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!

Rumours and Stuff

LyonHeart

Juniors
Messages
150
His first contract with us was on the development list. Of course he wasn’t on anything like $500k. But then he was upgraded and extended seven months later (as an 80 minute starter), which was four months before he went on the open market.

The salary cap forces clubs to spend their whole cap. This is why every top 17 player is on such big contracts. You can’t just lowball every merkin and come in $2M under the cap. 97.5% of it needs to be spent.
I get what your saying about the cap, but you just don't hand out $500k contracts to spend your cap. If you need to spend your cap, front load some of your big players and have more to spend the following season. There is no way Kitone is on $500k, Tuilagi and Kitone would be on about $500-$600k combined
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
100,116
I get what your saying about the cap, but you just don't hand out $500k contracts to spend your cap. If you need to spend your cap, front load some of your big players and have more to spend the following season. There is no way Kitone is on $500k, Tuilagi and Kitone would be on about $500-$600k combined
Yeah maybe not Kautoga, but Tuilagi would be for sure. I reckon $900k combined. Both regularly play 80 minutes.
 

85 Baby

Juniors
Messages
2,474
I get what your saying about the cap, but you just don't hand out $500k contracts to spend your cap. If you need to spend your cap, front load some of your big players and have more to spend the following season. There is no way Kitone is on $500k, Tuilagi and Kitone would be on about $500-$600k combined
I was going to suggest Kautoga may be one of the ones frontloaded, but that runs the risk of the Dylan Brown Falsity (IMO) where you get stuck always paying the player in advance of what they are worth.
If you’re going to frontload anyone, but especially a rookie, the conversation needs to be explicit that the increased value is under the assumption that future contracts may/probably not being to the same exorbitant increase.
But the “ideal” scenario would be something like Kautoga is on $500k (or whatever value above what you consider he’s worth) in 2026 (when there’s not really anyone else we can sign to adequately take up cap) and then in 2027 he’s on $300k (or whatever you consider to be below his worth). Moves salary into a year where you can’t use it more effectively.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
100,116
But the “ideal” scenario would be something like Kautoga is on $500k (or whatever value above what you consider he’s worth) in 2026 (when there’s not really anyone else we can sign to adequately take up cap) and then in 2027 he’s on $300k (or whatever you consider to be below his worth). Moves salary into a year where you can’t use it more effectively.
This is the only reason frontloading would work. It can't mean overpaying the player for an entire contract, because next time he's off contract it's irrelevant. His demands will be based on rival offers (even if they are 'informal'). Clubs need to maximise value within the duration of the contract.

Frontloading also benefits the player because, if they are smart with their money, they can invest more earlier to take advantage of expected asset inflation. The problem for clubs is that the player might decide he is 'homesick' in later years, after his effective salary has declined, and he then gains the benefit of the frontloading while the club loses the benefit. This is why negotiations with trusted players would be very different to negotiations with strangers (most external signings).
 

Delboy

First Grade
Messages
8,773
That's a good point. Hanging around junior footy tells you nothing about this stuff. You would just hear more shit rumours.
Keep saying crap as usual, I have nothing to do with junior footy other than watching occasionally. You are a deluded fool who tries to demean other posters with your posts stating you are obviously correct as you do the math or whatever. Just for once , you are wrong, nothing more to add.

By the way, what’s wrong with being interested in junior sport, always thought it was good work, not to be laughed at as you do. Just realise you are not educating anyone, just continually blowing smoke up your own rear end.
 

Cloeel

Juniors
Messages
932
This is the only reason frontloading would work. It can't mean overpaying the player for an entire contract, because next time he's off contract it's irrelevant. His demands will be based on rival offers (even if they are 'informal'). Clubs need to maximise value within the duration of the contract.

Frontloading also benefits the player because, if they are smart with their money, they can invest more earlier to take advantage of expected asset inflation. The problem for clubs is that the player might decide he is 'homesick' in later years, after his effective salary has declined, and he then gains the benefit of the frontloading while the club loses the benefit. This is why negotiations with trusted players would be very different to negotiations with strangers (most external signings).

Sometimes the most leverage a player has is a club who needs to spend money under their cap to comply.

Exactly why there is a market for mediocre players bouncing from club to club on short term deals.
 

