Salary cap fix

[BUDDY]

Who would you like to see at Easts?

Dallas Johnson ----> Koups
Gidley (yes even today) ----> SKD
Hoffman (most likely will be going) -----> Lopini

If you consider the times the likes of King, Gidley, Buderus, Hodgeson, Berrigan, Eastwood, Fa'alogo, Menzies, Tronc (even though he is back), Orford, Shirwin, Monaghan just to name a few, left the NRL. Add the union guys like Gower, Gaz, $BW and even Lote, Dell, Rogers and Tahu when they went. They all still had plenty to offer and even today would improve many teams compared to some of the rubbish around. A higher or better structured salary cap would have kept many of these players until they really were not upto NRL standard.

[Pass the Ball]

Dallas Johnson ----> Koups
Gidley (yes even today) ----> SKD
Hoffman (most likely will be going) -----> Lopini

If you consider the times the likes of King, Gidley, Buderus, Hodgeson, Berrigan, Eastwood, Fa'alogo, Menzies, Tronc (even though he is back), Orford, Shirwin, Monaghan just to name a few, left the NRL. Add the union guys like Gower, Gaz, $BW and even Lote, Dell, Rogers and Tahu when they went. They all still had plenty to offer and even today would improve many teams compared to some of the rubbish around. A higher or better structured salary cap would have kept many of these players until they really were not upto NRL standard.

I could concede that Dallas Johnson, Ryan Hoffman and Greg Eastwood would walk into a lot of NRL teams...The others IMO are well past their prime and injury prone and would therefore find it hard to get a start with an NRL team..

We certainly do not need to agree though...

[BUDDY]

I could concede that Dallas Johnson, Ryan Hoffman and Greg Eastwood would walk into a lot of NRL teams...The others IMO are well past their prime and injury prone and would therefore find it hard to get a start with an NRL team..

We certainly do not need to agree though...

As I said, if you consider the times in their careers that some of these guys left and are leaving even younger now is what is of a concern and certainly deteriorates the playing strength of many clubs.

[novice chook]

No matter how high the salary cap, it would never be enough to satisfy some clubs and individuals, and I can guarantee there would always be some Club executive prepared to take a risk of rorting, no matter how big the slice of the pie.

It's called greed, and it's rife in society in general, let alone rugby league.

And it's proven the downfall of plenty of businesses in the past and the future will be no different.

Living beyond one's means can only continue for so long before everything crumbles.


NC

[Kingbilly]

Theres is no cap on salaries in say the Utilities sector, if there was some of the better employees would go seek employment in resources and dilute the quality of personnel within Utilities ( for example )

That is what is happening within League and will continue to happen

Maybe I didn't make my point clear enough, private sector salaries are set by the market. They have a ceiling. Govt Sector salaries are set by a pre determined wage structure.
There is infact a celing for wages set by the employer (regulator in some cases) and the market.
The Salary cap is in effect the same, its determined by the employer/regulator and the market.

[Guest]

Problem with raising the cap will be that the star players will just get paid more. If anything, it will widen the gap between your fringe first graders and your stars, which for me, is an even bigger problem.

[redwhiteandbluester]

I'll have some of what you are on. I am comparing apples with apples, not apples with gold nuggets. Rugby League's competitors for TV money and sponsors are the other three codes IN AUSTRALIA. We have to provide the best game possible and that involves keeping our best players within the NRL. How do you know that the two marquee player system wouldn't help the issues we had with the dogs and storm? The current system we have is obviously not working.
Do you think they all just wanted to play for Melbourne? I'm sure you do
Do you think if the storm offered Slater and Smith $1M that Cronk and Inglis would not go somewhere else if they were offered $1M?
The other three codes have been innovative in their approach not dinosaurs like our News puppets. As I said, they offer their best players the opportunity of earning what the market wants to pay them within much higher parameters. Our players are not offered that same opportunity.

Idiotic post promoting a flawed system. Storm $700,000 over - all of this $700,000 on two players? Canterbury's systemic misappropriation of funds for two players? Please

If your only rationale for comparing wages is that those other comps are Australian, let's lump netball in there, and pay our stars only $10,000. Comparisons to any other sports are completely arbitrary because they're not part of the market that determines the value of players.

And how will it prevent sides cheating in instances like Melbourne - say Slater and Inglis were the marquees, and Smith demanded an improved contract when the cap is full, how will the presence of two marquees help conundrums like this?

[Guest]

i'll have some of what you are on. I am comparing apples with apples, not apples with gold nuggets. Rugby league's competitors for tv money and sponsors are the other three codes in australia. We have to provide the best game possible and that involves keeping our best players within the nrl. How do you know that the two marquee player system wouldn't help the issues we had with the dogs and storm? The current system we have is obviously not working.
Do you think they all just wanted to play for melbourne? I'm sure you do
Do you think if the storm offered slater and smith $1m that cronk and inglis would not go somewhere else if they were offered $1m?
The other three codes have been innovative in their approach not dinosaurs like our news puppets. As i said, they offer their best players the opportunity of earning what the market wants to pay them within much higher parameters. Our players are not offered that same opportunity.

you've hit the nail on the head

[Guest]

Problem with raising the cap will be that the star players will just get paid more. If anything, it will widen the gap between your fringe first graders and your stars, which for me, is an even bigger problem.

there will always be star players.regular 1st graders and fringe 1st graders.the thing is you need to nominate your top 25 and the salary cap needs to fit them in.starting with fringe at min $55k through to the star players up $500,000 its all about balancing the cap.