Wigan Warriors reported to have biggest ‘salary spend’ of 2024 Super League season

[the pieman]

i posted previously with examples of how the new marquee rules would work, and how naming different players impacted in different way (old rules v new rules) but also stated i had no idea who was paid what and my examples were purely for illustration purposes.

as fans does it matter who is named as marquee? All it shows to me is that the club is using the salary cap, exemptions and marquee slots to its full capacity, and we are seeing the benefits from it

the only thing i will say is that you cannot have 3 overseas stars as marquee, so that will prevent a club from just signing 3 highly paid overseas players, and not committing to either home grown / produced, and / or federation trained

the club has an accountant (s) who are paid to manage this on behalf of the club, and i know that there have been several iterations of the budget (this was last year) as we saw both incomings (Dupree) and outgoing (Singleton) for example

i was going to give examples, so went onto the RFL website so i had the exact figures for the 3 marquee players, however the RFL website is incorrect and still only stating 2 marquee (go figure)

https://www.rugby-league.com/salary-cap

this explains it far better, including some of the changes to the exemptions

https://www.totalrl.com/salary-cap-chan ... increases/

So in summary
Home Grown - counts as £50k on cap
So if we have Harry Smith and Liam Farrell on £200k each. It doesnt matter which one we name as the hit to the cap will be £250k (£150k extra will be reported in P&L as salaries etc)

Federation Trained - counts as £100k on cap
So if we have Jake Wardle and Luke Thompson both on £300k each, again it doesnt matter which one is named as the hit is the same - £400k to cap (£600k in total and the extra £200k will be reported in P&L)

Non-Federation Trained - counts as £150k on cap
So if we have Jai Field and Bevan French both on £300k each, again it doesnt matter which one is named as the hit is the same - £450k to cap (£600k in total and the extra £150k will be reported in P&L)

so cap hit = £1.1m, but financially reporting in P&L etc, will be £1.6m

[josie andrews]

i posted previously with examples of how the new marquee rules would work, and how naming different players impacted in different way (old rules v new rules) but also stated i had no idea who was paid what and my examples were purely for illustration purposes.

as fans does it matter who is named as marquee? All it shows to me is that the club is using the salary cap, exemptions and marquee slots to its full capacity, and we are seeing the benefits from it

the only thing i will say is that you cannot have 3 overseas stars as marquee, so that will prevent a club from just signing 3 highly paid overseas players, and not committing to either home grown / produced, and / or federation trained

the club has an accountant (s) who are paid to manage this on behalf of the club, and i know that there have been several iterations of the budget (this was last year) as we saw both incomings (Dupree) and outgoing (Singleton) for example

i was going to give examples, so went onto the RFL website so i had the exact figures for the 3 marquee players, however the RFL website is incorrect and still only stating 2 marquee (go figure)

https://www.rugby-league.com/salary-cap

this explains it far better, including some of the changes to the exemptions

https://www.totalrl.com/salary-cap-chan ... increases/

So in summary
Home Grown - counts as £50k on cap
So if we have Harry Smith and Liam Farrell on £200k each. It doesnt matter which one we name as the hit to the cap will be £250k (£150k extra will be reported in P&L as salaries etc)

Federation Trained - counts as £100k on cap
So if we have Jake Wardle and Luke Thompson both on £300k each, again it doesnt matter which one is named as the hit is the same - £400k to cap (£600k in total and the extra £200k will be reported in P&L)

Non-Federation Trained - counts as £150k on cap
So if we have Jai Field and Bevan French both on £300k each, again it doesnt matter which one is named as the hit is the same - £450k to cap (£600k in total and the extra £150k will be reported in P&L)

so cap hit = £1.1m, but financially reporting in P&L etc, will be £1.6m

Sorry & excuse my ignorance but what is P&L? Is it Profit & Loss?

[the pieman]

i posted previously with examples of how the new marquee rules would work, and how naming different players impacted in different way (old rules v new rules) but also stated i had no idea who was paid what and my examples were purely for illustration purposes.

