He signed a one year deal for 2023. Free to negotiate.I wasn’t sure if Farnwirth also still in the market.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
He signed a one year deal for 2023. Free to negotiate.I wasn’t sure if Farnwirth also still in the market.
But it is a restraint because you are putting restrictions upon Tedesco by placing a market value on him. He is not only the BMW but also the owner and if he wants to sell it at below market value he is entitled to do so.Its not a restraint. In this example it is simply supply & demand. The Rorters dont have a contract for Tedsco at 1.2 M. He might want to sign with them but he cant cause they simply dont have the money in their cap & want to spend their money eIsewhere(eg Sualli of Manu) I might want to buy a new BMW but i cant afford it. I think i should be able to get it for $1000 but the market dictates its worth $500 000. Its not a restraint of trade because the market has set the value.
Firstly i appreciate the discussion & everyone's ideas.The two major problems with the system you're suggesting, as far as I can see, are:
1) You don't have any place for TPAs. The NRL has decided TPAs are important as a way of making sure the code of rugby league is as competitive as it can be with external bidders for talent, so they ought to be factored in. What happens if club A's bid for a player is 800k and it comes with 300k of TPAs attached that are, as required, out of the club's hands, and club B's offer is 900k? Is club A required to increase its offer by 100k even though it is already the most lucrative deal on the table? If not, what value do the TPAs have?
2) There's no room for player preference. I have as many doubts as the next person about players "signing for unders to be part of a winning culture" at the Roosters, but equally it's pretty tough to force players to move to clubs they don't want to play for. I'm aware the AFL basically does this but (a) that system is under severe pressure and (b) that code doesn't have the same pressure from cross-code interest. Are you going to try to force a player who doesn't want to leave the ACT to sign for the Warriors even when the response is likely to be taking a contract from the Brumbies? Are you going to tell an 18 year old Indigenous kid from country Queensland that he has to go play for the Bulldogs because they've offered 70k a year more than the Cowboys?
Greg if what your suggesting was true i would be with you. However we all know Tedesco isnt selling himself at a discount . As it stands now, The Rorters determine a false market value cause we all know the Rorteres are paying more than "800k " for Tesdesco. Tedesco is NOT selling at below market value as you say . Thats the point. He is taking the 800k & ther rest off the books. His true market value is probably 1.4m. This system would make all that transparent.But it is a restraint because you are putting restrictions upon Tedesco by placing a market value on him. He is not only the BMW but also the owner and if he wants to sell it at below market value he is entitled to do so.
I don't think that's the problem I think the problem is when they are not declared Tedesco can sell it below market value if he wants just declare it a bit like the cowboy players buying cheap house's or Scott Prices house up on the gold coastBut it is a restraint because you are putting restrictions upon Tedesco by placing a market value on him. He is not only the BMW but also the owner and if he wants to sell it at below market value he is entitled to do so.
Once again , if the Tigs sign Rts , they have to withdraw their offer immediately. Tedescos market value now becomes the next highest bidder( Say Parra at 1m) . His market value has now dropped from 1.2 M cause the Tigs withdrew the offer. His new value is 1M. No rorting there, transparent values .Let's say that Tigers make the 1.2M offer to Teddy, knowing they are about to sign RTS, thus inflating the asking pricing for anyone else. Like I said, this approach provides too many ways to rort the system
It is still a restraint of trade though, money isn't the only consideration when choosing a workplace, there are many reason why someone may choose to work somewhere for less money. Under your system you are preventing someone from choosing their workplace even though the 2 parties have agreed to what they deem a fair salary, that is pretty much the definition of a restraint of trade. There is no way this would hold up.Greg if what your suggesting was true i would be with you. However we all know Tedesco isnt selling himself at a discount . As it stands now, The Rorters determine a false market value cause we all know the Rorteres are paying more than "800k " for Tesdesco. Tedesco is NOT selling at below market value as you say . Thats the point. He is taking the 800k & ther rest off the books. His true market value is probably 1.4m. This system would make all that transparent.
Hi Cobs sorry just saw your post. Can you transfer these posts please ? Thank youPlease post any further salary cap/TPA's topics in the Salary Cap Thread cheers.
It's ok mate, thanks. We dont move posts now because its confusing. We are only giving friendly reminders now if they go on for pages and/or someone complains. We all go off topic, I need reminding too 👍Hi Cobs sorry just saw your post. Can you transfer these posts please ? Thank you
What about the desires of the player? Should they not be able to say where they want to play? Also, money is not the only factor to be considered when signing a contract, particularly these young guys with a young family. Respectfully, your proposed model is flawed.Once again , if the Tigs sign Rts , they have to withdraw their offer immediately. Tedescos market value now becomes the next highest bidder( Say Parra at 1m) . His market value has now dropped from 1.2 M cause the Tigs withdrew the offer. His new value is 1M. No rorting there, transparent values .
Kaito, I love how you buck the trend and post in portrait.Not sure if my post makes sense
can't be bothered editing at the
moment but @watersider made a
good one earlier on and why it was
Introduced initially (to fend off
other codes in an already preety
much saturated market) and why the system is effectively still in place . A lot
of under the table stuff going on,
would be naïve to think otherwise
I understand that, but whilst ever the rest is off the books then for all intents and purposes Tedesco is selling below market value and any obstruction from allowing him to do so is a restraint.Greg if what your suggesting was true i would be with you. However we all know Tedesco isnt selling himself at a discount . As it stands now, The Rorters determine a false market value cause we all know the Rorteres are paying more than "800k " for Tesdesco. Tedesco is NOT selling at below market value as you say . Thats the point. He is taking the 800k & ther rest off the books. His true market value is probably 1.4m. This system would make all that transparent.
trying to make it rhymeKaito, I love how you buck the trend and post in portrait.
IMHO, he's developing into one of the best centres in the game, and probably a reasonable price.is Jessie Ramien still on n the market ? Hard nosed character who could add some real thrust for us out wide.
Those Sharks centres had hype earlier last year and got found out pretty quick against better oppositions.IMHO, he's developing into one of the best centres in the game, and probably a reasonable price.
Manu is in a league of his own .Those Sharks centres had hype earlier last year and got found out pretty quick against better oppositions.
Manu is the #1 centre in the game and I'd have a few ahead of Ramien.
He's capable though, I'm not a fan.
I like Herbie at centre too,Manu is in a league of his own .
Olam is floating somewhere near 2nd place.Penisini looks to have huge potential.
Staggs has all the tools ,keeps getting injured.