Time to scrap the cap

[The Engineers Room]

The points cap is a terrible idea. Again, it rewards mediocrity. These points caps would you give you points for playing for australia and origin, so what happens if a team is right on the limit and a player refuses to play an international at the end of the season because it'll mean his team cant fit him in for the year after.

And how would multi year contracts work, if a team got some success and their points suddenly ballooned up they could be forced to sack deserving players and then possibly pay their salaries elsewhere.

It's a bad idea and IMO even worse than salary cap. It's basically a direct way of penalising success while the salary cap is an indirect way.

Firstly, who says it would be based on rep games played, perhaps it could be a board of representitives that have no club affiliation that rank the top 100 players, Players in each tier get a value. The value of a player at the time he signs a contract would remain the same for the life of the contract, only when he wants to sign elsewhere or re-sign does the value change to his current assessment, this would mean young talent could be signed to long term contracts and developed instead of being pinched after 1 good year somewhere.

The points cap could give better exemptions and more evenly.

Also, the transparency is the key, there is no negotiation on the points value, a player can only fit in the cap if they are able to, no more brown paper bags.

 

[BIKER_DRAGON]

Hell yea the cap is crap get rid of it now.

 

[RHCP]

Those who are in favour of eliminating the salary cap are not looking at the big picture here. It's not just the clubs who are struggling financially like Newcastle, Cronulla and Canberra who will suffer; it will be every club that can't compete with the kind of cash teams like Easts and Brisbane have to throw around.

Having teams fold is not in the best interests of Rugby League. Although I think Nathan Tinkler would have deep enough pockets to prevent it, let's imagine that the salary cap is abolished and the Knights have to leave the competition. The NRL loses an entire city of once devoted Rugby League fans to one of it's biggest competitors, soccer.

Later down the track, while trying to stay competetive against the rich clubs, Penrith spends beyond its means. Just like in the scenario involving Newcastle, an area rich with fans of Rugby League collapses. And who's the other show in town? The AFL and GWS. The NRL loses one of it's greatest junior nurseries and more or less drives people towards another of it's biggest competitors.

Those are both worse case scenarios, but both are entirely possible. Removing the salary cap benefits few and weakens many, including the NRL.

The system is not perfect, but it is better than nothing.

 

[Perth Red]

Alternatively you could argue that to compete in an open market club like Newcastle would have to attract multi millionaire owners liek Tinkler and could the use his resources to become a powerhouse club.

I still prefer a well worked points sytem and like th eidea of points only being changed when a player decides to leave a club. We would see clubs hold onto their own star players alot longer.

 

[BIKER_DRAGON]

Those who are in favour of eliminating the salary cap are not looking at the big picture here.

Let the weak be vanquished (they have had their 43 years in the Shire sun). Then the strong can reign (unopppossed in the Kogarah sun).

 

[Scarves]

The cap has its purpose.

I'd tweek the cap two ways.

Firstly by allowing each club to have two clear marquee signings that are completely o/s the cap. These two players can be paid whatever and the cash can come from where ever. No limits. If the club can't afford marquee sigings, then they're the problem, they'll need to assess their issues and sort that stuff out or continue to disappoint their fan base.

I would also award clubs massive concessions for developing players from SG Ball aged competition who have from that level or equivalent standard of competition been with the respective club for at least ten years. Example - from 16 - 26 years old at the one club or in the one clubs system. These concessions would be scaling as a percentage. Example 10 year developed player = 25% concession, through to a 14 year developed player = 100% concession. This would promote clubs hanging onto players and fans especially youngsters developing an affinity with long term players. If a club is unable to take advantage of these long term developed player concessions, that is either a sign that the club has no serious competitive future or that the management structure of the club is crap.

 

[Noname36]

Let the weak be vanquished (they have had their 43 years in the Shire sun). Then the strong can reign

Then we'll have a situation that will see the end of clubs like Newcastle, Penrith and Canberra. Clubs who's areas do so much for the game in terms of support, juniors, promotion at a grass roots level, etc. And what for? So a few rich clubs that have done absolutely nothing for the game (i.e. the Roosters) can get stronger? What a horrible competition that would be.

