Re: Rumours thread. : Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:13 pm  

says in paper today we are big admirers of salford prop ray cashmere not a bad player

Re: Rumours thread. : Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:33 pm  

Father Jack wrote:

says in paper today we are big admirers of salford prop ray cashmere not a bad player

He's too soft

Re: Rumours thread. : Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:27 am  

The Chief wrote:

In the same vein, a great pack with average outside backs will win you nothing.

There is no reason why we can't have both. I've seen how much impact quality props like Ward, Fairleigh, Britt and Jammer can have on your team but that has also been combined with a Newlove, Gibbs, Lyon and Gidley.

There's one huge reason we can't have both. The "full stop" kind of reason - The Salary Cap. In a league such as SL where talent is at a premium rather ten-a-penny, unless you strike lucky and sign a team of Jamie Lyonesque players with mesmerising skills and absolute application who play purely for the game rather than they money it's impossible to hire a great pack and a great back line AND stay under the salary cap.

Take South Sydney this year - one of the best packs in the comp in the NRL but the backs are inferior to other teams. They will end up winning nothing.

Different competition. Different dynamics. The Australians have a huge talent pool to pick from, which means it's impossible for a select group of players to hold the clubs to ransom (as has often been the case in Britain). An NRL club can afford to hire 13 good players because there are so MANY good players undercutting each other in order to find work. If your prize winger bangs on the chairman's table and demands a 40% raise you can afford to phuck him off because you know there are three or four other as talented or potentially as talented players always available. Salaries go down (relatively rather than absolutely) and it becomes easier to finance a good team without falling foul of the salary cap.

Re: Rumours thread. : Sat Apr 17, 2010 7:43 am  

Codarmysaint wrote:

or, we could sign another marquee aussie centre, who will see no ball and in the meantime, leave Graham to struggle on AGAIN for another season with no help.

Shenton is much better than Gidleys current level of ability. if we can get him on a cheaper wage, bonus!. However, hes nailed on for Wigan anyway.

And we seem to think he is nailed on for you??

Re: Rumours thread. : Sat Apr 17, 2010 7:48 am  

wiganers wrote:

And we seem to think he is nailed on for you??

Well someone on here knows his GF very well and shes told them hes going to sign for wigan.

Re: Rumours thread. : Sat Apr 17, 2010 7:59 am  

Mugwump wrote:

There's one huge reason we can't have both. The "full stop" kind of reason - The Salary Cap. In a league such as SL where talent is at a premium rather ten-a-penny, unless you strike lucky and sign a team of Jamie Lyonesque players with mesmerising skills and absolute application who play purely for the game rather than they money it's impossible to hire a great pack and a great back line AND stay under the salary cap.

Different competition. Different dynamics. The Australians have a huge talent pool to pick from, which means it's impossible for a select group of players to hold the clubs to ransom (as has often been the case in Britain). An NRL club can afford to hire 13 good players because there are so MANY good players undercutting each other in order to find work. If your prize winger bangs on the chairman's table and demands a 40% raise you can afford to phuck him off because you know there are three or four other as talented or potentially as talented players always available. Salaries go down (relatively rather than absolutely) and it becomes easier to finance a good team without falling foul of the salary cap.

How do you explain the multiple Salary Cap breaches? Especially the phenomenal amount that Canterbury over spent by.

Re: Rumours thread. : Sat Apr 17, 2010 12:41 pm  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

How do you explain the multiple Salary Cap breaches? Especially the phenomenal amount that Canterbury over spent by.

Stupidity. Paying over the odds. Look, I'm not suggesting you can buy the entire Australian test team and stay under the cap. But it is possible to buy a very good one, as recent NRL winning teamsheets suggest.

Re: Rumours thread. : Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:57 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

Stupidity. Paying over the odds. Look, I'm not suggesting you can buy the entire Australian test team and stay under the cap. But it is possible to buy a very good one, as recent NRL winning teamsheets suggest.

The same principal you were on about before where you can replace a good player with another good player for less money is what Leeds have done for years, if you've got a good academy then you can do this, that's why Leeds squad has been the strongest and deepest in the league for years. They've brought a lot of good players into there team through there academy for a lot less money than the people they were replacing.

The clubs with the best academies, Leeds, Wigan, yourselfs and (maybe) Wire are the ones who benefit from the cap the most when managed properly.

We didn't do it well for a long time, now we're sorting it out. Until clubs learn that you have to rely on your academy more and more and invest into them, the standard is going to be poor in the league.

Re: Rumours thread. : Sat Apr 17, 2010 3:35 pm  

inside_man wrote:

We didn't do it well for a long time, now we're sorting it out. Until clubs learn that you have to rely on your academy more and more and invest into them, the standard is going to be poor in the league.

Yeah but the clubs still sign players from other clubs and those players aren't good enough. If you look at the NRL as an example you could take 15 squad players away from each side and they would be just as strong come the start of the following season. They have bigger, stronger, more athletic players in the junior and amateur systems over there.

If you put all your salary cap money into your academy you still wouldn't come up with that much with the guff that plays League at junior level. Go and watch the average kids game, they are all sparrow legged geeks.

What league needs to do is get into the schools at a young age, as young as 7 or 8 and spot the potential athletes and persuade them they are the future Greg Inglis rather than the future Lionel Messi. And they need to do it on a wider scale. The M62 nature of Rugby League means that 95% of the potential world class players the country could produce never play the game.

Re: Rumours thread. : Sat Apr 17, 2010 3:41 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Yeah but the clubs still sign players from other clubs and those players aren't good enough. If you look at the NRL as an example you could take 15 squad players away from each side and they would be just as strong come the start of the following season. They have bigger, stronger, more athletic players in the junior and amateur systems over there.

If you put all your salary cap money into your academy you still wouldn't come up with that much with the guff that plays League at junior level. Go and watch the average kids game, they are all sparrow legged geeks.

What league needs to do is get into the schools at a young age, as young as 7 or 8 and spot the potential athletes and persuade them they are the future Greg Inglis rather than the future Lionel Messi. And they need to do it on a wider scale. The M62 nature of Rugby League means that 95% of the potential world class players the country could produce never play the game.

Thats what I meant really! Aus has all these good players that they can replace existing ones with because every club has good players coming through. At the minute here theres only 3/4/5 clubs producing good youngsters and this leads to not enough to be spread out across the league. We might not have the world class youngsters but we need to get the general level of skills across the league up first.