Is Limiting Squad Sizes to 25 a Good Idea?

By: Daryl | March 25th, 2009

Something big is about to change in the football world. I’m not sure exactly what it is yet, but something’s about to happen. Might be 6+5, might be the homegrown players rule, might be the proposal to link club spending to club income.

Two more ideas have been discussed by UEFA and the European Club Association recently. First was the luxury tax. Just like in Major League Baseball (or so I’m told) this is basically a salary cap, with one important difference. Clubs can spend beyond the cap, provided they pay a luxury tax which is then shared among the less wealthy clubs.

So theoretically, if Man Utd have to spend above the agreed salary cap to pay Cristiano Ronaldo’s wages, they’ll also have to pay a percentage of what they spend into a fund, which will be distributed to teams lower down the totem pole (Fulham? Charlton? Shrewsbury? Halesowen Town? Your pub team? I’m not sure how low it would go.)

According to UEFA special adviser William Gaillard, this went down like a lead baloon at the conference. “People are less favourable to this idea,” he said. The plan “is not top of the agenda”.

Similarly, the idea about linking club spending to income (which I still like) has hit a bump in the road:

Gaillard said Platini’s plans to limit clubs to spending around 50 to 60 percent on wages and buying players “was still on the table, but has become more difficult”.

“Salary caps is still there, but what form will it take? Europe is a complex place for soccer. We have promotion, relegation, European competitions. It is very difficult to find a one size fits all solution,” he said.

Hmm. I take that to mean the ECA have gone cold on the idea.

The solution Gaillard sounds most upbeat about is limiting squad sizes to 25. Yes, this already happens in the Champions League and UEFA Cup, but the new idea is to limit squad sizes for domestic campaigns too.

Gaillard said a move to curb squads would help reduce massive wage bills at clubs and provide “a more level playing field”.

“It would stop the hoarding of players by the richer and more powerful clubs. Players would be signed to play rather than to possibly prevent opponents from signing the player,” Gaillard said.

I can see where hes coming from here. Yes, Man Utd would likely have a better 25 than West Brom, so that’s not going to change. But now that Man Utd can’t accommodate players #26 and #27, those guys will need to look for a new team, which might make them available to the Baggies.

One problem is that maybe chances would be limited for young players, but if the squad rules follow the Champions League format, then players under 21 could be exempt. Allowing clubs to have a 25 man squad plus freedom to play youth team players could definitely work. Wage bills go down, younger players have more opportunities and European Union labour laws remain unbroken.

So maybe this is the future?

As I mentioned last week, I’m ready for change. And if this is it… then so be it. But which of these proposed law changes would you prefer:

Some Related Stories:

Category: Europe

« Daily Dose: March 24th, 2009 | Home | Dirk Bikkembergs – Messing With Amateur Footballers Since 2005 »

The Offside RSS Feeds

Scouser

I knew my friend Shazback would reply to my comments and he didn't disappoint.

Please note that Salary Cap and Luxury Tax are two different animals.

In professional sports, a salary cap is a limit on the amount of money a team can spend on player salaries, either as a per-player limit or a total limit for the team's roster (or both). Several sports leagues have implemented salary caps, both as a method of keeping overall costs down, and to ensure parity between teams so a wealthy team cannot entrench dominance by signing many more top players than other teams.

I am not saying that Salary Cap / Luxury Tax in soccer should be a duplicate of Salary Cap / Luxury Tax in other sports. They can rectify what hasn't worked in other sports. For example, Salary Cap / Luxury Tax doesn't have an effect on the NY Yankees because either Salary Cap is too high or Luxury Tax is too low. So, in soccer they can make the Salary Cap too low and Luxury Tax too high.

Salary Cap coupled with Luxury Tax can "take care" of the 25 squad limit. The teams will still have 25 or more players but each team won't have so many highly paid (quality) players.

Still don't get it?
Johonna

Ish, that would be a problem with the EU and their work laws. Basically, it is the same reason why the whole 6+5 thing as stalled a bit - it is illegal in the EU to discriminate against workers from other EU countries. Football players are workers.
ish

I think its a good idea. Even with injuries most teams dont really use more then 25 players in a season anyway. They can also change it during the january window and since it doesn't effect under21's it allows for alot of room.
I also suggest perhaps that if they implement this they include the HG rule into as well, with 10 players in the 25 being a citizen of the country the team is located. 10 players from anywhere in the world, and that last 5 is a mix of either under25 players from any country or further players from the same country.
If the player has been playing for more then 5 years at the same club and are from overseas they can instead be counted in the last 5.
This would allow for many teams to keep their players and have a good mix of international and national players. You could pretty much make a team of 11 international players but your subs and reserves would have to be local.
Brian

"But then what happens if the team has a spate of injuries?"
Well, you could have an injured list, and if a player is on that then he doesn't count against the 25-man rule. I think the NFL already does this except that it's 53 men there
Al

Atletico has 25 players on the official roster.

And it's ruining us. We have a solid starting XI but most substitutes aren't that good.
Jatin

Doesnt this happen already in Spain?

