The spiral of silence refers to the idea that when people fail to speak, the price of speaking rises. As the price to speak rises, still fewer speak out, which further causes the price to rise, so that fewer people yet will speak out, until a whole culture or nation is silenced. This is what happened in Germany.
If you do not speak, you are not being neutral, but are contributing to the success of the thing you refuse to name and condemn.
Dr Zaius wrote:The NRL needs to take a reasonable amount of blame for the salary cap fiasco. What kind of a professional sporting organisation doesn't set the next year's salary cap until the season is over? Players need to be signed. The clubs with the most players off contract would be most effected.
The spiral of silence refers to the idea that when people fail to speak, the price of speaking rises. As the price to speak rises, still fewer speak out, which further causes the price to rise, so that fewer people yet will speak out, until a whole culture or nation is silenced. This is what happened in Germany.
If you do not speak, you are not being neutral, but are contributing to the success of the thing you refuse to name and condemn.
The difference is it's hard for those leagues to set a fixed cap early because it's collectively bargained that the cap is directly related to overall revenue, so until that's finalised, the cap cant be finalised.
Also they have fixed free agency periods so teams arent signing free agents until they know the cap, and there is cap limits on the NBA players in terms of salary (max salaries), and NFL contracts aren't full gtd, so they have incredible levels of flexibility.
So there are professional leagues, VERY professional leagues, who dont set their cap for the next season until after the previous one has finished, but there reasons for that and none of those reasons apply to the NRL.
Seiffert82 wrote:With Toots and Cotric on the books, ditching Leilua is the best thing this club could do on a number of fronts.
Then we can start having a discussion about bringing in a new half to partner Sezer. I'd be happy with Luke Brooks at the right price to be honest. Munster is not a controlling half, and he sounds like a bit of a knob.
You’ve got to unload toots. He is our equivalent of Moses Mbye for the Bulldogs
The difference is it's hard for those leagues to set a fixed cap early because it's collectively bargained that the cap is directly related to overall revenue, so until that's finalised, the cap cant be finalised.
Also they have fixed free agency periods so teams arent signing free agents until they know the cap, and there is cap limits on the NBA players in terms of salary (max salaries), and NFL contracts aren't full gtd, so they have incredible levels of flexibility.
So there are professional leagues, VERY professional leagues, who dont set their cap for the next season until after the previous one has finished, but there reasons for that and none of those reasons apply to the NRL.
The spiral of silence refers to the idea that when people fail to speak, the price of speaking rises. As the price to speak rises, still fewer speak out, which further causes the price to rise, so that fewer people yet will speak out, until a whole culture or nation is silenced. This is what happened in Germany.
If you do not speak, you are not being neutral, but are contributing to the success of the thing you refuse to name and condemn.
Dr Zaius wrote:The NRL needs to take a reasonable amount of blame for the salary cap fiasco. What kind of a professional sporting organisation doesn't set the next year's salary cap until the season is over? Players need to be signed. The clubs with the most players off contract would be most effected.
Dont you read this place? The Raiders are all to blame!!
Like I said, they were told to work off a 9.1m cap in April. The idea that we didn't know we couldn't spend 10m until the end of the year is just not true.
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
The clubs all had the information available at the same time. Some clubs gambled... some lost. The Raiders seem to have lost. I am still stunned by how little scope the Raiders have under the cap... given the loss of Paulo, Boyd and Austin. The club needs to shift money into the playmaking roles... and given we're told there is no scope to recruit a playmaker... well the fans have every right to be disappointed in how the cap has been managed.
Hopefully, it is now being managed with a view to securing a major halves signing for 2020.
Hardly a huge punt though! Not as if we signed Cameron Smith or something.
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Hardly a huge punt though! Not as if we signed Cameron Smith or something.
Thats a very very good int- we overspent the cap but didn't actually sign anyone for note. We blew the cap upgrading players we already had on the books....
gangrenous wrote: ↑July 29, 2018, 5:57 pm
My mind reads the title as “Crap management”... which actually doesn’t change anything whatsoever...
With the TV rights income known, I wonder why the NRL doles the cap limits out year by year. It would be better to take the Club management in confidence by producing a 'forward estimates' maximum spend amount out say 3 years. This could be audited with the Clubs required to show they will not bust the cap. Built into this could be a 'future rep player' allowance which will allow the clubs to budget for payments to the new stars. If the Club does not have rep players then the 'future rep player' allowance cannot be spent on existing players. It shouldn't be too hard to get some certainty back into the process and cater for the shortcomings of some CEOs.
Hardly a huge punt though! Not as if we signed Cameron Smith or something.
