A logical way to operate a salary cap is to set it as a budget at 90/95 % of a clubs total income , forcing clubs to concentrate on increasing their income, and to be less dependant on the SKY money, increase your income be that by benefactor ' donation ' , not directors loan or preferably by ' earned ' income, and the following year you can spend more

Simple really

Always been against the salary cap and always will be.
We were told it would stop clubs going broke, which is hasn't. It was also mooted that it would create a "level playing field" which of course it can't and hasn't.
I see no purpose in it at all!

However, there has to be a counter balance to the likes of Koukash who would raid every other club for their best players to attain the best 25 squad in the League. My thoughts would be to have eight club trained players in the match 17.
At present it's 8 in the squad of 25, 8 in the 17 though would compell clubs to produce from their own area rather than rely on other clubs doing the scouting, training and development for them.
Also I'd reduce the club trained qualifying rule from 3 years by the age of 21 to 3 years by the age of 19. They need to re-introduce separate years again for U15s and U16s from the recent merger of those age groups.

We need more finance into the game but we need more quality players coming through to SL equally.
More money and more quality players are essential, the salary cap is irrelevent IMO.

Meanwhile, in other news...

With a cap of £300k at the moment, it is not possible for any championsip club to be full time. Although at Fev we currently have four or five that are. Extra funding will enable us to increase that from next season and our major shareholder Feisal Nahaboo has already stated that Fev will have funds available to match the top end of the salary cap, whichever league we are in.

There is a lot of investment at Fev with the stadium development and a £350k centre of excellence. We are not standing still and waiting to be run into the gri=ound as some will suggest.

I suspect that similar things arehappening at Fax, Leigh, etc.

Whilst I might agree that the game needs more money and more quality players, I would suggest that the two aren't mutually exclusive. We might just end up paying more money for average players if the gene pool can't be significantly increased either through development or competing with NRL/RU for the best.

If we were to up the stakes on player recruitment, to raise the profile of the game, to attract that new investment it's a long hard road. If every team had a SBW or Billy Slater marquee signing do you think that that would 'do the trick'?

I have my doubts sorry to say I think our image issues and therefore our ability to pay run a bit deeper. Sure it would be great to watch week in week out, but, probably for 'the already converted'

I'd be all for an 8/17 but at the moment there's only Wigan, saints and Leeds that could keep their current first choice 17 and do it. There might be one or two others but I can't think of any

One problem which has been overlooked in the past and is one of the reasons that few championship players have moved to SL that many players do not want to become full time. Given that most championship players have some kind of career and get paid for playing part time, becoming a full time player (even for a SL club) may involve minimal pay rise (if any) but a huge rise in career ending risk.

The benefits of being full time are mostly fitness, stamina and recovery. This is the reason why many championship clubs can compete in a single match (challenge cup of friendly) but little more.

You have to wonder with this being the case, will an increase in cap level for championship clubs provide significant playing benefit.