It happens rather successfully there.
Ian

Fair points. I would have the luxury tax feed the other teams in the top division, though there's something to be said for a bit of it going to lower-division football. Not a perfect system, but better than the complete lack of financial limitation we have now, in my opinion. My favorite of all the plans is still limiting teams from playing in Europe if they are excessively debt-laden ... but there's no way in hell that's going to happen.
Shazback

And where does the money generated by this "luxury tax" go?

In closed leagues it goes to the general fund to raise the cap. But in open leagues? Does it go to the team at the bottom of the domestic league (thus increasing the gap with the lower divisions)? Does it go to lower league teams (on what basis? to what level?)? Does it go to grassroots football? Does it stay within the league or is it pooled by UEFA for pan-european projects?

A luxury tax maintains balance by "assisting" teams that don't reach the cap with money generated by teams that are over the cap. But if the money generated doesn't go towards these smaller teams, then there's no problem for the bigger teams. The luxury cap hasn't stopped the NY Yankees from breaking it pretty much every season, and still getting outstanding results, and that's with the money going to "help" the cap-compliant clubs. So how is it supposed to have much of an effect when the tax money doesn't go to clubs that are competing with the ones that pay the luxury tax?
Ian

My vote is for the luxury tax, but if it actually happens, I will eat my hat. Or at least a piece of wool from my hat. Anyway, I'll be surprised.
Scouser

I am for Luxury Tax. Luxury tax would "take care" of the 25 squad limit.

A luxury tax in professional sports is a surcharge put on the aggregate payroll of a team to the extent to which it exceeds a predetermined guideline level set by the league. The ostensible purpose of this "tax" is to prevent teams in major markets with high incomes from signing almost all of the more talented players and hence destroying the competitive balance necessary for a sport to maintain fan interest. The money derived from the "tax" is then divided among the teams that play in the smaller markets, presumably to allow them to have more revenue to devote toward the contracts of high-quality players.
Shazback

A 25-player limit doesn't account for the number of games played by different clubs. West Brom play 38 league games and 4-6 cup games. Man U play 38 league games, 10-13 Champions' League games, 10-13 cup games, and 4 games for the Super Cup, Charity Shield and Club World Cup. On one hand, 42-44 games, on the other 62-64. More games = more injuries & more need for rest. Arsenal can't count on a whols list of first team players during various moments this season. From Rosicky the perpetually injured to Fabregas, but also Walcott, Adebayor, or Eduardo, as well as the usual short-term one-week or two-week injuries. Forcing teams to select 25 players isn't an effective way to prevent players from being "hoarded" by clubs (I don't notice Barcelona and Real being prevented from "hoarding" players by the 25-play limit, unless buying two left wingers from Arsenal -Hleb and Henry- when you already have Iniesta is the aim). Players know when they join a club with lots of good players that the chances they have of playing regularly are lessened. If a player is ready to join Real Madrid to be their player #30 instead of being a starter at Gijon, what's wrong? If Real Madrid want to pay a player double what Gijon can offer him to play 2 games per season, is it UEFA's mandate to limit that? And what if Real Madrid have a turnover in place and he plays roughly 15 league games and a load of cup games?

Aston Villa have used only 21 players in the League, whilst Man U have used 29. Is that proof that Man U's squad policy is preventing Aston Villa from breaking into the "big 4"? Or just that Aston Villa aren't taking competitions other than the league seriously, so they're keeping their best players fresh, whilst Man U have to juggle their squad more, between a mid-december trip to Japan, playing the Italian champions and league leaders 3 days before playing the team that lead the English league for most of the early stages of the season and trying to stay in competition for both domestic cups. And just for the fact, West Brom have already used 27 players in the League this season. So the 25-player limit wouldn't be a simple "help small clubs by reducing the squads of big clubs" affair.
DarthZombie

I think it's a bad idea to limit the squads to 25. ManUtd might have more players and higher salaries, but it has to play more matches that WBA. What will you do with the extra fatigue? English clubs already have this problem, 25-squad limit will just add more for them.
Paul

It could work just like MLB. You have a 25 man roster that's eligible to play in all competitions. If a player is hurt, a Disabled List could be created which provides an exemption from the roster limits. As long as that player is on the DL, you could move a player up from the youth team, or make a move during the transfer window to add a player.
Daryl

It would definitely leave teams with the potential for more problems though injury/suspension. But that might mean a few younger players get some first team football.

Not sure what happens if players won't leave. It's possible you could have someone getting paid full wages, but not in the 25 man squad. So they essentially get a Winston Bogarde style holiday.

Unless maybe the 25 is an absolute limit. Meaning you can't buy that 26th player until you sell the 25th. But that creates whole new set of problems.
Johonna

But then what happens if the team has a spate of injuries? Inter has all but 2 central defenders injured. Juve has practically their whole midfield out, and Roma... Well I think they are also having to look to their academy to fill the bench.

If there are size limits on the squad, then a team could easily find itself without anyone to play in a certain position. All it takes is a little bad luck.

And I dont know that rich clubs hoard players. Inter tried to find new clubs for a couple "extra" players over the winter break but they wouldn't leave! There are some players who would rather sit on an Inter/Chelsea/Barcelona type bench than play for a Catania/Sunderland/Almeria type team. Sad but true.