Is there a need for a 'salary cap' in cycling?

[auscyclefan94]

Is there a need for a 'salary cap' in cycling? A proposed salary cap would simply restrict the amount a team could pay their riders and not based on how many sponsorship dollars a team receives. It is quite clear, that over the past few years, teams like BMC and Sky have been able to buy riders at will and increase their dominance in cycling (in theory it should have for BMC). This includes young riders as riders like Taylor Phinney and Joe Dombrovsky (sp) have now been bought by teams that very few people would have expected them to go to. This seems be due to the fact that they could offer more money than others teams, who are arguably better at development.

Would a salary cap help reduce the large inequity amongst cycling teams and nullify their ability to buy all the riders they want?

 

[El Pistolero]

Just watch when Sky don't win a GT next year. The world will burn.

 

[bangnz]

Funny i was just thinking this 5 mins ago (after reading of Team SKY's latest signings)

It would definatly make things alot more interesting by evening the playing field a bit and could make races alot more tactical rather than relying on the strength of the team

 

[DominicDecoco]

Wait, even more restrictions for already underpaid cyclists?

There's a hierarchy in most sports and cycling is no exception. I fail to see the problem.

 

[Netserk]

Yes. There is need for a cap. And points should stay with the team. ALL the points.

 

[El Pistolero]

Yes. There is need for a cap. And points should stay with the team. ALL the points.

No, definitely not all the points. Why would Radioshack deserve any points Cancellara earned?

 

[Netserk]

No, definitely not all the points. Why would Radioshack deserve any points Cancellara earned?

Because he earned them while riding for them. But this is off-topic, so I'll just leave it at that.

 

[Der Effe]

Wait, even more restrictions for already underpaid cyclists?

There's a hierarchy in most sports and cycling is no exception. I fail to see the problem.

Dumbest post ever.

 

[Yingge]

That would cause a new thread to be opened in The Clinic - "Salary Cap Rorts".

I guess it really depends on the number of Pro Tour teams vs the available sponsors. More teams stretches out the available sponsors and so on.

Remember though, while some riders command a 7 figure (Euro) salary, many of the others are way down the food chain.....way down.

 

[Netserk]

That would cause a new thread to be opened in The Clinic - "Salary Cap Rorts".

I guess it really depends on the number of Pro Tour teams vs the available sponsors. More teams stretches out the available sponsors and so on.

Remember though, while some riders command a 7 figure (Euro) salary, many of the others are way down the food chain.....way down.

And a cap would leave more money to the doms

 

[DominicDecoco]

Dumbest post ever.

 

[Michele]

Salary cap, minimun wage, bank guarantees, etc etc are all nice things on paper but not easy to keep under record especially with actual governing body.

 

[ultimobici]

Rather than an individual salary cap limit a team's salary budget. That way a team cannot buy up multiple talents like BMC did. Perhaps have a maximum percentage of the budget fir rider salaries?

 

[Cancellator]

And a cap would leave more money to the doms

Wouldn't they just leave the doms salaries at their current level and use the spare money elsewhere?

 

[FignonLeGrand]

Funny i was just thinking this 5 mins ago (after reading of Team SKY's latest signings)

It would definatly make things alot more interesting by evening the playing field a bit and could make races alot more tactical rather than relying on the strength of the team

This is a cycling forum I didnt come for a lecture on communism! Most teams have a few highly paid riders and many who get paid a pittance. There shouldnt be a salsary cap there should be much higher minimum wage for all the 23 year olds who are used up and spit out.

 

[hiero2]

Wouldn't they just leave the doms salaries at their current level and use the spare money elsewhere?

Agree.

No to the question. No need. There isn't a problem. You're trying to fix something that ain't broke. If it weren't Sky and BMC being the big spenders, it would be somebody else.

The money paid to the riders is a completely different world from 20-25 years ago. Even at the lower levels.

 

[hiero2]

Brilliant!

 

[Bavarianrider]

No, we live in a free world.
If somebody wants to spent 50 Million Euros on cycling each year, he is free to do so.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

A cap limit could result in more parity between teams if the cap limit was low enough. My only questions would be who, or what organization, would regulate or manage the caps for all teams? The UCI? For example, let's say an elite rider under a 4 year contract leaves his current team after 2 years. In that case, how much cap from the rider's original contract would the old and new teams each be responsible for? It is not like cycling has a single governing body over all events and teams. If the Breakaway League gets going, then maybe that organization could manage it.

 

[icefire]

Rather than an individual salary cap limit a team's salary budget. That way a team cannot buy up multiple talents like BMC did. Perhaps have a maximum percentage of the budget fir rider salaries?

Teams would get an extra salary for their riders by just getting external sponsors whose business activity does not enter into conflict with their official ones.

Yes, the next thing the sport needs is UCI regulating riders sponsorship deals such as this one of Contador advertising a matress:

 

[auscyclefan94]

Rather than an individual salary cap limit a team's salary budget. That way a team cannot buy up multiple talents like BMC did. Perhaps have a maximum percentage of the budget fir rider salaries?

That is what I meant by a salary cap. Hypothetically, if the cap is $10million and BMC pays Gilbert $4million, they have $6 million left to pay the others. They could pay him $9 million if they wanted. The point is that it restricts the team's budget.

I am totally against restricting the amount of sponsorship dollar that comes in as that would act as a disincentive to growing riders and making them successful. This way, a team like Sky will still be successful but they would have to work for it more because they couldn't simply buy riders and would have to develop them more. They could use the extra money they have in infrastructure, sports science, coaches, etc.

The major problem with the cap is setting the right amount. Setting a too low cap would reduce rider wages which is not good for the sport and setting it too high would make the cap redundant.

 

[DominicDecoco]

That is what I meant by a salary cap. Hypothetically, if the cap is $10million and BMC pays Gilbert $4million, they have $6 million left to pay the others. They could pay him $9 million if they wanted. The point is that it restricts the team's budget.

The thing is. What Gilbert, in this example, has done for the BMC sponsorship is much more worth than $4million. Sorry, but that's taking the pis* on an elite athlete. It really is.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

there's one team who actually don't even had a budget cap and they are bmc and they suck monkeyballs compared to their unlimited budget and other teams with far less money.

 

[movingtarget]

I am against them. In other sports they don't really work anyway. Someone is always fiddling the books or paying their people in other ways. There are always loopholes. Sportsmen should be paid what people are willing to pay them. I prefer an open market. Richest teams don't always dominate. BMC ? AC Milan, PSG ? Sometimes it does work : Manchester City last season. On the other hand you could say that Barcelona and Madrid have a constant stranglehold on the Spanish Football League simply because they are the richest clubs and attract the best players. No sign that is going to change anytime soon. Riders like Contador, Gilbert and Cancellara or Boonen etc are worth the money they are paid because it's a hard sport and those sorts of riders are the reason why people turn up to watch. They know how to win and they have charisma. They create excitement for the fans and are good for the sport.

 

[DominicDecoco]

That is what I meant by a salary cap. Hypothetically, if the cap is $10million and BMC pays Gilbert $4million, they have $6 million left to pay the others. They could pay him $9 million if they wanted. The point is that it restricts the team's budget.

A rider like Phil isn't even paid anything close to what he is worth for the sponsorship and brand that is BMC as it is now. Yet you want a salary cap to balance things - which is noble enough - but such a cap is taking the pis* on an elite athlete.