NEWS The salary-cap proposal that could revolutionise the game

[Jedhead]

For me people hear junior and they think he has been playing in the area since he was six and has come through to NRL. It's really outdated now that clubs scout and move guys around all the time post school and even for school.

The focus should just be development- where you were born or played Under 10's has no relevance.

Unless like I suggested junior clubs are going to get some money out of any change.

I think there should be some form of financial reward for these junior clubs to keep them in the loop and reward their development program.

Perhaps like in European soccer the player carries with them a sign-on bonus. That is throughout their career a very small percentage of the their overall salary say 1% is paid by the NRL to the junior club each year. So as that player's value increases so to does the reward to the junior club who helped develop him.

 

[Wolfie]

I think there should be some form of financial reward for these junior clubs to keep them in the loop and reward their development program.

Perhaps like in European soccer the player carries with them a sign-on bonus. That is throughout their career a very small percentage of the their overall salary say 1% is paid by the NRL to the junior club each year. So as that player's value increases so to does the reward to the junior club who helped develop him.

The benefit of the system say in the premier league is that if a player has been in a clubs system starting with their academy which i belive they sign for at age 15 ( could be wrong on that, but it wouldnt be far off ) up until the age of 23 if another club poaches a player they want to keep, they have to be financially compensated, regardless of if that player is out of contract or not for the time they have put into developing them.

 

[Sproj]

The benefit of the system say in the premier league is that if a player has been in a clubs system starting with their academy which i belive they sign for at age 15 ( could be wrong on that, but it wouldnt be far off ) up until the age of 23 if another club poaches a player they want to keep, they have to be financially compensated, regardless of if that player is out of contract or not for the time they have put into developing them.

This is why the AFL system works so well. The draft and trade work together. If a player leaves, even if free to do so before their first seven years at a club after being drafted, the club the player leaves from gets some kind of compensation. This system would not work with the NRL because there is neither a trade window or a draft but the point remains, it would be good to reward a club that gives a player their first NRL / NRL development contract but also disincentive moving. How does that happen without a trade window? I don't think it does. Regardless, I am glad the conversation has started because the system as it currently is just does not work. If you are a team at the top, you'd absolutely love it and we used to be one of those. As a team at the bottom, which we now are, it sucks.

 

[the_next]

Walker/Suaalii a Rooster junior.. wot?
Nice Nick.

 

[Jedhead]

The benefit of the system say in the premier league is that if a player has been in a clubs system starting with their academy which i belive they sign for at age 15 ( could be wrong on that, but it wouldnt be far off ) up until the age of 23 if another club poaches a player they want to keep, they have to be financially compensated, regardless of if that player is out of contract or not for the time they have put into developing them.

That's right. I'm saying we could do the same. In soccer they have a further financial add on in so much as they can write into the contract a 'sell on clause'. I.e. if an English premier side signs a lower division player and then his true value as a player is realised because they are now playing in a better team of players their value also goes up as now bigger European teams are keen to buy them. So Say Liverpool buys a player from a division two side for $700,000 but then that player plays in the champions league against teams like Barca and Bayern and one of them decide they would happily pay $20 million for that player, what happens is the division two side (provided they had a sell on clause) gets a percentage of that sell on $20 million. So if the division two had haggled for a 10% sign-on fee they'd get a further $2 million for the player they originally only got $700,000 for.

Maybe we might even consider sell-on fees in league!

So if Storm wanted Coates while he was still under contract to us we could sell him before his contract ran out for an agreed fee. This way lower clubs who developed a real top notch player could sell him on and use that bonus fee to pay other players.

 

[Big Pete]

Let's say for arguments sake that the ten players were all playing. This means the club receives a whopping $1 million off of the salary cap. Now as they were all rookies when they were brought into first grade (apart from the coach being an out and out fool) it would mean their combined salaries would hardly be stressing the clubs overall cap. So even if 6 wanted upgrades the bonus $1 million the club received would go a long way to giving them all an upgrade leaving the rest of the cap for the club to sign that marquee player to get bums on seats.

