Less clubs or higher salary cap

[BroncoBuck]

The cap needs to rise. We should be leveraging other forms of revenue much better. The restrictions we place on 3rd party sponsorship deals is ludicrous. Look at the way the Force and Waratahs are able to bump up contracts by getting businesses in to fund players. The NRL basically outlaws this (except for a paltry $100k per club).

 

[magpie_man]

Restraint of trade.

If a player or a club challenged the Salary cap, they would win seven days of the week.

It's only a matter of time before Holmes a Court/Delmege/Politis takes the NRL to court over the salary cap. The profitabilty/viability of their clubs depends largely on retaining key personnel, the salary cap prevents that.

 

[mongoose]

Gallop needs to go. He's nothing but a PR expert, he's not a business man. He's done his job of stabilising the game after SL but the NRL needs proper leadership and initiative.

 

[RainMan]

Less Clubs for me. 14 team competition.

 

[Sea_Eagles_Rock]

I agree in principle that the salary cap needs a tweak. But to do away with the salary cap now would create damage that I doubt could ever be undone. If my club caused the demise of the salary cap I would be very unhappy. I wasn't happy with Terry Hill when he took the game to court.

Being fair dinkum, it is really the under value of the TV rights and the 'cut' News Ltd take from the game that are causing all the problems. We will never recover from Super League until News Ltd is cut from the game. Their direct interest is costing the game millions. And Ch9 isn't doing the game any favours either.

 

[Briza]

Neither

Lower the salary cap so the elite players earn $150k per season, and make the lazy moffos get a career.

 

[Marshall_magic]

How's less teams going to help the stop the player drain, it just means less players running around each week resulting in more leaving.

 

[Johns Magic]

How's less teams going to help the stop the player drain, it just means less players running around each week resulting in more leaving.

Clubs would get more profit and hence the salary cap could be raised.

 

[Marshall_magic]

Clubs would get more profit and hence the salary cap could be raised.

but regular first graders will become fringe players and leave to the ESL to get a shot at playing in a higher standard (ESL over Premier League)


*eagerly awaits a ESL bagging joke*

 

[t-ba]

Clubs would get more profit and hence the salary cap could be raised.

Worked pretty well for Murdoch in the mid 1990's :sarcasm:.

That's dumb. Less clubs means less games, means less room on player rosters, means less games to flog to televsion.

It's a false economy. Sure, the clubs might be wealthier individually, but the game is poorer as a whole. Do you think the city of Brisbane was generating more revenue relative to to the competition in 1995 or now?

 

[VictorTheViking]

Something needs to be done with the salary cap.

imo, something along the lines of the "20/20" rule in the UK with tiers is the way to go.

Instead of having a hard ceiling on how much can be be spent on your top 25, have 'tiers' of value for your top squad. Say

5 players are allowed to earn in excess of $400,000p.a
10 players are allowed to earn between $200,000-$399,999
10 Remaining are allowed between $70,000-$199,999.

Of course, the figures would need some tweaking, but the whole idea is to reward the financially strong clubs and the marketable players. I think it's ridiculous that guys like SBW, Benji and Darren Lockyer aren't plastered across our TV Screens, magazines and bus shelters all because the players ability to attract sponsorship is handicapped by the Salary cap.

To stop clubs from killing themselves trying to compete with the powerhouses, maybe a rule stating that only 50% of club revenues can be spent on players could be instituted. To force the Sydney clubs to pull their fingers out, I'd exclude revenues generated from gaming concerns (leagues clubs). That way, they can do something productive with that money like membership drives, advertising matches and trying to get higher gates. All of which is alot more productive in the long run. I shake my head to think what a club like Parramatta could be drawing to matches now if they used that money in the mid 1990's to get fans to their games.

That sounds like a pretty good idea to me

 

[philstorm]

I don't think raising the salary cap would really help clubs keep their players.

If the cap was raised to $5 million, the top players would just start demanding 600K, because clubs have more money. If they couldn't get it from their club, they'd just go to another NRL club that would.

The current cap is $4 million, and Petero wanted 400K. What's the bet that if the cap was $5 million, he'd have wanted closer to 500K?

Maybe players would be more likely to stay in the NRL, but it wouldn't prevent situations where players simply are squeezed out of one NRL side into another.

Every players' wage would naturally rise.

Less teams and a higher salary cap would be ideal in my opinion. As more players go to England and the Titans have come in, the supply of quality players in the NRL has dropped, and hence the standard has as well.

Personally, I'd either cut Penrith or merge them with Parramatta. Two teams so close to each other is stupid, especially in Sydney where there's already a glut of NRL sides.

The next club in the firing line would be Cronulla. Geographically, it would make sense for them to merge with Canterbury, however Canterbury(as much as it pains me to say it) have such a strong history that this would be unfair to them. Also, clearly there are some cultural differences between the two regions.

