2022

All the news on the Canberra Raiders NRL team, all in one place

Moderator: GH Moderators

User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 3:16 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 2:12 pm
greeneyed wrote: January 2, 2022, 1:38 pm Maybe it's not all one thing or the other. I can't see anything wrong with Raiders fans wanting the NRL to treat their club fairly and equitably - and to pressure the NRL to eliminate policies that unreasonably disadvantage the club or favour others. Those Raiders fans can also want the club to be professionally run and coached.
Completely agree
It is my view that whilst not perfect, the nrl by and large has done a very good job in treating clubs, including our own, equitably and has provided a competition with a structure and rules that allows a club like ours the ability to compete and be as successful as any other.

The rest is up to us.
I think it is a little simplistic to say that it is the best system that they can use. No other competition with the subject of parity at hand, uses just one mechanism, particularly if that mechanism has many faults. They generally use a draft in association with it
I never said it was the best system they could use, simply that this system has proven (as per above) to be a very effective in allowing any club the ability to succeed or fail on their own terms.

The biggest and richest clubs in this league, like the roosters and broncos, can end up with the spoon
The smallest and brokest clubs in the league, like the Cowboys and Sharks, can win premierships
This is a league where big and small clubs can win, and you can “buy” a premiership with astute work in free agency the way the roosters tend to do it
You can “build” a premiership with fantastic pathways and junior development like Penrith
You can do with a mix of both.
Most fans can go into a season thinking they can play finals footy, pretty much if not every club has at least one genuine star player their fan base can cling to and adore and who wouldn’t look out of place in the best side in the comp


Not many leagues in pro sports can lay claim to that. The nrl and it’s salary cap system isn’t perfect but it’s not standing in the way of any clubs success.

And again, you’ll find no bigger advocate for an NRL draft than me.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Matt wrote: January 2, 2022, 12:28 pm
Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 10:05 am
Matt wrote: January 2, 2022, 9:51 am
Colk wrote: January 1, 2022, 11:22 pm
Botman wrote: January 1, 2022, 9:31 pm The salary cap is the ONLY reason a club like ours has even a chance to compete, and maybe even exist.
Go and check european soccer and let me know how clubs with our market share go when a salary cap doesnt exist.

Reality check, pal. If the NRL was run without a salary cap, and it was just dog eat dog, they'd have sold our damn license to the highest bidder 10 years ago. Hard to be competitve when you're the Perth **** Reds. What the salary cap does is provide is a baseline level of parity... and sure, other factors like life style, climate, beaches what-have-you matter, but the simple reality is, the only thing really holding this club back is itself.

There is absolutely nothing stopping us from being an excellently managed roster with excellent coaching. Can we attract the highest level talent alive? NO. But that just means we have to build and grow in differrent ways. There are many routes to success, it's not a one way street. The roosters and storm dont get to draw on a deep development system, anymore than we can draw on Free Agency. Every club has to walk their own line and make do with what they have.

Some do it better than most, we have to walk our line... if you want compensation because we are located in canberra and think somehow we should be given artificial (rather than natural) advantages to prop us up.. good luck, ill redirect your mail to the grave. You'll find it before we get legs up for being an underiable location.

So yes, by all means, shoot the salary cap into sun today and by 2025, we dont exist. The "consistency of teams both at the top and bottom" is a really simple way of saying which teams are run well and which arent. Wanna guess were we've stood generally speaking?

The broncos were a consitent top team when they were well managed, and they have as many advantages as any in the league... once they were poorly managed and poorly coached, nothing could stop them from being the worst team in the league
the bulldogs have all the advantages of any sydney team... doenst matter, they havent had anyone who knows what they're doing in years, they stink
Penrith draw on the best nursary in the world for RL talent, and until they found proper management and coaching they did nothing.
Parra have the second best by virtue of local, and they cant figure it the **** out because of mismanagement and bad coaching
The roosters have the smallest junior distrcit of any club and were a laughing stock for years, suddenly with good coaching and good management, they're a juggernaut
Melbourne have absolutely nothing, the game is STILL, after all this success, after all these years, an after thought in an AFL dominated state, there is no real domestic competition to draw from.
The knights and Manly have prestine beaches, the Dragons and Sharks are sitting on amazing locations...
Souths are 3 minutes bus ride away from the roosters and were a barren wasteland of success until...

None of it matters,
The ONLY consistent theme for good teams is:
- Good management
- Good coaching

that's all you need. We had that too! And were some unlucky bounces of the ball and brain fart away from maybe a title. Evidently we probably lucked into that, but ultimately we are responsible for our own success or failure.

the salary cap is not our issue, it's the reason we've survived this long
We are our issue.
Wow that’s a very long unnecessary post showing how you missed my point entirely. You sound a bit defensive also - you are not Nick Politis by any chance?

I don’t remember ever claiming in my post to get rid of the salary cap entirely or in particular having no system/free for all like European soccer, so what you are presenting is a false dichotomy and putting words in my mouth.

What I did simply say is that the current system wasn’t particularly effective in its current format for a few reasons in particular, which I think are fairly obvious. For example, is the salary cap transparent? Has the NRL uncovered systematic rorting itself or has it relied on fortunate happenstance? Does it take into consideration factors like location, lifestyle? For example, what happens when you want to put in another team, which RL needs to do (Perth or NZ et al) as they will be extremely disadvantaged in the player market in the beginning? I think these are quite legitimate questions and questions only designed to improve the system, because let’s face it compared to other sports, our transfer system is dreadful.

Now you could fix the salary cap itself or you could put in something like a draft/points system/anything else to work alongside the salary cap to counteract any inherent flaws in that system. It’s pretty much what every other professional sport has done (barring football) and something which, if we want to develop and grow the game further, needs to be looked at.
Colk, the only point you made that was valid, was the lack if transparency in the cap. But you took a while to get there.

Botman has replied it kind.

It's like for like really
Really? He went on a completely non-sensical rant about blowing up the salary cap which I never once intimated.

Also, you don’t think for example that the Dolphins entry has identified a problem with the salary cap? You don’t think that every big name player going to Roosters/Souths for the past 10 or so years doesn’t suggest a flaw? Also, lack of transparency isn’t just a minor problem, it’s an existential one.
I dont believe the Dolphins are worse off, no. That said, it would be unlikely for the to be competitive in yr 1. Storm is the only franchise to really buck the trend as far as new clubs go.

1. Cap is equal
2. With contracts in the NRL being meaningless, they have more than just the off contract players to pick from.
3. There are players that will see inaugural side as attractive
4. It's a nice spot/destination much like the GC.
5. Bennett is the coach, he will attract players
You’ve inadvertently hit the nail on the head with the Storm example - they worked because they could pick leftover talent from the disintegration/destruction of multiple clubs. They did a great job of course but that had never happened before and will never happen again.

Rugby League just don’t plan at all and they haven’t learnt from their past experiences - Western Reds, North Qld Cowboys, South Qld Crushers, Warriors were all rushed in to the competition with no forethought or planning. In those cases they didn’t have enough time to build a competitive squad from day dot and were given no assistance in terms of travel costs.

Again with the Dolphins, they haven’t been given enough time to build a competitive squad and there is no flexibility or assistance provided by the NRL to help them in this way. I know that is an anathema to RL and its’ supporters but maybe it’s time that the game looked at other sports and see how they do things because other sports just do it a lot better.

1. The cap isn’t equal. It would only be equal, if every team had the same purchasing power, which they clearly don’t. They are going to have to spend massive overs to get any players to sign and most likely the players they will sign will be from teams that are already struggling. This in turn widens the already considerable gap between the haves and have nots, which is definitely not a good thing - see results over the last two years.
2. Perhaps. Again it would depend on how many players they had signed, what other options are available and how much they have to spend. It is a risky strategy to bank on this happening en masse.
3. To whom? They have signed Felise Kaufusi and a few dregs. Jesus they were talking up Blake Austin as an option last week - that’s pretty dire. Think of it this way, if I were a player, why would I go to a club that has no history when I can choose a club that I know about. Security is s big thing.
4. See point 3 - it’s not working obviously
5. See point 3 - it’s not working obviously

It’s important that this club works. Really important. The game can’t afford to either have another Titans (crap side/low support) being a drag on the competition, or worse yet another defunct club, and at this point in time they are looking as bad as Wests circa last 90’s or Newcastle circa 2016. That would play so much into AFL’s hands
Billy Walker
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6900
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: 2022

Post by Billy Walker »

Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 3:24 pm
Billy Walker wrote: January 2, 2022, 2:10 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 1:07 pm The salary cap very effectively does what it aims to do, and contributes substancially to parity across the NRL
Is there more the NRL could do in terms of parity? Of course, once the NRL goes to 18 and probably eventually 20 teams, you'll find no bigger advocate for conferencing the NRL than me, no fan in the world is more eager than me to see the NRL establish a proper pathway from state U16-18's competitions into a NRL draft to help with this.

