Chicken_Faced_Killa
Well-known member
@ said:@ said:@ said:@ said:$ = Corruption
Until they reformat the Salary Cap so it is not based on $'s, clubs will rort the cap.
I've been advocating this for years with my friends.
A similar system to Supercoach, where players are rated on their level and all teams have the same skill/experience level.
Eg: Australian player worth 50 points
SOS player worth x points
200 NRL game player worth x points etc.
The problem with this system is what happens when you sign players for 3 and 4 years and they make SOS or the Australian team so you are over the cap through developing players.
How long is a player worth the SOS or Australian team points? If a player plays one game are they worth those points for their entire careers.
No matter what system you use there are going to be problems.
While there will be many flaws in any system initially, I feel it could be a smarter system and one which the players can earn whatever they want eliminating the TPA problem the administration has no choice in allowing.
On the point you made, thats an easy solution. While each player is graded annually, their points allocation at there present club remains the amount they were 'signed for' for the term of the contract. The only exemption clubs can apply for is if the player is graded down over 2 consecutive years?
The initial value of a player under the age of 16 is Zero. This allows clubs to develop juniors without threat of losing them. If they stay at there junior club from the age of 16 until retirement, they will always be 'Zero' to the developing club, but worth 'X' to any club choosing to buy that player.
I'm sure there will be flaws/alternatives to both scenarios above, but its a system we should be looking at.
I could see a points system working but it would have to be carefully balanced.
I agree having discounts for junior development is important but we don't want clubs throwing big money at young kids just to get them on the books for the future.
I would also be concerned about having players valued on the number of games they have played. For example a 300 game John Morris is not worth as much as a 300 game Luke Lewis. I would hate to see a situation where players reach a certain number of games and clubs don't want them any more due to the points value of the number of games they have played.
I also feel that a points system won't eliminate certain clubs being more appealing for TPAs and those clubs may just get even stronger.