Salary Cap

Got something to discuss about RL in general? Then this is the place to post it.
nathan_rugby
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:12 pm

Salary Cap

Post by nathan_rugby »

I know the Salary Cap was put in place to try and equal the playing field, give every team an opportunity to win and to stop a monopoly of 1 or few great teams.

The Grand Final has only been won by 4 teams and the league leaders by 7.

We are constantly losing our best talent to the NRL at an increasingly alarming rate.

So, is it working?

What would happen if they abolished it in the UK?

What is the reason they won't abolish or make serious changes?
Bomhead - "Lockers to prop."
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 5445
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 10:07 pm

Re: Salary Cap

Post by Firestarter »

The salary cap is the reason the championship is getting better....... the truth is that super league is getting worse and the championship is getting more and more better quality players...... things might change when the reserves come back next season
IF YOU STRIKE ME DOWN I WILL BECOME MORE POWERFUL THAN YOU CAN POSSIBLY IMAGINE
User avatar
Wigan_forever1985
Posts: 6560
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: Salary Cap

Post by Wigan_forever1985 »

nathan_rugby wrote: Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:57 am I know the Salary Cap was put in place to try and equal the playing field, give every team an opportunity to win and to stop a monopoly of 1 or few great teams.

The Grand Final has only been won by 4 teams and the league leaders by 7.

We are constantly losing our best talent to the NRL at an increasingly alarming rate.

So, is it working?

What would happen if they abolished it in the UK?

What is the reason they won't abolish or make serious changes?
I think the main reason is the team owners dont want to. Rugby league is a poor sport and it suits 99% of the league for it to stay that way including the bigger teams, Teams that have good youth setups like us can rely on them to produce cheap talent that still allows us to compete.

I think we now have a real issue (and IL is exasperating this) SL seems to have accepted its status as a feeder comp to the more powerful NRL and Union setups. So we essentially become like the MLS in football we can throw good money after bad but without respect for the competition we still wont attract the better talent

That said - i do believe the cap stops us ever being able to change that situation

This would be my 3 suggestions to change things:

1) Allow players to earn money through sponsorship that doesn't count on the cap, simple for the game to grow you need sell-able players. The product itself is defunct without a poster boy. Ive said this many times to grow as sport especially a niche sport you need casuals the only way you can get casuals is by a player or players transcending the sport. We had it nearly with Tomkins but his move to the NRL wiped out all the good work that was being done. Its the reason why Hamilton is so important to F1, O'Sullivan to snooker, Joshua/Fury for boxing. Like it or not casual fans are an absolute necessity.

2) Give teams a reason to push - Ive no issue with a cap but allow the teams to dictate it - let them invest profits back into the team, that gives them an incentive to drive up business. You wont attract money into a sport where the potential for making more money doesn't exist.

3) Grow the comp - get rid of the absolutely pointless international game in favour for a mid season All stars SL vs All stars NRL or alternatively enter a "england" team into the State of Origin series. The end of the season top 3 vs top 3. This would allow bragging rights - hard for the NRL to claim its the best comp if they are consistently turned over by super league teams. Granted all this would need to be agreed with the NRL which may be tricky but the international game does absolutely nothing for our game its pointless
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 5445
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 10:07 pm

Re: Salary Cap

Post by Firestarter »

Wigan_forever1985 wrote: Wed Jun 19, 2019 9:24 am
nathan_rugby wrote: Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:57 am I know the Salary Cap was put in place to try and equal the playing field, give every team an opportunity to win and to stop a monopoly of 1 or few great teams.

The Grand Final has only been won by 4 teams and the league leaders by 7.

We are constantly losing our best talent to the NRL at an increasingly alarming rate.

So, is it working?

What would happen if they abolished it in the UK?

What is the reason they won't abolish or make serious changes?
I think the main reason is the team owners dont want to. Rugby league is a poor sport and it suits 99% of the league for it to stay that way including the bigger teams, Teams that have good youth setups like us can rely on them to produce cheap talent that still allows us to compete.

