The_Judge Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 A new study shows three Scottish sides in the top 50 highest wage paying clubs in Britain. Aberdeen pay the least to players (less than teams like Rotherham and Barnsley) but still feature on the list in 50th position. Rangers are second highest in terms of outlay in wages by a Scottish club and sit in 40th (paying more than Wigan but less than Ipswich Town). Celtic fork out the greatest amount in Scotland and are Britain's 22nd biggest in that respect. They are just below Aston Villa and Burnley but above EPL team Brighton and Hove Albion. According to Kieran Maguire, lecturer in football finance at the University of Liverpool, Aberdeen fork out £7.8 million per year, while Rangers spend £17.6m. Celtic splash out £59.3 million a year. In a comprehensive study, Maguire has shown Celtic and Rangers are far bigger players in UK football once TV money is taken out of the equation. England's broadcasting deal dwarves Scotland's and with this factor removed from the calculations, it proves Scotland's biggest clubs can financially compete with those south of the border. Without TV, more Scottish sides feature in the British standings. Hearts are 43rd with £8.4m in revenue, Hibernian are 46th with £5.7m. Aberdeen are further up in 36th with an income of £12.4m, Rangers sit in 18th with an income of £25.6m and Celtic are up in 8th with an income of £50.3m (higher than Leicester, Newcastle and Everton). The study also asserts that Celtic have the 24th most-expensively assembled squad at £45m. Interestingly, Kilmarnock, who occupy a hugely-commendable second place in Scotland's top division, spent NOTHING in assembling their squad relying on loans and free transfers. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/celtic-rangers-aberdeen-rank-britains-13505684 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 9 minutes ago, The_Judge said: Once TV money is taken out of the equation. This is one of those "Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play? " moments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloPerth Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 4 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said: This is one of those "Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play? " moments Chapeau!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flybhoy Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 One of Deacon Blue's best songs that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Judge Posted October 31, 2018 Author Share Posted October 31, 2018 18 minutes ago, Flybhoy said: One of Deacon Blue's best songs that. Definitely in their top 50 imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ylf Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 Celtic’s wage bill £59 million[emoji849]. And the way they play in Europe. Waste of time. What’s the fukin point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swello Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 2 minutes ago, Ylf said: Celtic’s wage bill £59 million. And the way they pllay in Europe. Waste of time. What’s the fukin point I guess the point is that player wages - even at the modest tier that Celtic occupy - are vastly inflated and even our diddy clubs suffer the knock-on from that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wastecoatwilly Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 Guaranteed success off the park guarantees success on the park,when football becomes predictable i will be a millionaire. If a team is beat before they take the field then it's time to shuck it. Wages don't determine how good you play on a Saturday or any other day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONeils4Oyarder Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 If thats the case, then why don't Celtic just keep some of their money rather than give it to the players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 If thats the case, then why don't Celtic just keep some of their money rather than give it to the players?If I were a shareholder, and I nearly was, that’s a question I’d be asking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 14 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said: Guaranteed success off the park guarantees success on the park,when football becomes predictable i will be a millionaire. If a team is beat before they take the field then it's time to shuck it. Wages don't determine how good you play on a Saturday or any other day. Do you think that paying nearly 60m in wages, nearly treble to the nearest, has an impact on being able to win the league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blootoon87 Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 Oh great, another thread where wastecoatwilly argues his point that money makes no difference. I'm out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloPerth Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 5 minutes ago, Principal Flutie said: Do you think that paying nearly 60m in wages, nearly treble to the nearest, has an impact on being able to win the league? Please don't get him started on this. He feels all the other clubs have to do is try harder and get more fans along and all would be equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 Just now, PauloPerth said: Please don't get him started on this. He feels all the other clubs have to do is try harder and get more fans along and all would be equal. I feel it's important to highlight how thick this c**t is at every oppertunity. Especially when he does his "I care about Scottish football" act constantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 13 minutes ago, Principal Flutie said: I feel it's important to highlight how thick this c**t is at every oppertunity. Especially when he does his "I care about Scottish football" act constantly. You'll end going in circles as he'll never ever admit Celtics success is purely based on dwarfing other clubs financially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 11 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: You'll end going in circles as he'll never ever admit Celtics success is purely based on Bi-Lateral Commercial Bigotry therefore dwarfing other clubs financially. FTFY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Day Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 45 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said: Guaranteed success off the park guarantees success on the park,when football becomes predictable i will be a millionaire. If a team is beat before they take the field then it's time to shuck it. Wages don't determine how good you play on a Saturday or any other day. Sport is an area where money invested usually has a pretty good correlation with success - your argument might hold a bit of water in a league where the top 4 or 5 are relatively close financially (England isnt that close, but the difference is less marked than up here). In Scotland, outspending your rivals by the multiples that Celtic do is a pretty much nailed on method of guaranteeing success. You would have to appoint an awful coaching team not to get to the cup finals and win the league - and Lawell is too interested in feathering his own nest (£1.16m in salary) to make those sort of mistakes. Put another way, if Real Madrid paid Hibs level of wages they would have won all those European Cups? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crawford Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 3 minutes ago, Green Day said: Sport is an area where money invested usually has a pretty good correlation with success - your argument might hold a bit of water in a league where the top 4 or 5 are relatively close financially (England isnt that close, but the difference is less marked than up here). In Scotland, outspending your rivals by the multiples that Celtic do is a pretty much nailed on method of guaranteeing success. You would have to appoint an awful coaching team not to get to the cup finals and win the league - and Lawell is too interested in feathering his own nest (£1.16m in salary) to make those sort of mistakes. Put another way, if Real Madrid paid Hibs level of wages they would have won all those European Cups? I get entirely what you are saying but I think he is poking at cost to reward. On their day a club paying a third of celtics fees could do the same job but they don't play 2/3rds worth better than everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aim Here Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 2 hours ago, Crawford said: I get entirely what you are saying but I think he is poking at cost to reward. On their day a club paying a third of celtics fees could do the same job but they don't play 2/3rds worth better than everyone else. That doesn't matter. Paying ten times the wages doesn't get players that play ten times better. What it gets you is players that might be , say, twice as good at playing football (by some handwaved, rough, pulled-out-of-my-arse metric), but that's enough to get them ten times as much money in prize money, TV money and access to elite competitions. Celtic's players are worth ten times as much as the other Scottish teams - not because they really are ten times better at playing football, but they're good enough to beat the teams they need to beat to get access to ten times the revenue. It's a runaway positive feedback loop, caused by spending more on slightly better players being the most reliable way to buy wins at football. I blame that Jimmy Hill for this state of affairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 2 hours ago, Green Day said: Sport is an area where money invested usually has a pretty good correlation with success - your argument might hold a bit of water in a league where the top 4 or 5 are relatively close financially (England isnt that close, but the difference is less marked than up here). The sheer scale of the TV money in England has actually produced a levelling of the playing field. The relatively even distribution of TV Cash evens out the massive differences in commercial and matchday income. In England with a cunning manager and a bit of luck you could theoretically operate a top flight team with no supporters at all. Wigan practically did this for a few years Leicester's 2016 "Giant Killing" Premiership win was impressive given that they had a wage bill of 34% of the league's biggest payers (Man United £232M) But Rangers are the second richest team in this league and would need another 3 million to even get to 34% of Celtic's expenditure Even the lowest spenders that season (Watford) were able to spend a quarter of United's bill. Nobody outside of Rangers is within 25% of what Celtic spend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.