Can your club afford a $6 million salary cap?

[Perth Red]

Any club with an income over $12mill should be able to afford $6mill for its greatest assetts. In most businesses salaries run at 85%+ of operating costs. Cut out the 30 coaches, 12 water carriers, psychologist, nutritionalist, ego massager etc etc and there'd be plenty of money for players!

 

[Hugh Mungus]

I have a very real fear that we are about to see a complete wipe out of a generation of super stars as a result of the Storm scandal and the resultant backlash against the Salary Cap. My crystal ball shows Thurston, Inglis, Slater, Hoffman, Falau either playing league overseas or another code.

I personally think the Cap should be relaxed to reward development and loyalty. If clubs cannot afford it then relax third party arrangements.
Two things I am sick of hearing is that raising the cap will send clubs broke and secondly that some poor clubs do not have the sponsorship potential that others do.

1. Raising the cap will not send clubs broke - it will be chief exectuives of clubs not spending within their means. If the cap is $6 mil and you cannot afford it then don't spend it. Simple. Complaining that the NRL will then become like the EPL - gues what, it already is. We already have the usual's at the top, we then have the thereabouts and then we have the have nots. There is occasion movements between the tiers but generally it is pretty stable.

2. So basically we restrict what players can earn, because of a result of setting the benchmark not at the highest mark but at the weakest??? Cannot fathom how that even makes sense. I find it laughable that we ask our players, amongst the toughest of any sport, to back up 48 hour after games, play injured, play ten months of the year in some cases and yet then restrict what they can earn from outside the game!

 

[Bluebags1908]

With the grant the clubs would have got from a TV deal that our game deserves then I believe every club could afford the 6 million cap.

Spot-on. And all these salary cap issues wouldn't have happened or would have been minimal if Gallop negotiated a just TV deal last time. And defections to union would be minimal.

A $6m is possible if the NRL negotiates a TV deal that the game deserves next time.

 

[WireMan]

I have a very real fear that we are about to see a complete wipe out of a generation of super stars as a result of the Storm scandal and the resultant backlash against the Salary Cap. My crystal ball shows Thurston, Inglis, Slater, Hoffman, Falau either playing league overseas or another code.

I personally think the Cap should be relaxed to reward development and loyalty. If clubs cannot afford it then relax third party arrangements.
Two things I am sick of hearing is that raising the cap will send clubs broke and secondly that some poor clubs do not have the sponsorship potential that others do.

1. Raising the cap will not send clubs broke - it will be chief exectuives of clubs not spending within their means. If the cap is $6 mil and you cannot afford it then don't spend it. Simple. Complaining that the NRL will then become like the EPL - gues what, it already is. We already have the usual's at the top, we then have the thereabouts and then we have the have nots. There is occasion movements between the tiers but generally it is pretty stable.

2. So basically we restrict what players can earn, because of a result of setting the benchmark not at the highest mark but at the weakest??? Cannot fathom how that even makes sense. I find it laughable that we ask our players, amongst the toughest of any sport, to back up 48 hour after games, play injured, play ten months of the year in some cases and yet then restrict what they can earn from outside the game!

This year new teams are near the top of the EPL. Raising the cap to a level only half the teams can afford will make it a two tier league. Therefore due to the lack relegation you have to wonder what the point of clubs like sharks (for example) would be. In theory at the moment any team should be able to win as they all pay upto the cap (I think).

The reason the EPL has got closer is more teams over here can pay upto the cap (I think its 8 teams now). We needed a higher cap that only a few could afford to start as Union teams are always sniffing around.

As for losing players to the EPL. I think the strength of Sterling, the number of overseas players being cut and the lack of relegation probably means you won't see as many come over in the future.

 

[mickdo]

This year new teams are near the top of the EPL

I think you mean ESL

 

[attila_the_gorilla]

Raising the salary cap would do wonders. Not every team must spend the same amount. Nothing wrong with the Tigers spending 4.5 mill and the Broncos spending 6 mill.

The English Premier League is completely irrelevant. Yes, it's a fairly lop-sided competition. But that is only due to the European Champions League. Basically, there are about 20 great clubs in Europe where the biggest talents go, because of the Champions League. Those 20 or so European clubs are all fairly equal in terms of quality.

In Australia this Champions League is the NRL. There is enough talent for 16 very decent and competitive teams, but not if so many of the better players leave because the salary cap cannot afford them. And no, it wouldn't make a more lop-sided competition. The Storm have not been the team of the comp because of cheating. They have cheated because of their success.

Every player plays in a specific position. You can't have Thurston and Cronk in the same team. You can't have two first-choice fullbacks. You can only carry a certain number of front-rowers and outside backs in your 25. The talent would still even out pretty well.

 

[bobmar28]

Bulldogs would struggle, that's nearly 2 million dollars they would have to find. Imo most clubs would have trouble raising that much. How about $5 million?

 

[Misanthrope]

The only way the Knights could afford a $6 million salary cap is if the NRL grant was $6 million.

 

[Jobdog]

Yeah, lets increase the salary cap to $6 million and have the same 3 or 4 teams winning the comp every year. Great idea!

 

[mickdo]

Yeah, lets increase the salary cap to $6 million and have the same 3 or 4 teams winning the comp every year. Great idea!

Agreed. There is no point increasing the cap unless the grants to the clubs are equally increased.

 

[Perth Red]

It's an interesting dilemma, do you want to see the very best "rugby" players in the world playing NRL or do you want a even comp where a team can't build a squad due to having to let players go at the first sign of decent talent?

I still struggle to see how AFL and RU can afford $million players and NRL can't.

personally I could live in the shoet term with a two tier system and the lower tier either lift their business game to compete or we find clubs that can. It's happening in ESL where clubs like HKR and Hudds are slowly improving off the field and therefore building competitve squads on it.