I've been screaming into the wind for years about publishing player salaries and contract details, including TPA's...

But the simple reality is the Storm and Roosters aren't dominating because they have unbelievable advantages with a salary cap. They're dominating because they're extremely well run and well coached.
As were the Broncos, who i was told were only able to be successful because of all these wonderful advantages they had... and now even with all those advantages that made it so easy for them, they're just like any other poorly run **** hole club because the front office and coaching has fallen off a cliff. Imagine my surprise. And hot tip, the Storm and Roosters are going to go the same way should they ever find themselves back in a situation where they have poor management and coaching.

We have some natural disadvantages, things we need to overcome as a club in terms of the player market, the salary cap helps ensure these disadvantages arent a death sentence to our ability to compete and be successful. There is nothing stopping us from being well run and well coached and being a successful football team. The salary cap, although not perfect, plays a large role in ensure we can suceed or fail on our own merits. Unfortunately for us fans, we've done more of the latter than the former
I agree with you Bot. The bit that annoys me though is the acceptance of under performance. I’ll bet my hard earned that the Broncos won’t remain a steaming pile for long. The fan base, the club, the town - it just won’t accept an underperforming Broncos and they will do what needs to be done to get the club up top again even if some players and coaches get burned along the way.

It’s been far too long since we have had success, but sometimes it’s hard not to get a sense that we are cool with that. With the exception of poor Semi, none of our players seem to be fair game for any critical analysis and I think we are fairly kind and accepting of how the club is run.

We really have a bad habit of glorifying some players who would struggle to get a gig elsewhere.
A large part of what you are saying is due to the depth of talent in the competition. That’s due to the terrible state of junior development.

Some of our players probably wouldn’t get a gig at certain clubs, particularly at the top clubs, but clubs like us have to take punts on our own developed players or outcasts from other clubs. We are not going to buy our way out of trouble.
That’s fine, but I think we also need to be realistic about what we have. If we are content as a fan base with the status quo then where is the pressure on the club to perform? Would Ricky and Don still have jobs at the Broncos? Would the Broncos be content to see Whitehead and Croker on the $$ they are on for the output they are providing? If you read over some threads here you’d be forgiven for thinking CNK and Rapa are the number 1 fullback and winger combination in the comp. I think we have become very forgiving of underperformance which feeds in to Bot’s point, you can blame the NRL, the refs and everyone else but the reality is we are not good enough, we don’t seem to high high enough standards on or off the field but we are ok with it.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

The broncos seem to accept a lot these days, William.
and they had the Croker contract and worse with Darius Boyd, and were seemingly happy to have it. They've got Kevvie Walters at the helm right now. They're having to overpay to keep their best talent and are still losing stars left right and centre.

They wouldnt be my pick of who to use in these examples. For all their advantages, and how the NRL is apparently structured in a way that allows clubs like theirs to dominate, they're as lost in the wilderness as any club i've ever seen in recent memory and i dont think they even know what the problems are, let alone how to fix them.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 3:47 pm
Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 3:16 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 2:12 pm
greeneyed wrote: January 2, 2022, 1:38 pm Maybe it's not all one thing or the other. I can't see anything wrong with Raiders fans wanting the NRL to treat their club fairly and equitably - and to pressure the NRL to eliminate policies that unreasonably disadvantage the club or favour others. Those Raiders fans can also want the club to be professionally run and coached.
Completely agree
It is my view that whilst not perfect, the nrl by and large has done a very good job in treating clubs, including our own, equitably and has provided a competition with a structure and rules that allows a club like ours the ability to compete and be as successful as any other.

The rest is up to us.
I think it is a little simplistic to say that it is the best system that they can use. No other competition with the subject of parity at hand, uses just one mechanism, particularly if that mechanism has many faults. They generally use a draft in association with it
I never said it was the best system they could use, simply that this system has proven (as per above) to be a very effective in allowing any club the ability to succeed or fail on their own terms.

The biggest and richest clubs in this league, like the roosters and broncos, can end up with the spoon
The smallest and brokest clubs in the league, like the Cowboys and Sharks, can win premierships
This is a league where big and small clubs can win, and you can “buy” a premiership with astute work in free agency the way the roosters tend to do it
You can “build” a premiership with fantastic pathways and junior development like Penrith
You can do with a mix of both.
Most fans can go into a season thinking they can play finals footy, pretty much if not every club has at least one genuine star player their fan base can cling to and adore and who wouldn’t look out of place in the best side in the comp


Not many leagues in pro sports can lay claim to that. The nrl and it’s salary cap system isn’t perfect but it’s not standing in the way of any clubs success.

And again, you’ll find no bigger advocate for an NRL draft than me.
I think you are right from a historical perspective. I think the salary cap worked very well just post the war up to about ten years ago. I just think the worm turned when TPA’s were introduced and the cap became bigger.

So for instance, in the early 2000’s, when the cap was from memory around the 3-4million mark, and the average wage was sitting around $160k, it was more difficult for some clubs to stockpile talent. So if a club came in with an offer of say $200k more, than the player will likely jump ship because the percentage increase was considerable. Now, a top player earning $800k may be offered a similar increase, so $1m at a lesser club, they would be much less likely to switch. Look at Manu staying at the Roosters instead of joining Warriors for this example (based on publicised figures)

Once pay reaches a certain high level then a salary cap becomes less adept at forcing the distribution of talent - players will earn a good crust wherever they play and they don’t get squeezed out like they used to.

I think you also have to take into consideration that the gap is getting wider and wider - the results (whilst not totally attributable to the salary cap) have reached a point where you have to at least investigate other measures in addition to a salary cap, to even out the playing field. You also have to look at something else, if you want to expand the competition further.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

It's worth noting that an NRL Draft probably isnt going to greatly improve parity either, anyone who pays close attention to the north american sports will tell you drafts are a total crap shoot. There are instances like the Houston Astros and 76ers who built through the draft to be contenders, however they INTENTIONALLY lost games for years to do that, like put out teams that were simply not even to the standard of their competition.

The introduction of drafts invarably comes with the introduction of incentives for bad teams to be worse, and for strong teams to bloster their stocks by sending lottery tickets (aka draft picks) to bad teams to acquire what few good players they have, this suits both teams as one team is trying to win and wants good players, the other team is trying to lose so doesnt mind losing good players because they think (mostly incorrectly) that the draft picks will turn into franchise changing players, meaning generally speaking, the distance between the have and have nots grows

My experience with leagues that have drafts - the good teams with good front offices and coaches stay good, the bad team teams with poor decision makers and bad coaches stay bad
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
Billy Walker
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6900
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: 2022

Post by Billy Walker »

Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 4:16 pm The broncos seem to accept a lot these days, William.
and they had the Croker contract and worse with Darius Boyd, and were seemingly happy to have it. They've got Kevvie Walters at the helm right now. They're having to overpay to keep their best talent and are still losing stars left right and centre.

They wouldnt be my pick of who to use in these examples. For all their advantages, and how the NRL is apparently structured in a way that allows clubs like theirs to dominate, they're as lost in the wilderness as any club i've ever seen in recent memory and i dont think they even know what the problems are, let alone how to fix them.
I think they are a great example, because you point out they are a steaming pile of mess at the moment. But would you bet against them winning a premiership before us?

Darius was a disaster but I recall Bronco fans calling for his head the loudest. Milf sat in reserve grade for quite some time regardless of reputation or salary. I have no doubts favourite son Kevvie will be skewered as quick as you can blink if results don’t improve. It’s a culture where former players like Gordie and Cory Parker will call out the club and poor performance - something we just don’t have at Canberra.
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Billy Walker wrote: January 2, 2022, 4:09 pm
Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 3:24 pm
Billy Walker wrote: January 2, 2022, 2:10 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 1:07 pm The salary cap very effectively does what it aims to do, and contributes substancially to parity across the NRL
Is there more the NRL could do in terms of parity? Of course, once the NRL goes to 18 and probably eventually 20 teams, you'll find no bigger advocate for conferencing the NRL than me, no fan in the world is more eager than me to see the NRL establish a proper pathway from state U16-18's competitions into a NRL draft to help with this.

