What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2018 Salary Cap

Messages
13,797
the nrl isn't the only party holding up the CBA you know? takes 2 to tango

Razor is correct on that point. The RLPA has said publicly they won't let the NRL rush through and sign off on the 2018 salary cap until all the items in the CBA are agreed to, with specific mention going to the players getting a fixed percentage of game revenues. Hence the NRL cannot be solely blamed for this situation.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,420
A lot of these things are already in place though, its kind of like contra in the TV rights deal, included so you can boast about a higher figure. I am surprised about the NRL including them in the cap though as it means that the NRL has to pay 130% of these items.

I'm thinking this was one of the clubs stipulations not the NRL's. It benefits the clubs enormously to have everything included in the cap amount otherwise they end up picking up the tab for the extras not in the cap on a lower grant amount.

Smart piece of work by the clubs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vee

unforgiven

Bench
Messages
3,138
I'm thinking this was one of the clubs stipulations not the NRL's. It benefits the clubs enormously to have everything included in the cap amount otherwise they end up picking up the tab for the extras not in the cap on a lower grant amount.

Smart piece of work by the clubs.
Possibly, but I'm sure the clubs expected it to be on top of a $9-10 million salary cap lol
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,420
Not really as they would still be left with the bill. Say base cap was $10 mill then this $850k of extras was on top, that is $850k they would be expected to fund out of the left over grant amount. This way it is included so boosts their overall grant amount and it is covered by the NRL in that way. Win-win for them.
 

siv

First Grade
Messages
6,546
Razor is correct on that point. The RLPA has said publicly they won't let the NRL rush through and sign off on the 2018 salary cap until all the items in the CBA are agreed to, with specific mention going to the players getting a fixed percentage of game revenues. Hence the NRL cannot be solely blamed for this situation.

So my response - status quo $7 mil cap in 2018

And introduce the revised cap amount in 2019 if settled before mid Oct 2017

Just in time for the 1st Nov 2017 season 2019 signing window opens

If not settled by then it must wait for another 12 months and start in 2020
 

Jason Maher

Immortal
Messages
35,977
That would because you've bought Hunt.

Even with the bullshit 1.2 million figure (it's more like 900k), the cap is going up more than we're paying Hunt with even the low offer the NRL have made to clubs. If we were banking on 10 million, Dugan and Widdop would be re-signed already.


So my response - status quo $7 mil cap in 2018

And introduce the revised cap amount in 2019 if settled before mid Oct 2017

Just in time for the 1st Nov 2017 season 2019 signing window opens

If not settled by then it must wait for another 12 months and start in 2020

Wait... what? The NRL has already offered clubs over 8 million. They can't possibly renege and lower it back to the current 7 million, or every single club will be way over the cap next year.
 

unforgiven

Bench
Messages
3,138
Not really as they would still be left with the bill. Say base cap was $10 mill then this $850k of extras was on top, that is $850k they would be expected to fund out of the left over grant amount. This way it is included so boosts their overall grant amount and it is covered by the NRL in that way. Win-win for them.
Not win win if they have budgeted $10 million on player salaries
 

madunit

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
62,358
TBH that is their own stupidity. NRL has never mentioned a potential cap figure. If clubs decided to base recruitment on media speculation then more fool them.
What should they have budgeted for?

Every club has players to retain and recruitment to do.
 

unforgiven

Bench
Messages
3,138
TBH that is their own stupidity. NRL has never mentioned a potential cap figure. If clubs decided to base recruitment on media speculation then more fool them.
but I do agree that any club that has over committed has to accept responsibility for that.
though its hard as they are competing in a very small pool, once one club starts offering contracts on the assumption of 9-10 million, the others are in a position to either match those offers or miss out on players.
 

Vee

First Grade
Messages
5,084
Adding to the confusion is that there are some clubs (mine - the Knights - certainly) that have a vested interest in a player fire sale. It's certainly in our best interests for the cap to be as low as possible next year at this stage, and not just for financial reasons either.

We'd love it if some of the big spenders had to shed a player or two. We're sitting, ready to take advantage.
Missing out on Jack Bird won't hurt.
 

Vee

First Grade
Messages
5,084
Why does everyone just assume this? Is the presumption that the TV money will always go up - and that expansion will never be on the agenda?

The gravy train will scream to a halt at some point. Our market is limited. There's only so much revenue the NRL can generate with its current footprint.
Except that expanding would increase revenue, particularly in WA and NZ(?)
 

Vee

First Grade
Messages
5,084
As of 2018 the top 30 players will be included in the NRL salary cap, this would be part of the increase before they have even resigned any players.
Six tackles with Gus podcast addressed this saying 2017 cap with 25 players ~ $284k mean vs 2018 reported cap of $8.84M over 30 players ~ $294k mean. Given the revenue increase, it should be more.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,420
What should they have budgeted for?

Every club has players to retain and recruitment to do.

Not saying g it isnt poor planning on the nrl's part that it's gptmthis late in the day butnwhere has this mythical figure of $10mill been plucked from? Why not plan on $9mill or $12mill or some other figure a club may think it will be?

A safe bet would have been to aim at a reasonable $8.5-$9mill with some clauses if you're chasing a star that they'll get more if cap ends up being more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vee

Vee

First Grade
Messages
5,084
A lot of these things are already in place though, its kind of like contra in the TV rights deal, included so you can boast about a higher figure. I am surprised about the NRL including them in the cap though as it means that the NRL has to pay 130% of these items.
I reckon Contra is a con. Take the cash, what are Fox going to do, not advertise the footy?
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,420
Six tackles with Gus podcast addressed this saying 2017 cap with 25 players ~ $284k mean vs 2018 reported cap of $8.84M over 30 players ~ $294k mean. Given the revenue increase, it should be more.

It does seem pretty tight. It does need to be incremental but an avg of $10mill cap not including the $800k of other player expenses mentioned in that article with a club gra t of $13million, meaning clubs get $2.2mill after player expenses to build their business sustainability seems reasonable.

That would be $208mill out of an expected nrl revenue of around $520-540mill

If the nrl can't run itself, the game and grassroots on $300mill plus a year we are in trouble!
 
Top