Should Backended Contracts be banned.

[Liddy]

Should the NRL move to ban backended Contracts?

We all the trouble we have with the Salary Cap, it appears that the main reason we are in such dire
straights, is because of the backended contracts entered into by the previous Administration.

To help prevent this happening to us again, or any other Club, should these type of Contracts be banned?

Thoughts???

 

[cunno]

Not necessarily banned but restrictions placed on them so administrators can't stuf them and club up

 

[happy_tiger]

I don't think so

Clubs just need to manage their salary caps better and think about the future

Have a question though

Can a contract be altered afterwards if a TPA is found post a contract being signed ??

 

[Liddy]

I don't think so

Clubs just need to manage their salary caps better and think about the future

Have a question though

Can a contract be altered afterwards if a TPA is found post a contract being signed ??

Happy,

The TPA doesn't form part of the Contract I don't think.

Isn't the TPA a separate arrangement from the Contract?

A TPA can be entered into by a player after a Contract is signed can't it?

 

[happy_tiger]

I don't think so

Clubs just need to manage their salary caps better and think about the future

Have a question though

Can a contract be altered afterwards if a TPA is found post a contract being signed ??

Happy,

The TPA doesn't form part of the Contract I don't think.

Isn't the TPA a separate arrangement from the Contract?

A TPA can be entered into by a player after a Contract is signed can't it?

That's why I'm asking Liddy

 

[GNR4LIFE]

TPA's should be banned before back ended contracts

 

[sheer64]

Both TPA's and back ended contracts should be banned!

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

TPA's should be banned before back ended contracts

No they shouldn't. You're effectively restricting someone's income by not letting them market their brand. We need to be smarter at sourcing external TPA's for our players.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

TPA's should be banned before back ended contracts

No they shouldn't. You're effectively restricting someone's income by not letting them market their brand. We need to be smarter at sourcing external TPA's for our players.

I don't think they should either, but it's more logical to ban them before back ended contracts. As long as clubs are under the cap, it should be irrelevant who they pay and when they pay them. If clubs get themselves into a mess like ours has, it's their own fault. The good clubs know how to manage their cap.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

TPA's should be banned before back ended contracts

No they shouldn't. You're effectively restricting someone's income by not letting them market their brand. We need to be smarter at sourcing external TPA's for our players.

I don't think they should either, but it's more logical to ban them before back ended contracts. As long as clubs are under the cap, it should be irrelevant who they pay and when they pay them. If clubs get themselves into a mess like ours has, it's their own fault. The good clubs know how to manage their cap.

Why is it more logical? TPA's are outside the cap and don't even factor into a clubs cap financial stream. If anything banning backended contracts forces clubs to go to the market to get players to top up/balance their salaries with TPA's. Problem is you need marketable players to do so.

I do agree that good clubs manage their cap better than the crap ones. The NRL can't keep saving clubs from themselves. No one bails out small businesses that are poorly run.

 

[hammertime]

Yeah,very hard to restrict the TPA's but there certainly needs to be better policing of it. Extremely hard to do.

 

[ricksen]

Not banned - it's genuinely the club's own stuff up.
That said, the league should look at curtailing this sort of cap circumvention - the NHL recently did, to the extent that the cap hit for any given year is the average annual value over the life of the contract.
In other words -
Say we signed Farah for 4 years - $400k, $500k, $800k, $1.5m salaries over those five years. Rather than have the listed value on the cap each year, the average of $800k applies against the cap each and every year.

The TPA system is a mess, but that's a completely different kettle of fish.

