Home grown Salary cap relief

[Woodsie]

Crawley and others are surprisingly, in the wake of the Turbo's, calling for the introduction of an increased salary cap provision to enable and encourage clubs to grow and develope their own local players ...

My view is that whilst this would be an advatage to Manly in the short term .. . We are in fact in the middle of a golden era with the Turbos, Hoppas, Schuster etc

In the long term it would be a disaster ..... clubs like Parra, Penrith Canberra and Broncos etc would gain an enormous leg up ....

... and any thing that would be good for Parra is just ****ing WRONG ..

 

[Ron E. Gibbs]

Nah, Woodsie - Parra would still find a way to stuff it up. The thing is, the players would have to stay at the club and at least make their debut. There'd still be nothing to stop other clubs (ie, the Roosters) signing up youngsters from other clubs. In any case, I think if a club develops a player, that club should be rewarded somehow. Even if that club is Parramatta.

 

[Tomay]

This is a rule that should have been introduced a long time ago. Considering the NRL itself doesn't really do anything to support junior development, there has to be some incentives for the teams if the game is going to get funding at the grass roots level. That's what it comes down to, the long term future of the game. If they can get the balance right with the rule it would be great for the game, however, I am concerned about the NRL's ability to do so.

 

[Woodsie]

Nah, Woodsie - Parra would still find a way to stuff it up. The thing is, the players would have to stay at the club and at least make their debut. There'd still be nothing to stop other clubs (ie, the Roosters) signing up youngsters from other clubs. In any case, I think if a club develops a player, that club should be rewarded somehow. Even if that club is Parramatta.

I was amazed last year reading in the Parra forum that not one local player had debuted under Arffur in 5 years ....you are correct ... if any club can be given every advantage ... and piss it up against a wall ... it is Parra ...

 

[HappilyManly]

It should be a sliding scale reduction of the Cap.
Then Clubs could reinvest in bringing Juniors through.

Full season only so a Club can't sign a player at 30th June and gain the full discount or a single player getting the discount at two diffetent Clubs if he changes mid year

Discount:
If player at Club for Harold Matthews then 5% reduction
Plus
If player at Club for Flegg then 5% reduction added to Matts discount
Plus
If player at Club for NYC then 5% reduction added to Flegg discount
Plus
If player at Club for Reserves then 5% reduction added to NYC discount
Plus
If player at Club for NRL then 5% reduction added to Reserves discount
Plus
1% for each full season of NRL

This would see a Turbo (started Matts) initial NRL contract begin with a 25% Cap discount
Or
Chez (started NYC) would see an initial NRL contract begin with a 15% Cap discount
Or
Siro (started Reserves) would see an initial NRL contract begin with a 0% Cap discount as he didn't play full season in Reserves


Discounts are forfeited once a player changes Clubs.

 

[mickqld]

It should be a sliding scale reduction of the Cap.
Then Clubs could reinvest in bringing Juniors through.

Full season only so a Club can't sign a player at 30th June and gain the full discount or a single player getting the discount at two diffetent Clubs if he changes mid year

Discount:
If player at Club for Harold Matthews then 5% reduction
Plus
If player at Club for Flegg then 5% reduction added to Matts discount
Plus
If player at Club for NYC then 5% reduction added to Flegg discount
Plus
If player at Club for Reserves then 5% reduction added to NYC discount
Plus
If player at Club for NRL then 5% reduction added to Reserves discount
Plus
1% for each full season of NRL

This would see a Turbo (started Matts) initial NRL contract begin with a 25% Cap discount
Or
Chez (started NYC) would see an initial NRL contract begin with a 15% Cap discount
Or
Siro (started Reserves) would see an initial NRL contract begin with a 0% Cap discount as he didn't play full season in Reserves


Discounts are forfeited once a player changes Clubs.

Brilliant idea but will never fly with the morons running the game. Way too many sensible figures for Beatoff and Greenturd to grasp.

 

[manlyfan76]

If you bring a player through juniors then you should have control over that player for a few years.
Salary can be determined by their stats reviewed every year.

 

[HappilyManly]

Brilliant idea but will never fly with the morons running the game. Way too many sensible figures for Beatoff and Greenturd to grasp.

Any effort for Junior or Country League is too much for NRLHQ

I always thought that each NRL Club should have a sister CRL District.
Play trials and 1 game per year, have training camps with the CRL players etc

 

[Ned]

It should be a sliding scale reduction of the Cap.
Then Clubs could reinvest in bringing Juniors through.

Full season only so a Club can't sign a player at 30th June and gain the full discount or a single player getting the discount at two diffetent Clubs if he changes mid year

Discount:
If player at Club for Harold Matthews then 5% reduction
Plus
If player at Club for Flegg then 5% reduction added to Matts discount
Plus
If player at Club for NYC then 5% reduction added to Flegg discount
Plus
If player at Club for Reserves then 5% reduction added to NYC discount
Plus
If player at Club for NRL then 5% reduction added to Reserves discount
Plus
1% for each full season of NRL

This would see a Turbo (started Matts) initial NRL contract begin with a 25% Cap discount
Or
Chez (started NYC) would see an initial NRL contract begin with a 15% Cap discount
Or
Siro (started Reserves) would see an initial NRL contract begin with a 0% Cap discount as he didn't play full season in Reserves


Discounts are forfeited once a player changes Clubs.

That might work for us against the roorters, but apply that formula to the Broncos though, they'd have a massive advantage over everybody.

 

[HappilyManly]

That might work for us against the roorters, but apply that formula to the Broncos though, they'd have a massive advantage over everybody.

