Anthony Seibold wipes Wayne Bennett’s legacy from Red Hill

Porthoz

International Captain
Tbf i do agree with you as well that being the richest and best run club in the comp does see us hamstrung in some ways with a salary cap. Dont thin as Cult said it changes the expectations we have though.

You would be pretty naive to think we dont use our financial clout to give us an advantage when it comes to player recruitment in ways that arent on the books, and you only have to look at our facilities to see we are streets ahead of every other Rugby league team in the world let alone Australia. As a Broncos fan, i expect us to challenge every single year. I dont think its unreasonable to think thats whats expected from board level as well. We arent in the game to be also rans, otherwise we wouldn't invest so much into the club. My original point though was never really about financial clout as such anyway, it was about whats expected of a leading club, and Brisbane are without question one of the leading clubs in the NRL. ITs kind of got off track with the premier league talk! Which brings me to my next points!

In regards to Chelsea, they spent so much more than Newcastle because the owner of Newcastle, Mike Ashley, doesnt want the club anymore, wont invest any more money into it than the bare minimum and is looking to sell. I'd guess Newcastle would be in the bottom 3 spenders in the premier league right now.

Not sure if you watch a great deal of premier league football ( for the record, i do, its my main sport to watch ) but i think you are way off with what you think some of these clubs are spending. From the top of my head, Fulham, one place from the bottom of the league, have spent more than Man City, Arsenal and Spurs, as have Wolves, Bournemouth, Everton, Leicester and probably a lot of others ( i could research it, but im not sure i can be bothered! ). Liverpool have also easily been able to keep up with the spending of the big clubs. I'd guess apart from Chelsea nobody has spent more than them in the last few years than Liverpool. In financial terms, the premier league isnt a closed shop in terms of clubs spending power anymore, and that includes wages. Look at Wolves for example, they are owned by the Fosun group, probably the second richest owners in the premier league behind Sheik Mansour at City and i'd say they are primed to break into the top six if they recruit well if not higher. The big thing that holds back teams in the Premier league from recruiting the best players isnt money, its league position. Generally, if your club plays in the champions league, they have an edge in terms of recruitment.

The other leagues are a bit more difficult to crack for teams due to a lot of reasons i could go into but i dont think i will, not on this thread anyway, but the main one is probably a lot of politics.
I've been following European football for 50 years. I grew up with it, played it, and went to more live games there than NRL games here.
The EPL is a bit of different beast from all other leagues due to the obscene amount of money it generates, but the principle is the same, and I am not in the habit of making claims I can't back up. These are the EPL salary figures for 2017 (2018 are not officially out yet):

1- Man City: £265m
2- Man Utd: £264m
3- Chelsea: £221m
4- Liverpool: £208m
5- Arsenal: £199m

Then there is a significant drop to the next rung in terms of salaries, and already at half the amount of the top:

6- Tottenham: £128m
7- Leicester: £113m
8- Southampton: £112m
9- Everton: £105m
10- Swansea: £99m

Lowest:

17- Bournemouth: £72m
18- Middlesbrough: £65m
19 & 20- Hull and Burnley: £61m

Wanna know what the final ladder that year looked like?

1- Chelsea (Champions with 93 pts)
2- Tottenham Hotspur (86 pts) (well done to them, really!)
3- Manchester City (78 pts)
4- Liverpool (76 pts)
5- Arsenal (75 pts)
6- Manchester United (69 pts)
7- Everton (61 pts)
8- Southampton (46 pts)
9- Bournemouth (46 pts)
10- West Bromwich Albion (45 pts)
11- West Ham United (45 pts)
12- Leicester City (44 pts)
13- Stoke City (44 pts)
14- Crystal Palace (41 pts)
15- Swansea City (41 pts)
16- Burnley (40 pts)
17- Watford (40 pts)
18- Hull City (Relegated on 34 pts)
19- Middlesbrough (Relegated on 28 pts)
20- Sunderland (Relegated on 24 pts)

That's more than correlation right there, because not only do you have top spenders finish at the top of the ladder, you have bottom spenders finishing at the bottom of the ladder. And this picture repeats itself over the years, it's not just one statistical abnormality. In most other countries, the differences are much bigger even, because they don't benefit from a massive broacast deal.

