Hypothetical - Scrap the cap bring in a points system

[Caveman]

This is purely a hypothetical topic for discussions sake in the off season

Wanting to hear thoughts on a points based salary cap rather then a $ based salary cap allowing clubs to pay players as much as they want so long as their squad only adds up to say 1000 points for each clubs top squad with players values ranging between say 10 (for say new up and comers) to say 100 (Thurston).

This would allow players unlimited earning potential

This would allow clubs to strike deals based on performance without risk of busting the cap

This would make player payments irrelevant to the public

The points system should be public knowledge and would stop any speculation as to whos fudging salary cap figures

Obviously you'd have to have boundaries and guide lines in place like only so many players over this value and that value, and you'd also have to find a fair, consistent and transparent way of figuring out each players value and how frequently those values could be adjusted and by how much.


Could a system like this work and if so what would it need to work effectively?

What are the obvious and not so obvious floors and can they be worked around?

Pros versus cons to the current system?

 

[Pom_81]

A thousand times worse than the current system.

i) Way more complex than a simple salary cap

ii) Given the paranoid accusations about clubs with deep pockets, this would only lead to suggestions that certain clubs had "lent" on whoever judged the points system

iii) How do you judge players who are "system" players, like Melbourne's ability to pick up minimum wage forwards and turn them into serviceable players?

iv) Why not just make each club's payments to players public and be done with it? It's what pretty much every single major sports league with a salary cap already does.

 

[Caveman]

To me is more straight forward then the current cap because everyone will know what each player is worth.

Even if you made the salary cap public it would still not get rid of the paper bag to players rought that's seems to be going on at the moment - however a points based system would.

I don't believe there should only be one or to people's and our systems to decide the value of each player - that is the pay that needs to be indepth and incorruptable whilst still being transparent which I belive can be done.
I belive (at this stange) that the pros of a points system far out weigh the current salary cap model regardless of whether or not the cap is made public.

 

[Caveman]

Appolgies for all the typos

 

[gbrussell]

The idea of a points system is one my wife and I had considered for a while. In the middle of the 2015 season we put together a proposal and sent it off to Shane Richardson at the NRL. Unfortunately and not surprisingly we did not receive a response from anyone at “No Real Leadership”.

Yes a points system would be a restraint of trade which a friend of mine who is a lawyer confirmed, but then again a Salary Cap and a Draft is also restraint of trade. The Draft works in AFL because the Player’s Association and the AFL have a signed document that it won’t be challenged by the clubs or players as it is in the best interests of the game. Can’t see the NRL being that “forward thinking”, and also I suspect they don’t want to be transparent and have fans know what is happening behind the scenes in the corridors of power.

Our Proposal breaks up players into one of 6 categories.

Category Zero Player who starts and continues his senior career with his Junior League affiliated club. He is ranked as zero points whilever he stays at his original club, even if he progresses into Representative level.
Example Josh Reynolds.

Category One Player who starts his senior career at an NRL Club, but prior to that played his junior football elsewhere. He is ranked at 1 point whilever he stays at his original NRL Club, even if he progresses into Representative level.
Examples Tim Lafai, David Klemmer, Josh Jackson, Sam Kasiano.

Category Two Commonly referred to as “journeymen players”. These players have played for a previous club at NRL level, but have never played representative football at Senior level. These players are ranked at 2 points. Examples, Mitch Brown, Jonathan Wright.

Category Three Players currently playing NRL but not at their original NRL club, who have gone on to represent at City/Country level. Number of games required to trigger a change of points category from a lower category is two games. Ranked at 3 points.
Example Aiden Tolman.

Category Four Players currently playing NRL but not at their original NRL club, who have gone on to represent NSW or Queensland at State of Origin. Minimum number of Origin games required to trigger a change to this points category is three games. Ranked at 4 points.
Examples Trent Hodkinson, Michael Ennis.

Category Five Players currently playing NRL but not at their original NRL club, who have represented at International Level, (Tests, World Cup etc), players from another country who have played test/world cup football, prior to joining their original NRL club or players who have played representative Rugby Union. Minimum number of games required to trigger a change to this points category is four.
Examples James Graham, Josh and Brett Morris, Benji Marshall, Jonathan Thurston, Greg Inglis, Darius Boyd, Frank Pritchard. Ranked at 5 points.

Players who leave their original NRL Club, but return later do not qualify for their points category to be returned to its original level whilever they are playing representative football.

Consideration could be given to re-classifying players who have retired from representative football, or have not been selected for Origin or Test Football for a period of at least two full seasons.
Examples Jamie Lyon, Sam Perrett, suggested points category 2 (Journeyman Players).

The NRL would be in control of player rankings and publish a list at the start of the season, so it would be transparent, and fans would be more aware that clubs are not secretly cheating like many present fans suspect some clubs are.

Suggested points limit, 60 for a club’s top 25 players.

Once this system is brought in, clubs are to be given a 2 year time frame to get their teams inside the points limit as well as comply with any other restrictions.

The whole point to this is that clubs won’t be able to fill their rosters with high class rep players imported from elsewhere, and it will come a point where developing your own players has to happen to comply with the system.

No doubt at all that this system gives the “non-Sydney” clubs who potentially have bigger junior areas and seem to put more time into development an advantage.

It also caters for situations when an unfortunate run of injuries prevents teams bringing new developed players into first grade because the club would break the salary cap. This system allows new players to come into the squad particularly if they are Category zero.

Bottom line is that at some stage to comply with such a system a club HAS to find, develop and bring in to first grade it’s own players and can’t just keep using the chequebook.