It doesn't matter as each Club can only have 30 players.

So the Ponga's of the future will move away from Riff, Parra and Bronco nursery.
And those new Clubs would be taking them on without a discount

This way the talent still spreads but more Clubs would be rewarded for nurturing the next generation of league players

 

[DUFFMAN]

The rooster would sign every half decent 12-year-old to play in the local comp and turn around saying we developed him so we want a discount.

 

[Supreme Leader]

It should be a sliding scale reduction of the Cap.
Then Clubs could reinvest in bringing Juniors through.

Full season only so a Club can't sign a player at 30th June and gain the full discount or a single player getting the discount at two diffetent Clubs if he changes mid year

Discount:
If player at Club for Harold Matthews then 5% reduction
Plus
If player at Club for Flegg then 5% reduction added to Matts discount
Plus
If player at Club for NYC then 5% reduction added to Flegg discount
Plus
If player at Club for Reserves then 5% reduction added to NYC discount
Plus
If player at Club for NRL then 5% reduction added to Reserves discount
Plus
1% for each full season of NRL

This would see a Turbo (started Matts) initial NRL contract begin with a 25% Cap discount
Or
Chez (started NYC) would see an initial NRL contract begin with a 15% Cap discount
Or
Siro (started Reserves) would see an initial NRL contract begin with a 0% Cap discount as he didn't play full season in Reserves


Discounts are forfeited once a player changes Clubs.

Outstanding mate, won't get legs because the NRL would deem this to be sensible, and if you look at item 32 (b) ii of their charter says "we will only undertake activities that will lead to the demise of the code".

 

[HappilyManly]

The rooster would sign every half decent 12-year-old to play in the local comp and turn around saying we developed him so we want a discount.

Fine, but the 12 year old has to stay through every grade

As soon as he is offered a starting spot in a higher grade or a dollar more, the kid would move on and the Roosters lose his discount

 

[HappilyManly]

Outstanding mate, won't get legs because the NRL would deem this to be sensible, and if you look at item 32 (b) ii of their charter says "we will only undertake activities that will lead to the demise of the code".

Sad but true

Their sole focus on the top tier is undermining the very foundations of our code

 

[Tragic Eagle]

It will never happen as it requires transparency and consistency both of which are not embraced by the current administration .

 

[The Who]

A rule that protects junior players who have come through the ranks would mean the end of Melbourne, and potential expansion clubs such as Perth and Adelaide.
Such a rule would be a massive bonus to Brisbane and NZ who have huge RL nurseries. The 'Riff and Doesn'tmatter would be the next two clubs to benefit most.
Easts would be badly affected, but money is no object to them. I'd say we'd be the 3rd worst affected club should preferences be given to juniors. Our kids are lured by RU and surfing; sports that don't factor highly in clubs based in western Sydney.
In principle such a scheme sounds attractive but it is not fair in practice.
Over the years several Forum posters have suggested a 'Cap' based on points for rep players etc. That sounds the most fair system to me. However, putting certain points value on players is highly judgemental, and the form/value of players fluctuates from game-to-game let alone season-to-season.
I give you Nathan Cleary and Latrine Mitchell as prime examples.

 

[Terry Zarsoff]

The rooster would sign every half decent 12-year-old to play in the local comp and turn around saying we developed him so we want a discount.

They already have contracts in place on boys likely to be born in NSW between now and 2050.

An expensive but nonetheless comprehensive strategy.

On a serious note, Greenmount would never initiate anything that might advantage the Manly-Warringah club.

 

[HappilyManly]

A rule that protects junior players who have come through the ranks would mean the end of Melbourne, and potential expansion clubs such as Perth and Adelaide.
Such a rule would be a massive bonus to Brisbane and NZ who have huge RL nurseries. The 'Riff and Doesn'tmatter would be the next two clubs to benefit most.
Easts would be badly affected, but money is no object to them. I'd say we'd be the 3rd worst affected club should preferences be given to juniors. Our kids are lured by RU and surfing; sports that don't factor highly in clubs based in western Sydney.
In principle such a scheme sounds attractive but it is not fair in practice.
Over the years several Forum posters have suggested a 'Cap' based on points for rep players etc. That sounds the most fair system to me. However, putting certain points value on players is highly judgemental, and the form/value of players fluctuates from game-to-game let alone season-to-season.
I give you Nathan Cleary and Latrine Mitchell as prime examples.

It would be interesting to see each Club's NRL roster and their pathway from Harold Matthews.

Parra have zero Juniors in their NRL squad ATM so the argument that they are advantaged is gone

NZ Warriors probably have the most Juniors in their NRL squad but it's still a development area that should be helped to lure the Kiwis away from RU.

Scumos use Brisbane Souths as their feeder system. But their NRL side is now full of juniors of other Clubs

 

[Woodsie]

This way the talent still spreads but more Clubs would be rewarded for nurturing the next generation of league players

The problem I see with a broad based scheme such as you suggest .... is that out of a squad of 30 .. teams with massive juniors might be getting various discounts for say up to 20 players as opposed to some clubs with less juniors only getting discounts for say 10 players .... The nett result would be that apart from then giving these teams a massive differential in Salary cap spending to counter the lessor clubs offer ... it would also unwittingly increase the overall spend of clubs by increasing the salary cap significantly ...

My gut feel is that it could only be managable for a set number of marque juniors ... say 4 per club ...

 

[KOMORI]

Any effort for Junior or Country League is too much for NRLHQ

I always thought that each NRL Club should have a sister CRL District.
Play trials and 1 game per year, have training camps with the CRL players etc

Oi!! Leave that sort of sense out of NRL!!