2018 salary cap

[simmo05]

So this idiot is advocating an arms race that will wipe out 50% of the clubs in Sydney? What happens to the supporters of these clubs, which by the way, are all located in the growth areas? Alienate 50% of sydney to gain f**k all new supporters in other states that do not give a shit about league?

 

[nrlnrl]

So this idiot is advocating an arms race that will wipe out 50% of the clubs in Sydney? What happens to the supporters of these clubs, which by the way, are all located in the growth areas? Alienate 50% of sydney to gain f**k all new supporters in other states that do not give a shit about league?

People need to remember that the 2018 salary cap will be for the top 30 players, not to p25.

 

[Nice Beaver]

So this idiot is advocating an arms race that will wipe out 50% of the clubs in Sydney? What happens to the supporters of these clubs, which by the way, are all located in the growth areas? Alienate 50% of sydney to gain f**k all new supporters in other states that do not give a shit about league?

I think he's being overly simplistic.

But if that is their intent, they will lose a lot of supporters.

If my team was relocated to Perth etc I would give up on league, and I am sure supporters of other clubs would do the same.

 

[Perth Red]

I think he's being overly simplistic.

But if that is their intent, they will lose a lot of supporters.

If my team was relocated to Perth etc I would give up on league, and I am sure supporters of other clubs would do the same.

I think he can see that we have an unsustainable league at the moment that is stunting growth of the game. If this is the answer I have my doubts but with the massive central revenue clubs are about to receive they have little cause to blame anyone but themselves if they fall over now. Id much rather see 16 existing strong clubs being the foundation for us to expand the game to an eventual 20 team comp but I very much doubt that is likely so we end up with stagnation as the NRL runs around putting out spot fires.

 

[flippikat]

I think he can see that we have an unsustainable league at the moment that is stunting growth of the game. If this is the answer I have my doubts but with the massive central revenue clubs are about to receive they have little cause to blame anyone but themselves if they fall over now. Id much rather see 16 existing strong clubs being the foundation for us to expand the game to an eventual 20 team comp but I very much doubt that is likely so we end up with stagnation as the NRL runs around putting out spot fires.

Steve Mascord is a breed apart from your average RL journalist - he actually cares about covering the far-flung outposts of league, rather than the occasional bit of lip-service.

It disappoints me to see some others here call him an idiot, because our game NEEDS people like that.

His comments are clearly born out of frustration - and I think his frustration is valid - we are 20-30 years behind the AFL in terms of getting an Australia-wide footprint, after all.

I think the point that comes out of the article is that there's really only 2 ways Sydney can be rationalised - either the NRL decide who stays and who goes, which just causes a huge sh*tstorm (remember the last time they came up with a criteria?), or they give the clubs all they rope they want & let the market decide.

Both solutions have drawbacks, but at least the 2nd option means that clubs live or die (or relocate) by their own sword.

 

[simmo05]

I think he's being overly simplistic.

But if that is their intent, they will lose a lot of supporters.

If my team was relocated to Perth etc I would give up on league, and I am sure supporters of other clubs would do the same.

Correct. Most teams have struggled over the years. All an arms race will do is get rid of the clubs who are struggling that particular period in time.

 

[flippikat]

Correct. Most teams have struggled over the years. All an arms race will do is get rid of the clubs who are struggling that particular period in time.

A criteria would do the same too - especially if it includes variables like club revenue, membership numbers & crowd sizes that vary depending on on-field form.

The worst performing clubs *at the time the criteria is applied* would be under the axe.

I'm warming to the idea of "letting the market pick winners and losers", so long as the NRL offers relocation options with any bailout. It sounds like that was the path the ARL was meandering towards before the Superleague war (especially the peace settlement & bungled rationalisation in it's wake) disrupted everything.

I feel that if Norths had successfully moved to Gosford, other moves would likely have happened.

 

[Nice Beaver]

A criteria would do the same too - especially if it includes variables like club revenue, membership numbers & crowd sizes that vary depending on on-field form.

The worst performing clubs *at the time the criteria is applied* would be under the axe.

I'm warming to the idea of "letting the market pick winners and losers", so long as the NRL offers relocation options with any bailout. It sounds like that was the path the ARL was meandering towards before the Superleague war (especially the peace settlement & bungled rationalisation in it's wake) disrupted everything.

I feel that if Norths had successfully moved to Gosford, other moves would likely have happened.

Out of interest, which team do you support?

 

[flippikat]

Out of interest, which team do you support?

I support the Warriors.

Out of interest, what difference does that make?

 

[Nice Beaver]

I support the Warriors.

Out of interest, what difference does that make?

Lol

You don't think the team someone supports can skew their perspective on the merits of clubs relocating???????

