Beau Scott’s signing with the Knights seems to have opened a can of worms regarding the transfer of players between clubs (as invariably happens each season), to the point where the old draft discussion has been dusted off and brought out to see the light of day again.
For starters, I don’t think it’s actually that big a deal.
This season we’ve had Scott and Dave Taylor announce they’re moving on next year. Given that we’ve got 16 teams with 25 players each (not including tier two or Toyota Cup players), should we be hitting the panic button based on two of well over 400 hundred players?
As a Bulldogs fan I experienced this situation first hand with the “cashed-up” Titans signing Jamal Idris early last season. While it was disappointing it certainly didn’t affect my enjoyment of the game, my team or the player.
I don’t know how the draft solves this problem. From what I understand, it doesn’t.
The other problem the draft is supposed to solve is the even distribution of talent between clubs.
We have arguably the most even premier sporting competition in the world with nine different premiers over the past 11 years. We’ve also had the Warriors, Eels and Cowboys play in grand finals over that period.
All the pre-season hype was that this was going to be the closest season on record.
The on-field action supports this to the point where on Monday night we saw a team winless in 2012 (and who had lost their previous ten games) beat the undefeated, top-of-the-table reigning premiers. Can it get much more even?
Cameron Smith suggested recently that the NRL was a laughing stock for not having a draft.
I don’t see how the NRL has anything to learn in terms of talent distribution from the AFL who typically have a top four miles ahead of the rest, a middle eight battling away for the remaining semi spots and three or four clubs at the bottom of the table that struggle to win a game except against each other.
The AFL should be looking to league on how to distribute talent evenly between teams and create an even competition.
If these early season signings need to be stopped, I’d suggest that clubs, players and agents be banned from making announcements on signing players except for a two week mid-season window and then post season.
Negotiations should be free to continue at any time.
The reason for this is that the old June 30 deadline never worked and was completely unenforceable. Allowing clubs to negotiate but banning announcements is far easier to police and monitor compliance.
Yes there will be speculation about who might be going where, but that happens all the time anyway (Sonny-Bill, Foran, Minichiello et al) and isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
The other thing I’d implement would be salary cap concessions for players who have played extended periods for one club.
We have to move away from the concept of ‘local juniors’.
The original boundaries in Sydney were divvied up in 1908 and are no longer valid because of the super-juniors areas like Parramatta and Penrith, not to mention one city/region/country teams like Brisbane, Newcastle, New Zealand or North Queensland or the junior-less Melbourne and potentially Perth.
The salary cap concession method I would prefer to see in place is based on when a player is first signed to a club and joins that team’s system, rather than when a player makes his NRL debut.
Local juniors would obviously make up a large part of this talent pool for the Parramattas, Brisbanes, etc.
The player would then start accumulating salary cap concessions based on the number of years he is within a club’s system regardless of whether or not he actually goes on to play at NRL level.
Being a Bulldogs fan I call this the Asotasi Effect as I like to use Big Roy as an illustration.
Roy wasn’t a local junior but started with the Dogs at age 16 when he was scouted and signed by them.
He was put up in Sydney with club supporters and played for the Dogs junior sides for years before becoming an NRL player. The Dogs put a lot of time and money into identifying, nurturing and developing Asotasi’s talent long before he got anywhere near the NRL.
Fast forward eight years and he was regarded as one of the best props in the world. The Dogs were getting some return on their investment.
Then Souths swoop in and offer $400k+ per season to sign him which the Dogs simply couldn’t compete with. They received nothing in compensation for the time, effort and money it took to develop Asotasi.
Why would clubs bother putting time into juniors and developing players when the situation above can happen?
I’m not bagging Souths at all because all teams do it (including the Dogs – more than I’d like recently).
In my system, Asotasi starts accumulating salary cap concessions from the year he joins the club or from his 16th birthday, whichever is the latter. Say at 2% per year (the numbers are not definitive).
The concession doesn’t kick in until he is part of the top 25 contracted players and it can only be applied to Asotasi. After eight years in the Bulldogs system he is entitled to a 16% concession.
If a rival club comes in to offer a contract, the Bulldogs can make a counter offer, 16% of which is not included under the salary cap.
Players will still change clubs – it’s likely that Asotasi would have moved anyway even if the concession system above was in place. The salary cap will still ensure even distribution of talent.
This system will, however, reduce the number of players forced to switch clubs or head overseas and increase the likelihood of one club players. It will also reward clubs that put the time, effort and dollars towards identifying and developing talent from a young age.
PLANKO
Guest
Like the article Bazza. Not sure if well known Auditor Mr Shubert could understand you percentages. I personally don't want to see anything increases the cap until the grant gets increased as I don't support Brisbane . In reality they would be the only side that could spend more. I thought you points were great and I have enjoy hearing what people say about this one. I think a transfer fee sounds interesting. But a slippery slope cause sometimes clubs off load and it is not up to the player ?
The Barry
Roar Guru
Ken, the reason I picked Asotasi was to highlight that the local junior concept is outdated now. There can never be a fair distribution of local juniors because the boundaries are so uneven. No matter how many resources and how much money the Roosters pour into their juniors they're not going to have the same talent come through as others because their catchment area goes from Rose Bay to Clovelly. I believe that most of a players "development" occurs once he enters a clubs set up and starts getting professional training, usually around 16 or so. I'd say up to about 12 or 13 is about fundamental skills and participation. It's at this age as kids enter adolesence and start going to high school that numbers start to thin out a bit and you get more of the 'serious' players left. I take your point about the inflationary effect and giving clubs advantages - however the clubs that get the advantage are those that better identify kids at a young age and train them and bring them through. I think that's fairly desirable.
peeeko
Roar Guru
i think you make a good point here ken about Asotasi, yes he was from somewhere else before being "developed" by canterbury at 16. Personally i would favour a system that doesnt encourage clubs to start poaching kids at 16 but i guess clubs have to do it, especially ones without locals
AndyMack
Guest
Well a club just couldnt come in and pinch a player. If a player is off contract and wants to change clubs, they have to enter the draft and take their chances. There would be chances to trade, so if Souths really wanted Asotasi, they would have to make a deal with the Bulldogs, something along the lines of a fringe first grader plus Souths #2 draft pick. That way the Dogs have the option of getting something for the player they have developed.
