Points system for National Rugby League

[Champ1]

Here is a points system that i believe will stop the rorters & underhand business deals we all know goes on in the NRL world .
1-All players points are determined by market value. Whatever the highest bidder bids that is the value. All clubs get so many points to spend, lets say 90.

2-When a player is off contract, All clubs put in a dollar value for that player & have to lodge that offer with the NRL. if they want to contract him. EG -James Tedesco 2017.
Tigers say we will pay you 1.2 M a season. Rosters say we will pay you .850 m (850 k) but we all know that means 850K "on the books" & another 500 k "off the books".But under the points system that doesn't matter what they pay him. .Because the Tigers (the honest highest bidder) has offered 1.2 m, Tedesco is now worth 12 points, regardless of what the Roosters "claim"to be paying him. The beauty of this system is regardless of what the Roosters "claim" to be paying him, he still costs them 12 points off their salary cap, not 8.5 as they would have you believe .

3-All offers to a player have to be lodged with the NRL & are binding if the player accepts them.How ever a clubs offer can be withdrawn before a player excepts it .
EG -Cherry Evans. Tigers offer Cherry Evans 1.5 m . Manly offer 1.1 m .Cherry is now worth 15 salary cap points. But before Cherry Evans accepts the deal, we have signed Hastings on 600 k , so we withdraw the offer. Now Cherry Evans is only worth 11 salary cap points ,( Manlys highest bid) because we withdrew the offer.

4- You get a discount on salary cap points if your RL player is a Junior. EG Tigers offer James Tedesco 1.2 m. We get a 20 percent salary cap discount because we bred him. So if we offer him 1.2 m , if only costs us 9.6 points of our salary cap.But if the Roosters want hm, it costs them 12 salary cap points.

This system would ensure transparently & honesty because regardless of what the rorting clubs want to pay their players under the table, They still couldn't rort the points system.

As one wise man siad, this system will never be adopted because there are to many rich individuals entwined in the RL that are part of the rort.

 

[Merlot]

when the Jim Beam cup was running,it got rorted in the end,in saying that,it was a good way 2 spread talent,the NRLis flushed with cash,we get trashed by d media,even the most optimistic,GNR.[very mistic} n Tragic seem 2 agree we dont attract top shelf pllayers,lets play the long game,big callout 2 the goldfish,a draft is nonsense

 

[Lukic]

Just make the salary cap public like in American sports leagues. That's the easiest way. If it turns out guys like Manu are turning down $1m a year offers to sign on $500k with the Roosters, a public cap would make it obvious.

 

[gallagher]

Let's just take it in turn to win a comp.

 

[BAGNF05]

Just make the salary cap public like in American sports leagues. That's the easiest way. If it turns out guys like Manu are turning down $1m a year offers to sign on $500k with the Roosters, a public cap would make it obvious.

I agree with this. Even if it’s not an even playing field it at least sets up the David v Goliath narratives.

 

[Needaname]

Nah don’t make it complicated. It’s half way there. Just they don’t stick to their guns.
1. Need to restrict of year signings like Lodge and Pangai Jnr to only valid if it is a minimum 18month deal.
2. Let the market decide.
Using your Teddy logic in 2017.
For every player off contract have each nrl team put in a silent bid. Collate all 16 or 17 values and baseline the players minimum cap value to the number representing greatest average or median figure (which ever is greater) the in the collection of bids.
With that figure, each club interested in say James Tedesco then has to bid over that value.

 

[weststigerman]

Some good ideas here. If the NRL want the comp to be competitive they have to find a way to spread out the elite players beyond 3 or 4 clubs.

Unless Penrith choke they’re going to win again because half their team play origin level.

 

[gallagher]

Some good ideas here. If the NRL want the comp to be competitive they have to find a way to spread out the elite players beyond 3 or 4 clubs.

Unless Penrith choke they’re going to win again because half their team play origin level.

Penrith didn't need the NRL to spread the talent though. They built a squad

 

[Champ1]

Nah don’t make it complicated. It’s half way there. Just they don’t stick to their guns.
1. Need to restrict of year signings like Lodge and Pangai Jnr to only valid if it is a minimum 18month deal.
2. Let the market decide.
Using your Teddy logic in 2017.
For every player off contract have each nrl team put in a silent bid. Collate all 16 or 17 values and baseline the players minimum cap value to the number representing greatest average or median figure (which ever is greater) the in the collection of bids.
With that figure, each club interested in say James Tedesco then has to bid over that value.

