Replace the cap with a transfer fee system

[AlzzBulldog]

I think this would be better because it would allow people to pay big money for a transfer of a player even when hes on contract and if the clubs agree they could release the player easily if they are satisfied with the fee. And this would help some of the smaller clubs financially, because they could receive good money and use it on other players they need. Once the player is released then the other club takes on that players contract or renegotiate a different one, theres no need for a salary cap

 

[CMP]

I don’t like the Salary Cap. But I think you miss understand what the Salary Cap is there for and it’s role. A Transfer system is another conversation, which could run in conjunction with the current system. But it cannot replace the Salary Cap.

 

[_G-Dog_]

The NRL needs to get with the times & alllow cryptocurrency .. bitcoin & the like

 

[KiwiDog7]

Just go back to the days of bartering

 

[Trafford10]

I have been posting until I am blue in the face that the only effective salary cap without a draft is the MLB
They have the equalization tax & all players salaries are public record the MLB has acces to the players tax portal for declared MLB income.

 

[Mr Invisible]

Just go back to the days of bartering

I can see it now @KiwiDog7 ..

I Desmond of Hasler willst give thee 3 apples and 2 grapes for thy signature of that fair maiden.

*moment later*

BULLDOGS BREAKING NEWS: Aaron Woods signs with Bulldogs.

 

[chisdog]

Just go back to the days of bartering

What like North Sydney's last sponsor - Bartercard?

 

[chisdog]

Who sets the transfer fee? Is it a restraint of trade if it is too high? The Roosters don't have many juniors so they have to buy every player.

 

[boggie23]

I have been posting until I am blue in the face that the only effective salary cap without a draft is the MLB
They have the equalization tax & all players salaries are public record the MLB has acces to the players tax portal for declared MLB income.

Exactly. There is too many deal that aren’t at arms length. And players signing for “unders” but end up with cars or rich endorsement deals.

Make everything transparent. And set a cap. If you go over it fair enough. Say you are at 10 million. And you sign another player. Cool. You pay 3x the amount over in taxes. So all good. You have 12 million worth of talent. But it’s costing you 16. Doubt you would have the monopoly like roosters and dragons who get around the cap with “loyalty” or “lifestyle” excuses.

 

[Baby Blues]

Maybe there’s something in the CBA that keeps player salaries from being published? Not knowing how much a player counts towards the cap causes so much confusion.
I’m sure by keeping it secret has led to people trying to cheat the cap. How often has the NRL auditors actually caught teams cheating? It’s usually a reporter, internal whistleblower or the clubs themselves self reporting.

 

[boggie23]

Maybe there’s something in the CBA that keeps player salaries from being published? Not knowing how much a player counts towards the cap causes so much confusion.
I’m sure by keeping it secret has led to people trying to cheat the cap. How often has the NRL auditors actually caught teams cheating? It’s usually a reporter, internal whistleblower or the clubs themselves self reporting.

Yeh well I guess they are hiding from the scrutiny. Because when you see Cronk on 400k or something. Or Lockyer on 300k you think wtf.

Also say a player is on x amount then someone has a big season their manager will use the info to be like this player gets that and mine is better.

 

[Baby Blues]

Yeh well I guess they are hiding from the scrutiny. Because when you see Cronk on 400k or something. Or Lockyer on 300k you think wtf.

Also say a player is on x amount then someone has a big season their manager will use the info to be like this player gets that and mine is better.

Would you be more interested in a NFL style contract system where the whole amount isn’t guaranteed? The clubs would like that way more as you can cut players if they don’t perform to the level
of their contract.
I still can’t see how they police TPA’s. How would the NRL know if a player’s partner or family member got a a property at way below market value?

 

[Oatley Dog]

Exactly. There is too many deal that aren’t at arms length. And players signing for “unders” but end up with cars or rich endorsement deals.

Make everything transparent. And set a cap. If you go over it fair enough. Say you are at 10 million. And you sign another player. Cool. You pay 3x the amount over in taxes. So all good. You have 12 million worth of talent. But it’s costing you 16. Doubt you would have the monopoly like roosters and dragons who get around the cap with “loyalty” or “lifestyle” excuses.

But that is precisely why the cap was created, to stop the rich clubs from sucking up all the good players because they have a bottomless pit. We have billionaires running the Warriors, Broncos and Easts and a mega star running the Rabbits. Do you really think they couldn't find $50 million to shore up the existing and emerging talent if it meant maintaining their dominance. Meanwhile most of the other clubs go broke and we have an 8 team comp. Less games on TV means less revenue which means more comes from the members and sponsors. Got a spare $100k for season tickets?

 

[boggie23]

Would you be more interested in a NFL style contract system where the whole amount isn’t guaranteed? The clubs would like that way more as you can cut players if they don’t perform to the level
of their contract.
I still can’t see how they police TPA’s. How would the NRL know if a player’s partner or family member got a a property at way below market value?

Yeh the 3rd party agreements never seem at arms length and it’s evident that the 2-3 most influential clubs/owners/chairmen have the best players (Souths, roosters, broncos). What’s stopping either of them calling a mate and saying I’ll give you 200k to give to x player.

The nrl salary cap is the worst player management and salary cap system I can imagine. And there has very rarely been someone caught for systemic breaching without a whistle blower.