If I was being a hard marker, and I had to make it a 12 team competion, I'd go:

1. Sydney Rabbitohs
2. Gold Coast Titans
3. Manly Sea Eagles
4. Penrith-Parramatta Eels
5. St George-Illawarra Dragons
6. New Zealand Warriors
7. Newcastle Knights
8. Canterbury Bulldogs
9. Wests Tigers
10. Brisbane Broncos
11. North Queensland Cowboys
12. Canberra Raiders

$6 million salary cap.

Cronulla gone as there are too many Sydney teams, and they are just about the most mediocre of the lot.

League will never fully catch on in Melbourne. They're a gun side now, but only due to good manangement, rather than being a great league production region.

Souths and the Roosters to merge, as they both struggle for juniors, like it or not. Combine the two junior bases, and the two foundation clubs. There would be much whinging from both clubs about it, but at least they'd be forced to stop bitching with each other.

f**k you're an idiot.

 

[shaggy]

why would people want to get rid of clubs, seriously less clubs mean less games meaning less revenue for clubs,

due to the new import rules in the english game more players are going to be comming back to the nrl, a higher quality leaving, maybe but new players will step up and fill the void, they always have and always will, if anything the new rfl rules would push for more nrl clubs not less

tier system? are you kidding, what is it with people wanting to put in what hasn't worked it other codes/countires, the esl is getting rid of tier football for the sheer fact it doesn't work

the salary cap works, that is why the rfl wants to copy it, keep the salary cap as is, the nrl needs to be careful with cap increases some clubs won't be able to afford spending the full amount of the cap and end up going broke in the process of trying to compete with the wealthier clubs

 

[philstorm]

Here's a tip, if you were to kick the Storm out of the NRL, the next television rights would be worth 100 million less.

 

[t-ba]

tier system? are you kidding, what is it with people wanting to put in what hasn't worked it other codes/countires, the esl is getting rid of tier football for the sheer fact it doesn't work

I suggest you read what was meant by 'tier system' before you shoot your keyboard off. It was a structure of players wages, not a divisional structure...

 

[donkey|rope]

Gallop needs to go. He's nothing but a PR expert, he's not a business man. He's done his job of stabilising the game after SL but the NRL needs proper leadership and initiative.

i think every rugby league fan in the country is on the same page about gallop. i still think there is room for him to be involved with the NRL in a different capacity (weather he’d want to is another story). all in all, gallop does a decent job but he has absolutely no has long term goals for our game, let alone those of the short term persuasion. meanwhile union have got o'neill making grand statements about his vision. not that o'neill is a particularly impressive man, or that he actually has a hope in hell of rekindling any of the artificial success the rah rahs had in his last tenure, but at least he is inspiring that mob of idiots. the only thing gallop has ever inspired is monotony. we need someone who is aggressive with new ideas and willing to take risks. i think the NRL needs to sound out someone who either is a rugby league blue blood with a strong business background, or someone with international experience and success with other sporting competitions (i.e. the EPL, NFL, NBA).

 

[bobmar28]

I am getting pretty tired of hearing about this issue of 'player drain'.

A few people like Graham Hughes, Phil Gould, Steve Folkes... are saying we need to raise the cap to keep more players. (Exemptions also mean basically raising the cap.)

Mark Geyer even went as far as saying this week that he would rather see Penrith out of the comp and have 10 teams, hence making the comp stronger. (Correct me if I'm wrong)

And thats what would happen we would lose teams......more painful than losing some players!!!!

For me I would rather keep all teams and let players go to England. I have been through the toture of the JV-Tigers and Magpies and I would never want anyone to feel that pain of losing their club.

What bugs me most is these guys trot out the same rubbish without coming up with an answer-has anyone got one.

I think the best way to keep our game strong and keep all teams is through grassroots and I believe thats were the NRL and ARL are putting a lot of resources.

If we raise the cap we have to get money from somewhere, none of these cronies ever tell you where the money will come from.

Not leagues clubs because I don't think having plenty of pokies should equal a strong football team!!

Some say the game is not what it used to be but that may be cause of the style of play and the way the game is played.

I tell you one thing the Tigers wouldn't be averaging 18000 fans if it wasn't for the salary cap.

Bugger seeing Roosters, Dogs and Brisbane at the top of the table all of the time....yes bugger that!!!!

Relocation, amalgamation may be painful but it is necessary. Why should one city (Sydney) have nine teams when that powerhouse of rugby league (QLD) has only three. It's not the NSW RL any more.

The salary cap works.

 

[ozzie]

My point being that money should not only determine the distribition of players.

The Roosters are a great example-the lowest in popularity but strong on the field because they have good pokies and afew rich individuals.

better check the crowd figures there are several team below us

 

[ozzie]

f**k you're an idiot.

yes we don't want to share our three clubs with the scum and our junior numbers are increasing - we now have 69 teams in the SOUFFS junior comp including the second biggest club

 

[LeagueXIII]

AFL can survive by looking after their game, yet the rugby league solution is kick teams out of Sydney. PATHETIC. RL has already suffered enough damage due to the SL war why would you want to risk more by kicking teams out of Sydney? The whole thing that keeps league in the money is because people in Sydney watch it, it's the foundation of the game.