Eels seeking permission to cheat salary cap...

[Canard]

Would the Eels be happy to sign him to a 1 year for $150K deal and then let the open market judge his value in the 2013/14 Off season.

 

[bileduct]

But Jesus only wants him to play for the Eels!

 

[boxhead]

In what part of the post did I say all former players don't deserve a role? QUOTE]



Right here.

Yeah, and I go on to say that this should apply when there are other individuals with better credentials. Good work :roll:

It is ridiculous and inconsistent. Rabbitohs faced the same thing with Inglis, even though no mention of notional value had occurred while he was on his way to the Broncos

The fact it all comes down to the discretion of Schubert is ridiculous. I can't believe he wasn't one of the first people sacked under the new management

Agreed.

Would the Eels be happy to sign him to a 1 year for $150K deal and then let the open market judge his value in the 2013/14 Off season.

I wouldn't mind. The reality is we were probably going to pay overs in 2014-onwards for him anyway. And this is the part I really don't understand - it is for one year that he would be paid little. We are the reigning wooden spooners and even with Folau we would be very hard-pressed to make the top eight. Is it really so bad that we get him cheap for one year then over-pay for the next couple? We are taking a risk on a player that has been out of the game for two years FFS.

 

[bileduct]

Taking a risk.... LOL!

 

[Galeforce]

I would be surprised if Souths signed Folau, I would expect they need to move at least ONE hi profile player ( Asotasi or King) to allow them to complete the deal.The Eels now have the kick up the backside to get on with it and make the required player moves to fit Folau in properly.If the Eels cannot then their current contract arrangements and management are indeed in a mess!

 

[Firey_Dragon]

So in the space of two days LU has gone from "How can club A sing player X they must be over the cap!!!"

To

"If a guy says he want's to play for $50 and a packet of Winnie Blues, he should be allowed to and its not naive to think there are no third party payments involved!"

Its about consistency and a level playing field, every club should be given this exemption from now on, not just make up the rules as we go along to suit Parra.

I wasn't aware I made comments earlier on the topic in this thread. You're right, it is about consistency, but that consistency only exists for new signings. Lockyer was apparently on $200k, I'm sure he was worth a bit more than that on the open market.

It's like any business, some people are happy to take a pay cut if they are happy in a company they enjoy working for, or see opportunities further down the line. The NRL should view contracts no differently.

 

[boxhead]

Taking a risk.... LOL!

It is taking a risk. We would pay him big money in the following years. He has been out of the game for two years and his body shape has changed quite a bit. How is that not a risk?
There is no guarantee he will perform, and there is no telling what he should be valued at given his years out of the game - hence why Schubert choosing to value him is stupid.

 

[bileduct]

It is taking a risk. We would pay him big money in the following years. He has been out of the game for two years and his body shape has changed quite a bit. How is that not a risk?
There is no guarantee he will perform, and there is no telling what he should be valued at given his years out of the game - hence why Schubert choosing to value him is stupid.

Well then, let him go and play Rugby Union for a year and then assess his value after that.

Jesus has commanded him to play for the Eels, so he'll be back.

Risk avoided.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Yeah, and I go on to say that this should apply when there are other individuals with better credentials. Good work :roll:

No, you said former players shouldn't be given high-ranking jobs in the game. Then later you trotted out some crap about "credentials" when I questioned such a sweeping generalisation. So you contradicted yourself. Good work.:roll:

 

[Frenzy.]

Izzy could play in 2013 for $1 or $1m. Won't matter to the Eels. Have a look at their forward rotation. They'll be lucky to make 1000 metres a game and will be burnt out by SOO under Stuart's mate Elkin.

Having pointed that out, if there is any real credence to the story, and indeed, the request by the Eels, it shouldn't be ratified as acceptable.

Watch for moves on the Jennings front if it is.

Massive can of worms waiting to spew forth here.

 

[Someone]

hope we get kicked out tbh.

save embarrassment.

 

[BranVan3000]

i guess some people just want to watch other clubs burn. that's fine by me.

its a stupid idea and yes parra management in the past, and possibly the present is a joke. so keep having your stabs branvan3000. Its frighteningly original.

every club has been in the pits.

Honestly I don't want to see your fans suffer, but your club has made its bed and it now has to sleep in it.

 

[Parra Pride]

Honestly I don't want to see your fans suffer, but your club has made its bed and it now has to sleep in it.

You're right, we certainly made the "Folau agreed to play for $110,000 but Schubert thinks he is worth $400,000" bed.

