Salary Cap promotes mediocrity

[firechild]

We could always have competition like the AFL. Over there teams are winning by up to 200 points, might as well have Collingwood playing against the local under 9s team. It's great that on their day, Parra can give Melbourne a run (and actually have a good lead during the 2nd half). I think that overall the salary cap has worked (at least when clubs have adhered to it).

 

[juro]

I'd much rather have the salary cap, flawed though it may be, than open slather where only the rich teams can succeed.

However, with the eventual increase in the cap, I hope they institute a few changes such as long service discounts. As for giving discounts for juniors, I think this would unfairly advantage some teams such as Brisbane who have massive juniors bases to pick from.

 

[Noa]

I'd much rather have the salary cap, flawed though it may be, than open slather where only the rich teams can succeed.

However, with the eventual increase in the cap, I hope they institute a few changes such as long service discounts. As for giving discounts for juniors, I think this would unfairly advantage some teams such as Brisbane who have massive juniors bases to pick from.

As Ike said make it development based, maybe they have to appear in the NYC for said club to qualify as a junior, rather then geographical which clubs really have no bearing on when it comes down to it. This would eliminate your fears.

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

As Ike said make it development based, maybe they have to appear in the NYC for said club to qualify as a junior, rather then geographical which clubs really have no bearing on when it comes down to it. This would eliminate your fears.

No bearing for Melbourne at least...
It's a very complicated subject and as long as an equitable balance is found, it would only benefit the game.

The salary cap (if adhered to) does a reasonably good job achieving this.
The fact that club grants will exceed the cap under the new Tele rights deal (and it damn well should) will only serve to further level the playing field.

 

[Ozzy]

I agree, however i don't want to see kids of 14 signed up on $500 contracts so clubs can hoard as many of them as possible.

if a player has been developed by a club that club should be rewarded




i always wondered about this, it was essentially Terry Hill vs the NSWRL. my understanding is the AFL draft is accepted and not challenged by players, but theoretically if it were challenged in the same manner it should fail as well.

could the draft be slightly re-written to stop players being able to challenge it? could it be something the NRL implements which states "under our contract this is our rule so you either accept it or don't play in the NRL"?

That is my understanding as well. From what I remember Terry Hill challlenged it as a restriction of trade. Not sure but I have a feeling that forcing a player to accept or not, might not be legal.

 

[juro]

As Ike said make it development based, maybe they have to appear in the NYC for said club to qualify as a junior, rather then geographical which clubs really have no bearing on when it comes down to it. This would eliminate your fears.

Is there some rule as to how many players can be selected at NYC level? Taken to the extreme, a club could choose 17 different players every week, giving a massive number of juniors, just to rort the cap at the senior level. I guess a simple way of negating this is to say the junior needs to play say 10 games at NYC level to qualify for cap concessions.

 

[myanonymoususername]

The only reason the salary cap promotes mediocrity is that it is set at the level the most mediocre club can afford. I think it should be higher - and stretch the bottom few clubs to work harder at getting the finances to compete with the stronger clubs.

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

i always wondered about this, it was essentially Terry Hill vs the NSWRL. my understanding is the AFL draft is accepted and not challenged by players, but theoretically if it were challenged in the same manner it should fail as well.

could the draft be slightly re-written to stop players being able to challenge it? could it be something the NRL implements which states "under our contract this is our rule so you either accept it or don't play in the NRL"?

Don't the AFL players sign off on a conditional agreement that to play the game they accept the salary cap?

The salary cap goes hand in hand with a draft and to have a salary cap with no draft is just stupid and the Greg Inglis situation is a perfect example. The salary cap as it also does not spread the talent it just sends it to the UK and France.

 

[Pierced Soul]

Don't the AFL players sign off on a conditional agreement that to play the game they accept the salary cap?

thats what i thought may be the situation re:afl but since i dont follow that crap game i don't know how it works.

if a draft is a restriction of trade wouldnt a salary cap?

 

[Eels Dude]

Such a weird mentality.You only have these juniors because the clubs were set up in large population bases, doesnt give you a god-given right to keep them all. And yeah you spend money on them but what other way are you going to engage with the community. In the end you nearly always get first shot at them anyway so its no-one elses fault that you continually choose the wrong ones. And if there werent clubs with smaller bases taking these kids theyd go play another sport or be lost to the game all together.

Well it's not just about juniors it's about all young players youm develop. A sympathise with the Roosters for example. Everyone says they steal other clubs juniors but they really don't have a choice because their catchment area is so small compared to the other Sydney clubs. But clubs, including yours, also spend a lot on junior recruitment from country areas etc and snap up these 16 or 17 year old players then and there. How is it fair if 2 years later once they're developed and ready for first grade they go into a lottery as to which clubs get them.

Anyway, a draft was deemed a restraint of trade wasn't it? Someone more informed could remind or confirm for me but wasn't it Terry Hill who successfully challenged it in court after he was forced to sign for a club he didn't want to play for.

 

[mepelthwack]

our best teams in 2011 are not as good .. relative to the best teams of 1991
no question ...

but our worst teams of 2011 .. are a heck of a lot better then the worst teams of 1991

same number of quality players today
just spread between 16 teams .... not 4

fans vote with their feet , they want to know their team is some chance of winning most weeks ... no game is a foregone conclusion
in 2011 this is the case

in 1991.... there were heaps of games not worth watching due to the imbalance of the rosters
& crowds stayed away

while I am a Raiders fan & our great sides of the past were legendary
I much prefer 2011
not a shadow of a doubt.

I think you nailed it.

Well said

 

[BunniesMan]

Developing young players (by young I mean teens under 18) shouldn't be the responsibility of the clubs. The NRL/ARL/CRL should be doing that, that way we can have a draft and clubs cant sook about losing players they invested in.

 

[adamkungl]

The only reason the salary cap promotes mediocrity is that it is set at the level the most mediocre club can afford. I think it should be higher - and stretch the bottom few clubs to work harder at getting the finances to compete with the stronger clubs.

This is actually not a bad idea imo. Although I'm guessing advocates of a points system wouldn't agree.

 

[adamkungl]

Developing young players (by young I mean teens under 18) shouldn't be the responsibility of the clubs. The NRL/ARL/CRL should be doing that, that way we can have a draft and clubs cant sook about losing players they invested in.

Disagree entirely.

Don't want a draft. I like the fact that juniors are brought the the club all the way from the bottom, even though my own club doesn't have a whole lot.

Cap exemptions for juniors are the way to go.

 

[Big Pete]

I agree that the NRL should invest more money on juniors, don't like the idea of a draft though.

 

[Billythekid]

The salary cap isn't causing mediocrity at all. The much bigger problem is that the game simply hasn't had enough money and we need to keep the salary cap low because some clubs are struggling.

Even with these concerns the comp is far better now then it was in the past. Yeah we don't just have a couple of teams hoarding entire rep teams (who the hell wants this anway?) but there are far more worthwhile games now then there have ever been.

I think a much bigger concern is the lack of a second grade below the NRL (the toyota cup isn't enough).

Don't the AFL players sign off on a conditional agreement that to play the game they accept the salary cap?

The salary cap goes hand in hand with a draft and to have a salary cap with no draft is just stupid and the Greg Inglis situation is a perfect example. The salary cap as it also does not spread the talent it just sends it to the UK and France.

That isn't because we have a salary cap. That is because the game and the clubs simply haven't had enough money. Once we get a our big tv deal and clubs actually start increasing their memberships this problem will go away.

Also keep the draft far away form the NRL. I can't stand it in any other sport and i don't want it in ours.