Of course, it's true that a player will chose Man Utd over Fullham, but only if the pay is similar or slightly less. No way a player takes half the salary on offer at West Ham so he can play at Chelsea. However, it's more likely he will get at least the same amount of money, probably more.

And that would be the case with the Broncos over the Cowboys, Titans or Raiders, to name a few, if they were able to table competitive offers for any player they want, instead of being limited to do that very selectively by a salary cap meant to equalise the value of each NRL team's roster, which is how Souffs, Cows and the drug cheats were able to win a premiership in the last 5 years.
 
Last edited:

Wolfie

State of Origin Rep
6,084
4,143
It's a bit misleading with clubs like Chelsea it terms of salary because of the size of their squad, it's massive. To get a true picture you would need the salaries of the 30 man squad used in the Premier league, not the whole squad. They have about 55 players out on loan, so their squad is about 85 players, which is ridiculous, nobody else would have a squad that size. Also, Spurs are spending less as they have just paid a billion pounds for a new stadium, Things like that have an effect.

The accounts of all clubs in England came out the other day for 2018 for FFP so there should be data out there, it's just probably not all in one place.

The spending you mentioned also is only salary. I was making the point in regards to the premier league that the gap is now closing both in terms of what players are being paid and especially transfer fees. It's going to come down to who coaches their teams better in the next few years as I believe as the financial gap is shrinking and the top four sides are going to become a top eight.

Just out of curiosity who are you team? My username should probably give mine away!
 
It's a bit misleading with clubs like Chelsea it terms of salary because of the size of their squad, it's massive. To get a true picture you would need the salaries of the 30 man squad used in the Premier league, not the whole squad. They have about 55 players out on loan, so their squad is about 85 players, which is ridiculous, nobody else would have a squad that size. Also, Spurs are spending less as they have just paid a billion pounds for a new stadium, Things like that have an effect.

The accounts of all clubs in England came out the other day for 2018 for FFP so there should be data out there, it's just probably not all in one place.

The spending you mentioned also is only salary. I was making the point in regards to the premier league that the gap is now closing both in terms of what players are being paid and especially transfer fees. It's going to come down to who coaches their teams better in the next few years as I believe as the financial gap is shrinking and the top four sides are going to become a top eight.

Just out of curiosity who are you team? My username should probably give mine away!
I worked 1971-72 in Leicester and been a fan ever since. Watched many games at filbert street . Got frustrated at my team, to loose every talented player to the big clubs.
Having said that, I like our salary cap system.But believe we need relegation and promotion ASAP. Also division 1 should have 14 teams to play each other twice. Second division to play off for promotion.
IMO the only ones against, are the mediocre Sydney teams afraid of relegation.
 

Eta Carinae

QCup Player
373
56
It's a bit misleading with clubs like Chelsea it terms of salary because of the size of their squad, it's massive. To get a true picture you would need the salaries of the 30 man squad used in the Premier league, not the whole squad. They have about 55 players out on loan, so their squad is about 85 players, which is ridiculous, nobody else would have a squad that size. Also, Spurs are spending less as they have just paid a billion pounds for a new stadium, Things like that have an effect.

The accounts of all clubs in England came out the other day for 2018 for FFP so there should be data out there, it's just probably not all in one place.

The spending you mentioned also is only salary. I was making the point in regards to the premier league that the gap is now closing both in terms of what players are being paid and especially transfer fees. It's going to come down to who coaches their teams better in the next few years as I believe as the financial gap is shrinking and the top four sides are going to become a top eight.

Just out of curiosity who are you team? My username should probably give mine away!
You missed the point. If you want to be credible, you can't compare European soccer where there is no salary cap to the NRL.

