It seems there is very little movement of quality experienced established players in SL. Surely if clubs are abiding by the salary cap then as a player makes a name for himself at a "big" club he will get better offers from a lower placed club who are trying to strengthen?
InNRL you see big names moving around every year, this year sees one of the worlds best hookers, fullbacks and stand offs moving from top clubs to lower placed clubs. Why don't we see the same movement inSL of talent? Part of the range of clubs winning silverware in NRL is due to this player movement, a lack of it in SL is seeing the same old same old in terms of winning teams. What's going on?

The likes of Wigan, Leeds and Saints bring through quality youngsters, far more more than than the lower reaches of SL. This is a big part of why these clubs are constantly fighting it out for silverware.Most teams have their fair share of big name players but until the number of quality young lads are brought through at other clubs rises to play alongside the sprinkling of star names then we will more than likely see the usual sides fight it out for the trophies. That said, Catalans have a quality looking side and with the right coaching team and fixing up the away form could be easily at the top end.Warrington should improve on a dismal season for their standards, and Huddersfield have the team but need to take that next step now, which is possible so we have at least 6 teams of similar standards capable of silverware, just a couple of those need to fix up some issues.

What Biff said.

Plus it's a bit of the chicken and the egg situation.
The same 3 or 4 teams are always in with a chance of winning things. But is that because they have all the best players and the salary cap isn't working?
Or is it because they are better run and have a winning mentality? It seems to me players want to play for these clubs and will accept lower pay in order to play for a club with a chance of winning something.

As Biff said its about youth development but it's also about how clubs are run in every aspect.

Sort out our clubs off the pitch and they'll succeed on it.

Yep.Salford and Dr Koukash are a perfect example. He can chase success by throwing the big bucks at a handful of big names every year but it's clear they won't have a chance of breaking the top 6 until all the structures are put in place.

A salary cap works if it is just that that draws the players to the league. Thinking in terms of overseas players, if they are offered the chance to play at say Leeds and Widnes they will always pick Leeds, they have seen Leeds winning stuff for years and know that it must be a decent successful team whereas they haven't necessarily heard much about Widnes. Its a vicious circle, teams need to win stuff and gain exposure to attract good players but they need these players to do the winning, this is why only a few teams win things despite only spending the same on wages.

Because salary caps don't work to distribute talent, they only limit it. Rather than distribute success it entrenched it. Whether you are bill Gates or the owner of bobs used cars, unless you take over one of the big 4 clubs you are a generation away from success however much you spend off the field

Come on Smokey, just because you don't agree with the salary cap don't be daft. You know that isn't true.

It's not just that IMO. It's about the whole club set up and facilities etc. Leeds are a very well run club, probably the best in this country. St Helens, Wigan and Warrington are all clubs with a good set up and good facilities and a larger fan base. The best example of this is Hull. They haven't won a lot in the last 10 years, haven't challenged recently but have still attracted bigger names.

I'm not sure what the salary cap is meant to do these days. It was introduced to try and prevent reckless clubs from overspending and going bankrupt by limiting player wages to a percentage of turnover. Now it's just a set maximum with a load of exemptions for home developed players and the marquee rule I suppose it is meant to be a leveller. It works to a certain extent.

It's no coincidence that the teams that have won the majority of the trophies recently have the best youth development which IMO is the key to success.

Disprove it then. Show me examples.

It doesn't work in Super League like the NRL because the lower placed clubs aren't of the stature of those at the top. You would be mad to move from Leeds to Wakefield for example. Moving from state of the art facilities and 16,000 crowds every week to park facilities and 3,000 fans in a dilapidated stadium. Not only does it not work from higher place to lower placed, it's incredibly rare to see players still wanted by their clubs move between the top 4/5 clubs either.

That and the fact that Super League aren't monitoring or ensuring compliance with the salary cap. This WILL come out in autobiographies over the next 20 years, when players playing during the Super League era become distanced enough from the sport and from the possibility of having to pay money back. Gifts, jobs in third party companies for family members, housing improvements, payments after departure from the club from third party companies, all absolutely impossible to trace and the RFL aren't even attempting to. The dirty dealings of clubs like Wigan are out there in autobiographies already, Sean Long's for example mentions Wigan offering him brown paper bags stuff with cash. The fact a salary cap came in won't make this kind of off-the-books transaction more rare, it would make it even more useful to both club and player.

