Cross-Forum-Discussion Round 5 2022

[NZWarriors.com]

	gREVUS - nzwarriors.com
	JOINED: .May 7, 2012 MESSAGES: 8,960 REACTIONS: 14,926

---

	BroncosFever - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .June 6, 2014 MESSAGES: 1,928 Reaction Score: 3,663

---

They will probably do us by 30 or so

To concede 70, I don’t know how Nathan Brown can go on

---

he survived 2 wooden spoons and some dickhead thought he would be good for the warriors. this is nothing. he'll blame individuals, forget he put them there and move on. its the team that i'm worried about

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	lynx000 - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .July 27, 2008 MESSAGES: 5,857 Reaction Score: 6,948

---

Every now and again you get a glimpse of the dominant half Ben Hunt should have been.

---

Thanks Nashy for the sig

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	BooKhaki - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 16, 2020 MESSAGES: 1,456 Reaction Score: 1,761

---

Paps re-signs for half or less of what other teams offer. Grant and Hughes re-sign on undisclosed amounts with no fanfare.

Manu re-signs for a little of half of what he was offered elsewhere. Walker was highly sought after but re-signs for about half of what he was likely offered.

Penrith lose no one important.

Of course, when you are a team that sucks, vultures just pick at your corpse because they know they aren't getting good players from the top teams, they all are amazingly unavailable but good players from teams that suck, easy pickings.

How can a salary cap work when you have players like Coates going to top teams for less than everyone else is offering because he wants success? The salary cap cannot be fair under these circumstances and let's not even get started on NRL-sponsored salary cap rorting with the Storm and their legal gambling fringe benefits?

Salary cap working y'all.

This comp somehow just keeps getting worse. There was nothing else on tonight after the AFL, I didn't even entertain watching this game. Anyone else a disillusioned fan? How are inconsistent and rage inducing refereeing and regular floggings good for the game?

And does the comp give fans of struggling teams hope? Nope, 'they just need to get better' and 'there is no subconscious bias but here are two examples of it happening.'

This would make sense, but Paps and Manu signed on for reportedly 800k+, and Grant was 1m+.

Thoughts like this make me want salaries to be made public like in American sports, so at least there is some truth behind opinions instead of complete guesswork.

---

 

[NZWarriors.com]

	gREVUS - nzwarriors.com
	JOINED: .May 7, 2012 MESSAGES: 8,963 REACTIONS: 14,926

---

	BooKhaki - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 16, 2020 MESSAGES: 1,456 Reaction Score: 1,761

---

This would make sense, but Paps and Manu signed on for reportedly 800k+, and Grant was 1m+.

Thoughts like this make me want salaries to be made public like in American sports, so at least there is some truth behind opinions instead of complete guesswork.

---

its like the forward pass rule though, the NRL could fix it, but they wat the drama and the headlines instead

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	BroncsFan - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .July 28, 2016 MESSAGES: 9,714 Reaction Score: 13,708

---

This would make sense, but Paps and Manu signed on for reportedly 800k+, and Grant was 1m+.

Thoughts like this make me want salaries to be made public like in American sports, so at least there is some truth behind opinions instead of complete guesswork.

Paps was reportedly re-signed for $650k... absolute bargain for a top 3 fullback that would normally go for over $1m.

I cant recall what Manu re-signed for, but Warriors were offering at least $1m and fullback (Walsh to 6). He chose to stay at rorters to play center with little fanfare around it

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	BooKhaki - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 16, 2020 MESSAGES: 1,458 Reaction Score: 1,765

---

Paps was reportedly re-signed for $650k... absolute bargain for a top 3 fullback that would normally go for over $1m.

I cant recall what Manu re-signed for, but Warriors were offering at least $1m and fullback (Walsh to 6). He chose to stay at rorters to play center with little fanfare around it

Quick google search and it's saying "3 years over 2million" So you'd have to guess he's on minimum 700k. This is slight unders for him, he'd probably get 850-1m on the open market, but you can understand someone taking unders to stay at a premiership winning club.

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	Sproj - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 5, 2013 MESSAGES: 34,725 Reaction Score: 35,998

---

Quick google search and it's saying "3 years over 2million" So you'd have to guess he's on minimum 700k. This is slight unders for him, he'd probably get 850-1m on the open market, but you can understand someone taking unders to stay at a premiership winning club.

As @BroncsFan said, Paps reportedly re-signed for 650k, we aren't just pulling this number from our butt (though the reporter might have been). The other points as mentioned in his post stand. And yes, every salary is guesswork but it was also reported Paps signed on for less because he had a head knock.

Regardless, it is interesting that top teams very rarely lose highly sought after players but bottom clubs struggle to retain them. Also, some players leave poor teams to go to better teams for less.

I am not blaming the players either, this is the way the system works and if I were them, I would be willing to take a bit less salary to stay at a club I like and to play in a winning culture. I don't know if I would be willing to sacrifice 400k+ a year for that though.

