Exactly. Having a marquee spot available though is not the same as having money available under the cap.

I think a lot of people are still struggling to grasp that concept.

Correct

And if we paid 2.2m last year with Tomkins and George getting say 150k each above their salary cap value (guessing) then when Tomkins leaves we only have his salary cap value available (100k) plus any money offset by nominating a different marquee (so if Farrell is on 175 then if we nominate him we have 75k available) not the 300 Sam got.

So I theory we are still paying up to the salary cap max and have 2 marquees but overall be paying less playing wages.

I suspect the bigger cut backs will come off the field though in the back room etc.

Another cold hard fact for me is that in 2016 and 2017 seasons in particular we were awful to watch and some of the fans we lost may never comeback and I think that is why a few people, including myself, were hoping for a signing that would grab the headlines and hopefully be a major coup as an addition to the squad.

I love it when we bring the kids through and long may it continue however, having the odd "glamour" signing with the skill set to match does get the fans taking and adds that extra bit of hopefulness and excitement to a new season.

A I've said previously I'm not anti Sammut and as long as he wears a cherry white shirt he will get my support however, its still a bit of an anti climax me after some of the Widdop rumours were going around.

Does a marquee player really have a BIG effect on the attendance?

Wire had one last year I think their attendances went down.

Saints went up by just over 1% but if you factor in they had the Good Friday game at home and another home derby v Wigan in the "Super 8's" the reality is that they probably flat lined.

Wigans dropped by 13% but you can hardly say we were poor to watch for most of last season.

I dont think there's 1 answer.
But I do agree that a big marquee signing will only have a short lived/limited effect. It's not helped other teams as you say.
The ageing fan base is an issue I think and I don't think we have done the best we could in building the younger element up.
There's the financial aspect and although I believe that Wigan ticket prices are fantastic there is generally a shortage of spare cash for younger families and with all the financial issues currently affecting us then being in a cash strapped area affects us a lot.

The other thing, and I appreciate this is very subjective and no "facts" sit behind this is the general attitude of a lot of our fan base.
We seem intent on running everything down to the "N'th" degree.
I'm not saying there aren't issues, but in general the club is as well run now and as successful as it has been for the last 25years, yet if you looked at message boards, Facebook, Twitter the loudest Wigan fans have portrayed a club in crisis.
And I do believe it has demoralised and eaten away at any feel good factor we may have had at the turn of the previous decade.

As I said the other day and have you have said we need that to turn it around, constantly portraying perceived negatives and almkst ignoring the many good things the club are doing isn't helping us.
We need to get the good messages and stories out there and the fans have a big part to play in this.

I/We did what we did in 2010/11 (flags) and the feel good factor lifted everyone and the club, without getting into a whole argument over that there needs to be something to replace that, I'm not sure what that should be but rather than being pessimistic about the new season I'm absolutely desperate to watch these young lads coming through wells/partington/paisley/mullen, our new signings (yes hardaker) bullock, hankinson, sammut and I still class greenwood as a new signing.
Plus gildart/budgie/davies/marshall/escare/faz etc.
We've a hundred things to be grateful for and yes a couple of things need working in, but anyone would think it's the other way round.

We need to get that feel good factor back and a change of coach, a marquee signing, attractive rugby were just some of the reasons given by those who have stayed away, the club have done some of that but I feel for a lot they were excuses rather than reasons.
Butbthe club also need to understand even if they are then that is the paying publics perogative and they need to win them back.

If we were to sign Jonathan Thurston, yes. If we just give Williams a pay rise and make him our marquee, no.

Well given that a wage demand for that type of player iscompletely out of anyone's range in the UK I.e. of we were to go for Shaun Johnson it would be practically double what we paid a Sam Tomkins and it would count nearly double on the cap, what's wrong with giving a George Williams a marquee that's about half to a 3rd of what a Shaun Johnson would be?
Putting aside what some keyboard experts think he's an England international, would walk into every SL team and was wanted by some NRL club's and will be again as his current deal starts to run down.

And Given that he'll be on around a 3rd to half of what a Shaun Johnson would want and counts about half what Shaun Johnson would cost on salary cap how do you reckon we would financially make that work?
We'd be about 400k a year more worse off and we'd have to lose another 75k off the salary cap to get him in as his dispensation wouldn't be as good?
Another 400k is around 2000 extra speccies on top of the 600k currently lost equals another 3k speccies required.
Until we get that 5k back and start averaging north of 15k then we really need to be more pragmatic.
From 2000-2004 (perceived by many as the glory years of suoer league) when we signed Matthew johns, Adrian lam, Steve renouf etc our home average was barely above 11 thousand!

