Pigman wrote: ↑September 3, 2018, 8:43 pm
Tom Brady's been the best QB in the league for a decade and has played on WELL below market deals the entire time. Fair to say they dont give the faintest **** about this, what a player and club agree to in terms of contractual arrangements it non of their business.
So perhaps it you and your box who need to be reacquainted. People like living near the beach and are frequently willing to work for less to do so. That's life.
NFL contracts and caps are public aren’t they though?
I think that’s the simple answer. It’d cut all the ridiculous speculation right out and you’d just have to accept what’s what. I imagine it’d put more pressure on players to take the money at smaller clubs now everyone knows what they’re getting paid.
There are a lot of players who wouldn’t like the public to know how high their salary is. But I think there’d be just as many or more who wouldn’t like the public to know how little they’re on. Surely it would also lend to fans/pundits actually being able to rate players on value rather than one blanket ‘first grader’ standard for everyone.
Pigman wrote: ↑September 3, 2018, 8:43 pm
Tom Brady's been the best QB in the league for a decade and has played on WELL below market deals the entire time. Fair to say they dont give the faintest **** about this, what a player and club agree to in terms of contractual arrangements it non of their business.
So perhaps it you and your box who need to be reacquainted. People like living near the beach and are frequently willing to work for less to do so. That's life.
NFL contracts and caps are public aren’t they though?
I think that’s the simple answer. It’d cut all the ridiculous speculation right out and you’d just have to accept what’s what. I imagine it’d put more pressure on players to take the money at smaller clubs now everyone knows what they’re getting paid.
There are a lot of players who wouldn’t like the public to know how high their salary is. But I think there’d be just as many or more who wouldn’t like the public to know how little they’re on. Surely it would also lend to fans/pundits actually being able to rate players on value rather than one blanket ‘first grader’ standard for everyone.
Preach!
I’ve been driving the bus on this. Make the salaries public. Cap cheating disappears over night
Pigman wrote: ↑September 3, 2018, 8:43 pm
Tom Brady's been the best QB in the league for a decade and has played on WELL below market deals the entire time. Fair to say they dont give the faintest **** about this, what a player and club agree to in terms of contractual arrangements it non of their business.
So perhaps it you and your box who need to be reacquainted. People like living near the beach and are frequently willing to work for less to do so. That's life.
NFL contracts and caps are public aren’t they though?
I think that’s the simple answer. It’d cut all the ridiculous speculation right out and you’d just have to accept what’s what. I imagine it’d put more pressure on players to take the money at smaller clubs now everyone knows what they’re getting paid.
There are a lot of players who wouldn’t like the public to know how high their salary is. But I think there’d be just as many or more who wouldn’t like the public to know how little they’re on. Surely it would also lend to fans/pundits actually being able to rate players on value rather than one blanket ‘first grader’ standard for everyone.
Preach!
I’ve been driving the bus on this. Make the salaries public. Cap cheating disappears over night
greeneyed wrote: ↑September 3, 2018, 9:21 pm
You simply CANNOT accept... "I'd rather live by the beach" to accept that a say, $500k difference between deals is acceptable.
If they do... they need to start again... and give the Raiders a $500k loading, a $1m loading so as to attract players away from the beach! It's ridiculous to think otherwise!
Would depend on personal circumstances... but plenty of people take less money in their careers to live in areas which are considered better... my wife could go and work in Dubbo and earn a ton more money than she does... but we dont want to live in Dubbo and make a plenty good living here in Canberra.
Why would players be any different?
Problem is most people outside of Canberra see the place as boring as Dubbo.. Hence why the club pays overs to attract and hang on to talent
Making the salaries public would be interesting for the fans, but I don't think it would help even up the player market. It would probably just depress us even more.
greeneyed wrote: ↑September 3, 2018, 9:21 pm
You simply CANNOT accept... "I'd rather live by the beach" to accept that a say, $500k difference between deals is acceptable.
If they do... they need to start again... and give the Raiders a $500k loading, a $1m loading so as to attract players away from the beach! It's ridiculous to think otherwise!
Would depend on personal circumstances... but plenty of people take less money in their careers to live in areas which are considered better... my wife could go and work in Dubbo and earn a ton more money than she does... but we dont want to live in Dubbo and make a plenty good living here in Canberra.
Why would players be any different?
