Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

[Champ]

As suggested before, all players should be on a points system. The more valuable a player is the higher the points.

I'll say this every time, and it's not a slight against you, but can anyone please show me a professional league of any sport globally that has a centrally-assigned points cap system in place? Can't work, won't work.

100% this. The whole idea is a complete non-starter. All it does is distort player cost, not "fix" it. Depending on how the points are assigned, it would likely be a disaster for solid first graders who happen to have played a game or two of rep football and are now given rep-level points, while wildly overvaluing unproven talent. Instead of allowing clubs to keep the players they have developed, it would force them into Joseph Suaalii style bidding wars over "next big thing" talent that has a very low points score.

Every time I get into a conversation with a points system advicate they have to tweak the system in response to every problem.

What about players who get international caps for second tier nations - would they carry the same points weighting as Australia internationals? *Oh no, it would be half.* So teams would be incentivised to sign Tongan and Kiwi players rather than Australians - how would that go down? *Oh no, Tonga and NZ are good now, so they would have full weighting.* So some guy who plays a couple of games off the bench for Tonga has the same weighting as an Australian international? *It could be based on number of games played.* But some international teams play more than others.

And so it goes on, until they end up saying actually there would just be a panel of judges who decide how many points to assign everyone. Which basically turns roster construction into "are you a better judge of talent than Gorden Tallis, Neil Henry and Braith Anasta". There's no way any system that relies on external judgement of talent is going to work.

I understand some of the concerns. As many of our fellow Tigers fans have mentioned it wouldnt be easy & I dont profess to have all the answers. But what about a "price" points system that the market decides. Let me illustrate.
Lets take Suaali for example. Souths are willing to pay 300k for him so he is worth 30 points. But the Rorters come along & say we will pay him 500k , so his point score goes up to 50 points. However Souths get him for a 50% points discount (ie 25 points because he was developed by them). So Souths now say we will offer you 600k knowing that it will only cost them 30 points . As all NRL sides have the same points, sides like the Rorters would be hesitant using a large amount of points on an unproven players.
This same principle applies to all players. The "price" points system is very similar to how the salary cap works now but actually acts as a transparent public salary cap, rather than the "one payment on the books plus paperbags" with the existing salary cap.
For example , The Warriors offer Manu 950k but he signed with the Rorters for supposedly 750k ( with paperbags) , it will still cost the Rorters 95 points because that was the highest offer.

All contracts & offers have to be lodged with NRL & once lodged are binding on the club if the player decides to accept them so that would stop clubs trying to intentionally inflate the points price of players by submitting bogus offers. If a club does withdraw the offer after it has been accepted they would have to subsidize the difference of what they offered & what the player actually signed for at another club. On top of this , they would lose the difference of the price points between the 2 offers off their salary cap points for the lentgh of the contract they offered.

Any thoughts?

At first glance, it's a better idea than others I've heard. I'm thinking aloud here but the first questions I'd want answered are:
- Is it fair to make one team pay, even in points, for another club's stupid contract offer? I guess this happens anyway - the whole buyer's remorse thing. But if the Roosters genuinely have built a team culture players want to be a part of, even at a discount, should they be penalised because no hopers like the Warriors can only throw money at the situation?
- How would the system account for length of contract? I guess average annual value, but players often prefer to take smaller deals with the certainty of longer duration. Again, if some dumb club has to offer stupid contract years to attract talent is it fair effectively to make smart ones match it or be penalised?
- What happens when clubs are negotiating with multiple players at the same time? You'd have to assume the Tigers would be at least interested in more or less any player on the market now, and could in theory make offers to several players knowing they aren't likely to get all of them (and if they absolutely had to could withdraw an offer). If the whole transfer system became a chain, where club A can't offer player Y a contract until player X has made a decision, it would get horribly snarled up.

As I say, just thinking aloud. It's an interesting idea.

1- It would stop the Rorters for example signing someone on a 500 k contract ( and a paper bag for further 400k) when every one knows that player is worth 900k. If they really want that player, the question is are they willing to spend those points? Once again if you are a stupid club offering stupid deals , you put yourself in a bad position if the player accepts that deal. Not dissimilar to how the salary cap works now , except this is harder to rort.
The player can sign anywhere he wants (eg for culture reasons or likes the coach) however it would them come down to if the club valued that player enough to pay the points.