In any case, whether it is guesswork or not, it highlights the point of the discussion, the salary cap doesn't work. It is supposed to disperse talent across the competition. Well we currently have 2 teams that can win the comp unless injuries smash them.

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	BooKhaki - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 16, 2020 MESSAGES: 1,463 Reaction Score: 1,766

---

As @BroncsFan said, Paps reportedly re-signed for 650k, we aren't just pulling this number from our butt (though the reporter might have been). The other points as mentioned in his post stand. And yes, every salary is guesswork but it was also reported Paps signed on for less because he had a head knock.

Regardless, it is interesting that top teams very rarely lose highly sought after players but bottom clubs struggle to retain them. Also, some players leave poor teams to go to better teams for less.

I am not blaming the players either, this is the way the system works and if I were them, I would be willing to take a bit less salary to stay at a club I like and to play in a winning culture. I don't know if I would be willing to sacrifice 400k+ a year for that though.

In any case, whether it is guesswork or not, it highlights the point of the discussion, the salary cap doesn't work. It is supposed to disperse talent across the competition. Well we currently have 2 teams that can win the comp unless injuries smash them.

The only reporting I found was 3 years over 2 million, that's more than 650k.

The salary cap, while it isn't perfect, it does work. As you can see with so many people leaving Storm and Penrith. Storm have lost Bromwichx2, Smith, Kaufusi and likely Munster, and you think they should also lose Paps? Penrith have lost Laurie, Burton, Api, Capewell and Kikau and could lose more when a few of them come up after next year.

Penrith especially have developed young blokes and locked them in long term at the right time, instead of doing what Brisbane do and letting them all hit the open market and go into bidding wars. Certain clubs handle the cap better, and also have better coaching and development.

---

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Well we currently have 2 teams that can win the comp unless injuries smash them.

Or probably can still win it even if injury smashes them. Storm haven't missed their top prop Welch, Panthers were unbeaten even before Cleary returned.

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	Sproj - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 5, 2013 MESSAGES: 34,728 Reaction Score: 36,000

---

The only reporting I found was 3 years over 2 million, that's more than 650k.

The salary cap, while it isn't perfect, it does work. As you can see with so many people leaving Storm and Penrith. Storm have lost Bromwichx2, Smith, Kaufusi and likely Munster, and you think they should also lose Paps? Penrith have lost Laurie, Burton, Api, Capewell and Kikau and could lose more when a few of them come up after next year.

Penrith especially have developed young blokes and locked them in long term at the right time, instead of doing what Brisbane do and letting them all hit the open market and go into bidding wars. Certain clubs handle the cap better, and also have better coaching and development.

Let me simplify the point. I have no problem with Paps staying at Melbourne per se. I have no problem with Penrith stockpiling talent they have developed themselves, in fact I applaud them for it. I actually wish the NRL rewarded clubs who develop their own talent more. I have problems with players staying at clubs for WAY unders and then because of this (and other murky means) then being able to attract top end talent from struggling clubs as well.

The Melbourne Storms of this world should not be able to get a State of Origin playing Coates on unders from another club who developed them. The Roosters should not be allowed to poach whoever they want when they want, including trying to entice Haas from a club he has an existing deal with and then the media got on board in support of this.

Of course some teams manage the cap better than others but some of those same teams (Roosters, Storm) have outside cap advantages that other teams don't. What is the purpose of a cap if certain teams are allowed to work around it but others aren't?

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	BooKhaki - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 16, 2020 MESSAGES: 1,466 Reaction Score: 1,766

---

Let me simplify the point. I have no problem with Paps staying at Melbourne per se. I have no problem with Penrith stockpiling talent they have developed themselves, in fact I applaud them for it. I actually wish the NRL rewarded clubs who develop their own talent more. I have problems with players staying at clubs for WAY unders and then because of this (and other murky means) then being able to attract top end talent from struggling clubs as well.

The Melbourne Storms of this world should not be able to get a State of Origin playing Coates on unders from another club who developed them. The Roosters should not be allowed to poach whoever they want when they want, including trying to entice Haas from a club he has an existing deal with and then the media got on board in support of this.

Of course some teams manage the cap better than others but some of those same teams (Roosters, Storm) have outside cap advantages that other teams don't. What is the purpose of a cap if certain teams are allowed to work around it but others aren't?

I guess that's where the problem is, we don't know when a player takes way unders as all the contracts are guesswork, and then you need to consider 3rd party deals.

With the Coates deal, you're basically saying he shouldn't be allowed to go to a club he chooses for less money because it's not fair. That's taking away a players choice, he should absolutely be allowed to go to a better club for less money if he wants to. I'd be with you and complaining if Storm signed him for more money than what Brisbane offered, as that would be strange. But you can't stop a bloke taking less to try and better himself in a better system.

