We need a whole new team and coach

Malla

*********
Joined
Aug 30, 2007
Messages
10,870
Reaction score
13,470
You're wrong and not smart enough to comprehend what I'm saying (or the situation at all really). No point continuing this. I gave you 50% as an e.g. because it's easier to calculate. You can use whatever % you think the salary cap will decrease by but the principle is the same.
Not smart enough to comprehend you lol okkkk

The principal is wrong. No need to debate here tho - you'll see for yourself what happens in a few months when the salary cap drops.

The point I was making however was, we are not signing anyone worthy now with the current salary cap, it'll be even more tougher to sign with a reduced cap.
 

grunta

= dOgGyStYlE =
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
263
Reaction score
242
Coronoavirus isn't going to affect our 2021 recruitment in a negative way.

I can't see us winning a premiership until 2024 but I expect us to be a mainstay finals team (potentially make a top four) from 2021 onwards.

Pay will stay until a top coach is available (Flanagan only coach I see on the horizon) or he has a horrible season with the 2021 roster - when we actually will have expectations worth noting. If you need an example look at the Knights from 2018 onwards (and we're better than their 2017 roster in almost every way).
Mate Bennett is gone from souths as of next year! I'd be head hunting him
 

TwinTurbo

Kennel Legend
Gilded
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
9,347
Reaction score
15,419
How? It decreases for every club. Current players will have to take a % decrease depending on how much the salary cap decreases. E.g. if Josh Jackson is on 600k and the salary cap decreases by 50% he'll be on 300k afterwards. It isn't exactly that simple (higher end players will take more of a pay cut than minimal wage players) but that's the principle. You're not looking into it enough if that's your opinion. There is no world where we lose the salary cap % we are going to have to spend for 2021 (our "advantage" in the transfer market) therefore nothing changes except how much the player receives (which doesn't matter to us, it's the % they're on in the salary cap that does matter).
Why would an NRL player with a valid and enforceable contract ever agree to a 50% (your example) pay cut? They have mortgages to pay, families to feed and expenses to cover. As professional sportsmen they only have a short time frame in which to earn a decent income that might have to last their entire lifetime. It's not like a normal profession where 40 or 50 years of earning capacity is common. They might have 10 years if they are lucky and asking them to give up 50% for one year (ie; 10% of 10 years) is like asking someone in a normal job to give up 50% for 5 years (ie; 10% of 50 years). Keeping in mind that players have already given up a large % of this years contract value. Personally I'd tell them to eff off and pay my contract value, if not, see you in court which having a valid contract signed by all parties I'd win easily.

Whether it's 50% or 10% they are relying on the players' goodwill and there is a limit to that.

Go Dogs
 

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,756
Reaction score
18,941
Why would an NRL player with a valid and enforceable contract ever agree to a 50% (your example) pay cut? They have mortgages to pay, families to feed and expenses to cover. As professional sportsmen they only have a short time frame in which to earn a decent income that might have to last their entire lifetime. It's not like a normal profession where 40 or 50 years of earning capacity is common. They might have 10 years if they are lucky and asking them to give up 50% for one year (ie; 10% of 10 years) is like asking someone in a normal job to give up 50% for 5 years (ie; 10% of 50 years). Keeping in mind that players have already given up a large % of this years contract value. Personally I'd tell them to eff off and pay my contract value, if not, see you in court which having a valid contract signed by all parties I'd win easily.

Whether it's 50% or 10% they are relying on the players' goodwill and there is a limit to that.

Go Dogs
If the money isn't there than the money isn't there... Todd Greenberg spoke about this on Fox. It's in the players contracts (something disaster) and they agreed a couple of years ago to get more money if the game is doing well, but that also means if the game is going bad they get less money. I think it's called ambassadors of the game but it could be called something else. I can't find the specific video to give you but if you were watching Fox you'd know yourself. The longer the game is out the bigger the pay cut. This is also why players don't have a choice (if they want to get paid) to play in the conditions the NRL sets them.
 

_G-Dog_

Kennel Legend
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
13,303
Reaction score
7,733
We may need new management if the current crew havent done anything major until 2022.. sure theyve cleared the decks now thiers the 2nd part of building somthing strong..
 