Why make it secret? Every club interested in a player lodges a contract price with the NRL they are willing to pay for a player. The highest bid becomes his points. It would be public & transparent. Its not a bidding war, its a way to fairly establish a players true value.
EG Tedesco 2017.
Tigers offer 1.2 m , Rorters offer 850k ( haha) . Tedesco is now worth 12 points. He can decide to sign with the rorters if he likes, however it still costs the Rorters 12 points. However the rorters now are faced with a problem. Their under the table payments are of no consequence cause they only have the same amount of points to spend as every one else.
At the moment , say the salary cay is 10mil. The Rorters SAY they pay Tedesco 850k ,& we all know thats rubbish. But they get away with this because they hide the extra payments.That allows them to probably buy up to 5 extra players that most other clubs, and the most frustrating thing is we all know its going on.
With the points system, Tedesco would be rightly valued at 1.2 mil, cause thats the highest bid, his true market value. It is so simple, transparent easy & fair. All the talent would be evenly spread around & the clubs who developed the talent has a better ability to be competitive because of the development discount. It would stop the clubs like the rorters who just pilfer the best talent from the clubs who develop them.

 

[supercoach]

Good luck with the point system, I have been banging on about it for a decade. I have emailed stuff to the NRL and the media with no response . The people who run the NRL are happy with what we have now, where we have the haves and have nots. Although Penrith have thrown a spanner in the works. A battler club that develops talent and wins comps without rorting.

You either have a system where the richest wins like the EPL or you have a serious level playing field where every team is limited to the exact same resources. You will still get clubs who can manage their resources better, but at least every club start off on a level playing field. In a perfect world , you want come round one each year every team has a real chance of playing finals football.

Anyway it’s a waste of time, will never happen. The NRL is run by a few self interested people

 

[crazycat]

Penrith didn't need the NRL to spread the talent though. They built a squad

And that is fine.

Look That's rugby league. When you have say Nathan Cleary play with Tyrone May and Luai. It just is a consequence of the Junior basin and those gang sticking together.

Leave the Penrith problem out of this. One easy way to solve it would be once contracts get upgraded Penrith will have to move on players...

Which reminds me:
Villiame Kikau to Bulldogs (following Burton and Brent Naden).
Api Koroisau to us.

Penrith, unlike Easts are bleeding players. You are not seeing these super teams retain their talent.

 

[Needaname]

Why make it secret? Every club interested in a player lodges a contract price with the NRL they are willing to pay for a player. The highest bid becomes his points. It would be public & transparent. Its not a bidding war, its a way to fairly establish a players true value.
EG Tedesco 2017.
Tigers offer 1.2 m , Rorters offer 850k ( haha) . Tedesco is now worth 12 points. He can decide to sign with the rorters if he likes, however it still costs the Rorters 12 points. However the rorters now are faced with a problem. Their under the table payments are of no consequence cause they only have the same amount of points to spend as every one else.
At the moment , say the salary cay is 10mil. The Rorters SAY they pay Tedesco 850k ,& we all know thats rubbish. But they get away with this because they hide the extra payments.That allows them to probably buy up to 5 extra players that most other clubs, and the most frustrating thing is we all know its going on.
With the points system, Tedesco would be rightly valued at 1.2 mil, cause thats the highest bid, his true market value. It is so simple, transparent easy & fair. All the talent would be evenly spread around & the clubs who developed the talent has a better ability to be competitive because of the development discount. It would stop the clubs like the rorters who just pilfer the best talent from the clubs who develop them.

I get what your suggesting. But every club gets 13mil from the NRL as a grant.
So money isn’t the issue for any club. All can afford the salary cap. The points system you are suggesting has merit. But how is it any different to the current salary cap.

Do you think the Roosters pay their players less because they can’t afford to meet the salary cap?

If Tedesco costs them 12 points or 1.2 mil what difference does it make?

 

[Champ1]

I get what your suggesting. But every club gets 13mil from the NRL as a grant.
So money isn’t the issue for any club. All can afford the salary cap. The points system you are suggesting has merit. But how is it any different to the current salary cap.

Do you think the Roosters pay their players less because they can’t afford to meet the salary cap?

If Tedesco costs them 12 points or 1.2 mil what difference does it make?

You are right, there is no difference whether it is 1.2 m or 12 points. I guess in essence what this system does is make them (the Rorters ) pay the true market value for lets say Tedesco, instead of claiming to be paying him less. As you correctly state, money isnt an issue . The issue is a club like the rorters probably spend 18m on their salary cap by "pretending" to contract players for a lower figure & paying them covertly in other ways . But this system, whether it be by salary cap or points, will stop the Rorters gaining benefit from those underhanded payments. In fact they could covertly pay a player 20millon a season if they wanted to. But they still couldnt stack their sides with all the nrl talent on bogus undervalued contracts like they do now.

