An Idea for a fair Salary Cap

[mxlegend99]

Why should the Roosters suffer because we have such a small catchment area?

As it stands now, you benefit from being able to cherry-pick players other clubs can't afford. I think the rules should be changed so that teams can afford their juniors and that long serving players are exempt from the cap.
If you don't have the juniors to keep, that's your problem. Teams who make young players into talented football players shouldn't have to worry about not being able to afford them. Teams who don't raise juniors, should. Find your own source of talent, and support them. Seems more fair to me. I hate seeing Penrith losing so many talented players because of the salary cap. Especially to the Roosters.

 

[antbytes]

We have a cap 'cause clubs rort the system.
Let's get rid of the cap and see the big money city based clubs (Manly, Roosters, Dogs, Dragons, Brisbane) buy juniors from the small money country based clubs (Knights, Raiders, Cowboys). We'll see the big clubs win year after year and their fan base get bigger and bigger while the small clubs fade into the distance.
The cap would work so much better with a draft, but the players didn't go for that one.

 

[mxlegend99]

I don't know. Can you imagine how many players the Broncos could have exempt in a couple of years? Not to mention how much Lockyer alone would free up.

Why do we need to change the cap???

To have clubs keep the players they make... and to help keep players in the NRL rather then switching codes. If long serving players became exempt from the cap.. we could pay them whatever we wanted too... keep them in NRL and in their clubs.

Also helps pay more money to up and coming players if the older members aren't part of the salary cap. So Union and overseas are less likely to be able to take our players.

 

[sydraider]

Roosters - Maybe you should scout an area and make it your own ????
Can this be done ???
The baseball system in the US has a minor league system which feeds the 'bigs'. Why can't this be copied here ?
As a 'country member' (and I mean that in its literal form) it would be great to see the local Port Macquarie Sharks play the Wauchope Knights ? Or the Moree Cowboys v Narrabri Roosters ? Whatever !

As far as the Raiders are concerned... they never seemed to have a problem attracting and keeping players when they were winning ?

When we were winning, it was a roster made up of juniors, qlder's and kiwis.
Apart from Mal, none were really superstars before they came to the club.

 

[antbytes]

There's your problem....
You need a coach/system that can develop juniors with a club that they want to stay with.
When Sheens & McRae were there the club was strong.
It's not only money and climate that keeps players !

 

[sydraider]

There's your problem....
You need a coach/system that can develop juniors with a club that they want to stay with.
When Sheens & McRae were there the club was strong.
It's not only money and climate that keeps players !

Most Raiders fans have known the problem has been in our coaching appointments for some time now.

Still back when we were winning, clubs like the storm did not exist. We have always had a qld'er policy, who is to say we would not have ended up with an inglis etc.

You are right though, as soon as the raiders have a coach/system that can develop these players like sheens did, we wont reach the heights we used to.
Hopefully Henry can bring all that back.

 

[antbytes]

The Knights have a similar problem.
David Waite was not a great coach but he had a talent for finding youth. The Knights current status as a strong club is nearly all due to Waite's scouting.
In the years since the players coming through have been much thinner on the ground. There are the occasional glimpses of brilliance (Tighe, Mullins) but on the whole 2007 looks like a long year coming. Goodbye Gids (who is having a blinder this year) another of the stalwarts goooone ! God forbid, Brett Dallas could take his place ????

 

[roosters06]

Also helps pay more money to up and coming players if the older members aren't part of the salary cap. So Union and overseas are less likely to be able to take our players.

It wont have that effect. What will happen is that players start demanding much more, and that the poorer clubs risk bankruptcy.

 

[mxlegend99]

It wont have that effect. What will happen is that players start demanding much more, and that the poorer clubs risk bankruptcy.

Poorer clubs won't be able to pay them then. Another club who can will. I'd love to see all the NRL stars stay in the NRL. ANd maybe attract other guys to our sport even.

 

[marshall stalin]

Since this is a capitalist country why is there a cap for - let clubs spend what they want as after all do they limit coles and woolworths market share to help small and independant business's in the same industry- No they don't.

The NRL should reduce the comp to 12 clubs by the following

* Merge Penrith and Parramatta
* Merge Souths/Norths/Melbourne - to play out of Gosford
* Merge St George-Illawarra and Cronulla
* Merge Canterbury and the Warriors and relocate them to NZ

12 clubs - two full rounds of Home and away - 5 team Finals series - 6 games each week - 2 on Friday - 2 on Staurday night - 1 on Sunday and 1 on Monday

 

[roosters06]

Poorer clubs won't be able to pay them then. Another club who can will.

which defeats the purpose of giving the concession to players who've played "x" number of years for their club.

Back to the drawing board.

 

[black cat]

i know its been said before,but i lean towards scrapping the cap and using a points system for players.pay players want you want but you are only allowed to field a team worth so many points.

i'd like to know what people classify as juniors.if you look at the roosters v dogs 04 gf teams,the dogs had about 4 locals jnrs and the roosters 2,but those clubs had a lot of players who had been at the respective clubs since they were about 15,16,17.
there is only a few teams that have true local jnrs but lots of clubs get players from the bush,nz etc when they are young.

 

[BrisVegas]

i know its been said before,but i lean towards scrapping the cap and using a points system for players.pay players want you want but you are only allowed to field a team worth so many points.