(C)Glenn and Andrea Russell

A lot of thought has been put into this proposal. We would be interested in sensible thoughts.

 

[Dognacious]

The points system u suggest would have stopped us winning the 2004 premiership. A bunch of our top players took pay cuts to get under the cap after the 2002 cap fiasco, so they could give us a premership that we missed out on in 2002. Under your points system a bunch of players would have had to go. You couldnt reduce your points to stay at a club.

But thats not likely to happen again, just an example of how it wouldn't have helped us in 2004.

Biggest problem would be rating players. What about sides that have a lot of very good players who dont qualify for origin. Or old players who used to play origin who are ordinary now? Under your points system farrah is worth more than sbw. Farrah having played origin and sbw not qualifying for it.

 

[CroydonDog]

players could potentially "point themselves" out of the competition and make themselves virtually unemployable.

 

[Mr Invisible]

It's simple. Each year players go into a draft. Worst team gets first pick, and each team can put on hold 3 players that can't be drafted for up to 3 years each year.

Rates are std and NRL controls all third party deals along with clubs.

Simple and effective.

 

[CrittaMagic69]

Id rather dump the celery cap, only holds the game back ino.

 

[Vlasnik]

It's simple. Each year players go into a draft. Worst team gets first pick, and each team can put on hold 3 players that can't be drafted for up to 3 years each year.

Rates are std and NRL controls all third party deals along with clubs.

Simple and effective.

This is where the AFL kicks our asses!!! But even their system can't control teams tanking for higher first round picks.

 

[Vlasnik]

Id rather dump the celery cap, only holds the game back ino.

Only problem with dumping the salary cap is a lot of clubs would fold or become uncompetitive which would damage the game in the long run.

 

[CrittaMagic69]

Only problem with dumping the salary cap is a lot of clubs would fold or become uncompetitive which would damage the game in the long run.

Good, we don't need weak clubs holding back the game. Stronger clubs should be rewarded for thr $$$ they bring in and weaker clubs should be forced to do better or piss off. It's not as if clubs will be spending tens of millions extra on wages anyway.

 

[gbrussell]

The points system u suggest would have stopped us winning the 2004 premiership. A bunch of our top players took pay cuts to get under the cap after the 2002 cap fiasco, so they could give us a premership that we missed out on in 2002. Under your points system a bunch of players would have had to go. You couldnt reduce your points to stay at a club.

But thats not likely to happen again, just an example of how it wouldn't have helped us in 2004.

Biggest problem would be rating players. What about sides that have a lot of very good players who dont qualify for origin. Or old players who used to play origin who are ordinary now? Under your points system farrah is worth more than sbw. Farrah having played origin and sbw not qualifying for it.

I think you have misuderstood what my wife and I proposed. Many players in that team, El Masri, Ben Harris, Matt Utai, Braith Anasta, Brent Sherwin, Roy Asostasi, Willie Mason, Steve Price, Corey Hughes, Adam Perry, JT and SBW, were all players we gave their first opportunity in first grade. El Masri, Sherwin and Corey Hughes were all local juniors worth zero points whileever they stayed at the Dogs. The others were all brought into the Dogs system before they had played for another NRl CLUB and thus ranked at one point. There is no way that team would have been over the limit of 60 points. Despite SBW and JT playing for NZ and Australia respectively they would have stayed as a 1 pointer until they left the Bulldogs, they are now 5 pointers. I acknowledge there are some weaknesses in the system, particularly players who are no longer up to origin or test level, which is why I say players who have not been selected in or retired from test football can be considered by the NRL to a reduction to 2 points. That 2004 team had only a ahndful of "inported" players whose points would have gone up, the current team in my view is more of an issue. Players like S Mortimer, P Mortimer, Brentnall would have been a 1 pointer their entire career, all the Hughes brothers a zero for their entire career.

 

[gbrussell]

players could potentially "point themselves" out of the competition and make themselves virtually unemployable.

Yeah they could do that. It gives a players original club the best chance of keeping a player. Clubs who develop their own players and keep them, thus have the best chance of buying a players they particularly need.

 

[Bad Billy]

Id rather dump the celery cap, only holds the game back ino.

Only problem with dumping the salary cap is a lot of clubs would fold or become uncompetitive which would damage the game in the long run.

Good, we don't need weak clubs holding back the game. Stronger clubs should be rewarded for thr $$$ they bring in and weaker clubs should be forced to do better or piss off. It's not as if clubs will be spending tens of millions extra on wages anyway.

I'm with Marley on this one.
Shit clubs will fold and be replaced by others, eventually you'll wind up with a competition of only strong clubs.

 

[COVENS]

Good, we don't need weak clubs holding back the game. Stronger clubs should be rewarded for thr $$$ they bring in and weaker clubs should be forced to do better or piss off. It's not as if clubs will be spending tens of millions extra on wages anyway.

Losing clubs means less games a round, means shorter season, means less games to telecast means less money in the NRL.

 

[Mr Invisible]

I'm with Marley on this one.
Shit clubs will fold and be replaced by others, eventually you'll wind up with a competition of only strong clubs.

Your mean like NRL heavyweights Souths / Roosters / Broncos / Storm are already?

 

[hayes]

Should just have a luxury tax 200% for every dollar spent over the cap.

 

[Rodzilla]

the salary cap is only to stop players getting paid what they are worth and to put that money into the executives pockets instead

 

[Vlasnik]

Losing clubs means less games a round, means shorter season, means less games to telecast means less money in the NRL.

It also means an exodus of fans leaving the game for other pastures and I agree with you 100%, with that said your post holds too much common sense for some here on the kennel.