It’s funny, we change the competition format at the drop of a hat, probably averaging a different competition structure every 4 years yet the one consistent has been the salary cap, for some reason it seems untouchable.

It was brought in to

A) Level the competition because Wigan (the current holders of every domestic trophy) were winning everything.

B) Protect teams financially.

It’s done neither.

It’s levelled the competition in the worst possible way. The same teams win the title, but their quality is levelled down to be closer to the mediocre teams.

If it’s a choice between watching a high quality team win all the time or a lower quality one, give me the quality one.

I don’t think many can argue that super league isn’t stale. We all know who will win the grand final. It’ll be saints or Wigan.

Bring in some other mechanism to protect team financially, and allow the teams that can afford it to build higher quality teams.

More stars in the league will make it more marketable, more lucrative, and increase the standard of the major finals, the games that matter. Sure, the same teams might win, as they do now. But the quality will be higher.

I’ve said the exact same thing on these forums for the last 10 years.

Usually Wakefield or Leigh fans that disagreed with me but Wakefield will probably have changed their tune now they have a bit of cash.

If Wigans billionaire owner wants to splash his cash he should be allowed to. He shouldn’t be held back because wasters like Leigh. Hull fc and Salford might get upset

But you have only been on here for 1 year

Scrapping the cap will please a lot of fans, until their club spends more than it can afford.

Any wonder why folk dont bother here anymore

You think the cap should be kept?

Bit of a double edge sword isnt it.

Keep the cap so there is some equality, a bit of a level playing field.

Scrap the cap and watch a couple of teams take over dominance, leaving the rest to fall by the wayside if they dont have the financial means to pursue glory.

At ough call, each of us have an opinion. I dont think there is a right or wrong answer.

Keep the cap and let Wigan/St Helens dominate
Get rid and let Wigan/St Helens dominate

Tough choice if you ask me.
I dont know the answer as I am sure others dont but I do know that Aus teams will carry on raiding our squads for the betterment of theirs and not ours.

We however need strong teams a bit like HKR/ Leigh/Wire/Leeds etc coming through. Would it help if they could spend what they want, possible ! would it,who knows but this is down to the owners to spend wisely.

Only 4 teams have ever won the Grand Final....

For me, the cap needs to be raised,( by how much, I'm not sure). We need to be able to keep our top quality players, and also attract more quality players from the NRL. It's important that we can get as much quality on show as possible to put more bums on seats. If anything, this would allow other teams, apart from Wigan & Saints, to catch up to their level, and seriously challenge for honours.

If you want more quality on show "scrap the cap".To get more NRL you would have to raise the cap to match theirs, in real terms would be practically getting rid of the cap.
Ultimately it is upto the clubs owners/backers to manage the finances of said club.

TBH - I don't think they're going to scrap the cap, but increasing it significantly would give us some kind of measure to where it should be, and give us a guide to see if it needed tweaking any further.

I’ve mixed feelings about it.

We’re certainly asking the cap to fix too many problems. Competitive balance, financial stability, even propping up the academy system. And scrapping it would at least spare us the nonsense about ‘great culture’ and it all being about ‘developing your own players’.

However, moving from the outcome of the season being drearily predictable to a higher proportion of games being non-contests would still be a big step. If Wigan are winning by 40, 50, 60 nearly every week, only ever challenged by Saints you’d think the best players might eventually want to go elsewhere (i.e. the NRL) for a challenge.

Ultimately I suspect it’d have to lead to greater change. Possibly fewer, bigger teams - and we all know how popular the idea of mergers is. But I feel like we’re already on the edge of what is tolerable for predictability.

To scrap the cap would also have to unrestrict overseas quota. both are self defeating policies. you want people to watch the game then offer them the best product.
More people watching is increased revenues and increase in kids wanting to play. Grass roots will not grow if the pinnicale of the sport is not attractive

Lol what?

If Huddersfield were successful, they may get 5000 fans. If Hull are , stick 10k on that figure and Leigh have been a breath of fresh air, winning The Challenge Cup. I think your club's current plight is testament to the fact that you can spend hugely on players, but that is not going to win you trophies, until your club culture and coaching can match the ambition,

I

I see I'm a bit late to this conversation, but scrapping the cap WILL increase the gaps between Teams. There are some that can't even afford the full cap.

I was told that Featherstone were top spenders last season in the Championship but could only spent about £1m in salaries which is ridiculous.

The NFL is a perfect example of the salary cap working. All of those Teams can afford the $255m cap spend, but they still have to make the right decisions about players and coaches. Wigan have just made the best decisions so far, with Warrington, Hull KR, Saints, even Hull FC and probably some others still having the financial means to compete. They just haven't made better decisions on personnel compared to Wigan.

There are already 3 major dispensations for clubs to be able to spend over the £2.1m cap.

On a personal note, as a Wire fan, I'd love to win the Grand Final, but purely on merit. It would be great to spend above and beyond the cap to bring in world class talent and even take away the best from teams lower down the table. But if we won the GF, people would say that we bought the league, and I don't want that. If we do actually win the GF, I don't want anyone to be able to question it. Same for any other Team that can break the 4-club cycle.

We need all clubs in the English system to actually be able to spend £2.1m first. It's on them to make the right decisions, and then we increase it over time. But that only happens when the Sport grows, which I'm still waiting on IMG to sort out.

If you lose the cap you've got to ban Director's loans. Falling out with folk and immediately asking for their loan to be repaid has caused financial crashes many times in the past.
If a Director puts money in...it has to stay in.

That literally had nothing to do with the post of mine you quoted ????

Well said. I’ve said for 10 years if an owner wants to put money in they should follow the football league protocols. It can’t go in as a loan, it goes in and a donation within the profit and loss account

You want the likes of Castleford and London to hold back the Super League and to continue trying to make it a level playing field?

I don't feel having a salary cap is the problem, it can be raised or changed, rules added like franchise player tags etc to allow better spending on stars.

I feel the Superleague should become a closed league, remove traditional promotion/relegation. SL 1 and SL 2 use the grading system to move teams between if needed. This would allow teams to spend time rebuilding without the fear of being relegated, when even if relegated they will be too good for the level below etc

I don't think either of them are holding Super League back. I just everyone to be able to afford the full cap for a start.

perhaps a first step in the process would be a compulsory full cap spend as a condition of competing in Super League?... I assume its part of the grade A criteria?

The first step should be a salary cap based on a percentage of turnover to stop wasters like Salford, Leigh and Wakefield holding the rest of SL back