 

[supercoach]

If the salary cap was partly introduced to bring the bottom teams and the top onto the same level playing field than TPA's need to be abolished or at least be part of the cap. As for back ended contracts, I see no problems, the problem is like most politicians some club officials can not look beyond the next year and as we know lots of decision come back to bite you further down the track

 

[Liddy]

Not banned - it's genuinely the club's own [automatically edited] up.
That said, the league should look at curtailing this sort of cap circumvention - the NHL recently did, to the extent that the cap hit for any given year is the average annual value over the life of the contract.
In other words -
Say we signed Farah for 4 years - $400k, $500k, $800k, $1.5m salaries over those five years. Rather than have the listed value on the cap each year, the average of $800k applies against the cap each and every year.

The TPA system is a mess, but that's a completely different kettle of fish.

I think that is a much better system.

For salary cap purposes, it's much better to average the Contract total over the years it is for, irrespectively of when payments are made.

Everyone knows where they stand and former Administrations can't stuff it up for following Administrations.

Happy, I was just addressing the issue of backended contracts, not TPA's.

 

[Tiger_Watto]

Not at all… Its a good way to write allocations within the salary cap if your smart enough. You need to remember these backloaded deals would have been signed off by the NRL. Obviously they dont see a problem with it as they are fully disclosed.

Its the people employing the monkeys to balance the books who should be banned... Amateur Hour!!!

 

[Tiger_Watto]

TPA have existed since the start of Rugby League… They just now have a Title!

 

[cqtiger]

I'm a believer in a no cap environment.

Let any team buy any player for any amount of money. If they go bust trying to win a comp - too bad. I don't care if Manly has a handful of international players in reserve grade (not that it would ever happen).

The way I see it is that the wealthy clubs don't suffer under a cap system anyway. So, a club like ours can run middle of the road for a number of years then plan to spend big for a few years in the hope of having a short span of success. Way better than us just suffering year after meaningless year.

I remember in the 70's Balmain plodding along, getting the wooden spoon, then one off season they signed Neil Pringle (the best young talent around back then). Then they bought an old pom by the name of Brian Lockwood and didn't they do well together. Never won the comp but they started winning games.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

 

[VanillaThunder]

The cap is there to protect clubs from themselves, and I think we could take a leaf out of the NBA's book and introduce maximum contracts. If it can clear the NBA's players association then it should get through ours.
There'd still be an argument that rich, TPA-laden clubs will be more attractive, but it would make clubs like ours more sustainable and stop Manly shelling out half their cap trying to retain two blokes.
I'd like to think it would restore a bit more player-club loyalty too.
There'd still be rep bonuses and the like on top of it, but I think a number around 7-800,000 a year would be close to fair.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

 

[GNR4LIFE]

TPA's should be banned before back ended contracts

No they shouldn't. You're effectively restricting someone's income by not letting them market their brand. We need to be smarter at sourcing external TPA's for our players.

I don't think they should either, but it's more logical to ban them before back ended contracts. As long as clubs are under the cap, it should be irrelevant who they pay and when they pay them. If clubs get themselves into a mess like ours has, it's their own fault. The good clubs know how to manage their cap.

Why is it more logical? TPA's are outside the cap and don't even factor into a clubs cap financial stream. If anything banning backended contracts forces clubs to go to the market to get players to top up/balance their salaries with TPA's. Problem is you need marketable players to do so.

I do agree that good clubs manage their cap better than the crap ones. The NRL can't keep saving clubs from themselves. No one bails out small businesses that are poorly run.

Idk CB, it was just a throw away comment. I neither support nor am against TPA's or back ended contracts. I guess where i thought the logic was, was that at least with back ended contracts its the club who pays, but with TPA's an outside agency does. Or do outside agencies pay back ended contracts? I have no idea, i really have no dog in this fight. I'll take you at your word.

 

[Newtown]

TPA's are very thinly disguised forms of rorting. They are being used by so many clubs to gain advantage over clubs who are in no way able to financially compete. Marina Go is telling Wests Tigers supporters that our problems are centred around the CAP. That is untrue. This club's problems are centred around its distinct inability to attract TPA's which in turn would attract class players and in turn again allow the club to be still under the CAP. Is the NRL doing it's policing job? The answer is a big no.