Salary cap fix

[Guest]

These are my thoughts on the salary cap for next year and heading into the future
the NRL got us into this mess by underselling the T.V rights in the 1st place
if the T.V money was what it should be all clubs would be getting a bigger slice
per year (approx $1 mill extra each) so until the new tv deal is done (i think its 2012) THE NRL SHOULD CUT ITS LOSSES and dig into its coffers to stop all this releasing of players to play overseas or going to union AFL or ping pong SO WE CAN PAY THE TOP STARS WHAT THEIR WORTH IN KEEPING WITH OTHER SPORTS (e.g UNION)- and spreading the talent between the clubs

1)NRL should contribute an extra $1 mill to each club
(this would effectively mean that each club wont have to find extra revenue to reach their cap limit to what they already spend)

2)We should increase it from 4.1 to 4.5 million + 1 marquee player ($500,000 limit+ unlimited sponsorship dollars for that 1 player)
(this will mean an increase of $400,000 for spreading across the top 24 players in your club + 1 marquee player would get the $500,000 limit + unlimited private sponsorships which would mean every club could attract 1 marquee player -thats a total of 16 marquee players throughout the comp which would stop our very top players from leaving the NRL)
We could also include within the cap (4.5 mill) 1 or 2 2nd tier marquee players @ $400,000 each + up to $250,000 private sponsorships.

3)A PANEL OF 6 EXPERTS (be it past players & or coaches or high ranking former officials) to form a group deciding of each players worth e.g CAM SMITH $500,000 (MARQUEE STATUS) SLATER $400,000 (2ND TIER MARQUEE STATUS)BRETT FINCH $350,000 (TOP END 1ST GRADER) ANTHONY QUINN ($250,00 S.O.O PLAYER) S.O.O PLAYERS ARE WORTH MIN $250,000 AGAINST CAP- WHEN A CLUB HAS REACHED THEIR CAP ALLOWANCE THAT IS THEIR LIMIT.These are just figures plucked out for use as examples only

4)DISCOUNT OF 5% is given if player makes 1st grade debut at a club as long as player has been with that club for previous 2 seasons.( this would encourage clubs to develop)
DISCOUNT OF 5% for every 2 years of service with that club after 10 1st grade games.( this would encourage loyalty between club & player) e.g GREG INGLIS 18 Y/O on $100,000 makes 1st grade after being at storm for 3 years is on salary cap of $95,000 he turns 20 after 2 years of making debut is worth $300,000 now gets benefit of salary on cap= $270,000 he turns 22 is valued at $350,000 benefit on cap = $297,500 and reaches limit of 15% discount and stays on that discount until his value increases to 2nd tier MARQUEE STATUS OR TOP MARQUEE STATUS he then fits into that catagory

5) min wage in top 25 players is $50,000 ( i think) min wage for 1st grader after 2 years since making debut $75,000 unless valued different by expert panel.
6)on top of salaries above ,the NRL has a loyalty NRL fund for all S.O.O & AUS
players for every rep game they play an amount say $5,000 gets listed under their name and is given to them 2 years after retiring from the game as long as they have stayed loyal to the NRL.special dispensation given to players over the age of 33 y/o who wish to play overseas before retiring.

something to the above affect,it can be tinkered to fit in exactly to what the fairest way agreed to by all clubs.Players will be ENTERED IN SALARY CAP the market value of what they are worth,If a player cannot find a club for his market value his value is decided by averaging the top 3 bidders for his services and signs with the club of his choice.
THE SALARY CAP FIX
NO CLUB CAN THEN BE OVER THE SALARY CAP WITHOUT IT BEING TRANSPARENT

[Guest]

whatever
pay the mokeys bannanas and they still play. what does cameron smith need $500k for? flat screen tv and an automobile don't cost that much.

[Rocky Rhodes]

whatever
pay the mokeys bannanas and they still play. what does cameron smith need $500k for? flat screen tv and an automobile don't cost that much.

Yeah, they are free at Melbourne..

[redwhiteandbluester]

A well thought out plan, but way too complicated.

The clubs definitely need a bigger slice of the TV pie (and that pie will increase substantially once the new deal is negotiated).

I am also cautious of any system that is motivated by a desire to keep star players. If we take a deep breath, who have we really lost? A handful of three quarters to rugby union, and Karmichael Hunt. Big whoop. The game has grown stronger in their absence.

Also, as the previous posters have said, the star players can afford a nice car and a playstation whether they're getting $500,000 now or $550,000 under a bigger cap. Little tweaks to the system like you're proposing will make a minuscule amount of difference.

It's either a cap, which will be imperfect no matter how many revisions we make, or a free market, which has its downfalls as well. Every system is flawed. But if one accepts that the cap is here to stay, then I don't think any number of bandaid provisions and minor adjustments will make a drastic difference.

On a side note, the one provision I would like strengthened is recognition of long service, e.g. 8 years first grade service to a club and only 50% of the wages count to the salary cap. So, for instance, we might have offered Fitzgibbon $200,000/year but only $100,000 counted against the $4.1mn cap. This would stem the flow of ageing players to England when they still have plenty to offer the code in Australia.

[Kingbilly]

the NRL got us into this mess by underselling the T.V rights in the 1st place
if the T.V money was what it should be all clubs would be getting a bigger slice per year

This is where you lost me. In my opinion based on the actual RL market the TV rights were far too expensive. But before people say about AFL, they were even more too expensive.

Get more money from TV rights and what will happen, only 2 things.
Firstly the players will get more money and secondly we will pay more for foxtel.

