Paul Kent: NRL salary cap isn't working

[Lambretta]

Wrong. The salary cap is working beautifully.

For souths, roosters and dogs.

The salary cap will tear apart the core of these three teams over time and unless they can find another crop of cheap young players to replace the "stars" who leave to go to other teams or sports they will slide down the table.

In 2010 St George looked unbeatable and they had great players right across the park. The same comment about the cap could have been made about them at the time. Yet the cap, amongst other things cruelled them.

Teams best placed to survive the salary cap penalties won't be basket cases with their hands out asking for help to stop them going under.

The strong teams will be the ones that bring young players through their ranks and get talent cheaper earlier in players careers.

The bulk of the Roosters team have come through the ranks. The same with Souths. Another team on the rise is the Panthers, a team that have put their faith in young players.

It's not necessarily about Juniors - although that doesn't hurt - it's about recognising how best to recruit young players and bring them through the ranks at your club and balance them with some talented players in key positions.

But no matter what you do - teams will continue to go through the rise and fall of fortune that the salary cap encourages through stopping teams spending more than a set amount.

 

[Noname36]

I agree there needs to be better transparency so the clubs that don't do it well can learn off the clubs that do, I don't agree that players should be forced to disclose their entire earnings to the public though

It's not really a matter of the bottom clubs just learning to do it.

In order to secure third party sponsors to pay for players for your club you need to be selling something attractive that sponsors want to jump on board with. In order to be attractive you need to be winning and getting FTA coverage and it's very difficult to win consistently when you're playing against teams that already have a much more expensive playing roster due to their significant TPDs.

 

[Craig Johnston]

It's not really a matter of the bottom clubs just learning to do it.

In order to secure third party sponsors to pay for players for your club you need to be selling something attractive that sponsors want to jump on board with. In order to be attractive you need to be winning and getting FTA coverage and it's very difficult to win consistently when you're playing against teams that already have a much more expensive playing roster due to their significant TPDs.

I don't think that's all there is to it, a club needs to have the right infrastructure in place to give themselves a chance to start with, it's very clear that some clubs, and usually those clubs complaining don't have the commercial experience required at board level to be able to best leverage whatever it is that works best for their geographics, this is the horse well before the cart

 

[franklin2323]

Sure, maybe you cant stop it. Lets publish the numbers though and not pretend the comps actually an even playing field.

Then we would need to publish sponsorship numbers. The question is how to stop TPA but why aren't the bottom teams using them. Pre-Gus we didn't use them why should the better clubs get punished because our management was too stupid to use them?

 

[carlosthedwarf]

More garbage from Kent without solutions

 

[Nice Beaver]

Then we would need to publish sponsorship numbers. The question is how to stop TPA but why aren't the bottom teams using them. Pre-Gus we didn't use them why should the better clubs get punished because our management was too stupid to use them?

Come on.

Do you really think the Penrith board were just using the salary cap and not TPAs because they were "too stupid"?

Its all about who you know. Gus has plenty of pull and brought in the TPA benefactors.

 

[franklin2323]

Come on.

Do you really think the Penrith board were just using the salary cap and not TPAs because they were "too stupid"?

Its all about who you know. Gus has plenty of pull and brought in the TPA benefactors.

I don't doubt that. We have always had plenty of smaller sponsors. Anyone only needs to open a local paper to see a Panther player. Sponsors like heartland Holden have been here for years just never had player sponsorship.

Does having 5 players getting all your cap sound like Leary & co had an idea? Our cap was sorted by Phil Moss Gus just said what was overs and what wasn't

 

[seanoff]

Is there any top line sporting competition in the world that has a system that allows for an even spread of talent.
I am a casual MLB fan and I know that the same teams always tend to be there at the pointy end of the season.
I dont follow football but from what I see the English,Italian and Spanish competitions always feature the same few big name clubs.
No idea about NBA or NFL,maybe fans of those sports could enlighten us.
So.genuine question,is there a better system out there?

EPL, La Liga, etc etc do not have a salary cap system. thus the number of actual contenders is limited to 3 - 6 of the biggest clubs in each league. you know their names and they all play champions league every year. so Real Madrid, Barca, Bayern, Borussia, Arsenal, Man U, Liverpool, Chelsea, Man City and Chelsea while they have rich owners. just about all the others in those comps have no realistic shot at winning anything, the ceiling is not even Champs league, its Europa Cup.

MLB has a luxury tax where over a certain number you have to pay a sum to the MLB. Baseball in the US is very regional. there are only very few national games a week, the rest are restricted to local markets. SO, NY, LA, Boston, etc have big local TV markets, their TV rights are massive. St Louis, great baseball town, no one out of St Louis gives are flying **** about them. their local TV deal is nothing like the Yankees, Dodgers, Mets, Angels, Red Sox. last yr the Dodgers paid $190M more in salaries than Houston

The NFL is extremely competitive and close top to bottom, apart from a couple of teams that are useless just about anyone can beat anyone else on any given sunday. they have a draft and a hard cap. $133M next year. 12 wins - 4 losses is considered a very decent season and the best record last season. only the odd game offers odds over a TD. most of the rest are Seattle by 2.5, Dallas by 1 etc.

NBA is the slightly different. 2 or 3 great players together are extremely hard to stop. Even 1 makes you competitive. The Thunder have 2 great players, one is out and has been for a while the other guy is basically winning games by himself. if the other guy comes back, they are a contender instantly to win it all. they basically have those 2. that's all. you get lucky and you can win it all or do a Miami and get 3 players together including the best player, anything less then winning it all was a failure and their bench in that run was little better then a pick up team from this board.

 

[God-King Dean]

NFL, NBA, AFL & other competitions have a draft - and the shit teams are still shit.