How much better would the NRL be this year with SBW, Gasnier, Hunt, Johnson, Berrigan etc runnign around in it?

 

[Pigskin]

I have little doubt that Brisbane could afford an $8m cap ... but regardless of how much the rise is, it will be the usual story. Too many Sydney teams, weighing down the competitions growth.

Tangent !

On a completely different note - why does this forum pick on Berrick Barnes so much ? He left league to go the Reds when he was what ? 19 or something ?. He had played junior rep footy, and was simply doing his apprenticeship in lower grades and benchwarming for the Broncos. I have little doubt he would be in the top echelon of halfbacks in RL today if he stayed.

In my mind he is indeed a great loss to our code - much more so than a great number of the outside backs we have lost for a time over the years.

Oink !

 

[betcats]

penrith cannot right now.

 

[The Tank]

I'd rather lose a few quality players here and there than lose a few clubs here and there. The cap will rise significantly when the new TV contract is in place. A little of topic but Jason Akermanis (faggotball) wants the AFL's cap doubled from 7.9m to 15m.

 

[$$Poor Boy Blues$$]

It's an interesting dilemma, do you want to see the very best "rugby" players in the world playing NRL or do you want a even comp where a team can't build a squad due to having to let players go at the first sign of decent talent?

I still struggle to see how AFL and RU can afford $million players and NRL can't.

personally I could live in the shoet term with a two tier system and the lower tier either lift their business game to compete or we find clubs that can. It's happening in ESL where clubs like HKR and Hudds are slowly improving off the field and therefore building competitve squads on it.

How much better would the NRL be this year with SBW, Gasnier, Hunt, Johnson, Berrigan etc runnign around in it?

The comp would be a lot better with said players in it. Imagine stripping EU football of its major players? Quite a fall.

The trouble is with how the game is set up and owned. I read somewhere RL playes get only half of the games income. AFL its much higher. US sports get 90%+. Maybe that was the AFL figure. As far as I know, they keep down RL income so they dont have to lose excess money to players. And this is why we are losing players at a great rate. It is essentially so those who own the game can make more money off T.V. They must figure its either in their pockets or some guy who was raised a peasant but was lucky enough to have football talent. Huge conflict of interests.

The only way the Knights could afford a $6 million salary cap is if the NRL grant was $6 million.

Its sad the Knights are in such dire straights. Hopefully they secure those new investors. And hopefully said investors are great for the club. I see potential at Newcastle with their stadium.

I still think we need to lift the cap. My post on salary cap overhaul is gone now I think. It borrowed much from the NBA, rewarding long service and junior development (to make up for a lack of a draft). My proposal would be for a soft cap in which exemptions existed allowing clubs to spend over the cap (i.e spending only on specifically targeted purchases; not wasting money wholesale).........this is opposed to the current NRL salary cap which is a "hard" cap.

I think my cap serves the interests of the game better. Under it, the Knights would be no worse off than now.

 

[hellteam]

Interesting article..

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...ur-of-salary-cap/story-e6frep5o-1225859631236

The Courier-Mail can reveal a secret poll put to all 16 NRL club chief executives just last week by the game's governing body saw 12 clubs indicate that keeping the salary cap at its current $4.1 million ceiling was the right course of action.
Three clubs - believed to be Brisbane, Parramatta and Melbourne - would support an increase, while Cronulla argued the cap was already too high

So basically Broncos, Melbourne, Parra want it higher, Cronulla wants it lower, and everyone else is fine with it.

Why is Cronulla in the comp again? Surely all they're gonna do is hold the game back when they want to make the cap higher.

 

[chrisD]

Interesting article..

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...ur-of-salary-cap/story-e6frep5o-1225859631236



So basically Broncos, Melbourne, Parra want it higher, Cronulla wants it lower, and everyone else is fine with it.

Why is Cronulla in the comp again? Surely all they're gonna do is hold the game back when they want to make the cap higher.

Cronulla will be a lone voice when the new TV deal hits, they won't hold anything back. They've got until 2013 to catch up or be left behind.

 

[Fein]

Dopey, I have advocated a marque player elsewhere on this forum. Just because I didn't mention it in this instance as it wasn't being discussed doesn't discount my point that the comp is severly lacking depth. 30 man squads are the way to go in future. Raise the cap, increase the squads, bring in a marque player... is that so hard to understand?

I am aware that the cash that has gone to the redevelopment would not be there if we were funding a $6m cap. Some of the funds currently spent on coaching staff would have to be trimmed too. If we ran a coaching staff like the Sharks we could do it.

If you read a bit more about the Leagues club, you will find the pokies tax has bitten harder than expected, and the club is in the process of changing its financial model. They have a plan, and the future looks good.

But the Dragons have revenue sources outside the Leagues club. We have very big corporate support. But what I said stands. The Dragons (with 2 leagues clubs, huge corporate sponsors) could finance a $6m cap, at a pinch.

As you are a Knights fan, I pity your clubs dire financial state. From what I can tell, they are struggling with the current cap. All the best for the future.

Goddo, unless your club has a buyout from Bruce Gordon, and I grant you that is a distinct possibility, there is NO WAY the current St George Illawarra can play at $6 million.

St George leagues club would almost be specials to win the award for the slowest to react to impending law changes and as a result, the grants from the leagues club dried up quicker than the Todd River in a drought.

Mind you, take Crowe and Holmes A Court out of the equation and Souths would be back to where they were in 2005.

Manly would be the same.

The point I'm making here is that while privatisation seems to be the way forward, there must be someone to IMMEDIATELY fill the void in the event that the owner(s) should meet either an untimely demise or financial ruin.