I've been screaming into the wind for years about publishing player salaries and contract details, including TPA's...

But the simple reality is the Storm and Roosters aren't dominating because they have unbelievable advantages with a salary cap. They're dominating because they're extremely well run and well coached.
As were the Broncos, who i was told were only able to be successful because of all these wonderful advantages they had... and now even with all those advantages that made it so easy for them, they're just like any other poorly run **** hole club because the front office and coaching has fallen off a cliff. Imagine my surprise. And hot tip, the Storm and Roosters are going to go the same way should they ever find themselves back in a situation where they have poor management and coaching.

We have some natural disadvantages, things we need to overcome as a club in terms of the player market, the salary cap helps ensure these disadvantages arent a death sentence to our ability to compete and be successful. There is nothing stopping us from being well run and well coached and being a successful football team. The salary cap, although not perfect, plays a large role in ensure we can suceed or fail on our own merits. Unfortunately for us fans, we've done more of the latter than the former
I agree with you Bot. The bit that annoys me though is the acceptance of under performance. I’ll bet my hard earned that the Broncos won’t remain a steaming pile for long. The fan base, the club, the town - it just won’t accept an underperforming Broncos and they will do what needs to be done to get the club up top again even if some players and coaches get burned along the way.

It’s been far too long since we have had success, but sometimes it’s hard not to get a sense that we are cool with that. With the exception of poor Semi, none of our players seem to be fair game for any critical analysis and I think we are fairly kind and accepting of how the club is run.

We really have a bad habit of glorifying some players who would struggle to get a gig elsewhere.
A large part of what you are saying is due to the depth of talent in the competition. That’s due to the terrible state of junior development.

Some of our players probably wouldn’t get a gig at certain clubs, particularly at the top clubs, but clubs like us have to take punts on our own developed players or outcasts from other clubs. We are not going to buy our way out of trouble.
That’s fine, but I think we also need to be realistic about what we have. If we are content as a fan base with the status quo then where is the pressure on the club to perform? Would Ricky and Don still have jobs at the Broncos? Would the Broncos be content to see Whitehead and Croker on the $$ they are on for the output they are providing? If you read over some threads here you’d be forgiven for thinking CNK and Rapa are the number 1 fullback and winger combination in the comp. I think we have become very forgiving of underperformance which feeds in to Bot’s point, you can blame the NRL, the refs and everyone else but the reality is we are not good enough, we don’t seem to high high enough standards on or off the field but we are ok with it.
I agree with the general consensus that the club has not made the right decisions lately or that there aren’t high enough standards but my point about the club and the system relates to two things

1. Recruit and retention - The Croker and Whitehead decisions were terrible in isolation but it relates to the rule that clubs have to spend to the salary cap. I’d agree that the club shouldn’t have resigned them (or at least on that money) but you have to allocate those funds elsewhere. You’d have to either pay other players that money (and have fans claim that other players are overpaid), pay your juniors a lot more (that brings some risks) or you could bring forward payments and leave some money to spend on outside recruitment (that’s probably not a great idea for a club like us who are not a recruitment club because you need to land somebody). If for example the NRL allowed teams to spend as little as they want then the club could make that decision in isolation.

2.) Patience from fans - If for example you go down the route of saying player x or player y isn’t good enough, which by the way is a fair assessment on some, then you have to know that a.) we are not a recruitment club which leads to b.) that the players to replace x and y will be from within. So you have to then say to your supporter group that we are going to be worse for the short time in the hope (that is if these players aren’t snapped up elsewhere) that we will be better. Now in an scenario with a draft where teams naturally rise and fall, this idea can be easily sold and generally you see that after a few years of pain, teams rise up the ladder. But with a system like the NRL salary cap where there is no reward for player development and where only a few clubs have ever really achieved success via this method, then it is a very hard sell. Essentially you get stuck in a mediocrity spiral
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 4:30 pm It's worth noting that an NRL Draft probably isnt going to greatly improve parity either, anyone who pays close attention to the north american sports will tell you drafts are a total crap shoot. There are instances like the Houston Astros and 76ers who built through the draft to be contenders, however they INTENTIONALLY lost games for years to do that, like put out teams that were simply not even to the standard of their competition.

The introduction of drafts invarably comes with the introduction of incentives for bad teams to be worse, and for strong teams to bloster their stocks by sending lottery tickets (aka draft picks) to bad teams to acquire what few good players they have, this suits both teams as one team is trying to win and wants good players, the other team is trying to lose so doesnt mind losing good players because they think (mostly incorrectly) that the draft picks will turn into franchise changing players, meaning generally speaking, the distance between the have and have nots grows

My experience with leagues that have drafts - the good teams with good front offices and coaches stay good, the bad team teams with poor decision makers and bad coaches stay bad
I’m actually not a fan of a draft. I think it is too simplistic and it comes with the potential of tanking.

I would probably go down the route of a recruitment cap in the form of say an auction, in addition to an overall cap, whilst also looking at a points system that the NRLW are trialling. The latter intrigues me - there are negatives of course (how to judge a players worth) but the big positive is that it is totally transparent and you would take way any suggestion of rorting that comes with the current system.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

Billy Walker wrote: January 2, 2022, 4:43 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 4:16 pm The broncos seem to accept a lot these days, William.
and they had the Croker contract and worse with Darius Boyd, and were seemingly happy to have it. They've got Kevvie Walters at the helm right now. They're having to overpay to keep their best talent and are still losing stars left right and centre.

They wouldnt be my pick of who to use in these examples. For all their advantages, and how the NRL is apparently structured in a way that allows clubs like theirs to dominate, they're as lost in the wilderness as any club i've ever seen in recent memory and i dont think they even know what the problems are, let alone how to fix them.
I think they are a great example, because you point out they are a steaming pile of mess at the moment. But would you bet against them winning a premiership before us?

Darius was a disaster but I recall Bronco fans calling for his head the loudest. Milf sat in reserve grade for quite some time regardless of reputation or salary. I have no doubts favourite son Kevvie will be skewered as quick as you can blink if results don’t improve. It’s a culture where former players like Gordie and Cory Parker will call out the club and poor performance - something we just don’t have at Canberra.
Those old heads were threatening players careers who dared speak out about how bad Kevvie was
Again… don’t think they’re a great example, the broncos are as far away from a club I aspire the raiders to be as any
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
User avatar
Matt
Don Furner
Posts: 36715
Joined: May 18, 2010, 4:17 pm
Favourite Player: Wighton, Croker, Hodgson
Location: Canberra

Re: 2022

Post by Matt »

Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 5:03 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 4:30 pm It's worth noting that an NRL Draft probably isnt going to greatly improve parity either, anyone who pays close attention to the north american sports will tell you drafts are a total crap shoot. There are instances like the Houston Astros and 76ers who built through the draft to be contenders, however they INTENTIONALLY lost games for years to do that, like put out teams that were simply not even to the standard of their competition.

The introduction of drafts invarably comes with the introduction of incentives for bad teams to be worse, and for strong teams to bloster their stocks by sending lottery tickets (aka draft picks) to bad teams to acquire what few good players they have, this suits both teams as one team is trying to win and wants good players, the other team is trying to lose so doesnt mind losing good players because they think (mostly incorrectly) that the draft picks will turn into franchise changing players, meaning generally speaking, the distance between the have and have nots grows

My experience with leagues that have drafts - the good teams with good front offices and coaches stay good, the bad team teams with poor decision makers and bad coaches stay bad
I’m actually not a fan of a draft. I think it is too simplistic and it comes with the potential of tanking.

