Has the Salary cap failed

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

less star players and big names.

I think of all the points made, this is the hardest one to refute. And I don't think it is too simple a solution to fix, as I don't think the Salary Cap is the root cause - the root cause is the commercial failure and the fact that we just haven't driven revenues enough to be able to spend more on players.

But it is hard to argue that we are not losing more players and signing fewer genuine quality players.  

[ELBOWSEYE]

16 minutes ago, Dave T said:

St Helens are clearly the strongest club around at the moment, however the last decade is quite interesting.

LLS - a good measure of success. Saints have won 4 LLS. We have had 7 different winners in the last 10 years. That's more than the previous 10 years.

Grand Finals. Saints have won 5, We've had 3 different winners. It's disappointing that more of those LLS winners didn't manage to win the GF (including my own team!) - but they contributed to excellent finals in many cases.

Challenge Cup - Saints have won 1. We've had 6 different winners.

 

So overall Saints have clearly been very successful, and for a sustained period of time, but we do have a decent level of variety across British RL. We don't need to be quite so negative based on the fact Saints are on a great run right now.

Its the GF winners that are the big issue, also we are starved of big names. Recently are better players are forwards who normally don't receive plaudits outside of the sport. The only current player who could gain a wider exposure is welsby, no others at this moment come close to it. 

The shortage of regular top level international games also reduces exposure for lots of our players. 

[Jughead]

16 minutes ago, Dave T said:

St Helens are clearly the strongest club around at the moment, however the last decade is quite interesting.

LLS - a good measure of success. Saints have won 4 LLS. We have had 7 different winners in the last 10 years. That's more than the previous 10 years.

Grand Finals. Saints have won 5, We've had 3 different winners. It's disappointing that more of those LLS winners didn't manage to win the GF (including my own team!) - but they contributed to excellent finals in many cases.

Challenge Cup - Saints have won 1. We've had 6 different winners.

 

So overall Saints have clearly been very successful, and for a sustained period of time, but we do have a decent level of variety across British RL. We don't need to be quite so negative based on the fact Saints are on a great run right now.

Ten clubs in Super League have made at least one final in something like the past seven or eight years, so the variety has been shared. Alright, only one team has won the past four Grand Finals but they’ve beaten four different opponents to do so and each of the last six cup finals has had a different winner, too. I do think Rugby League always manages to find a negative in everything, when you could also say that we’ve made steps towards the variety people crave and that many finals are tense and tight affairs. 

[Exiled Wiganer]

26 minutes ago, Dave T said:

St Helens are clearly the strongest club around at the moment, however the last decade is quite interesting.

LLS - a good measure of success. Saints have won 4 LLS. We have had 7 different winners in the last 10 years. That's more than the previous 10 years.

Grand Finals. Saints have won 5, We've had 3 different winners. It's disappointing that more of those LLS winners didn't manage to win the GF (including my own team!) - but they contributed to excellent finals in many cases.

Challenge Cup - Saints have won 1. We've had 6 different winners.

 

So overall Saints have clearly been very successful, and for a sustained period of time, but we do have a decent level of variety across British RL. We don't need to be quite so negative based on the fact Saints are on a great run right now.

Look across 25 years, and the stats clearly show an extraordinarily extended period of dominance. In fact, the spreading it around point illustrates how one club has utterly dominated. 

[Damien]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I think of all the points made, this is the hardest one to refute. And I don't think it is too simple a solution to fix, as I don't think the Salary Cap is the root cause - the root cause is the commercial failure and the fact that we just haven't driven revenues enough to be able to spend more on players.

But it is hard to argue that we are not losing more players and signing fewer genuine quality players.  

Its been death by a thousand cuts over 20 odd years and yes there are undoubtedly other factors but I do think that the  failure for the salary cap to at least keep pace with inflation has been a contributor to those factors. The simple fact is that the base salary cap in 2003 was £1.8 million and should now be sat at a touch over £3 million if it had merely risen with inflation. That is a huge reduction in real terms and affected our ability to compete with other leagues over a long period.

Even when TV deals drastically increased the salary cap didn't and even went down at some times. There is no doubt that losing players to RU and NRL leads to a less commercially attractive competition and one that is less attractive to fans. You start to act and talk like a second rate competition and people start to see it as that.

Edited February 22, 2023 by Damien

[Exiled Wiganer]

44 minutes ago, Dave T said:

There is definitely something in this. 

On the face of it, it is absolutely staggering that St Helens (c£2.5m spend) could even compete with Penrith and St George (c£6.8m spend) never mind go over to their backyard and beat them.

I do think it is important to understand what the cap is for. I think there are two main things - sustainability, where i think it has been a success. There are natural downsides to that though in terms of us losing players and missing out on top talent from across the world.