Not necessarily, because the proposal weights two factors you see. Total amount of games and a surplus of bought vs. blooded players. So since Wests have been chasing their tail for so long they've had to sign a bunch of experienced heads and a few 'moneyball' signings so this attempt at benefitting from the system isn't quite saving them the money they thought they would, especially since their coming stone motherless last so the pressure to make additional is high.

Meanwhile the top teams have already adjusted, they're prioritising those prospects more, taking the best U/18s and U/21s who have yet to debut while holding onto the players that happened to come through their system.

The flipside of this is that NRL careers are ending at 25, since clubs don't want a piece of those 150 game good club players anymore because it messes with their 'purity' score.

Maybe as a reward for development the NRL could stipulate that developed players not only saw the club credited by $100,000 from the cap but they were also off the market to other clubs for their first two years unless of course the club who 'blooded' them deemed them surplus to their requirements. This initial two season moratorium on developed rookies would also go a long way to stopping them from trying to hold their club to ransom for a bigger paycheck.

It would need some serious modifications, that's one way of fixing it. Clubs to an extent already do this with 'hey sign this contract and we'll give you a game' the issue is that clubs are being forced to offer massive overs just to keep these players.

Also as per the suggestion it's 50,000 per metric. The article didn't go onto say what influence blooded/total games would have, just the surplus of the roster.

 

[Mister Wright]

Too often these suggestions get thrown out because they're "too hard to apply" or go against tradition. These idea has merit and needs to be teased out further to ensure it benefits the game.

 

[mitch222]

Its a terrible idea on the system. It doesn't solve anything. If you want a junior reward system, reward them for being in the teams development squad from 14-15 not the year before the debut. They are true juniors not just players bought for excessive money before they are about to debut in first grade from struggling clubs

 

[Harry Sack]

All good points both for and against. I'm just glad someone got the conversation started. The current system needs an overhaul.

 

[Kimlo]

Follow up article

Source: Sydney Morning Herald

By Adrian Proszenko​

April 13, 2022 — 6.08pm

Parramatta have proposed that the NRL double the existing incentives available for clubs to retain players they have developed in a bid to foster loyalty and decrease player churn. The issue of how best to reward clubs for developing players is timely given the NRL is about to commence negotiations with the Rugby League Players Association on a new collective bargaining agreement. The topic was thrust further into the spotlight after the Herald revealed the details of a proposal put forward by sports management consultant Ramy Haidar to the NRL and several clubs, under which the Roosters would be considered a development franchise.

Haidar’s paper has sparked debate and led to the unearthing of several other proposals that will undoubtedly pique the attention of head office. Under the current system, clubs receive a 10 per cent salary cap concession for the first two years for a player they are deemed to have developed, which reverts to five per cent for every year thereafter. The Eels wrote to the NRL late last year proposing the reward rise to 20 per cent for the duration to help retain talent.

“My view is that anything which promotes the development of players should be encouraged,” Parramatta chairman Sean McElduff said. “The current development player allowance, which is 10 per cent for the first two years, shouldn’t reduce to 5 per cent after year two; it should actually go up.
“Why would it decrease? It should increase if you want to foster and reward the development of players, build loyalty with supporters and put more money into the game. “This suggestion puts more money into players’ pockets, it rewards you for developing players and it helps in terms of tribalism and looking after fans. That would reward all clubs in the same way.”

