201 replies to this topic

[The Parksider]

Warrington were a club on the up prior to Moran assuming majority control (although he was involved for a few years prior). There is no doubt though that his money helped, but it was certainly coupled with decent business acumen within the club. Pretty much one without the other is not far off useless.

Well I take your point Dave but only up to a point.

[Rascal Bongo Stork]

I’m split on this one – the problem is that if we allow clubs to spend a £1m on a player or two on 5 year contracts, what happens when the rich backer gets bored and goes elsewhere? The club struggles and has to try and sell players to survive – I remember Warrington picking Jonathan Davies up on this kind of thing!

I do think that within reason we should look to do something to keep our top players though.

that's a danger and one that has happened to more than one football club but we have RL clubs going #### up or threatening to on a regular basis so might as well let some sugar daddy have his fun for a while. It could really start a buzz within the sport though and in the media and public consciousness outside of the regular RL fans.
Plus if one owner starts doing it then it might attract someone else with a load of dosh to buy another club and do the same. Some rich men love the kick of being in the spotlight and the adulation they get splashing the cash on a sports team - the Premier League is for the mega rich nowadays - that leaves a lot of multi millionaires out there with a hankering to be loved by the great unwashed. Come to RL rich dudes, we'll love you!*
I think it's more than worth the gamble - the sport needs something to get us rolling again and maybe Mr Koukash is the start of it.

* - well, a lot of people will hate your guts and RL Meltdown will be kept very busy but hey,dats showbusiness

[Dave T]

On the face of it, I think Phil Veivers can probably feel a little bit aggrieved, but the reality is we have no idea at all about what is going on inside the Salford club. None of us know who the influential people are, who the people who are resistant to change are, who the secret underated leaders are.

Unless you are right in the thick of it, you cannot have any kind of informed opinion on these kind of matters.

Bloody hell Steve if our opinions need to informed then we are buggered!

[tonyXIII]

I have not been a supporter of the "spend as much as they want" philosophy in the past as it has led to perceived inequality and, generally speaking, most of us seem to be in favour of a level playing field. Now that my club is the one with lots of money (apparently), it would be rather hypocritical to change my view. However, if the salary cap is now seen to be holding the game back, perhaps we should look again. I do want a fair competition, though, not one where one or two mega-rich clubs suck all the talent away from the others. There has to be a way to achieve what we want.

[Rascal Bongo Stork]

if it's managed well - i.e a marquee player is one that is of a specific type - a top nrl player, a top RU player or a top SL player who if he is not kept within SL would more than likely go to RU and there is a limit to how many you can have, 3 for example - then I think it could be a great positive. Clubs would not be able to just go out and impoverish other clubs' squads as the only players they could sign from them would be ones that are buggering off to RU anyway.
If you've got a marquee player (i.e an England international who is going to switch codes to RU to take the better pay on offer) and you can afford to keep him then you keep him, if you cant then surely it's better that he stays within SL than leaves the sport altogether?

[Dave T]

if it's managed well - i.e a marquee player is one that is of a specific type - a top nrl player, a top RU player or a top SL player who if he is not kept within SL would more than likely go to RU and there is a limit to how many you can have, 3 for example - then I think it could be a great positive. Clubs would not be able to just go out and impoverish other clubs' squads as the only players they could sign from them would be ones that are buggering off to RU anyway.
If you've got a marquee player (i.e an England international who is going to switch codes to RU to take the better pay on offer) and you can afford to keep him then you keep him, if you cant then surely it's better that he stays within SL than leaves the sport altogether?

Another risk with this is suddenly agents spotting an opportunity to tout their players even more to Union knowing that they have an opportunity to get more money from a SL club.

Like I say, I support something changing in principle - we just need to be very careful here, as a seemingly minor change could have a big impact.

[Rascal Bongo Stork]

Another risk with this is suddenly agents spotting an opportunity to tout their players even more to Union knowing that they have an opportunity to get more money from a SL club.

Like I say, I support something changing in principle - we just need to be very careful here, as a seemingly minor change could have a big impact.

yes you're probably right there. Hmm, counfound it.
Still, I dont think the salary cap has worked - clubs are still skint, you know before the season starts which strata of the table individual clubs will be in when it finishes. If it's to stop them going bust then it doesnt work, if it's to create a level playing field between the 14 clubs then it doesnt work. There does need to be regulation to stop utter madness but something needs to be done to create interest out there and I'm behind Daddy Warbucks Koukash all the way.
I'll let someone much wiser than me work out the knotty details, I'm just a pleb on t'net!