Thats a very very good int- we overspent the cap but didn't actually sign anyone for note. We blew the cap upgrading players we already had on the books....
And this is the sad thing. We appear to have blown the cap on "upgrades" for a squad that is under performing. It's very unfortunate what has happened with the cap.
Hardly a huge punt though! Not as if we signed Cameron Smith or something.
That’s exactly it
They gambled and lost but whatever we were over by, we managed to get under by releasing Baptiste and some other undesirable players.
This gamble is not the reason why we’re don’t have cap space to upgrade the level of talent
Hardly a huge punt though! Not as if we signed Cameron Smith or something.
Thats a very very good int- we overspent the cap but didn't actually sign anyone for note. We blew the cap upgrading players we already had on the books....
And this is the sad thing. We appear to have blown the cap on "upgrades" for a squad that is under performing. It's very unfortunate what has happened with the cap.
Bingo..it deserves caps.
WE BLEW THE CAP ON UPGRADES FOR A SQUAD THAT IS UNDERPERFORMING.
3rd Battalion Royal Australian Regiment..Old Faithful
#emptythetank
Hardly a huge punt though! Not as if we signed Cameron Smith or something.
Thats a very very good int- we overspent the cap but didn't actually sign anyone for note. We blew the cap upgrading players we already had on the books....
And this is the sad thing. We appear to have blown the cap on "upgrades" for a squad that is under performing. It's very unfortunate what has happened with the cap.
Yeah I agree, we re-signed a lot of people in 2017 based on 2016 form, and very very few of them have reached that level again.
Mulholland said it in his last interview. Most of the money went on automatic upgrades (i.e backloading) and Rep bonuses (to already regular internationals).
edwahu wrote: ↑July 29, 2018, 9:09 pm
Mulholland said it in his last interview. Most of the money went on automatic upgrades (i.e backloading) and Rep bonuses (to already regular internationals).
Lol. I think an agent has got one over Mulholland.
"Where's my client's 15% automatic upgrade each season in this contract?"
greeneyed wrote: ↑July 29, 2018, 9:13 pm
"Upgrades" aren't automatic. Rep bonuses are. Automatic rep bonuses cannot be the problem and if that's the case, thet's an even bigger debacle.
This is the quote from Mulholland in Saturday's CT.
"Sometimes players achieve bonuses which give them a big increase in their contracts as well. The salary cap's only gone up $200,000 for next season.
"It's not a monumental increase and players that have played representative games get bonuses, contracts go up incrementally so we might've lost some [players], but ... it all adds up."
Incremental increases suggests ratchet clauses or backloading to me. Minimum wage goes up 5k but that should be immaterial.
Considering Rapana and Whitehead haven't played a sanctioned rep game since last year it really is a poor excuse for why we would have no money for next year, but there it is in writing.
Honestly it wouldn't surprise me if we were paying players big bonuses or handing out upgrades for ridiculous stuff like making first grade or playing 50 games for the club.
greeneyed wrote: ↑July 29, 2018, 9:13 pm
"Upgrades" aren't automatic. Rep bonuses are. Automatic rep bonuses cannot be the problem and if that's the case, thet's an even bigger debacle.
This is the quote from Mulholland in Saturday's CT.
"Sometimes players achieve bonuses which give them a big increase in their contracts as well. The salary cap's only gone up $200,000 for next season.
"It's not a monumental increase and players that have played representative games get bonuses, contracts go up incrementally so we might've lost some [players], but ... it all adds up."
Incremental increases suggests ratchet clauses or backloading to me. Minimum wage goes up 5k but that should be immaterial.
Considering Rapana and Whitehead haven't played a sanctioned rep game since last year it really is a poor excuse for why we would have no money for next year, but there it is in writing.
Honestly it wouldn't surprise me if we were paying players big bonuses or handing out upgrades for ridiculous stuff like making first grade or playing 50 games for the club.
If this is the excuse it is ridiculous. That should be simply part of the expected increases in the cap, and it should be factored in when contracts are signed. It is ridiculous. There has to be an investigation into this!
Losing Rapa would hurt us like losing Semi has hurt the Eels.
We lose him and we not only need to find someone to finish at his level - rare as they are - but we’d also need our already underdone prop rotation to get more early tackle metres.
I reckon any money we’d save on the wing would be negated by the money we’d have to pay to upgrade our bigs. Which we all agree we need to do while we’ve still got Rapa.
Dr Zaius wrote: ↑July 29, 2018, 12:06 pm
The NRL needs to take a reasonable amount of blame for the salary cap fiasco. What kind of a professional sporting organisation doesn't set the next year's salary cap until the season is over? Players need to be signed. The clubs with the most players off contract would be most effected.