PuntPal
Guest
I think this is a brilliant article and I agree with every single word of it
Jaceman
Guest
A few points - you suggest the comp is even because the undefeated Manly who have had the opening rounds draw from hell (well done NRL!!??) go to Cronulla on a very wet night and some dodgy decisions and just lose. I could use the example of other blowouts on the weekend to show that in this round at least the gap may widen but next week may be different. NRL games are designed to be close because you both get a turn with the ball and with 10 yard offside rule its not hard to make at least 50 metres in 6 tackles unlike AFL and Union where the ball is up for grabs all the time and dominant sides can really dominate. The downside of this is that referees decisions are crucial and not many years ago the Monday papers used to be full of headlines/bleats about refereeing (eg Round 1 this year). As Masters wrote the other week the Foxtel commentators in some cases at least play down the refereeing errors I guess to have a controversy free broadcast although Nine's Gould and Warren barely mentioned the possibility of a forward pass for Tigers Ryans try to get back into the Saints game (and no replay) last friday night. However Ken above mentioned that Asotasi came from elsewhere to be "developed" at 16. How does one account for junior development in Dubbo? The AFL system isnt perfect (drafting 18 year olds?) but you may get a player and draft picks for the loss of a player and it does tend to have many players stick at a club for many years rather than the NRL transfer system. Of course Melbourne received Champion for Inglis which didnt work out that well for Melbourne but they seemed to have overcome that...
Dan
Guest
What an awesome article!! -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
Ken
Guest
I imagine they do, that's how we've ended up with the reasonably successful, though complex, interaction of rules and caps and concessions that we have now. Never going to stop the media or the fans debating 1 section or another though.
roarr
Guest
I really don't understand why the fans are the ones who have to come up with the system that works perfectly. It's all well and good debating about pro's and con's of different systems and how they would work etc... but surely the NRL has a group of serious thinkers who can devote a couple of weeks/months/years into research, planning, testing etc etc etc. And I'm not talking about the ARLC, they are the executive, they can make the final decision of whether to implement the system and whether it will be fair and beneficial to all 16 teams and the whole of the RL community. It seems as if for every issue that pops up (and thats usually about 1-2 a week), Gallop and the media come out and say "Hmm maybe we should have a draft... the current system needs tinkering". Then all the passionate fans and RL media commentators have a fairly intelligent (sometimes) discourse about different strategies and which ones would be most suitable. After this week or so of heated debate... the next issue pops up and the old one is put on the back burner.
Ken
Guest
I'm a little baffled as to why you would use Asotasi as an example, since he was poached from another junior system at 16 - which is completely OK and done by all clubs but I wouldn't really think it best illustrates the spirit of your proposition. Do you count the time players have spent in the junior system or just when they play grade? Just looking up Asotasi it doesn't look like he played Flegg until 18. The proposition itself has a much bigger issue though, you state: 'The salary cap will still ensure even distribution of talent.' That's what it does currently but your proposition will completely undermine that power. Clubs with great junior development like Parra, Brisbane, Saints etc will do very well out this. Consider Saints as an example since they currently are the definition of a mature team with lots of local juniors - haven't done the sums but with plenty of old boys like Hornby, Cooper, Creagh etc that have played there since they first strapped on a boot (or turned 16? I'm unsure on your requirement) they would be saving many hundreds of thousands of dollars on their players. Then think about Canterbury or the Roosters - teams that tend to buy a lot of players and have a higher turnover - their discount relative would be quite small. Fair enough, you might say, the Dragons have 'grown' those players they deserve a discount. Which is fine except this then distorts the marketplace. The Dragons then have all this spare cash available to buy the best Canterbury or Roosters players going around, while the Dogs in return will only be able to afford to buy lower performing players back from the Dragons (whose prices will probably be inflated by all the concessions that they have). Over time this effect will only magnify, the salary cap would end up just driving a wedge between the haves and have-nots.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Couple of issues here. First of all, lets assume we have a club with lots of non-salary cap money to spend. Lets call them Collingwood. They vacuum up a lot of juniors, and start banking their years of eligibility, so when they come good they have 10 or 12% discount on their salary cap. Second, lets assume we have a club that can barely make cap. Lets call them Norf. They have to be sparing with their junior development funds. See the long term issue with which club is more successful in the long term ? I believe that junior clubs should do junior development, and the league as a whole should fund this, ideally through a percentage of a players salary being kicked back by the lague to his junior club(s).
Jimbo Jones
Guest
OK, I understand that we should let clubs reap the rewards of bringing a player up through their systems, and developing them. But if we start offering salary cap concessions then there isnt a level playing field for all the clubs really is there?
kiwidave
Guest
"They received nothing in compensation for the time, effort and money it took to develop Asotasi." This sounds like an argument for transfer fees to me.
kiwidave
Guest
Elaborate then, how would the draft stop this from happening?
peeeko
Roar Guru
i think people really just need to accept that players will move from club to club. Deal with it
AndyMack
Guest
"Then Souths swoop in and offer $400k+ per season to sign him which the Dogs simply couldn’t compete with. They received nothing in compensation for the time, effort and money it took to develop Asotasi." Ahhh, the draft would stop this happening.....!!! I think I have come to the conclusion that the draft won't work in the NRL.