Just out of curiosity, I stated clearly Seibold should be allowed one mediocre season, about the same as last season. It's hard to define but lets say we finish 4 points out of the top 4 then narrowly lose in the first week of the finals. That would be about the same as last season. You rejected that idea. So, if this season is about as successful as last season (mediocre), you would be in favor of Seibolds sacking?
 

Wolfie

State of Origin Rep
6,084
4,143
You missed the point. If you want to be credible, you can't compare European soccer where there is no salary cap to the NRL.

Just out of curiosity, I stated clearly Seibold should be allowed one mediocre season, about the same as last season. It's hard to define but lets say we finish 4 points out of the top 4 then narrowly lose in the first week of the finals. That would be about the same as last season. You rejected that idea. So, if this season is about as successful as last season (mediocre), you would be in favor of Seibolds sacking?
Actually I can and be credible, because I was comparing the stature of those clubs and their expectations Reyter, others bought in salary caps.

You are also presuming I agree with you that last year was mediocre, which I also said after thinking about it I don't think it was mediocre, I think it was inconsistent. My opinion on Seibold is if the squad is mostly fit, I'd expect him to better what we did last year with our roster. If he can't, I'd be asking questions. I certainly don't think he should be cut any slack for underachievement.
 

Porthoz

International Captain
I doubt there will be a "Top 8" any time soon, and given we're talking about the salary cap, I've put down the salary load of each club. If we were looking at each club's financial turnaround including player transfer costs, the differences would be even starker.
You cannot compare expectations of clubs which only limitation is how deep their pockets are, with a club limited by an equalising salary cap, it's apples and oranges.

I don't really have a team in the UK, but have some sympathy towards the Gunners and West Ham for different reasons. I also kinda follow your team, since you've been dipping quite a bit in the Porto pound (my club).

P.S. Hate Man Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea with a passion btw... they're the Rorters, Cronulla and Manly of the EPL for me.
 
Last edited:

Eta Carinae

QCup Player
373
56
I doubt there will be a "Top 8" any time soon, and given we're talking about the salary cap, I've put down the salary load of each club. If we were looking at each club's financial turnaround including player transfer costs, the differences would be even starker.
You cannot compare expectations of clubs which only limitation is how deep their pockets are, with a club limited by an equalising salary cap, it's apples and oranges.

I don't really have a team in the UK, but have some sympathy towards the Gunners and West Ham for different reasons. I also kinda follow your team, since you've been dipping quite a bit in the Porto pound (my club).

P.S. Hate Man Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea with a passion btw... they're the Rorters, Cronulla and Manly of the EPL for me.
I'm not really familiar with UK soccer clubs but in the NRL, Manly are a basket case. One of if not the poorest club in the competition, playing out of a cow paddock which they can usually fill to around 30-35% of capacity. If it weren't for the salary cap, the only team competing with them for the spoon would be the Shonkies.
 

Wolfie

State of Origin Rep
6,084
4,143
I doubt there will be a "Top 8" any time soon, and given we're talking about the salary cap, I've put down the salary load of each club. If we were looking at each club's financial turnaround including player transfer costs, the differences would be even starker.
You cannot compare expectations of clubs which only limitation is how deep their pockets are, with a club limited by an equalising salary cap, it's apples and oranges.

I don't really have a team in the UK, but have some sympathy towards the Gunners and West Ham for different reasons. I also kinda follow your team, since you've been dipping quite a bit in the Porto pound (my club).

P.S. Hate Man Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea with a passion btw... they're the Rorters, Cronulla and Manly of the EPL for me.
I never actually made any reference initially to the salary cap initially, that was bought into it by others. I basically said big, high profile clubs have big expectations and there is pressure there on the head coach, and then after the salary cap got bought in i said that wouldn't change the expectations of a club like Real Madrid or Man United, they would still expect success and thats exactly the same with the Broncos. I dont think that statement is incorrect, a bit like Man United, even if you dont like Brisbane, you recognise they are the biggest club in the NRL. Salary cap or not, there is pressure for clubs like that basically.