The NHL only set their cap for 18/19 on the 22nd of June, after the Stanley Cup finals were finished. This is due to the fact that the cap number is very much tied into the revenue the NHL generates overall.
The sad thing is that I don't think we wouldn't been that far from being elite with the right management - upgrades on our spine would have a huge effect.
I don't believe this would've been far fetched at all:
- Sacrifice one of Wighton, BJ, or Croker for an upgrade on fullback. If BJ goes, Cotric or Wighton move to centre. If Croker goes, Wighton moves. If Wighton goes, then all bar full back stays the same.
- Punt Austin and Sezer. Don't Hingano or Baptiste. Keep Williams as a cheap backup. That should be able to get you at least one elite half and another that's better than Williams or Sezer.
The best clubs are ruthless in their cap management. We're not - hence why we suck.
afgtnk wrote:The sad thing is that I don't think we wouldn't been that far from being elite with the right management - upgrades on our spine would have a huge effect.
I don't believe this would've been far fetched at all:
- Sacrifice one of Wighton, BJ, or Croker for an upgrade on fullback. If BJ goes, Cotric or Wighton move to centre. If Croker goes, Wighton moves. If Wighton goes, then all bar full back stays the same.
- Punt Austin and Sezer. Don't Hingano or Baptiste. Keep Williams as a cheap backup. That should be able to get you at least one elite half and another that's better than Williams or Sezer.
The best clubs are ruthless in their cap management. We're not - hence why we suck.
greeneyed wrote: ↑July 29, 2018, 9:13 pm
"Upgrades" aren't automatic. Rep bonuses are. Automatic rep bonuses cannot be the problem and if that's the case, thet's an even bigger debacle.
This is the quote from Mulholland in Saturday's CT.
"Sometimes players achieve bonuses which give them a big increase in their contracts as well. The salary cap's only gone up $200,000 for next season.
"It's not a monumental increase and players that have played representative games get bonuses, contracts go up incrementally so we might've lost some [players], but ... it all adds up."
Incremental increases suggests ratchet clauses or backloading to me. Minimum wage goes up 5k but that should be immaterial.
Considering Rapana and Whitehead haven't played a sanctioned rep game since last year it really is a poor excuse for why we would have no money for next year, but there it is in writing.
Honestly it wouldn't surprise me if we were paying players big bonuses or handing out upgrades for ridiculous stuff like making first grade or playing 50 games for the club.
I thought the Denver test match this year in Rep Round: England v New Zealand, was a sanctioned Test match for EW.
I am more concerned with the CEOs comments to Raiders fans that he can assure us he is spending the full amount of the cap. To me this means we are not looking at the value of a player, so that we are paying $300K to a player who may be worth $200K on the open market. We seem to have stood our ground (at last) in the cases of those that are leaving. I can see that the purchase of the two Englishmen and upgrades to Cotric and Havili and possibly Murchie would be needed but it could not possibly take all of the cap space formerly used on Austin, Paulo, Boyd and lesser lights such as Gubb.
greeneyed wrote: ↑July 29, 2018, 9:13 pm
This is the quote from Mulholland in Saturday's CT.
"Sometimes players achieve bonuses which give them a big increase in their contracts as well. The salary cap's only gone up $200,000 for next season.
"It's not a monumental increase and players that have played representative games get bonuses, contracts go up incrementally so we might've lost some [players], but ... it all adds up."
Incremental increases suggests ratchet clauses or backloading to me. Minimum wage goes up 5k but that should be immaterial.
Considering Rapana and Whitehead haven't played a sanctioned rep game since last year it really is a poor excuse for why we would have no money for next year, but there it is in writing.
Honestly it wouldn't surprise me if we were paying players big bonuses or handing out upgrades for ridiculous stuff like making first grade or playing 50 games for the club.
If this is the excuse it is ridiculous. That should be simply part of the expected increases in the cap, and it should be factored in when contracts are signed. It is ridiculous. There has to be an investigation into this!
Yeah the incremental increases don’t make sense to me. If someone is on a deal of $1 mil over 3 years, I didn’t really think pay rises would be on the cards. It’s not like the average Joe’s annual salary that gets a pay increase each year. Your figure should be locked in for the period of the contract.
For the NHL/NBA/NFL gurus out there, how did those clubs handle negotiations when the cap was decided so late? Do players just accept how it is, and hold off negotiating until then?
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.
Nickman's love of NSW
NSW has done a superb job - 18/12/2020
NSW has been world-class with their approach to date, that's a fact. - 04/02/2021