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

Status
Not open for further replies.

lingard

Coach
Messages
11,440
It does suck. But we did know what the rules were when we made our decisions.

Certainly. And IF mismanagement by our club was the problem, then the club is at fault. No doubt. However, I think the argument has gone beyond this now. I think we have three issues here:
1. That the whole salary cap structure is in dire need of review and overhauling and:
2. There appear to be some possible inconsistencies in the way the NRL reacts to clubs who have 'breached' the salary cap rules, and:
3. Individual players (employees) are having their livelihoods negatively impacted. Would Luke Kelly have re-signed if he'd known about our salary-cap problems? Would Ben Crooks have come here?
 
Messages
19,418
Certainly. And IF mismanagement by our club was the problem, then the club is at fault. No doubt. However, I think the argument has gone beyond this now. I think we have three issues here:
1. That the whole salary cap structure is in dire need of review and overhauling and:
2. There appear to be some possible inconsistencies in the way the NRL reacts to clubs who have 'breached' the salary cap rules, and:
3. Individual players (employees) are having their livelihoods negatively impacted. Would Luke Kelly have re-signed if he'd known about our salary-cap problems? Would Ben Crooks have come here?

Agree absolutely with 1 and 3. 2 is a difficult one, because every case is basically different (as well as the fact that cases are often separated by several years and changes in policy). Every year clubs get done for low level breaches of the cap, typically arising from over-runs on bonuses/ match payments etc. We've been caught ourselves in the past and copped the same small fine. This latest case though, if it holds, is more than a minor over-run and deserves something more than a $15k fine. Doesn't matter whether the responsibility is with the old board, new board or both. That ain't the NRL's fault.
 

lingard

Coach
Messages
11,440
So many eels supporters play the victim and blame everyone else. It's f**king embarrassing.

There is a bit of victim mentality in what Mr Sim is saying - and I don't go along with that; but for most of his letter I think he's merely pointing out that the current salary cap structure is very flawed and is in desperate need of overhauling from a number of different perspectives.
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
79,067
To artificially create a premiership window. Done right, a club can have a few years where their roster value is higher than the cap, sure it has to catch up with you in the end, but if you jag a premiership, who's gonna complain?

(insert picture of manly here)
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/nr...nger-at-the-club/story-fndujljl-1227373415027

NRL 2015: Parramatta spent more than $1 million over past two years on players no longer at the club

by: Nick Walshaw
May 28, 2015 9:00PM

PARRAMATTA have spent more than $1 million in the past two years on players who are no longer at the club — including eight who have signed with rival NRL outfits.

Apart from running last in 2015, The Daily Telegraph can reveal the Eels are also paying around $300,000 for seven unwanted players including dud English import Lee Mossop and Canterbury centre Jacob Loko.

Having outlayed $750,000 last year on players no longer at the club, the Eels are spending roughly half that figure again on Mossop, Loko, Hull prop Mitch Allgood and Wests Tigers forward Brenden Santi.

Justin Hunt, the son of 1980s premiership winger Neil, is also on the list with a pair of unnamed NYC players.

Thankfully, however, it seems the rot is about to stop.

Speaking yesterday, Eels CEO Scott Seward insisted the payments — all to players signed under previous administrations — would be completely gone from the club’s books by 2016.

Indeed, next season will be the first time in six years that Parramatta haven’t paid cash to players no longer at the club.

“Unfortunately, one of the fundamental problems (of previous administrations) was the idea of a quick fix,’’ Seward said.

“Recruiting huge batches of players in the hope they could turn the club around in a year.

“But of the 29 players who debuted between 2010 and 2012, only four remain.

“You can’t build a successful NRL squad with that type of hit and miss approach. And ultimately, it’s led to the issues we have been dealing with in the last 18 months.”

Currently, the Eels are embroiled in a salary cap saga that has seen them fined $525,000 and threatened with the loss of competition points from next season.