When signing a Trent Barrett it increased our average by 1500 (helped by having 2 x 22k and 24k saints attendances in the same year) yet the year after with only 1 x saints game we were back at the same level before we signed him.

Since 2012 the crowds have been going down by 500 a year and we've lost around 3k, most other club's have shown decreases but maybe not as much.

Marquee overseas not only being financially risky is only a tiny part of the answer.

Depends who the marquee player is I suppose.
I never said we were poor last season but the 2 years previously we were downright woeful.

We need to stimulate interest in new supporters. You and I are ST holders of many years so we don't need any motivating to buy a new one each year but to get people who have never been or are lapsed supporters a real top marquee player is one potential route in increasing the age/mix of the fan base.

Absolutely nothing wrong with promoting an existing player to marquee status. It doesn't give the same excitement as signing a NEW big Aussie name though, that's all I'm saying.

And signing a new name marquee Aussie isn't a guarantee that all will go well or it will bring crowds in which has been proved many times.

On previous threads people have asked who's the best players we've had in 30 years

Best prop - Andy Platt
Best 2nd row - Dennis Betts
Best halfback - Gregory and Edwards were top of the answers.

I'm sure if we went

Best full back -rads and Tomkins would be there or thereabouts
Best loose forward - farrell/lockers would be in the frame along with Hanley
Best hooker - dermott/Newton would be at the top of most people's lists.

Where do they all come from?

Now before people start throwing gene miles/bell/Barrett/renouf or henry paul out there.

The games/cards have changed, not necessarily for the better imo but it has.

And when it comes to 600/700k per year players were out the running.
Do we want to risk 300ks on Tyrone Roberts, Jamie sandow, Blake Austin? Which realistically is about the top we could afford
Even Leeds this year with their acquisitions are taking risks (although merrin I think is a quality purchase).
And would any of those put 2/3k on the gates purely because of their signature?
And those signatures and 2ks would only just about cover their cost and has been proved it doesn't guarantee it will happen or keep those fans.

Promotion of and inspiring of our youth and our own players in terms of making them star names is something we should be focussing on.
Making gildart, Burgess, Manfredi, Williams, Davies, Farrell and the next generations coming through household names rather than making out that these players are 2nd or 3rd best and not worth the money they get is also something we should do at club level and "Game wide".

Again, not the full answer, but part of dozens of things that need to be done.

The overall strength of the game and feeling like you’re watching a top quality product will have the biggest bearing on attendances. I’m somebody who said I felt a Widdop style signing could put bums on seats but that will only happen over a longer period if your side is playing good rugby against other good teams.

Castlefords style of play in 2017 got everyone praising them and they achieved that with some players you’d probably class as journeymen much like Sammut. Their average attendance that year was just over 9,500 in comparison to the seasons either side where it was around the 7,800 mark. Winning helps of course and it was new for Cas to be winning so many games whilst playing attractive rugby but if we could play a more exciting brand then I’m sure there’s no reason why we couldn’t get the crowds up.

You seem to be picking things up that I've not said or intimated. I'm not looking for a row, all I'm saying is that a marquee signing of Thurston would put more bums on seats than a wage increase for Williams. Nothing more, nothing less. At no point have I said Matty Johns is better than Shaun Edwards or Matty Bowen was better than Sam Tomkins... And I've also not said that Thurston is a realistic target. All I've said is that a big name, new marquee signing would put bums on seats. I've also not said that a £500K Aussie would put enough bums on seats to cover their wage. All I've said, and I've said it a few times, is that crowds would increase with a top, top, Aussie signing.

By top top Aussie you can’t mean the likes of Thurston or Cronk. Little left of their careers and wouldn’t IMHO add much to us.

To put “bums on seats” you’d be looking at a top Kiwi or Aussie. Players like Shaun Johnson, Jason Tamaulolo (sp), Andrew Fifita, Valentine Holmes, James Tedesco, Boyd Cordner, the Trbojevic brothers, Kodi Nikorima.

As good as players Thurston and Cronk are or were; I just don’t think they’d be as effective or as good over in SL at this stage of their careers and we’d be better off spending the money elsewhere. No doubt they’d be over on marquee wages and I wouldn’t have thought it to be worth it.

The reality is that list of Aussies/Kiwi’s/Tongan’s will never come over here, especially at this stage of their careers. To rely on a signing to put bums on seats is irresponsible IMHO and a sign of poor marketing.

Crowds would increase if we let everyone in for free.

Equally unsustainable

But if we're throwing ideas out that don't require any kind of logic and long term wont work, then feel free.

Just don't be surprised if someone picks holes in those ideas.