2-A club would be penalised for the length of the contract they offered or the length of the contract that was signed by the player , whichever was the lesser. Remember , that would only happen if the club withdrew the contract **after** it was accepted by the player. This would stop clubs offering bogus contracts to inflate a price points to screw another club over. Also would promote responsible salary cap management by the clubs.

3-Just like now, clubs offer multiple deals to different players.And just like now, once they spend their cap they withdraw the remaining offers with no penalty before the rest of the offers are excepted. The price points would only be held against a club that signed a player for under market value while the other offer was still valid ( ie not withdrawn. )

Example- Rorters offer Manu 500k ( plus paper bag) . Tigers offer 900k. Manu signs with Rorters it cost the Rorters 90 points because Tigers offer was not withdrawn.

Example 2-- Rorters offer Manu 500k ( plus paper bag) . Tigers offer 900k. Souths offer 750k .
before Manu signs anywhere , Tigers withdraw offer(with no penalty) cause they have signed another centre. Manu signs with Rorters & it now only cost the Rorters 75 points because Souths offer was still current (750k) when Manu signed with the Rorters.

As I said , dont have all the answers & appreciate any feedback suggestions & potential issues.
Putting it simply, it would be a more effective transparent way of policing the salary cap, would encourage clubs to develop their own juniors, (because of the discount in points) , & the paperbags dont matter as you cant spend over your maximum points anyway.

I like the idea of having a price points system however take the case of Papali'i based on Chammas report. Eels want to pay him 425k or 42.5 points tigers offer 600k or 60 points so eels may up offer to 500 k and get him but it costs them 60 points instead of 50. Here is the sticking point under what you originally put forward - the Warriors who developed him get a 50% discount so come in with an offer of 800k that blows both the eels and tiges out of the water but they only have to carry 40 points. I suppose you could get around that by decreasing the development discount for every year the player has been away from his development club. There would need to be a lot of tweaking done but it does seem a fairer system than present.

Yep , certainly. I just said 50% as a suggestion but like you say , with tweaking by someone smarter than me,Ii seriously cant see how this wouldn't work. It would be so transparent & the Rorters for example couldn't stockpile premium talent with paper bags.

 

[cochise]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

 

[Geo]

Anthony Minichello gets Latte's for life..

 

[happy_tiger]

Im continually confused how people believe that Simpkins' performance was better than Liddles this year. Liddle may not have been great but Simpkin was way out of his depth.

Its just, Liddle lacks in the main fundamental of a hooker, passing. Its atrocious. So the frustration over the season builds up, otherwise I don't see much of an issue in his game, but this one issue, is pretty damning.

Didn’t Luciano Leilua got into a push and shove with Liddle last offseason because of his service from dummy half?

Correct, seemingly it was justified

And there were games that Liddle’s service from dummy half was horrible he can run but his passing is average while Simpkin at this stage can pass the ball better but not as effective at running yet but honestly if I had to pick one of them two I’m going with Simpkin

Liddle has no kicking game either which is really important from 9 these days

A lot of 9 don't have decent kicking games

Go through all the 9 at NRL clubs ..many can't kick

The best hookers have an all round repertoire of talent including kicking, service, the draw an pass and defense, anything less and your behind schedule.
The Hodgson deal would be very valuable at this point in time in our development of the 9s we have coming through.
There will never be a player everyone on this forum agrees with signing, even if we landed The Cheese there would be a hater.

Seriously though

Go through the Top hooker from every side and tell me who has an all round kicking that is remotely quality ...doesn't have to be Cam Smith quality ...but at least average ....

Few and far between ......

 

[Champ]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

Agree. Thats why this points system works. a player can earn what he likes outside the points system, but it stops clubs like the Rorters paying under "on the books" plus a paperbag or TPA.. A players points in decided by the highest dollar figure any club is prepared to pay him . He can earn unlimited amounts,according to his image & efforts & and it doesnt affect his price points. But it stops the Rorters paying someone 500K making the rest up with paperbags & TPAs.