I would probably go down the route of a recruitment cap in the form of say an auction, in addition to an overall cap, whilst also looking at a points system that the NRLW are trialling. The latter intrigues me - there are negatives of course (how to judge a players worth) but the big positive is that it is totally transparent and you would take way any suggestion of rorting that comes with the current system.
Pts system = Fantasy footy.
Thats the system you are subscribing too in this instance. In reality it won't work, because you can't move every player every yr.
User avatar
gangrenous
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13892
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

Re: 2022

Post by gangrenous »

Botman wrote:The broncos seem to accept a lot these days, William.
and they had the Croker contract and worse with Darius Boyd, and were seemingly happy to have it. They've got Kevvie Walters at the helm right now. They're having to overpay to keep their best talent and are still losing stars left right and centre.

They wouldnt be my pick of who to use in these examples. For all their advantages, and how the NRL is apparently structured in a way that allows clubs like theirs to dominate, they're as lost in the wilderness as any club i've ever seen in recent memory and i dont think they even know what the problems are, let alone how to fix them.
Yeah Broncos are a hot mess and I’m loving every day it lasts.

They have advantages and they’re pissing them into the wind.
User avatar
Matt
Don Furner
Posts: 36715
Joined: May 18, 2010, 4:17 pm
Favourite Player: Wighton, Croker, Hodgson
Location: Canberra

Re: 2022

Post by Matt »

This talk is waaaaay off topic, BUT, the NFL is 1 of the best run sports in the world. It has a cap AND a draft.
Look back though the Super Bowl Era, it's the same teams at the top, and the same teams at the bottom. Now, there is a little more shuffling involved, but basically in the last decade Storm = New England
Patriots, and for all the same reason, best coach, best player, best organisation. New York Jets = Bulldogs (? @Botman help me out), bad players, bad coaches, bad organisation [more interesting, they are in the same Div]. You can't say destination is an issue here.

So, even multiple constraints, in an extremely well funded, well run, and well built sport system, and it still don't work.
Billy Walker
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6900
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: 2022

Post by Billy Walker »

Colk - your points above suggest to me that perhaps we need to think hard about whether being a development club is the right space for us. I’d argue we are a recruitment club already. We have a good smattering of Qlders, Poms, Kiwis and Sydney based juniors. I’d say if we keep finding ourselves in a situation of too much cash and nobody to spend it on then some questions need to be asked about what D. Furner is doing.
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Matt wrote: January 2, 2022, 5:43 pm
Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 5:03 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 4:30 pm It's worth noting that an NRL Draft probably isnt going to greatly improve parity either, anyone who pays close attention to the north american sports will tell you drafts are a total crap shoot. There are instances like the Houston Astros and 76ers who built through the draft to be contenders, however they INTENTIONALLY lost games for years to do that, like put out teams that were simply not even to the standard of their competition.

The introduction of drafts invarably comes with the introduction of incentives for bad teams to be worse, and for strong teams to bloster their stocks by sending lottery tickets (aka draft picks) to bad teams to acquire what few good players they have, this suits both teams as one team is trying to win and wants good players, the other team is trying to lose so doesnt mind losing good players because they think (mostly incorrectly) that the draft picks will turn into franchise changing players, meaning generally speaking, the distance between the have and have nots grows

My experience with leagues that have drafts - the good teams with good front offices and coaches stay good, the bad team teams with poor decision makers and bad coaches stay bad
I’m actually not a fan of a draft. I think it is too simplistic and it comes with the potential of tanking.

I would probably go down the route of a recruitment cap in the form of say an auction, in addition to an overall cap, whilst also looking at a points system that the NRLW are trialling. The latter intrigues me - there are negatives of course (how to judge a players worth) but the big positive is that it is totally transparent and you would take way any suggestion of rorting that comes with the current system.
Pts system = Fantasy footy.
Thats the system you are subscribing too in this instance. In reality it won't work, because you can't move every player every yr.
I’m subscribing to that or at least a discussion about it. Or you could do a draft. Or you could do a recruitment cap. Or a transfer window. Or you could do a number of things better than the absolute dog’s breakfast that we have at the moment.

Also, have you seen the transfer system lately? Contracts are absolutely worthless at the moment, players, player managers and clubs breaking contracts on a whim, players signing more than a year in advance and then usually getting a release a short time after etc. I think you are getting that already.

Also read what the NRLW are doing before criticising. It is at least interesting and totally transparent. I could think of a few things they could fix up but you can’t systematically cheat it and you would see talent and good players going to clubs that they aren’t going to now

https://www.nrl.com/news/2021/06/30/202 ... s-tracker/
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Billy Walker wrote: January 2, 2022, 5:51 pm Colk - your points above suggest to me that perhaps we need to think hard about whether being a development club is the right space for us. I’d argue we are a recruitment club already. We have a good smattering of Qlders, Poms, Kiwis and Sydney based juniors. I’d say if we keep finding ourselves in a situation of too much cash and nobody to spend it on then some questions need to be asked about what D. Furner is doing.
You have to look at who you are recruiting. All the players we have recruited have been either juniors from other clubs (Tapine and Mooney etc), players looking for an opportunity (CNK), players cut for bad behaviour (Young, CHN and Elliott) and players passed on by other clubs (Hodgson, Whitehead). None of these players were in hot demand, and if they were they wouldn’t have come here (let’s be honest) so in essence our recruitment has nearly been perfect for a few years now. With that in mind, we are never going to be a club that buys the best talent or in demand talent - that’s just not going to happen, so ergo we can’t rely totally on recruiting our way to the top.

That in essence underscores how difficult it is for certain regional clubs to compete and win competitions. Your recruitment has to be perfect and miles better than everybody else because otherwise you can’t compete. If we make a mistake, we can’t just buy the next big fish on the market and release the mistake.

Also, as per the rule, you have to spend the money. That ruling is a really bad one because that is why you have clubs on the bottom offering contracts that are too high because they have to spend the money somewhere. They can’t just bank it and roll it over.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

It is certainly an interesting concept and i can see the appeal of it.
Its worth a discussion at least... im all for anything that is better, better is always good. And if it's better, i'd support it even though i personally believe the current system is mostly pretty good and could be remarkably better with what i view are relatively minor tweaks.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Matt wrote: January 2, 2022, 5:49 pm This talk is waaaaay off topic, BUT, the NFL is 1 of the best run sports in the world. It has a cap AND a draft.
Look back though the Super Bowl Era, it's the same teams at the top, and the same teams at the bottom. Now, there is a little more shuffling involved, but basically in the last decade Storm = New England
Patriots, and for all the same reason, best coach, best player, best organisation. New York Jets = Bulldogs (? @Botman help me out), bad players, bad coaches, bad organisation [more interesting, they are in the same Div]. You can't say destination is an issue here.

So, even multiple constraints, in an extremely well funded, well run, and well built sport system, and it still don't work.
No because they have the draft. Everybody has real equal access to talent so it is completely down to the front office. It is also completely down to luck in a lot of ways. The problem is different here, when you have free agency, the location is the factor

Another thing with American sports is that a team’s success quite often revolves or centres around a generational talent. So take for example Jordan and the Bulls. The Bulls won six or seven championships whilst he played. Ever since he has retired in the late 90’s they have done zilch. Tom Brady was the key player at the Patriots during that time. I’m not an NFL fan at all but have they done anything since he left? Those examples seem to permeate American sport.

I think the Storm are incredible and they are a complete freak show (nevertheless it was helped by massive cap rorting - you can pay people less after you have paid them over what they were allowed for five years) however let’s look at the Roosters.

In an environment where everybody has the same amount of money (supposedly) they have recruited ad nauseum the best player on the market. If we were to transplant the Roosters into an American sports context that wouldn’t happen. Brad Fittler would have led them to great success over a decade or so, and they would have dropped down the ladder and gone through a rebuilding process. They may never get back for another 10-15 years etc. Instead what has happened is that they have bought multiple great players over a long time (20 years) with their outside recruitment being the main instigator of their success.

Now in a supposedly controlled and regulated environment where everybody is supposedly equal, can you name me another team that has been able to achieve this? Souths (another privately owned glamour club) have also managed to do this over the last 10 years. Is there another sport where top end talent invariably go to only one or two teams?
Last edited by Colk on January 2, 2022, 6:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Matt
Don Furner
Posts: 36715
Joined: May 18, 2010, 4:17 pm
Favourite Player: Wighton, Croker, Hodgson
Location: Canberra

Re: 2022

Post by Matt »

Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 6:08 pm
Matt wrote: January 2, 2022, 5:43 pm
Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 5:03 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 4:30 pm It's worth noting that an NRL Draft probably isnt going to greatly improve parity either, anyone who pays close attention to the north american sports will tell you drafts are a total crap shoot. There are instances like the Houston Astros and 76ers who built through the draft to be contenders, however they INTENTIONALLY lost games for years to do that, like put out teams that were simply not even to the standard of their competition.

