2022

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

Moderator: GH Moderators

User avatar
gergreg
Laurie Daley
Posts: 10672
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: 2022

Post by gergreg »

I used to hear the comments about the NRL being the closest sporting competition in the world quite a lot. Gallop used to use it as his fallback comment whenever salary cap questions came up but you rarely hear it now and over the last decade.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

I’m not looking for, or needing anything
As you yourself explained perfectly GE, when the cap was introduced it was done so with the intention of stopping clubs going broke.
It was its primary objective then, as it is now, as it is btw in pretty much every league where a cap exists
It’s a cap on wages to ensure they can’t outstrip profits and thus ensure the ongoing viability of the clubs

So I appreciate the effort gone into explaining that yes, I am indeed spot on about the primary objective of a salary cap and it’s secondary benefits to assist in talent spread

And it’s why salary caps are still the main market regulation measure used in pro sports
it’s very effective in ensuring wages can’t outgrow profits, and also assists in competitive balance
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 »

gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 9:44 am I used to hear the comments about the NRL being the closest sporting competition in the world quite a lot. Gallop used to use it as his fallback comment whenever salary cap questions came up but you rarely hear it now and over the last decade.
But the quotes above show the NRL was saying that in each of the 2016-2019 Annual Reports. I didn't go back further. viewtopic.php?p=1843431#p1843431

Once blowouts started in 2020, the data they had been relying upon disappeared.
Image
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 140250
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2022

Post by greeneyed »

Botman wrote: January 3, 2022, 9:46 am I’m not looking for, or needing anything
As you yourself explained perfectly GE, when the cap was introduced it was done so with the intention of stopping clubs going broke.
It was its primary objective then, as it is now, as it is btw in pretty much every league where a cap exists
It’s a cap on wages to ensure they can’t outstrip profits and thus ensure the ongoing viability of the clubs

So I appreciate the effort gone into explaining that yes, I am indeed spot on about the primary objective of a salary cap and it’s secondary benefits to assist in talent spread

And it’s why salary caps are still the main market regulation measure used in pro sports
it’s very effective in ensuring wages can’t outgrow profits, and also assists in competitive balance
That's absolutely not what I was saying. This is what I was saying: viewtopic.php?p=1843438#p1843438
Image
User avatar
gergreg
Laurie Daley
Posts: 10672
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: 2022

Post by gergreg »

greeneyed wrote:
gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 9:44 am I used to hear the comments about the NRL being the closest sporting competition in the world quite a lot. Gallop used to use it as his fallback comment whenever salary cap questions came up but you rarely hear it now and over the last decade.
But the quotes above show the NRL was saying that in each of the 2016-2019 Annual Reports. I didn't go back further. viewtopic.php?p=1843431#p1843431

Once blowouts started in 2020, the data they had been relying upon disappeared.
Ok, good to note. I don't read the annual reports but I do listen out for public comments from the administration so interesting that they have been using it.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
User avatar
Fuifui Bradbrad
Bradley Clyde
Posts: 8018
Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
Favourite Player: Phil Graham
Location: Marsden Park

2022

Post by Fuifui Bradbrad »

Some great discussions going on in here. I need to go back and give it a proper read.

It might have already been mentioned, but there’s a comp* I’ve heard about that has a soft salary cap. Say the cap is $10m, if a club is willing and able to spend over that they’re allowed to, but they need to pay a cap tax. The tax then gets redistributed back to the other clubs who don’t go over.

So Rooster can spend $15m, but would have to pay $2.5m towards the cap tax. I don’t mind this idea. Opens up the chance for wealthy clubs to spend more of they want, while also helping those clubs that might need the assistance.

*I can’t for the life of me remember which one, I’m thinking NHL, but not certain.

** Edit ** The NBA and MLB have this system. Official name is a Luxury Tax. Found this on the NBA’s system
“Wikipedia” wrote:In addition to the soft cap, the NBA utilizes a luxury tax system that is applied if the team payroll exceeds a separate threshold higher than the salary cap. These teams pay a penalty for each dollar their team salary exceeds the tax level. From 2002 to 2013, if a team exceeded the luxury tax threshold, they must pay one dollar to the league for every dollar that they are over the limit. For the 2013-14 season and onward, teams paid an incremental rate based on their team salary. They also have to pay a repeat offender rate, which is an additional dollar for every dollar over. For 2014-15 teams pay the repeater rate if they also were taxpayers in all of the previous three seasons. For 2015-16 and all subsequent seasons, teams pay the repeater rate if they were taxpayers in at least three of the four previous seasons
Last edited by Fuifui Bradbrad on January 3, 2022, 10:19 am, edited 3 times in total.
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.