Draft is a terrible idea.

 

[T.S Quint]

The NFL is extremely competitive and close top to bottom, apart from a couple of teams that are useless just about anyone can beat anyone else on any given sunday. they have a draft and a hard cap. $133M next year. 12 wins - 4 losses is considered a very decent season and the best record last season. only the odd game offers odds over a TD. most of the rest are Seattle by 2.5, Dallas by 1 etc.

You can still build a team full of stars in the NFL though, while other teams suffer.
Seattle was a Superbowl team last year, but just added one of the best (and highest paid) tight ends in the league.
Obviously it's about cap management, and some teams are much better at it than others.
But really , in the NFL you just need a star QB. If you have that then you instantly become competitive. Some teams go decades without being able to get an elite QB, while others are able to find 2 in a row (Favre/Rodgers; Manning/Luck; Montana/Young).

The salary cap does afford other teams the chance to be successful if they manage their cap right, but really it is the same teams who keep reaching the end of the season and it's because of the QB's they have.

 

[seanoff]

You can still build a team full of stars in the NFL though, while other teams suffer.
Seattle was a Superbowl team last year, but just added one of the best (and highest paid) tight ends in the league.
Obviously it's about cap management, and some teams are much better at it than others.
But really , in the NFL you just need a star QB. If you have that then you instantly become competitive. Some teams go decades without being able to get an elite QB, while others are able to find 2 in a row (Favre/Rodgers; Manning/Luck; Montana/Young).

The salary cap does afford other teams the chance to be successful if they manage their cap right, but really it is the same teams who keep reaching the end of the season and it's because of the QB's they have.

when Russell Wilson comes off his rookie contract at the end of next season, then watch. they'll have to start shedding talent and a lot of it. He is basically $18M under what his pay will be next yr.

and yes, if you get a transcendent QB it's a massive leg up. altho lots of teams have won with merely competent QBs and Baltimore won with Trent Dilfer FFS.

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

As has been said there are third party deal for some players, so the cap isn't fair at the moment. Granted fairer than any other around the world most probably, but as I've said in the past teams like Melbourne, New Zealnd Warriors, Canberra, Gold Coast and the North Queesland Cowboys should be allowed to spend more. And I think a soft cap should be introduced whereby if you spend above the cap you have to give the same amount of money to the NRL who spread it around the other NRL sides. It's not fair, but we don't have a fair system now, and least then it will be a little more open and honest, are the rumours true that on paper J Clinton was on more than D Lockyer at one stage for the Bronx?

It's very much a team game, everybody relies on one another, so don't like the idea of a marquee player signing. Half-backs rely on front-rowers very much etc. as you know.

 

[Craig Johnston]

Drafts promote tanking, tanking is the most un Australian thing you could do in league

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

Yes, please no draft.

Going off the point, there are too many interchanges in rugby league, and too many matches. And I want to make Origin just a two match contest every year, where you win by an aggregate score. F taking Origin matches to Melbourne, England, USA or New Zealand, just play them in Sydney and Brisbane. But have a 3 match Test series between NZ and Australia every year. And on the same weekend a three match series between Saamoa v Tonga and PNG v Fiji. Origin on Saturday afternoon's instead too. 4pm Kick-off. So cut the number of NRL matches, and the number of NRL teams in Sydney. Put Cronulla, Manly, St George Dragons, Illawarra Steelers, Balmain Tigers and Western Sydney Magpies in the NSW Cup. I detest the way the NSW Cup has been set up for this year. Place the Brisbane Brothers, West Coast Pirates and the New Zealand Orcas in the NRL, though we need to change the name of the NRL too, need a new name for rugby league.

The NSW Cup should be a big thing in its own right, with the following teams in it, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, St George Dragons, Manly, Balmain Tigers, Western Suburbs Magpies, Cronulla, Newtown, North Sydney, Illawarra Steelers, Wentworthville Wolves, NZ Warriors and the NZ Orcas. Play 18 matches in the regular season, the top 4 play-off, with the Grand Final taking place alternatively in Sydney and Auckland.

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

The big clubs are only shackled by the current salary cap until the NRL has enough money in the bank themselves where the fate of the dumpster divers of the competition doesn't matter that much to the big picture.

It's not a matter of if, but when.

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

The big clubs are only shackled by the current salary cap until the NRL has enough money in the bank themselves where the fate of the dumpster divers of the competition doesn't matter that much to the big picture.

It's not a matter of if, but when.

So the bigger the competition gets, and the more popular '"rugby league" gets, the more uneven the "NRL" is going to get?

Mmmmmm.

Anyway, the 16 "NRL" teams that I want to see is,

New Zealand Warriors, New Zealand Orcas, Penrith Panthers, Parramatta, Sydney Roosters, Sydney Rabbitohs, Newcastle, Brisbane Broncos, Brisbane Brothers, NQ Cowboys, GC Titans, WC Pirates, Adelaide Rams, Melbourne, Canberra, Canterbury.

 

[Glen]

Is there anything Paul Kent likes about Rugby League?

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

Look, if you read what soccer journos write about soccer up here, and they are meant to be soccer supporters, some even coach soccer to kids, it makes what Paul Kent says and writes about rugby league child's play. And what P Rothfield writes too. Journos are usually by nature, cynical and bitter people.

 

[Jason Maher]

Lol@dumping and demerging the Dragons and Tigers. Removing those two fan bases won't negatively impact the compeition in any way.

 

[BuffaloRules]

The difference is that soccer is king in UK...

RL is in a crowded market place over here, and constant negative and whinging media story lines from their own specialist juornos tends to always reinforce the position that League is on the decline amongst the people with a limited following of the game...

You don't get this media negativity from the other codes...