The introduction of drafts invarably comes with the introduction of incentives for bad teams to be worse, and for strong teams to bloster their stocks by sending lottery tickets (aka draft picks) to bad teams to acquire what few good players they have, this suits both teams as one team is trying to win and wants good players, the other team is trying to lose so doesnt mind losing good players because they think (mostly incorrectly) that the draft picks will turn into franchise changing players, meaning generally speaking, the distance between the have and have nots grows

My experience with leagues that have drafts - the good teams with good front offices and coaches stay good, the bad team teams with poor decision makers and bad coaches stay bad
I’m actually not a fan of a draft. I think it is too simplistic and it comes with the potential of tanking.

I would probably go down the route of a recruitment cap in the form of say an auction, in addition to an overall cap, whilst also looking at a points system that the NRLW are trialling. The latter intrigues me - there are negatives of course (how to judge a players worth) but the big positive is that it is totally transparent and you would take way any suggestion of rorting that comes with the current system.
Pts system = Fantasy footy.
Thats the system you are subscribing too in this instance. In reality it won't work, because you can't move every player every yr.
I’m subscribing to that or at least a discussion about it. Or you could do a draft. Or you could do a recruitment cap. Or a transfer window. Or you could do a number of things better than the absolute dog’s breakfast that we have at the moment.

Also, have you seen the transfer system lately? Contracts are absolutely worthless at the moment, players, player managers and clubs breaking contracts on a whim, players signing more than a year in advance and then usually getting a release a short time after etc. I think you are getting that already.

Also read what the NRLW are doing before criticising. It is at least interesting and totally transparent. I could think of a few things they could fix up but you can’t systematically cheat it and you would see talent and good players going to clubs that they aren’t going to now

https://www.nrl.com/news/2021/06/30/202 ... s-tracker/
I stand corrected... Thats an awful system, outside of a very small talent pool. For a start up league such as this, I think it could work. It will spread the talent. BUT... what happens next yr, when 1 team has 6 Origin reps? Even worse if some of your '1pt rookie no bodies' becomes a rep star? They have to move some on. So the punt you took on a rookie that paid off in yr 1, bites you in the butt for yr 2.

The way you get pts allocated to your person isn't the same as fantasy footy, but the result is the same. Meaning every yr there will be mass movement, and TBH, in this senario its happening more at the top than the bottom.

If you are going to go down this road, and it's not perfect, but you have to have a rolling pts cap to allow for this kind of rise in talent. In other words, the cap needs to be 135pts, +/- X% rise in player for a Max 2-3yrs (approx avg contact length). In other words, if your rookie becomes a stud in yr 1, you have 2-3yrs to rebalance the books. However, the maths on this becomes crazy hard.

OR

The value of the player it only taken at the end of the contract, NOT, the season.

Ultimately, public salary is easier. It already allows for contract length and change in salary at appropriate intervals - which is generally reflective of talent.

Yes, there are other things that should be considered, like loyalty to a club, Jr development etc etc, but ultimately is transparent of salary that solves the issue (any discount above is also visible and therefore a part of the whole thing). Because at least you can see who is paid what and whether the NRLs view on the 'worth' of a player is correct/viable.

The current system is broken, but there isn't a perfect fix either. The best you can do is create a black and white set of books so everyone can at least look at.
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Matt wrote: January 2, 2022, 6:56 pm
Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 6:08 pm
Matt wrote: January 2, 2022, 5:43 pm
Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 5:03 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 4:30 pm It's worth noting that an NRL Draft probably isnt going to greatly improve parity either, anyone who pays close attention to the north american sports will tell you drafts are a total crap shoot. There are instances like the Houston Astros and 76ers who built through the draft to be contenders, however they INTENTIONALLY lost games for years to do that, like put out teams that were simply not even to the standard of their competition.

The introduction of drafts invarably comes with the introduction of incentives for bad teams to be worse, and for strong teams to bloster their stocks by sending lottery tickets (aka draft picks) to bad teams to acquire what few good players they have, this suits both teams as one team is trying to win and wants good players, the other team is trying to lose so doesnt mind losing good players because they think (mostly incorrectly) that the draft picks will turn into franchise changing players, meaning generally speaking, the distance between the have and have nots grows

My experience with leagues that have drafts - the good teams with good front offices and coaches stay good, the bad team teams with poor decision makers and bad coaches stay bad
I’m actually not a fan of a draft. I think it is too simplistic and it comes with the potential of tanking.

I would probably go down the route of a recruitment cap in the form of say an auction, in addition to an overall cap, whilst also looking at a points system that the NRLW are trialling. The latter intrigues me - there are negatives of course (how to judge a players worth) but the big positive is that it is totally transparent and you would take way any suggestion of rorting that comes with the current system.
Pts system = Fantasy footy.
Thats the system you are subscribing too in this instance. In reality it won't work, because you can't move every player every yr.
I’m subscribing to that or at least a discussion about it. Or you could do a draft. Or you could do a recruitment cap. Or a transfer window. Or you could do a number of things better than the absolute dog’s breakfast that we have at the moment.

Also, have you seen the transfer system lately? Contracts are absolutely worthless at the moment, players, player managers and clubs breaking contracts on a whim, players signing more than a year in advance and then usually getting a release a short time after etc. I think you are getting that already.

Also read what the NRLW are doing before criticising. It is at least interesting and totally transparent. I could think of a few things they could fix up but you can’t systematically cheat it and you would see talent and good players going to clubs that they aren’t going to now

https://www.nrl.com/news/2021/06/30/202 ... s-tracker/
I stand corrected... Thats an awful system, outside of a very small talent pool. For a start up league such as this, I think it could work. It will spread the talent. BUT... what happens next yr, when 1 team has 6 Origin reps? Even worse if some of your '1pt rookie no bodies' becomes a rep star? They have to move some on. So the punt you took on a rookie that paid off in yr 1, bites you in the butt for yr 2.

The way you get pts allocated to your person isn't the same as fantasy footy, but the result is the same. Meaning every yr there will be mass movement, and TBH, in this senario its happening more at the top than the bottom.

If you are going to go down this road, and it's not perfect, but you have to have a rolling pts cap to allow for this kind of rise in talent. In other words, the cap needs to be 135pts, +/- X% rise in player for a Max 2-3yrs (approx avg contact length). In other words, if your rookie becomes a stud in yr 1, you have 2-3yrs to rebalance the books. However, the maths on this becomes crazy hard.

OR

The value of the player it only taken at the end of the contract, NOT, the season.

Ultimately, public salary is easier. It already allows for contract length and change in salary at appropriate intervals - which is generally reflective of talent.

Yes, there are other things that should be considered, like loyalty to a club, Jr development etc etc, but ultimately is transparent of salary that solves the issue (any discount above is also visible and therefore a part of the whole thing). Because at least you can see who is paid what and whether the NRLs view on the 'worth' of a player is correct/viable.

The current system is broken, but there isn't a perfect fix either. The best you can do is create a black and white set of books so everyone can at least look at.
It’s at least a discussion point. I do think you would have to run it over a time period. Maybe a period of over 5 years to really take hold of fluctuations or as you say, at the end of the player’s contract. I think the problem that I see straight away is that there are too many pools of players. You have things like rep honours back in 2018 which I think is crazy because you are not taking into account the current standing of the player.

Again, though I think the NRL really need to spitball some ideas because as you say the system is broken. You may need to have one or two things to counteract the flaws of the current system (junior dispensations, cap on recruitment etc). Another way, perhaps would be to have the NRL pay the players directly rather than the clubs (I remember that idea being floated a while ago). I would also allow the clubs to spend under the salary cap if they wish as it is ridiculous forcing the Bulldogs (2021) or the Knights (2016) to have the same salary cap as other teams.

