Tell that to the fans of saints during the 80s

Yeah Koukash seems keen to invest in the youth set up as well, although this often gets missed with all the talk of big name players.

oh yes i remember when we bought our current players like Roby, Lomax, Swift, Percival, Jones, Makinson, Wheeler?
Let alone the ones we've lost like Graham and Eastmond.

All of those took years to develop. Yes you buy the odd star, but a balanced team is better with a large proportion of locally based players, bu this takes time and patience

And its the best think he's doing, imo. It will bring long term sustainable success to Salford.

Look who Salford have brought through over recent years, myler, turner, ratchford! All taken by the bigger clubs! So should the smaller clubs be expected now with the threat or relegation to plow money into youth only for the likes of Leeds, Saints, Warrington to cherry pick the talent we have produced! Now with relegation back and even before then is it viable for small clubs to put a large chunk of there money into youth development when doing so could result in relegation and having them young stars cherry picked. IMO it's only the bigger clubs who can keep there young stars! Leeds,Saint, Warrington, Wigan know this that's why this 100,000 homegrown player rule is so much more beneficial to the top clubs!

I agree, although people seem to think you can only do one or the other, when in reality you can still go after big names and produce your own players as well.

We had 8 years with no relegation for precisely that reason, the saints and wigans of this world can't take all the talent, losing 1 (or 3 in this case in how many years?) shouldn't mean a youth system is invalid.

Also, saints had 9 out of the 17 players in the first two games as home grown players, 4 from abroad and 4 from other clubs - or 10 from the 19 home grown, 5 from abroad and 4 from other clubs, it's hardly like were packed with talent from other teams youth!

Bringing in chase and smith means Sneyd is forced out of the club - if he signs for cas and then takes off, would he of been cherry picked as well?

Spot on. Leeds have won 6 titles, 3 World Club Challenges and topped the league twice in the last 10 seasons without spending the full cap in any of those seasons.

Its no surprise the 3 most successful clubs have the 3 most successful youth setups

Still think the salary cap tax is better.

In that if club A wants to spend say, £150k over the existing cap, they have to pay every other club not spending over the cap a fee of say a third of it (i.e. £50k).

Therefore, it gives clubs a decision - spend lower, below the cap and gain financially or spend over to keep toe to toe with Koukash and pay other clubs, who can in turn strengthen, offer more and drag the quality of the competition up.

This golden ticket idea is nonsensical and I think the marquee player would cause issues in the dressing room, particularly if the marquee player doesn't pull his weight or isn't value for money.

but it is depressing that the London conveyer belt has been binned just as it was starting to deliver the goods.

I'd remove the cap. If clubs want to overspend then so be it, but I'd make the penalty for going bust immediate demotion to the 3rd tier and 2 years of no promotion for them!

What this idea will do is bring more money into circulation within the game that would not be there otherwise and that can only be a good thing for all clubs.
If for whatever reason a club decides not to use its ticket but would rather sell it and use the extra generated funds to expand for example their youth academy then where is the negative in that.
As it stands only a small handful of clubs have a successful academy structure.Reason being they are the only ones who can afford it.This then gives them an unfair advantage because of the dispensations they get on their salary cap.It is a self perpetuating cycle where the clubs with the academy get stronger and all the other clubs fall further behind.Its alright saying well in that case you should improve your academy but the reality is that very few clubs can afford to do that and compete with the big clubs.
If this Golden Ticket idea helps the smaller clubs financially then wheres the harm in giving it a go.
Allowing clubs to have a Marquee Signing will generate extra revenues for all clubs which is surely for the good of everyone.
Finally where was all the debate and uproar when Wigan were given the dispensation to keep Tomkins a few years ago because he was considered a Marquee name in the game that the RFL wanted to keep within SL.And this at a club that has one of the best academies within the game.

But Sneyd played nearly 2 seasons for us, he didn't really impress so do get experience he's gone out on loan, ( you know like teams have been doing for years.

