NRL need to introduce a system where clubs are not allowed to sign a player on a contract under 20% of the highest tabled offer by rival clubs or 30% if it’s a junior that the club has developed.

This will ensure the cream of the crop can’t all fit into 1 side without unbalancing the salary cap and 3rd party deals will have more of a positive influence, especially in keeping juniors at the clubs.

The value should be based on the average earnings per season in the tabled offer.

The only real issue here is players accepting offers from clubs they don’t necessarily want to play for, or interstate clubs which will cause ‘family issues’.

Has this been considered by the NRL before?

@CocaCola said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

NRL need to introduce a system where clubs are not allowed to sign a player on a contract under 20% of the highest tabled offer by rival clubs or 30% if it’s a junior that the club has developed.

This will ensure the cream of the crop can’t all fit into 1 side without unbalancing the salary cap and 3rd party deals will have more of a positive influence, especially in keeping juniors at the clubs.

The value should be based on the average earnings per season in the tabled offer.

The only real issue here is players accepting offers from clubs they don’t necessarily want to play for, or interstate clubs which will cause ‘family issues’.

Has this been considered by the NRL before?

I Don’t mind your concept. You’re right about the hardship issues though - it may not be tenable.

I think a points cap for players rather than a salary cap also has merit. Each player has a certain amount of points, as players come off contract, they are ranked by an independent board. Clubs can pay whatever they want but are limited by the amount points their squads can have. Each players points are made public and clubs can choose 2 marquee signings that sit outside the points cap.

This takes the money side out of it and side deals.

@bbobb said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@CocaCola said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

NRL need to introduce a system where clubs are not allowed to sign a player on a contract under 20% of the highest tabled offer by rival clubs or 30% if it’s a junior that the club has developed.

This will ensure the cream of the crop can’t all fit into 1 side without unbalancing the salary cap and 3rd party deals will have more of a positive influence, especially in keeping juniors at the clubs.

The value should be based on the average earnings per season in the tabled offer.

The only real issue here is players accepting offers from clubs they don’t necessarily want to play for, or interstate clubs which will cause ‘family issues’.

Has this been considered by the NRL before?

I Don’t mind your concept. You’re right about the hardship issues though - it may not be tenable.

I think a points cap for players rather than a salary cap also has merit. Each player has a certain amount of points, as players come off contract, they are ranked by an independent board. Clubs can pay whatever they want but are limited by the amount points their squads can have. Each players points are made public and clubs can choose 2 marquee signings that sit outside the points cap.

This takes the money side out of it and side deals.

In theory a points cap works, however allocating points to each player is going to be a subjective exercise which is where it falls over. You’ll have too many different opinions.

I say good luck to clubs that can attract players for reasons other than money - everyone is trying to do that and clubs that have been successful in this area shouldn’t be punished.

I think the crux of the issue is transparency of salaries and offers and removing the temptation to cheat the cap. How you do that is anyone’s guess.

@weststigers said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

I say good luck to clubs that can attract players for reasons other than money - everyone is trying to do that and clubs that have been successful in this area shouldn’t be punished.

Rorters will rort.

@bbobb said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@CocaCola said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

NRL need to introduce a system where clubs are not allowed to sign a player on a contract under 20% of the highest tabled offer by rival clubs or 30% if it’s a junior that the club has developed.

This will ensure the cream of the crop can’t all fit into 1 side without unbalancing the salary cap and 3rd party deals will have more of a positive influence, especially in keeping juniors at the clubs.

The value should be based on the average earnings per season in the tabled offer.

The only real issue here is players accepting offers from clubs they don’t necessarily want to play for, or interstate clubs which will cause ‘family issues’.

Has this been considered by the NRL before?

I Don’t mind your concept. You’re right about the hardship issues though - it may not be tenable.

I think a points cap for players rather than a salary cap also has merit. Each player has a certain amount of points, as players come off contract, they are ranked by an independent board. Clubs can pay whatever they want but are limited by the amount points their squads can have. Each players points are made public and clubs can choose 2 marquee signings that sit outside the points cap.

This takes the money side out of it and side deals.

Would work fine but it is not in the interest of the clubs, players and player managers rorting the system. No need to think it is complicated just implement it as evolving process.

@weststigers said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@bbobb said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@CocaCola said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

In theory a points cap works, however allocating points to each player is going to be a subjective exercise which is where it falls over. You’ll have too many different opinions.

A good point but I think there are so many public footy stats today, It would be hard to rort the system. While admittedly not 100% right, things like SuperCoach and fantasy leagues have a similar approach (yes I know they are stats driven and don’t reflect all parts and performance). However, If you had Teddy or Tauamolo the most expensive across those leagues and not in the top 100 in the points cap, questions could be asked.