The salary cap was meant to be a system that levelled the playing field so all teams could compete equally as well as preventing clubs from overspending.The problem with that is that it massively favours the already well established clubs that have the large fan bases and the well organised youth structures.With the extra spending power that the salary cap exemptions give for home produced talent it just increases the gap between the established clubs and the rest.
Its OK saying that the other clubs should improve their own youth structures and facilities to the same level as the big clubs but as Warrington have shown even with their spending power this can take over 10 years before you start to see any real talent coming through so what chance do the clubs with smaller financial muscle really have of ever catching up.The big clubs will still attract all the best youth talent,still win all the trophies between them and the prize money that goes with them and so the gap just continues to grow.
As for the salary cap being a means of preventing clubs from overspending i think you can throw that out the window now that the threat of relegation is back in the mix.As was recently witnessed in the Middle 8s competition the SL clubs under threat threw a lot of resources at survival and 2016 will likely see a lot more of the same for the teams threatened with playing in the middle 8s.The consequences of relegation to players jobs and club staff is just so great that the gamble has to be taken.

So hypothetically ask yourself what would be the consequences if the salary cap was scrapped.Would the likes of Leeds,Wigan,Saints or Warrington suddenly go on a mad spending spree and throw their highly successful business models out the window in an attempt to win trophies that they are already winning on a regular basis,Dr Koukash with Tim Sheens help has already seen the error of his ways in trying to buy success and come out publicly saying those days are gone and why would he continue pumping millions into a system that hasnt worked anyway.
We have to accept that the guys running their respective clubs are not idiots and know how best to run their own clubs without ruining them.
OK so if there was no salary cap then people will say that the big clubs will benefit the most and continue to win everything but that is already happening anyway so whats the harm of relaxing the salary cap and seeing if allowing clubs to run their own finances and maybe bringing in some real overseas talent that would benefit the whole game rather than the run of the mill,2nd tier,past their sell by date or looking for one last payday type of player we currently recruit from overseas.

Have you not heard of Kyle Amor ?

He came from Leeds (albeit as a fringe player) to Wakefield and progressed very well at the small town club and was then signed by Saints (who even paid for his signature).

The big 4 will dominate the game for years to come as they are able to hoover up most of the quality youngsters.
Of course, they don't all start life at Wigan, Saints, Leeds etc, Amor being a great example.
Although he is thought of as a Leeds junior, he is of course Cumbrian, which is a fair walk from Leeds.

Wigan have their welsh "academy" to allow them to bring on more "home grown" juniors.

The service area's were supposed to allow club to reap the rewards of helping "local" juniors to advance into the pro game but, this system doesn't actually work as it was set out to do and of course, if any quality players do make it at the smaller clubs, cash speaks louder than words and it's not difficult for the big boys to dominate in this area.

Warrington, Huddersfield and Leeds.

So two of the big 4 and a club with a club who have as many bottom place finishes as they do play off wins. They dont seem very good examples.

In fact, Huddersfield are a great example of what i am talking about. Davy became chairman in '96, he appointed tony smith in 2001, Huddersfield didnt win a play off game until 2010 and have won one since that year.

Which big 4? When did Warrington or Huddersfield become a part of the Big 4?
All teams who finished 1st in the league in recent years. That surely shows a big improvement from where both Huddersfield and Warrington were and proves you can improve your team and sign quality players under a salary cap. Brough, McGillvary, Cudjoe, Ferres, Crabtree, Westwood, Ratchford, Clark, Hill, Currie are all players who would be worthy of playing for Leeds, Saints or Wigan.

Leeds would not have improved as they have without a salary cap to suppress spending on first team players and allow that money to be spent on back room staff and on the club itself.

Not to mention Widnes, Catalans and Hull KR who all have improved significantly with the help of a salary cap to keep them within touching distance.

If the salary cap doesn't spread talent then Leeds wouldn't run with such a small squad.

Widnes, Les Catalans, Hull KR have won a grand total of 0 top flight trophies under the SC. Neil Hudgell will happily tell you about the glass ceiling they hit.

Huddersfield are 20 years in to Davy's involvement and have 3 play off wins in total.

Warrington have been a top flight club for more than a century, its silly to pretend they cam from a lowely place.

What players were Leeds wanting to keep who went to another SL club?

Since Cas sorted themselves out behind the scenes and started being able to spend/run close to the full cap over the last couple of years they've done well for themselves.

The salary cap would work if it was a level playing field but there's still teams that don't/can't spend the cap. Although with the new TV deal teams should be spending the full amount. What needs to be brought in with the new money is a minimum cap floor, to lift teams up.

In fact, most of it boils down to the people running clubs and handing out contracts - poorly run teams tend to do poorly and teams that give the wrong players huge contracts always do poorly.