In terms of spreading the success, there is an argument it has been less successful, but I'm not sure that is down to the Salary Cap on a basic level, it is possibly due to the design and some of the concessions which basically give a couple of clubs advantages that are almost impossible to overtake, and the headline cash cap is too low to over-compensate. The cap incentives for player development is well intended, but imho the unintended consequences of it are problematic for competition. Nobody has ever been able to articulate how any club can overtake Saints, Wigan and Leeds with their legacy youth pathways. I'd argue it's impossible to overtake decades worth of benefits that have built up.

Sure, people will be dismissive and just pat themselves on the back as them trying harder, but that simply isn't true.

I think the answer to the small player is investment, investment and more investment in increasing it, so that 3 clubs do not dominate that. We must both grow the pool and grow the ability to pay rates which are competitive with our rivals. 

[Exiled Wiganer]

7 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Ten clubs in Super League have made at least one final in something like the past seven or eight years, so the variety has been shared. Alright, only one team has won the past four Grand Finals but they’ve beaten four different opponents to do so and each of the last six cup finals has had a different winner, too. I do think Rugby League always manages to find a negative in everything, when you could also say that we’ve made steps towards the variety people crave and that many finals are tense and tight affairs. 

That’s nonsense. The same winner over and over again for decades, save when they pause for breath, is dominance far beyond what anyone would expect in a level playing field. That you beat different teams is actually a perfect illustration. We have 11 fairly evenly matched teams, who can compete to lose to Saints. In fact, it illustrates an even bigger gap - it is possible, if everything goes right for a club, like Catalans a couple of years ago, for them to be competitive - but then they fall away. In our relatively brief period of dominance, we played a wide variety of teams in finals, none of whom could sustain it. 

[Damien]

19 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Ten clubs in Super League have made at least one final in something like the past seven or eight years, so the variety has been shared. Alright, only one team has won the past four Grand Finals but they’ve beaten four different opponents to do so and each of the last six cup finals has had a different winner, too. I do think Rugby League always manages to find a negative in everything, when you could also say that we’ve made steps towards the variety people crave and that many finals are tense and tight affairs. 

Its a myth that the salary cap has led to this variety, There has always been a variety of finalists, that is the nature of cup competition. The Challenge Cup alone had 8 different finalists in the 90s, even with Wigan's dominance. In the 5 years prior to the salary cap it had 5 different winners.

Edited February 22, 2023 by Damien

[Gerrumonside ref]

Should we turn this on it’s head and ask why are Saints succeeding?

Then, why aren’t Wigan, Leeds, Warrington, Hull et al?

What is it that St Helens are doing as a club that is leading to all this success?

Why can’t the others copy and improve best practice/culture/coaching/recruitment given the concept of a level playing field?

 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Gerrumonside ref

[Jughead]

4 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

That’s nonsense. The same winner over and over again for decades, save when they pause for breath, is dominance far beyond what anyone would expect in a level playing field. That you beat different teams is actually a perfect illustration. We have 11 fairly evenly matched teams, who can compete to lose to Saints. In fact, it illustrates an even bigger gap - it is possible, if everything goes right for a club, like Catalans a couple of years ago, for them to be competitive - but then they fall away. In our relatively brief period of dominance, we played a wide variety of teams in finals, none of whom could sustain it. 

It’s literally not nonsense and is indeed fact. Nobody is arguing that Saints are dominant in the Grand Final at present, however, we have had six different winners of the Challenge Cup in the past six years, we’ve had more different finalists in the past seven Grand Finals than all of the Super League Grand Finals up to that point and only Wakefield and Leigh (though they’ve never had consecutive seasons in Super League) have failed to reach a final in the past eight years. That is variety, of some form. 

Super League has been, up to this point, cyclical. Saints, Wigan and Leeds have had periods of success and periods of falling away. It’s little different to Catalans three or four year period of success that saw a cup win and league leaders shield win (and Grand Final appearance). Players retire, move on or regress whilst other clubs are back on the upturn of their cycle, like, say Huddersfield who have finished third, been to a cup final that (again) was won very late and are amongst the favourites for both competitions this year. 

[Just Browny]

Isn't there a strong case that the pandemic period was the most difficult economic challenge our game has ever had to endure and the cap helped our club game stay largely intact?

[Oxford]

13 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

Look across 25 years, and the stats clearly show an extraordinarily extended period of dominance. In fact, the spreading it around point illustrates how one club has utterly dominated. 

But this could just as easily be due to, and a perfect illustration of, the fact that our sport is a game that favours the dominant side. It may also be a product of certain more favourable things of those sides who dominate.

When Liverpool City were around even they had a decent player or two in their ranks and at the same time kids wanted to play for their home town team and didn't tend to gravitate towards successful clubs.