Problem is most people outside of Canberra see the place as boring as Dubbo.. Hence why the club pays overs to attract and hang on to talent
Absolutely
The problem isnt that they are potentially going to allow lifestyle factors such as the beach being a valid reason for taking less, it's that the NRL will concede this is a natural advantage without addressing it for clubs who don't have this advantage.
Pigman wrote: ↑September 3, 2018, 8:43 pm
Tom Brady's been the best QB in the league for a decade and has played on WELL below market deals the entire time. Fair to say they dont give the faintest **** about this, what a player and club agree to in terms of contractual arrangements it non of their business.
So perhaps it you and your box who need to be reacquainted. People like living near the beach and are frequently willing to work for less to do so. That's life.
NFL contracts and caps are public aren’t they though?
I think that’s the simple answer. It’d cut all the ridiculous speculation right out and you’d just have to accept what’s what. I imagine it’d put more pressure on players to take the money at smaller clubs now everyone knows what they’re getting paid.
There are a lot of players who wouldn’t like the public to know how high their salary is. But I think there’d be just as many or more who wouldn’t like the public to know how little they’re on. Surely it would also lend to fans/pundits actually being able to rate players on value rather than one blanket ‘first grader’ standard for everyone.
Preach!
I’ve been driving the bus on this. Make the salaries public. Cap cheating disappears over night
Amen brothers!
Count me in as being on the bus
... not the **** tigers bus... this one ^
edwahu wrote: ↑September 4, 2018, 1:34 pm
Making the salaries public would be interesting for the fans, but I don't think it would help even up the player market. It would probably just depress us even more.
Fair point there ed..about being depressed.
I'd hate to watch Boyd etc who's making $600k just phone it in while my good self works very hard for his modest 5 figure salary.
Imagine Matts Matchups...
Boyd $600k > rating 4.
3rd Battalion Royal Australian Regiment..Old Faithful
#emptythetank
People move to Canberra and a host of other cities to focus on their careers or because they want a different lifestyle to what most people want.
I wonder if the Raiders have considered using an organisational psychologist as part of our recruitment team. It's of course vital to have a keen eye for talent but there are a lot of other factors that go into creating a high performance culture.
Green eyed Mick wrote:People move to Canberra and a host of other cities to focus on their careers or because they want a different lifestyle to what most people want.
I wonder if the Raiders have considered using an organisational psychologist as part of our recruitment team. It's of course vital to have a keen eye for talent but there are a lot of other factors that go into creating a high performance culture.
I'm guessing not
Gina Riley: Oh, come on, John. That’s a bit old hat, the corrupt IOC delegate. John Clarke: Old hat? Gina, in the scientific world when they see that something is happening again and again and again, repeatedly, they don’t call it old hat. They call it a pattern.
edwahu wrote: ↑September 4, 2018, 1:34 pm
Making the salaries public would be interesting for the fans, but I don't think it would help even up the player market. It would probably just depress us even more.
Fair point there ed..about being depressed.
I'd hate to watch Boyd etc who's making $600k just phone it in while my good self works very hard for his modest 5 figure salary.
Imagine Matts Matchups...
Boyd $600k > rating 4.
You’d have to make players tax submissions open to the public to make any difference, and that’s not going to happen. It’s only Rugby League at the end of the day.
I honestly believe that money is still the number 1 reason for player movement, 2nd is perceived chance of premiership success, with proximity to a **** beach well down the list.
greeneyed wrote: ↑September 3, 2018, 9:21 pm
You simply CANNOT accept... "I'd rather live by the beach" to accept that a say, $500k difference between deals is acceptable.
If they do... they need to start again... and give the Raiders a $500k loading, a $1m loading so as to attract players away from the beach! It's ridiculous to think otherwise!
Would depend on personal circumstances... but plenty of people take less money in their careers to live in areas which are considered better... my wife could go and work in Dubbo and earn a ton more money than she does... but we dont want to live in Dubbo and make a plenty good living here in Canberra.
Why would players be any different?
Because most players careers are lucky to be 10 years long, comparing their situation to your wife's is laughable. She will be working well past 45 and NRL players are pretty much washed up at 30.
Trust me mate no one in rugby league plays for less than they can get, surely the last 10 salary cap scandals shows that.
Top players also earn 3-4 times what my wife does, so 10 years equates to about 40 years of my wife's income.
The simple reality is people sacrifice money all the time for other factors.