Last year, the Eels paid out $750,000 to eight players no longer at the club — Reni Maitua (Canterbury), Jacob Loko (Canterbury) Daniel Harrison (Manly), Jordan Latham (Manly), Cheyse Blair (Manly), Jake Mullaney (Salford), Matt Ryan (Wakefield Trinity) and Brayden Wiliame (Newcastle).

This year, they are paying out roughly half that for players like Loko who, ironically, has also been sidelined for much of the year by his new club, Canterbury.

Seward, however, insists it is all about to end.

Since arriving at Eels HQ late in 2013 with Eels coach Brad Arthur, the pair have been working to refine a recruitment program combining the promotion of junior talent with marquee purchases like New Zealand No. 6 Kieran Foran.

“We have a core squad now that is young and, we believe, can take us to the next level because we’re investing in their development,’’ Seward says.

“As a club we’re already spending more money on junior development and talent identification than ever before and we believe that investment will pay off substantially in the future.

“From a recruitment view, it means we only target players who can take the squad forward.

“It also allows players to develop without being chewed up and spat out by a club desperate for success at any cost.”

Certainly the club can no longer afford to pay for players like Mossop, who must surely rank among the worst buys in Parramatta history.

Signed midway though 2013, the English international arrived shortly before Christmas to reveal that, well, he had a bung shoulder which would keep him out for up to three months.

Then when, finally, Mossop did return, he lasted three games ... then stuffed a shoulder again.

And still the club is paying him now — while he plays in the English Super League with Wigan.
 

bartman

Immortal
Messages
41,022
From above:
Speaking yesterday, Eels CEO Scott Seward insisted the payments — all to players signed under previous administrations — would be completely gone from the club’s books by 2016.
Thanks Spags. Thanks 3P. Thanks Osborne. Thanks Kearney. Thanks Bentley. Thanks Stuart.

And thanks to you bunch of clowns on here that blindly supported and voted those cowboys on the Board in the first place!

Thank f**k ParraMount didn't get elected to try on more of the same...
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
92,486
“We have a core squad now that is young and, we believe, can take us to the next level because we’re investing in their development,’’ Seward says.

Well done assembling such a young squad in such a short amount of time. :lol:

“As a club we’re already spending more money on junior development and talent identification than ever before and we believe that investment will pay off substantially in the future.

I bet it will. :lol: Wonder whose idea that was.

“From a recruitment view, it means we only target players who can take the squad forward.

“It also allows players to develop without being chewed up and spat out by a club desperate for success at any cost.”

You mean like all the young players we have been paying to play for other clubs these past couple of years? :lol:

I like Seward but he is definitely being a bit dishonest here.
 

Casper The Ghost

First Grade
Messages
9,924
Surely injuries and suspensions must come into play, they should abolish the 2nd tier cap and just have a top 35 with one cap.

I reckon every club has a top 60.

All three grades are integrated under one cap.

Once a player is dropped out of the top 60 that player cannot rejoin the top 60 for his club until at least the following season or thereafter.

Top 60 provides the freedom and flexibility for any player to rise up the ranks at any time or be dropped or sold off, etc, at any-time of the season. Only under 21's can play in the Holden Cup. All players in the top 60 can play for any of the three grades.

Any player injured is either removed from the top 60 and can't come back until the following season or is kept in a cap stasis where the club is unable to introduce a new player into the top 60. Any player removed from the top 60 can be replaced by another player coming from wherever, however... Bundy cup, etc, but whatever goes on the club must stick to the cap. With each player in the top 60 given a cap value, makes it very easy for the NRL to monitor the cap.

SIMPLE.

We have 17 players for each grade + 9 extra players which should only be juniors coming into the under 20's. Now we have plenty of opportunities for juniors to be blooded against men, particularly when a club is hit with a lot of injuries in any particular season.

The NRL kicks in the new top 60 cap in 4 years time providing ample flexibility for all clubs to plan for it accordingly down the line.

Clubs can do whatever they like, back end, front end or even on the books be paying any player $1 or $1.5 million for a season but regardless of whatever they do the total of the cap must be used up by the 60 players on the books before the 1st round of each season commences.