 

[Dingus]

http://www.premierleague.com/page/Headlines/0,,12306~2214645,00.html

Yes that is the manager/coach accepting that they are playing for 2nd after 11 from 38 weeks.

no salaray cap will work a treat

 

[Borat.]

http://www.premierleague.com/page/Headlines/0,,12306~2214645,00.html

Yes that is the manager/coach accepting that they are playing for 2nd after 11 from 38 weeks.

no salaray cap will work a treat

Bullcrap- he is trying put pressure on Chel$ski......but the point you make is valid only 4 clubs have a shot at the title each year....

 

[Howdy]

How about franchise players or whatever they are called? The are some leagues around the world that successfully use this. Bascially it means, that one players wage doesn't count towards salary cap. This wouldn't turn nrl into spanish La Liga (soccer), and it would maybe increase our chances to keep players like Israel Falou. I mean, if 1 team can pay 1 player 1m a year, go ahead, he would be the one exception in team( Of course I don't think there would be teams who could afford that, oh wait). But of course I see a problems with this, other players in team would maybe hate getting paid less and would want more and other problems.Arrggh crap, I hate loosing great players for other leagues and being scared that Inglis or Manu will leave (just example). But I guess nothing will make best players not to leave for other codes, nrl can't financially compete

 

[Wests is Best]

Firstly, who says it would be based on rep games played, perhaps it could be a board of representitives that have no club affiliation that rank the top 100 players, Players in each tier get a value. The value of a player at the time he signs a contract would remain the same for the life of the contract, only when he wants to sign elsewhere or re-sign does the value change to his current assessment, this would mean young talent could be signed to long term contracts and developed instead of being pinched after 1 good year somewhere.

The points cap could give better exemptions and more evenly.

Also, the transparency is the key, there is no negotiation on the points value, a player can only fit in the cap if they are able to, no more brown paper bags.

I believe this has merit.

I like the cap, but I think it is way to exposed to rorting.
However, I am not a believer in scrapping the cap with nothing to restrict the clubs (and ultimately the game) from going broke, because without some restraint of spending, the game will die, and die quickly in my opinion.

One problem with the points system I can see is that there could be players left on the scrap heap when they get a little past their best.
But I guess that can be sorted by a player being able to request a points downgrade when no club will want them??
I think this system can be tweeked to make it work.

 

[Scarves]

I've seen how the points system works in third tier competitions. I didn't rate it. It is an absolute restraint of trade, clubs and players would challenge it. Someone like David Williams who played a test and two origins but was injured the entire 2010 season would almost be priced out of the competition. And how would you accurately compare a test wingers value to a first grade halfbacks value? Or a New Zealand Internationals value to an Australian players value. The value of the positions are almost incomparable. Kiwi's have one good game and are fringe test selections.

Sam Perrett and Jason Knightingale are current internationals, what rating do they get compared with Josh Dugan, Lachlan Coote, Mick Ennis, Chris Heighington or Peter Wallace? Who is seriously more valuable? Who is authorised to judge their value? The best guide is always market monetary forces. A points system wouldn't work.

 

[The Engineers Room]

Not if you use my system where the players are given points in tiers and it is re assessed every year. They keep the points they have for their current contract but new contracts get the new points. Long service exemptions and juniors exemptions would be added in.

 

[Scarves]

Not if you use my system where the players are given points in tiers and it is re assessed every year. They keep the points they have for their current contract but new contracts get the new points. Long service exemptions and juniors exemptions would be added in.

Can't agree with any points system. I'd need to see it very detailed but I'm yet to see or hear of any points system that has the flexiblility of free market renumeration. Free market renumeration is the most accurate way to gauge what a player is worth. Once we start messing with that by artificially adding specific values to certain players, then the players will suffer. Players will not like it, they won't cop it at the professional level. A points system is a pointless argument because it will never happen. No player can be fairly compared to another so therefore no points system can be fair to the player regardless of whether or not it is "re-assessed every year".

I still do not understand how an Australian International would be compared to an English or Kiwi International. I don't understand how even in a tiered points system (seriously could there be any other kind?) how players in different positions could be accurately compared. Even players in the same position play the game differently, Hayne's more of a playmaker than a Coote for instance. Some players are goal kickers, some like Hodkinson played for City because there were no other options available, seriously how would a point system judge his rep jumper compared to a Chris Lawrence who made the Aussie squad on the back of a raft of centres becoming unavailable for test selection?