Nickman's love of NSW
  • NSW has done a superb job - 18/12/2020
  • NSW has been world-class with their approach to date, that's a fact. - 04/02/2021
User avatar
gergreg
Laurie Daley
Posts: 10672
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: 2022

Post by gergreg »

Just back tracking a little I certainly don't agree with a flexible cap option which would allow clubs to underspend one year to then go over the cap the following year. It could get to a point where teams are cycling through a premiership window and fans know that half the teams in the comp aren't really competitive for an entire season. It is also making it more difficult to police and the NRL is pretty bloody hopeless at keeping on top of it, as is.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:24 am Just back tracking a little I certainly don't agree with a flexible cap option which would allow clubs to underspend one year to then go over the cap the following year. It could get to a point where teams are cycling through a premiership window and fans know that half the teams in the comp aren't really competitive for an entire season. It is also making it more difficult to police and the NRL is pretty bloody hopeless at keeping on top of it, as is.
I think the game’s inability to manage or oversee anything is the biggest drawback against any idea you’d have.

You only have to look at the introduction of this second biggest side in Brisbane (the decision making process and planning the introduction of them) that the league is still far behind other sports in terms of planning and strategic thinking. Other sports are also way less conflicted in their decision making as well.
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 3, 2022, 10:48 am
gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:24 am Just back tracking a little I certainly don't agree with a flexible cap option which would allow clubs to underspend one year to then go over the cap the following year. It could get to a point where teams are cycling through a premiership window and fans know that half the teams in the comp aren't really competitive for an entire season. It is also making it more difficult to police and the NRL is pretty bloody hopeless at keeping on top of it, as is.
I think the game’s inability to manage or oversee anything is the biggest drawback against any idea you’d have.

You only have to look at the introduction of this second biggest side in Brisbane (the decision making process and planning the introduction of them) that the league is still far behind other sports in terms of planning and strategic thinking. Other sports are also way less conflicted in their decision making as well.
Most would agree this is 1 of the worst run pro sports in the world - could be the worst TBH
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Fuifui Bradbrad wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:19 am Some great discussions going on in here. I need to go back and give it a proper read.

It might have already been mentioned, but there’s a comp* I’ve heard about that has a soft salary cap. Say the cap is $10m, if a club is willing and able to spend over that they’re allowed to, but they need to pay a cap tax. The tax then gets redistributed back to the other clubs who don’t go over.

So Rooster can spend $15m, but would have to pay $2.5m towards the cap tax. I don’t mind this idea. Opens up the chance for wealthy clubs to spend more of they want, while also helping those clubs that might need the assistance.

*I can’t for the life of me remember which one, I’m thinking NHL, but not certain.
You may be talking about the NBA which has a luxury tax I think. You’d still have to have a draft or something in addition to that idea which they do have. You’d also have to limit it by a timeframe - so let’s say the Roosters, Souths, Parra etc spend over the salary cap. They couldn’t just do it year in and year out.

Also, you’d have to think about what happens if every team goes over the cap or a majority of them do. That might sound far fetched in theory, but if you do increase purchasing power that would obviously have an inflationary impact on wages for all players, which then means that the struggling clubs will have to spend even more to purchase a player.

Most importantly, it doesn’t really solve the main problem at hand, which is not that clubs are going to go broke (if you are giving clubs more than the salary cap they shouldn’t really go broke unless they are completely negligent) but how do you give struggling clubs (in terms of recruitment) greater opportunity, so players aren’t just going to the same clubs all the time.

On reflection what you want to do is make teams earn success through some sort of patience and development process, rather than allowing teams to go the easier route and just buy star players on the market. Therefore, the options would be either to make it harder for clubs to purchase star players (recruitment caps, nominal loadings, transfer fees/trades) or make it easier for clubs to keep players that they have developed (cap incentives or discounts)
Most importantly though you need to come up with something transparent.
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Matt wrote: January 3, 2022, 11:17 am
Colk wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:48 am
gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:24 am Just back tracking a little I certainly don't agree with a flexible cap option which would allow clubs to underspend one year to then go over the cap the following year. It could get to a point where teams are cycling through a premiership window and fans know that half the teams in the comp aren't really competitive for an entire season. It is also making it more difficult to police and the NRL is pretty bloody hopeless at keeping on top of it, as is.
I think the game’s inability to manage or oversee anything is the biggest drawback against any idea you’d have.

