What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Players agree to pay cut

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,285
In the context of this conversation, who cares how they act?

The fact is SOO generates $X income per year and the players are the primary reason for that.

It would be like saying Tom Cruise doesn't deserve a percentage of the box office for one of his movies because he is an asshole.

No its not. Its like saying some new guy who has never acted in a movie steps into the role of James Bond and deserves the same pay that the legendary James Bonds of the past have gotten.
The history of SoO and the old legends is the reason everyone loves SoO. Almost any players could step in and play it and the fans would tune in.
 

Exsilium

First Grade
Messages
9,552
What they’re not telling you is that Bradley Parker didn’t have to give up 6% of his salary.
 

Spot On

Coach
Messages
13,900
No its not. Its like saying some new guy who has never acted in a movie steps into the role of James Bond and deserves the same pay that the legendary James Bonds of the past have gotten.
The history of SoO and the old legends is the reason everyone loves SoO. Almost any players could step in and play it and the fans would tune in.

End thread.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,759
how much revenue to origin bring in this year given the reduced capacities and whatever tv rights bullshit 9 and Fox pulled?

were not talking a pay cut for last year, it’s for the this and next. Which makes me suspect the tv deal Vlandys has agreed to is shthouse.we don’t know if crowds will back or not.
 

Valheru

Coach
Messages
17,594
No its not. Its like saying some new guy who has never acted in a movie steps into the role of James Bond and deserves the same pay that the legendary James Bonds of the past have gotten.
The history of SoO and the old legends is the reason everyone loves SoO. Almost any players could step in and play it and the fans would tune in.

No they wouldn't

If the best 34 players were not available there would be less people watching.
 
Messages
13,584
No its not. Its like saying some new guy who has never acted in a movie steps into the role of James Bond and deserves the same pay that the legendary James Bonds of the past have gotten.
The history of SoO and the old legends is the reason everyone loves SoO. Almost any players could step in and play it and the fans would tune in.

Did you know that George Lazenby played James Bond without previously being in any single movie or having a shred of acting experience?

What you are describing, actually happened.
 

10$ Ferret

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
1,109
When you (the players) are the literal reason the money is being generated then you deserve a slice of the pie.

NO
Its the game that generates the money not the players themselves. Yes I know, without the players there is not game. But without the U6s through to A grade there is no game.
The players change every year and are expendable.

Don't forget they are sharing too much of a percentage of a revenue pie that doesn't really exist in the NRL comp
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,285
No they wouldn't

If the best 34 players were not available there would be less people watching.

If there was a mass exodus of otherwise available players it would affect the value because that would signal to everyone it does not matter much any more. If players retire (like Cam Smith) or leave the sport like Folau and Karmichael Hunt the SOO is fine. You could have a case where 34 players just happen to retire at the same time and SOO would be fine the next year.
 
Messages
12,629
In the context of this conversation, who cares how they act?

The fact is SOO generates $X income per year and the players are the primary reason for that.

It would be like saying Tom Cruise doesn't deserve a percentage of the box office for one of his movies because he is an asshole.
Origin is what it is because the NSWRL raped and pillaged the BRL for years, creating resentment north of the Tweed. When it was created in 1980 the pundits in NSW said it wouldn't last. Queensland started flogging NSW and it became the pinnacle of the game.
 
Messages
12,629
Was this because the NSWRL was richer due to having poker machines when Queensland did not?
If so it is another good moral based argument for more QLD teams and less Sydney teams.
Yes. Queensland didn't legalise gaming machines until the 1990s. NSW had them from the mid-50s.

In the perfect scenario there would be 6 or 7 teams in Sydney and 3 in Brisbane, leaving plenty of room for expansion in NZ, Perth and even Adelaide.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,759
NO
Its the game that generates the money not the players themselves. Yes I know, without the players there is not game. But without the U6s through to A grade there is no game.
The players change every year and are expendable.

Don't forget they are sharing too much of a percentage of a revenue pie that doesn't really exist in the NRL comp

i wouldn’t say 20% is too much. For most human services businesses staff salaries account for around 60-75% of expenditure. The players are the games biggest asset, good luck getting $500mill plus revenue without them.
 
Top