Mullen on the Juice

Discussion in 'Newcastle Knights' started by ryan.a87, Jan 17, 2017.

  1. Hello, I'm The Doctor

    Hello, I'm The Doctor First Grade

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    7,565
    Likes Received:
    1,331

    "...and take the NRL to the Court of Arbitration for Sport."


    And that is probably just BEGINNING the Court of Arbitration for Sport process...
     
  2. Hardcore_Fan

    Hardcore_Fan Juniors

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,489
    Likes Received:
    501
    At the end of the day, paying mullens salary isn't going to affect our recruitment this season, we are that far under the cap it doesn't matter.
     
  3. Spot On

    Spot On Coach

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Messages:
    10,435
    Likes Received:
    1,367
    Haven't read up about this so can someone tell me why the Knights are paying anything to Mullen now?
     
  4. Bring it home Knights

    Bring it home Knights First Grade

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    118
    But wouldn't it make sense to front end some contracts to pay them less later using Mullen's cash?
     
  5. Hardcore_Fan

    Hardcore_Fan Juniors

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,489
    Likes Received:
    501
    We are millions under the cap. We can front load heaps of contracts without worrying about Mullen.
     
  6. Alex28

    Alex28 Coach

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    Messages:
    10,665
    Likes Received:
    202
    I honestly don't care about being OK even if we are still paying him.

    Why are we paying for a drug cheats house?

    He let us down. After his career here I can't believe he is doing this to us. If he ever gets life membership I'll quit my membership.
     
  7. Hello, I'm The Doctor

    Hello, I'm The Doctor First Grade

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    7,565
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    "Who cares, youre only spending $15k a week on nothing"

    Never become an accountant...
     
  8. Hardcore_Fan

    Hardcore_Fan Juniors

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,489
    Likes Received:
    501
    Not the point I was making.

    All I am saying is, paying Mullen doesn't affect our cap situation and recruitment. Spin it all you like though
     
  9. slotmachine

    slotmachine Bench

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    3,978
    Likes Received:
    515
    The doctor's point is that every dollar you pay Mullen is one less you can front load in 2017, therefore one less you can spend in 2018. As we are getting shafted by not having big TPA deals every dollar is important.
     
  10. Hardcore_Fan

    Hardcore_Fan Juniors

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,489
    Likes Received:
    501
    We have heaps of room, I doubt even without mullens money, we would be using all our cap space to front load contracts. We can front load all our good players and still have money to spare.

    Whether or not we pay Mullen or not,
    It makes no difference to anything except our bank balance.
     
    perverse likes this.
  11. perverse

    perverse Referee

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    21,620
    Likes Received:
    947
    Yeah, I agree. I'm pretty sure there's a limit imposed by the NRL these days to the amount you can front-load or back-load a contract. You would need to re-negotiate a new contract with the player to do it, and given that I don't see us "extending" too many of our squad at the moment, particularly ones that are already signed beyond this year, then I can only ascertain that we're either at that limit already or have no interest in doing it.

    I feel like front and back loading is something you do when you're trying to open a premiership window, because you always feel pain at the end of that back or front-loaded period, generally either paying a squad more than its worth in the case of backloading, or scrambling to re-sign $12mill of talent with a $9mill cap in the case of front-loading. It makes sense when you're trying to max out a squad for a short period, not when you're building over the long term.

    "Rebuilding" from the point of view of a wealthier club - is generally the recovery period after they've maxed out their cap on front/backloading.

    For the front-loading argument to make any sense we'd need to be at cap this year with front-loaded contracts. We're not, so it's a non-argument for mine. It's wishful thinking.
     
  12. slotmachine

    slotmachine Bench

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    3,978
    Likes Received:
    515
    It would be interesting to get the precise rules for how the cap works (along with public player salaries). Makes the discussions much more interesting.

    If it were a free-for-all in terms of front loading you could pay gags say $2m this year and nothing in 2018 and 2019. Surely our owners would be OK with signing off on that?
     
  13. perverse

    perverse Referee

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    21,620
    Likes Received:
    947
    What would the point be though? If you fill the rest of the cap for 2018 and 2019, you're up shit creek trying to retain everyone for 2020 onwards. This might work if you take this approach with players that are signing their last big contract. We could take this approach with someone like Graham, but we can't pay him for this year unless he comes this year. Even then, you end up in a position where you lose a valuable player at the end of that contract and have no cap space to spend to replace them without shedding elsewhere.

    I'm not really massive on front/back loading unless you've got a clear, achievable target on when you want to compete for a premiership.
     
  14. slotmachine

    slotmachine Bench

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    3,978
    Likes Received:
    515
    The alternative is just to lose that cap space forever. Surely getting in a hired gun for 2 years is preferable?
     
  15. perverse

    perverse Referee

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    21,620
    Likes Received:
    947
    On the surface and in the short term, sure. It would only put us backwards again in a year or 2 if you get anyone of actual worth - because they're going to be occupying a valuable spot in the team for free for a period.

    Having said that, our cap is potentially so damn sparse with everything that we've shed that it might take years to fill it, I dunno. I'm philosophically opposed to front/backloading for the most part... I guess I'd have to see the books to know for sure if we could get away with it.
     
  16. slotmachine

    slotmachine Bench

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    3,978
    Likes Received:
    515
    It would be fascinating to see the cap/salary position for every club.
     
  17. perverse

    perverse Referee

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    21,620
    Likes Received:
    947
    Yes, it would be interesting to spend an evening looking over each clubs books. I think the Broncos official books would be the biggest laugh. Milford on $400k I think? hahahaha.
     
  18. Knight76

    Knight76 Juniors

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,093
    Likes Received:
    200
    If we have cap space left over after year end, surely the NRL can deduct it out of the debt we apparently owe them.
     
    Hardcore_Fan likes this.
  19. macavity

    macavity Coach

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Messages:
    18,335
    Likes Received:
    809
    Apparently you can't move money around any more. So it is just lost.
     
    perverse likes this.
  20. Zoidberg

    Zoidberg Bench

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    Messages:
    4,005
    Likes Received:
    269
    I don't understand why Mullen continues to fight it.
     

Share This Page