Some clubs are run professionally, others are old boys clubs with no idea. Nathan Cleary and Chad Townsend are on similar money. Salary cap isn't fixing clubs making those recruiting decisions. Dogs are paying Flanno Jnr 500k to vacuum Gus's Camry.
Short of having the NRL putting all players in a pool then making teams out of them and allocating them to different clubs, you will never get an even spread of talent. Even then the ones that land in the better setups will still come out on top.
The clubs need to get better. Some seem to be taking steps in the right direction, others not so much.
First point: Even if you are right (to a degree) you have to look outside of your own club and even yourself as a dyed in the wool league supporter and remind yourself that you and I are in the minority. There are a lot more people who are casual viewers and watch whatever sport is of most interest to them. If the game continues to be as it is, then why would somebody watch teams getting bashed up by 30, 40 and 50 points when they can watch other sports and watch a contest.
Second point: On the merits of the salary cap, I am just criticising the system. It is a terrible system because the game can’t police it. Furthermore, even when teams have been caught (incidentally by somebody spilling the beans internally and not because the ARLC caught them) a lot of them (Canberra, Bulldogs, Storm for example) have won a competition shortly afterwards so the punishment is never strong enough. This has been made worse by allowing TPA’s and other outside arrangements, which makes it impossible to track, benefits only a few clubs and is totally against the idea of the salary cap, to the point where one wonders why even have it.
Third point: There are better options than just a salary cap. Look at other competitions. It is the same debate as junior development: just because it has been done in a particular way in League, it doesn’t mean it should be.