At what cost?

The newspapers are full of stories about Manchester United, Liverpool, Portsmouth and other struggling financially, with the real possibility of a top tier club dissapearing from the landscape.

The biggest reason for this - overspending on wages, and transfer fees, not just the immediately reported costs, but clauses that take effect over time, and are largely unseen.

While this goes on, other sports are getting stronger at the club level, with salary caps in place. This guarantees that teams live within their means, and players are not treated like a £5 toaster from the supermarket (one glitch and replaced) - is this a sign of the times?

Competition around Europe for the best players is the widely discussed reason for this, and if a wider body does not do the sensible thing, then why should one nation take the lead to put themselves at a disadvantage?

This leads to the age old club vs country debate, with dyed in the wool fans choosing the club option. But the success (or supposed) of the English leagues within European competition fuels the need to buy players from abroad who are proved, and expensive, rather than risk a failure with an academy product.

But is European success that important, or will a hard decision in the short term, reap long term success?

Most leagues function under a hard cap (if any), with a maximum limit, and often minimum spend on wages, which punishes smaller market teams, who have to stretch themselves to reach the minimum.

Could a flexible cap work?

Instead of a fixed numerical value, a percentage of income makes more sense
This would have to be considered, in whether it uses only gate reciepts, or all income (with TV income being so variable [especially between divisions] this percentage may have to be levied from the previous seasons levels.

Say a 60% cap, giving smaller teams the incentive to try younger players, or innovative tactical ideas, and larger teams the incentive to prioritise key positions to spend money on, and blood youngsters at others. With this idea I would group Wages and Transfer fees together to make up that maximum of 60%, so teams also have to balance a big signing, against their wage demands.

This would allow teams to stay within budget, and strengthen the national side with more qualified playing in the top leagues.

Creativity in expanding revenue would be rewarded as teams would then be able to spend more on their players. The quality of stadiums would be improved to maximise gate takings, giving teams more to spend. Each team would build for the future, and develop longer term aims than just the win/loss column.

Short term loss within inter-league play would surely follow, but is an attempt at the European Cup more important that the survival of a club - surely most people would say no.

Once one league takes the league, then others will see the benefits, and follow - sports are all copycats, and it just needs the precedent to be set. But will anyone have the courage to plan for the future?