On the player salaries being public, it is an interesting one and has been discussed for a while. I personally agree with it, as it would at least give lower clubs a guide into what players are being paid elsewhere at bigger clubs and budget accordingly. It could fall flat like a draft proposal but as you have seen over the last couple of years the competition needs some adjusting,
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 6:26 pm It is certainly an interesting concept and i can see the appeal of it.
Its worth a discussion at least... im all for anything that is better, better is always good. And if it's better, i'd support it even though i personally believe the current system is mostly pretty good and could be remarkably better with what i view are relatively minor tweaks.
There are some problems - how do you measure players and over what timeframe does it work across but heck it is worth a discussion. I’m sure there are heaps of ideas from smarter minds than I but things can only be achieved through discussion.
User avatar
Matt
Don Furner
Posts: 36715
Joined: May 18, 2010, 4:17 pm
Favourite Player: Wighton, Croker, Hodgson
Location: Canberra

Re: 2022

Post by Matt »

Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 7:18 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 6:26 pm It is certainly an interesting concept and i can see the appeal of it.
Its worth a discussion at least... im all for anything that is better, better is always good. And if it's better, i'd support it even though i personally believe the current system is mostly pretty good and could be remarkably better with what i view are relatively minor tweaks.
There are some problems - how do you measure players and over what timeframe does it work across but heck it is worth a discussion. I’m sure there are heaps of ideas from smarter minds than I but things can only be achieved through discussion.
Talk about it sure, but you are trying to put a worth on a player. How about u look at his salary???

I think the NRL should uses this "fantasy footy" method as a way to give a "baseline" for ratifying contract value. This should at least get the dodgey contact talk an out. Let's face it, it's generally not the top 1%, the Turbos, DCEs, Lolos, Pongas of the world we are worried about. It's that 2nd tier, the Radleys, aging Morris's, Burgi, AFBs, Paulos, etc.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

I feel it worth reiterating and expanding on some points i touched on earlier
And before i do, i would say i really love these kinds of convesations, reasonable minds can disagree but these are the real issues that will shape the future of RL.

First thing:
Salary caps in particular are not designed to produce parity, the intention of them was to cap wages to ensure poor clubs would not be able to send themselves broke into trying to compete with rich clubs ability to pay wages. Nothing more, the fact that resulted in talent spread is nothing more than a nice bonus. In NRL terms, we have a salary cap not because they dont want the Australian team playing for the Roosters, but because they dont want the Tigers going broke because they've over extended themselves trying to compete against the hypthetical Australian Roosters

Also market regulation measures in pro sports are VERY rarely designed to deliver absolute parity, they are designed to deliver the OPPORTUNITY for parity. A draft is a good example, the worst team has the oppporunity to get the best player, but if they cant scout and cant evalute, they'll not get them. And if the good team is better and can find the talent later, they'll keep winning and the loser will keep losing. Bad teams have the first and best opportunity and if they're good enough, they'll improve.

It's not that the losing team just gets to get the best player, the Orlando Magic dont get to the end of the year and get to draft LaBron James, it's not a charity, you've still go to go and compete and do your job and do it well if you want to be successful, pro sports is not a communist commuity where the rich share with the poor by rule.

Parity measures aim provide a competition whrre no team is unreasonably prohibited from success or disadvantaged in such a way that success is made unnaturally harder to achieve than another. It's not designed to level every aspect of it. There are reasonable and natural advantages (such as our junior development pathways vs the roosters) and disadvantages (such as our undesirable location vs the roosters) for every team, and it is not and has never aimed to ensure teams MUST ahve a bad period after being good, that goes against the very nature of professional sport. What would be the point of achieving if by rules and regulations it was practically mandated that you could not sustain it no matter how good you are?

Re: Salary floors, they're not silly, though id argue the NRL doesnt do them very well or smartly, they are IMO, an absolute requirement, especially when the money for the cap is coming from the governing body. That is the workforces money, it should go to them, in one way or another, the clubs have no right to pocket that. It's not a gift, it's to pay wages, to the men who put their bodies on the line for our entertaininment. They earn the money, not the clubs. There can be no salary ceiling (read: salary cap) without a very high floor in a fair and equitable workforce IMO. It is what is fair and right.

Again, im all for better systems, if it's better we should do but this discussion has done nothing but solidify my view that the NRL and it's salary cap system is far better than any alternative solution out there that i've seen so far, in terms of providing teams the OPPORTUNITY to achieve success. There are things they can and should impliment to improve that, a draft, a proper trade/free agency system, finding some way to rebalance the club vs player contract balance (and i say that as someone who is probably as pro player as any poster on this site, the pedulum had to swing but but it has gone too far the other way now), and much greater levels of transparancy on ALL salaries.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 140250
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2022

Post by greeneyed »

Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 8:02 pm
First thing:
Salary caps in particular are not designed to produce parity, the intention of them was to cap wages to ensure poor clubs would not be able to send themselves broke into trying to compete with rich clubs ability to pay wages. Nothing more, the fact that resulted in talent spread is nothing more than a nice bonus. In NRL terms, we have a salary cap not because they dont want the Australian team playing for the Roosters, but because they dont want the Tigers going broke because they've over extended themselves trying to compete against the hypthetical Australian Roosters
But that is not what the NRL itself says.

"Why have a Salary Cap?

The NRL Salary Cap serves two functions:

1. It assists in "spreading the playing talent" so that a few better resourced clubs cannot simply out-bid other clubs for all of the best players. If a few clubs are able to spend unlimited funds it will reduce the attraction of games to fans, sponsors and media partners due to an uneven competition. Allowing clubs to spend an unlimited amount on players would drive some clubs out of the competition as they would struggle to match the prices wealthy clubs could afford to pay.

2. It ensures clubs are not put into a position where they are forced to spend more money than they can afford, in terms of player payments, just to be competitive."

Read more: https://www.nrl.com/operations/integrity/salary-cap/

They've spent a great deal of time feeding us spin on how competitive the game is and how at the start of any year, any club can win. But then they sort of ignored the data, which you quoted earlier, which shows that, in fact, the competition has been dominated for decades by less than a handful of clubs.
Image
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Matt wrote: January 2, 2022, 7:44 pm
Colk wrote: January 2, 2022, 7:18 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 6:26 pm It is certainly an interesting concept and i can see the appeal of it.
Its worth a discussion at least... im all for anything that is better, better is always good. And if it's better, i'd support it even though i personally believe the current system is mostly pretty good and could be remarkably better with what i view are relatively minor tweaks.
There are some problems - how do you measure players and over what timeframe does it work across but heck it is worth a discussion. I’m sure there are heaps of ideas from smarter minds than I but things can only be achieved through discussion.
Talk about it sure, but you are trying to put a worth on a player. How about u look at his salary???

I think the NRL should uses this "fantasy footy" method as a way to give a "baseline" for ratifying contract value. This should at least get the dodgey contact talk an out. Let's face it, it's generally not the top 1%, the Turbos, DCEs, Lolos, Pongas of the world we are worried about. It's that 2nd tier, the Radleys, aging Morris's, Burgi, AFBs, Paulos, etc.
Salary may of may not, but it is usually dependent on who they are playing for (obviously certain clubs have to pay a higher rate unless they take a punt on players who aren’t in demand). Anyway, if you aren’t able to obtain that information on salary then you simply have to come up with something else that is transparent. Whatever that may be, I don’t know, but I am sure it can be achieved.

I think ultimately what you are wanting to achieve is the avoidance of say Cronk and Tedesco going to the Roosters in the one year. You want to make it incredibly difficult, if not impossible for a club to simply just buy their way to a competition. Sure, buy the occasional star every now and then but not a plethora of them (Btw other clubs have done it in the past so I am not just picking on them although they are clearly the best at it: Manly and the Bulldogs did for a period. Souths did Parramatta at least tried it)

What that will in turn do, is bring more focus into development of players and being patient with that process, rather than having the constant fear of being raided or plundered or trying to copy the Roosters method. Which has done absolute zip for player development.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

greeneyed wrote: January 2, 2022, 8:27 pm
Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 8:02 pm
First thing:
Salary caps in particular are not designed to produce parity, the intention of them was to cap wages to ensure poor clubs would not be able to send themselves broke into trying to compete with rich clubs ability to pay wages. Nothing more, the fact that resulted in talent spread is nothing more than a nice bonus. In NRL terms, we have a salary cap not because they dont want the Australian team playing for the Roosters, but because they dont want the Tigers going broke because they've over extended themselves trying to compete against the hypthetical Australian Roosters
But that is not what the NRL itself says.

"Why have a Salary Cap?