The game has been bastardised because of the almighty $. IF anything we need to cut players salaries and send more money to development

[melon....]

How about dropping the cap altogether. If clubs like Souffs or Nulla or even Easts dont survive who ****ing cares. It may make them wake up and learn to run a business by monetising its grass roots, developing, and spawning alternative markets.

The rest of the clubs shouldnt prop up the weakest. There is no equality brought by the cap. Its a restraint of trade period. someone take this to ****ing court - youd kill it!.

[Guest]

This is where you lost me. In my opinion based on the actual RL market the TV rights were far too expensive. But before people say about AFL, they were even more too expensive.

Get more money from TV rights and what will happen, only 2 things.
Firstly the players will get more money and secondly we will pay more for foxtel.

The game has been bastardised because of the almighty $. IF anything we need to cut players salaries and send more money to development

from what i've heard the league make $150 mill a year from t.v rights s.o.o and other avenues yet only $50 mill of that goes back to the clubs in the form of grants ,so make it 66 mill instead gives all clubs the dollars they need to keep the cream of the talent at prices other codes are offering them at the same time even the best players from the u.k could be enticed to come here to play instead of the other way around ,and each club would have at least 3 top end marquee players plus the cap would be TRANSPARENT because every player has a market value price .If a club already has 3 marquee players and the value of another player goes up to $400,000 + on renewing his next contract,the club has to either re shuffle on who their marquee players are or let him go to another club.spread of talent.

[Guest]

How about dropping the cap altogether. If clubs like Souffs or Nulla or even Easts dont survive who ****ing cares. It may make them wake up and learn to run a business by monetising its grass roots, developing, and spawning alternative markets.

The rest of the clubs shouldnt prop up the weakest. There is no equality brought by the cap. Its a restraint of trade period. someone take this to ****ing court - youd kill it!.

I am all for an increase in the cap off the back of a fairer TV rights deal. However, I am against dropping the cap altogether as we will be back to the bad old days where the Broncos will be able to field the Queensland SOO team.

[Guest]

How about dropping the cap altogether. If clubs like Souffs or Nulla or even Easts dont survive who ****ing cares. It may make them wake up and learn to run a business by monetising its grass roots, developing, and spawning alternative markets.

The rest of the clubs shouldnt prop up the weakest. There is no equality brought by the cap. Its a restraint of trade period. someone take this to ****ing court - youd kill it!.

i don't often agree with a lot of your comment but on this point i have to agree

[melon....]

I am all for an increase in the cap off the back of a fairer TV rights deal. However, I am against dropping the cap altogether as we will be back to the bad old days where the Broncos will be able to field the Queensland SOO team.

Only if the Broncos can afford them.

[Guest]

I am all for an increase in the cap off the back of a fairer TV rights deal. However, I am against dropping the cap altogether as we will be back to the bad old days where the Broncos will be able to field the Queensland SOO team.

If this is still possible, then it is obvious there is room for another QLD team. This wouldv'e happened a long time ago if it wasn't for whinging from News Ltd and the Broncos.

That would mean Brisbane Broncos have to compete for corporate dollars in Brisbane and also share the players around. This would be 4 QLD clubs sharing the QLD talent pool which is probably a fair reflection.

[BUDDY]

Leave the cap at $4.1M and allow one or two marquee players exempt from the cap.
That should spread the elite players around. If a player can earn $1M in AFL, yawnion or soccer in this country then the elite league players deserve it too. It is the premier code of football in Australia afterall.

Agree with melon that the Storm players should take this to court as a restraint of trade. Maybe then the NRL will wake up and make the necessary changes.

[Headless Chook]

I really can't believe the number of people who have come out and said we need to increase the salary cap to prevent this from happening again. Surely people realise that if the salary cap was $10m this would still happen. The reason why Melbourne were over the salary cap was not because they felt sorry for the players and wanted to pay them more, it was because they sought an unfair advantage by not operating within the limit.

[BUDDY]

That's right HC. So we need to somehow allow the elite players to earn what they are capable of earning. Splitting $4.1M between 25 players restricts their earning capacity. An increase will atleast allow the better players to earn what other codes or Super League may be offering and therefore keeping them in the NRL. I can understand what the NRL is trying to do by not making clubs go bankrupt but others have had financial problems in the past and have looked at alternatives by merging. The NRL seems to be hanging on waiting for this new TV deal hoping that that will be the saviour for all clubs. In the mean time we will lose some super players to our game, the likes of K-Hunt, Folau, Slater. Those that say that other great players will come through have no idea.

[redwhiteandbluester]

That's right HC. So we need to somehow allow the elite players to earn what they are capable of earning. Splitting $4.1M between 25 players restricts their earning capacity. An increase will atleast allow the better players to earn what other codes or Super League may be offering and therefore keeping them in the NRL. I can understand what the NRL is trying to do by not making clubs go bankrupt but others have had financial problems in the past and have looked at alternatives by merging. The NRL seems to be hanging on waiting for this new TV deal hoping that that will be the saviour for all clubs. In the mean time we will lose some super players to our game, the likes of K-Hunt, Folau, Slater. Those that say that other great players will come through have no idea.

I don't think what the elite players are getting paid is actually very far away from 'what they're capable of earning.' If it was, they would have already moved to rugby.

It's paranoid to fret about a mass exodus to rugby union - we have lost 'super players' before, and the game has grown stronger. In the same year we lost Karmichael Hunt to AFL, it was one of the best seasons ever.

And there aren't that many that have crossed to rugby, so the gap between RL wages and so called 'earning capacity' cannot actually be very big.