I can quite easily see a top eight in the premier league quite honestly. Probably not a top eight where they are all title challengers, but a top eight that are a level about the other teams in the league. The current top six have pretty much been better than everyone else for quite a while. I think Wolves and Everton if they spend well will be up there with the likes of Spurs, Chelsea, Arsenal. I think United will challenge again next year along with Man City and Liverpool. Wolves and Everton have the potential, financial clout and history to be major players in England again. I actually wouldnt be surprised to see Spurs and Arsenal start to slip a bit.
 

Porthoz

International Captain
I never actually made any reference initially to the salary cap initially, that was bought into it by others. I basically said big, high profile clubs have big expectations and there is pressure there on the head coach, and then after the salary cap got bought in i said that wouldn't change the expectations of a club like Real Madrid or Man United, they would still expect success and thats exactly the same with the Broncos. I dont think that statement is incorrect, a bit like Man United, even if you dont like Brisbane, you recognise they are the biggest club in the NRL. Salary cap or not, there is pressure for clubs like that basically.
I don't know why we're going in circles on this? I'm not arguing the Broncos aren't the NRL elite, I mean only an idiot would really!
The salary cap reference is because you cannot compare expectations from clubs in competitions without one with the expectations at the Broncos.
Being elite in the NRL is not the same thing as being elite in La Liga, where Barcelona and Real Madrid basically share almost all the top players in the comp.
We can't share the top 60 players in the NRL with the rorters, win the premiership every second year and leave the scraps to the other 14 clubs, which is something that would probably happen without a salary cap.

I can quite easily see a top eight in the premier league quite honestly. Probably not a top eight where they are all title challengers, but a top eight that are a level about the other teams in the league. The current top six have pretty much been better than everyone else for quite a while. I think Wolves and Everton if they spend well will be up there with the likes of Spurs, Chelsea, Arsenal. I think United will challenge again next year along with Man City and Liverpool. Wolves and Everton have the potential, financial clout and history to be major players in England again. I actually wouldnt be surprised to see Spurs and Arsenal start to slip a bit.
That bold part right there is exactly my point. In the NRL, the salary cap allows every club to be a title challenger (even if that's not practically the case, due to some basket case clubs). The NRL has seen 12 different premiers in 20 years. Compare that to any European soccer league!
 

Wolfie

State of Origin Rep
6,084
4,143
I don't know why we're going in circles on this? I'm not arguing the Broncos aren't the NRL elite, I mean only an idiot would really!
The salary cap reference is because you cannot compare expectations from clubs in competitions without one with the expectations at the Broncos.
Being elite in the NRL is not the same thing as being elite in La Liga, where Barcelona and Real Madrid basically share almost all the top players in the comp.
We can't share the top 60 players in the NRL with the rorters, win the premiership every second year and leave the scraps to the other 14 clubs, which is something that would probably happen without a salary cap.


That bold part right there is exactly my point. In the NRL, the salary cap allows every club to be a title challenger (even if that's not practically the case, due to some basket case clubs). The NRL has seen 12 different premiers in 20 years. Compare that to any European soccer league!
You absolutely can compare expectations. If there was a salary cap in the premier league for example, you arent seriously telling me Man United still wouldn't expect to be one of the top clubs. A salary cap evens out a competition, a salary cap wont temper the expectations of fans and the people running football clubs. Real Madrid and Barcelona would still get the best players even if there was a level playing field because they are Real Madrid and Barcelona.

Moving away from football and into the same game, Rugby League, There is a salary cap in the UK Super League, yet the expectations of Wigan, St Helens and Leeds ( the biggest sides in England ) are way above the expectations of say Huddersfield, Salford or Wakefield. The salary cap has no bearing at all on what is expected of those teams. Even with the salary cap in the UK, the competition has still been dominated by the big 3. They all expect to win and they attract the best because they are the elite. At the end of the day, Elite clubs get an advantage because they are elite clubs. This salary cap nonsense needs to be put to bed because elite clubs will always be elite clubs no matter what.

