less money did Ford take? And I thought that was at least partially related to his dad's departure. Not many players are going to have parents also in the circuit.
If we don’t take players at their word then this debate won’t go far. Especially when the rest of the debate is people with literally no experience of pro rugby stating they wouldn’t take such a large pay cut or stating that Sarries just can’t be under the cap cos I just don’t believe it.
Ford accepted approx 10% less, from I’ve read. He did so to move closer to home. My point is players will accept less money for various reasons.
Brits got a £700k house to co-own and live in. So maybe the monthly figure going into his bank account was lower than other sides offered, but clearly he was getting some significant benefits elsewhere.
EDIT - And yes, when the team is engaging in massive salary cap infringements, I'm not expecting the players to be telling the truth.
Scrumhead wrote:While I agree that Quins would have to pay more to attract players, I very much doubt that players like Goode, Maitland and Lozowski are cheap. They might not be current internationals, but they’re key players whose salaries most likely reflect their importance in the squad.
The big earners are fairly obvious - Farrell, Itoje, George, Mako, Billy, Daly and Koch.
The next rung are mostly ex-academy, but are all regular-ish internationals who will now be on full contracts - Earl, Tompkins, Malins, Isiekwe. I’d imagine they are now compensated at a similar level to Goode, Maitland and Lozowski. You could maybe add Davies in to that as he was regularly featuring for Wales before he signed.
Other first team regulars like Wray or Lewington are probably on slightly above average salaries. However, I suspect a lot of the squad players will be on average money (I’m thinking of players like Woolstencroft or Taylor) and some of their main 23 like McFarland and Mawi will be cheap for now, but won’t be as cheap come renewal time.
When you break it down, it might be possible that they’re within the cap, but I count 7 very expensive players and 4-7 who will be well above average. That’s a lot. Perhaps their squad players are paid peanuts?
I'd be surprised if the likes of Wray and Lewington are above average. Wray is Saracens all his days and would likely be on a lower contract than he could get elsewhere because of that loyalty. Lewington joined from a relegation-bait London Irish - if given the choice between staying at them with a larger contract or moving to Saracens, winning stuff, not getting thumped regularly, and potentially getting more England recognition, I'd imagine he'd be willing to accept a smaller contract. Same with Tompkins - quite apart from anything else, when he left, he went to The Dragons. You think he's not willing to be paid under his market value to be back at a successful, happy club where he's comfortable and loved?
The majority of that squad is either Saracens-developed, mostly Saracens-developed, or signed from smaller clubs. I'd imagine they play very hard ball with contract renegotiation - "This is the offer to stay at Saracens - to play at the top of the table, with Maro Itoje and Owen Farrell, to be in a successful team that catches the eye of the international selectors. We developed you, you enjoy it here, it's a good atmosphere, and you know we take care of our players off the pitch. I know you can get more money elsewhere and, if you want to go, we'll miss you. But that's the offer on the table here and we can't afford to give you anything else, so take it or let us know that you're moving on so we can start preparing for life after you."
Puja
Would you change your job to get paid less?
I always find it strange that we talk like that about sportspeople. Why would they go elsewhere to get less money unless there was a promise of more money later...
Yes, absolutely. If it was going from a shitty job where the environment was terrible, everyone was miserable, and we never hit targets, I would absolutely consider going to a less stressful job where my colleagues were all brilliant, we worked well together, there was a beautiful office and the best equipment, and the company took us on holiday once a year. In fact, sign me the fuck up!
That's not to mention that sports have international selection, which is much more likely to come from being at a top club; personal sponsorship and image rights, which is more likely to come from being at Saracens than London Irish; and the sheer joy of winning trophies and achieving things in your career - would you rather win 3 Premiership titles and get paid 10% less or earn 10% more to play at Newcastle and fight relegation each year?
Puja wrote:
I'd be surprised if the likes of Wray and Lewington are above average. Wray is Saracens all his days and would likely be on a lower contract than he could get elsewhere because of that loyalty. Lewington joined from a relegation-bait London Irish - if given the choice between staying at them with a larger contract or moving to Saracens, winning stuff, not getting thumped regularly, and potentially getting more England recognition, I'd imagine he'd be willing to accept a smaller contract. Same with Tompkins - quite apart from anything else, when he left, he went to The Dragons. You think he's not willing to be paid under his market value to be back at a successful, happy club where he's comfortable and loved?
The majority of that squad is either Saracens-developed, mostly Saracens-developed, or signed from smaller clubs. I'd imagine they play very hard ball with contract renegotiation - "This is the offer to stay at Saracens - to play at the top of the table, with Maro Itoje and Owen Farrell, to be in a successful team that catches the eye of the international selectors. We developed you, you enjoy it here, it's a good atmosphere, and you know we take care of our players off the pitch. I know you can get more money elsewhere and, if you want to go, we'll miss you. But that's the offer on the table here and we can't afford to give you anything else, so take it or let us know that you're moving on so we can start preparing for life after you."