I think we now have a real issue (and IL is exasperating this) SL seems to have accepted its status as a feeder comp to the more powerful NRL and Union setups. So we essentially become like the MLS in football we can throw good money after bad but without respect for the competition we still wont attract the better talent

That said - i do believe the cap stops us ever being able to change that situation

This would be my 3 suggestions to change things:

1) Allow players to earn money through sponsorship that doesn't count on the cap, simple for the game to grow you need sell-able players. The product itself is defunct without a poster boy. Ive said this many times to grow as sport especially a niche sport you need casuals the only way you can get casuals is by a player or players transcending the sport. We had it nearly with Tomkins but his move to the NRL wiped out all the good work that was being done. Its the reason why Hamilton is so important to F1, O'Sullivan to snooker, Joshua/Fury for boxing. Like it or not casual fans are an absolute necessity.

2) Give teams a reason to push - Ive no issue with a cap but allow the teams to dictate it - let them invest profits back into the team, that gives them an incentive to drive up business. You wont attract money into a sport where the potential for making more money doesn't exist.

3) Grow the comp - get rid of the absolutely pointless international game in favour for a mid season All stars SL vs All stars NRL or alternatively enter a "england" team into the State of Origin series. The end of the season top 3 vs top 3. This would allow bragging rights - hard for the NRL to claim its the best comp if they are consistently turned over by super league teams. Granted all this would need to be agreed with the NRL which may be tricky but the international game does absolutely nothing for our game its pointless
England team into state of origin now that would be tasty....... i not sure the aussies would go for it though
IF YOU STRIKE ME DOWN I WILL BECOME MORE POWERFUL THAN YOU CAN POSSIBLY IMAGINE
DaveO
Posts: 15880
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: Salary Cap

Post by DaveO »

Outside of the USA where they crown their own teams world baseball champions or whatever I can't think of one sport that is successful that does not have proper internationals. Even with what you might term US sports the fact a Canadian team just became champions is seen as positive and a way to expand the game.

Having been able to watch GB teams come within a push in the back from Meninga from taking a series off the Aussies I can attest to the atmosphere and think the International game is key to the sports long term well being.

Look at Cricket. There is literally nothing to match an Ashes series and it used to be the same in RL.

So I would do the opposite of killing off the International game in favour of some made up non-game such as All stars SL vs All stars NRL which absolutely no one is vested in at all in that I would try and resurrect proper tours. Difficult since we moved to summer but I'd look into it.

The insular approach might work in the USA where the market is over 250m people but not here.

As to the salary cap it certainly has failed on its mission to even out the competition but that may have been that despite having the cap clubs like Cas could still not afford to pay to the limit. Now with all the clubs getting the full £2m paid via the Sky TV money they do and maybe it is possible for more teams to compete. Hard to say because apart from Hull who have done well at Wembley there is not much evidence of this yet.

Raising it will never get past the SL chairmen as most can't or won't pay above the £2m received from Sky. Even IL who wanted the marquee rule seems to have run out of cash. So there is no point abolishing it. I think only Warrington under Moran would be able to take advantage and maybe Leeds with their income from Headingley.

I have long said players ought to be free to use their image rights without this counting on the cap. They can in Australia I believe. This is an easy and quick fix to getting more money into the game and making it more attractive to players.

Overall though the cap is not going to be abolished and I think it will only increase if a new TV deal offers considerably more cash. Given the product at the moment looks drab I can see the TV money going down not up.

As said in an earlier post RL lost its opportunity to be in the national eye when Sam Tomkins was in the news. Our inability as a sport (never mind as a club) to hold onto him and keep other star players has done a lot of damage to making it attractive to sponsors.

This all stems from the RFL and the idiots running it who went for the Sky deal without putting it out to tender and then adopted their "whole game appracoch" spreading the cash across the board and working as if the sport of RL exists in a bubble.

We have to hope that next time around someone can negotiate better than Nigel Wood and his cronies did. I can't say I am hopeful.
User avatar
Wigan_forever1985
Posts: 6560
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: Salary Cap

Post by Wigan_forever1985 »

DaveO wrote: Wed Jun 19, 2019 11:37 am Outside of the USA where they crown their own teams world baseball champions or whatever I can't think of one sport that is successful that does not have proper internationals. Even with what you might term US sports the fact a Canadian team just became champions is seen as positive and a way to expand the game.
An international game is only good if there is a point to it, no one cares about international rugby league why flog a dead horse and waste money

The Aussies for example rate SOO far far far higher than the international game so i contest that you couldn't create a game such as an all star game series or top 3 vs top 3 and not make it bigger than the pathetic international setup. The idea is for this to replace the "international" feel so super league becomes England in effect.

