Already posted this in the Liverpool section, but was interested in hearing what the forum thinks of this.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1302561/liverpool-introduce-performance-related-contracts?cc=5739

Managing director Ian Ayre has revealed that new deals are being structured to offer lower basic salaries and more performance-related bonuses.

He told the Liverpool Echo: "The attitude I'm trying to put forward when we're negotiating with agents is that we want to do a contract which is fair for both sides.

"Fair often means the right amount of reward for a player who delivers. Everyone we bring through the door, we expect to perform and do the best they can. As long as any player does that, they should be rewarded for it.

"If a player performs, then he will be rewarded. That's the philosophy of the contracts we are offering and signing."

Do you see this kind of wage strategy working?

Nobody wants to get stuck with overpaid, under-performing players (Sneijder's situation the most recent example), but how do you measure such performance-related bonuses? And how do you do it fairly between players in different positions and roles? And what about fringe players who don't get the chance to shine too often in the first place?

I mean, the idea is a sensible one and of course there are performance-related bonuses in players' contracts already, such as appearance, clean sheet and goal-scoring bonuses, but can you make bonuses such a significant part of a player's wage that it will effectively protect the club from over-paying the player if he doesn't perform very well? Do you risk selfishness on the pitch and poor team spirit with this kind of payment strategy?

It's a good way to motivate players to give their all, but some players might be hesitant to join Liverpool because of these new deals imo. They probably wouldn't want their performances to lower their wages.

7amood11 wrote:It's a good way to motivate players to give their all, but some players might be hesitant to join Liverpool because of these new deals imo. They probably wouldn't want their performances to lower their wages.

If they are so concerned about that then frankly, Liverpool should pass on them anyway.

This will help weed out some of the potential deadwood from the squad. It will also give some hope and a lot of motivation to the younger or fringe players who want to give it a go and break into the team.

It's certainly not the easy way to go about building a side that can challenge for something, but it's probably one of the most honest ways of going about it.

Squad and rotaional players wont like this, same with players who suffer long term injuries

I see two problems with this;

Injury, and objectivity.

How to objectively judge a player's performance. How far does the salary climb? How low will the base salaries be?

With a sport depending in so much variables, writing a formula for the bonuses would be hell.

What class players would want to join us on pay as you play? Or perform? How are we going to judge that, Rodgers will probably judge players on passing so maybe a thousand pound for every pass? Three thousand taken off for every misplace pass.

Two yard pass Master Joe Allen would be *bleep* minted.

Nice idea in thoery, but in practice there are a few problems.

One, what is "perform"? Who's opinion?

Secondly, why would player X take Liverpool's offer when someone else can offer similar money, better or as good a team and no risk of not getting paid if for reasons out of their control they dont play well?

Football is a team game and this I think can drive players to selfishness.

Why should I make a run off the ball to create space for someone else to score? Why should I take away a defender's focus by sprinting 30m to the near post so someone behind me can get a tap in and get the credit and then the money? Nope, I'll wait right here thanks, maybe I will get that tap in.

In on goal? A goal sounds better than an assist...I think im going to shoot this one.

There are slightly extreme examples but not beyond possibility.

Overall, I think you might find it hard convincing players of this if they have other options.

fatman123 wrote:Squad and rotaional players wont like this, same with players who suffer long term injuries

Actually, it'll probably be that first group who benefit the most. They won't be signing Joe Cole-esque deals anymore, but those are the exception, not the rule, even in Liverpool which has given out their fair share of crap contracts lately. Instead, their wages might be slightly lower than usual on average, but they can make extra money with impact performances in their time on the field. Somebody like N'Gog a couple years ago would be making almost the same money in base contract, but would be able to get a bonus for goals scored, for instance.

The players like Suarez or Gerrard or now Sturridge will probably still be paid competitive money. Players that are considered first names on the team sheet will have to be offered the same contracts as before, or close to them, or Liverpool won't be able to attract high-caliber players. Trust me, Ayre knows that.

Just ask yourself, do you really think a top player would accept a pay cut in exchange for a pay-by-goals basis? Even someone at the top of the stats tables like RVP or Suarez would be crazy to do that.

What if they get injured ?

No good player is going to accept this if he can get guaranteed money somewhere else... unrealistic by Liverpool.

7amood11 wrote:It's a good way to motivate players to give their all, but some players might be hesitant to join Liverpool because of these new deals imo. They probably wouldn't want their performances to lower their wages.

At first, yeah, probably it would motivate the players. But if you find yourself rooted to the bench, in the long run you might get disgruntled for not getting your chances to pad your stats and get those bonuses.

The Franchise wrote:Nice idea in thoery, but in practice there are a few problems.

One, what is "perform"? Who's opinion?

Secondly, why would player X take Liverpool's offer when someone else can offer similar money, better or as good a team and no risk of not getting paid if for reasons out of their control they dont play well?

Football is a team game and this I think can drive players to selfishness.

Why should I make a run off the ball to create space for someone else to score? Why should I take away a defender's focus by sprinting 30m to the near post so someone behind me can get a tap in and get the credit and then the money? Nope, I'll wait right here thanks, maybe I will get that tap in.