@bbobb said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@weststigers said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@bbobb said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@CocaCola said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

In theory a points cap works, however allocating points to each player is going to be a subjective exercise which is where it falls over. You’ll have too many different opinions.

A good point but I think there are so many public footy stats today, It would be hard to rort the system. While admittedly not 100% right, things like SuperCoach and fantasy leagues have a similar approach (yes I know they are stats driven and don’t reflect all parts and performance). However, If you had Teddy or Tauamolo the most expensive across those leagues and not in the top 100 in the points cap, questions could be asked.

How do you rank, say SBW? Or a player coming from another code like Tuqiri? Or a player from England with no stats in the NRL?

What about a Jack Bird coming off multiple long-term injuries?

The NRL could write into contracts that players need to cede their tax records? It’ll become apparent very quickly whether they are obtaining money from where they shouldn’t be.

@Cultured_Bogan said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

The NRL could write into contracts that players need to cede their tax records? It’ll become apparent very quickly whether they are obtaining money from where they shouldn’t be.

Cede their Tax records to who…?

Pretty sure off the books dodgy deals wouldn’t be included in the individuals Tax returns…

As for contract bids very subjective like a points system …what a player is worth to one Club would be different to another…

They may choose to take less to play for a strong Club which influences future earning, rep selection etc

The reverse also applies wouldn’t stop Clubs paying overs if the players value is less than what other Clubs would pay…

@weststigers said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@bbobb said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@weststigers said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@bbobb said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@CocaCola said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

In theory a points cap works, however allocating points to each player is going to be a subjective exercise which is where it falls over. You’ll have too many different opinions.

A good point but I think there are so many public footy stats today, It would be hard to rort the system. While admittedly not 100% right, things like SuperCoach and fantasy leagues have a similar approach (yes I know they are stats driven and don’t reflect all parts and performance). However, If you had Teddy or Tauamolo the most expensive across those leagues and not in the top 100 in the points cap, questions could be asked.

How do you rank, say SBW? Or a player coming from another code like Tuqiri? Or a player from England with no stats in the NRL?

What about a Jack Bird coming off multiple long-term injuries?

The points system wouldn’t be automated, it would have to be made through an independent commission or something similar. In relation to your question:

• I think ESL form is fairly exposed and a ranking could be made. Clubs do this to some extent when offering a contract.

• Long term injuries. A player has a baseline score prior to the injury that is deprecated in line with length of time out of the game. I am not sure of the algorithm but you get general idea.

• Other Codes. Similar to ESL form however for elite players (SBW, Lote) who play international Rugby attract a minimum baseline score that is then assessed by the points committee.

I really appreciate the questions as I have been thinking about it foe a while. I admit there are probably holes in it but the main premise is to remove the ambiguity by removing the salary driver. You can’t expose a salary but knowing how many points a player is worth could be made public.

I reckon player salaries should just be public - obviously this has it downsides but every other sport in the world you know what guys are getting paid. Would let you see exactly how every club is spending their cap, but completely understand why the players didn’t want it.

@Geo said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@Cultured_Bogan said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

The NRL could write into contracts that players need to cede their tax records? It’ll become apparent very quickly whether they are obtaining money from where they shouldn’t be.

Cede their Tax records to who…?

Pretty sure off the books dodgy deals wouldn’t be included in the individuals Tax returns…

As for contract bids very subjective like a points system …what a player is worth to one Club would be different to another…

They may choose to take less to play for a strong Club which influences future earning, rep selection etc

The reverse also applies wouldn’t stop Clubs paying overs if the players value is less than what other Clubs would pay…

The NRL. Just thinking out loud is all.

The NRL in a roundabout way already has a minimum designated market value a player is worth to ensure clubs don’t sign superstars on peanuts.

Players should be able to go wherever they like for whatever value they like for reasons you’ve stated in your post. A player might be happy to earn $800k instead of $1m to win a couple of premierships and boost their representative chances.

Player managers are the real issue I believe. They will push everything to the last to squeeze that extra bit of commission out of their clients (and prospective club.) Change the player manager system to flat fee and only accredit a certain amount every year.

I really don’t like points systems, I don’t think there is a fair way to determine points.

@cochise said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

I really don’t like points systems, I don’t think there is a fair way to determine points.

I like the idea, but agree that the points allocation would be arbitrary.

@Cultured_Bogan said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

@cochise said in Contract Bids - Player Market Value:

I really don’t like points systems, I don’t think there is a fair way to determine points.

I like the idea, but agree that the points allocation would be arbitrary.

I also have an issue with what some people want included in how you determine each players points. People often want things like the number of games played etc.