The Grub is back.... At the Roosters

[God-King Dean]

SKD
SBW
JWH
LOD
FPN

How can they afford to keep so many acronyms under the cap?

 

[adamkungl]

SKD
SBW
JWH
LOD
FPN

How can they afford to keep so many acronyms under the cap?

You forgot RTS!

but honestly, this is way better than the 09 season where we were running out with 3 rangas in the starting lineup. Dark days. No wonder we got the spoon.

 

[Crazy Steve]

Roosters cant win the comp even if they have the pack.
The halves are useless and you guys signed the worse of the two for another four.

Spastics.

It's funny that a fan of a club that has signed Braith Anasta, Adam Blair and already had Timid Lolzen, and Bunji Marshall on their book as well as having Tim Sheens as coach for nearly 10 years would call another club spastics.

Enjoy your spoon genius!!!

 

[gerg]

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/1303159/cap-guns-roosters-reap-recruitment-rewards/?cs=2453

''The other thing is that we had a significant sum left over last year. We left some money up our sleeve and that obviously carries over and gives us extra spending this year.''

Is this a legitimate quote? So clubs can underspend one year and carryover the cash?

 

[innsaneink]

Is this a legitimate quote? So clubs can underspend one year and carryover the cash?

I believe they topped up Maloneys deal by as much as 75% last year with last years cap, thanks to the Warriors

 

[bellyache]

i believe they topped up maloneys deal by as much as 75% last year with last years cap, thanks to the warriors

ka mate!

 

[eozsmiles]

Is this a legitimate quote? So clubs can underspend one year and carryover the cash?

It doesn't "carry over". It just gives you room to move the following year. So if the cap is $6 million and you only have $5 million worth of players on the books, you can go on a $1 million spending spree without cutting any current players. It doesn't mean you get $7 million.

 

[851]

It's funny that a fan of a club that has signed Braith Anasta, Adam Blair and already had Timid Lolzen, and Bunji Marshall on their book as well as having Tim Sheens as coach for nearly 10 years would call another club spastics.

Enjoy your spoon genius!!!

There is no way we are getting the spoon,sticky this if you like.

 

[Matchball]

It's funny that a fan of a club that has signed Braith Anasta, Adam Blair and already had Timid Lolzen, and Bunji Marshall on their book as well as having Tim Sheens as coach for nearly 10 years would call another club spastics.

Enjoy your spoon genius!!!

No worries paint huffer. The pressure is on you guys ths year.
Im betting no 8 for you.

 

[gerg]

It doesn't "carry over". It just gives you room to move the following year. So if the cap is $6 million and you only have $5 million worth of players on the books, you can go on a $1 million spending spree without cutting any current players. It doesn't mean you get $7 million.

So why does the quote from Sullivan, which I quoted, suggest that it carries over?

 

[macnaz]

How many years did the sharks spend under the cap. They cant come out now and expect to carry it over . Use it or lose it , isnt that how it works.

 

[Didgi]

''The other thing is that we had a significant sum left over last year. We left some money up our sleeve and that obviously carries over and gives us extra spending this year.''

I think people are misunderstanding this. What he means is if they're 500k under cap in 2012, they've still got that 500k to use up in 2013 towards backended contracts, percentage increases and new signings. What he doesn't mean is they have that space plus whatever they underspent by the year before.

 

[Frenzy.]

How many years did the sharks spend under the cap. They cant come out now and expect to carry it over . Use it or lose it , isnt that how it works.

2010, 2011 & 2012 that I know of but no one at the Sharks expects that money to carry over. I don't know why you'd draw that bow.

It's not a case of use it or lose it either. Obviously if you keep the same 25 players that go into the cap for the season after the year you were under you have money to spend. Someone simply might drop out of the top 25 but you would still be entitled to spend up to the cap if the circumstances changed for the club.

 

[Snappy]

Roosters fans are acting exactly like Knights fans were this time last year. I expect the same result.

 

[bellyache]

Go roosters!http://www.roosters.com.au/playerprofiles

 

[adamkungl]

Roosters fans are acting exactly like Knights fans were this time last year. I expect the same result.

Knights never had the players to back it up. Nuffy central over there, Bennett or not.

That said, no excuses for Easts this year. Roster is top 4 on paper. All about attitude this year, and if they don't deliver we'll rightly cop it.

 

[The Elephant In The room]

I think people are misunderstanding this. What he means is if they're 500k under cap in 2012, they've still got that 500k to use up in 2013 towards backended contracts, percentage increases and new signings. What he doesn't mean is they have that space plus whatever they underspent by the year before.

Brandy Alexander on Sports Today (2UE) explained it pretty clearly tonight (and it still sounds like a rort/loophole that will either be exploited or closed):
1 - players are contracted until 31 Oct, which is the period the salary cap relates to.
2 - the roosters had cap space of $400k left over
3 - the Warriors agreed to/were persuaded to release Maloney "early", with "early being sometime after the season ended, but before 31 Oct
4 - The Roosters then "pre-paid" Maloney in 2012 for the 2013 season, thereby bringing the salary cap effect forward and meaning that only $100k of Maloneys 2013 salary is counted in the 2013 cap.

It's a rort. It might be a legitimate rort, but it's still a rort, plain and simple. And it's a rort that I doubt any other team would have been allowed to get away with.

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

Brandy Alexander on Sports Today (2UE) explained it pretty clearly tonight (and it still sounds like a rort/loophole that will either be exploited or closed):
1 - players are contracted until 31 Oct, which is the period the salary cap relates to.
2 - the roosters had cap space of $400k left over
3 - the Warriors agreed to/were persuaded to release Maloney "early", with "early being sometime after the season ended, but before 31 Oct
4 - The Roosters then "pre-paid" Maloney in 2012 for the 2013 season, thereby bringing the salary cap effect forward and meaning that only $100k of Maloneys 2013 salary is counted in the 2013 cap.

It's a rort. It might be a legitimate rort, but it's still a rort, plain and simple. And it's a rort that I doubt any other team would have been allowed to get away with.

Why? Because of Schubert? Granted there's not that many bright people in rugby league but wouldn't it be just a little too obvious for an ex player analysing our salary cap? Anyway, the rest of the clubs can use the precedent excuse now so get over it.

 

[the bondi spy]

No worries paint huffer. The pressure is on you guys ths year.
Im betting no 8 for you.

Gee I bet the bookies are trembling in their boots over that statement...

 

[Cookie67]

I find it laughable that people think the Roosters have special conditions with their Salary Cap. If they managed to get Maloney under the 2012 cap good on them and I am sure that the Roosters staff cannot be the first to find this condition. If they are thou, I am impressed.