How much to 'guarantee' promotion ?

[Franchise FC]

Had a very interesting debate at work today.

How much would it cost to buy the players to 'guarantee' promotion ?
£10m, £20m, more ??

Let's say £20m.

If everyone knows that this will guarantee promotion, then every club would spend £20m to get their hands on the £90m PL money.

However, the conundrum is that it would leave 21 teams in the Championship £20m down the drain and no promotion.

Anyone got the 'right answer'.

[Friday's Legacy]

wages inclusive then at least £20m, but Mills for £5.5m proves you don't get much for that money any more!

[No Fixed Abode]

a subtle dig at Leicester here...

[Ian Royal]

Had a very interesting debate at work today.

How much would it cost to buy the players to 'guarantee' promotion ?
£10m, £20m, more ??

Let's say £20m.

If everyone knows that this will guarantee promotion, then every club would spend £20m to get their hands on the £90m PL money.

However, the conundrum is that it would leave 21 teams in the Championship £20m down the drain and no promotion.

Anyone got the 'right answer'.

It's not about an absolute figure, because with an absolute figure anyone can match it. I'd say to guarantee promotion you've got to spend (inc Wages for signings) at least £10m morethan anyone else, if not £15m - £20m more. If you're talking about comparing overall wage budgets and transfer spending, then maybe even more.

Even doing that you have to make sure it's on three or four key players and have a decent squad already. Otherwise you're in the territory of buying an entire new team with the prospect of some dodgy early results while everyone gets to know the tactics and how to play with each other.

[Mr Angry]

There is no such thing as spending to "guarantee" promotion; all a club can do is spend to increase their chances of gaining promotion.

Same as the premiership; no matter how much you spend on players, say £50M for a world cup winning striker, it doesn't guarantee you the title if that player then goes and only scores 1 goal for you.

[Victor Meldrew]

Also it depends very much on your starting point.
If you think you have say 6 players already that you feel are of the better quality at this level then you probably need about 7 or 8 new players all costing about 2-3 million.
We bought promotion under Pardew (just) which shows it can be done and Saints did the same last season (starting with that man Pardew again) and it looks as though Leicester are following that approach this season.
Last season they went for experienced players on loan and it didn't work so now they seem to be going for players in their prime years (say 24-27) such as Nugent,Mills,St Ledger,Maynard etc.
I think it could well work for them as there is not a great deal to beat unless West Ham do the same and bring in players to supplement Nolan.

[Svlad Cjelli]

You can't "guarantee" promotion. You can just make it much, much, more likely.

But a couple of broken legs the day after the transfer window, or a dressing room bust up or two, or a "Dream Team"-esque coach crash could scupper it all.

There's also the issue that you can only play 11 players at a time - but lots more and you then have the problem of keeping them happy when they're not playing. You can buy the best players in teh world, but what you cannot ever buy is team spirit and motivation.

[rhroyal]

How many big spenders at this level have successfully "bought" promotion recently?

QPR last season are the most recent example to me. By far their most important signing in doing that was Warnock, who ensured they had a team ethic and effective system to go with the big names and the money. To be honest, Taarabt was their only prima donna, with Faurlin and Routledge possibly their only other "glamorous" names. Very different approach to what Leicester are doing.

Beyond that, I'd argue that you'd have to go back to Jewell's Wigan in 05 to see a team who have "bought" promotion. Possibly Hull? Not on the same level. You can see plenty of failures though. How much did Boro spend 12 months ago? And Ipswich? I haven't even mentioned Cardiff and Forest; failing year on year.

The money has to be spent the right way to build an effective squad. After this, I'd answer it takes a lot of money in a league where Mills fetched £5million. Say you start with a spine of 6 or 7 players. You want to add another 7 or 8 top players to that, plus several "squad" players. I imagine you're looking at around £25million in transfer fees to do that, with wages to match.

[Thomas L'Heureux]

wages inclusive then at least £20m, but Mills for £5.5m proves you don't get much for that money any more!

Disagree. Charlie Adam went to Liverpool for £6.5million and Roger Johnson to Wolves for £7million.

