Why bother to have a salary cap?

Why even bother with the cap when teams who cant afford to fit a player in who wants to play there just get the NRL to ok it anyway? The Sharks offer considerably more then Souths but Burgess signs with Souths because the NRL ok a discount, now Teo is going to sign with Brisbane because the NRL will ok a discount. Mind you Parra get screwed because Folau wanted to sign for less (in first year and catch up in 2/3)but the NRL say no.

Now we have Manly sign Tapau and likely Walker without room in the cap but the ok to add players and release players in the future. Surely you must have the room before you sign players, not make room after.

The NRL blocked Teo coming to the Broncos about a month before Burgess signed with Souths.

Has there been a change in that? I can't find any articles on this.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/sam-burgess-return-could-pave-the-way-for-ben-teos-move-to-brisbane/story-fnp0lyn3-1227611387774

what a load of shlt that Teo could be registered for 350k and Burgess 500k

"Could pave the way"

I reckon the Folau saga has seen these exceptions come about

tat-tall wrote:I reckon the Folau saga has seen these exceptions come about

It is called the "Folau rule".

tat-tall wrote:I reckon the Folau saga has seen these exceptions come about

Completely agree.

I know Shanbon and other Parra fans cry blue murder every time the NRL makes an exception but I reckon they were hoping Folau/Parra would just fall into line and since then are just more cautious that there are plenty of other codes/sports/options.

Can't believe this is allowed. Its unfair on the rest of the comp that Souths(Burgess), Broncos(Te'o) and Parramatta(Hayne) will all be allowed discounts to register these players. My opinion will not change when my Roosters are allowed to do the same with SBW

It's a crock of shit.
If they werent the popular teams, they wouldnt get approved.

Agree. Too much is also made of what the player wants in my opinion. You want $600k a year. Well that's nice but we can only afford to pay you $400k so you either accept less or go elsewhere.

You are a pro athlete and your job is one that millions envy. Accept that, play the sport and move closer to home/friends when you are retired. Until then do your job

Beast From The Big East wrote:Agree. Too much is also made of what the player wants in my opinion. You want $600k a year. Well that's nice but we can only afford to pay you $400k so you either accept less or go elsewhere.

You are a pro athlete and your job is one that millions envy. Accept that, play the sport and move closer to home/friends when you are retired. Until then do your job

The issue it that they are given a nominal value by the NRL and that value has to go on the cap. According to the NRL Burgess is only worth 600k so thats all souffs have to pay him in the cap. If the NRL used his real value theres no way they could get him under the cap and he'd have no choice but to go elsewhere.

Krump wrote:
The issue it that they are given a nominal value by the NRL and that value has to go on the cap. According to the NRL Burgess is only worth 600k so thats all souffs have to pay him in the cap. If the NRL used his real value theres no way they could get him under the cap and he'd have no choice but to go elsewhere.

Surely it should be the same as a player who just came off contract. Clubs come to you and say what they will/can pay you. You take whatever one you prefer. If that means a hit in salary to play at a preferred club then deal with it

If NRL want to separately top up players contracts then it should fall to an auction system. NRL can negotiate whatever contract they want with the player then the player goes to whichever team is willing to pay the highest percentage of that contract. Still keeps the "stars" in the game which is what the NRL wants

Personally if they piss off to another code I wouldn't allow them back, it might make them think twice about chasing the dollars. There's always another star coming through.

Does anyone have a link to a story expressively stating the Broncos were blocked by the NRL or is it just arm chair donkeys speculating ?

Your Name wrote:Does anyone have a link to a story expressively stating the Broncos were blocked by the NRL or is it just arm chair donkeys speculating ?

More importantly does anyone have a link to a photo of a donkey in an armchair

McFlogchops wrote:It's a crock of shit.
If they werent the popular teams, they wouldnt get approved.

And so they should be approved.

There has to be some upside for teams (say for example the Broncos) that pretty much carry the popularity of the NRL and make up for deadweight teams (say for example the Sharks)

Oz Sport Mad wrote:

And so they should be approved.

There has to be some upside for teams (say for example the Broncos) that pretty much carry the popularity of the NRL and make up for deadweight teams (say for example the Sharks)

Troll much?

OSM has always been a fuckstick.


Basically what he is saying is that the salary cap shouldn't be in place, as the team he supports is the only team in a massive league crazy city.

Carry on.