Suspended players go into a cap stasis or are removed from the top 60 but their cap value remains until their contract has ended which means if the club wants to replace this player with another of equal quality the club needs to play monopoly with their top 60. All fun and games.
 
Last edited:
Messages
17,689
Wow our dicknose CEO thinks we are dumb. He says "players that were signed under the previous administration" but what he doesn't say is "players that were released under the CURRENT administration" .....and that's because this salary cap drama is down to them And how they released all those players and payouts.

Surely the salary cap mess WOULD not HAVE HAPPENED if we didn't release those players and kept them till The end of their contracts. Buts who's decision was to release? But some
People can't admit that because it was the plumber who was in charge at the time.
 
Messages
17,689
Last year, the Eels paid out $750,000 to eight players no longer at the club — Reni Maitua (Canterbury), Jacob Loko (Canterbury) Daniel Harrison (Manly), Jordan Latham (Manly), Cheyse Blair (Manly), Jake Mullaney (Salford), Matt Ryan (Wakefield Trinity) and Brayden Wiliame (Newcastle).

But it's Roy's fault lol
 

bartman

Immortal
Messages
41,022
More propaganda Jake? Elections are over....

Previous administrations seemed to sign players willy nilly, often for overs, and with ridiculous back ends on the deals - with no regard for their eventual impact on our cap. Someone has to make the tough decisions to cut through that previous crap and wear the consequences, rather than perpetuate the situation for evermore.

Time for a chill pill... it was all a mess (thanks to 3P), but now it's heading in the right direction. Even the NRL admit the Club's current Board/administration is doing everything they can, workng toward being clean and clear of the previous bullshit for the 2016 season.
 
Last edited:
Messages
17,689
More propaganda Jake? Elections are over....

Time for a chill pill - it was all a mess (thanks to 3P), but now it's heading in the right direction. Even the NRL admit the Club's current Board/administration is doing everything they can, workng toward being clean and clear of the previous bullshit for the 2016 season.

Propaganda for what? You idiot. Elections have come and gone. But facts are facts. Current management have been in power for 2 years and we are coming LAST.

You still avoid the questions who's responsible for releasing those players which have gotten us in a salary cap mess??
 
Messages
19,418
Last year, the Eels paid out $750,000 to eight players no longer at the club ? Reni Maitua (Canterbury), Jacob Loko (Canterbury) Daniel Harrison (Manly), Jordan Latham (Manly), Cheyse Blair (Manly), Jake Mullaney (Salford), Matt Ryan (Wakefield Trinity) and Brayden Wiliame (Newcastle).

But it's Roy's fault lol

Well, he was running the show when these players (or at least most of them) were signed to their initial contracts, which turned out to be out of whack with their ability to contribute to the team. You don't seem to understand the link between the extent to which a player's contract is onerous, and the incentive to get out of part of the cost of that deal.
 
Messages
19,418
Propaganda for what? You idiot. Elections have come and gone. But facts are facts. Current management have been in power for 2 years and we are coming LAST.

You still avoid the questions who's responsible for releasing those players which have gotten us in a salary cap mess??

You do understand that releasing the players had the direct effect of reducing our salary cap expenditure (all went to other clubs)? It is the difference between the salary of their replacements and our proportion of the salary of the released players that determines whether we gain/save on the cap. And, of course, there is the issue of 'irregularities' in our earlier disclosures to the NRL that prompted the club to bring the NRL in in the first place, which affects the underlying cap expenditure.
 

Stagger eel

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
65,835
From above:
Thanks Spags. Thanks 3P. Thanks Osborne. Thanks Kearney. Thanks Bentley. Thanks Stuart.

And thanks to you bunch of clowns on here that blindly supported and voted those cowboys on the Board in the first place!

Thank f**k ParraMount didn't get elected to try on more of the same...

So no responsibility on those who signed off on their termination and pay outs which in affect caused this mess??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top