I think Koukash has a point here. I dont think it would be a bad move to say clubs are allowed two players whose wages do not count on the cap, it would allow the top clubs to have a fighting chance to keep their best players from going to union/NRL eg Tomkins with Wigan. Maybe say they must be eligble for a home nations team as well.

It most likely won't happen and he has hardly been mentioned but I would like to see Shaun Edwards be given a chance, I think he would be available after That Six Nations too, he wasn't given a chance in league as a coach which is a shame and he would do a fantastic job even if it's until the end of the season. Salford have the money now so it's worth a shot.

But why does it have to be as simple as "raise the cap" or "lower the cap"? This completely restricts the debate to basically rich club vs poor club, when there are a ton of other good options...limited number outside the cap, etc, etc.

Yes, but in all cases, note how it's the group with the most money who control the contracts. The RFU and ECB are richer than the clubs and the counties. The RFL and FA are poorer than (at least many of) the clubs.

Well said

I get the impression that a few clubs could pay more than the salary cap but it is in all of the owners interest at the clubs that could do so to simply keep the current status quo. As things stand the top clubs stay at the top anyway, without them needing to do much or pump much money in, and the weaker clubs cant even spend enough to compete anyway. Koukash is just what the game needs to spice things up and smash the cosy old boys network of Lenegan, Hetherington, McManus and Moran. There is far more money in the game than there was 10 or 20 years ago and players are being paid far less in real terms. There is far more Sky money being given to each club now, attendances are greatly increased, ticket prices are up and yet we are constantly being told there is no money in the game and players wages are going down year on year. Something doesnt add up.