You only have to look at the introduction of this second biggest side in Brisbane (the decision making process and planning the introduction of them) that the league is still far behind other sports in terms of planning and strategic thinking. Other sports are also way less conflicted in their decision making as well.
Most would agree this is 1 of the worst run pro sports in the world - could be the worst TBH
I agree, we pretty much do everything the wrong way. Junior development, constant rule changes, media/PR, confidence in product. The game is completely beholden by a certain media organisation and we don’t even have the courage to expand the game outside of Qld and NSW - you even have fans and media types arguing that we should bring back the Bears instead of a team in Perth. I often wondered what position the game would be if we had the AFL’s vision, confidence and administration over the past 30 years.
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 »

greeneyed wrote: January 2, 2022, 9:48 pm @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.
I'm confused as to the issues?!?

"ASSISTS" is the 2nd word of the quote.

Then while you say the broadcaster is most important, FANS comes 1st in the quote, the sponsors 2nd, with media parters AKA the broadcaster 3rd - YES, can easily be argued as a softening for the benefit of the real corp intention, but in black and white, they come last.

As for "clubs going broke" that seems a "well duh" type thing. Of course that's a major reason why the cap exists.

I'm not sure why the argument exists?!?

Which leads to Botmans major theory of orgainsation, coach, players. Have I mentioned the Storm = Patriots comparison? Bellemy = Bellichik. Cam Smith = Tom Brady. That's why these clubs have dominated for the past decade.

Similarly Manchester United dominated the EPL for a decade. It's the same reasons, coaching Sir Alex Ferguson, organisation, and best players - Beckham, Giggs, Scholes, Van Nisory Cantona, Yorke, Ferdinand... the list goes on, and in. The coach retires, the organisation starts breaking down. The difference, no cap in EPL.

TBF, once Sheens left and caps became a big thing, our club went sideways fast too.
User avatar
gergreg
Laurie Daley
Posts: 10672
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: 2022

Post by gergreg »


Colk wrote:
Matt wrote: January 3, 2022, 11:17 am
Colk wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:48 am
gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:24 am Just back tracking a little I certainly don't agree with a flexible cap option which would allow clubs to underspend one year to then go over the cap the following year. It could get to a point where teams are cycling through a premiership window and fans know that half the teams in the comp aren't really competitive for an entire season. It is also making it more difficult to police and the NRL is pretty bloody hopeless at keeping on top of it, as is.
I think the game’s inability to manage or oversee anything is the biggest drawback against any idea you’d have.

You only have to look at the introduction of this second biggest side in Brisbane (the decision making process and planning the introduction of them) that the league is still far behind other sports in terms of planning and strategic thinking. Other sports are also way less conflicted in their decision making as well.
Most would agree this is 1 of the worst run pro sports in the world - could be the worst TBH
I agree, we pretty much do everything the wrong way. Junior development, constant rule changes, media/PR, confidence in product. The game is completely beholden by a certain media organisation and we don’t even have the courage to expand the game outside of Qld and NSW - you even have fans and media types arguing that we should bring back the Bears instead of a team in Perth. I often wondered what position the game would be if we had the AFL’s vision, confidence and administration over the past 30 years.
There are plenty of things wrong with the organisation but they're not even close to the worst run professional sport in the world.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 11:40 am
Colk wrote:
Matt wrote: January 3, 2022, 11:17 am
Colk wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:48 am
gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:24 am Just back tracking a little I certainly don't agree with a flexible cap option which would allow clubs to underspend one year to then go over the cap the following year. It could get to a point where teams are cycling through a premiership window and fans know that half the teams in the comp aren't really competitive for an entire season. It is also making it more difficult to police and the NRL is pretty bloody hopeless at keeping on top of it, as is.
I think the game’s inability to manage or oversee anything is the biggest drawback against any idea you’d have.

You only have to look at the introduction of this second biggest side in Brisbane (the decision making process and planning the introduction of them) that the league is still far behind other sports in terms of planning and strategic thinking. Other sports are also way less conflicted in their decision making as well.
Most would agree this is 1 of the worst run pro sports in the world - could be the worst TBH
I agree, we pretty much do everything the wrong way. Junior development, constant rule changes, media/PR, confidence in product. The game is completely beholden by a certain media organisation and we don’t even have the courage to expand the game outside of Qld and NSW - you even have fans and media types arguing that we should bring back the Bears instead of a team in Perth. I often wondered what position the game would be if we had the AFL’s vision, confidence and administration over the past 30 years.
There are plenty of things wrong with the organisation but they're not even close to the worst run professional sport in the world.
‘Not even close’? We are a very very badly run sport and if we are not even close then there are some terribly run sports around the world.