 

[flippikat]

Lol

You don't think the team someone supports can skew their perspective on the merits of clubs relocating???????

Sure it does.

I'm in Wellington.. so I'm lucky if I get the chance to go up for *one* game per season (time off work, family commitments, money to travel & stay away from home etc).

If the NRL were to put a team in Wellington, I'd be a member right away. They'd be MY team.

So from my perspective, to see Sydney fans get in a lather about losing an NRL club or two when A) there's already 4 (give or take) games in Sydney per weekend, and B) their old club would still play plenty of "away" games in Sydney if moved somewhere else, seems a bit privileged, when Brisbane (The 2nd biggest league city in Australia) gets an NRL game every two weeks, Perth (the best Affiliated State capital) gets maybe 2-3 per year, and some NZ cities get ONE if we're lucky.

But the thing is, it's rare to see cities so un-evenly represented in competitions.. AFL and NRL are quite unique in that regard.. and it surely can't be sustainable.

 

[Nice Beaver]

Sure it does.

I'm in Wellington.. so I'm lucky if I get the chance to go up for *one* game per season (time off work, family commitments, money to travel & stay away from home etc).

If the NRL were to put a team in Wellington, I'd be a member right away. They'd be MY team.

So from my perspective, to see Sydney fans get in a lather about losing an NRL club or two when A) there's already 4 (give or take) games in Sydney per weekend, and B) their old club would still play plenty of "away" games in Sydney if moved somewhere else, seems a bit privileged, when Brisbane (The 2nd biggest league city in Australia) gets an NRL game every two weeks, Perth (the best Affiliated State capital) gets maybe 2-3 per year, and some NZ cities get ONE if we're lucky.

But the thing is, it's rare to see cities so un-evenly represented in competitions.. AFL and NRL are quite unique in that regard.. and it surely can't be sustainable.

Hmmmmmkay.......

 

[Saxon]

Thats like comparing NRL to your local pub league team.

Not that much of a stretch if the NRL team is the Warriors...

 

[AJB1102]

Just as an interesting fact to put things in perspective: next years entire salary cap for all 16 clubs is still >$10mill short of a single NFL team, of which there are 32 (and that is not converting USD to AUD!)

Just as an interesting fact to put things in perspective: Australia's population is 24M, still 299M short of the USA's population of 323M. So 2x as many teams to service almost 14x as many people and the money that comes with that. Not even converting USD to AUD!

 

[simmo05]

Sure it does.

I'm in Wellington.. so I'm lucky if I get the chance to go up for *one* game per season (time off work, family commitments, money to travel & stay away from home etc).

If the NRL were to put a team in Wellington, I'd be a member right away. They'd be MY team.

So from my perspective, to see Sydney fans get in a lather about losing an NRL club or two when A) there's already 4 (give or take) games in Sydney per weekend, and B) their old club would still play plenty of "away" games in Sydney if moved somewhere else, seems a bit privileged, when Brisbane (The 2nd biggest league city in Australia) gets an NRL game every two weeks, Perth (the best Affiliated State capital) gets maybe 2-3 per year, and some NZ cities get ONE if we're lucky.

But the thing is, it's rare to see cities so un-evenly represented in competitions.. AFL and NRL are quite unique in that regard.. and it surely can't be sustainable.

Been sustainable for both sports so far for over a hundred years.

 

[Card Shark]

So this idiot is advocating an arms race that will wipe out 50% of the clubs in Sydney

Queenslander?

 

[TheFrog]

When we look at a list of the clubs who are reportedly happy to go with a higher cap – Canterbury, Canberra, South Sydney, St George Illawarra and Sydney Roosters – we have a clue as to some of the clubs who might be left at the end of an open "arms race" scenario.

Bit of a long bow to draw in my opinion, that clubs wanting a higher cap are therefore the most viable. Even longer that retaining four clubs all within 15km of the Sydney CBD, some of them only a few km apart, and losing the others, is in any way a desirable outcome.

 

[flippikat]

Been sustainable for both sports so far for over a hundred years.

Yeah, but for most of that time they've been suburban competitions - with suburban-scale income & expenses. All the teams pretty much scrapping over the same city.

Totally different scale to what we have now.. and I can't see how 9 teams sharing a city of 5 million potential fans can all compete with - for instance - a club that represents one city of over 2 million.

 

[Perth Red]

Just said on fox game rlpa have refused the $9.4million offer. Buckle up!

 

[Perth Red]

Bit of a long bow to draw in my opinion, that clubs wanting a higher cap are therefore the most viable. Even longer that retaining four clubs all within 15km of the Sydney CBD, some of them only a few km apart, and losing the others, is in any way a desirable outcome.

Well Souths and dragons wouldn't want a higher cap surely? Leaving aside the 130% grant argument.