Before the Brisbane Broncos announced yesterday that they had lured Wayne Bennett back to the club, the rugby league rumour mill had the star coach returning to the St George Illawarra Dragons on a three-year deal worth approximately $3 million.
This in turn had generated talk of the NRL introducing a salary cap for coaches; discussions that were prompted by the news that those responsible for running the Newcastle Knights on behalf of the NRL deemed $800k a season as too much to pay for a coach.
One can only imagine their response to the news that Bennett’s Brisbane contract is worth $4 million, or $1.33 million a season.
A spokesperson for the NRL confirmed that coaches’ salaries were a talking point for the competition, but denied that there was any plan to include coaches’ wages in a salary cap.
When I first heard about this story on the radio, I scoffed loudly in my car, much to the amusement of the occupants in the vehicle stationed next to me at a red light. I thought it was ridiculous that a club could be prevented from spending however much they wanted in order to attract an elite coach.
However, perhaps there is some logic to the argument.
The NRL website clearly outlines the reasons for the competition having a salary cap on players.
The NRL Salary Cap serves two functions:
1. It assists in “spreading the playing talent” so that a few better resourced clubs cannot simply out-bid other clubs for all of the best players. If a few clubs are able to spend unlimited funds it will reduce the attraction of games to fans, sponsors and media partners due to an uneven competition. Allowing clubs to spend an unlimited amount on players would drive some clubs out of the competition as they would struggle to match the prices wealthy clubs could afford to pay.
2. It ensures clubs are not put into a position where they are forced to spend more money than they can afford, in terms of player payments, just to be competitive.
So the reasons for the NRL salary cap can be summarised as ‘parity’ and ‘protection’.
Point 1 is an argument for another day, but Point 2 is interesting considering the subject matter.
The $1.33 million a season the Broncos are reportedly paying Bennett to return to the club is worth more per year than any player on the Brisbane roster. Ricky Stuart’s deal with Canberra was rumoured to be around the $1 million mark as well, while Des Hasler is said to be earning $875k with the Bulldogs.
Admittedly, not all clubs are splashing out that kind of money for coaches, but even allowing for the tabloid inflation of those figures, considering the salary cap for 2014 is set at $5.5 million, you can start to see just how significant those type of head coach contracts for are for the clubs, and their overall spending.
If part of the reason for the player salary cap is to prevent clubs from spending more than they can afford, the NRL is essentially saying that the cap exists to save clubs from themselves. By that rationale, surely there should also be a cap on how much a club spends on a coach? If not the entire footballing department?
Based on Bennett’s stint with Newcastle, some are questioning question whether the $1 million offer from the Dragons and the $1.33 million deal with the Broncos are sound investments. Likewise Ricky Stuart’s contract with the Raiders.
Should those clubs be saved from themselves when it comes to the contracts they’re willing to hand out to coaches? Why should the clubs only be protected by bad financial decisions on players?
If the answer to that last question is that those particular clubs can afford to make ‘mistakes’ because they have more money to spend, then why isn’t that extended to the players they can afford?
It does seem like there are some serious contradictions at play here.
I’m not suggesting the NRL abolish the salary cap. Doing so probably would lead to clubs overspending, which leads to clubs going broke. No one wants to see that.
Yet if you are going to have a players’ salary cap, there is a school of thought that says there should also be a salary cap for coaches, or that the existing cap should include the coach’s salary.
Rather than being scoffed at, it really is food for thought.