And yes we had 8 years of no relegation to bring through youth and when lower teams have, they've been poached it's happened to all the lower teams, you simply can't be successful from purly youth you need the world class players beside them also to bring them young guys through.
The FOUR teams that have won the super league in the last 18 years wouldn't have done so without their big money signings weather that be Australian or English.

And ask saints fans in the 80s that's well over 20 years ago! Try 1976 for the last successful period of my clubs history.

Barmy idea this golden ticket thing. I do understand the thinking behind it, but it's just barmy.

You've just contradicted yourself? You understand it but it's barmy? Normally when something's barmy you do t understand it.

Ans is it as barmy as the 2b12s 3 8ths debolical.

It hasn't been binned, it can be as effective with a competative London in the 2nd tier



Thats just madness. What would it do to a club like Salford if the Dr was allowed to spend wht he wanted, but then got board in 3 yrs and just walked away?

If the homegrown 100k rule wasn't in force Leeds would have been miles over the cap.

all the current rules in place are to benefit the current top teams.

Are you trying to say Man Utd didnt make big signings? They spent a hell of a lot of money relative to other clubs, they do now, and they certainly did then.

You sound like a united fan in 2009 but what if Mansour get bored and walks away? 5 years massive crowd increase brand new training/academy facility current world class team and 2 trophies later...... Nope still not board.

I completely disagree that clubs such as Wakefield, Bradford and London couldn't attract marquee signings. Local businessman/businesses (who aren't currently commercial partners) might be much more inclined to sponsor/invest the vast majority of a players wage for the likes of Cameron Smith, Billy Slater, James Graham, SBW etc.

No it can't. Lets not be silly.

What if Salford spend the full cap and the Dr got bored and wanted out in 3 years? Are we pretending that as long as Salford spend this arbitrary sum they will be ok? When all evidence is to the contrary?

Lol


It's not in force. It's a proposal for next season

There is, already, and has been for a fair old while, provision for developed players and long serving players to receive dispensations on the cap.

When Dr Koucash first got involved he asked for Salford to be able to spend over the cap, not to gain an advantage on the big clubs, but simply so he could spend the same as the big clubs were actually spending on salaries.

Slightly off topic, but what would people think about a home grown central contract?

I've read through the topic and Salford seem to be criticised by some fans for wanting to spend big money rather than developing their own. However Salford fans quite rightly argue they HAVE developed their own but just got cherry picked.

Saints,Leeds Wugan always get bigges up for having outstanding junior development (which is correct) however some of the bottom teams have excellent junior development, Bradford, London, Cas (who IMO are one of the best junior developers) the problem is the bottom teams develop the juniors, then Leeds, Sainrs, Wire come a long and pick a Ratchford, Bateman, LMS.

Your junior development looks a damn lot better when your got the cream of your junior talent and a couple from other teams.

Each team could have one HG player to be Centrally contracted. They have to be in the ETS or Knights squad. For example Kieran Dixon. London could apply to the RFL for Dixon to be centrally contracted. The RFL could pay up to £100k plus whatever London want to pay him. This way London are rewarded for developing players, they don't spend all their time and effort to see him sign for one of the bigger clubs just as London are starting to reap the rewards. Each club could have £100k from the RFL to Centrally contract one player. The RFL would only have to set aside £1.2 million.

Thoughts?

I was very pro cap but the game is stagnating and with the reintroduction of promotion and relegation this really needs to be looked at again.

Marquee player rule - not for me I think it just creates too much focus on one player when this is after all a team game.

Golden ticket - I can see where koucash is going with this but the influence clubs will have on each other in this situation if buying others is allowed isnt healthy.

Personally I think we should consider getting rid of the cap and having 25 man squads plus youngsters and let the market find its level again.



It'll never happen with certain chairman now, but we have capacity to grow the game via attendance and much better TV deals by improving the product on the pitch.