Because salary caps don't work to distribute talent, they only limit it. Rather than distribute success it entrenched it. Whether you are bill Gates or the owner of bobs used cars, unless you take over one of the big 4 clubs you are a generation away from success however much you spend off the field

Come on Smokey, just because you don't agree with the salary cap don't be daft. You know that isn't true.

It's not just that IMO. It's about the whole club set up and facilities etc. Leeds are a very well run club, probably the best in this country. St Helens, Wigan and Warrington are all clubs with a good set up and good facilities and a larger fan base. The best example of this is Hull. They haven't won a lot in the last 10 years, haven't challenged recently but have still attracted bigger names.

I'm not sure what the salary cap is meant to do these days. It was introduced to try and prevent reckless clubs from overspending and going bankrupt by limiting player wages to a percentage of turnover. Now it's just a set maximum with a load of exemptions for home developed players and the marquee rule I suppose it is meant to be a leveller. It works to a certain extent.

It's no coincidence that the teams that have won the majority of the trophies recently have the best youth development which IMO is the key to success.

Disprove it then. Show me examples.

It doesn't work in Super League like the NRL because the lower placed clubs aren't of the stature of those at the top. You would be mad to move from Leeds to Wakefield for example. Moving from state of the art facilities and 16,000 crowds every week to park facilities and 3,000 fans in a dilapidated stadium. Not only does it not work from higher place to lower placed, it's incredibly rare to see players still wanted by their clubs move between the top 4/5 clubs either.

That and the fact that Super League aren't monitoring or ensuring compliance with the salary cap. This WILL come out in autobiographies over the next 20 years, when players playing during the Super League era become distanced enough from the sport and from the possibility of having to pay money back. Gifts, jobs in third party companies for family members, housing improvements, payments after departure from the club from third party companies, all absolutely impossible to trace and the RFL aren't even attempting to. The dirty dealings of clubs like Wigan are out there in autobiographies already, Sean Long's for example mentions Wigan offering him brown paper bags stuff with cash. The fact a salary cap came in won't make this kind of off-the-books transaction more rare, it would make it even more useful to both club and player.

The salary cap was meant to be a system that levelled the playing field so all teams could compete equally as well as preventing clubs from overspending.The problem with that is that it massively favours the already well established clubs that have the large fan bases and the well organised youth structures.With the extra spending power that the salary cap exemptions give for home produced talent it just increases the gap between the established clubs and the rest.
Its OK saying that the other clubs should improve their own youth structures and facilities to the same level as the big clubs but as Warrington have shown even with their spending power this can take over 10 years before you start to see any real talent coming through so what chance do the clubs with smaller financial muscle really have of ever catching up.The big clubs will still attract all the best youth talent,still win all the trophies between them and the prize money that goes with them and so the gap just continues to grow.
As for the salary cap being a means of preventing clubs from overspending i think you can throw that out the window now that the threat of relegation is back in the mix.As was recently witnessed in the Middle 8s competition the SL clubs under threat threw a lot of resources at survival and 2016 will likely see a lot more of the same for the teams threatened with playing in the middle 8s.The consequences of relegation to players jobs and club staff is just so great that the gamble has to be taken.

So hypothetically ask yourself what would be the consequences if the salary cap was scrapped.Would the likes of Leeds,Wigan,Saints or Warrington suddenly go on a mad spending spree and throw their highly successful business models out the window in an attempt to win trophies that they are already winning on a regular basis,Dr Koukash with Tim Sheens help has already seen the error of his ways in trying to buy success and come out publicly saying those days are gone and why would he continue pumping millions into a system that hasnt worked anyway.
We have to accept that the guys running their respective clubs are not idiots and know how best to run their own clubs without ruining them.
OK so if there was no salary cap then people will say that the big clubs will benefit the most and continue to win everything but that is already happening anyway so whats the harm of relaxing the salary cap and seeing if allowing clubs to run their own finances and maybe bringing in some real overseas talent that would benefit the whole game rather than the run of the mill,2nd tier,past their sell by date or looking for one last payday type of player we currently recruit from overseas.

Have you not heard of Kyle Amor ?

He came from Leeds (albeit as a fringe player) to Wakefield and progressed very well at the small town club and was then signed by Saints (who even paid for his signature).

The big 4 will dominate the game for years to come as they are able to hoover up most of the quality youngsters.
Of course, they don't all start life at Wigan, Saints, Leeds etc, Amor being a great example.
Although he is thought of as a Leeds junior, he is of course Cumbrian, which is a fair walk from Leeds.

Wigan have their welsh "academy" to allow them to bring on more "home grown" juniors.

The service area's were supposed to allow club to reap the rewards of helping "local" juniors to advance into the pro game but, this system doesn't actually work as it was set out to do and of course, if any quality players do make it at the smaller clubs, cash speaks louder than words and it's not difficult for the big boys to dominate in this area.

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.