So the relegation clause *was* invoked

And then the players just got paid nearly the same anyway?

Taking Hucks as an example. Say he was on 20k a week in the Prem, which was then cut to, say, 15k a week (I can imagine anywhere between 25% and 50% cuts). But somehow we only managed to reduce the overall wage bill by less than 10%. So did Hypothetical Hucks wages go back up to 18k or did we bring in several more players on vastly inflated wages (presumably pissing off those who took the cut)? I suppose it's all water under the bridge; but I'm curious now...

Anyway, my point was that all managers since Prem promotion until McNally/Lambert pissed away a lot of money one way or another.

Posted By: BerlinCanary, Oct 19, 17:48:08