And when would the points be realocated? At the end of every year? And who would allocate the points? What if other teams disagree with the points allocated to other players? What if a team win the Grand Final and has an increase in points allocation across the board? Players may have contracts for multiple years and could sue for breach of contract if clubs had to release them cause someone arbitarily decides they are wrth another 40% in points. What is the defining characteristic which players should be graded on? Speed, tries scored for wingers? Size, number of offloads, tackles per games for fowards? and on and on and on....

 

[black cat]

i'd think players would get points equal to the rep level they played and be allocated by the governing body.
it could be a certain number of games for aus not one off appearences.maybe regular 1st graders and rookies would obviously attract lower points.
it was only a suggestion i heard which i thought had merit,that way a team couldnt have 7 or 8 internationals but i also believe a draft should be implimented.as for your concerns about the legal side of things,whats to stop the salary cap being challenged now.

 

[Iafeta]

In view of Big Willies comments about the Salary cap as well as the abolishment of the Anti-tampering rule, I thought I might put forward an idea that would suit Big Willie or the Rabbitohs. It is a variable salary cap that allows rich successful clubs to retain the players they want whilst not penalising less well off teams.

My idea would be to allow the clubs to spend what they like. They would still have the $4 million Salary Cap, but if a club decides that they want to go over it, then they can start the competition with less points. For example the club can spend up to $4million with no penalty. Anything over $4 million but under $4.5million, then they start the competition minus 4 points. Anything over 4.5million but under 5million is another 3 point. Over 5mill is another 2 points etc with the maximum they can be docked all up is 10 points. You could also add point to teams who under spend.

This would reduce a lot of the problems of the current system. Just because a team has a big Junior comp doesn't mean that they should get salary cap concessions for their juniors. The team that has no Juniors could argue that they are disadvantaged because a team like the Dragons has 1000 times the juniors available to them. This system would not be immune from cheats, but it might be better than the current system.

No.

Because the salary cap is not only brought in to bring equity to the entire season, its also brought into bring equity to individual games. If you have the Kangaroos face up against a park side, no-one's going to care. It'll beg for more 50 point blow outs and thats the last thing rugby league needs.

 

[Iafeta]

i think anyone at the club for more then 8 years should be exempt
and local players should be getting a 25% discount

that encourages local junior development systems and rewards loyalty in long serving players
the cap should stay at 4mil

Agree with the loyalty scheme.

Disagree with the juniors scheme. Teams like the Warriors, Panthers, Broncos with large geographical catchment areas will be heavily favoured. Teams will relatively small catchments like the Roosters will be disadvantaged - the idea of the salary cap is to not advantage or disadvantage one team or another.

 

[Iafeta]

Boohoo. Why should other teams suffer and have teams like Roosters steal the talent they created?

Very naiive and narrow minded comment really.

The Roosters are lumped with an area designated by tradition, history, and junior club affiliations. That's not their problem in the day and age of the salary cap and they shouldn't be duly punished for it.

 

[Iafeta]

As it stands now, you benefit from being able to cherry-pick players other clubs can't afford. I think the rules should be changed so that teams can afford their juniors and that long serving players are exempt from the cap.
If you don't have the juniors to keep, that's your problem. Teams who make young players into talented football players shouldn't have to worry about not being able to afford them. Teams who don't raise juniors, should. Find your own source of talent, and support them. Seems more fair to me. I hate seeing Penrith losing so many talented players because of the salary cap. Especially to the Roosters.

I disagree.

If Penrith, or any other club want to retain juniors, they need to dig deep, just as the Roosters have to attract juniors.

It's up to an individual club's player strategy, the Roosters is clearly on bringing in young players and hoping to retain the pick of them. Good luck to them. If club A didn't want to lose player B, club A should offer player B more of an incentive - be it encouraging loyalty, some form of remuneration, or investing in the youngster's future through tertiary education or an apprenticeship. If other clubs, like the Roosters, do do this, then you can't very well get into them for it.

 

[BrisVegas]

i'd think players would get points equal to the rep level they played and be allocated by the governing body.
it could be a certain number of games for aus not one off appearences.maybe regular 1st graders and rookies would obviously attract lower points.
it was only a suggestion i heard which i thought had merit,that way a team couldnt have 7 or 8 internationals but i also believe a draft should be implimented.as for your concerns about the legal side of things,whats to stop the salary cap being challenged now.

In effect you would be punishing players for making rep sides? "Sure you can play for QLD/NSW/AUS/NZ but you will be worth more points and have to change clubs." What if a player has a form slump? Will their points value drop? What constitutes a form slump? And I'm sure that NSW sides would all be for QLD and NZ sides getting "Points Cap" allowances due to a lesser number of home sides for local rep players to be a part of.

And my concern wasn't about players challenging the system, which they would. What if you had 4 young players signed for another 3 years and 3 of them made the Australian side, and all of them played Origin? Would the club have to foricbly terminate someones contract to stay under the points limit?

What if a side has a foward pack that gets alot of representitive honours? All their points are tied up in their fowards, which they had not planned for, and they have no points left for backs. How could teams plan for their future without knowing what players would be worth in a few years time?

 

[Iafeta]

Poorer clubs won't be able to pay them then. Another club who can will. I'd love to see all the NRL stars stay in the NRL. ANd maybe attract other guys to our sport even.

I'd rather not see 50 point blow outs for 3 times a weekend which your suggestion drives towards.