 

[cochise]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

Agree. Thats why this points system works. a player can earn what he likes outside the points system, but it stops clubs like the Rorters paying under "on the books" plus a paperbag or TPA.. A players points in decided by the highest dollar figure any club is prepared to pay him . He can earn unlimited amounts,according to his image & efforts & and it doesnt affect his price points. But it stops the Rorters paying someone 500K making the rest up with paperbags & TPAs.

I don't think other clubs poor decisions should determine a players worth.

 

[tigerballs]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

Agree. Thats why this points system works. a player can earn what he likes outside the points system, but it stops clubs like the Rorters paying under "on the books" plus a paperbag or TPA.. A players points in decided by the highest dollar figure any club is prepared to pay him . He can earn unlimited amounts,according to his image & efforts & and it doesnt affect his price points. But it stops the Rorters paying someone 500K making the rest up with paperbags & TPAs.

I'm agreeing with you 100% except in the case where a new bid trumps an old contract. For example, if Tedesco at the Tigers was a 50 point player ($500k ) and the Roosters offered a mill to make him a 100 point player, he would be a 100 point player to every club bar the Tigers, where he would remain at the points value of his current contract. That would not only encourage retention of juniors but when you have a good one, it's usually much easier to source a TPA of reasonable value to help cover a contract upgrade.

 

[tigerballs]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

Agree. Thats why this points system works. a player can earn what he likes outside the points system, but it stops clubs like the Rorters paying under "on the books" plus a paperbag or TPA.. A players points in decided by the highest dollar figure any club is prepared to pay him . He can earn unlimited amounts,according to his image & efforts & and it doesnt affect his price points. But it stops the Rorters paying someone 500K making the rest up with paperbags & TPAs.

I don't think other clubs poor decisions should determine a players worth.

That's the only way players are currently valued, by what a club offers. That's how Mbye and Packer made their millions.

 

[cochise]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

Agree. Thats why this points system works. a player can earn what he likes outside the points system, but it stops clubs like the Rorters paying under "on the books" plus a paperbag or TPA.. A players points in decided by the highest dollar figure any club is prepared to pay him . He can earn unlimited amounts,according to his image & efforts & and it doesnt affect his price points. But it stops the Rorters paying someone 500K making the rest up with paperbags & TPAs.

I don't think other clubs poor decisions should determine a players worth.

That's the only way players are currently valued, by what a club offers. That's how Mbye and Packer made their millions.

Only because they took those deals, if they were willing to stay at their club for a fair value why should their club be disadvantage due to a poor decision by the Tigers? For example Tigers offered $850k (850 points under the proposed system) for Mbye which is way overs, if the Dogs were happy to keep him for $600k and he is willing to stay for that amount. Why should the Dogs be disadvantaged due to the Tigers stupidity and have to put him in the points cap for 850?

 

[tigerballs]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

Agree. Thats why this points system works. a player can earn what he likes outside the points system, but it stops clubs like the Rorters paying under "on the books" plus a paperbag or TPA.. A players points in decided by the highest dollar figure any club is prepared to pay him . He can earn unlimited amounts,according to his image & efforts & and it doesnt affect his price points. But it stops the Rorters paying someone 500K making the rest up with paperbags & TPAs.

I don't think other clubs poor decisions should determine a players worth.

That's the only way players are currently valued, by what a club offers. That's how Mbye and Packer made their millions.

Only because they took those deals, if they were willing to stay at their club for a fair value why should their club be disadvantage due to a poor decision by the Tigers? For example Tigers offered $850k (850 points under the proposed system) for Mbye which is way overs, if the Dogs were happy to keep him for $600k and he is willing to stay for that amount. Why should the Dogs be disadvantaged due to the Tigers stupidity and have to put him in the points cap for 850?

Read my previous reply to the Champ.

 

[cochise]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

Agree. Thats why this points system works. a player can earn what he likes outside the points system, but it stops clubs like the Rorters paying under "on the books" plus a paperbag or TPA.. A players points in decided by the highest dollar figure any club is prepared to pay him . He can earn unlimited amounts,according to his image & efforts & and it doesnt affect his price points. But it stops the Rorters paying someone 500K making the rest up with paperbags & TPAs.

I don't think other clubs poor decisions should determine a players worth.

That's the only way players are currently valued, by what a club offers. That's how Mbye and Packer made their millions.

