If you do that "marquee player" idea, then straight away you have players already on a club's books who want to be the marquee player and get paid top whack. If another gets chosen one or two get disgruntled and want moves to clubs that will up their dough.

Dressing room disharmony is assured everywhere, and no one really benefits other than the 28 players across the league who end up as the salary cap busters.

You can't attract the Billy Slaters of the NRL, because the Joel Monaghans of Super League will instantly demand the high wages meaning you can't bring a new player over anyway without losing one of the best you already have.

Here's an idea; let those who can afford to spend more (subject to a 50% income limit, which is an iffy base line), but coincide that with the introduction of a draft.

What ?

Strip that down a little GDMM, give an example of how that would work?

Fair enough. What if we learn't that yawnion was sniffing around Richie Myler so we decided to make him our Marquee and Stefan Ratchford wanted to be the marquee then he has three choices. Search for another club that will offer him a Marquee slot, but bearing in mind there will only be 13 available he may struggle. Accept that he's an 'ordinary' player and get on with it. Leave and play kick and chase or NRL. If he chooses the latter and leaves SL, the chances are he would have don that anyway so nothing lost. If he finds another club willing to sign him as a Marquee then good luck to him. The very best players would be spread out across all clubs helping to level up the competition and keep them in SL


I don't think it would. I don't think Paul Wood would have been upset that we signed Morley even though I'm sure Mozz would have been on a better contract. Better players get paid better than their peers, if they're not then they need a better manager.


Same as for british players. It is upto the club to decide is Slater worth the money as well as the risk of losing Monaghan, and if they decide yes then can Monaghan find a Marquee position at another club.

In theory at least, a Marquee system would ensure that the very very best players stay in SL as well as evening up the competition. As regards overseas players, we are only likely to see the very best such as Thurston or Slater which again I think would be good for SL.

As a concept, it's not a bad idea but the fact remains there would be few clubs out of the 14 who could afford a marquee player or 2. This would then again cause clubs to try and outlive their means and go to the wall. 2 teams have already declared they won't be spending the SC next year in Cas & KR and it'd be a safe guess that neither will Wakey, Salford and Bradford either with London's & Hudds massive losses funded by their benefactors even if they do spend the limit.

Until the competition as a whole gets stronger where all clubs can spend up to the salary cap without a big risk of running at a loss, any concept thought of will have major flaws for someone as the difference between Wigan, Wire, Leeds etc is so much different to the likes of Salford, Cas and KR.

To make effective use of the SC it would have to be reduced. But you shouldn't have to handicap the clubs performing well to bring the less well off teams up to standard. Instead, we need to work to increase the revenue and improve the business models for the lower sides to get them upto the level of being able to spend £1.65M on player wages. If this isn't possible, we need to cut the amount of teams in the league as no matter what, the lower teams will be handicapping the competition on a whole.

This is very loose, so bear with me.

Those at the top of the spending tree, have last dibs on signings. Those at the bottom have the first opportunity to sign out of contract players. One potential knock-on effect would potentially, force the higher spending teams to buy players before they are out of contract, aiding the income of the lesser spending clubs.

Basically, a variation on the NFL draft. But it is your financial position which determines, not where you finish in the league.

How does it work in the NFL if players do not wish to go to the club that wants them?

With any system, including Marquee players, there would have to be some spending safeguards which I don't think I explained properly, mainly because I don't know (and bearing in mind I'm kind of making this up as I go along). Clubs would have to provide the RFL with evidence displaying that they can afford their marquee. Maybe a contract from a sponsor or a written agreement from an individual to cover their costs, or some kind of businesss plan.

How this, or any other system, works it is important that the clubs, or maybe it's just a few clubs, need to be protected from themselves or overly ambitious directors/owners. But equally it isn't fair to hold back those well run, financially secure or simply wealthy clubs because of a few less wealthy or for fear of 3 or 4 clubs dominating the competition. Let's face it, the salary cap as it stands has not protected clubs financially, nor has it leveled out the competition.

I dont know if the NFL draft works in teh same way as the nba one used to, but, as monkey has said, the lower your finishing position you get the first pick of the new players coming out of the college system, or high school.

Teams get 'draft picks', and can trade these picks to other teams for players and cash so using SL as an example, if john bateman was available we could've sent a player to widnes in return for their draft pick, allowing us to go first and add john bateman to our squad.

If it's known the player doesn't want to go to a particular team, again, the team can arrange a trade to another side.

The other difference between the american drafts and SL, is that all rookies coming into the league can only earn a set amount for the first 2 years, or so, their 'Rookie' contract.

It's still a daft amount compared to what SL salaries are though.

I dont see that you could do that over here, from an employment law point of view. I don't know how american sports and the college system get around it over there, unless its just accepted that THAT is the pathway for education to professional sports

I imagine so, and bear in mind our salary cap in rugby league is similarly accepted. There's always talk of one in football, but employment law, restriction of trade, etc are all brought up immediately to shoot the idea down and protect the rich.

I'm sure if one of the wealthier men in rugby league wanted to challenge the legalities of the salary cap - resulting it being scrapped altogether - they could go to court and do so. They'd probably be successful, but would also be accused forevermore of destroying the sport.

In fairness to the RFL/SL, they have it pretty well stitched up. The SC is intrinsic to the laws of the game, the first law of the game is; you cannot challenge the laws of the game.