If you honestly think professional sports is just some auction house where players go where ever the highest bid is without an consideration of other facts then i think you're not living in the real world.
There is MANY factors that go into a players decision... including and probably not limited to money, the club (are you old looking for a premiership? Young looking for a shot), the coach (good coach who can get the most out of you?), the role they'll play at the club (can you get regular FG?), family considerations (is your wife and kids going to be happy? home sickness, social circles), profile (will this help you gain the profile needed for career after football in the media industry?) and lifestyle (beach, surfing, the arts, hiking, nightlife, mountain bike riding, whatever your bag, does the city deliver what you want in your life?)
Players take less all the time because of these factors and more. They really arent any different to any of us. Those factors matter as much to them as they do to you or i.
gergreg wrote: ↑September 4, 2018, 6:28 pm
I honestly believe that money is still the number 1 reason for player movement, 2nd is perceived chance of premiership success, with proximity to a **** beach well down the list.
Yep, at the top end at least. The money the player managers generate for themselves every time they move a player drives it as well.
The NRL has a RESPONSIBILITY to treat all the clubs in exactly the same fashion. They are abrogating their responsibility if they agree that "living by the beach" is a reason to accept that a big difference in contract values is a reason for a big contract difference. It's just not reasonable, not acceptable and the NRL should be ashamed of themselves for even thinking it.
it's very reasonable, it happens in every day life, across every virtually every profession in the country.
Lifestyle matters.
What the NRL needs to do, is accept this, accept that some franchises have a geological advantage and factor that in when figuring out their cap structure. It's simple really. And screaming into the wind about how lifestyle doesnt matter isnt the answer, and it wont ever be the answer. So we can scream all we like on that front, for all the good that'll do.
Pigman wrote: ↑September 4, 2018, 8:40 pm
it's very reasonable, it happens in every day life, across every virtually every profession in the country.
Lifestyle matters.
What the NRL needs to do, is accept this, accept that some franchises have a geological advantage and factor that in when figuring out their cap structure. It's simple really. And screaming into the wind about how lifestyle doesnt matter isnt the answer, and it wont ever be the answer. So we can scream all we like on that front, for all the good that'll do.
There is no salary cap in most professions. The NRL is entrenching an advantage for every other club other than tne Raiders in this announcement of their salary cap arrangements. They need to actually ADD to the Raiders cap, not accept that clubs can discount their cap because of a beach side location!
Did you actually read the post?
Take a few deep ones, calm yourself down, if you need to, take a few time out minutes... and read the post
that's exactly what im saying... the answer is not to say lifestyle reasons are not valid, that is absolutely absurd and going down that path is a waste of time, energy, and oxygen. Because everyone with a brain cell knows lifestyle is a major factor in career decisions.
The answer is to accept that lifestyle is a very relevant factor, and accept that your goal as an organisation is to create parity, and compensate the clubs disadvantaged by this geological factors to help enable them to overcome these natural disadvantages.
Screaming into the wind about how lifestyle doesnt matter and should be considered is how you get laughed out of meetings and ignored for being a **** **** and how you lose any chance to win your argument.
Pigman wrote: ↑September 4, 2018, 9:21 pm
Did you actually read the post?
Take a few deep ones, calm yourself down, if you need to, take a few time out minutes... and read the post
that's exactly what im saying... the answer is not to say lifestyle reasons are not valid, that is absolutely absurd and going down that path is a waste of time, energy, and oxygen. Because everyone with a brain cell knows lifestyle is a major factor in career decisions.
The answer is to accept that lifestyle is a very relevant factor, and accept that your goal as an organisation is to create parity, and compensate the clubs disadvantaged by this geological factors to help enable them to overcome these natural disadvantages.
Screaming into the wind about how lifestyle doesnt matter and should be considered is how you get laughed out of meetings and ignored for being a **** **** and how you lose any chance to win your argument.
Bit like some overbearing people on this forum Piggy?
Pigman wrote: ↑September 4, 2018, 9:21 pm
Did you actually read the post?
Take a few deep ones, calm yourself down, if you need to, take a few time out minutes... and read the post
that's exactly what im saying... the answer is not to say lifestyle reasons are not valid, that is absolutely absurd and going down that path is a waste of time, energy, and oxygen. Because everyone with a brain cell knows lifestyle is a major factor in career decisions.