The NRL Salary Cap serves two functions:

1. It assists in "spreading the playing talent" so that a few better resourced clubs cannot simply out-bid other clubs for all of the best players. If a few clubs are able to spend unlimited funds it will reduce the attraction of games to fans, sponsors and media partners due to an uneven competition. Allowing clubs to spend an unlimited amount on players would drive some clubs out of the competition as they would struggle to match the prices wealthy clubs could afford to pay.

2. It ensures clubs are not put into a position where they are forced to spend more money than they can afford, in terms of player payments, just to be competitive."

Read more: https://www.nrl.com/operations/integrity/salary-cap/

They've spent a great deal of time feeding us spin on how competitive the game is and how at the start of any year, any club can win. But then they sort of ignored the data, which you quoted earlier, which shows that, in fact, the competition has been dominated for decades by less than a handful of clubs.


Did you read the thing you quoted?
It is absolute comfirmation of what i am saying

The salary cap assists in talent spread but allowing unlimited spead would drive some clubs out of the competition as they would struggle to match the prices wealthy clubs could afford to pay

it's literally there in the thing you quoted. It's exactly what the NRL are saying, the cap aims to avoid clubs folding trying to match the prices wealthy clubs can pay, and a side effect of that is it assits in talent spread.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

I've read it 5 times now
I dont know what you're seeing in that other than very clear communication about the intent and goals of a salary cap. It's pretty expressively stated haha. and on that note, im out haha. WILD **** from GE late on a sunday eve.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 8:02 pm I feel it worth reiterating and expanding on some points i touched on earlier
And before i do, i would say i really love these kinds of convesations, reasonable minds can disagree but these are the real issues that will shape the future of RL.

First thing:
Salary caps in particular are not designed to produce parity, the intention of them was to cap wages to ensure poor clubs would not be able to send themselves broke into trying to compete with rich clubs ability to pay wages. Nothing more, the fact that resulted in talent spread is nothing more than a nice bonus. In NRL terms, we have a salary cap not because they dont want the Australian team playing for the Roosters, but because they dont want the Tigers going broke because they've over extended themselves trying to compete against the hypthetical Australian Roosters

Also market regulation measures in pro sports are VERY rarely designed to deliver absolute parity, they are designed to deliver the OPPORTUNITY for parity. A draft is a good example, the worst team has the oppporunity to get the best player, but if they cant scout and cant evalute, they'll not get them. And if the good team is better and can find the talent later, they'll keep winning and the loser will keep losing. Bad teams have the first and best opportunity and if they're good enough, they'll improve.

It's not that the losing team just gets to get the best player, the Orlando Magic dont get to the end of the year and get to draft LaBron James, it's not a charity, you've still go to go and compete and do your job and do it well if you want to be successful, pro sports is not a communist commuity where the rich share with the poor by rule.

Parity measures aim provide a competition whrre no team is unreasonably prohibited from success or disadvantaged in such a way that success is made unnaturally harder to achieve than another. It's not designed to level every aspect of it. There are reasonable and natural advantages (such as our junior development pathways vs the roosters) and disadvantages (such as our undesirable location vs the roosters) for every team, and it is not and has never aimed to ensure teams MUST ahve a bad period after being good, that goes against the very nature of professional sport. What would be the point of achieving if by rules and regulations it was practically mandated that you could not sustain it no matter how good you are?

Re: Salary floors, they're not silly, though id argue the NRL doesnt do them very well or smartly, they are IMO, an absolute requirement, especially when the money for the cap is coming from the governing body. That is the workforces money, it should go to them, in one way or another, the clubs have no right to pocket that. It's not a gift, it's to pay wages, to the men who put their bodies on the line for our entertaininment. They earn the money, not the clubs. There can be no salary ceiling (read: salary cap) without a very high floor in a fair and equitable workforce IMO. It is what is fair and right.

Again, im all for better systems, if it's better we should do but this discussion has done nothing but solidify my view that the NRL and it's salary cap system is far better than any alternative solution out there that i've seen so far, in terms of providing teams the OPPORTUNITY to achieve success. There are things they can and should impliment to improve that, a draft, a proper trade/free agency system, finding some way to rebalance the club vs player contract balance (and i say that as someone who is probably as pro player as any poster on this site, the pedulum had to swing but but it has gone too far the other way now), and much greater levels of transparancy on ALL salaries.
Very good post Botman. I also like these debates because we are all coming from a position of trying to make the game better.

I don’t we are actually miles apart on this at all. I think you have touched on some things that can be done in addition to a salary cap. Some like the draft, I don’t know if they are achievable due to the RLPA resistance but a free agency window is a good idea - the argument that a player needs more than a year to settle their future doesn’t wash. Greater transparency on salaries of player worth is a given. Also the whole angling for releases from clubs and signing somewhere else for higher money is one of my pet peeves over the past couple of years - if that is the case maybe there should be some kind of fee given to the club which they can use for purchasing players in the future?

Re: salary floor. Are you talking about a minimum on what an individual player earns or what the salary cap spend is? If it is the latter, I am not against a floor per se, all I am arguing is that it should be a little lower than 95%. Considering the Knights of 2016 or the Bulldogs over the last couple of years, I don’t know how they could have spent that much. If you want to keep it as high, my argument would be let them spend 90% or whatever base you want to use but then let them spend 110% of the cap the following year? Just an idea.

On the draft (AFL for example), it is not a mandated success - failure system (perhaps I worded this incorrectly) but I have noticed that there is greater ebb and flow, so teams haven’t spent 10-20 years at the top for example. Of course, it doesn’t prevent failure or guarantee success but it provides good opportunity for teams.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

agree, we're not wildly apart on things, just perhaps some differing philosophies on some aspect of things
on the salary floor, it's the latter, i dont agree with 95% every year, year on year, it doesnt allow enough flexability for teams to properly plan and build. To be honest i care very little about minimum salaries for individual players, it rises in alignment to the cap, it's a true zero sum game, the cap raises, minimum salary rises accordingly and in proporition and as far as cap management goes, the needle doesnt move

I cant recall if i've said so here before, but the NFL has, i believe an 89% mandate across 3 years. But they also roll over unused cap space, using the NRL to explain it, a club like the bulldogs over 2019-20-21 on 10m cap per year (forever just to make it easy) they HAVE to spend 26.7mil across any three year period... but they're also allowed to underspend in 2019, and roll cap over... so say they spend 8m in 2019 because... well they stink and no one is worth paying, they can roll over 2m for 2020, so now their effective cap is actually not 10m, but 12m, so they can hit the market hard and afford to over pay... as long as over any 3 year period they shell out the 26.7m they're good.
If they happen to spend it it 7.5m, 7.5m and then a big spurgle of 12 mil in the third year, well good luck to them, right? the workforce get the spoils at the end of the day.

There are smart ways to allow clubs some freedom but also ensure the workforce get what they have earned. I dont think the NRL does this particularly well right now. Tough to put a hard 95% floor toothpaste back in the tube at the bargaining table though, as from an RLPA perspective that impacts their entire membership
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 140250
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2022

Post by greeneyed »

@Botman I'm not sure how you can possibly interpret this quote in any way other than to say they are aiming to even the competition through the salary cap, one of two objectives:

"It assists in "spreading the playing talent" so that a few better resourced clubs cannot simply out-bid other clubs for all of the best players. If a few clubs are able to spend unlimited funds it will reduce the attraction of games to fans, sponsors and media partners due to an uneven competition."

For many years, in Annual Reports the NRL has repeatedly told us that they want a close competition and the salary cap is their mechanism for doing it.

"The NRL Premiership remains one of the closest, most exciting sporting competitions globally, with 34 per cent of matches decided by six points or less and a record number of golden point games of any season in history... The NRL salary cap operates to ensure that playing talent is more evenly spread across the 16 NRL clubs. It remains one of the key factors behind why the NRL Premiership remains so close and competitive each year." 2016 NRL Annual Report.

"The NRL salary cap continues to be a key driver of the the competitive balance of the NRL competition, ensuring the close and exciting contests seen across the season." 2017 NRL Annual Report.

"The NRL Premiership continues to be the closest major sporting competition in Australia. In 2017, 35 per cent of games were decided by six points or less. And the average margin was 13 points. This is one of the reasons why fans stayed glued to games right until the end - and why the salary cap is so important in keeping all teams competitive." Todd Greenberg, 2017 NRL Annual Report.

