Warrington, Huddersfield and Leeds.

So two of the big 4 and a club with a club who have as many bottom place finishes as they do play off wins. They dont seem very good examples.

In fact, Huddersfield are a great example of what i am talking about. Davy became chairman in '96, he appointed tony smith in 2001, Huddersfield didnt win a play off game until 2010 and have won one since that year.

Which big 4? When did Warrington or Huddersfield become a part of the Big 4?
All teams who finished 1st in the league in recent years. That surely shows a big improvement from where both Huddersfield and Warrington were and proves you can improve your team and sign quality players under a salary cap. Brough, McGillvary, Cudjoe, Ferres, Crabtree, Westwood, Ratchford, Clark, Hill, Currie are all players who would be worthy of playing for Leeds, Saints or Wigan.

Leeds would not have improved as they have without a salary cap to suppress spending on first team players and allow that money to be spent on back room staff and on the club itself.

Not to mention Widnes, Catalans and Hull KR who all have improved significantly with the help of a salary cap to keep them within touching distance.

If the salary cap doesn't spread talent then Leeds wouldn't run with such a small squad.

Widnes, Les Catalans, Hull KR have won a grand total of 0 top flight trophies under the SC. Neil Hudgell will happily tell you about the glass ceiling they hit.

Huddersfield are 20 years in to Davy's involvement and have 3 play off wins in total.

Warrington have been a top flight club for more than a century, its silly to pretend they cam from a lowely place.

What players were Leeds wanting to keep who went to another SL club?

Since Cas sorted themselves out behind the scenes and started being able to spend/run close to the full cap over the last couple of years they've done well for themselves.

The salary cap would work if it was a level playing field but there's still teams that don't/can't spend the cap. Although with the new TV deal teams should be spending the full amount. What needs to be brought in with the new money is a minimum cap floor, to lift teams up.

In fact, most of it boils down to the people running clubs and handing out contracts - poorly run teams tend to do poorly and teams that give the wrong players huge contracts always do poorly.

Value is the rest of it - Leeds, Wigan & Saints for example, are not only well run but get more bang for their buck due to the number of academy products on first or second contracts at the club, players performing to a level above what they get paid meaning there's room to add in bigger name players etc.

Huddersfield and Catalans have had squads more than capable of playing in or making GF's in the past 5 years.poor Coaching or choking when it matters has ultimately cost them but they have been thereabouts, Warrington have made finals and blown it when they could/should have won it atleast once. People moaning about same teams winning it but its now up to these other sides to make that final step, but imo it's not down to playing ability as there are at least 5/6 sides at a similar level, and there SHOULD have been more different winners/finalists in recent years, that has nothing to do with the SC.

You can't blame the structure for clubs like warington and huddersfield chocking and failing to win a title. Those clubs have had the ability for some time now, warrington should have won a grand final by now and huddersfield should have contested one. It's up to them to make the final step, but the opportunity is there. The competition is more level and open than it has ever been.

The last time huddersfield contested a major final was 2009. Yet since then they've actually improved much more as a team showing great week in week consistency and beating the likes of wigan leeds and saints on a regular basis. Comparative to their playing ability huddersfield are underachieving. They should be contesting more finals.

Have Widnes, Catalans and Hull KR all improved significantly under the SC?

Who said it should be easy? They were in the 2nd division. Winning playoff games isn't the only measure of improvement. It would be stupid to pretend Huddersfield aren't a contender for trophies and they clearly have players in their team capable of being at the "Big 4". How can that happen if the cap not only doesn't spread talent but entrenches it?

Warrington have significantly improved from where they were. Again, stop being daft just because you don't agree with the SC.

You're seriously asking which players Leeds would've kept or not signed but for a salary cap?
Well off the top of my head:
Mathers, Calderwood, Walker, McKenna, Diskin, Scruton, Morley, Murrell, Jones-Bishop, Aiton.

Again, stop being daft just because you don't like the salary cap. It quite clearly spreads talent. It might not do it as much as you'd like but it certainly does not entrench it.

What it does is stops 1 reckless owner hugely inflating the entire players market and then force well run clubs from having to increase their wages bill and risk their hard-fought business position.

It's no coincidence that since Warrington, Cas and Huddersfield significantly improved their off-field operations their on-field performance has improved. Have a well run club and players will want to play for you.
Salford have proved the vice-versa for me.

Whilst the same teams might be winning it, since the Challenge Cup final moved back to Wembley 8 years ago we've had 9 of the current 12 SL clubs make a final appearance (only Salford, Wakey and Widnes haven't, but the latter two both Semi Finalists).

Salary cap doesn't include prize money, so winners can pay more and keep winning?

Whilst choking maybe the more fun way of describing why they fall apart at play-off time, there is also a pretty good chance that they aren't good enough when the big clubs take a step up at play off time. Especially when you remember that coaches like trent Robinson at les Catalans and Nathan brown at hudds have gone on to win at big clubs.

It's a nice narrative and one which tries to remove the SC from an increase spread of success despite that being one of the salary caps main selling points but the facts are that after leaving hudds Nathan brown won a gf and after leaving les Catalans trent Robinson did coaching is one thing you can't blame.

Browns' win with Saints last year was a written in the stars kind of thing probably not to be repeated in years, if ever, the way things ran for them in the play off series, i'm sure even their own fans would admit that (not that they hadn't deserved a break after all the finals losses). I wouldn't put it down to any master stroke by Nathan Brown and their fans were hardly distraught when he left, just right place at right time.

If Robinson had stayed at Catalans, imo they would have kicked on and at least have played in a GF by now, as it is i think their current coach is just not up to it and they have gone backwards, they have the playing staff to be right in the mix. Put it this way, If Trent Robinson had that group of players they would have been top 4 for sure this year. Like i say, not all about the players but getting the little things right behind the scenes too.