The Eels roster is being picked apart by rival clubs.Credit:Getty

The Panthers, who are aware of the Haidar pitch, declined to comment on the issue, although they are understood to have similar sentiments to the Eels. Properly rewarding developing clubs is an issue that long-serving Canberra chief executive Don Furner has been pushing for years. Furner, who could see value in Parramatta’s proposal, has written papers on the topic and believes an effective approach would be to provide rewards based on how long a player has been in a club’s system. Under his model, a salary cap discount of 5 per cent would apply to players who have been there from Jersey Flegg level, 10 per cent for those who have also been there Harold Matthews and between 15 and 20 per cent if they have also come through the SG Ball system.
“I’ve used the Roosters as an example; you don’t have to be born and bred in Bondi,” Furner explained. “Say you bring in a kid from Queensland like Jake Friend or Roger Tuivasa-Sheck from New Zealand, they should get the same reward as what we get when we bring Josh Papali’i from Souths Logan to Canberra.
“Yes, Penrith has this big junior base, but this doesn’t disadvantage clubs like Melbourne, Brisbane or the Roosters.”

The Herald spoke to numerous clubs on and off the record. Several powerbrokers raised questions about whether rewards for funding should come in the form of salary cap dispensation, additional funding or a mixture of the two. Cronulla general manager of football Darren Mooney, who has helped build rosters at the Sharks, Tigers and Knights, said the debate was topical.

“At the end of the day we definitely want to be talking about it, so if it creates a conversation around how we reward clubs for developing players, that’s a good thing,” Mooney said.
“The biggest issue I have got is if you’ve got $500k off the cap, who pays for that? The clubs do.
“You are basically spending money to develop players and then you’re spending more money to keep them because you’ve got a salary cap exemption. “I’d also want to see the definition of ‘development’ before you talk about a system. It needs to go hand in hand with a development fee structure, because if there are really big development fees on a player, you question whether a club will sign them.”
RLPA chief executive Clint Newton was one of the stakeholders who had seen Haidar’s presentation.

“All those things are worth throwing into the mix. It comes down to the practicality of how it can be implemented into the current system,” Newton said. “Anything that promotes the development of players and rewards clubs for bringing them into their rosters is worth a discussion.”

 

[Old Mate]

fck the roosters.

 

[Jedhead]

Wish they'd actually set aside a week during the off season for clubs and player reps to come together to discuss this properly.

If something serious is not done soon we will be locked up with a three tiered competition in perpetuity. We must ensure that any new plan is underpinned with the idea that junior clubs are financially compensated for their hard work for two reasons.

1. It will ensure we develop more players of the required standard to service NRL expansion.

2. It will ensure we steal a march on the AFL's plans for national dominance.

Failure to address either issue will lead to further erosion of our game.

 

[1910]

“I’ve used the Roosters as an example; you don’t have to be born and bred in Bondi,” Furner explained. “Say you bring in a kid from Queensland like Jake Friend or Roger Tuivasa-Sheck from New Zealand, they should get the same reward as what we get when we bring Josh Papali’i from Souths Logan to Canberra.
“Yes, Penrith has this big junior base, but this doesn’t disadvantage clubs like Melbourne, Brisbane or the Roosters.”

Furner is my spirit animal.

 

[nopatience101]

Just like the transfer windows, this will come to nothing. They’ve been talking about both for the last two decades and nothing ever comes of it. There’s even renewed talk now of a national reserve grade comp again, which again will never happen.

 

[Battler]

Follow up article

Source: Sydney Morning Herald

By Adrian Proszenko​

April 13, 2022 — 6.08pm

Parramatta have proposed that the NRL double the existing incentives available for clubs to retain players they have developed in a bid to foster loyalty and decrease player churn. The issue of how best to reward clubs for developing players is timely given the NRL is about to commence negotiations with the Rugby League Players Association on a new collective bargaining agreement. The topic was thrust further into the spotlight after the Herald revealed the details of a proposal put forward by sports management consultant Ramy Haidar to the NRL and several clubs, under which the Roosters would be considered a development franchise.

Haidar’s paper has sparked debate and led to the unearthing of several other proposals that will undoubtedly pique the attention of head office. Under the current system, clubs receive a 10 per cent salary cap concession for the first two years for a player they are deemed to have developed, which reverts to five per cent for every year thereafter. The Eels wrote to the NRL late last year proposing the reward rise to 20 per cent for the duration to help retain talent.

