Quote: DaveO "You are probably right in the sense Wigan have tried to emulate Leeds in their pay structure and offer a progression salary-wise as players hit various milestones. So players will get pay rises when these are hit. This is a good thing in the sense it ought to put an end to the situation where really talented players are stuck on poor contracts and so they get fed up.
However the object of the exercise is to assemble a top side and not just keep all the players happy. We have the highest wage bill in the league and I don't think it is warranted. Where has all the money gone? My concern is we are paying too many average players too much money and this is holding the club back from making signings to fill obvious gaps in the side. For example it was rumoured Powell was given a huge pay rise when Widnes came sniffing. I'd have let him go.
We do have a great academy set up but no club has ever succeeded off home grown talent and Wigan don't even try to do this with plenty of signings from outside the club. Part of the problem is quite a few of these have also been bang average lately but that doesn't mean the solution is going to be found in the academy. I suppose what I am trying to get it is your posts sounds like you are justifying a lack of signings because we decided to pay home grown talent more and we should be happy we are doing so whereas my stance is I don't see a problem with doing that with the [ibest of them [/ibut given the huge wage bill we must be doing this with not just the best of the home grown talent but with the entire squad wherever they come from some of whom don't warrant it.
It can't be mutually exclusive to give someone like Davis a pay rise and also not be able to afford a better centre than Sarge. If it is for Wigan the balance isn't right.'"
I'm not trying to justify anything.
I'm saying that if any club in the league had signed 4/5 players of the quality of burgess/davies/marahall/Williams etc on the money we paid they'd be looking at them as great signings.
SOME of our fans take them for granted and imo think we should pay them less as we've produced them.
We may get first dibs but the lads deserve the right money.
I'm not sure why people keep saying where's the money gone. We have the largest wage bill but pay the same as say saints When you exclude marquee payments (saints will pay 2 x players as marquee and only the first 100k or whatever it is and thenabove that is kind of irrelevant for this dicussion) they will pay the same out as Wigan I.e.1.85million or whatever it is.
Now
Look at their squad numbers from 20 onwards (Barba apart as he's no1 obviously) and then look at wigans.
I know who's I'd rather have.
The argument then would be would you rather have 18/19 top players and very little else or a squad of 26/27 plus, that in effect is where some of the money has gone.
I'm not privy too what every player is on (I know a couple) but I do know that whatever people think end of the day it's perception.
Player x is on 125k - some think that's a lot and some think it isn't.
My argumemt wasn't about whether you go for 18 top players or a bigger squad, each to their own i suppose and pro's and con's for both imo.
I'm saying that wigans investment in the systems, infrastructure etc is well worth it's cost and when players come out of this system and earn bigger contacts I for one applaud the players and the club for earning and paying it (and with the temptations of large money in other places paying them is even more imperative).
SOME fans say why doesn't leneghan splash the cash, yet we pay more money out than other clubs, he can't win.
SOME fans on one hand are lauding wire for signing 3/4 players every year and then we all sit and giggle when it doesn't work or have longevity.
We do make signings, we sign a lot of our own younger lads every year (each one with different risk rewards).
I look at Davies and Marshall as new signings for example. Others see them as youngsters who should be happy to be at Wigan for the privilege. If we undervalue these lads then other clubs won't.