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	Sproj - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 5, 2013 MESSAGES: 34,730 Reaction Score: 36,000

---

I guess that's where the problem is, we don't know when a player takes way unders as all the contracts are guesswork, and then you need to consider 3rd party deals.

With the Coates deal, you're basically saying he shouldn't be allowed to go to a club he chooses for less money because it's not fair. That's taking away a players choice, he should absolutely be allowed to go to a better club for less money if he wants to. I'd be with you and complaining if Storm signed him for more money than what Brisbane offered, as that would be strange. But you can't stop a bloke taking less to try and better himself in a better system.

But again, contracts are guess work, did he really go on unders?

Anyway, let's just agree to disagree otherwise we will go around in circles.

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	BooKhaki - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 16, 2020 MESSAGES: 1,469 Reaction Score: 1,767

---

But again, contracts are guess work, did he really go on unders?

Anyway, let's just agree to disagree otherwise we will go around in circles.

IIRC, that's what was reported at the time. Brisbane offered him over 500k/yr and he took less.

It would be a much easier discussion to have with visible salaries, hopefully that happens in the near future.

---

 

[NZWarriors.com]

	Dixpat - nzwarriors.com
	JOINED: .February 3, 2014 MESSAGES: 2,131 REACTIONS: 4,727

---

Why not go the Polo way and give every player a points value in each position say 1-10 and allow clubs to pay them whatever they choose but the starting team for each week’s match cannot exceed say a total of 102 points.

Players points value would be reassessed each year against a specific set of criteria for that position.

The concept would need some fleshing out but should even teams on a week to week basis

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	Super Freak - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .January 25, 2014 MESSAGES: 30,582 Reaction Score: 17,679

---

Bunker officials should have been dropped, as well.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1518869795919204352

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	Sproj - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 5, 2013 MESSAGES: 34,756 Reaction Score: 36,032

---

Any chance of sacking all of them from every game?

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	Scorchie - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .March 16, 2008 MESSAGES: 2,746 Reaction Score: 3,013

---

It’s interesting how the narrative in the media was how great and awesome the Storm were, and not how damaging the 70-6 result was. It’s week 6/7 and a club is losing by 60+

Not good for the prosuct

---

 

[NZWarriors.com]

	wizards rage - nzwarriors.com
	JOINED: .April 18, 2016 MESSAGES: 6,596 REACTIONS: 17,489

---

	Scorchie - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .March 16, 2008 MESSAGES: 2,746 Reaction Score: 3,013

---

damaging the 70-6 result was.

---

70-10 mate. We’re almost twice as good in attack than what your stating

---

Smash em bro

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	Allo - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 28, 2012 MESSAGES: 8,215 Reaction Score: 6,603

---

	Dixpat - nzwarriors.com
	JOINED: .February 3, 2014 MESSAGES: 2,131 REACTIONS: 4,727

---

Why not go the Polo way and give every player a points value in each position say 1-10 and allow clubs to pay them whatever they choose but the starting team for each week’s match cannot exceed say a total of 102 points.

Players points value would be reassessed each year against a specific set of criteria for that position.

The concept would need some fleshing out but should even teams on a week to week basis

---

That’s a version similar to how the NRLW was run until this coming season. Each player was valued depending on representative caps from the previous few years and there was a cap of x-points for the whole squad.

There’s merit to the idea, so far as talent dispersion and giving fringe players and rookies a decent shot at playing, and stops clubs picking up premium players that are ‘unnecessary’ just because they can afford/underpay them.

But it has flaws at the same time in that a rookie can come from the clouds and become a marquee level player in a season and the club are forced to lose players to come under the points cap the next season, as opposed to having extra time with multi year deals at a set, sometimes sliding, but still known, value.

But overall with your idea, all you’re doing is removing the money limit and putting a subjective (to the criteria) value on how good that player is in that particular season.

You’ll have some players potentially moving clubs every season because their value could change drastically and the clubs can’t hold on to them. It also kills any value in developing players if they are forced out not even by being outbid, but by arbitrary values that change year on year

I know you’re talking about weekly teams and not squads, but it’s the same problem, just on a weekly basis.

It’ll keep players that deserve to play, if not start, off the field more and more because the coaches can’t make them all fit

---

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

	BooKhaki - broncoshq.com
	JOINED: .September 16, 2020 MESSAGES: 1,478 Reaction Score: 1,776

---

	Dixpat - nzwarriors.com
	JOINED: .February 3, 2014 MESSAGES: 2,131 REACTIONS: 4,727

---

Why not go the Polo way and give every player a points value in each position say 1-10 and allow clubs to pay them whatever they choose but the starting team for each week’s match cannot exceed say a total of 102 points.

Players points value would be reassessed each year against a specific set of criteria for that position.

The concept would need some fleshing out but should even teams on a week to week basis

---

That would stop a team putting out their best team each week, and I think that's a truly horrible concept.

---