“My view is that anything which promotes the development of players should be encouraged,” Parramatta chairman Sean McElduff said. “The current development player allowance, which is 10 per cent for the first two years, shouldn’t reduce to 5 per cent after year two; it should actually go up.
“Why would it decrease? It should increase if you want to foster and reward the development of players, build loyalty with supporters and put more money into the game. “This suggestion puts more money into players’ pockets, it rewards you for developing players and it helps in terms of tribalism and looking after fans. That would reward all clubs in the same way.”

The Eels roster is being picked apart by rival clubs.Credit:Getty

The Panthers, who are aware of the Haidar pitch, declined to comment on the issue, although they are understood to have similar sentiments to the Eels. Properly rewarding developing clubs is an issue that long-serving Canberra chief executive Don Furner has been pushing for years. Furner, who could see value in Parramatta’s proposal, has written papers on the topic and believes an effective approach would be to provide rewards based on how long a player has been in a club’s system. Under his model, a salary cap discount of 5 per cent would apply to players who have been there from Jersey Flegg level, 10 per cent for those who have also been there Harold Matthews and between 15 and 20 per cent if they have also come through the SG Ball system.
“I’ve used the Roosters as an example; you don’t have to be born and bred in Bondi,” Furner explained. “Say you bring in a kid from Queensland like Jake Friend or Roger Tuivasa-Sheck from New Zealand, they should get the same reward as what we get when we bring Josh Papali’i from Souths Logan to Canberra.
“Yes, Penrith has this big junior base, but this doesn’t disadvantage clubs like Melbourne, Brisbane or the Roosters.”

The Herald spoke to numerous clubs on and off the record. Several powerbrokers raised questions about whether rewards for funding should come in the form of salary cap dispensation, additional funding or a mixture of the two. Cronulla general manager of football Darren Mooney, who has helped build rosters at the Sharks, Tigers and Knights, said the debate was topical.

“At the end of the day we definitely want to be talking about it, so if it creates a conversation around how we reward clubs for developing players, that’s a good thing,” Mooney said.
“The biggest issue I have got is if you’ve got $500k off the cap, who pays for that? The clubs do.
“You are basically spending money to develop players and then you’re spending more money to keep them because you’ve got a salary cap exemption. “I’d also want to see the definition of ‘development’ before you talk about a system. It needs to go hand in hand with a development fee structure, because if there are really big development fees on a player, you question whether a club will sign them.”
RLPA chief executive Clint Newton was one of the stakeholders who had seen Haidar’s presentation.

“All those things are worth throwing into the mix. It comes down to the practicality of how it can be implemented into the current system,” Newton said. “Anything that promotes the development of players and rewards clubs for bringing them into their rosters is worth a discussion.”

Lol at that parra image : Gutho, Mahoney, Moses were all developed by other clubs and Brown is borderline. I respect them for advocating for a jr reward system, but what a meme if the NRL bases it off which club you debuted for. Get ready for the rorters to up the poaching ante if this comes in in its proposed form.

EDIT: that said, it would be better than the current system. Imagine if the Broncos still had Dfifi, Walsh, Walker, Hunt, etc

 

[1910]

Lol at that parra image : Gutho, Mahoney, Moses were all developed by other clubs and Brown is borderline. I respect them for advocating for a jr reward system, but what a meme if the NRL bases it off which club you debuted for. Get ready for the rorters to up the poaching ante if this comes in in its proposed form.

EDIT: that said, it would be better than the current system. Imagine if the Broncos still had Dfifi, Walsh, Walker, Hunt, etc

Walker (Ipswich Norths Tigers)
Fifita (Souths)
Walsh (Tweed)
Hunt (Blackwater)

Still want to base it on geography?

 

[Cult]

Walker (Ipswich Norths Tigers)
Fifita (Souths)
Walsh (Tweed)
Hunt (Blackwater)

Still want to base it on geography?

aCtUaLlY wAlKeR wAS bOrN iN lEeDs sO hE’s tHeIr jUnIoR duhhhh