Salary Cap

[ads]

[quote author=ads]
[quote author=L80]
You do a trade, and you go 4 years on less than $600 a week. First year you usually get under $400, sometimes even less than $300. And that's slogging it out 48 weeks a year, 6 days a week, 8-10 hr days.
And what's the minimum wage for a nrl squad player? 50k? I would take that for only training 5 or days a week for 2-3hrs in a flash, especially when there's an opportunity of earning hundreds of thousands a year for playing footy!! Also remembering the footy season is maybe 32 odd weeks at the most... 16 extra weeks off a year would be nice!

And does playing footy make a bloke completely unable to get a normal job like anyone else after they retire? They certainly have alot more time on their hands to study part time than the normal person doing it 2 or 3 nights a week after working 10 hrs.

Dead set, these guys sometimes forget how it is to live like the blokes sitting on the hill...

I'd say you'd look at this from perspective 1.
[/quote]

Look ads, its a fair enough sentiment, but thats all it is..sentiment. People talk about this like revenue is all that matters.

Ummmmmm......$90m from TV rights ummmm +/- player contracts +/- other stuff +/- marketing = what ???

Whats undeniably missing is a profit & loss statement. For gods sake, noone can say players deserve more of the pie when the size of the whole pie isnt known, let alone the gross profit portion of the pie, let alone the net profit portion of the pie.

So if anyone wants to weigh into the debate with a pie in hand i say OK, but do you actually know what your holding ?

And if anyone here thinks that the whole pie will become common knowledge amongst stakeholders down to fans because the NRL/News Limited think its a jolly good idea to provide it, then you have ****locks for brains.

No offence but these types of wayward theorisations are sheer fantasy.

[/quote]

I should have said in my post about perspective 1 or 2 that I am undecided which I support. I agree a profit/loss statement would be useful, as well where all the money is spent. And I agree the chances of that are so minimal.

But my post (not the one above where I've quoted someone else) but the post before that was talking about two 'philosphical' view points.

As long as we don't get into the American/Canadian sport thing of cancelling entire seasons due to strike action from players.

 

[Fluffy]

[quote author=ads]
[quote author=L80]
You do a trade, and you go 4 years on less than $600 a week. First year you usually get under $400, sometimes even less than $300. And that's slogging it out 48 weeks a year, 6 days a week, 8-10 hr days.
And what's the minimum wage for a nrl squad player? 50k? I would take that for only training 5 or days a week for 2-3hrs in a flash, especially when there's an opportunity of earning hundreds of thousands a year for playing footy!! Also remembering the footy season is maybe 32 odd weeks at the most... 16 extra weeks off a year would be nice!

And does playing footy make a bloke completely unable to get a normal job like anyone else after they retire? They certainly have alot more time on their hands to study part time than the normal person doing it 2 or 3 nights a week after working 10 hrs.

Dead set, these guys sometimes forget how it is to live like the blokes sitting on the hill...

I'd say you'd look at this from perspective 1.
[/quote]

Look ads, its a fair enough sentiment, but thats all it is..sentiment. People talk about this like revenue is all that matters.

Ummmmmm......$90m from TV rights ummmm +/- player contracts +/- other stuff +/- marketing = what ???

Whats undeniably missing is a profit & loss statement. For gods sake, noone can say players deserve more of the pie when the size of the whole pie isnt known, let alone the gross profit portion of the pie, let alone the net profit portion of the pie.

So if anyone wants to weigh into the debate with a pie in hand i say OK, but do you actually know what your holding ?

And if anyone here thinks that the whole pie will become common knowledge amongst stakeholders down to fans because the NRL/News Limited think its a jolly good idea to provide it, then you have ****locks for brains.

No offence but these types of wayward theorisations are sheer fantasy.

[/quote]

im hungry

 

[PEPSI]

on one hand we have country Rugby League, the breeding ground, the talent pool, the reason we kick Unions Back Side not getting enough finance, on the other side we have the millionaires of the game saying they should get paid more.

I know where i would be directing the excess and extra sponsorship funds.

50K for yound blokes playing reserve grade just starting in the game is good enough for me. AFL Rookies only get 25K and only when they play a senior first team game does their salary jump to 50K

 

[Dan]

[quote author=ads]
[quote author=L80]
You do a trade, and you go 4 years on less than $600 a week. First year you usually get under $400, sometimes even less than $300. And that's slogging it out 48 weeks a year, 6 days a week, 8-10 hr days.
And what's the minimum wage for a nrl squad player? 50k? I would take that for only training 5 or days a week for 2-3hrs in a flash, especially when there's an opportunity of earning hundreds of thousands a year for playing footy!! Also remembering the footy season is maybe 32 odd weeks at the most... 16 extra weeks off a year would be nice!

And does playing footy make a bloke completely unable to get a normal job like anyone else after they retire? They certainly have alot more time on their hands to study part time than the normal person doing it 2 or 3 nights a week after working 10 hrs.

Dead set, these guys sometimes forget how it is to live like the blokes sitting on the hill...

I'd say you'd look at this from perspective 1.
[/quote]

Look ads, its a fair enough sentiment, but thats all it is..sentiment. People talk about this like revenue is all that matters.

Ummmmmm......$90m from TV rights ummmm +/- player contracts +/- other stuff +/- marketing = what ???

Whats undeniably missing is a profit & loss statement. For gods sake, noone can say players deserve more of the pie when the size of the whole pie isnt known, let alone the gross profit portion of the pie, let alone the net profit portion of the pie.

So if anyone wants to weigh into the debate with a pie in hand i say OK, but do you actually know what your holding ?

And if anyone here thinks that the whole pie will become common knowledge amongst stakeholders down to fans because the NRL/News Limited think its a jolly good idea to provide it, then you have ****locks for brains.

No offence but these types of wayward theorisations are sheer fantasy.

[/quote]

And with george Rose in the team you better be careful with any pies!