Tommygilf Posted May 29, 2016 Share Posted May 29, 2016 just a question, how much are the full time championship players getting paid? Both those at full time clubs like Bradford, leigh, Sheffield and London as well as pros in semi pro teams. Recently read an article on RU championship players where some were being paid £6000 a year and even had situation where they weren't paid at all in June because they had no games. Is this the case in RL (amongst professional championship players)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweaty craiq Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 £100k a player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim2 Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 £100k a player I doubt if anyone at Sheffield is on that. And judging by the results, you get what you pay for. "I am the avenging angel; I come with wings unfurled, I come with claws extended from halfway round the world. I am the God Almighty, I am the howling wind. I care not for your family; I care not for your kin. I come in search of terror, though terror is my own; I come in search of vengeance for crimes and crimes unknown. I care not for your children, I care not for your wives, I care not for your country, I care not for your lives." - (c) Jim Boyes - "The Avenging Angel" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tex Evans Thigh Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 £100k a player Every full time player is on £100k? Yeah sounds about right. You might get some guys who are full time on as little as £15k, maybe less. Average full time pay in the championship is probably around £30k. Some of the top guys will obviously be on big money up to the £100k mark maybe a little higher but that will be definitely the exception. I'd be surprised if someone like Gaskell, despite being one of the best players in the division is on much more than 70/80k which is a hell of a lot for the championship. At the other end there will certainly be part time players on small contract amounts and match money only deals. I reckon a lot of the lower end players will have a guaranteed money of around 5-10k plus match money. There isn't a great deal of money in the championship outside of those with investors. Formerly Alistair Boyd-Meaney fifty thousand Poouunds from Keighley...weve had im gid." MIPM Project Management and Business Solutions " Discounts available for forum members contact me for details Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trojan Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Every full time player is on £100k? Yeah sounds about right. You might get some guys who are full time on as little as £15k, maybe less. Average full time pay in the championship is probably around £30k. Some of the top guys will obviously be on big money up to the £100k mark maybe a little higher but that will be definitely the exception. I'd be surprised if someone like Gaskell, despite being one of the best players in the division is on much more than 70/80k which is a hell of a lot for the championship. At the other end there will certainly be part time players on small contract amounts and match money only deals. I reckon a lot of the lower end players will have a guaranteed money of around 5-10k plus match money. There isn't a great deal of money in the championship outside of those with investors. I knew a player who played for Lancashire Lynx. He could have played full time for one of the smaller SL clubs, Salford, 'Fax (at the time) Wakey or Cas, but he simply couldn't afford it. He could make more on his contract there £300 per game, and his full time work pay. “Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.” Clement Attlee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derwent Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 A lot of Championship players are better off playing part time. I know a Workington player who was offered a SL deal a couple of years ago worth £40k a year. He earns £45k from his full time job and another £20k from his rugby so he's better off being a part time player. I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hindle xiii Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 I was told the same, part time rugby is reasonably good money on top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwis 13 6 Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 These cases mentioned of part time players with full time jobs turning down Super League deals as they dont pay enough speaks volumes about the Super Leagues low salary cap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Parksider Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 These cases mentioned of part time players with full time jobs turning down Super League deals as they dont pay enough speaks volumes about the Super Leagues low salary cap What point are you making here? The SL salary cap reflects the revenues available from the clubs share of the TV deal, their commercial income and any top ups chairmen put in. Clubs can't pay what they don't have. I'm sure very many good quality union and soccer players don't make the transition to their professional game because their work careers pay more than what they can get turning professional as an RU or soccer player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thepimp007 Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 What point are you making here? The SL salary cap reflects the revenues available from the clubs share of the TV deal, their commercial income and any top ups chairmen put in. Clubs can't pay what they don't have. I'm sure very many good quality union and soccer players don't make the transition to their professional game because their work careers pay more than what they can get turning professional as an RU or soccer player. But some clubs obviously do and im all for letting the owners spend what they have if they do so without putting the club in debt. Super League is not a patch on what it used to be and we need to let those with deep pockets attract the better players again