I can’t think of another professional sport which has had the money that we have had and been around for as long as we have, yet still can’t do something as simple as expand the game. I can’t think of another where there are so many conflicts of interest.

Do you think the AFL would have any of their sides and popularity within NSW and Qld if they were run by RL administrators. If V’landys was in control of them, he would have said they were ‘rusted on’ league states, so don’t bother.
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 140250
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2022

Post by greeneyed »

@Matt It seems clear to me that one objective of the NRL is spreading the talent so as to promote the evenness of the competition... because an uneven competition would lose the interest of fans. The other objective is to help ensure clubs don't overspend, beyond their resources and go to the wall. That is, there are two objectives. They've stated it very clearly.

Botman, as I understand it, is saying there is one (preventing the collapse of clubs who overspend)... and that spreading the talent and closeness of the competition is an incidental benefit:
Botman wrote: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
What I'm saying is that is incorrect. The NRL very clearly says it wants to spread the talent through the salary cap, so as to promote an even competition. It has gone to great lengths to make the claim, and find evidence to support it. It is a major stated objective of the NRL in having the cap. Actually, however, my belief is that the NRL is failing to achieve that stated objective.

One reason is the major loophole in the cap... TPAs. And two of the major beneficiaries have been the Storm and Roosters. According to the figures the NRL has released, the Storm have a $1 million jump on clubs at the other end of the scale. The figures the NRL has hidden (game wide sponsor TPAs) have benefited the Roosters significantly. NRL.com itself advised us that Cooper Cronk and James Tedesco had major TPAs (this was when they announced the 2019 TPA figures... the half the NRL was actually revealing).
Image
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 3, 2022, 11:57 am
gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 11:40 am
Colk wrote:
Matt wrote: January 3, 2022, 11:17 am
Colk wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:48 am

I think the game’s inability to manage or oversee anything is the biggest drawback against any idea you’d have.

You only have to look at the introduction of this second biggest side in Brisbane (the decision making process and planning the introduction of them) that the league is still far behind other sports in terms of planning and strategic thinking. Other sports are also way less conflicted in their decision making as well.
Most would agree this is 1 of the worst run pro sports in the world - could be the worst TBH
I agree, we pretty much do everything the wrong way. Junior development, constant rule changes, media/PR, confidence in product. The game is completely beholden by a certain media organisation and we don’t even have the courage to expand the game outside of Qld and NSW - you even have fans and media types arguing that we should bring back the Bears instead of a team in Perth. I often wondered what position the game would be if we had the AFL’s vision, confidence and administration over the past 30 years.
There are plenty of things wrong with the organisation but they're not even close to the worst run professional sport in the world.
‘Not even close’? We are a very very badly run sport and if we are not even close then there are some terribly run sports around the world.

I can’t think of another professional sport which has had the money that we have had and been around for as long as we have, yet still can’t do something as simple as expand the game. I can’t think of another where there are so many conflicts of interest.

Do you think the AFL would have any of their sides and popularity within NSW and Qld if they were run by RL administrators. If V’landys was in control of them, he would have said they were ‘rusted on’ league states, so don’t bother.
Not that I watch UFC, but the odd interview I’ve seen seems to involve athletes who can string a better sentence together than the dullards the NRL glorifies. Total lack of vision and dreadfully run sport!
User avatar
gergreg
Laurie Daley
Posts: 10672
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: 2022

Post by gergreg »

Instead of comparing only against AFL, look at a few other sports. Rugby Australia is a fine example. How are they going?

The 'sleeping giant' of Australian sport... etc.

Nobody is arguing that the NRL is run better than the AFL. However I would argue that the NRL managed the 'darkest day in Australian sport' incidents much better than the AFL did.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 34737
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: 2022

Post by Botman »

gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:24 am Just back tracking a little I certainly don't agree with a flexible cap option which would allow clubs to underspend one year to then go over the cap the following year. It could get to a point where teams are cycling through a premiership window and fans know that half the teams in the comp aren't really competitive for an entire season. It is also making it more difficult to police and the NRL is pretty bloody hopeless at keeping on top of it, as is.
Not could
Its pretty much inevitable that it does. If that’s not your cup of tea, and I can understand why, then yeah soft/rolling caps won’t be something you can support

I don’t mind it myself but the point raised is a fair criticism
Last edited by Botman on January 3, 2022, 12:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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 »

greeneyed wrote: January 3, 2022, 12:04 pm @Matt It seems clear to me that one objective of the NRL is spreading the talent so as to promote the evenness of the competition... because an uneven competition would lose the interest of fans. The other objective is help ensure clubs don't overspend, beyond their resources and go to the wall. That is, there are two objectives. They've stated it very clearly.