Getting back to my original point about Seibold ( or any coach for that matter ) anyway not getting any leeway as a coach is based on our standing as a club. You have acknowledged we are an NRL elite club, even with this salary cap, we are an NRL elite club. Being like the tigers, or Newcastle isn't an option for us. Thats why Hook and Henjak got booted. I looked at our roster, and came to the conclusion that this year we should be bettering what we did last year ( barring a lot of injuries to key players ). If we have a mediocre year, and by that i'm talking about a year like the Tigers/Knights/Raiders had last year ) then i think Seibold should get punted. No question at all in my mind. If we scrape into the top eight, then i think a lot of questions should be asked about him, if we go as well as i believe we will go under him, he is going to be taking all the plaudits.
 

Porthoz

International Captain
You absolutely can compare expectations. If there was a salary cap in the premier league for example, you arent seriously telling me Man United still wouldn't expect to be one of the top clubs. A salary cap evens out a competition, a salary cap wont temper the expectations of fans and the people running football clubs. Real Madrid and Barcelona would still get the best players even if there was a level playing field because they are Real Madrid and Barcelona.
You can't be serious. You think people would take a third of their potential salary at a different club, just so they could play for Madrid or Barcelona?

Moving away from football and into the same game, Rugby League, There is a salary cap in the UK Super League, yet the expectations of Wigan, St Helens and Leeds ( the biggest sides in England ) are way above the expectations of say Huddersfield, Salford or Wakefield. The salary cap has no bearing at all on what is expected of those teams. Even with the salary cap in the UK, the competition has still been dominated by the big 3. They all expect to win and they attract the best because they are the elite. At the end of the day, Elite clubs get an advantage because they are elite clubs. This salary cap nonsense needs to be put to bed because elite clubs will always be elite clubs no matter what.

Getting back to my original point about Seibold ( or any coach for that matter ) anyway not getting any leeway as a coach is based on our standing as a club. You have acknowledged we are an NRL elite club, even with this salary cap, we are an NRL elite club. Being like the tigers, or Newcastle isn't an option for us. Thats why Hook and Henjak got booted. I looked at our roster, and came to the conclusion that this year we should be bettering what we did last year ( barring a lot of injuries to key players ). If we have a mediocre year, and by that i'm talking about a year like the Tigers/Knights/Raiders had last year ) then i think Seibold should get punted. No question at all in my mind. If we scrape into the top eight, then i think a lot of questions should be asked about him, if we go as well as i believe we will go under him, he is going to be taking all the plaudits.
Ok, so you clearly are not overestimating the expectations on the Broncos (which I agree with), but underestimating those put on the top European soccer teams.
They're expected to win the comp every second or third year at the most. Do you expect that from the Broncos?
 

Wolfie

State of Origin Rep
6,084
4,143
You can't be serious. You think people would take a third of their potential salary at a different club, just so they could play for Madrid or Barcelona?


Ok, so you clearly are not overestimating the expectations on the Broncos (which I agree with), but underestimating those put on the top European soccer teams.
They're expected to win the comp every second or third year at the most. Do you expect that from the Broncos?
I expect us to be challenging every year, thats all i have ever said. I'm not underestimating any expectations of football teams in Europe. Its like i've been saying all along, the big European clubs expect to be strong challengers every year for the major trophies, which would be their domestic league or the champions league. Thats exactly the expectation i think we have at Brisbane.

And you are putting words into my mouth for some reason ( which seems to be a theme on this thread now ). I never mentioned players taking a third of their salary to play for those clubs. I said if there was a level playing field, then yes, players would choose to join Real Madrid over Levante or Espanyol for example. And actually, i do think there would be plenty of players who would probably take unders to play for those clubs. I'm not sure why you cant grasp that my initial point in all this is all about expectation levels at top clubs, not salary caps. Those expectation levels will never change regardless. Some clubs just have that prestige.
 

Porthoz

International Captain
I expect us to be challenging every year, thats all i have ever said. I'm not underestimating any expectations of football teams in Europe. Its like i've been saying all along, the big European clubs expect to be strong challengers every year for the major trophies, which would be their domestic league or the champions league. Thats exactly the expectation i think we have at Brisbane.

