Junior Development and Reward for Clubs

[Perth Red]

They are just developing at other clubs ready to come home when the nrl wakes the f**k up!

 

[Chief_Chujo]

3 mill on running hm and sg ball teams? Yeh right. These teams directly benefit Canberra Raiders, as does Mounties and u20's squad. Good luck attracting enough external players to move to canberra if you cut your jnr pathways! The salary cap prevents them from spending this alleged 3mill on other clubs players, it is dumb argument he is making!
Maybe the govt should threaten to remove their pokie machine licenses if they remove jnr funding?

We're paying $400k of WA league Money to run an SG ball team for the benefit of all the nrl clubs.

It was reported last year that we spend $3mil a year on juniors, but it would be less now we have pulled out of logan. Some clubs spend as little as $100k a year. Why the f**k should we, dragons, parra etc do all the work? If some clubs dont want to spend on juniors fine, but they can spend the money they save in the form of transfer fees. Or just give us junior concessions so that juniors can stay with the teams that develop them.

 

[God-King Dean]

Perth.

 

[Perth Red]

So which clubs are not running a hm, sg ball (or qland equiv) u20's and link up with a nsw or qland cup for reserve team? What are canberra Raiders nrl team doing any different to every other club? How can some clubs be running all that on $100k? I call BS.

You haven't answered how not spending an alleged $3mill on jnrs is going to help signing first team players given
a) raiders already spend full salary cap
B) if theyre not from the region you have to pay overs to get established players to go there

 

[Walt Flanigan]

You haven't answered how not spending an alleged $3mill on jnrs is going to help signing first team players given
a) raiders already spend full salary cap
B) if theyre not from the region you have to pay overs to get established players to go there

The point Furner is making is that if there's no reward for investing more $$ in juniors than other clubs then they'll simply stop doing it and it will be Rugby League that suffers when the AFL moves in on those kids.

 

[Danish]

are they spending $3 million on juniors and getting no money back in return, or are they simply spending $3 million and collecting it back in junior registration fees and sponsorships, tax deductions etc?

 

[Perth Red]

The point Furner is making is that if there's no reward for investing more $$ in juniors than other clubs then they'll simply stop doing it and it will be Rugby League that suffers when the AFL moves in on those kids.

But there is lots of reward. Fact is if you develop your own players you are likely to sign them sooner, cheaper and for longer. Especially a club like Canberra that has and will continue to struggle to attract signings from other clubs. And again they can't use that 3mill signing anyone, the leagues club exists to fund jnr RL, every club is running development teams at u16, U18, U20 and reserve grade link up. I can see no logic to what he is claiming. I know he is lobbying for concessions that will benefit his club but his threat is just hot air and the nrl will just laugh at it. Is he suggesting the Raiders leagues club is not going to fund any jnr sport? Is he suggesting the nrl raiders are going to be the only club in the nrl to not run those 4 developments sides that every team is running? I a, not sure what his threat is and who it will hurt the most?

 

[Edwahu]

But there is lots of reward. Fact is if you develop your own players you are likely to sign them sooner, cheaper and for longer. Especially a club like Canberra that has and will continue to struggle to attract signings from other clubs. And again they can't use that 3mill signing anyone, the leagues club exists to fund jnr RL, every club is running development teams at u16, U18, U20 and reserve grade link up. I can see no logic to what he is claiming. I know he is lobbying for concessions that will benefit his club but his threat is just hot air and the nrl will just laugh at it. Is he suggesting the Raiders leagues club is not going to fund any jnr sport? Is he suggesting the nrl raiders are going to be the only club in the nrl to not run those 4 developments sides that every team is running? I a, not sure what his threat is and who it will hurt the most?

At the moment we have to pay overs to keep any decent junior we produce. The same money we were going to pay Milford has just about paid for Austin, Hodgson and Sezer combined. Good Juniors are a hot commodity, and that will continue to be the case.

