No salary cap whatsoever - would it be so bad?

[Feej]

I'm not convinced by any of these arguments, if clubs fold tough shit, the fans of said team don't deserve a team because they can't support them, should have played more pokies at the leagues club.
They should fold and fall into a qld- cup level tournament and struggle and strive to get back into the big league. That can remain the dream of their die-hard fans. Meanwhile new clubs would naturally emerge where they can be supported- more qld teams, a papua new guinean team or two, etc.
It would be a survival of the fittest situation. Ofcourse it would be good for the game because we wouldn't lose any stars to other codes like we have been, in fact we'd be poaching players from other codes.

It's so counter productive to shackle the top popular successful clubs to help the dead weight unpopular unsuccessful shitty clubs, this is just obvious indisputable logic. Clearly it is bad for rugby league. How about unpopular shitty unsuccessful clubs can eff off and stop holding everything down? Duh. This game is run by morons, and that's why it's the best sport in the world with the emptiest stadiums and the most frustrated fans.

Oh, so you support the Bronco's too?

 

[bileduct]

I'm not convinced by any of these arguments, if clubs fold tough shit

Enjoy your two club competition then.

 

[ethan tremblay]

id rather see 12 good teams then 16 with 5 good teams and the rest mediocre some of the players today wouldn't even dominate country footy

 

[Eion]

I'm not convinced by any of these arguments, if clubs fold tough shit, the fans of said team don't deserve a team because they can't support them, should have played more pokies at the leagues club.
They should fold and fall into a qld- cup level tournament and struggle and strive to get back into the big league. That can remain the dream of their die-hard fans. Meanwhile new clubs would naturally emerge where they can be supported- more qld teams, a papua new guinean team or two, etc.
It would be a survival of the fittest situation. Ofcourse it would be good for the game because we wouldn't lose any stars to other codes like we have been, in fact we'd be poaching players from other codes.

It's so counter productive to shackle the top popular successful clubs to help the dead weight unpopular unsuccessful shitty clubs, this is just obvious indisputable logic. Clearly it is bad for rugby league. How about unpopular shitty unsuccessful clubs can eff off and stop holding everything down? Duh. This game is run by morons, and that's why it's the best sport in the world with the emptiest stadiums and the most frustrated fans.

A PNG team or 2? You have really lost the plot tone. Think I'll take the current morons running the game over you.

 

[eozsmiles]

Doesn't the salary cap shackle the teams at the bottom? The ones a the top have good players, coaches, sponsors, thoroughbred clubs, structures, etc etc etc

Who was the last big name play maker to change clubs?

 

[whall15]

What's the definition of developed though? Canterbury signing a 18 year old JT? Our a guy coming through from u12s

Where they first debut in a comp from SG Ball up.

 

[Vic Mackey]

I don't like how in soccer a top club can hoarde about 50 great players just so other teams can't have them, you could make rules where reserves can't be paid more than 75 k or something like that. But the top 17 should be open slather.

Clubs that suck and would lose 80- 0 like I said would fall back into a sub-league that isn't even shown on television where they compete to get into the top league. There would naturally be some major adjustments that organically took place, clubs dying and others springing into life, but there's no reason to fear that. If a club wants to die, let it die. Why keep it on life support and meanwhile make sure the top teams are handicapped to resemble coma patients as well? So idiotic it's laughable.

Is there a ranking list of nrl clubs from richest to poorest? I bet you could move the bottom 8 to somewhere else, change their name, and make them wildly successful.

You have posted 2 of the single worst posts in LU history.

Ok so a team like manly struggles and gets beaten 80-0 every week. You then shift them off to some random qld cup comp and bring up who???? Wingham? Who then lose every game next year 100-0.

Off your logic there would be like 3 strong teams, then the rest multiple teams running round with guys like Ben Rogers being their star players.

You say that teams can spend whatever they want on the top 17 and then only $75k max on other squad members...hmm you know what sounds like....A SALARY CAP!!!!

Your proposed system could not even go close to working and the logic is beyond stupid. I sincerely hope you are still drunk from last night

 

[Canard]

Where they first debut in a comp from SG Ball up.

There is 5 clubs at least on the NRL that don't compete in that comp.

 

[JamesBrandy]

There definitely has to be a salary cap. Otherwise St George's 11 premierships in a row record might be threatened.

I think they should increase the salary cap and ease up on 3rd party payments.
For clubs that bring rep players through the ranks they should get an exemption for, there's not enough 1 club players anymore.

I'd also like to see a marquee player allowance. 1 player per club doesn't come under the salary cap, and you can pay them 2 mill a year if you want to.

 

[Loudstrat]

I'm not convinced by any of these arguments, if clubs fold tough shit, the fans of said team don't deserve a team because they can't support them, should have played more pokies at the leagues club.

Melbourne, Gold Coast and Canberra would probably fold first. Do you really want that?

They should fold and fall into a qld- cup level tournament and struggle and strive to get back into the big league. That can remain the dream of their die-hard fans. Meanwhile new clubs would naturally emerge where they can be supported- more qld teams, a papua new guinean team or two, etc.
It would be a survival of the fittest situation.