A point system would always be criticised, for either unfairness or for undervaluing another country's rep status, or for being a wrong opinion. Market forces however roll differently, if a club over pays a player and they are not perceived to be worth their high stock, well the club is derided for poor management. A point system will mean that instead, the game will be derided and ridiculed. No disrespect and I appreciate anyone that wants to attempt to fix perceived problems with the salary cap, however a point system is something that should stay in Fantasy Football games.

 

[Schiltzenberger]

Trying to compare what would happen here with the EPL is complete nonsense and people that have done it haven't put enough thought into it.

Sure, there is the usual suspects at the top, it isn't just because of no cap though. No cap does play a part but the main reason they have a select few at the top each year is mostly due to European competition, where they make most of their money.

- They finish near the top in EPL and they get a bigger slice of the TV money, according to how high they finish there is a big difference in how much cash you get. So the top teams are always getting more money compared to the other English teams anyway.

- Then usually the top 4 will play in Champions League, getting a huge amount of cash, through TV money, better sponsorships and bigger gate takings.

- Then the next 2 or 3 teams will play in the Euro Cup competition, I've forgotten the name, Europa I think. They too will get a lot more money through being in Europe competition.

So the EPL money difference between teams is huge mostly due to Europe, once a team qualifies for Europe they get massive money and go out and buy better players. It is pretty much harder for these teams to fail than it is to be successful. The difference between the 'haves' and 'have nots' gets bigger every year, that wouldn't be the case in the NRL, well it wouldn't be as dramatic.

The only times there is a different team coming in to the top of EPL is usually due to a billionare owner buying the team, like Chelsea or Man City. Teams do fall out of the top as well when they burn too much money too soon, like Leeds. They borrowed heaps and bought players after getting into Europe, then they had a bad year and didn't make it to Europe and because they'd banked on that extra Euro money they went broke.

So comparing to the NRL and EPL with no cap is stupid. Sure there will be teams that will make the finals most years but the effect won't be nearly as exaggerated as the EPL.

Have a look at how many teams won premierships before the cap started, in the 20 years before the cap come in about 9 different teams won premierships. During that time nearly every team won a comp or 2.

I would much rather see a team win a GF and have a chance to win another 1 or 2 in a row than seeing them get decimated by the salry cap, just because of their success.

We should scrap the cap and stop holding teams back to the Cronulla level. Instead of having good teams that others try to emulate the NRL is trying to keep everyone back so the likes of the Sharks can keep playing.

If we do keep the cap it should be raised to $5 or $6mil or more, so we can at least keep decent players from going to Union or Super League etc.
If a team can't afford it then too bad, leave the comp.

 

[The Engineers Room]

Can't agree with any points system. I'd need to see it very detailed but I'm yet to see or hear of any points system that has the flexiblility of free market renumeration. Free market renumeration is the most accurate way to gauge what a player is worth. Once we start messing with that by artificially adding specific values to certain players, then the players will suffer. Players will not like it, they won't cop it at the professional level. A points system is a pointless argument because it will never happen. No player can be fairly compared to another so therefore no points system can be fair to the player regardless of whether or not it is "re-assessed every year".

I still do not understand how an Australian International would be compared to an English or Kiwi International. I don't understand how even in a tiered points system (seriously could there be any other kind?) how players in different positions could be accurately compared. Even players in the same position play the game differently, Hayne's more of a playmaker than a Coote for instance. Some players are goal kickers, some like Hodkinson played for City because there were no other options available, seriously how would a point system judge his rep jumper compared to a Chris Lawrence who made the Aussie squad on the back of a raft of centres becoming unavailable for test selection?

A point system would always be criticised, for either unfairness or for undervaluing another country's rep status, or for being a wrong opinion. Market forces however roll differently, if a club over pays a player and they are not perceived to be worth their high stock, well the club is derided for poor management. A point system will mean that instead, the game will be derided and ridiculed. No disrespect and I appreciate anyone that wants to attempt to fix perceived problems with the salary cap, however a point system is something that should stay in Fantasy Football games.

Market system doesn't work because players desire to stay at/go to a club will change their value. I know the problems but transparency is a huge advantage to this system.