The sports you mention like cricket of course have international games because no one cares about the club game - the casuals are attracted to the "england" side of things but that sport along with union and golf (ryder cup) are vastly marketed.

The fact that we have a world cup were 90% of teams outside of england/Nz/Oz are made of England/NZ/Oz players just makes it a joke its like the league leaders shield while it should be in theory the pinnacle of achievement it just isn't no one cares

I bet an All Star superleague team vs All star NRL team series would get more people in a stadium that an international game

England vs New Zealand att. at Hull 17649
WCC game 2019 att. 21331

Just because other sports do one thing doesnt mean we should follow suit we need to do what people watching our sport want to see, and from the people i speak to international game is least on the list
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure
SJ
Posts: 1070
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:46 pm

Re: Salary Cap

Post by SJ »

Very good debate.
Re International RL Club rugby has always in my time taken precedence It was the opportunity to see the star antipodians that attracted me to International games. I like the suggestion of a All Stars of SL v All Stars of NRLwhatever their provenance I believe it would be an attractive proposition for species!
DaveO
Posts: 15880
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: Salary Cap

Post by DaveO »

Wigan_forever1985 wrote: Wed Jun 19, 2019 12:18 pm
DaveO wrote: Wed Jun 19, 2019 11:37 am Outside of the USA where they crown their own teams world baseball champions or whatever I can't think of one sport that is successful that does not have proper internationals. Even with what you might term US sports the fact a Canadian team just became champions is seen as positive and a way to expand the game.
An international game is only good if there is a point to it, no one cares about international rugby league why flog a dead horse and waste money

The Aussies for example rate SOO far far far higher than the international game so i contest that you couldn't create a game such as an all star game series or top 3 vs top 3 and not make it bigger than the pathetic international setup. The idea is for this to replace the "international" feel so super league becomes England in effect.
They might rate the SOO higher but they absolutely hate losing international fixtures.
I bet an All Star superleague team vs All star NRL team series would get more people in a stadium that an international game

England vs New Zealand att. at Hull 17649
WCC game 2019 att. 21331

Just because other sports do one thing doesnt mean we should follow suit we need to do what people watching our sport want to see, and from the people i speak to international game is least on the list
Two can play at that game. When its been at the DW with England v the Aussies crowds have been 23k plus and at least once at capacity (now 24k) . How on earth do crowds of 17K, 21K, 23K and 24K equate to no one being interested?

They idea you would get that for a made up team is in my view fanciful.

As to the SOO itself I have always wondered why the Aussies can get so much rivalry into SOO. Players are selected to represent the Australian state in which they played their first senior rugby league game. So in England that could mean a Yorkshireman who made his senior debut for Wigan being expected to be passionate about playing for Lancashire v Yorkshire if we tried the same here. Not going to work is it?

So instead we try and manufacture something else such as your All Star game. And that is the point. How do you manufacture a rivalry? Wigan v Saints, GB/England v Aus. Now they are rivalries steeped in history. Your All Stars game would be an exhibition match in comparison.
pedro
Posts: 5293
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:37 pm

Re: Salary Cap

Post by pedro »

They only rate soo better as in the early 00's GB had such a piss poor team that it died out
User avatar
Wigan_forever1985
Posts: 6560
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: Salary Cap

Post by Wigan_forever1985 »

The all star game was just an idea my preferred option would be a top 3 vs top 3 SL vs NRL to replace the international game

Lets face it the international game will never grow past 3 teams i just dont see as it brings anything to the game except making it look more small time because it highlights how only 3 countries play rugby league (france have made decent progress but are no where near winning anything)

In addition England is now mainly picked from NRL talent so this further creates a gulf between the casual public and the game. you can imagine it watching with a casual if they got excited about watching a player they liked he probably doesnt even play in our league. It also re-enforces the idea that the NRL is a Superior league

The only way we can fight that is by a marker - and i dont mean the WCC because we know thats not on a level field. If we want to get respect for the comp there needs to be a time we can compete against theirs. England doesn't gain that at all if 50% of your squad don't play in SL and 10% of your squad are there because of their grandparents
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure
Post Reply