Luckily for us, though, it's just a case of Leicester having more money than sense.

[Svlad Cjelli]

An interesting stat from the Deloitte report is that no-one in recent years has got automatic promotion from Tier 2 has without having a top-six salary bill.

Not only does this show the correlation between spending (but also the fact that each season at least 4 teams with "top six" spending don't get automatic promotion), but it makes me wonder if our wage bill in the 106 season was top-six. It must have been if this is right, and I've no reason to start doubting Deloittes.

[ZacNaloen]

I can't imagine it wasn't. the players we had may not have cost us a lot to buy, but they were good players being paid what they were worth.

[roadrunner]

I can't imagine it wasn't. the players we had may not have cost us a lot to buy, but they were good players being paid what they were worth.

'greed.

*** 10,000 Post Count Alert ***

I hope you have a speach prepared!

[Vision]

An interesting stat from the Deloitte report is that no-one in recent years has got automatic promotion from Tier 2 has without having a top-six salary bill.

Not only does this show the correlation between spending (but also the fact that each season at least 4 teams with "top six" spending don't get automatic promotion), but it makes me wonder if our wage bill in the 106 season was top-six. It must have been if this is right, and I've no reason to start doubting Deloittes.

I can't imagine it wasn't. the players we had may not have cost us a lot to buy, but they were good players being paid what they were worth..

We lost a substantial amount of money that season so its possible. I do wonder though whether the wage bills Deloittes are referring contains hefty bonus payments upon promotion. That being thye case it wouldnt be much of a surprise to see promoted wage bills feature in the Division's top 6.

[Svlad Cjelli]

Yes, good point well made.

[T.R.O.L.I.]

An interesting stat from the Deloitte report is that no-one in recent years has got automatic promotion from Tier 2 has without having a top-six salary bill.

Not only does this show the correlation between spending (but also the fact that each season at least 4 teams with "top six" spending don't get automatic promotion), but it makes me wonder if our wage bill in the 106 season was top-six. It must have been if this is right, and I've no reason to start doubting Deloittes.

What about Blackpool in 09/10? I'd be very surprised if their wage bill was "top six" that season given the likes of:

Newcastle
West Brom
Cardiff
Forest
Derby
Middlesbrough

[Big Foot]

An interesting stat from the Deloitte report is that no-one in recent years has got automatic promotion from Tier 2 has without having a top-six salary bill.

Not only does this show the correlation between spending (but also the fact that each season at least 4 teams with "top six" spending don't get automatic promotion), but it makes me wonder if our wage bill in the 106 season was top-six. It must have been if this is right, and I've no reason to start doubting Deloittes.

What about Blackpool in 09/10? I'd be very surprised if their wage bill was "top six" that season given the likes of:

Newcastle
West Brom
Cardiff
Forest
Derby
Middlesbrough

[T.R.O.L.I.]

Fair fcuks - only skim-read the post.

Dirk alluded to our wage bill (and also that of Sheffield United) being "Top-Six" - looking at the table, only really Leeds and Wolves (Saints too perhaps?) jump out as potentially chucking good money after bad with regards to player's wages so no reason to doubt it I suppose.

[Mr Angry]

Fair fcuks - only skim-read the post.

Dirk alluded to our wage bill (and also that of Sheffield United) being "Top-Six" - looking at the table, only really Leeds and Wolves (Saints too perhaps?) jump out as potentially chucking good money after bad with regards to player's wages so no reason to doubt it I suppose.

I bet Craig Mackail-Smiths wages aren't less than £20K a week, given that he is supposed to have turned down a couple of Premier League sides.

[Seal]

I suspect Leicester will be a live case study.

In for Routledge as well now.

[Jerry St Clair]

Not only does this show the correlation between spending (but also the fact that each season at least 4 teams with "top six" spending don't get automatic promotion), but it makes me wonder if our wage bill in the 106 season was top-six. It must have been if this is right, and I've no reason to start doubting Deloittes.

That very subject was debated on here at the time.

From memory I think we were about 9th in the wages table and about 14th in transfer fees. Or perhaps vice versa.