The answer is to accept that lifestyle is a very relevant factor, and accept that your goal as an organisation is to create parity, and compensate the clubs disadvantaged by this geological factors to help enable them to overcome these natural disadvantages.
Screaming into the wind about how lifestyle doesnt matter and should be considered is how you get laughed out of meetings and ignored for being a **** **** and how you lose any chance to win your argument.
Excuse me Nick.. I don't need to "calm myself down". I am perfectly calm. I doesn't make any of my views already expressed any less valid. They're all still valid. Thank you.
Pigman wrote: ↑September 4, 2018, 6:55 pm
Top players also earn 3-4 times what my wife does, so 10 years equates to about 40 years of my wife's income.
The simple reality is people sacrifice money all the time for other factors.
If you honestly think professional sports is just some auction house where players go where ever the highest bid is without an consideration of other facts then i think you're not living in the real world.
There is MANY factors that go into a players decision... including and probably not limited to money, the club (are you old looking for a premiership? Young looking for a shot), the coach (good coach who can get the most out of you?), the role they'll play at the club (can you get regular FG?), family considerations (is your wife and kids going to be happy? home sickness, social circles), profile (will this help you gain the profile needed for career after football in the media industry?) and lifestyle (beach, surfing, the arts, hiking, nightlife, mountain bike riding, whatever your bag, does the city deliver what you want in your life?)
Players take less all the time because of these factors and more. They really arent any different to any of us. Those factors matter as much to them as they do to you or i.
Nick has done a great job of getting his point across in this post - his wife earns $300k.
Na, she earns significantly less, which is my point... she could earn in that range if we wanted to live in Dubbo. But, we dont really have any interest in living in Dubbo. That's what people do, they weigh up the options and make the decision that's best for them and their families.
We decide to stay in Canberra for less because it suits our lifestyle... Just as players may elect to take less to stay in Sydney near a beach because it suits their lifestyle.
Rumour on the Warriors forum that we have signed Junior (fetalaiga) Pauga, He's a centre/winger, did his knee in his final game last year but has made his way back to ISP recently(played against mounties on the weekend), will only be depth but he Looked a very good prospect in under 20's
I know 1 particular tiger's player took pay cuts and deferred deals to stay despite reasonable interest from elsewhere due to being happy in th er area and settled extended family etc, it really is an individual decision.
Look at Lui, article claimed he stayed at the raiders due to his daughter being happy in Canberra
Guys,
1. The NRL isn't going to change diddly squat. You can yell, scream, jump up and down, whatever; it will do absolutely nothing. Hell, Don Furner has been told as much every other yr for a decade, lobbying for this sort of thing (Jr compensation/ discounts, longevity at clubs discounts, etc).
2. Lifestyle is 100% a decision in anyone's life. Therefore it is for players. We have had the whole beach vs bike path argument a million times. People take less to suit a lifestyle all the time. So, it works the other way too, how much do I need to earn to forgo the lifestyle?!?
So, until the NRL joins the published earnings theory nothing will change in this regard. And I doubt this will happen.
James Hooper says Norman still being shopped, but there are no takers. SURELY... SURELY... at some point a low ball bid will get a signature. I think we should be pursuing this.
Parra will be needing to pay a LOT of the freight on that $920k to ship Norman anywhere.
He is an out of form half that's never played rep footy, has just picked up a spoon and has negative off-field images to his brand.
I haven't seen much of him this year tbh, but judging on ability alone I'd say he'd be picked ahead of Williams in the skins, however other options should be looked at first.
Sid wrote:Gold Coast seems like one of the most attractive locations to live.. their NRL sides have always struggled.
True but go to the GC and you have a next to 0 chance of winning a comp and slim to play finals.
Go to the Roosters and it is the opposite. Add to that on the coast the extra dollars you earn will go into buying a house at the Roosters your wife’s brother gets given a house and you get to live in it.
Sid wrote:Gold Coast seems like one of the most attractive locations to live.. their NRL sides have always struggled.
True but go to the GC and you have a next to 0 chance of winning a comp and slim to play finals.
Go to the Roosters and it is the opposite. Add to that on the coast the extra dollars you earn will go into buying a house at the Roosters your wife’s brother gets given a house and you get to live in it.
Yep, if the location alone were such a drawcard Gold Coast would be able to draw the best players to win comps. and play finals.. Gold Coast does have the best beaches in Australia after all.
$$$ + Location + more $$$ = Players to win you premierships..