Only because they took those deals, if they were willing to stay at their club for a fair value why should their club be disadvantage due to a poor decision by the Tigers? For example Tigers offered $850k (850 points under the proposed system) for Mbye which is way overs, if the Dogs were happy to keep him for $600k and he is willing to stay for that amount. Why should the Dogs be disadvantaged due to the Tigers stupidity and have to put him in the points cap for 850?

Read my previous reply to the Champ.

Your idea does improve it, but say it is the Roosters offering the $600k, I still don't think they should be disadvantaged due to the Tigers stupidity.

 

[happy_tiger]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

Agree. Thats why this points system works. a player can earn what he likes outside the points system, but it stops clubs like the Rorters paying under "on the books" plus a paperbag or TPA.. A players points in decided by the highest dollar figure any club is prepared to pay him . He can earn unlimited amounts,according to his image & efforts & and it doesnt affect his price points. But it stops the Rorters paying someone 500K making the rest up with paperbags & TPAs.

I don't think other clubs poor decisions should determine a players worth.

That's the only way players are currently valued, by what a club offers. That's how Mbye and Packer made their millions.

Only because they took those deals, if they were willing to stay at their club for a fair value why should their club be disadvantage due to a poor decision by the Tigers? For example Tigers offered $850k (850 points under the proposed system) for Mbye which is way overs, if the Dogs were happy to keep him for $600k and he is willing to stay for that amount. Why should the Dogs be disadvantaged due to the Tigers stupidity and have to put him in the points cap for 850?

Read my previous reply to the Champ.

Your idea does improve it, but say it is the Roosters offering the $600k, I still don't think they should be disadvantaged due to the Tigers stupidity.

Yep ...we need to become better cheats ....if you can't beat them ...join them

 

[tigerballs]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

Agree. Thats why this points system works. a player can earn what he likes outside the points system, but it stops clubs like the Rorters paying under "on the books" plus a paperbag or TPA.. A players points in decided by the highest dollar figure any club is prepared to pay him . He can earn unlimited amounts,according to his image & efforts & and it doesnt affect his price points. But it stops the Rorters paying someone 500K making the rest up with paperbags & TPAs.

I don't think other clubs poor decisions should determine a players worth.

That's the only way players are currently valued, by what a club offers. That's how Mbye and Packer made their millions.

Only because they took those deals, if they were willing to stay at their club for a fair value why should their club be disadvantage due to a poor decision by the Tigers? For example Tigers offered $850k (850 points under the proposed system) for Mbye which is way overs, if the Dogs were happy to keep him for $600k and he is willing to stay for that amount. Why should the Dogs be disadvantaged due to the Tigers stupidity and have to put him in the points cap for 850?

Read my previous reply to the Champ.

Your idea does improve it, but say it is the Roosters offering the $600k, I still don't think they should be disadvantaged due to the Tigers stupidity.

In that case, the Tigers would most likely get the player anyway because they are offering more money. This is the only method to prevent, say, the Roosters from offering the same $850 but only claiming $650.

 

[Tiger5150]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

You realise that genuine TPA's are unrestricted now dont you?

I believe in a free society where authority doesnt own you like chattel slaves.

 

[old_man_tiger]

The point per dollar idea is interesting, but you can't implement a change like that without a large project, with a dedicated risk aspect, thinking of all the things I can't think of after cracking a case of XPA in front of the fire.

 

[Tiger5150]

Im going over to the Salary Cap thread to see if there is any news on signings...

 

[Deleted member 3518]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

You realise that genuine TPA's are unrestricted now dont you?

I believe in a free society where authority doesnt own you like chattel slaves.

