well that is where you are going wrong.

Players would be worth the same amount of points to any club trying to buy them, the only club who would benefit from any exemption or dispensation are the club players are currently at.

Yes, I'm aware of that. My point still stands that the best players in each group will go to the club paying the highest wages. Short term wage inflation, long term clubs taking financial gambles as the only way to try to be successful.

again, clubs would be limited in what players they could bring in, so they couldnt bring in more than one or two of each group in each position, this would spread the talent around rather than concentrate it.

I would also argue there isnt a huge difference in quality between the players in each group, i doubt clubs are going to complain because there club only got Gareth Ellis when they could have got Sam Burgess for a bit more money, or they only got JJB rather than Gilmour

It wouldn't spread the talent around because this would apply to all clubs and they could only bring in players whose quality matches their spending ability.



Or if they only got James Roby rather than rlBob Beswickrl?

yes, it would apply to all clubs, so the bigger clubs wouldnt be able to hold onto the better players, It would become for instance a poor use of the points cap for leeds to be spending 12 points on 3 wingers, meaning one of Donald, Hall, or Smith would need to leave and join a different club, leaving the way open for a smaller club to pick one of them up

there is no cap, ever, anywhere that would legislate for poor recruitment

Ah but Smokey, in your example you highlighted your point based on a 50% increase when I said 10. If Wire are paying King 150k he would become 165k on the cap, not that much of a biggie. Where the system would really reward clubs would be coupled with my homegrown ruling of a further ten percent discount totalling 20%.

Where this really works is that overseas players arent directly too expensive and young players arent forced to stay at one club due to being expensive on someone elses cap but when coupling the two together - Homegrown V Overseas, the club is encouraged to take the homegrown player.
That and we can increase payments to players without really increasing the true monetary cap.

Your system values them as equals. Which is insane. Playing for any international team other than Australia, New Zealand or England would have serious repercussions for a player's chances of a SL contract.
What about the vast majority of Super League players who would be classed as 'experienced' but without representative honours? The players who make up the majority of SL teams. What's going to spread their talent around the league?

Who's talking about star players? What could be a star player for Salford, may well just be a squad man for Leeds. Therefore currently it is quite feasible that Salford may offer more money than Leeds to a player due to the total cap on both clubs spending. Under the points system they would both cost the same amount of points but Leeds could pay that player a damn sight more. How's that spreading the talent around the clubs?



A player would cost the same points for either team in the example above, where would there need to be give for Leeds?



If you understood how the cap in that article works you'd know that the points a player is worth decreases after a certain length of time at a club. So a squad player could sit there getting more money with the club losing points off his total after a length of time. Have you read the article?




Who's talking about not getting a game? Squad players get all sorts of game time but aren't classed as essential players?



No different to a monetary cap then?

i was directly addressing a 50% increase.

I would agree with taxing overseas players and exempting youngster, i would be very very much in favour of it

that has already been addressed in that there would need to be a separate system for those outside the tier one nations.

they would naturally need to move, having more youngsters and fewer experienced SL players would allow more 'star' players. It would be up to each club to find a balance they were comfortable with

This would be exactly the same. Unless now you are saying that leeds are going to start spending huge amounts of money on players they would class as no better than a 'squad' man


Because they can only fit a certain amount of players under the cap, when signing one it is likely they would need to release someone else unless they had spare capacity

that would be for a maximum of two points for international players, after 5 years service. I highly doubt a team is going to pay over the market rate to keep a player for 5 years so that they can gain a maximum of two points after the fifth year

ok, so why would the pay a shed load of money and 4 points on a player they didnt really want?

except in the monetary system, according to you, Smaller clubs need to pay more to attract poorer quality players, entrenching the bigger clubs position and making it easier for them to attract more better players.

As SBR has said, there will be players of different ability within the same points category, would Leeds pay more for these players if they wanted them, of course they would. But with your system, there would be no limit on what they could pay them.



So no change to now then, apart from the fact that the teams that can pay the most can have the pick of the best players within each point range because they can pay them more.



*edit* scrap that comment, I've re read your post 2.9453125:10