I agree with your points. It has brought some stability to the game and helped our youngsters. I would allow a certain number of "club produced" young players to be excluded from the salary cap at least until they have earned a full time place in the senior squad.

Im not sure whether that in itself would work, but I certainly think there should be some kind of reward in the salary cap for having a certain number of home grown players in your squad.

It's definitely a good thing, as we fans of Leeds who lived through near bankruptcy should fully understand. History has shown time and again that some clubs will put their entire future at risk chasing glory, and RL simply cannot afford to lose any SL clubs through their own mismanagement. The cap level is up to the clubs to decide, so long as the RFL also has basic solvency requirements in place as well. I do tend to agree that if clubs spend less than a minimum then their right to a franchise spot should be questioned, as the gap between top and bottom is probably of more significance than the absolute level of the cap.

Like most others I think its been great overall - ending clubs living beyond their means and helping to leveling up the competition (although there are still clear bands in SL the top/middle/bottom teams are more competetive among themselves).

I also think something could be done to help clubs retain youngsters - I'm sure the current cap has contributed to the fact that next year Leeds will have quite a few more overseas players than we've had for a while.

Very good point is that and I agree. I doubt we'd have lost Ellis the year before and Smith this term if not for the Cap.

And Delaney looks like a "value for money" salary cap signing (not knocking him, I've not seen him play)

Under the cap every team needs some dependable but cheap players - some may be good old one-club pros but more often they seem to be overseas signings.

Thanks ever so much for all the feedback, some really good suggestions in there!