85 Baby

Juniors
Messages
2,474
This is the only reason frontloading would work. It can't mean overpaying the player for an entire contract, because next time he's off contract it's irrelevant. His demands will be based on rival offers (even if they are 'informal'). Clubs need to maximise value within the duration of the contract.
I absolutely think it’s at risk of players misunderstanding how much a club values them. To ignore its relevance runs the risk of tHe ClUb LoWbALlEd Me!
It also runs the risk of expecting (or even operatively requiring) continuing the practice in future contracts. It may be the case that due to changing balances in squad, that the player who was frontloaded, now needs to be backloaded.
You should know this better than most, just because you see something that makes perfect sense, doesn’t make it an easy sell to the person affected.
Frontloading also benefits the player because, if they are smart with their money, they can invest more earlier to take advantage of expected asset inflation. The problem for clubs is that the player might decide he is 'homesick' in later years, after his effective salary has declined, and he then gains the benefit of the frontloading while the club loses the benefit. This is why negotiations with trusted players would be very different to negotiations with strangers (most external signings).
Would you consider Kautoga a trusted player then?
I would also say rather than just risk mitigating it to who you trust, it can also be a tool in cultivating trust with those you don’t yet.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
100,116
Keep saying crap as usual, I have nothing to do with junior footy other than watching occasionally. You are a deluded fool who tries to demean other posters with your posts stating you are obviously correct as you do the math or whatever.
I am never obviously correct. I make assessments. We can never know whether they were correct. The fact you can't understand that points to why plenty of merkins here don't like the way I post.

Here's a very simple analogy that might help you understand my point here.

Suppose you're having a punt and you see a team is listed at $3.50 to win that weekend. You assess that they are good value, and they really should be worth about $2. Is there any way to prove you were right? If you back them and they win, does it say anything at all about what price they should have been? If they lose, does it confirm anything? I assume you'll make a smartarse reply instead of answering, so I'll answer for you. All three answers are no. In the same way, I'm not ever 'obviously correct' in my analysis here. I'm just better at explaining my logic. It makes a few merkins feel stupid or like I think their opinions don't matter, and for that I apologise to you personally.
Just for once , you are wrong, nothing more to add.

By the way, what’s wrong with being interested in junior sport, always thought it was good work, not to be laughed at as you do. Just realise you are not educating anyone, just continually blowing smoke up your own rear end.
Volunteering with kids' sport is God's work. I used to do it myself and I still admire it greatly. But there are people who do it for the wrong reasons and they tend to overinflate their importance and how connected they are. Be careful trusting these people. You should trust me instead.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
100,116
I absolutely think it’s at risk of players misunderstanding how much a club values them. To ignore its relevance runs the risk of tHe ClUb LoWbALlEd Me!
The player only needs to think the club values them more than any rivals. But I don't think any club will have success if it needs to be the highest bidder to keep its own players.
It also runs the risk of expecting (or even operatively requiring) continuing the practice in future contracts. It may be the case that due to changing balances in squad, that the player who was frontloaded, now needs to be backloaded.
You should know this better than most, just because you see something that makes perfect sense, doesn’t make it an easy sell to the person affected.
In the end, a player either understands the way the salary cap motivates clubs or he doesn't. And rival clubs are also motivated the same way. If Crichton or Luai want to go somewhere more desperate, that's their business.
Would you consider Kautoga a trusted player then?
Probably not yet but you never know. He went from a nobody to an NRL player in half a season. There was probably some euphoria and he might think it's all about Ryles and the club. There could be a few bromances involved.
I would also say rather than just risk mitigating it to who you trust, it can also be a tool in cultivating trust with those you don’t yet.
Good point
 

85 Baby

Juniors
Messages
2,474
The player only needs to think the club values them more than any rivals. But I don't think any club will have success if it needs to be the highest bidder to keep its own players.
We’re in court dealing currently with the intelligence levels of players. I can definitely foresee a player asking why they only getting $400k (of a 3 year $1.2m deal) when last contract they got $500k (of a 3 year $1.1m deal). Not all players but it only takes one disgruntled player to muddy everything.
In the end, a player either understands the way the salary cap motivates clubs or he doesn't. And rival clubs are also motivated the same way. If Crichton or Luai want to go somewhere more desperate, that's their business.
My point is more around educating the player around the circumstances.
Probably not yet but you never know. He went from a nobody to an NRL player in half a season. There was probably some euphoria and he might think it's all about Ryles and the club. There could be a few bromances involved.
Good if true.
Good point
See @Delboy it is possible
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
100,116
We’re in court dealing currently with the intelligence levels of players. I can definitely foresee a player asking why they only getting $400k (of a 3 year $1.2m deal) when last contract they got $500k (of a 3 year $1.1m deal). Not all players but it only takes one disgruntled player to muddy everything.
Surely this is part of negotiations, but they have managers to advise them on what is and isn't a good deal. If they won't listen to good advice (or just reason), do we even want them? Plenty of players would be more trouble than they’re worth.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
100,116
Tuilagi played 80 mins regulary? maybe in Dog years.

Kelma played 80 mins in 3 games all season
This was before he re-signed. They're not going to take money off him just because we have better forward depth now.

R12, 2024: 73 minutes
R13, 2024: 80 minutes
R14: 2024: 80 minutes
R15, 2024: 70 minutes (injured and missed the next two months)
R24, 2024: 55 minutes
R25, 2024: 80 minutes
R27, 2024: 80 minutes

December 2024: Parramatta Eels extend Kelma Tuilagi
 
Top