Sorry to be blunt Yed - but where are you getting this rubbish from? If you take us for example, we do NOT have oodles of spare cash piling up somewhere that we'd love to spend on an increased cap. The club still relies very heavily on contributions from many minor sponsors (as well as the obvious major ones) and from supporter organised groups like the Vice Presidents Associations and the Supporters Trust. Without these our youth development would suffer.

An increased salary cap without significant boosts to clubs income streams from major sponsors and/or TV contracts would see further pressure on investment in areas like youth development and facilities.

RL in the UK is most definitely NOT a sport awash with cash. Raising the salary cap is most definitely NOT something we should be doing.

Just out of interest SEB (and not connected to this thread directly) will Wire be spending less on youth development next year as we will lose two age groups in moving to an U16 and U19 side ??

When it comes to sports clubs that have viable business plans and make a profit in most sports, there are very very few that are in the black, but plenty of clubs with rich owners/backers pump money in to clubs way beyond their calculated means.

Look at Man City and Chelsea they lose more than they make yet their owners care not a jot and still spend within their means not the clubs.

People say it's a flawed business model (it is) but only if said owner leaves, it very rarely happens and especially if said wealthy owner/backer is a fan.
It's ok putting in safe guards for the what if factor but sport lives in the here and now.

You're honestly telling me now that if we had no salary cap and Thurston said tomorrow i fancy a 3 year spell in SL but i'd want a million that we wouldn't be in the market?

On youth development only the richer clubs and i include london in this are offering anything as Rouges will say there isn't enough investment but it isn't from the clubs that struggle in the main.

Even with a salary cap with the exception of London (who can't attract players) and Widnes who are newly promoted it's the richest clubs that made the top 8, that's no surprise to me.
Once Widnes become established i would imagine them taking Wakefield place in the top 8.

The salary cap for me is all smoke and mirrors, the rich clubs have already broken away from the poorer clubs and created a two tier league anyway.

You won't find many people in football - outside of their own fans obviously - who are delighted with what Man City and Chelsea have done in the last few years though will you?

Even IF Simon Moran was prepared to bank roll a salary cap busting spending spree at Wire - and we don't know if he is, people just assume and that's pretty naive really - isn't it extremely selfish of us to want that to happen? Warrington stockpiling world class players would simply create a modern day Wigan or the eighties and nineties. How is that good for the game in general?

I think it is fair to say that more than a "reasonable" cash injection into some sports clubs is not always from a legitimate source.

Where as Wigan and Leeds were the only clubs capable, there are far more now anyway, plus i'm not advocating unlimited spending just less resrictions to reflect certain clubs spending power.

While the SC may hold back the top clubs potential spending power currently, and people argue that we're losing the top players who are chasing the better salaries in the NRL and kick'n'clap, why would you want an increased SC?

We can't match the NRL from next year no matter what so we'll still be getting out of favour, second rate Aussies just on a higher pay check as some people put it. The same goes for our top sportsman. They'll get a few tens of thousands on top of their wedge which isn't going to stop them if a contract which could still come in for double from elsewhere. The rest of the squad and mediocre players will also get increased wages. This isn't going to increase the value or quality of the competition or an individuals performance, just increase the clubs expenditure of which many already cannot afford.

As SEB mentioned we are not exactly cash rich but the business is sustainable at the current SC. Why push the boundaries from our POV and damage the future of our club for short term success which isn't even guaranteed? Especially after all the work squad builder has put in over the last 10 years or so to get us up to the stage we are... U20's league leaders and champions just being the tip of it.

First and foremost we need to work together to increase the revenue the sport generates, and all clubs at all levels including the RFL need to pull their respective weight. No excuses. Until clubs are effectively self sustainable covering all their costs and expenses, the SC should not change.

in regards to changing the salary cap levels then i am ok with this as long as the rich can't spend that much,and just because they can,as that will only widen the gap at the top.we certainly don't need another case of wigan buying trophies just because they could,or do we need leeds chasing them cos they could

the benchmark for success can be seen by all at the rhinos,we don't break the cap,we don't back down when agents demand more money for their clients,but we continue to win silverware and on a level playing field with all the top sides too,so the question has to be why do we spend our money better than everyone else?
if the limit was raised moderately and across all clubs then i dare say that the same clubs would appear at wembley and win grand finals each year?

I have to say that Leeds are the 'gold standard' that we should all be aiming for. You are a beacon of hope for smaller clubs like Wire. We do our best to emulate you, but year after year you just seem to get better. Even when we manage to retain the services of TS, whom you trained up and gave a job to when nobody else would, we still get beaten in the GF.

However, the really important question I would like to ask is, do you think Paul Wood can now be described as the hardest man in SL, or do you think it's still Ryan ?

bailey wouldn't have even felt a thing as he's that tough

Of course he wouldn't, he hasn't got any balls. He only goes for the small players.

Yes and looked what happened to both Wigan and Leeds. Wigan won everything which became boring and Leeds went bust trying to chase the dream of catching Wigan, who went bust or very close to later on. The salary cap is not perfect and should be altered to once again include a maximum percentage of turn over. It is more important to stop the farce of clubs spending too much and going bust. That is what really hurts the sport.

On the issue of a draft system that could not work in Rugby League as all clubs pay and bring up their own junior players and it would be very damaging to then poach these players to other clubs that have not invested in their youth.

Rugby league needs to forget these grand ideas and build from the lower divisions and look to increase standards we always seem to look for the quick fix or the god father.

We are strong in the heartlands and the process of converting the unbelievers will take many years of junior and school development which thankfully has started and needs to be given support, that is where our long term success will come from.