Like the Crushers - that Brisbane started the SL war over in the mother of all tantrums? Or the Gold Coast - who are struggling on their fourth attempt? :lol:

Ofcourse it would be good for the game because we wouldn't lose any stars to other codes like we have been, in fact we'd be poaching players from other codes.

Some facts

• We have not lost a player we could not afford to lose.
• Apart from the brainless dribbler with his named on his back, we have only lost Queensland wingers, unwanted discards and old farts topping up their pension
• No player has come back anywhere near the skill level of then they left - except Matt Rogers
• What player do we need to poach from another code anyway?

It's so counter productive to shackle the top popular successful clubs to help the dead weight unpopular unsuccessful shitty clubs, this is just obvious indisputable logic. Clearly it is bad for rugby league. How about unpopular shitty unsuccessful clubs can eff off and stop holding everything down? Duh. This game is run by morons, and that's why it's the best sport in the world with the emptiest stadiums and the most frustrated fans.

Second to their club, fans love competition. This century, of the 14 teams that have competed every year since 2001, only the Raiders haven't been to a GF. Wests, Easts and Saints won their first premierships in decades. And Brisbane - for all its glut of resources - have been to less grand finals than Parra and the Warriors!

If a club wants to die, let it die.

What club wants to die you f*cking genius???????????

Is there a ranking list of nrl clubs from richest to poorest? I bet you could move the bottom 8 to somewhere else, change their name, and make them wildly successful.

I can see Cronulla suddenly becoming AC Milan from Group 7 :crazy:

So you really want an 8 team comp? :lol::lol:

 

[Mader45]

Who was the last big name play maker to change clubs?

You serious? Inglis to Souths. Idris to Titans. Lewis and Carney to Cronulla. Civoneciva to Panthers was massive. Boyd to Knights.

Marshall, Hayne, Slater and most of the 'stars' of the game have been at their clubs long term or are juniors. These moves are minimal because they generate most of the teams profit, so they sacrifice everything they can for them. Even two premierships...

 

[POPEYE]

What's the definition of developed though? Canterbury signing a 18 year old JT? Our a guy coming through from u12s

This is where the ARLC should apply boundaries. JT was only signed by the Dogs at the beginning because he played for free and only then 29
matches in 3 years. For a club to claim a player cap free that player should have played a required number of games per season wearing a
number 17 or under. He went from #18 in a Doggie pissant cup to a starting half at the Cowboys so NQ are entitled to put their brand on him.

 

[rabbitohs95]

Still need a cap but maybe raise it up, again like what the RLPA wants, $6.5 or something like that.

 

[betcats]

Doesn't the salary cap shackle the teams at the bottom? The ones a the top have good players, coaches, sponsors, thoroughbred clubs, structures, etc etc etc

Who was the last big name play maker to change clubs?

Must be troll post.

 

[betcats]

You serious? Inglis to Souths. Idris to Titans. Lewis and Carney to Cronulla. Civoneciva to Panthers was massive. Boyd to Knights.

Marshall, Hayne, Slater and most of the 'stars' of the game have been at their clubs long term or are juniors. These moves are minimal because they generate most of the teams profit, so they sacrifice everything they can for them. Even two premierships...

Folau to broncos was big. Scott Prince to tits was big. We have clubs
chasing JT already.

What team has seriusly been shackled to the bottom?

 

[IanG]

You would have what you get in European Soccer where only 4 clubs would be in contention. In fatc I've heard suggestions that the Broncos would be unstoppable.

 

[mongoose]

Melbourne, Gold Coast and Canberra would probably fold first. Do you really want that?
Like the Crushers - that Brisbane started the SL war over in the mother of all tantrums? Or the Gold Coast - who are struggling on their fourth attempt? :lol:


Some facts

• We have not lost a player we could not afford to lose.
• Apart from the brainless dribbler with his named on his back, we have only lost Queensland wingers, unwanted discards and old farts topping up their pension
• No player has come back anywhere near the skill level of then they left - except Matt Rogers
• What player do we need to poach from another code anyway?

Second to their club, fans love competition. This century, of the 14 teams that have competed every year since 2001, only the Raiders haven't been to a GF. Wests, Easts and Saints won their first premierships in decades. And Brisbane - for all its glut of resources - have been to less grand finals than Parra and the Warriors!


What club wants to die you f*cking genius???????????


I can see Cronulla suddenly becoming AC Milan from Group 7 :crazy:

So you really want an 8 team comp? :lol::lol:

Canberra are actually probably the second most financially viable club after Brisbane. No idea.

 

[bartman]

Err.....see season 2012

:lol: lol.

 

[Loudstrat]

Canberra are actually probably the second most financially viable club after Brisbane. No idea.

Yes, it shows. Your biggest signing in the last decade was Matt Orford :lol:

 

[Miller was a legend]

Yes, it shows. Your biggest signing in the last decade was Matt Orford :lol:

Don't forget dummy spit fergobinks!