to up our competition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Parksider Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 But some clubs obviously do and im all for letting the owners spend what they have if they do so without putting the club in debt. Super League is not a patch on what it used to be and we need to let those with deep pockets attract the better players again to up our competition Back to the salary cap argument that unlimited wages can see more top players come into the game. Great for the top two or three clubs, a disaster for the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trojan Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 What point are you making here? The SL salary cap reflects the revenues available from the clubs share of the TV deal, their commercial income and any top ups chairmen put in. Clubs can't pay what they don't have. I'm sure very many good quality union and soccer players don't make the transition to their professional game because their work careers pay more than what they can get turning professional as an RU or soccer player. Back in the sixties I used to work with a guy who was the accountant where I worked and apparently a fair soccer player. But he only played as part time pro for Ossett Town. Of course in those days soccer wasn't as lucrative a profession as it is now. My wife's cousin was married to a pro cricketer, who supplemented his winter income by driving lorries, and subsequently coaching in South Africa, where in those apartheid days they paid big money for British County players as coaches. I don't think this is the case in both sports today, in some ways RL has lagged behind. Tommy Docherty used to tell the tale of summer retainers. £10 pw for him and £12 for the supremely talented Tom Finney. Docherty queried it and was told it was because Finney was a better player. "not in the summer he's not" quipped Docherty! “Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.” Clement Attlee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve wild Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Alex Murphy uses that anecdote in association with Von Vollenhoven. Still funny though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmyvtec Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 It's the reason a lot of the Sheffield squad left this year. Told they had to commit to full time or leave so they did because they just couldn't afford it. One of the players in question was offered 20k. His day job he was earning 35. It's a no brainer at the end of the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trojan Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 It's the reason a lot of the Sheffield squad left this year. Told they had to commit to full time or leave so they did because they just couldn't afford it. One of the players in question was offered 20k. His day job he was earning 35. It's a no brainer at the end of the day. Can't believe they let John Davies go. “Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.” Clement Attlee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwis 13 6 Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 What point are you making here? The SL salary cap reflects the revenues available from the clubs share of the TV deal, their commercial income and any top ups chairmen put in. Clubs can't pay what they don't have. I'm sure very many good quality union and soccer players don't make the transition to their professional game because their work careers pay more than what they can get turning professional as an RU or soccer player. I totally agree with the need for salary cap i just think it is currently low. If clubs cant afford a higher cap then the question should be is super league the level they should be competing at? Or what can they do to get to that level such as find a wealthy backer, increase sponsorship, find ways to increase revenue streams, Merge with another club to form a bigger entity etc. I get that a lot of championship players have careers that pay more than super league contracts and that situation also happens in a lot of sports. My point is that it would be good if a standard/minimum Super League contract was big enough to tempt players into going full time pro as it would pay more than day job & semi pro wages. But obviously the game cant spend money it dosnt have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derwent Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 I totally agree with the need for salary cap i just think it is currently low. If clubs cant afford a higher cap then the question should be is super league the level they should be competing at? Or what can they do to get to that level such as find a wealthy backer, increase sponsorship, find ways to increase revenue streams, Merge with another club to form a bigger entity etc. I get that a lot of championship players have careers that pay more than super league contracts and that situation also happens in a lot of sports. My point is that it would be good if a standard/minimum Super League contract was big enough to tempt players into going full time pro as it would pay more than day job & semi pro wages. But obviously the game cant spend money it dosnt have. Well you say that but even in the cash rich NRL the minimum contract is only worth about £41k so there's not a great deal of difference. I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwis 13 6 Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 £41,000 pounds is $85,000 NZ dollars that is good money to me, I would like to be paid $85k/year.. But i see your point where even in the NRL you can get people working & playing semi pro making more than a minimum NRL contract. I think its good that championship clubs can now spend to the level of Super league Cap if they can demonstrate revenue streams to sustain that amount of spend. Its one rule for all with a self preservation aspect to it where you cant spend level of cap if you dont have the financial turnover available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.