"On field in 2017 the NRL Premiership continues to be the closest major sporting competition in Australia, with 35 per cent of games decided by six points or less, average margin at 13 points being the lowest over the last 15 years." John Grant, 2017 NRL Annual Report.

"The 2018 season was the closest in more than a decade. The average margin of games across the season was 12.8, with 29 per cent of matches decided by four points or fewer. We saw some remarkable comebacks, which meant fans knew their team was always in the contest." 2018 NRL Annual Report.

"Our competition was as close as it has ever been in 2019. It took until the 191st game of a 192 game season to determine who would play in the 2019 Premiership Finals series." Peter V'landys, 2019 NRL Annual Report.

"Our footy was closer than ever. It took until the 191st game of a 192 game season before the NRL Premiership top eight was finalised." Andrew Abdo, 2019 NRL Annual Report.

"The salary cap limits each club's player spending to $9.6 million, underpinning the close competition witnessed in the 2019 NRL season." 2019 NRL Annual Report.

I'm sure you'll find some words that qualify the statements about the effectiveness of the salary cap in evening and spreading the talent... because their own rules (like TPAs) undermine it.

But there surely can't be any doubt that one of the NRL's objectives in having a salary cap is spreading the talent and evening the competition. And it’s not a secondary or incidental one.
Image
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

The words are the words....
The language is clear.

the salary cap ASSISTS spread of talent.
However a lack of salary cap in the league 'sview WOULD drive some clubs out of the competition as they would struggle to match the prices wealthy clubs could afford to pay.

The aim of the NRL salary cap, and ANY salary cap is primarily to stop clubs sending themselves broke paying talent to compete with richer clubs. Theyve told you much in the passages you've posted. They can package it and PR spin all they like, they've given you the answer. They can put it in what ever order they like in text, meaning is extremely clear.

The NRL's objective is to not have clubs go broke and compromise the competition. Spreading of the talent is secondary assist.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

The league does not intervene with talent disparity
It does with clubs on the brink of financial ruin, in spite of the level of mismanagement
Doesn’t happen for talent disparity or spread

Actions stick true to the expressly stated goals of the league posted by yourself
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
Billy Walker
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6900
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: 2022

Post by Billy Walker »

Very interesting discussion - some good points all round.
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Botman wrote: January 2, 2022, 9:36 pm agree, we're not wildly apart on things, just perhaps some differing philosophies on some aspect of things
on the salary floor, it's the latter, i dont agree with 95% every year, year on year, it doesnt allow enough flexability for teams to properly plan and build. To be honest i care very little about minimum salaries for individual players, it rises in alignment to the cap, it's a true zero sum game, the cap raises, minimum salary rises accordingly and in proporition and as far as cap management goes, the needle doesnt move

I cant recall if i've said so here before, but the NFL has, i believe an 89% mandate across 3 years. But they also roll over unused cap space, using the NRL to explain it, a club like the bulldogs over 2019-20-21 on 10m cap per year (forever just to make it easy) they HAVE to spend 26.7mil across any three year period... but they're also allowed to underspend in 2019, and roll cap over... so say they spend 8m in 2019 because... well they stink and no one is worth paying, they can roll over 2m for 2020, so now their effective cap is actually not 10m, but 12m, so they can hit the market hard and afford to over pay... as long as over any 3 year period they shell out the 26.7m they're good.
If they happen to spend it it 7.5m, 7.5m and then a big spurgle of 12 mil in the third year, well good luck to them, right? the workforce get the spoils at the end of the day.

There are smart ways to allow clubs some freedom but also ensure the workforce get what they have earned. I dont think the NRL does this particularly well right now. Tough to put a hard 95% floor toothpaste back in the tube at the bargaining table though, as from an RLPA perspective that impacts their entire membership
Well there you go. I inadvertently poached an idea from another competition. I think it is quite a clever way (not because I thought of it btw but just because it makes sense)

The current system just means that players that aren’t much chop (Kyle Flanagan for example) are getting paid way overs to try and make up a cap
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 140250
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2022

Post by greeneyed »

@Botman I understand you’re searching for another interpretation because it doesn’t help your argument. But it’s clear the NRL has two objectives for the salary cap. They even number them, 1 and 2. There’s a very large body of evidence there are two in their public statements. It’s important to understand it, because it’s important to judge the NRL’s performance on meeting their stated objectives.

When the NSWRL introduced the salary cap in 1990, the main concern was to stop clubs from spending beyond their means and going bankrupt. There were cases of just that happening, clubs operating while effectively insolvent. But in the more recent years of the NRL, things have changed. They have bailed clubs out, as recently as the Tigers, Dragons, Knights and Titans. But the salary cap, together with the new funding models, have changed things. That’s because the broadcast deals are now so rich, the NRL grants, funded by the broadcasters, entirely cover the players’ salaries and contribute significantly to the clubs’ operational costs. The football department cap helps future proof the system, avoiding any further bailouts. The lack of reserves is another threat to clubs… The clubs are “too big to fail”, because x number of teams are needed to fulfil broadcasting deals. But the funding model means it’s pretty much impossible for clubs to fall over now.

Bottom line, there’s no doubt that stopping clubs from overspending and going to the wall is an important objective of the cap.

But you’ve missed how important the other objective of the NRL’s salary cap is. The one they even label as No. “1”. They want an even competition - because that’s what the broadcasters want. The broadcasters want the fans of all clubs to know they have a chance, day one of the season, any day of a match. That’s because fans won’t watch if their team has no chance. They turn off if there’s a blow out in the score line. The broadcasters (Channel 9) told the NRL in the pandemic that they want plenty of tries, plenty of scoring, which means more “excitement”. But they soon realised they’d asked for the wrong thing. The blowouts in score lines that started in 2020 and became the biggest ever seen in 2021… meant the fans were turning off their TVs. And other media. So much so that by the time the 2021 finals approached, the referees were quietly told to put their whistles in their pockets.

That’s partly a story of rules of the game and how it’s officiated. But it’s also about the salary cap.

The NRL very clearly says they want to spread the talent among the clubs, because it promotes an even competition. They’ve told us exactly that for years in the NRL’s annual reports. They then cite the evidence in the annual reports… the cap is working because we have the closest competition in world sports. The evidence? Low margins, uncertainty about the top eight. An even competition isn’t a secondary objective these days. It’s critical to making the game attractive to broadcasters and maximising revenue streams from the broadcasters.

But the evidence of two or three teams dominating grand final appearances and premierships for decades was studiously ignored. The NRL would point to the true outliers in the numbers when they happened. A Sharks or Tigers premiership. “See… anyone can win.” But those numbers have shown the NRL’s stated policy objective for the salary cap - an even competition, through spreading the talent - was not being delivered.

Why? Well, the NRL’s own policies were secretly undermining the cap. The TPAs loophole. The vested interests love that loophole. The one that allowed the Roosters to sign Cooper Cronk and James Tedesco in the same year. The NRL gleefully told us how low the Roosters’ aggregate TPAs were… while not releasing the figures for half the TPA dollars. The ones the NRL decided the public “wasn’t interested in”. It turned out Cronk and Tedesco had huge TPAs from “whole of game sponsors” on joining the Roosters. The Storm had regular old garden variety TPAs, which were in the numbers, worth $1 million, $800,000. That buys a top of the shelf playmaker for the Storm completely outside the cap. Meanwhile clubs like the Bulldogs, Warriors, and yes, the Raiders had virtually no access to TPAs.

It’s important to judge the NRL on their actual stated policy objectives and to see if they’re delivering. To look at all the evidence.

Spreading the talent and an even competition has been a critical stated objective of the NRL’s salary cap system for many years now. They’ve been going to great lengths to claim they’re delivering on it. But the evidence suggests the NRL has been failing to deliver. The 2021 ladder really exposed it… the “new rules” of the on field game exposed it. I won’t claim it’s not complex picture. That the reasons for the 2021 ladder and blowouts did not have multiple causes. But you just have to look at the squads to see the salary cap isn’t spreading the talent.

An interesting footnote. The NRL, after releasing some aggregate data on TPAs in 2018 and 2019, have failed to do so in 2020 and 2021. Maybe they all dried up due to the pandemic? Maybe there was too much transparency for their liking.
Image
Post Reply