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!

Salary Cap Effectiveness

Springs09

Juniors
Messages
1,903
After what seems like a decade of Roosters/Storm domination I had a look back over ladder positions from the last 2 decades to see how well the salary cap is doing at what it aims to do - create an even spread of playing talent across the competition, making the comp close, competitive and fair.

Anyway, top 4 is usually the benchmark for a team's competitiveness that year when it comes to premierships, as no one is yet to win one from outside. From 2011 (when Melbourne started dominating again) this is how many times each team made the top 4:

Melbourne - 8
Sydney Roosters - 6
South Sydney - 5
Manly - 4
Brisbane - 3
North Queensland - 2
Canberra - 2
Cronulla - 2
Wests Tigers - 1
Canterbury - 1
Penrith - 1
Parramatta - 1
No Appearances: St George Illawarra, Gold Coast, New Zealand, Newcastle

This compared to the corresponding period last decade (2001-2009)
Canterbury - 5
Brisbane - 4
Sydney Roosters - 4
Melbourne - 4*
Newcastle - 3
Parramatta - 2
Cronulla - 2
New Zealand - 2
Penrith - 2
St George Illawarra - 2
Manly - 2
Canberra - 1
Wests Tigers - 1
North Queensland - 1
Gold Coast - 1
No Appearances: South Sydney

- 15 teams made the top 4 at least once from 2001-09 with the only exception being Souths who struggled after being readmitted to the comp. Only 12 have made the top 4 at least once from 2011-19 with Storm and Roosters both making it more times than any team from 01-09.
- Since 2013 only 2 teams have been minor premiers, Roosters 4 times and Melbourne 3 times. 6 different teams were minor premiers from 2001-09, no team won it 4 times, the closest being Melbourne at 3 but were cheating the cap at the time.
- Both teams had similar periods of dominance last decade, however Roosters only won 1 minor premiership and had several poor years afterwards while Melbourne's dominant period was when they were cheating the salary cap.
- Aside from their disrupted year in 2016, Roosters have not finished lower than 2nd every other year since 2013.
- Storm, Roosters and Souths have all made over 5 prelim finals in the last 9 years, with Storm the most at 7. No team made 5 prelims from 2001-09.
- 7 teams have made the top 8 less than 3 times since 2011, with Titans only once (due to the Eels' salary cap drama), Warriors only once since 2012 (coming 8th), Tigers 8 straight without a top 8 appearance and Knights 6 straight without a top 8 appearance.
- From 2001-09, only 5 teams made the top 8 less than 3 times, one of them being Gold Coast who only came in in 2007. Tigers only made it once but that came with a premiership, Penrith only twice but including a premiership and minor premiership, and Cowboys made it three times, making the prelim all three times and the GF once.

Of course, there's a lot more to these results than just the salary cap working or not working. But is dominance like this good for the game? Dynasties can be enjoyable but how long can they last before fans start getting sick of them? How many neutrals are looking forward to seeing the Roosters or Storm in the GF once again? Will the Roosters and Storm eventually come back to the playing field or will they be top 4 bound for years to come?

For example, you'd think the salary cap would even out such things as Melbourne being able to keep the best hooker of all time in Cameron Smith who seems to want to play until he is 40, current NZ international hooker Brandon Smith and apparent best player in the QLD cup and former NYC player of the year hooker Harry Grant.
 

yobbo84

First Grade
Messages
9,885
From our original 2012 Top 4 finish, there are only 4 players who remain at the Rabbitohs:

Sam Burgess
Adam Reynolds
John Sutton (retiring)
George Burgess (leaving)

Heck, after this year we'll only have 4 players left from our 2014 premiership team (Alex Johnston, Adam Reynolds, Sam Burgess, Tom Burgess).

That's a pretty big turnover in 5 years. I'd say the salary cap is working fine.

Some clubs are just run better than others.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,957
The salary cap is loose enough that well run clubs can still retain great talent, rich clubs can also spend a lot more off the field which has a direct influence on the field (check out how well Olympic hosting nations do when they pump money into Olympic sports from 8 years out). Winning and losing has many variables not cap related - coaching, talent scouting, preparation, club culture, training facilities, captains leadership etc etc

I dont mind dynasty's as long as they only 5 or so years, gets a bit stale after that, especially if you have two at same time dominating.