Ok they catch the clubs who had lots of injuries and used 30 players, and fine them 50-200k but they have never caught anything systemic, because they have no idea.

I like the soft and hard cap of the nba where sure with bird rights (sort of long serving allowance) you can go above the cap, but you get slammed with luxury tax (penalty).

In effect you could potentially go over the cap for your own juniors with a system like that which I think would be fair (until roosters start signing 12 year olds to contracts to get around the system )

 

[boggie23]

But that is precisely why the cap was created, to stop the rich clubs from sucking up all the good players because they have a bottomless pit. We have billionaires running the Warriors, Broncos and Easts and a mega star running the Rabbits. Do you really think they couldn't find $50 million to shore up the existing and emerging talent if it meant maintaining their dominance. Meanwhile most of the other clubs go broke and we have an 8 team comp. Less games on TV means less revenue which means more comes from the members and sponsors. Got a spare $100k for season tickets?

The fact is there isn’t enough revenue to support 50 million in losses every year. Like you’d go over your cap for a year or 2 then think shit I can’t keep this up.

Clubs get a 10-12 mil grant per year. If a team can justify a 4-6 million dollar loss just on players salary, let alone directors, staff, coaches, training facilities etc, and be able to maintain it for several years to create a dominance then good on them.

But for me spreading the talent doesn’t make the game more entertaining. I stopped watching 5 weeks ago. And most likely I’m done for the year.

League used to be a spectacle. Now it’s almost mundane.

 

[Oatley Dog]

The fact is there isn’t enough revenue to support 50 million in losses every year. Like you’d go over your cap for a year or 2 then think shit I can’t keep this up.

Clubs get a 10-12 mil grant per year. If a team can justify a 4-6 million dollar loss just on players salary, let alone directors, staff, coaches, training facilities etc, and be able to maintain it for several years to create a dominance then good on them.

But for me spreading the talent doesn’t make the game more entertaining. I stopped watching 5 weeks ago. And most likely I’m done for the year.

League used to be a spectacle. Now it’s almost mundane.

I think you are missing the point. A cap prevents that money from being splashed around. Your proposition gives those few elite clubs with cash an advantage that turns the comp into a two tiered one that has 50+ point floggings as the norm. You may not like "mundane" but no-one likes touch footy. You are right most clubs couldn't support even a $20m loss - so you have to have systems in place to not only protect them from themselves but protect the game. It's called a salary cap. It's imperfect but it's a whole lot better than a system that penalises the ones that can most afford to be penalised.

People cite the MLB/NFL/NBA systems as evidence that you can work around it but sadly overlook the fact that every one of those teams is privately owned, privately sold when it suits and has an owner or consortium that has billions in available income to invest. We are only about 7% of the size of their country and have 4 winter sports all competing for the dollars. It's time to be pragmatic about this and accept that while not the perfect answer it does in fact do a reasonable job of maintaining a comp that has enough uncertainty that picking the winner from year to year is a challenge. There hasn't been a back to back for over 20 years. That alone tells you that the big clubs don't have a mortgage on the comp.

 

[Trafford10]

But that is precisely why the cap was created, to stop the rich clubs from sucking up all the good players because they have a bottomless pit. We have billionaires running the Warriors, Broncos and Easts and a mega star running the Rabbits. Do you really think they couldn't find $50 million to shore up the existing and emerging talent if it meant maintaining their dominance. Meanwhile most of the other clubs go broke and we have an 8 team comp. Less games on TV means less revenue which means more comes from the members and sponsors. Got a spare $100k for season tickets?

That is why the equalization tax in the MLB does work.

 

[gbrussell]

I have said many times there HAS to be a better way than using players salaries to equalize team strengths. I have put forward my idea of a points system on this forum, and also sent it to the NRL. The NRL didn't even have the decency to reply and say thanks for your suggestion. They obviously don't like fan feedback and their heads are so far in the sand that the salary cap is their GOD. Think of the teams who have been caught over the years, did the integrity unit catch them? Nope. Most were either as the result of whistleblowers or self reporting. The NRL Integrity unit are pretty much useless. A draft goes hand in hand with a cap in most sports. AFL might not be as good a sport as NRL but AFL administration leaves the NRL administration for dead.

 

[Trafford10]

The NRL would have to be one of the most corrupt sporting bodies in world sport. Certainly by far & away the most corrupt sporting organization in Australia. It's totally ineffective & abused salary cap & TPAs are just a pathetic joke.

 

[Oatley Dog]

That is why the equalization tax in the MLB does work.

No it doesn't. Not in the context of its application here. We would have 4 teams in the comp who would continue to spend over the cap because they can source income and the other 12 would eventually fold or just be ESL type cannon fodder. It's already been established that the TPA's are nowhere near what people think they are and that is because there is no money in the economy for "playing". There are maybe half a dozen people in Australia that could afford to throw money at sport. Even Lowy can't keep the A-league afloat. In any event it is irrelevant. it's not the cap that is actually creating the problem. It is the payments to players off book that has everyone wondering. Do you really think that sports stars all around the world aren't getting paid away from their actual disclosed salaries? Of course they are and no doubt rorting the tax system as well so having disclosed incomes only works for those who are honest - a bit like our salary cap....

If having rules were a guarantee of compliance then we wouldn't need cops, but here we are. Salary caps are just rules.