In society . Of course! Who doesn’t agree with that? But you’re talking about a form of entertainment and business where the whole thing is predicated on a belief system that 2 sides enter into a competition where as , at the very least , both have an equal chance of winning that competition. It’s literally the reason the business makes any money to begin with. And unlike , say the premier league/ English football,there is only 1 competition . There’s not the 3 cups plus 2 European completions as well .
Otherwise what are we doing ? We might as well watch WWE, if we want fixed outcomes !
But we don’t want fixed outcomes .
If the roosters/storm ,truely are that much better than the rest of the league, then fixed monetary outcomes like hard caps , luxury taxes , transparency in salaries , shouldn’t be an issue . The Patriots have dominated the NFL for a long time . And good teams like the packers , Steelers , ravens are always there or there abouts.
This is the same in the NBA with teams like The Spurs and heat etc. they’re always near the top of the league . (Spurs for the first time since 99 have a team that can’t make the finals) .
The cream will always rise to the top .
But the nrl has no parity what do ever . And the salary cap and it’s illusion that it provides that is a joke .
If the EPL is the goal , then scrap the cap. My interest will definitely fall off a cliff . Or at least it will force clubs like ours to understand our true operating budget pales in comparison .
MLB is fine with “moneyball” and this disparity.
If the NRL continues this way then they will lose the public, as we don’t have the same fan culture that the English do .

 

[Tiger5150]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

You realise that genuine TPA's are unrestricted now dont you?

I believe in a free society where authority doesnt own you like chattel slaves.

In society . Of course! Who doesn’t agree with that? But you’re talking about a form of entertainment and business where the whole thing is predicated on a belief system that 2 sides enter into a competition where as , at the very least , both have an equal chance of winning that competition. It’s literally the reason the business makes any money to begin with. And unlike , say the premier league/ English football,there is only 1 competition . There’s not the 3 cups plus 2 European completions as well .
Otherwise what are we doing ? We might as well watch WWE, if we want fixed outcomes !
But we don’t want fixed outcomes .
If the roosters/storm ,truely are that much better than the rest of the league, then fixed monetary outcomes like hard caps , luxury taxes , transparency in salaries , shouldn’t be an issue . The Patriots have dominated the NFL for a long time . And good teams like the packers , Steelers , ravens are always there or there abouts.
This is the same in the NBA with teams like The Spurs and heat etc. they’re always near the top of the league . (Spurs for the first time since 99 have a team that can’t make the finals) .
The cream will always rise to the top .
But the nrl has no parity what do ever . And the salary cap and it’s illusion that it provides that is a joke .
If the EPL is the goal , then scrap the cap. My interest will definitely fall off a cliff . Or at least it will force clubs like ours to understand our true operating budget pales in comparison .
MLB is fine with “moneyball” and this disparity.
If the NRL continues this way then they will lose the public, as we don’t have the same fan culture that the English do .

If James Tedesco can earn $$ from a contract with a company completely unrelated to the Roosters, in which Roosters do not benefit, say Coke for example......why should he not be able to earn that money.

Genuine TPA's are totally unrestricted right now as they should be.

 

[happy_tiger]

Im going over to the Salary Cap thread to see if there is any news on signings...

No just comments on Brooks ,Coronavirus and the Discord ....

 

[Chicken_Faced_Killa]

Rather than trying to assign points to players I think it would be pretty easy to fix the cap:

all contracts public
hard cap on TPAs (eg $2m)
better system of cap relief for juniors/veterans

With regards to the above suggestions. I massively agree with better system of rewarding clubs for developing and retaining players. However, whilst I agree about making contracts public like the US sports the Players Association have said publicly that they'll never allow it as they will claim it breaches privacy, just like capping TPD's will be disputed as restriction of trade

I don't believe in restricting TPAs

Why? The salary cap wouldn't mean a thing if you didn't restrict TPAs.

Because I don't believe in limiting what players can earn away from the game.

So you want it to be like the EPL where the richest clubs will always dominate the competition? I believe in an even playing field.

I believe in people being able to earn from their own image and efforts. Things like players being paid to be on radio programs or fox would be out if you can TPAs.

Agree. Thats why this points system works. a player can earn what he likes outside the points system, but it stops clubs like the Rorters paying under "on the books" plus a paperbag or TPA.. A players points in decided by the highest dollar figure any club is prepared to pay him . He can earn unlimited amounts,according to his image & efforts & and it doesnt affect his price points. But it stops the Rorters paying someone 500K making the rest up with paperbags & TPAs.

There’s an easy way to cheat your system:

Tigers tell Luciano we are going to pay you $750 000 a year but we are only going to table this contract of $500 000 just don’t go to any other clubs for an offer so we can keep your price down. Bang Tigers only have 2/3 of the points counted to the cap and just do it again for the next player.