Puja
Would you change your job to get paid less?
I always find it strange that we talk like that about sportspeople. Why would they go elsewhere to get less money unless there was a promise of more money later...
Yes, absolutely. If it was going from a shitty job where the environment was terrible, everyone was miserable, and we never hit targets, I would absolutely consider going to a less stressful job where my colleagues were all brilliant, we worked well together, there was a beautiful office and the best equipment, and the company took us on holiday once a year. In fact, sign me the fuck up!
That's not to mention that sports have international selection, which is much more likely to come from being at a top club; personal sponsorship and image rights, which is more likely to come from being at Saracens than London Irish; and the sheer joy of winning trophies and achieving things in your career - would you rather win 3 Premiership titles and get paid 10% less or earn 10% more to play at Newcastle and fight relegation each year?
Puja
This. Mind, an interesting question to ask Paul Pogba
As said earlier there is an awful lot to admire about what Sarries have done and do. In many ways, they are the model of what a good pro club should be, and bearing in mind their (lack of) heritage, its a remarkable story of tenacity from the likes of Wray; they've spend years and multi millions in building a top class squad (a few times!) a fan base and modern facilities and establishing strong links in the community and a quality academy with pipeline. See also Exeter.
That said, their behaviour with respect to the salary cap was appalling and they deserve all the approbation and punishment associated with that and also enhanced ongoing scrutiny; personally- as per a lot of DOR's- I think the salary cap is constraining our clubs and prob the national side, but I haven't a better answer to prevent many clubs being priced out of 1st class existence by sugar daddies- which is what happened to many fine clubs. But Sarries egregiously broke the rules (as did others, and deliberately, but to nothing like that extent).
I'd also add that I'd happily take a job that paid less if, off the books, the boss was buying me property and setting up off shore businesses from which I could stand to make loads more, plus get security when I eventually have to retire when I'm broken.
I'd also assume I'd have to stay loyal to this guys 'company', even after he's been forced out in disgrace. But I still have the property and businesses...
Just shows up the limitations of the cap policing system, but also, many of those players have more than emotional investments in Sarries and Wray.
Times article on Borthwick rebuilding Tigers:
‘Porter has been offered a more lucrative contract to return to Australia, potentially opening the door to international rugby, but wants to stay’.
Mellsblue wrote:Times article on Borthwick rebuilding Tigers:
‘Porter has been offered a more lucrative contract to return to Australia, potentially opening the door to international rugby, but wants to stay’.
Can you blame him. Came out of Sydney University as a Championship winning captain and then was left to play in lesser games and only called into Super League training squads for a couple of years. Comes to Tigers and is a regular in the 23 man squad playing in big games. He's added a lot to his game since he joined the club and despite being raised in Australia was born in England to English parents so it's not like he's turning his back on international selection.
I think the only thing that’s clear is that if you want to believe Sarries are still breaking the cap then you will.
All I’d add is that it’s worth remembering that some clubs are still operating with 2 marquees, as when the cap dropped it was said that current contracts would be honoured- potentially Farrell and Itoje? Likewise, contracts signed prior to the cap changing would only have 75% counted towards the new cap- from memory the likes of Tompkins, Isiekwe, Malins and Earl all signed long term deals just before heading out on loan and havn’t signed contracts since.
Mellsblue wrote:Times article on Borthwick rebuilding Tigers:
‘Porter has been offered a more lucrative contract to return to Australia, potentially opening the door to international rugby, but wants to stay’.
Mellsblue wrote:Interview with Ford in The Times today states that he took a £100,000 pay cut to move to Sale…
Does he happen to mention that's in line with the 33% decrease in the cap?
Reduction in cap and he can't count as a marquee player. Also a £100k pay cut still leaves him on more than a significant amount, he was allegedly Tigers marquee player on £650k a year, similar to what Biggar is allegedly paid at Saints and what Smith is again allegedly requesting as a salary increase from Quins next summer.
Sorry for the excessive use of allegedly but media reporting can sometimes be way off (anyone who's seen the absolute shite the Daily Mail posted about club debt this week knows what I mean).
Daly didn't take a pay cut from Wasps to join Sarries. And they never fully explained all those property investments Wray made in partnership with certain players as part of companies, after which Wray sold his shares.
The Times today, interview with Ellis Genge:
‘“I had everything up there (Leicester),” Genge says, “It was more money… but I had this magnetic force pulling me back.”’
