Dave Smith's 'war chest' dilemma

Because it's to keep players in the game not keep players at specific clubs.

Not unless the Storm get a SL style leg up(in another code) to assist.

I'm going to fence sit on this...........Overall, I think the whole idea of marquee players funded by the NRL is unfair and a very slippery slope in terms of inflating salaries to an unsustainable level. To my understanding, The salary cap is in place to essential play two roles. Firstly, it is supposed to even out the competition and avoid a few rich clubs from dominating (think EPL). Gus Gould has previously claimed that this has a flow on effect in that clubs who do not develop juniors or are ineffective in the way they are managed are rewarded equally to those doing a good job. Maybe so. However, the second role of salary cap is to ensure clubs remain financially viable by not spending money they can't afford, especially on one or two players. So in relation to that point maybe a war chess does help keep players in the NRL that might otherwise leave. Perhaps another way to approach it is the A League model where each club has a limited number of marquee players not counted in salary cap.

Don't care , just hate afl. We are at war. No ha ha or lol . Agree with phill Gould on that one

The salary cap is increasing every year and will continue to do so into the next rights deal, so the need to pay players outside the cap will not required other than to compensate a player in role that benefits the game as a whole, ambassador etc. I would let players go who want to go as those who stay love the game and this will reflect on the field. The money saved spend on other aspects of the game, junior development, advertising and so on.

I agree with you Planko, but I really like sports prophets idea of chasing big name SA and French union stars . So good, especially SA. I work with a lot of SA and while they are union mad most really get into league No telling what advertising a marquee SA rugby player could bring to the game.

Please NRL start using some of the money to build infrastructure. Despite people carrying on about a certain local ground the other night ANZ looked awful. The irony it was the same 2 clubs Manly and the Dogs. Brookvale had 6 events on it's surface in the preceding 7 days at Brookvale Oval. ANZ had also a punishing regime of events. NRL needs to protect it image and it's players. The NRL needs get involved with ANZ in it's ownership I believe. OR start buying into grounds around the country the long term benefits are enormous. Let clubs sort out recruitment. If a certain player is that critical to the NRL that they will be lost then the NRL should buy them and Auction them to the highest bidder. NRL intervention should not be to benefit of the incumbent club. If the incumbent club benefits you don't have to be genius to see this getting abused.

The difference is the Swans were also rans for a great majority of those years, not winning multiple premierships, once they got to that stage, they became the best attended team in Sydney - don't think the Storm will ever manage that feat in Melbourne.

Exactly, thank you for articulating perfectly what I was thinking Christo.

If they do it for one club/player then they should do it for all clubs/players otherwise they are promoting bias and an unfair competition.

Warchest dilema over ceo discretion is silly. Not just in this line of thinking, but anywhere. They will never use it more than likely. Its a defensive thing, designed to ward off (if anything) free-shot poaching. It is not a substitute for other things. And it is a retrospectively applied thing, in that its role is to prevent what happened in the past happening again. People, however cannot make the distinction they will bring it out, as if they are in fear. Whether or not such a thing is used remains to be seen. But I can guarantee you its not the danger people complain about.

If used properly, people need to think outside the box of what Marquee Allowance is. Retention is only one option. What about recruitment? Think about it. NRL club recruits whoever is the current South African fly half. Interest in NRL immediately increases in a relatively new and suitable market. Additionally, should the player become even slightly successful, the NRL has now displayed to existing talent from South Africa that a lucrative and successful career can be made playing RL in Australia. Could open the doors for more talented players seeking offers from NRL clubs. What about having signed Dan Carter a few years ago after he won a World Cup? Perhaps would have worked if there was a new second NZ club that required a big name that will immediately put bums on seats. Recruitment is probably the best place to utilise this Marquee Allowance in my opinion. Let's see huh...

Here's a scenario to ponder.Why didn't Manly ask the NRL to use their discressionary powers with marquee payments to keep DCE or Foran?Both players came through Manly's system and both left because of money,no matter what spin they put on it.What the NRL are basically saying with their marquee plans are that they will reward players who are not loyal to them. -- Comment from The Roar's iPhone app.

The Marquee allowance may work like this. THe player negotiates a contract with whom ever he wamts to play with under the salary cap. The NRL then pays them 1 Million per year non negotiable regardless of who they choose to play for. No player is worth more than an extra Million dollars. Also when negotiating these contracts consideration should be given to the fact the NRL provides much better post career oppurtunities when they decide to retire.

The swans were on an afl drip for 20 years.

I am now of the opinion that the "war-chest" be ditched. Look, as long as league is around, there are going to be athletes that other codes are going to be interested in. Rugby league just creates awesome athletes - it's no secret, and we are now in a time where we are starting to see a lot. Lose Inglis? ...how good is Rodger Tuivasa-Sheck going? Matt moylan? Taumololo? We've lost SBW, Hayne and Burgess and as good as those guys are- already we have replaced them with new names who are lighting up the game. I just think that as a league fan we have nothing to worry about, let other codes poach. Not only does it make us look superior, we know the next big thing is never far away. The great thing is knowing we are yet to see the best players, so I've jumped off the doomsday bandwagon and thought 'the hell with it" and no longer care.

I have been saying for ages the NRL should pillage south africa. There must be hundreds of talented players who can't make the springboks side and who would be better suited to League.

Players leave for all sorts of reasons. I don't think the NRL should do a thing to stop them. There will always be another superstar waiting for their time in the sun. If the league has extra money in the bank it should be put into either grassroots development or building infrastructure/reducing costs for clubs. Leave it to the clubs themselves to manage recruitment.