Without a cap and only 2-4 teams that can win ever year the NRL would not be as worth as much to TV companies as viewers numbers would drop.
NFL has realised that having a hard salary cap is the way to go. It sees teams like the 49ers be in the Super Bowl three years ago to be at the bottom of the pile now. It goes in cycles for every team.
If their was no salary cap and the top 4 was going to be Roosters, Broncos, Storm and Souths for example every year the number of matches I would watch in a year would greatly diminish, this is the way NRL is heading if they don't re-work either the Salary Cap or the effect of TPA on the competition.
I agree. As a TV product a cap has many advantages and is a necessity to balance the audience.
The NFL does have a capt - it is a sport where 31 of the teams are privately owned. The cap has nothing to do with sport and everything to do with guaranteeing a return for those people. If you can artificially cap expenses in any business, but have no such cap on income, you would take it.
Problem is the cap affects the most important element of the sport in a negative way - the players. It is their earning capacity that is capped.
Put the shoe on the other foot for the NRL & NFL owners - would they accept an income cap?
No way.
It only takes an iota of thought to realise this.