And you are putting words into my mouth for some reason ( which seems to be a theme on this thread now ). I never mentioned players taking a third of their salary to play for those clubs. I said if there was a level playing field, then yes, players would choose to join Real Madrid over Levante or Espanyol for example. And actually, i do think there would be plenty of players who would probably take unders to play for those clubs. I'm not sure why you cant grasp that my initial point in all this is all about expectation levels at top clubs, not salary caps. Those expectation levels will never change regardless. Some clubs just have that prestige.
You don't seem to grasp the difference between being a top club in a competition with, and a competition without the salary cap, but here we are...

I'd like for the Broncos to be real challengers every year, but I know that isn't realistic, and winning a comp every 5 or 6 years would already be a great achievement. Try to tell that to a Man Utd or Barcelona board, they would laugh you out of the room!
That's because the NRL is a level playing field, while the EPL, La Liga, Serie A, Bundesliga, Eredivisie, LPF, etc... are NOT.

I didn't put words into your mouth, I explained to you what a level playing field (salary cap) would mean for teams like Madrid or Barca:
Clubs have 10 million (give or take) to pay 30 players, which means that they either pay about $350K each player, or they pay a few top ones $1m and spread the rest over the remaining roster.
In this level playing field, Real Madrid or Barcelona would not be able to pay every player $1m like they can now, so they would have to pick a few, but any other top player wanting that kind of money, would have to go to Levante or Espanyol instead of them. I highly doubt any player would take 1/3 of their value (because that is all Madrid or Barca would be allowed to pay them, not because you said that) to be able to wear their jersey.

P.S. I have tried to make myself as clear as possible, and already went on far too long in this discussion, which reminisces of a religious debate with Morkel. For everyone's sake, whether you (want to) get it or not, I'm stopping the circle jerk.
 

Wolfie

State of Origin Rep
6,084
4,143
You don't seem to grasp the difference between being a top club in a competition with, and a competition without the salary cap, but here we are...

I'd like for the Broncos to be real challengers every year, but I know that isn't realistic, and winning a comp every 5 or 6 years would already be a great achievement. Try to tell that to a Man Utd or Barcelona board, they would laugh you out of the room!
That's because the NRL is a level playing field, while the EPL, La Liga, Serie A, Bundesliga, Eredivisie, LPF, etc... are NOT.

I didn't put words into your mouth, I explained to you what a level playing field (salary cap) would mean for teams like Madrid or Barca:
Clubs have 10 million (give or take) to pay 30 players, which means that they either pay about $350K each player, or they pay a few top ones $1m and spread the rest over the remaining roster.
In this level playing field, Real Madrid or Barcelona would not be able to pay every player $1m like they can now, so they would have to pick a few, but any other top player wanting that kind of money, would have to go to Levante or Espanyol instead of them. I highly doubt any player would take 1/3 of their value (because that is all Madrid or Barca would be allowed to pay them, not because you said that) to be able to wear their jersey.

P.S. I have tried to make myself as clear as possible, and already went on far too long in this discussion, which reminisces of a religious debate with Morkel. For everyone's sake, whether you (want to) get it or not, I'm stopping the circle jerk.
You just have your own agenda. And yes, you did put words into my mouth. You said " You can't be serious. You think people would take a third of their potential salary at a different club, just so they could play for Madrid or Barcelona? " I never mentioned anything about a player taking less to play at another club. But if you know about football like you say you do, then you clearly know the attractions of playing for a club like Barcelona. A salary cap isnt going to wipe out the prestige and history they have.

You can stop, thats fine, but my point still stands. Even with a salaray cap, elite clubs are elite clubs and their expectations are always higher then middle of the road clubs. For some strange reason, you are fixated on some point about a salary cap that isnt even mine. Its time you actually forgot about the salary cap and if you want to debate anything, debate what i said about expectations. Thats never going to change. You say your point is clear, but mine is clearer at the end of the day. I made a simple point about elite clubs expectations, and its been twisted into some salary cap nonsense.
 
Top