[brooza]

Don't we already have an extra allowance for marquee players? I thought Tomkins was on it

[Pottsy]

It's lovely that everyone is willing to offer their advice and support to little old Salford at this time.

Ultimately though, only one person's opinion matters (no, not you, Parky! ) and that's the Dr himself.

It's his money, his club and if he wants to splash that cash on his team and tread on a few toes in the process then that's his prerogative.

I don't recall this concern when the likes of Wigan, Wires, Leeds etc were picking the bones off our husk of a club.

[barrowraiderskid]

I think you've got a point Dave, be interesting to see how Salford pans out.

For me I look back at Wigan under Whelan, racing through coaches, splashing out transfer fees, spending up to the cap, running the club at a loss (from memory). Where as his sucessor, runs the club at a profit, made a shrewd coach appointment, landed two trophies (plus a hub cap), when his hand was forced replaced the coach from within and it served him pretty well last season.

Good luck to Salford, I'm sure there's loads of stories in this and I hope there new owner finds success and establishes Salford as a force, rather than see him become Super Leagues equivalent to Des Johnson.

Even though Johnston cheated, the one thing he did though was get people in the ground, that is what Koukash has to do. How did he get people to watch Barrow, he bought a winning team.

Koukash has to do what Johnston did but obviously without breaking the rules. When Johnston was signing players he created headlines within the town, people were talking about the club people wanted to see what was happening the floaters attended games. We got to 3,000 crowds at the back end of 09 season.

Johnston is an example which can obviously get slated to death as he is an idiot but the principle in getting people into the ground is exactly what Koukash has to do. But do it legally and more sustainably to what dessie did. If he has to throw money about and create headlines to get people into the ground so be it. He hasn't broken any rules and how much money has he spent so far? None yet we are all talking about them

I don't think getting an academy structure first is the way forward for Salford, they've got a massive area to tap into and the best way to do that is with a winning side.

[Pottsy]

We already have a strong academy but unfortunately other clubs have benefitted more than us at times.

Which of the current leading clubs based its initial resurgence on homegrown talent?

[Pottsy]

We already have a strong academy but unfortunately other clubs have benefitted more than us at times.

Which of the current leading clubs based its initial resurgence on homegrown talent?

Murray bought in a team at the start of the Leeds revival, as did McRae at Saints and Smith at Warrington.

Aside from the possible exception of Wigan, most of the current big boys had to buy success initially and then augment their winning teams with homegrown talent.

[Dave T]

We already have a strong academy but unfortunately other clubs have benefitted more than us at times.

Which of the current leading clubs based its initial resurgence on homegrown talent?

Murray bought in a team at the start of the Leeds revival, as did McRae at Saints and Smith at Warrington.

Aside from the possible exception of Wigan, most of the current big boys had to buy success initially and then augment their winning teams with homegrown talent.

Salford will have to buy plenty of players there is no doubt about that.
Every succesful team has had to buy players, therefore a team even Wigan - Carmont, Leaulei, Finch etc weren't from St Pats.

[hindle xiii]

Jon Molloy signs for Salford on a 3-year deal from Huddersfield.

[Red Willow]

He was a free agent.

Not sure what to make of this at all.

[Gav Wilson]

He was a free agent.

Not sure what to make of this at all.

Thats all you're going to get at this stage in the season, I wouldn't worry about it.

If you're in the same situation this time next year, then be worried.

[longboard]

Good luck to Molloy.

He was unlucky with injuries at Hudds.

[hindle xiii]

He was a free agent.

Not sure what to make of this at all.

Oh I read he'd negotiated a release from his Huddersfield contract, naymind.

[roughyedspud]

put a bid in for george north......

[Padge]

yes you're probably right there. Hmm, counfound it.
Still, I dont think the salary cap has worked - clubs are still skint,

The cap stopped being about stopping clubs from going broke when the clubs themselves voted to scrap the percentage of income rule.

Edited by Padge, 10 March 2013 - 07:20 PM.