TwinTurbo

Kennel Legend
Gilded
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
9,347
Reaction score
15,419
If the money isn't there than the money isn't there... Todd Greenberg spoke about this on Fox. It's in the players contracts (something disaster) and they agreed a couple of years ago to get more money if the game is doing well, but that also means if the game is going bad they get less money. I think it's called ambassadors of the game but it could be called something else. I can't find the specific video to give you but if you were watching Fox you'd know yourself. The longer the game is out the bigger the pay cut. This is also why players don't have a choice (if they want to get paid) to play in the conditions the NRL sets them.
Cutting player payments while no games are being played and no income is coming in is very different to cutting player payments because the NRL has mismanaged the funds and can't afford to pay the clubs. It is worth keeping in mind that we pay our players and the NRL pays us. Aside from rep players, the NRL doesn't actually pay any players, the clubs pay their players and they can use the NRL payments or any other funds at their disposal to pay their players. The Salary Cap being the evener.

In simple terms, why should one of our players be forced to cop a pay cut because, say, the Titans can't afford to pay their players? I'm no lawyer but even I could make that case in court.

Go Dogs
 

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,756
Reaction score
18,941
Cutting player payments while no games are being played and no income is coming in is very different to cutting player payments because the NRL has mismanaged the funds and can't afford to pay the clubs. It is worth keeping in mind that we pay our players and the NRL pays us. Aside from rep players, the NRL doesn't actually pay any players, the clubs pay their players and they can use the NRL payments or any other funds at their disposal to pay their players. The Salary Cap being the evener.

In simple terms, why should one of our players be forced to cop a pay cut because, say, the Titans can't afford to pay their players? I'm no lawyer but even I could make that case in court.

Go Dogs
The NRL gives clubs a grant to cover the salary cap. I guarantee you if the salary cap decreases by X% so will the players contracts. Also clubs signing players now (e.g. Frizell, Latrell) are signing players based on X% of the salary cap (the same % which = what they'd be on if the cap stayed the same). Until we know what they salary cap is going to look like moving forward those players aren't going to know what they're going to be earning. This was spoken again on Fox with Kent relaying what I'm telling you (I also said this before Kent said it today).

Every club will be able to pay the salary cap whatever it is (as again they get a grant from the NRL). Pay cuts/no work is happening everywhere, not just NRL. Also again it is across the board for every club and player.

If we can't agree on this we're just going to be going around in circles. I'm pretty confident it'll pan out the way I'm saying but we'll have to wait and see.
 

TwinTurbo

Kennel Legend
Gilded
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
9,347
Reaction score
15,419
The NRL gives clubs a grant to cover the salary cap. I guarantee you if the salary cap decreases by X% so will the players contracts. Also clubs signing players now (e.g. Frizell, Latrell) are signing players based on X% of the salary cap (the same % which = what they'd be on if the cap stayed the same). Until we know what they salary cap is going to look like moving forward those players aren't going to know what they're going to be earning. This was spoken again on Fox with Kent relaying what I'm telling you (I also said this before Kent said it today).

Every club will be able to pay the salary cap whatever it is (as again they get a grant from the NRL). Pay cuts/no work is happening everywhere, not just NRL. Also again it is across the board for every club and player.

If we can't agree on this we're just going to be going around in circles. I'm pretty confident it'll pan out the way I'm saying but we'll have to wait and see.
The players have current legally binding contracts. In order to change that requires BOTH PARTIES to agree to the change, the effective result being a new contract. If the player/s don’t agree then they are entitled to seek legal recourse to have their contracts honoured.

I know what I would do, I would tell my players that we will honour their contracts, pay them the agreed amount in full, regardless of how much the NRL pays us. When the club’s business returns to normal, as it most certainly will, we can afford it. The clubs that can’t, we’ll that’s their problem. We have lost and let go a plethora of quality players over the last 4 years because of salary cap constraints, plus many players we would have liked to have signed but couldn’t. The clubs that took our players because they could offer more money didn’t care and neither should we when the shoe is on the other foot.

Think of the player loyalty it would generate, we would be known as the club that financially supports its players and honours its contracts. It’s an ever so easy spin to generate positive publicity, “we don’t believe in cutting our players’ salaries just because the NRL screwed up its finances”, “players have mortgages and families to support” etc etc. There’s a once in 20 years opportunity here and we should take it.

Go Dogs
 

Reality Dogg

Banned
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
112
Reaction score
19
We can’t even afford to run the club without begging for donations from members, asking them to pledge their money! NRL is becoming a complete joke and let’s be honest our club is not what it used to be! We are now the joke of Sydney clubs being run by a muppet CEO and negligent incompetent board! We need a Gus Gould clean out
 

DinkumDog

Kennel Immortal
2 x Gilded
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
22,711
Reaction score
41,540
We can’t even afford to run the club without begging for donations from members, asking them to pledge their money! NRL is becoming a complete joke and let’s be honest our club is not what it used to be! We are now the joke of Sydney clubs being run by a muppet CEO and negligent incompetent board! We need a Gus Gould clean out
Name other Sydney clubs in significantly better shape and reasons why. Don’t say the Chooks or Wabbits - without their wealthy backers they’d be nowhere and sooner or later they’ll stop pouring personal wealth in unless the business warrants it (just like the Penns at Manly). They are rich in part because they are smart enough to not pour good money after bad.