Razza
Guest
IF CLUBS HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY A BLOKE LIKE BENNET 1 MILLION BUCKS A SEASON TO COACH THEN LET THEM, THEY MUST HAVE THE MONEY, MAYBE IT WILL PUT A SMILE ON HIS FACE FOR ONCE . IF ANYONE DESERVES AN EARLY RELEASE,THEN IT IS STEVE MATAI, HE HAS BEEN LOYAL TO THE CLUB FOR MANY SEASON AND HAS PUT IN EVERY GAME, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE HIM FINISH HIS DAYS WITH THE EAGLES, BUT IF IT HIS WISH TO GO BACK HOME AND PLAY FOR THE WARRIOR'S, THEN I AM 100% BEHIND HIM. AND AS FOR THE OTHER PLAYERS SAID TO BE LEAVING, WELL GOOD LUCK FELLOWS, BUT LOOK AT YOUR DAYS AHEAD, YOU ARE GETTING LONG IN THE TOOTH WITH CONSTANT INJURIES, DONT BITE YOUR NOSE OFF TO SPITE YOUR FACE. AS FOR CHERRY EVANS BEING WORTH 1 MILLION A YEAR ???, COME ON LETS KEEP IT REAL, IF I WAS PAYING SOMEONE THAT MONEY I WOULD WANT MANY TRIES OUT OF HIM EACH GAME, A GREAT YOUNG PLAYER, BUT HOT AND COLD, JUST LIKE FORAN, IN SAYING THAT I WISH THEM EACH ALL THE BEST IN THE FUTURE. WHY DOES THIS SORT OF STUFF HAVE TO COME OUT EVERY YEAR NEARING THE GRAND FINALS, IS IT DONE TO PUT TOP PLAYERS OFF THEIR GAME. PRETTY WEAK I THINK, BUT TYPICAL OF SOME MEDIA, WAIT UNTIL THE LAST WHISTLE IS BLOWN FOR THE SEASON. "GO THE EAGLES"
Jay C
Guest
Pretty sure Bennet got an ordinary knights team to one game shy of the GF last year. This year should not be what Bennett is rated on. And no the coaches should be in the cap. That is crazy. Next you will want the support staff and any new equipment included. And why not junior development at that point. The way Wayne left in 2006 was a shambles and as a Bronco supporter it is great to have him back. Griffin is a lovely guy, but the Broncos belong to Wayne. Hopefully he can set up the long term success of the club. Also how sour is Tallis. Pick your bottom lip up mate, no one cares.
Glenn Innes
Guest
Cadfael - Exactly it would be boring because the same two or three clubs would dominate every year,even more so than EPL..the low scoring nature of soccer means that even though over a thirty eight game season the cream does rise to the top most of the games are still relatively close.You also have knockout cup comps to give lesser teams something to aim for (like Hull made the FA cup final) In League where points are far easier to score you would have regular fifty and sixty point thrashings and the whole thing would a giant yawnfest until the second last week of the season. Also EPL can do what it likes it has a virtual monopoly over the English sporting scene,it has no real competition from other sports Rugby League in Australia does..
EM
Guest
Maybe relocate some Sydney teams to brisbane.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Disagree. If a club wants to spend themselves silly on a coach, good luck to them. I agree with a salary cap on players. The competition would be then too much like the EPL with the big, rich clubs taking everything.
frustrated old forward
Guest
The Coach is considered part of the team. If the team wins the comp the Coach gets a premiership ring therefore he is part of the salary cap. The people who volunteer their time to raise money to help the clubs operate only get a warm fuzzy feeling.
Andrew
Guest
No! If the club wants to pay an exorbitant fee for the coach, so be it.
Train Without A Station
Guest
Any muppets shelling out $1M a year for Ricky Stuart deserve their own demise.
Rob G
Guest
Is Ricky really on $1million a year. Hahahhahaha that's awesome.
john badseed
Guest
Breaking news from Brookie Ryan. Due to coaching salary cap issues at the club, Manly's coach, Geoff Toovey, has today issued a statement. "As of today I have officially severed my association with the Manly club. From the beginning of next week I will be joining the Canterbury Bulldogs in the capacity of Assistant Coach to Des Hasler. I have enjoyed my time at the Sea Eagles, however due to the release of 80% of my current squad I felt that I had no other choice. I will make no further statement until the beginning of next week". Ryan, I believe the former coach of the Whale Beach Wombats U/6's, Kelly 'Bottom Turn" Pipeline, will be the interim coach.