We often applaud top clubs for their pathways but if all the top junior players head their way what exactly are we congratuling them on?

7 minutes ago, Damien said:

Its a myth that the salary cap has led to this variety, There has always been a variety of finalists, that is the nature of cup competition. The Challenge Cup alone had 8 different finalists in the 90s, even with Wigan's dominance. In the 5 years prior to the salary cap it had 5 different winners.

This is also a great point and often overlooked if you only measure on who wins a comp you deliberately narrow what your analysing, and reacting to.

1 minute ago, Jughead said:

Super League has been, up to this point, cyclical. Saints, Wigan and Leeds have had periods of success and periods of falling away

And that widens the area you're looking at straight away.

Looking at where players who had success in those teams are from would be a vital lesson, likely to point to a gravitational pull that denies teams in their area of origin to sign them and build a team around them.

5 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Super League has been, up to this point, cyclical. Saints, Wigan and Leeds have had periods of success and periods of falling away. It’s little different to Catalans three or four year period of success that saw a cup win and league leaders shield win (and Grand Final appearance). Players retire, move on or regress whilst other clubs are back on the upturn of their cycle, like, say Huddersfield who have finished third, been to a cup final that (again) was won very late and are amongst the favourites for both competitions this year. 

All good points in the only one or two succeed argument.

[Jughead]

8 minutes ago, Damien said:

Its a myth that the salary cap has led to this variety, There has always been a variety of finalists, that is the nature of cup competition. The Challenge Cup alone had 8 different finalists in the 90s, even with Wigan's dominance. In the 5 years prior to the salary cap it had 5 different winners.

Who said it had anything to do with the salary cap? 

There’s been a long argument, as I’m sure you’re aware, that the same clubs win the competitions on offer. That’s simply not true. 

The reasons for variety and the reasons for Grand Final dominance by one club is not down to the salary cap, nor would either change significantly with a jump in the cap or removal altogether. 

[Damien]

6 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Who said it had anything to do with the salary cap? 

There’s been a long argument, as I’m sure you’re aware, that the same clubs win the competitions on offer. That’s simply not true. 

The reasons for variety and the reasons for Grand Final dominance by one club is not down to the salary cap, nor would either change significantly with a jump in the cap or removal altogether. 

Because its a salary cap thread and this so called variety is an argument people use for its retention.

[Dave T]

47 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

Look across 25 years, and the stats clearly show an extraordinarily extended period of dominance. In fact, the spreading it around point illustrates how one club has utterly dominated. 

If things look OK in the last 10 years, why on earth would you stretch that Outlook to 25 years to make it look worse? 

[The Masked Poster]

The modern Grand Final was started in 1998. By 2004, four different teams had won it. Which isn't bad. 

But since then no other team has won it. This is not a good thing and however close other teams might have got, it's almost irrelevant as we don't tend to remember second place in any sport.

Something is definitely not right.

[Exiled Wiganer]

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

If things look OK in the last 10 years, why on earth would you stretch that Outlook to 25 years to make it look worse? 

I did it because the cap has been in place for that long. I would argue that the last 10 years are misleading, as they include the only sustained dip in Saints’ fortunes in that period. Time will tell, and I don’t mind coming back to this in a couple of years time. 

[Dave T]

53 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

I think the answer to the small player is investment, investment and more investment in increasing it, so that 3 clubs do not dominate that. We must both grow the pool and grow the ability to pay rates which are competitive with our rivals. 

How exactly? Genuine question. How do Salford ever overtake Saints' development pathway? Can decades of headstart ever be pulled back? 

[Exiled Wiganer]

34 minutes ago, Jughead said:

It’s literally not nonsense and is indeed fact. Nobody is arguing that Saints are dominant in the Grand Final at present, however, we have had six different winners of the Challenge Cup in the past six years, we’ve had more different finalists in the past seven Grand Finals than all of the Super League Grand Finals up to that point and only Wakefield and Leigh (though they’ve never had consecutive seasons in Super League) have failed to reach a final in the past eight years. That is variety, of some form. 

Super League has been, up to this point, cyclical. Saints, Wigan and Leeds have had periods of success and periods of falling away. It’s little different to Catalans three or four year period of success that saw a cup win and league leaders shield win (and Grand Final appearance). Players retire, move on or regress whilst other clubs are back on the upturn of their cycle, like, say Huddersfield who have finished third, been to a cup final that (again) was won very late and are amongst the favourites for both competitions this year. 

But it hasn’t been cyclical has it. In the last 25 years Saints have won twice as many prizes as Wigan. Leeds were the best grand final winners during a golden generation, but even then Saints were the best week in week out team over most years. 