On the plus side having such a successful team in AFL heartland has helped the games growth enormously so not all bad news!
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,325
A salary cap on its own doesn't distribute talent ideally. Organisations that manage their cap best will naturally be ahead of another that doesn't.

Excatly. In other words it hasn't worked.
The thing it is supposed to do is give each clubs fans hope that their club will be good if not now at least reasonably soon. But fans of clubs are actually thinking the top clubs are cheating and (at least with Roosters) they will poach our best players in due course.
A draft would be better.
 

siv

First Grade
Messages
6,563
No the underlying issue has been the % increase across the two recent TV deals

The last deal jumped the base salary cap by a staggering 27% in one season

This had the effect of giving stars a good % increase so they didn't feel they needed to leave for more money

On the converse you had clubs who over paid players on potential that didn't eventuate
 

adamkungl

Immortal
Messages
42,955
If there was a draft, the fruitloops who make up the majority of the NRL fanbase would somehow convince themselves we're cheating that too.

But lets see how that would pan out anyway, we have a pretty good example...

Gold Coast had cash to spend
They bought themselves the player who they considered to be the best young player available, Ash Taylor
They actually got worse, and tanked his career too

And you people want to give this mob the best young players every year! Surely that's a human rights violation
 

adamkungl

Immortal
Messages
42,955
Its the 3rd party deals that are the killer. This was last years, no one could say with a straight face that this is accurate. The Roosters dont seem to have many 3rd parties which is utter nonsense unless all their roster are playing for unders. - BIG unders.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2018/12/13...ents-public-and-strengthens-contract-process/

I'm all for the NRL publishing every players club salaries but what's the point if people are going to FAKE NEWS it because it doesn't fit the rorting narrative they've constructed in their heads?
 

TheVelourFog

First Grade
Messages
5,061
A better indicator would be Premiership wins in that time period, and there is a fairly good spread

Nobody cares who came 3rd in a season.
 

Knight Vision

First Grade
Messages
5,066
If there was a draft, the fruitloops who make up the majority of the NRL fanbase would somehow convince themselves we're cheating that too.

But lets see how that would pan out anyway, we have a pretty good example...

Gold Coast had cash to spend
They bought themselves the player who they considered to be the best young player available, Ash Taylor
They actually got worse, and tanked his career too

And you people want to give this mob the best young players every year! Surely that's a human rights violation
Please give me a run down on how much you think each of your top 17 are on. I'd love to see how you can fit the Roosters roster under the cap. By my calculations nearly half the cap is gone on 5- 6 players. Only 3rd party deals could allow the Roosters to keep that roster together- not that there's anything wrong with it
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
Before we talk about the EFFECTIVENESS of the salary cap, we need to agree on the GOAL of the salary cap.

Is it now about redistributing talent? Or, like when it was first introduced, is it meant to stop clubs spend money the dont have?

Then we should be asking IF and WHY we want that.

THEN we can ask if it is effective or not......

I think no one is really sure what the cap is for, but no one can be bothered to look into it. Its just easier to leave it as it is.
 

Springs09

Juniors
Messages
1,903
A better indicator would be Premiership wins in that time period, and there is a fairly good spread

Nobody cares who came 3rd in a season.

No it wouldn't. Premiership wins can come from one alright year and a couple good games at the end. Not the same as consistently winning 3/4 of your games year after year.
 

Someguy

First Grade
Messages
6,793
Tom Brady was a 7th round draft pick so effectively the majority of teams had 6 chances to get him...they didn’t. Way I see it is the patriots saw talent there but knew no one else would take him so left it till last pick. Introducing a draft will fix nothing, just help the teams that are currently at the top due to recruitment skills, dumb teams will draft a ‘future superstar’ and blow their cap on them or players drafted to a weak team will tank untill released then become stars at a top team.
 

TheVelourFog

First Grade
Messages
5,061
No it wouldn't. Premiership wins can come from one alright year and a couple good games at the end. Not the same as consistently winning 3/4 of your games year after year.

ask a Sharks fan whether they care that they got the spoon in 2014 anymore
 
Top