JayBob
Guest
Yeah Brisbane are so good at attracting bigger crowds and selling more merchandise, must be their management and not the fact it's a one team city. Maybe we should put 9 different teams in Brisbane and observe the crowds over a weekend. I actually agree with Ryan, I said it a couple of years ago(before the Dogs bought Des lol). My argument was that a coach has more influence on how a team performs than any other single player, so logically they should be included.
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
Without a doubt, the coach is the easiest person to fire at a football club. My old man (who coached professional basketball) used to say "Players win games, coaches lose games."
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
Indeed - Ryan Buckland mentioned as such above, mate.
Tim
Guest
It actually might be kind of nice if they directed the money towards grassroots access and development and gameday affordability rather than into ever increasing salaries
Brett McKay
Expert
Someone please correct me if I've misheard this, but weren't the AFL talking about limiting the amount clubs could spend on coaches and/or their football departments, so as to again even out the differences between the haves and have nots? I don't think coaches should be included as the same cap as players, but I think limiting clubs to what they spend on coaches is worthy of discussion...
T bone
Guest
I think the salary cap needs to work in conjunction with a draft to be effective... If this was the case, then I think the coach should be outside the salary cap. In my view, the salary cap has dragged the standard of league down.... So far, this season would have to be the most boring in history- has the salary cap been a factor in this? I think it has a small part.
mushi
Guest
I agree with having a cap because lets face it our clubs are predominantly run by muppets that are incentivised to focus on the short term and we'd be seeing clubs popping up and folding like it was the 1920s NFL
HarryT
Guest
Why not include the coaches in the salary cap? The main characters in the game are the players and as many resources as possible should be directed to them.
Don
Roar Rookie
A few things given I have the day off; . Bennett and Jack Gibson were saying well before coaches were on massive money that the coach should earn at least as much or even more than the highest paid player at the club. From his first day at the Broncos he was always the highest paid person in the football dept. . Almost all of the "super coaches" mentioned did an apprenticeship on lower dollars and weren't paid big bucks until they delivered results. Leave Stewart aside and look at guys like Bellamy and Hasler. They were long term assistants then got their chances at moderate salaries and only when they delivered results did the pay rises come along with them. . It is the role of the club's boards to ensure they are paying coaches and other senior management only what the club can afford. If a "super coach" presents his powerpoint in the interview at a bottom 4 club and shows how you can win a premiership in 2 years by paying him $1M PA but without needing to change much in the playing roster then you should be thinking "buyer beware." If you still sign him, the auditors should probably check whether that club has also given the bank details to someone in Nigeria who wants to deposit $12M in exchange for you getting 20%. . There will always be snake oil salesmen like Ricky who, after delivering a good win years ago now have a lot of "spin" around them to deflect focus from the actual results. Like the wild west, they take their wagon from town to town and fleece the desperate locals looking for a quick cure and then he hitches up his horses, stows the cash in his carpet bag and gets out of Dodge hopefully before the yokels realise they were swindled. Add a slick haircut and a handlebar moustache and he would be the perfect villain. . Equally there will also be coaches who once delivered something that looked really promising for a short time so the club prematurely rushed to lock them in on larger long term contracts for fear of another club grabbing this obvious "genius" from under their nose. Then, early into the next season you realise that, while you thought you ordered a Mercedes Benz, they delivered you a bush taxi with a wound back speedo. You can't afford to replace it so you are stuck with the embarrassment of driving it publicly for the next 3 years or going to the bank cap in hand to borrow enough to at least get a new Camry so people stop laughing at you. Can you hear me Michael Searle and Peter Doust? . The coach is the easiest person to sack at a club when things go south. It looks to the public as the club acting on results and not tolerating poor results. In truth it is more like the board and management saying; "we know it is not his fault and we bought the wrong players but if we admit that then most of us will be out of a job, best we sack the coach..." Because of the above, let your club decide what they pay a coach and, as members and fans take your club's management to task if he ends up being a Gump. The NRL has no place being involved in preventing player or coach recruitment stupidity and it would rob us all of a good laugh either at our own or other's expense.
Parrafan
Guest
If you want the real reason for why clubs are run so badly look at the majority of clubs boards. They are made up of predominately ex players voted for by members as a popularity contest.