[Man of Kent]

Hard to tell whether the cap has made any difference when clubs don't spend the maximum and with so many exemptions/allowances for the clubs that do.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

Its the GF winners that are the big issue, also we are starved of big names. Recently are better players are forwards who normally don't receive plaudits outside of the sport. The only current player who could gain a wider exposure is welsby, no others at this moment come close to it. 

The shortage of regular top level international games also reduces exposure for lots of our players. 

I'm not sure my outlook is as negative as yours. I agree that we have fewer high quality imports and obviously we have had some go to Oz, but we still have a lot of great Rugby talent playing in SL.

I think saying only Welsby could gain wider exposure is just wrong. 

[ELBOWSEYE]

17 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I'm not sure my outlook is as negative as yours. I agree that we have fewer high quality imports and obviously we have had some go to Oz, but we still have a lot of great Rugby talent playing in SL.

I think saying only Welsby could gain wider exposure is just wrong. 

I may sound negative but I still enjoy the rugby, all I was trying to show was the perspective of our sport not only as we see it but from outside. 

On Welsby he is the only player who I think is potentially on another level(if you look at the headline grabbing things he has done in 3 years) I still rate lots of other players but struggle to see how they will make people sit up outside of our sport. It may be wrong but its just the way I see it. 

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

But it hasn’t been cyclical has it. In the last 25 years Saints have won twice as many prizes as Wigan. Leeds were the best grand final winners during a golden generation, but even then Saints were the best week in week out team over most years. 

I think what St Helens have done is rather than blow other teams out of the water, they have shown an outstanding level of consistency. Their lows have never been too low - in fact they have never finished below 5th in the ladder. If we look at their main rivals Wigan and Leeds have both had rough patches, and Bradford have had a disastrous fall from grace. The likes of Wire, Catalans, Hull FC, Hudds have teased the top of the table for short spells, but fallen away. 

There is an interesting table on wiki though which shows all results over a 25 year period, and they sit top, as you'd expect, but only 27 wins ahead of Wigan - around 1 win more per year on average.

[Exiled Wiganer]

37 minutes ago, Dave T said:

How exactly? Genuine question. How do Salford ever overtake Saints' development pathway? Can decades of headstart ever be pulled back? 

It takes decades of work, I agree. Getting lots and lots of development officers is the only way. 

We can succeed, if the entire game reaches for it.

I see 3 main problems. First, our player pool is too small, and so it is easy for a small cabal to get a choke hold over it. Though, as we saw last year with Peet’s petulance over losing Nicholson, that cabal do not welcome competition. We must at least be able to get numbers back to where they were in areas which have formerly developed players. 

Second, we are paying far less than the competition, and that always results in a lack of talent. Which adversely affects everything. The first point can partly address that - call it the Ajax approach - while I would argue that at this point we have absolutely nothing to lose giving it a whirl, and abolishing the cap. What’s the worst that can happen - a single club winning the league over and over again??

Third, as to Saints’ domination. The first 2 play into that, but in addition other clubs have to be better. Saints have the best juniors (see above on player pool), but they have the best coaching, recruitment and retention policies, and the best board, which almost certainly feeds into the rest. They are also very good at making sure that the gross cap goes as far as it possibly can when turned into net income. There is nothing stopping other clubs - someone mentioned FC on this thread - seeking to match them at least. It will take hard work and time - looking at the competitors and the length of contracts their players are signed up for, I can see no one save perhaps for the all new Wolves getting close to Saints till 25, absent some calamitous injuries in Glassdom. But by the second half of this decade we could genuinely see a wider mix of Saints standard clubs. 

I actually think that, from Wigan’s perspective, Saints’ endless domination is a good thing, as it requires us to look at ourselves in a way that, maybe, an era of FC success wouldn’t. But when our overseas spots include Mago, Miski and Ellis, it’s clear we are a long way behind. 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Exiled Wiganer

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

I may sound negative but I still enjoy the rugby, all I was trying to show was the perspective of our sport not only as we see it but from outside. 

On Welsby he is the only player who I think is potentially on another level(if you look at the headline grabbing things he has done in 3 years) I still rate lots of other players but struggle to see how they will make people sit up outside of our sport. It may be wrong but its just the way I see it. 

On individuals, we saw Croft as MoS last year, Field getting most of the headlines throughout the season. Welsby obviously was excellent. We probably had Williams as England's best in the WC (if it was Union he would be a huge star with his international performances imho), Makinson is great and a former Golden Boot winner. 

At our club, we have Dufty who could be box office, and in reality the likes of Ashton should be a star right now - I think he'd be better of going to a different club though. We see the same at all clubs, there are players who should absolutely be box office.

Of course none of that changes the overall point that we have fewer than in previous years - I agree with that point - but I think we have some fabulous players in RL, particularly in comparison to other similar sports.