Points system rather than Salary Cap

[Kiwi Eagle]

I don't like the idea personally

A PUSH to scrap the NRL salary cap in favour of a ''Fantasy League'' styled points system will today be discussed by the club chief executives overseeing cap reform.

The five-man sub-committee - comprising club bosses Shane Richardson, Bruno Cullen, Steve Burraston, Don Furner and Steve Noyce - will today decide whether to recommend to the other NRL chief executives that a points system is trialled alongside the current salary cap next season, with a view to implementing a model as early as 2013. While the machinations of the system are still to be decided, the concept has still garnered significant support from the sub-committee.

Salary cap auditor Ian Schubert is believed to have prepared a number of models to discuss with the working party, although supporters of it acknowledge that only trial and error is likely to produce the best system. That is why Schubert is planning to run the points system parallel with the current salary cap this year and next year. If it produces favourable results, members of the sub-committee conceded it could be in place by 2013, after the next broadcasting deal is confirmed. They say at least a year would be required for the ''phasing in'' process to take place.
''I believe it's a fool-proof way to stop cheating,'' Furner, the Canberra chief executive, said yesterday. ''You can't put more than X amount of points on the field.''

It is believed the committee will work initially on a 100-point model for each club. Every player will be graded based on, principally, the number of NRL games they have played and representative experience. Discounts are expected to be suggested for long-serving players. But there remain some chinks; for example if players are valued higher if they play State of Origin and Test football, how should a Kiwi international, say Benji Marshall, or an English representative, Sam Burgess, be treated? The sub-committee will meet today to discuss the various models, as well as other cap reform, before making their recommendations to all the CEOs next week.

''It's a new animal,'' said Noyce, the Roosters boss. ''The recommendation [from the last meeting of the sub-committee] was to overlay it over this season and next season and see what anomalies it may spit out. If we put it up against existing rosters, after two or three years we'll have the ability to see whether it has merit, or spits out too many anomalies. I think it's good that we're looking at different options. Some of them are worth taking a little bit of time with.'' Sharks chairman Damian Irvine has proposed a points model previously, while Manly chief executive Graham Lowe is understood to have tendered a similar proposal as part of salary cap submissions offered up by all club bosses recently.

Cullen said he was warming to the idea of replacing the salary cap - which has served its purpose but which regularly attracts criticism - with a points system. ''I'm a bit of a convert to it,'' Cullen admitted yesterday. ''It's an attractive type of scheme because it takes away all the salary cap-type considerations. It's certainly caught our [the sub-committee's] interest and we think it worthy of consideration.'' But Furner, while also offering firm support, also admitted that some form of salary cap would still exist alongside the points model to ensure the clubs did not spend beyond their means.

''We all whinge about the salary cap,'' he said. ''It's like speeding laws. You know that you need them but you don't like it when you get fined. Everybody realises that the salary cap has saved clubs from going broke. It's restraint of trade, but it does work - it's stopped clubs going broke and it's stopped clubs dominating.''

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/points-to-prove-club-bosses-moot-radical-overhaul-of-the-cap-system-20100721-10l50.html

 

[Rusty]

Arg!

First start by getting us an independent commission, I won't trust NewsLtd to set a points system that NewsLtd clubs then use to win competitions.

Second, this will cause no end of problems, how do you rate SOO players, do they get more points per game, or just by being a SOO player, I mean is Wolfman or Quinn equal to Thurstan in this regard? What about internationals, is Robbo the same as Burgess or the same as Slater?

What about Daly M winners, or Clive Churchill winners, or players like Lyon who have come from the ESL with already established credentials?

What about long term player discounts, when do they kick in and will it be a one club thing?

And lastly what about the salary issue? Say both us and melbourne have 10 points left and want to sign player X, they offer 10 times the amount, he goes there... since all that matters is the points no foul.

 

[Snoz]

a potenial issue include:

NZ warriors obviously supply alot of NZ test players and hence their rep points will accumulate fast

personally i think a better system is to bring in a player draft for new talent i.e. kids in the u20's.

this would prevent the rich clubs from acquiring all the best young talent i.e. storm, broncos, eels etc

like the afl system the bottom side from the previous year gets 1st choice.

 

[Chip and Chase]

A draft requires the consent and support of the players association as it is essentially a restraint of trade and can't be imposed. The AFL players association support and embrace the concept, that's why it works there. They tried it in the ARL and Tezza challenged it and won, so they had to disband it.

I kind of like the points system, but the problem with it is that if you develop a youngster who comes along in leaps and bounds you get penalised. Take Foran for example, rookie last year and probably worth diddly squat in terms of cap points, less than 12 months later he is a NZ international and worth a heap of cap points. Where is the benefit to Manly ? Under the current system we sign him on a 3-4 year deal for unders in the hope he improves and we are ahead of the salary cap for the last 2 years of his contract when he blossoms [Yes I know he isn't signed and we all wish he was tied up for 4 years, it's just an example].

I think maybe what they need to do is look at players in 3 year blocks and fix their points rating over that period if they stay at the same club. That way if you get a youngster who you develop, or even a middle of the road player who makes Origin, you get to keep him at fixed points for 3 years as your reward for development. The flipside is that if you have an international who goes off the boil than you are stuck with their elevated points for the 3 years. However if a player signs with a different club over that 3 year period than he is revalued at his current points rating. That makes it more difficult for teams to poach good players, and also gives them incentive to take underperforming players and give them a go in a new environment.

I think they also need to look at some form of discounts (salary or points cap) for long term injured players who contribute very little to a season. It is difficult to replace quality players (like Brett for example) because they account for a fair chunk of your cap but you get no return on them.

 

[DSM5]

Rusty, I think it reads that you can only put so many 'points' on the field.  But I agree with you it still doesn't stop rich clubs locking players up, or 'warehousing' them like the Storm did in the U20s comp.  By the way, do the Storm U20s still play for points?  A player draft?  I'd like to think a player goes where he wants to go, not where he's picked to go.  It's not a simple thing and I'd also like to think the NRL could get some real brains into the decision tent, not just five brain dead CEOs.  It'll end up like the two ref fiasco.  

 

[Rusty]

Rusty, I think it reads that you can only put so many 'points' on the field.  But I agree with you it still doesn't stop rich clubs locking players up, or 'warehousing' them like the Storm did in the U20s comp.  By the way, do the Storm U20s still play for points?  A player draft?  I'd like to think a player goes where he wants to go, not where he's picked to go.  It's not a simple thing and I'd also like to think the NRL could get some real brains into the decision tent, not just five brain dead CEOs.  It'll end up like the two ref fiasco. 

Yeah I understood, my issue is that not every 5 point player will be the same, obviously some will be better then others, ie halves will be worth more, so if the only constraint of a team is points then what is to stop one team paying massive overs to get each and every player that is the best in their points bracket.

Whats to stop the storm buying the best of the best rookies for big big big money since they would only be worth 1 or 2 points, no one else would be able to match the money offered even if they had the points spare and would have to settle for lesser 1 point players, the same would be true of each bracket.