 

[old_man_tiger]

Here is a points system that i believe will stop the rorters & underhand business deals we all know goes on in the NRL world .
1-All players points are determined by market value. Whatever the highest bidder bids that is the value. All clubs get so many points to spend, lets say 90.

2-When a player is off contract, All clubs put in a dollar value for that player & have to lodge that offer with the NRL. if they want to contract him. EG -James Tedesco 2017.
Tigers say we will pay you 1.2 M a season. Rosters say we will pay you .850 m (850 k) but we all know that means 850K "on the books" & another 500 k "off the books".But under the points system that doesn't matter what they pay him. .Because the Tigers (the honest highest bidder) has offered 1.2 m, Tedesco is now worth 12 points, regardless of what the Roosters "claim"to be paying him. The beauty of this system is regardless of what the Roosters "claim" to be paying him, he still costs them 12 points off their salary cap, not 8.5 as they would have you believe .

3-All offers to a player have to be lodged with the NRL & are binding if the player accepts them.How ever a clubs offer can be withdrawn before a player excepts it .
EG -Cherry Evans. Tigers offer Cherry Evans 1.5 m . Manly offer 1.1 m .Cherry is now worth 15 salary cap points. But before Cherry Evans accepts the deal, we have signed Hastings on 600 k , so we withdraw the offer. Now Cherry Evans is only worth 11 salary cap points ,( Manlys highest bid) because we withdrew the offer.

4- You get a discount on salary cap points if your RL player is a Junior. EG Tigers offer James Tedesco 1.2 m. We get a 20 percent salary cap discount because we bred him. So if we offer him 1.2 m , if only costs us 9.6 points of our salary cap.But if the Roosters want hm, it costs them 12 salary cap points.

This system would ensure transparently & honesty because regardless of what the rorting clubs want to pay their players under the table, They still couldn't rort the points system.

As one wise man siad, this system will never be adopted because there are to many rich individuals entwined in the RL that are part of the rort.

I have been thinking about pretty much the same system so I love it and think you're a genius. Points 2 and 3 could be governed so clubs couldn't put in frivolous bids to multiple players as the NRL would know the total cap value of all their offers.

 

[Red88_Tiger]

Good luck with the point system, I have been banging on about it for a decade. I have emailed stuff to the NRL and the media with no response . The people who run the NRL are happy with what we have now, where we have the haves and have nots. Although Penrith have thrown a spanner in the works. A battler club that develops talent and wins comps without rorting.

You either have a system where the richest wins like the EPL or you have a serious level playing field where every team is limited to the exact same resources. You will still get clubs who can manage their resources better, but at least every club start off on a level playing field. In a perfect world , you want come round one each year every team has a real chance of playing finals football.

Anyway it’s a waste of time, will never happen. The NRL is run by a few self interested people

Probably have better response if you emailed vlandys

 

[jadtiger]

A points system is probably one of the best and fairest way of equalising the competiton which is the reason why it will never happen.There are far too many vested interests who have too much power in the NRL who will make sure it will never be.The powerful rich clubs will never agree to equality or even fairness.

 

[BAGNF05]

I get what your suggesting. But every club gets 13mil from the NRL as a grant.
So money isn’t the issue for any club. All can afford the salary cap. The points system you are suggesting has merit. But how is it any different to the current salary cap.

Do you think the Roosters pay their players less because they can’t afford to meet the salary cap?

If Tedesco costs them 12 points or 1.2 mil what difference does it make?

Because the club has a finite number of points under the system. Points in brown paper bags aren’t attractive.

 

[jirskyr]

There's a very critical flaw to this plan, and there tends to be critical flaws to all points-based considerations.

In this case the flaw is good teams will be hammered by "offers" from other clubs. Those claims will artificially stretch a well-performing club outside the points limit, whether or not any of the offers are genuine or work out.

The Roosters are a good example. Say Tigers claim Tedesco for $1.2M, Storm claim Crichton for $900K, Warriors claim Tupouniua for $700K etc. Individually these offers may all be genuine to each club, but they can add up so quickly that Roosters cannot now "afford" their roster.

So now Roosters have to release someone to stay under points - say they release Tedesco. So Tedesco now is compelled to play for Tigers because they made the highest bid and forced his club into a points crisis? That becomes restraint of trade and the RLPA will not agree to it, any more than they will currently support a draft system.

You will end up with situations where clubs on the brink of breaching their points will have claims tactically made against off-contract players to force the club over the points limit, and force them to shed players, though they may be currently points compliant. And even though the player himself might not want to leave.

You also risk collusion between clubs intentionally throwing in simultaneous high bids on the same target club, to destroy their points balance. It incentivises a pile-on of certain clubs who are known (publicly) to be at points risk.

