Re: Walsh : Thu Jun 11, 2015 6:59 pm  

St pete wrote:

He means giving walmsley extra to keep him having him just signed a new deal.

That's not what has happened or what Cunningham said though. He said along the lines of if the NRL come sniffing when around Walmsley then we could potentially use the rule to keep him here.

Re: Walsh : Thu Jun 11, 2015 7:00 pm  

BackrowSaint wrote:

That's not what has happened or what Cunningham said though. He said along the lines of if the NRL come sniffing when Walmsleys contract is up then we could potentially use the rule to keep him here.

Re: Walsh : Thu Jun 11, 2015 11:48 pm  

If he's fit it's a no-brainer, really.

Quality southern-hemisphere playmakers are a dwindling commodity. I was going to say "when fit he's a cut above SL-standard scrum halves" - but, hell, when INJURED he's a cut above SL standard.

Re: Walsh : Fri Jun 12, 2015 7:24 am  

Other than Roby and Walmsley- we currently haven't got anybody who NRL would be interested in and both are signed up relatively long term.
But realistically what is Roby earning ???? Possibly £200k - so making him our Marquee in reality only gives us £100k to spread around keeping others happy.
May help to keep Savelio and gone towards Walsh - but is that what this Marquee rule was brought in for ?
Not in my opinion - I thought the idea was to bring in some top class talent to a very average league. I'd love to see a Sam Burgess back where he belongs in an England RL shirt

Re: Walsh : Fri Jun 12, 2015 8:10 am  

yogi bear wrote:

Not in my opinion - I thought the idea was to bring in some top class talent to a very average league. I'd love to see a Sam Burgess back where he belongs in an England RL shirt

I think you are jumping to your own conclusions there. That was only a small part of the reason.

Re: Walsh : Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:04 am  

Donkey OTay wrote:

I think you are jumping to your own conclusions there. That was only a small part of the reason.

May have been a small part to you - but just sharing a spare £100k between what we already have is not going to excite many people. If that was the idea of this then we should have just raised the cap slightly.
In my opinion the Marquee rule should only be used to attract or keep top class players in SL.
Personally I would prefer a reward for clubs producing their own players - say only 70% of their salary counts on the cap.

Re: Walsh : Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:06 am  

You can have as many "Marquee Clauses" and "Special Dispensations" as you like. You've still got to come up with the money, somehow.

Given that Rugby League isn't a cash rich sport the impact will ultimately be minimal.

Basically, those who kicked up the fuss will spend the money whilst the rest won't be able to afford the extravagance. Which only highlights the fiction currently being pumped out by Koukash and co. that it will be a "boon" to the entire sport.

The reality is Koukash is gaming the system. He's like most big businessmen in that he's impatient, wants immediate success and can't be bothered putting in place the kind of infrastructure projects which, whilst far less costly than buying talent, only yield tangible results several years down the line. I doubt he has any intentions of remaining at Salford for very much longer. At which point the club will likely join its former great rival, Swinton, on the RL scrapheap. If it exits in anything firmer than the rapidly fading memory of fans I'll be (pleasantly) surprised.

Re: Walsh : Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:12 am  

yogi bear wrote:

May have been a small part to you - but just sharing a spare £100k between what we already have is not going to excite many people. If that was the idea of this then we should have just raised the cap slightly.
In my opinion the Marquee rule should only be used to attract or keep top class players in SL.
Personally I would prefer a reward for clubs producing their own players - say only 70% of their salary counts on the cap.

You mean like Graham? Or Eastmond?

KEEPING the top talent we can create is as a valid a use as BUYING for the sake of bringing in a name (seriously, Hohaia, Perry, Laffranchi and looking wider Bowen, Mason, Eastwood, Asotasi - has anyone successfully brought over a "marquee" in recent years?)

Roby won't be our marquee next year, nor will Walmsley (at this moment) - the argument is we can achieve our current recruitment and retention goals without the 100k freed up by naming Roby for the sake of naming Roby ... if we need to offer Roby/ Walmsley/ anyone else a huge contract to keep them here (ala Graham) then we will and not affect the balance of our side using this rule.

Re: Walsh : Fri Jun 12, 2015 10:59 am  

Just to add a bit of spin, you could say that when a "marquee" player is close to moving on or retiring that this would give the other players a reason to perform better as they want the £££ and the tag of been a "marquee" player. Don't the yanks called it an MVP?

Re: Walsh : Fri Jun 12, 2015 12:20 pm  

Magic Superbeetle wrote:

You mean like Graham? Or Eastmond?

KEEPING the top talent we can create is as a valid a use as BUYING for the sake of bringing in a name (seriously, Hohaia, Perry, Laffranchi and looking wider Bowen, Mason, Eastwood, Asotasi - has anyone successfully brought over a "marquee" in recent years?)

Roby won't be our marquee next year, nor will Walmsley (at this moment) - the argument is we can achieve our current recruitment and retention goals without the 100k freed up by naming Roby for the sake of naming Roby ... if we need to offer Roby/ Walmsley/ anyone else a huge contract to keep them here (ala Graham) then we will and not affect the balance of our side using this rule.

Yes - would've been nice to keep them 2 - certainly Graham.
You also fail to mention people like Lyon, Gidley, Soliola, Barrett, Renouf, Vainakolo, etc etc etc who have come over during the confines of salary cap and ripped it up. If this rule is to be used then it should be used to entice that calibre of player to SL. Or as mentioned - keeping hold of top quality if you're lucky enough to produce somebody special. Not just top up the salary of the mediocre currently on show.