Botman, as I understand it, is saying there is one (preventing the collapse of clubs who overspend)... and that spreading the talent and closeness of the competition is an incidental benefit:
Botman wrote: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
What I'm saying is that is incorrect. The NRL very clearly says it wants to spread the talent through the salary cap, so as to promote an even competition. It has gone to great lengths to make the claim, and find evidence to support it. It is a major stated objective of the NRL in having the cap. Actually, however, my belief is that the NRL is failing to achieve that stated objective.

One reason is the major loophole in the cap... TPAs. And two of the major beneficiaries have been the Storm and Roosters. According to the figures the NRL has released, the Storm have a $1 million jump on clubs at the other end of the scale. The figures the NRL has hidden (game wide sponsor TPAs) have benefited the Roosters significantly. NRL.com itself advised us that Cooper Cronk and James Tedesco had major TPAs (this was when they announced the 2019 TPA figures... the half the NRL was actually revealing).
I think Botman is right on this one GE.
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 140250
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2022

Post by greeneyed »

Billy Walker wrote: January 3, 2022, 12:10 pm
greeneyed wrote: January 3, 2022, 12:04 pm @Matt It seems clear to me that one objective of the NRL is spreading the talent so as to promote the evenness of the competition... because an uneven competition would lose the interest of fans. The other objective is help ensure clubs don't overspend, beyond their resources and go to the wall. That is, there are two objectives. They've stated it very clearly.

Botman, as I understand it, is saying there is one (preventing the collapse of clubs who overspend)... and that spreading the talent and closeness of the competition is an incidental benefit:
Botman wrote: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
What I'm saying is that is incorrect. The NRL very clearly says it wants to spread the talent through the salary cap, so as to promote an even competition. It has gone to great lengths to make the claim, and find evidence to support it. It is a major stated objective of the NRL in having the cap. Actually, however, my belief is that the NRL is failing to achieve that stated objective.

One reason is the major loophole in the cap... TPAs. And two of the major beneficiaries have been the Storm and Roosters. According to the figures the NRL has released, the Storm have a $1 million jump on clubs at the other end of the scale. The figures the NRL has hidden (game wide sponsor TPAs) have benefited the Roosters significantly. NRL.com itself advised us that Cooper Cronk and James Tedesco had major TPAs (this was when they announced the 2019 TPA figures... the half the NRL was actually revealing).
I think Botman is right on this one GE.
I can't do anything more than provide the substantial body of evidence to the contrary: viewtopic.php?p=1843431#p1843431
Image
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 3, 2022, 10:48 am
gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:24 am Just back tracking a little I certainly don't agree with a flexible cap option which would allow clubs to underspend one year to then go over the cap the following year. It could get to a point where teams are cycling through a premiership window and fans know that half the teams in the comp aren't really competitive for an entire season. It is also making it more difficult to police and the NRL is pretty bloody hopeless at keeping on top of it, as is.
I think the game’s inability to manage or oversee anything is the biggest drawback against any idea you’d have.
I agree with this, RL has imo mostly been very poorly administered, and it’s why it’s objectively the best product but somehow not the nations top sport… a lot of the last 20-30 years the code has shot itself in the foot repeatedly, but we have to be careful as a code that we don’t just shut down good ideas and progress simply because we don’t trust the current governing body to implement it well

Not necessarily you, but I feel there is attitude around some fans to never grow or risk change because they’ll just **** it up anyways and it’s fine the way it is.
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 3, 2022, 12:15 pm
Colk wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:48 am
gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:24 am Just back tracking a little I certainly don't agree with a flexible cap option which would allow clubs to underspend one year to then go over the cap the following year. It could get to a point where teams are cycling through a premiership window and fans know that half the teams in the comp aren't really competitive for an entire season. It is also making it more difficult to police and the NRL is pretty bloody hopeless at keeping on top of it, as is.
I think the game’s inability to manage or oversee anything is the biggest drawback against any idea you’d have.
I agree with this, RL has imo mostly been very poorly administered, and it’s why it’s objectively the best product but somehow not the nations top sport… a lot of the last 20-30 years the code has shot itself in the foot repeatedly, but we have to be careful as a code that we don’t just shut down good ideas and progress simply because we don’t trust the current governing body to implement it well

Not necessarily you, but I feel there is attitude around some fans to never grow or risk change because they’ll just **** it up anyways and it’s fine the way it is.
I don’t disagree Bot but I’m not convinced there is any appetite to change anything. The NRL is like a small scale hardware store that turns a modest profit. There might be potential to go bigger but no real desire. As it stands the game fills a good number of TV slots each week.