as fans does it matter who is named as marquee? All it shows to me is that the club is using the salary cap, exemptions and marquee slots to its full capacity, and we are seeing the benefits from it

the only thing i will say is that you cannot have 3 overseas stars as marquee, so that will prevent a club from just signing 3 highly paid overseas players, and not committing to either home grown / produced, and / or federation trained

the club has an accountant (s) who are paid to manage this on behalf of the club, and i know that there have been several iterations of the budget (this was last year) as we saw both incomings (Dupree) and outgoing (Singleton) for example

i was going to give examples, so went onto the RFL website so i had the exact figures for the 3 marquee players, however the RFL website is incorrect and still only stating 2 marquee (go figure)

https://www.rugby-league.com/salary-cap

this explains it far better, including some of the changes to the exemptions

https://www.totalrl.com/salary-cap-chan ... increases/

So in summary
Home Grown - counts as £50k on cap
So if we have Harry Smith and Liam Farrell on £200k each. It doesnt matter which one we name as the hit to the cap will be £250k (£150k extra will be reported in P&L as salaries etc)

Federation Trained - counts as £100k on cap
So if we have Jake Wardle and Luke Thompson both on £300k each, again it doesnt matter which one is named as the hit is the same - £400k to cap (£600k in total and the extra £200k will be reported in P&L)

Non-Federation Trained - counts as £150k on cap
So if we have Jai Field and Bevan French both on £300k each, again it doesnt matter which one is named as the hit is the same - £450k to cap (£600k in total and the extra £150k will be reported in P&L)

so cap hit = £1.1m, but financially reporting in P&L etc, will be £1.6m

Sorry & excuse my ignorance but what is P&L? Is it Profit & Loss?

Yes.

what i was basically trying to show is that the accountants will declare different figures 1 for salary cap purposes (RFL use only) and 1 for the annual figures (P&L / Balance sheets) which will show all playing and non-playing salary, so the figures could be very different

[nathan_rugby]

Given so many of the teams seem not to spend to the cap is it high time it was done away with?

The reason you have given is probably the argument for having the cap. If a lot of teams don't spend up to it and you then removed it, it could create an even bigger gap.

I feel like it is stopping the sport from growing and putting up barriers and should be removed (but not at the expense of clubs being financially irresponsible).

[medlocke]

Given so many of the teams seem not to spend to the cap is it high time it was done away with?

The reason you have given is probably the argument for having the cap. If a lot of teams don't spend up to it and you then removed it, it could create an even bigger gap.

I feel like it is stopping the sport from growing and putting up barriers and should be removed (but not at the expense of clubs being financially irresponsible).

But that is the problem Nathan, these lower level team have had 28 years to sort their act out and they have not, they have taken the piss, the likes of Castleford etc are holding the game back, if the disappear down to the Championship then so be it, surely the elite level of the game should only be for those clubs that can afford to play there, the end

[fozzie58]

Given so many of the teams seem not to spend to the cap is it high time it was done away with?

The reason you have given is probably the argument for having the cap. If a lot of teams don't spend up to it and you then removed it, it could create an even bigger gap.

I feel like it is stopping the sport from growing and putting up barriers and should be removed (but not at the expense of clubs being financially irresponsible).

I agree it should be removed and as you quite rightly point out so long as clubs are able to spend as they like then for me have at it the myth of the cap bringing the sport closer together is for me just that a myth.

Of course the issue would be how do you police clubs from going haywire when they can’t afford it but again you’re bob on the cap as it stands is stopping the sport growing,maybe an increase of a million or so would be a better and safer bet then doing away with it for good?

[Exiled Wiganer]

I have been mulling this over. Do I have this right? If the cap is 2.1m but it can (only) be exceeded for 3 marquee players, then, to reach 3.1m we would be paying 1m to those 3 above the relevant cap. If, say, the 3 marquee players are Smith, Thompson and French, then if we split the excess we would be paying Smith 380k. Thompson 430k and French 480k. I happen to think that Thompson and French are genuinely world class talents, and would not say they were over priced at that price. I am guessing those figures would compare very well with what they would get in the NRL…

[the pieman]

I have been mulling this over. Do I have this right? If the cap is 2.1m but it can (only) be exceeded for 3 marquee players, then, to reach 3.1m we would be paying 1m to those 3 above the relevant cap. If, say, the 3 marquee players are Smith, Thompson and French, then if we split the excess we would be paying Smith 380k. Thompson 430k and French 480k. I happen to think that Thompson and French are genuinely world class talents, and would not say they were over priced at that price. I am guessing those figures would compare very well with what they would get in the NRL…

Not quite

Its £2.1m plus homegrown player allowance (was £100k but think that has increased), welfare allowance (£50k) and dispensation for winning trophies.

[up the junction]

After reading this topic I think some people have to much time on there hands .

[Exiled Wiganer]

I am not sure whether I count as having too much time on my hands, but may I say that my only regret is that having to earn a living prevents me from spending more of my time on Wigan rugby matters.