There should be a £5m salary cap. A perfect compromise. A cap to keep those who want to keep the little clubs happy, whilst allowing the richer clubs to use their chequebooks a little more freely.

This would also allow us to compete more fairly with union.

We need more covenants though...

- Academy trained players under 21 should not count on the cap
- Welsh or French players should not count on the cap, to encourage development of their national sides.
- England players should count at 25% on the cap, to encourage development of our national side.
- Academy trained players under 23 should count at 50% of their salary
- Other players count 100% of their salary on the cap
- Australians count 150% on the cap
- Australians over 28 should count double on the cap.
- Clubs need to prove viability and availability of funds to comply with the above. Setting a %age of income is not an option because this does not take into account a rich businessman, for instance, injecting funds into the club in order to improve turnover/profit in years to come.

To be fair we only need another 5 millionaire owners pumping money in to Salford, Bradford, Wakefield Castleford and KR and we'd be fine.

Wire, Wigan, Leeds, Hudd, Bronco, Hull FC, Saints, Widnes and Catalans are either doing well, have good financial structure in place or have a rich despot in charge.

Crap.

No directors loans or borrowing? How is the club meant to stay in existence, never mind grow for the future without any facilities?

Clubs are businesses like any other.

Quote: Horatio Yed "To be fair we only need another 5 millionaire owners pumping money in to Salford, Bradford, Wakefield Castleford and KR and we'd be fine. Wire, Wigan, Leeds, Hudd, Bronco, Hull FC, Saints, Widnes and Catalans are either doing well, have good financial structure in place or have a rich despot in charge.'" KR have a millionaire backer, it's why we've been able to run at significantly losses for the last couple of years. www.parasolgroup.co.uk/about-us/ ... ment-team/ www.silverlinesales.co.uk/about/

Quote: Horatio Yed "To be fair we only need another 5 millionaire owners pumping money in to Salford, Bradford, Wakefield Castleford and KR and we'd be fine. Wire, Wigan, Leeds, Hudd, Bronco, Hull FC, Saints, Widnes and Catalans are either doing well, have good financial structure in place or have a rich despot in charge.'" KR have a millionaire backer, it's why we've been able to run at significantly losses for the last couple of years. www.parasolgroup.co.uk/about-us/ ... ment-team/ www.silverlinesales.co.uk/about/

I think quite a few people on this thread are massively over-estimating the amount of money the "richer" clubs have available to spend. Even the ones winning trophies and backed by wealthy investors have still posted losses in recent years. I don't have the figures to hand but I know Warrington have not always posted a profit in recent years. And whilst not wishing to diminish Mr Moran's much appreciated support, I'd like to point out it certainly doesn't run to pouring millions into the club.

The Salary Cap may not be perfect but I'm pretty sure the sport would be in a much worse position without it.

Who are these teams with loads of cash splashing around? I know Saints have a rich owner but we haven't made a profit in quite a while and, at a guess, I'm pretty sure most other SL teams don't either. How is transferring money from investments in revenue generation to transfer fees (to RU I hasten to add) better for our sport?

Leeds, Hull, Wire, Hudds could easily afford it, Wigan have publicly stated a desire to do it. Saints as you say have an owner who could afford it.

And why are our playing staff an investment? Theres only so much money we can spend promising jam tomorrow, we need to actually at some stage put the product on the pitch.

If paying out a 200k more for a name from RU brings in 1k on his debut, 100 extra season tickets he is pretty close to paying his extra value off. Warrington famously made money from paying Andrew Johns a fortune, their investment in him meant that they actually earned money to invest in these other areas, aswell as all the free publicity they got and not to mention the fact we got to see a big name player playing in our league.

That doesn't mean its sustainable in the same way that in a real business world Manchester City's spending wouldn't be sustainable. We need business models that work and I'm not sure that what you're suggesting would do that.



Agreed.



That's a fair point.

Thats fine when its Andrew Johns. There are no English RU names that would have the same effect. The biggest player you could sign would probably be say Wigan signing Chris Ashton back and would that bring the pie eaters flooding into the JJB to see the genius that is Englands best outside back in union, playing league?

If it's a case of paying out big money to get a big name in then go for Jonathan Thurston or Benji Marshall. If it's a RU player then it would have to be a case of going overseas, getting Dan Carter or someone in.

Financial Fair Play is the answer.