We all show outrage at the scandals and drama but they fill league shows and sell papers. In the end is there really any desire to fix something that isn’t really broken. I like AFL and watch a fair bit each year. At times it can be a little much to the other extreme trying to be a leader on every social issue rather than a sport. More progressive yes, necessary I’m not sure, but the sport does seem hell bent on being as genuinely attractive, accessible and marketable to as wide an audience as possible. That goes to ensuring there is genuine competitiveness among all teams.

NRL - I think it’s happy with what it has. At the end of the if every second raider player was convicted of a he heinous crime in the off season we’d still all find a way to move past it. The NRL supporter base is small but rusted on so there is no incentive or need to woo supporters or improve the product or the game day experience or competitiveness of all teams. Just is what it is.
Colk
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 365
Joined: July 18, 2020, 1:59 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2022

Post by Colk »

Botman wrote: January 3, 2022, 12:15 pm
Colk wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:48 am
gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:24 am Just back tracking a little I certainly don't agree with a flexible cap option which would allow clubs to underspend one year to then go over the cap the following year. It could get to a point where teams are cycling through a premiership window and fans know that half the teams in the comp aren't really competitive for an entire season. It is also making it more difficult to police and the NRL is pretty bloody hopeless at keeping on top of it, as is.
I think the game’s inability to manage or oversee anything is the biggest drawback against any idea you’d have.
I agree with this, RL has imo mostly been very poorly administered, and it’s why it’s objectively the best product but somehow not the nations top sport… a lot of the last 20-30 years the code has shot itself in the foot repeatedly, but we have to be careful as a code that we don’t just shut down good ideas and progress simply because we don’t trust the current governing body to implement it well

Not necessarily you, but I feel there is attitude around some fans to never grow or risk change because they’ll just **** it up anyways and it’s fine the way it is.
I agree totally. The mid 1990’s was a bit of a sliding door moment. If we managed it properly, who knows where we would or could be.

I’m convinced that the game has to progress, not only in terms of things like structure, but also with things like long term strategy - go to Perth, Adelaide, put another NZ side in. Do it steadily of course. But at least have a strategy and desire to grow, rather than having no confidence in being able to do it. Because you are right, at its best, the game is the best product.

Anyway, my feelings/fear are not that they could stuff it up (they could) but more that they don’t have the gumption to at have a go.
BJ123
Noa Nadruku
Posts: 155
Joined: December 9, 2016, 11:03 am
Favourite Player: Chicka

Re: 2022

Post by BJ123 »

I’d just like the NRL to have the kind of strategic plans that AFL have. For example AFL have a long term plan to make their sport the number one game in Canberra via the GWS and they are slowly plodding in that direction.

I’d also like to see a balanced approach to Salary Caps, Transfer windows, public financials and public player earnings etc.

It’s crazy that Storm and Roosters can poach the best young teenagers from across the country, but not do their fair share of supporting junior football for the very young or the younger players who are never going to get a sniff of NRL level.
User avatar
gergreg
Laurie Daley
Posts: 10672
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: 2022

Post by gergreg »

Botman wrote:
gergreg wrote: January 3, 2022, 10:24 am Just back tracking a little I certainly don't agree with a flexible cap option which would allow clubs to underspend one year to then go over the cap the following year. It could get to a point where teams are cycling through a premiership window and fans know that half the teams in the comp aren't really competitive for an entire season. It is also making it more difficult to police and the NRL is pretty bloody hopeless at keeping on top of it, as is.
Not could
Its pretty much inevitable that it does. If that’s not your cup of tea, and I can understand why, then yeah soft/rolling caps won’t be something you can support

I don’t mind it myself but the point raised is a fair criticism
I mean we have a situation now where it is basically 4 - 6 teams truly in contention each season. Would it actually be better or worse if half the teams are pretty much tanking for a full season.

Your Storm and Roosters would be unbeatable in their 'on' years. Which fans across the board would hate. So every third year the 14 other clubs are competing for the premiership, and probably still getting beaten by the Storm or Roosters?

Many fans hate how players chop and change so much - signing deals a year out. Well that would be even worse.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
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 »

greeneyed wrote: January 3, 2022, 12:04 pm @Matt It seems clear to me that one objective of the NRL is spreading the talent so as to promote the evenness of the competition... because an uneven competition would lose the interest of fans. The other objective is to help ensure clubs don't overspend, beyond their resources and go to the wall. That is, there are two objectives. They've stated it very clearly.

