No salary cap whatsoever - would it be so bad?

[Tone83]

What exactly would happen if there was no salary cap? I honestly don't get it, the sharks would suck? Oh no I can scarcely imagine... wait a minute... they do suck and have for quite some time. The storm would dominate? Oh we couldn't have that it wouldn't... wait a minute, they effing do dominate. It just doesn't seem to work at all, and even if it did I don't think I'd agree with it. Why shouldn't more successful clubs be more successful on the field? You'd get clashes between heavyweights and then david vs goliath matches, both with their certain appeal. As it is now you get loser team vs shackled team and the fans lose, missing out on the quality they could be seeing. Ultimately the game is handicapped.

 

[bileduct]

If there was no salary cap the Storm wouldn't dominate. They would fold.

They would be one of the first teams to go.

 

[some11]

The rich clubs would simply be able to out spend the others to sign the best players.

You'd probably end up having the same top 4 every year, with those 4 playing each other many times in Grand Finals and those 4 winning premierships more often/back to back.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

1. The disparity between the rich and poor clubs would probably rise significantly.

and

2. Some clubs would spend more than they can afford to compete and would be in even more financial strife than they are now.


Having said that I wouldn't care if they did get rid of it, or at least modified is so that third party deals weren't restrcited. Or, they should have a cap based on club income. That would not prevent 1. but it would still prevent 2. which would be the most important thing.

 

[BunniesMan]

The Broncos would dominate. With no cap they'd be the Manchester United of the NRL.

No cap comps work in American Baseball and European Soccer because it is the culture people have grown up with for more than a century. The fans of all the non superpower clubs understand that they won't win like the big clubs do, they understand they live for the David v Goliath moment in the sun and then go on to not win the majority of the time.

Fans of those comps understand that. Australian league fans would not accept that. The vast majority would not follow their team if they had no chance at success in the long term.

 

[Kiwi]

The Broncos would dominate. With no cap they'd be the Manchester United of the NRL.

No cap comps work in American Baseball and European Soccer because it is the culture people have grown up with for more than a century. The fans of all the non superpower clubs understand that they won't won like the big clubs do, they understand they live for the David v Goliath moment in the sun and then go on to not win the majority of the time.

Fans of those comps understand that. Australian league fans would not accept that. The vast majority would not follow their team if they had no chance at success in the long term.

This...no one would get close to the Broncos, an open checkbook with news limited backing, just have everyone play to see who gets flogged by them in the grand final. I imagine the Broncos backline and forward pack would resemble the Australian one, every year. The cap has to stay in some way shape or form. If you get rid of the cap have a limit on rep players that come from other clubs. Yeah pay them what ever you want, but you can only have so many.

 

[Beetlejuice]

You have to be joking.

The way Rugby League is played, a rich club like Brisbane would put 70 on Cronulla. Soccer can have a shock result when one team parks the bus in front of goal and plays on the counter. You can't do that in League. Possession will eventually lead to points.

The system is great. Although by the end of the year the difference between the top 4 and a lot of other teams is very clear, you will never know what side will go great next year.

No more threads for you.

 

[dogslife]

1997 would happen... Again

 

[Garts]

If there was no salary cap we would see 4 clubs dominate, some go bust and the game suffer as some fans would be lost.

 

[Fire]

souffs would be a powerhouse...

 

[Cloudsurfer]

Not a bad thing possibly but all the same, paying high prices or recruiting who you think are the best players doesn't guarantee success

with no cap... imo it would come down to things like:
1. coaches and how well they get a team working - getting the best player/s doesn't mean a thing without team effort & culture
2. variables in the game (reffing (interpretation of the rules etc), injuries, combination against combination, etc)
3. any given game, any given day

All of which exists now

 

[carlosthedwarf]

1. The disparity between the rich and poor clubs would probably rise significantly.

Would be an issue but this one

2. Some clubs would spend more than they can afford to compete and would be in even more financial strife than they are now.

is a far bigger issue. The salary cap protects clubs from themselves. If nothing else, that's a great reason to keep it.

 

[Clarke]

Terrible. Lack of understand from the outset in this thread.

 

[seanoff]

yeah, NO.

you'd have 2 or 3 clubs that just dominated. it wouldn't even be close.

the other 13 would either get flogged every time they played one of the "big" clubs or go broke trying to compete.

the salary cap is there for a reason. the NFL use the term "any given Sunday". they want their teams to compete every week of every year and have a shot.

baseball - AL East. it's a huge upset if the Yankees don't win it. Tampa are good every so often, Boston come and go, Toronto haven't been to the playoffs in 20 seasons and Baltimore are usually the whipping boy. why is this. because NYY often have a payroll that is the combined amount of Toronto, Baltimore and Tampa.

The EPL, Manchester United, then the billionaire playthings have brought some competition and Arsenal up until this year. that's it. everybody else plays for scraps, or even just to stay in given it is so lucrative.

can you imagine the crowd at NQ v GC if both teams hadn't even got close in 20 years. there'd be more dogs and possibly cats then people.

 

[Mader45]

What exactly would happen if there was no salary cap? ........ It just doesn't seem to work at all

9 different premiership winning teams since 2000 says otherwise. Other comps with caps have similar numbers.

Check out how many different teams have won La Liga, Serie A and the EPL (no cap) in that time.

 

[Knightmare]

The Storm "dominate" because they cheated. You can't tell me that if they had played by the rules of the competition they registered to play in, that Cronk, Slater and Smith would all play for them?

 

[Eion]

There's only 1 handicap here.

 

[Cerne Abbas Giant]

The Storm "dominate" because they cheated. You can't tell me that if they had played by the rules of the competition they registered to play in, that Cronk, Slater and Smith would all play for them?

Err.....see season 2012

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

I love the fact that the Broncos have to be shackled just because most of the other clubs can't turn a profit. it's like throwing weights on the most athletic student in the school because a kid with down syndrome is running in the same race.

 

[The Eagle]

I love the fact that the Broncos have to be shackled just because most of the other clubs can't turn a profit. it's like throwing weights on the most athletic student in the school because a kid with down syndrome is running in the same race.

Your lot ruined the game and is barely recovering, I'd love to see all super league clubs shut out of the comp and from any competitive league like they did to souffs, norths and others

I love how pathetic the broncos are today, they deserve to be pathetic as they are money grubbing merkins