The truth is most clubs are up struggle street (particularly now) and in fact several are worse off than the Dogs. Do you believe sponsors are not renegotiating deals with other clubs given they have no current exposure?

Perhaps you can also specify your charges against the current administration and what exactly is a ‘Gus Gould Clean-out’ and where has one been performed with stellar results?
 

Teddybear

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
2,899
Reaction score
1,970
Not a good look i agree.

Surely they could handle behind closed doors with each Individual member if they wishing for refund.
We can’t even afford to run the club without begging for donations from members, asking them to pledge their money! NRL is becoming a complete joke and let’s be honest our club is not what it used to be! We are now the joke of Sydney clubs being run by a muppet CEO and negligent incompetent board! We need a Gus Gould clean out
 

speedy2460

Kennel Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
5,180
Reaction score
4,564
To all the people wanting to get rid of Dean Pay and appoint another coach.
Do you seriously think ANY coach could improve this lot?
The recruitment has reached a stalemate, because of the lack of available funds, not because of the incumbent coach.
2021 was going to be different, as funds would have been available, but that may be ruined by the Covid-19 virus affecting all clubs.
 

D- voice

Kennel Addict
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
7,851
Reaction score
11,231
Name other Sydney clubs in significantly better shape and reasons why. Don’t say the Chooks or Wabbits - without their wealthy backers they’d be nowhere and sooner or later they’ll stop pouring personal wealth in unless the business warrants it (just like the Penns at Manly). They are rich in part because they are smart enough to not pour good money after bad.

The truth is most clubs are up struggle street (particularly now) and in fact several are worse off than the Dogs. Do you believe sponsors are not renegotiating deals with other clubs given they have no current exposure?

Perhaps you can also specify your charges against the current administration and what exactly is a ‘Gus Gould Clean-out’ and where has one been performed with stellar results?
People forget...It wasn't that long ago when our leagues and football clubs were the envy of all clubs, and at one stage our club was on the verge of investing a billion dollars in the Liverpool Oasis project.
Yes times aren't what they used to be but that goes for all clubs, we have to work hard to regain our statures, our problems will be history once we get the football side of things sorted, I know what needs to be done most of us do, some don't want to admit...
One suggestion, if Soffs don't need Bennett for 2021, why not pair him with a young coach (it can be Pay) ???
It would a win win situation to all parties !
As for Gould he is no more than a players motivator, I would never want him in an administrative position at our club...
He is trouble !!!
 

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,756
Reaction score
18,941
People forget...It wasn't that long ago when our leagues and football clubs were the envy of all clubs, and at one stage our club was on the verge of investing a billion dollars in the Liverpool Oasis project.
Yes times aren't what they used to be but that goes for all clubs, we have to work hard to regain our statures, our problems will be history once we get the football side of things sorted, I know what needs to be done most of us do, some don't want to admit...
One suggestion, if Soffs don't need Bennett for 2021, why not pair him with a young coach (it can be Pay) ???
It would a win win situation to all parties !
As for Gould he is no more than a players motivator, I would never want him in an administrative position at our club...
He is trouble !!!
Bennett is only a short term option and we don't have a team ready to win a premiership (moved on from the Broncos and potentially Rabbitohs for that exact reason). Bennett is also obviously on the downfall (I personally think he's lost his touch). We're still rebuilding. If we recruit right for 2021 we can be a top eight team. There is still a long way to go after that (being a top four team, winning the premiership, etc - basically being back to where we almost were under Des). Flanagan and Bellamy are the only two obvious candidates atm (and Bellamy is a long shot).
 

D- voice

Kennel Addict
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
7,851
Reaction score
11,231
Bennett is only a short term option and we don't have a team ready to win a premiership (moved on from the Broncos and potentially Rabbitohs for that exact reason). Bennett is also obviously on the downfall (I personally think he's lost his touch). We're still rebuilding. If we recruit right for 2021 we can be a top eight team. There is still a long way to go after that (being a top four team, winning the premiership, etc - basically being back to where we almost were under Des). Flanagan and Bellamy are the only two obvious candidates atm (and Bellamy is a long shot).
There are a handful of top coaches that can't be considered for different reasons
This is why Bennett is a good idea as a mentor coach !!!
 
Last edited:
Top