And he clearly said junior funding would continue. He is talking about funding for the Raiders elite development programs.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

But there is lots of reward. Fact is if you develop your own players you are likely to sign them sooner, cheaper and for longer.

Yes and that's great until a team like the Broncos or Roosters comes knocking and offer these kids massive TPAs. Clubs like us, with limited corporate exposure, can't compete in this third party system so we'd like junior development concessions to help retain those juniors to even the playing field a bit.

 

[Perth Red]

Tbf Milford is a star player, the three you've got are solid club but not in same league. Reality is nrl these days is a business and players will go where they can pick up the biggest pay cheque. Why the Raiders can't pay same or more as other clubs is what you should be asking. Either it is poor salary cap management or poor ability to get them third party deals. Or maybe players just want to move out of canberra!

I do think the league needs to look at the third party payment issue and look at the difficulties some clubs face due to their location ie Broncos will find it much easier than a small place like canberra. None of that makes any difference to the fact Raiders cutting jnr development is somehow going to hurt anyone other than themselves.

 

[Chief_Chujo]

"Poor ability to get tpas". Its Canberra ffs, are we gonna get dhs to top up their salaries? You said it yourself, its a business these days, so if we can't get the tpas the other teams can, maybe junior concessions will even it out a bit

 

[Pete Cash]

Haha how much corporate money do you think is Canberra Perth red. Its a relatively small centre of governance so its primarily public services. Its a city of 380k.

Poor abilities to get TPA lmao.

 

[Perth Red]

There s nowhere that says clubs can only link up with companies on their doorstep. If the club has a strong brand and star players with marketing value the. Why can't younattract a company who wants to benefit from that from elsewhere?
Problem with what your suggesting is there is equal inequality in both incomes and jnr regions. So let's take cronulla for example, you could offer extra salary cap of say $2mill for jnr produced players but sharks don't have the size of leagues club as canberra so don't have the disposable income to spend this money. Rooster or manly have very small jnr areas to draw upon so where's the equity with clubs with massive jnr areas?

And for the final time how does Raiders leagues club cutting jnr sport spending help the nrl Raiders first team?

 

[Perth Red]

Haha how much corporate money do you think is Canberra Perth red. Its a relatively small centre of governance so its primarily public services. Its a city of 380k.

Poor abilities to get TPA lmao.

Similar to Townsville yet they seem to be able to keep a decent squad together?

 

[Walt Flanigan]

I don't know about "squad", they're fortunate enough to have a once in a generation player. When was their last top 4 finish?

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Canberra has produced some great players in recent years - some of the most talented individuals going - and they haven't been poached by other clubs as such.

Unfortunately they have been marginal human beings and been sacked.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

That's true, but we do still have to pay overs to keep them. That's why concessions for junior players would come in handy.

I don't see the big deal about TBH. It would benefit all teams and encourage them to pump more money into junior development. Seems like a no-brainer.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Depends what the rules are. If they have to come from the local area it will be very different to just having played at the club in 20s or even 18s. If a club got a concession for bringing a player into first grade after they played 18s and 20s you'd just see the likes of the Roosters buying them at 17 and 18. If they had to be 'local' juniors the Roosters and Storm would be f**ked while Brisbane would be laughing. Canberra would be far from the most advantaged by such a rule.

 

[Chief_Chujo]

How many under 18s get poached? Kids are less likely to move clubs at 17-18, especially interstate.

I dont have a problem with concessions if the club develops them from 18. Take RTS for example, roosters may not have had him from 12, he may not be local, but they pulled him out of yawnion and put a lot of time into developing him. Would anyone really have a problem if, in a situation like that, a club is given a cap concession to try and keep him at their club?
The roosters are the classic no juniors club, and what's their reward for actually developing a player for once? Nothing, he starts hitting his straps and they can't get anywhere near the offers being thrown at him.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Where do you think the Roosters get theit Matthews and ball sides from? They have no juniors so they obviously get them other clubs' areas.