You cannot end up with a system where the value of a player is determined by random bids by opposition clubs. Even if the bids are binding, many of the bids will not come through because a club will not shed all it's best footballers, in which case there is limited penalty for making a risky bid - you may jag the player, and if you don't, you simply make life difficult for their incumbent.

There's also a huge issue with speculative bidding or negotiating, because under the current system you can engage in negotiations with unlimited numbers of players without committing your funds. For example Tigers might want to talk to Tedesco and Munster both off contract, knowing it's (a) not realistic to jag both players, and (b) you are only sounding out possibilities. Under this points system you could do no such thing, you'd have to lodge official offers, and you'd probably have to choose only one of Tedesco or Munster, not being able to afford it if both said "yes" (also NRL would be unlikely to let you lodge new claims if your projected points total was beyond the allowed limit).

Lastly, it would make the chances of re-signing players much lower, because any club near their points limit would be highly exposed to speculative offers from other clubs on off-contract players. If Warriors wanted Tupouniua for example, and Roosters were previously paying him $450K, assuming Roosters were close to their points limit, Warriors would only have to bid enough to drive Roosters over their points limit. This would leave Roosters unable to counter-bid on Tupouniua or forced to try to break a contract with an existing player.

No offence to those complaining about the NRL not adopting a points-based system, but the primary reason is not self-interest or cronyism or fraud or ineptitude, the primary reason for avoiding points-based systems is they are all critically flawed in some respect.

I continue to say this - name any professional sport in the world that operates with a points-based cap?

 

[BAGNF05]

There's a very critical flaw to this plan, and there tends to be critical flaws to all points-based considerations.

In this case the flaw is good teams will be hammered by "offers" from other clubs. Those claims will artificially stretch a well-performing club outside the points limit, whether or not any of the offers are genuine or work out.

The Roosters are a good example. Say Tigers claim Tedesco for $1.2M, Storm claim Crichton for $900K, Warriors claim Tupouniua for $700K etc. Individually these offers may all be genuine to each club, but they can add up so quickly that Roosters cannot now "afford" their roster.

So now Roosters have to release someone to stay under points - say they release Tedesco. So Tedesco now is compelled to play for Tigers because they made the highest bid and forced his club into a points crisis? That becomes restraint of trade and the RLPA will not agree to it, any more than they will currently support a draft system.

You will end up with situations where clubs on the brink of breaching their points will have claims tactically made against off-contract players to force the club over the points limit, and force them to shed players, though they may be currently points compliant. And even though the player himself might not want to leave.

You also risk collusion between clubs intentionally throwing in simultaneous high bids on the same target club, to destroy their points balance. It incentivises a pile-on of certain clubs who are known (publicly) to be at points risk.

You cannot end up with a system where the value of a player is determined by random bids by opposition clubs. Even if the bids are binding, many of the bids will not come through because a club will not shed all it's best footballers, in which case there is limited penalty for making a risky bid - you may jag the player, and if you don't, you simply make life difficult for their incumbent.

There's also a huge issue with speculative bidding or negotiating, because under the current system you can engage in negotiations with unlimited numbers of players without committing your funds. For example Tigers might want to talk to Tedesco and Munster both off contract, knowing it's (a) not realistic to jag both players, and (b) you are only sounding out possibilities. Under this points system you could do no such thing, you'd have to lodge official offers, and you'd probably have to choose only one of Tedesco or Munster, not being able to afford it if both said "yes" (also NRL would be unlikely to let you lodge new claims if your projected points total was beyond the allowed limit).

Lastly, it would make the chances of re-signing players much lower, because any club near their points limit would be highly exposed to speculative offers from other clubs on off-contract players. If Warriors wanted Tupouniua for example, and Roosters were previously paying him $450K, assuming Roosters were close to their points limit, Warriors would only have to bid enough to drive Roosters over their points limit. This would leave Roosters unable to counter-bid on Tupouniua or forced to try to break a contract with an existing player.

No offence to those complaining about the NRL not adopting a points-based system, but the primary reason is not self-interest or cronyism or fraud or ineptitude, the primary reason for avoiding points-based systems is they are all critically flawed in some respect.

I continue to say this - name any professional sport in the world that operates with a points-based cap?

NSWRL - not fully professional but it can work, why don’t players claim restraint of trade when the so called ‘salary cap’ bites them.

 

[supercoach]

The salary cap is fine if everyone plays by the rules, but it’s like tax, ever club is bending and breaking the rule. There are a 100ways to rort the salary cap with zero possibility of being caught. A family member gets a contract with a sponsors private company, a job x football, a new kitchen for your mum and the list goes on.
Also players will take a little less to play for successful clubs and demand a truck load more to play for weak clubs. So the weaker clubs get less bang for their cap than the good ones.

There must be a better system to get all teams on a equal playing field. Okay it might not be a point system