Botman, as I understand it, is saying there is one (preventing the collapse of clubs who overspend)... and that spreading the talent and closeness of the competition is an incidental benefit:
Botman wrote: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
What I'm saying is that is incorrect. The NRL very clearly says it wants to spread the talent through the salary cap, so as to promote an even competition. It has gone to great lengths to make the claim, and find evidence to support it. It is a major stated objective of the NRL in having the cap. Actually, however, my belief is that the NRL is failing to achieve that stated objective.

One reason is the major loophole in the cap... TPAs. And two of the major beneficiaries have been the Storm and Roosters. According to the figures the NRL has released, the Storm have a $1 million jump on clubs at the other end of the scale. The figures the NRL has hidden (game wide sponsor TPAs) have benefited the Roosters significantly. NRL.com itself advised us that Cooper Cronk and James Tedesco had major TPAs (this was when they announced the 2019 TPA figures... the half the NRL was actually revealing).
Ok. That makes more sense.
And yet, both of you are right.

By capping salary you stop clubs going broke, meaning you have a competition, but it also makes it more compeditive as it 'assists' talent spread because u have a budget to spend 'wisely'.

In other words, you guys are arguing chicken or the egg.
Billy Walker
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6900
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: 2022

Post by Billy Walker »

If Botman and GE are in the market for a new suit or two and you give them both $600 capped to get it done. Botman’s $600 is getting a lot more suit if he is shopping in Bangkok than GE is if he’s trying to spend his $600 in Milan. You can’t get equity with a fixed cap across multiple markets. A cap will however stop GE and Botman going broke from overspending on suits.
User avatar
Fuifui Bradbrad
Bradley Clyde
Posts: 8018
Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
Favourite Player: Phil Graham
Location: Marsden Park

Re: 2022

Post by Fuifui Bradbrad »

That’s where I like the idea of the Luxury Tax. If the suits are capped at $600, but GE and Bot can both spend $700 and I only have $500. They can both spend $700 on their suits, pay $50 towards the Luxury Tax.

Then tax can then either go to me so I can buy a $600 suit, or be put into other initiatives, like developing tailors
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.

Nickman's love of NSW
  • NSW has done a superb job - 18/12/2020
  • NSW has been world-class with their approach to date, that's a fact. - 04/02/2021
User avatar
gergreg
Laurie Daley
Posts: 10672
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: 2022

Post by gergreg »

Fuifui Bradbrad wrote:That’s where I like the idea of the Luxury Tax. If the suits are capped at $600, but GE and Bot can both spend $700 and I only have $500. They can both spend $700 on their suits, pay $50 towards the Luxury Tax.

Then tax can then either go to me so I can buy a $600 suit, or be put into other initiatives, like developing tailors
Unless GE and Bot buy the best suits and leave you with the Lowes suit to waste your $550 on.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
User avatar
Fuifui Bradbrad
Bradley Clyde
Posts: 8018
Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
Favourite Player: Phil Graham
Location: Marsden Park

2022

Post by Fuifui Bradbrad »

Yuck to the Lowes suit. Maybe GE can sell me an old Milan suit for $300, and I can use the remaining $250 to start my own suit company. See if Bot would be unstressed in buying from Fui’s Suits and Pants Co
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.

Nickman's love of NSW
  • NSW has done a superb job - 18/12/2020
  • NSW has been world-class with their approach to date, that's a fact. - 04/02/2021
Billy Walker
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6900
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: 2022

Post by Billy Walker »

gergreg wrote: January 4, 2022, 9:43 am
Fuifui Bradbrad wrote:That’s where I like the idea of the Luxury Tax. If the suits are capped at $600, but GE and Bot can both spend $700 and I only have $500. They can both spend $700 on their suits, pay $50 towards the Luxury Tax.

Then tax can then either go to me so I can buy a $600 suit, or be put into other initiatives, like developing tailors
Unless GE and Bot buy the best suits and leave you with the Lowes suit to waste your $550 on.
That’s why the NRL needs to reduce the number of Sydney based suit manufacturers to ensure only the finest garments are being worn across the land.

I think most clubs would fall over themselves to get Sam Walker on the books, but this kid only emerges after a spate of injuries in the halves at the chooks. Tells me we don’t have a fair spread of talent and under the current system some clubs are hoarding all the fine suits.