 

[BunniesMan]

i guess some people just want to watch other clubs burn. that's fine by me.

its a stupid idea and yes parra management in the past, and possibly the present is a joke. so keep having your stabs branvan3000. Its frighteningly original.

every club has been in the pits.

Noone sane wants that. Personally if the ladder next season was based on clubs I want to suck and clubs I want to win games Parra would be closer to the top than the bottom.

All most of us are saying is we don't want any special rules for your club that others don't get. If you got it tomorrow Manly would be sooking for exemptions for Stewart.

And considering other clubs like Souths, Canberra, Warriors, St George among others have room. It shits us when your club is arguing that this is necessary "for the sake of rugby league" because there is no other way to get Folau playing league.

Either sign him for what everyone else would be forced to pay or move on and let one of the other many clubs sign him that are actually in the position to do it.

 

[Parra Pride]

All most of us are saying is we don't want any special rules for your club that others don't get. If you got it tomorrow Manly would be sooking for exemptions for Stewart.

We don't want that either, we want the NRL to let Folau play for the amount he has happily agreed to, which would be within the salary cap.

 

[BunniesMan]

We don't want that either, we want the NRL to let Folau play for the amount he has happily agreed to, which would be within the salary cap.

And again, we want you to play within the same rules other have. Schubert gave us a minimum price we had to pay Inglis every year. No paying unders for even 1 year even though he agreed to it.

He didn't let us get away with that so he is right not to let you get away with the same thing.

 

[ek999]

You're right, we certainly made the "Folau agreed to play for $110,000 but Schubert thinks he is worth $400,000" bed.

It opens up the door for massive salary cap rorts. What's to stop a club from loading up on stars saying they want to play together and will accept $200k each to do so but get paid an extra $300k each outside of the salary cap.

 

[Kiwi]

Just to ask the question if Folau's "value" is 400k, taking Souths as an example here ( not a dig at them ), what are the values of Luke, Sam and Luke Burgess, Asotasi, Sutton, Inglis, Crocker, King, Lima, Te'o, Merrett? for starters and how can any of the top sides afford Folau this late in the season. Show me a top 8 side can afford or has 400k spare under the cap to sign Folau and I'll show you a side cheating the cap. Same with my club the Broncos, we can't afford him with the number of reps already in our side. It's not poor management, these are top 8 sides already. Anyone supporting a top 8 side saying they can afford Folau is full of shit and blind.

And really any club that has that sort of cash spare this late in the year and didn't use it to sign a top player early on should be kicked out of the comp for being stupid.

 

[boxhead]

Well then, let him go and play Rugby Union for a year and then assess his value after that.

Jesus has commanded him to play for the Eels, so he'll be back.

Risk avoided.

I would be happy with that, and I think any Eels fan would be. I don't really care what happens next year. As long as we can get Folau for 2014 to combine with Hopoate, Hayne and co, I'll be singing along.

No, you said former players shouldn't be given high-ranking jobs in the game. Then later you trotted out some crap about "credentials" when I questioned such a sweeping generalisation. So you contradicted yourself. Good work.:roll:

How is it not obvious that what I intended was that an ex-player should not be prioritized over an individual with business acumen? Either you are a blind moron or you take certain parts of a post far too seriously without considering the underlying point. Either way, you make me laugh.

And yeah, you questioned something which was obviously a generalization and thus, you should have considered the other implications. And as for "crap", really? Do you have any idea what it takes to run a multi-million dollar business? Here's a hint; not someone recruited simply because they are a legend of the game. And I pointed it out because this happens a lot. People complain incessantly about how clubs and the NRL's governing bodies are poorly run, and part of (I am not saying wholly) the reason is because favoritism is applied to popular faces, not effective ones. A similar example is using former players as commentators - half of them don't even understand the game anymore, many of whom wouldn't get a job elsewhere in such a role because they are not the right person for the job. The ones that speak fluently and provide insight are highly valued - hence why Peter Sterling is considered by many as one of the best commentators for our code. Andrew Johns and Brad Fittler though? Pass.

 

[Joker's Wild]

It opens up the door for massive salary cap rorts. What's to stop a club from loading up on stars saying they want to play together and will accept $200k each to do so but get paid an extra $300k each outside of the salary cap.

How would they manage this "extra $300K outside the cap"? Payments that are linked to the club, members or sponsors all go under the cap. Only 3rd party deals with no links can be exempt