Value is the rest of it - Leeds, Wigan & Saints for example, are not only well run but get more bang for their buck due to the number of academy products on first or second contracts at the club, players performing to a level above what they get paid meaning there's room to add in bigger name players etc.

Huddersfield and Catalans have had squads more than capable of playing in or making GF's in the past 5 years.poor Coaching or choking when it matters has ultimately cost them but they have been thereabouts, Warrington have made finals and blown it when they could/should have won it atleast once. People moaning about same teams winning it but its now up to these other sides to make that final step, but imo it's not down to playing ability as there are at least 5/6 sides at a similar level, and there SHOULD have been more different winners/finalists in recent years, that has nothing to do with the SC.

You can't blame the structure for clubs like warington and huddersfield chocking and failing to win a title. Those clubs have had the ability for some time now, warrington should have won a grand final by now and huddersfield should have contested one. It's up to them to make the final step, but the opportunity is there. The competition is more level and open than it has ever been.

The last time huddersfield contested a major final was 2009. Yet since then they've actually improved much more as a team showing great week in week consistency and beating the likes of wigan leeds and saints on a regular basis. Comparative to their playing ability huddersfield are underachieving. They should be contesting more finals.

Have Widnes, Catalans and Hull KR all improved significantly under the SC?

Who said it should be easy? They were in the 2nd division. Winning playoff games isn't the only measure of improvement. It would be stupid to pretend Huddersfield aren't a contender for trophies and they clearly have players in their team capable of being at the "Big 4". How can that happen if the cap not only doesn't spread talent but entrenches it?

Warrington have significantly improved from where they were. Again, stop being daft just because you don't agree with the SC.

You're seriously asking which players Leeds would've kept or not signed but for a salary cap?
Well off the top of my head:
Mathers, Calderwood, Walker, McKenna, Diskin, Scruton, Morley, Murrell, Jones-Bishop, Aiton.

Again, stop being daft just because you don't like the salary cap. It quite clearly spreads talent. It might not do it as much as you'd like but it certainly does not entrench it.

What it does is stops 1 reckless owner hugely inflating the entire players market and then force well run clubs from having to increase their wages bill and risk their hard-fought business position.

It's no coincidence that since Warrington, Cas and Huddersfield significantly improved their off-field operations their on-field performance has improved. Have a well run club and players will want to play for you.
Salford have proved the vice-versa for me.

Whilst the same teams might be winning it, since the Challenge Cup final moved back to Wembley 8 years ago we've had 9 of the current 12 SL clubs make a final appearance (only Salford, Wakey and Widnes haven't, but the latter two both Semi Finalists).

Salary cap doesn't include prize money, so winners can pay more and keep winning?

Whilst choking maybe the more fun way of describing why they fall apart at play-off time, there is also a pretty good chance that they aren't good enough when the big clubs take a step up at play off time. Especially when you remember that coaches like trent Robinson at les Catalans and Nathan brown at hudds have gone on to win at big clubs.

It's a nice narrative and one which tries to remove the SC from an increase spread of success despite that being one of the salary caps main selling points but the facts are that after leaving hudds Nathan brown won a gf and after leaving les Catalans trent Robinson did coaching is one thing you can't blame.

Browns' win with Saints last year was a written in the stars kind of thing probably not to be repeated in years, if ever, the way things ran for them in the play off series, i'm sure even their own fans would admit that (not that they hadn't deserved a break after all the finals losses). I wouldn't put it down to any master stroke by Nathan Brown and their fans were hardly distraught when he left, just right place at right time.

If Robinson had stayed at Catalans, imo they would have kicked on and at least have played in a GF by now, as it is i think their current coach is just not up to it and they have gone backwards, they have the playing staff to be right in the mix. Put it this way, If Trent Robinson had that group of players they would have been top 4 for sure this year. Like i say, not all about the players but getting the little things right behind the scenes too.

Your argument is based on nothing more than circular reasoning. When clubs don't win it's because of the coach, when that coach wins elsewhere it's because of fate or something else.

None of which actually go against the point. Apparently saints can 'luck' into a gf win but hudds can't even win a few play off games. This is apparently your argument against success being entrenched.

The salary cap and how it is structured not only allows the top clubs to spend more, it also ensures they get more 'bang for their buck' and it also ensures that lesser clubs cannot 'catch up' .

The irony is that when necessary those big clubs have never been shy in throwing their financial weight around. Leeds, Wigan and Saints all had no problem shelling out big sums on fielden, Harris and Sculthorpe, or making outlandish bids for lomu and sonny bill, when Jamie Lyon became available he wasn't going to wakefield, when Ali was available he wasn't going to Salford and when trent Barrett was available he wasn't going to widnes.