Makes Bots point that the cap ensures nobody goes bankrupt but doesn’t actually get an even spread of players.
Shiv
David Shillington
Posts: 38
Joined: April 6, 2008, 7:42 pm

Re: 2022

Post by Shiv »

I dunno - think I am more with Botman on this one. I do agree that the Salary cap stops clubs going broke. I would even postulate that it helps level say 75% of the playing field stay level. However the other 25% (i.e. the cream of the crop players in each club) being far more impacted by available TPA's
Salary cap is equal to all clubs (so tick), however TPA's are not equal to all clubs. In fact TPA's potentially have a more compounding effect here then the actual $$ they represent. If you think about it a TPA might mean if the Player plays for your club and they "only" get an extra $50k overall - if that is above what anyone else can pay, AND that extra $50k is not coming out of your cap, then you not only get your player, but you haven't crippled your cap to do so - giving you more money to spend on other players, and thus compounding the TPA's value to your clubs available Salary Cap $$.
If you look at Storm - they called Cameron Smith a once in a generation player - and had massive TPA's accordingly. What that really meant though is any time his contract was up for review - every other team was competing against not only his Salary cap wage, but also his TPA $$ - and if you were in a multi-team town, or a small town then you had no chance. If you tried to match his Total Contract Value with just Salary cap - you'd have trashed your Salary cap.

Having said all of that, I really am on the fence about TPA's - I can see the good and bad sides of it. Equally I don't begrudge any of the people racking in the cash whilst the going is good - heaven knows their body spends 50 years paying for 10 years of effort. I do however fully support 100% visibility of a Club's Total Contract Value of all players, including all the TPA's. Lets then really cheer when a team that has a $1m advantage gets beaten - and stop pretending that both teams came into that game with equal $$ spent
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 140250
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2022

Post by greeneyed »

Matt wrote: January 4, 2022, 5:37 am
Ok. That makes more sense.
And yet, both of you are right.

By capping salary you stop clubs going broke, meaning you have a competition, but it also makes it more compeditive as it 'assists' talent spread because u have a budget to spend 'wisely'.

In other words, you guys are arguing chicken or the egg.
It’s not even really the chicken or the egg. Botman is saying the egg is the only really important thing. Chickens are incidental. I’m saying both the chicken and the egg are important… for the NRL… and they say their objective is to have both chickens and eggs.

Botman says that the cap is good enough in spreading the talent and not important to the outcome of only a few clubs dominating grand finals and premierships for decades. Whether there’re chickens is pretty much irrelevant.

I’m saying the NRL has a clear objective of having chickens (and eggs). They’ve touted evidence there are chickens, but ignored the evidence there’s a lack of chickens. In fact, the NRL is doing a poor job of ensuring we have enough chickens. And that’s one important reason why only a few clubs have dominated grand finals and premierships for decades.

I would hasten to add… I agree that the performance of coaches and clubs are also very important. I readily accept that this is a complex issue. But that doesn’t mean that the NRL shouldn’t be held to account for not achieving their objective of having enough chickens… and I have some ideas why there’s a lack of chickens and how they can fix it.
Image
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 140250
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2022

Post by greeneyed »

Billy Walker wrote: January 4, 2022, 10:44 am Makes Bots point that the cap ensures nobody goes bankrupt but doesn’t actually get an even spread of players.
His point is different to that. He’s said the NRL isn’t even trying to get a spread of talent through the cap.
“Botman” wrote: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
Image
Billy Walker
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6900
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: 2022

Post by Billy Walker »

greeneyed wrote: January 4, 2022, 10:56 am
Matt wrote: January 4, 2022, 5:37 am
Ok. That makes more sense.
And yet, both of you are right.

By capping salary you stop clubs going broke, meaning you have a competition, but it also makes it more compeditive as it 'assists' talent spread because u have a budget to spend 'wisely'.

In other words, you guys are arguing chicken or the egg.
It’s not even really the chicken or the egg. Botman is saying the egg is the only really important thing. Chickens are incidental. I’m saying both the chicken and the egg are important… for the NRL… and they say their objective is to have both chickens and eggs.

Botman says that the cap is good enough in spreading the talent and not important to the outcome of only a few clubs dominating grand finals and premierships for decades. Whether there’re chickens is pretty much irrelevant.

I’m saying the NRL has a clear objective of having chickens (and eggs). They’ve touted evidence there are chickens, but ignored the evidence there’s a lack of chickens. In fact, the NRL is doing a poor job of ensuring we have enough chickens. And that’s one important reason why only a few clubs have dominated grand finals and premierships for decades.

I would hasten to add… I agree that the performance of coaches and clubs are also very important. I readily accept that this is a complex issue. But that doesn’t mean that the NRL shouldn’t be held to account for not achieving their objective of having enough chickens… and I have some ideas why there’s a lack of chickens and how they can fix it.
That’s quite an omelette - I work better with suit analogies :lol:
Post Reply