Salary Cap Concessions For Local Juniors

[Acka]

Hi I'm just running a poll to see how people feel if there were salary cap concessions given to teams that produce their own players e.g develop their juniors instead of poaching players from other clubs or the bush.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

Tough question I am going to sit on the fence with this one, maybe if a club looses a player that they've had from Flegg and he goes onto 1st grade somewhere else the club that buys him has to pay the club a fee?

I think that this would be pretty fair.

But I am always very dubious in regards to concessions if clubs want a player they will keep him, simple as that.

 

[Mighty Tiger]

No, however they should change the current 10yr concesion to 12yrs and make that cover the full contract period for a player at a club no matter what grade he is playing(start from Matts,Ball, Flegg or Premier League etc)

This would then see that junior when he is around the 27-29yr becovered under the concesion list.

I would also have no limit on how many players a club can claim and not set limit as to how much a club could claim

I would keep the limit to a 10% concesion for all players that qualify for this exemption

Any higher and it could get out of hand quickly for clubs (which is why the salary cap was introduced in the 1st place for - to avoid teams funded by leagues clubs to avoid going banckrupt)

 

[The Engineers Room]

The issue is who is a local junior. I count it as the district where you first lace on a boot. So there would be no discount for players that come from the country areas of NSW. The local junior should also have to not have played at any level for another club (outside of the district).

This would mean very few players would be local juniors and in the Brisbane situation would their district be the small one around the local brisbane area (South East Division)? North Queensland on the other hand would get an enormous advantage. They have a huge local area. And NZ would be getting discounts for an entire nation, with Melbourne getting the whole state to themselves.

 

[Twizzle]

The issue is who is a local junior. .

thats really the crux of it

most players get recruited at 14 to 16,

being a 16 year old junior at a club thats been recreuited from the bush, doesn't really make a junior.

Other than that I support the rule, subject to the defininition of "local junior"

 

[The Colonel]

To offer a salary cap concession for local juniors you have to give everyone a fair and even playing field from which to start from. I'd guess a lot of clubs would be reluctant to give up their junior clubs to help othetr clubs without a big junior base.

 

[The Preacher]

A situation is in place at present where clubs pay a development fee if the take a player from another junior area, from Jersey Flegg down to Harold Matthews. If say The Rorters get a junior from The Swamp, they pay the Swamp $5k.
I believe if a player has been with one district through his junior footy, the seniors should not be penalised for having to pay NRL money levels as he goes through the grades. I think it should be something where the scale of the contract money to be counted in either the primary or secondary caps should decrease as the years of active service pass, to the stage where a ten year player does not have his salary included in the cap at all.
Just a thought.

 

[Misty Bee]

No.

 

[wittyfan]

The salary cap seems to be working pretty well as it is so there's no real need to change anything.

 

[ozzie]

And what do you do with the juniors that cannot be catered for by one club. After all Recruitment like the NFL is now a part of the game - love it or hate it. I would also suggest that there is not too many teams consisting soley of their own juniors.

It has been mentioned previously above that for this to work a level playing field has to be set which would mean that several clubs in the Souths area would return back to Easts. If you have a look at the junior area for the Roosters it also includes the CBD - sure going to get a club going there.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

The salary cap seems to be working pretty well as it is so there's no real need to change anything.

I agree and reiterate everyone faces a problem and if a club is desperate to keep a player of immense talent they will always find a way to do it.

If it means letting go of a couple of other decent players then so be it, unfortunately when a club does so they whinge like a stuck pig!

 

[sheet_ed]

What about Melbourne and Auckland? Sorry guys - these two teams get screwed because of their distance and small fan base in alien territory.

If you give that concessions then Fitzgerald will just winge (again) that Parramatta has more juniors than anyone else (don't know if it true) and Parramatta should get more money than anyone - screw that argument!!

Not even worth thinking about.

 

[Acka]

And what do you do with the juniors that cannot be catered for by one club. After all Recruitment like the NFL is now a part of the game - love it or hate it. I would also suggest that there is not too many teams consisting soley of their own juniors.

It has been mentioned previously above that for this to work a level playing field has to be set which would mean that several clubs in the Souths area would return back to Easts. If you have a look at the junior area for the Roosters it also includes the CBD - sure going to get a club going there.

14 out of the Dragons top 25 this year were local juniors. I'm just saying that clubs should be rewarded for developing their own talent. Look at the Dragons situation pretty much all of their players were either local juniors, came from the bush or were lower graders with other clubs they weren't going out and buying quality players left right and centre like other clubs E.G Roosters

 

[Dragonwest]

Clubs gets screwed either way. With concessions certain clubs will bitch, without other clubs will/are doing the same. I believe there should be some small concession, no more than 10% of a players worth. For example a club like dragons with bout 90% local juniors would gain a 300k advantage. Now i think that is fair for the work they put into youth developement and the continual loses of players they suffer every year.

This would also put clubs like the roosters in a situation whereby they can pump money into rural area to claim the rewards. Which would then become a win win situation for league nation wide. The NRL would need to focus on boundary distributions to keep it fair aswell.

 

[cookie36]

I think that firstly you need to ensure that all teams have the same opportunity to have a junior base, melb, auckland to a degree and some of the sydney clubs would then have to reassign their areas so it is a fair system. Secondly, do you really want to have clubs pick their own juniors before picking kids from the bush because they can get them cheaper. This I think would be playing into the AFL's hands.

 

[The Preacher]

Isn't Rugby League going to be huge in Victoria after the S.O.O. game in '06.
They'll have juniors jumping out of trees to play for The Shower.
Too Farkin Bad about them having no juniors, there shouldn't be a team down there anyway.
It is not, nor will League ever be, a national competition.
Face facts and relocate to where there are junior players without a club to call their own.

 

[ozzie]

14 out of the Dragons top 25 this year were local juniors. I'm just saying that clubs should be rewarded for developing their own talent. Look at the Dragons situation pretty much all of their players were either local juniors, came from the bush or were lower graders with other clubs they weren't going out and buying quality players left right and centre like other clubs E.G Roosters

no but what are you going to do with your juniors who can't get a game with you? Especially since Souths, etc are crying out for better players.

You may also note that the four clubs within Easts Territoy have all gained players and at a very good rate, however if clubs could do as well with the same amount of juniors then good luck to them.

Also what is different between us buying bush players and other lower players from other clubs. Have a good look at how long some of the Premier league team and JF have been with the club

 

[Acka]

I think that firstly you need to ensure that all teams have the same opportunity to have a junior base, melb, auckland to a degree and some of the sydney clubs would then have to reassign their areas so it is a fair system. Secondly, do you really want to have clubs pick their own juniors before picking kids from the bush because they can get them cheaper. This I think would be playing into the AFL's hands.

If the kids from the bush are good enough they still will get picked. On the Melbourne and Auckland question well Melbourne have feeder clubs in North Sydney in the NSW Premier League and Norths in the Queensland Cup and I think Auckland have a strong enough junior league

 

[Acka]

If the kids from the bush are good enough they still will get picked. On the Melbourne and Auckland question well Melbourne have feeder clubs in North Sydney in the NSW Premier League and Norths in the Queensland Cup and I think Auckland have a strong enough junior league

So if players that are local juniors for these clubs end up playing for Melbourne might be eligble for a salary cap discount

 

[The Engineers Room]

In terms of first graders in the NRL the best area is probably Newcastle.

Illawarra also has a few, as does Wests and Penrith out of the Sydney based clubs.

Of the current NRL crop Parramatta have less than 10 players that are from their junior base.

The real winner would be Nth Qld.