I think when players like sterlo and Kenny came over the seasons didn't conincide so players played in both comps, I think some top talent comes over when they are getting towards their retirement, but isn't the :marquee" player supposed to be a top star as in slater, smith sbw etc, not an everyday joe who is reaching retirement, we have that system now?

Yes ,that's what I meant about some clubs being able to afford better. We will just have to wait and see.

Isn't a ''marquee'' player status decided by the club,thereby releasing
more salary cap dosh to be spent on the rest of the squad. this is a way to increase the cap without infringing the rules. Only the 'Big Boys' can afford the money, but as has been said before '' No big name is going to migrate northwards''

i think the clubs that voted in the marquee player was just another way to get over the salary cap hull have one new face next season in frank pritchard and possible another in krisnan inu along with ellis,minnecello,price and snyed so who at hull do you think as a marquee player all good unless the accounting in hull is done differently

It's an extra option.
For us I can see us keeping a player off the cap that we have trained. 100 thousand start for a home trained lad. I don't know the wages but with leroy, Jerry, eorl ect and the academy going full time in the future we should have more home grown quality! If a lad warrants that amount then take them off the cap, allows more free money if required.
A marquee player maybe not for us. The club was against it so can't see them fronting 175k plus for a player.
Fair play to the clubs who do it, big names do make games interesting. Say if Sam b signed for wire I would be more inclined to watch the game on sky, magic weekend, final ect. Creates a media buzz too if they can be attracted.
Saying that nrl and union can still offer more money and the lifestyle/climate in aus, France, nz may have more of sway than good old Blighty

I think all this talk of a 'marquee' player is babb !! i think most clubs will end up using it on keeping their current best player at the club rather than actually go and sign what most would describe as a 'marquee signing'.

Let's be honest they're are probably only 10-15 genuine marquee players in the world and how many of them are gonna give up what they have to come and play for the likes of Hull KR/Salford/Leeds etc etc ??

I was trying to take the positives out and how our club could utilise it. For example taking one of local lads off cap. Don't know how much the likes or eorl, leroy, Jerry, Bruno earn but 100k off the cap could free up some capital encase we need an extra signing or an opportunity comes up

Yeah i agree that, for us would be a positive, i meant the ruling in general....some people seem to think the best players in the world are suddenly going to be turning out on a Thursday night at Wheldon road etc !!

Yeah there won't be a massive influx of the worlds best but Wigan, Saints, Leeds, maybe wire, fc and Catalans could sway some of the bigger names! Or help tempt one of there bigger names to stay! Won't make a massive difference but the decisions been made and we can take at least something out of it

no but it may help us keep some of our top players in SL , already lost too many, kyle eastmond, ashton if have loved to have seen still playing SL.

Nail on the head. Plus so called( over the hill Aussies ) for the most part are at a higher level that 3/4 of super league players.

I think some people are misunderstanding the rule. You don't get 100k off the cap, you just don't count any amount OVER 100k for home grown or 175k for none home grown.
If we were paying any player over 175k id be surprised.

Ahh ok so if we chose a home grown player to be our 'marquee' and his wage was 120k we can discount the 20k off the cap?

Yes, anything over 100k for a home grown player and 175k for a non home grown.

Across the various boards the general assumption is that Aussies or Kiwis will come over as the marquee but I think more likely to be players already here and not necessarily moving clubs. As far as we are concerned does anyone know who would actually foot the bill? Or is it just taken for granted KD would cough up? I don't imagine the Giants generate enough money to be able to do it themselves.......unless someone knows otherwise? I would prefer us not to go down this road I see it as a potential for resentment and division within a squad.

Oh so not quite as much we would or could save off the cap as I thought!

Nope, i would guess that it is more to help clubs keep hold of the likes of Tomkins, Eastmond, Burgess etc in the future.

Well to be fair it doesn't help us at the min but I would rather had watched a Saints game with eastmond in it, Wigan with Tomkins. They can do some damage but you want to see our boys compete against the best and not add extras to the rival sports/comps.
Hopefully our academy will churn out some top players in the coming seasons

if teams can pick which player is the marquee player why not just raise the salary cap?.for me a proper marquee allowance should be given to teams who bring a " star" to the game or stop a star leaving and has to be approved by rfl..

Exactly Charlie ...that's basically what it is in my opinion.

IMO it should only have been allowed for someone who has played for England, Australia or New Zealand in the last 3 years.

So brough wouldn't count.

yes...he is another who is great for fartown , but isn't a world star

Brough played for England in 2012

never to be seen again! to scotlands advantage

That makes sense. There would be some sort of standard being set then.