Exactly. Union are having the same trouble that League is having ie loads of good forwards but very little class in the way of backs. Why else are Union clubs poaching League backs? It's because they're having trouble developing their own. So instead of going looking for big names to throw cash at, why not pump that money into something more long term worthwhile?

Say several national Academy of Excellence style structures to help nurture and develop a bigger player pool?

Clubs want to spend more money on players. That's fine if there's enough quality to go round. But at the moment in this country there isn't.

Exactly. Just because players get paid more doesn't make them better.

I remember when Kevin Penny came through there were RU clubs after him and Warrington gave him a good deal to keep him in rugby league. You can bet if we hadn't come up with the goods to keep him everyone would have been saying it was a crying shame for the game to lose possibly the greatest talent since Offiah to have come out of rugby league, and that the money spent bringing a 30 odd year old Chris Hicks would have been better invested in Penny.

I think Manchester City show why salary caps are needed

I like to think of it like F1. If the cars werent restricted by rules then Ferrari, McLaren and Red Bull would be even more dominant than they already are as their money, which already funds far superior development anyway, would put them miles in front of all the other cars on the grid because they financially cannot keep up and require the help of the restrictions to stay moderately competitive.

For example:
British GP 2011
Gap between 1st and 19th (lowest placed finisher after retirements) 3 laps
British GP 1992 (some restrictions in place but not to the level of now) 1st and 16th gap was 4 laps

Now I know that might not sound a lot but 1 lap is HUGE in F1 so to have made it that much more competitive is exactly what the FIA are after.

And this is what the RFL are after but these things take time. Once the lower teams start to learn from the higher, richer teams how to develop cars/players depending on the sport then the sport will become closer.

I think the next step forward is to restrict the number of outside players allowed in a team not just foreign players for example I will use Wigan vs Wire (only other team I know about really)
Using the teams used in the last game between the 2 last season:

Warrington:
Riley -Academy
J Monaghan,- Overseas
Bridge - Bradford
Atkins - Wakefield
King - Overseas
Briers - Saints
Myler - Widnes
Morley - Lets just say elsewhere
M Monaghan - Overseas
Carvell - Again just elsewhere
Anderson - Overseas
Grix - Halifax
Cooper - Academy

Replacements:
Harrison - Academy
Clarke - Wigan
Mitchell - Academy
Blythe - Academy

Just 4 players that were grown by Wire themselves. However I think if they are there as long as Briers and Clarke was then maybe they should be allowed to be counted in the academy figure.

Wigan:
S Tomkins - Academy
Charnley - Academy
J Tomkins - Academy
Carmont - Overseas
Richards -Overseas
Deacon - Bradford
Finch - Oversea
Coley - Salford
Leuluai - Overseas/Quins
Lima - Overseas
Hansen - Overseas BUT our academy trained. There are arguments over this but if Man Utd bring a Welshman through their academy is he not Man Utd Academy trained? (Giggs )
Hoffman - Overseas
O'Loughlin - Academy

Replacements:
McIlorum - Academy
Prescott - Academy
Farrell - Academy
Hock - Academy


The reason, like I stated above, I chose Wire was because I know a little about their team and alot more compared to others in the league, for example picking on Hull or Hudds wouldve been better but wouldve required more research haha.

Anyway the point is that the sport requires time to develop Wigan have developed that team over many years Wire are only just now starting to build a team based on their own talent which is why they must buy in so many other players because their own are simply not ready yet or they simply havent learnt enough yet on running their academy/scouting in the same way Wigan can.

I know for a fact that my brothers friend is in the current crop of Wire youngsters (17 atm) and hes going to be a good player and theres better because I've seen it. Not meaning to compliment another team but Wire have big times ahead in their forwards if they nurture these guys properly. Wigan have known how to do this for years, as has Leeds and Saints and its the rest of the leagues time to start catch up and for me limiting the number of non-academy players in a team (in a 25 man squad) would be the best step to take rather than a salary cap. I think the salary cap should only be a last resort. Imagine a league where noone ever lost players to union or NRL. Imagine a league where Saints still had Graham and Eastmond. Wigan still had Ashton and the other youngsters from a couple years back like Thornley.

The kids are the future. NOT the salary cap.

Yes.

Other clubs have had long enough to sort themselves out finacially. If others clubs bring more money in then they should be entitled to spend more.