In on goal? A goal sounds better than an assist...I think im going to shoot this one.

There are slightly extreme examples but not beyond possibility.

Overall, I think you might find it hard convincing players of this if they have other options.

I think the performance bonuses could be set up so that they enable the player to earn even more money than on a traditional contract, if the player performs well enough. So I believe players would definitely consider these new types of contracts.

But I echo your concern about selfishness. Team spirit also, you might start hating on the teammates who compete with you for a starting spot if it's very important for your salary that you play as much as possible.

Also I really can't figure out myself how a heavily performance-related pay system could work in football, like Lord Spencer already said, because it has to based on solid stats. The coaching team's opinion on your performances cannot be what influences your salary, there would be fights. But then again stats don't cut it either because you cannot make them fair and even on every player and position.

Actually the more I think about this, the worse it seems to me.

*cough*sniejder*cough*

I think some people misunderstood the way it will work. Players will still get paid via the traditional contracts (like Art pointed out). The bonuses are a plus depending on the performances.

For example let's say someone like Sneijder we would offer 100k as his contract instead of the 200k or whatever he wants. And if he plays well he will get huge bonuses.

I think some of you thought it means us trying to sign players on free and then paying them whenever they perform well.

Messiah "Aggerswagger" wrote:I think some people misunderstood the way it will work. Players will still get paid via the traditional contracts (like Art pointed out). The bonuses are a plus depending on the performances.

For example let's say someone like Sneijder we would offer 100k as his contract instead of the 200k or whatever he wants. And if he plays well he will get huge bonuses.

I think some of you thought it means us trying to sign players on free and then paying them whenever they perform well.

But how do you judge how well different players perform? That's what I cannot understand about this.

No clue, that's up to the guy who thought of this idea. I'm guessing Gk's, Defenders and DM's will get bonuses for clean sheets. And the rest for goals and assists. But stats would really be an awful way to judge performances.

How is this idea any different to what goes on at clubs anyway? If a player performs well, doesn't he get a salary increase when he signs a new contract?

Yohan Modric wrote:How is this idea any different to what goes on at clubs anyway? If a player performs well, doesn't he get a salary increase when he signs a new contract?

Well you can't give a contract extension to players after every game they perform well. I think it's a unique idea, but distinguishing on performances could create a problem for hurt the moral of the team.

This is a method used in US sports for 3 types of players:
- Player coming off of injury, cannot get the guaranteed contract he wants, willing to do this for 1 year so he earns a guaranteed contract
- Same as above except for an underperforming player
- Older player who still wants to play in a top club... but cannot do so for his market value. He's trading off wage for club status.

Regardless of how you look at it, it's not something that works for the good and performing players. Definitely unworthy for a club like Liverpool.

The more i think of it, this is completely idiotic lol.

well it doesnt have to be goals and assists, appearances, mins played, games started, conversion/pass completion rate can also be useful. This of course depends on the player/position, but a huge pitfall of this policy is that players might be more motivated to work on their own stats rather than team achievements.

Well if it says anything about our owners is that they are cheap as f*ck. Have already cut the annual wage bill by millions and yet still looking for ways to cut more. Smells like the direction of mediocrity if anything to me. I'll be patient, let's see how this works out.

sportsczy wrote:This is a method used in US sports for 3 types of players:
- Player coming off of injury, cannot get the guaranteed contract he wants, willing to do this for 1 year so he earns a guaranteed contract
- Same as above except for an underperforming player
- Older player who still wants to play in a top club... but cannot do so for his market value. He's trading off wage for club status.

Regardless of how you look at it, it's not something that works for the good and performing players. Definitely unworthy for a club like Liverpool.

Why do people in this thread think it will work any differently at Liverpool than it does in the US? There's nothing in the quotes or in the workings of the club to suggest that this will be a strategy for pursuing stars. It is going to be used for rotational/young/injury prone/old players, not if they sign a Cavani or a Jovetic or some similar-caliber player in the summer.

First off the whole idea of bonuses is hardly new.

Secondly, this may not be what Ayre is getting at. It could be kinda like the Raul Meireles deal. Sign him and give him fairly low wages with an agreement that if he performs well over the initial period his wages will be increased.

Performance-related bonuses work fine as small add-ons, like a bonus for the whole team if they win a game or a goal-scoring bonus. But I don't see how a significant proportion of a player's salary could be based on performances in football. It's just too difficult to implement and there are too many obstacles.

I think this idea comes from our owners and furthermore they probably have something similar in place in "their other sport" baseball (Red Sox) where it's much easier to compare individuals based on a few key stats and where players' roles are not as different as in football.

I can't see this working in football.

Nah... there isn't much of anything like this in baseball other than for very fringe players. Everything is guaranteed for the good ones. If anything, it's add ons to an already huge wage lol.

The Red Sox had massive wages and are still top 5 in MLB i believe. This ownership is a huge spender if it thinks it can win.

I get the feeling that they don't trust Liverpool's management much so far.