Yeah. I reckon that this thing has been remarkably even over the seasons. The last few seasons though, certain teams have really struggled. I mainly speak of The Lions, Pumas and Vipers. All three of these teams have been in the comp for at least three seasons overall and haven't looked like finals contenders. The other major issue at the moment is the sudden movement from good to bad that one team can become. The Rays are not exempt in this. Now, obviously we came in and now will lose a heap of players, but at the time I wouldn't have signed Tyson if I knew he was going to up and leave after one season. Choco we knew was going to leave but that was a forced signing. Still, I think that there's a bit more disloyalty these days. One team players are becoming very rare. At the same time, it annoys me to see players refusing to leave clubs despite being offered more at other clubs. I dunno, I just think that teams should have to build to premierships. That will sound hypocritical coming from me, but a lot of the rays were fringe first graders that came good. We had a great core and fringe players around it. The carbs will just have good players all over the park and will not add anything by taking seconds players and making them firsts players. They'll just force other clubs to sign seconds players.
Can't believe I read all that lol. not a big fan of a salary cap ITBT... but that is a really interesting look on it. One thing it would stop is teams like the 'Rays and Gamblers coming in with an awesome side who all leave after 1 season. Would mess Choco up massively though He'd have to be close to 10 lol.
Maybe if u implented the V-Bookie thing cash could be handed out that way? Post count additions maybe?
I think the Gamblers will really make a few career, and re-ignite some. I see Hayes getting back to his test match form. Hopefully we can turn some guys like Weaver, Damo and some other guys we are chasing into some first class players. The Gamblers won't have class all over, we will have a lot of good players but quite a few standard first graders.
I think it would be really interesting. The competition would be more even, and it recruitment would have to be done more wisely. Then, wise HoRs could recruit a real gem of a player who's new and has a low rating, who turns out to be gun. Just an idea.
salary cap definitely wouldnt hurt the competion, however you wouldnt want to constrict teams so much much that reserve grade squads would be filled with absolute crap so as to not bust the budget. All in all it would even up the competition thats for sure
I think the key point is, teams either go for all out money on 1st Team, and have no backup so in injury they'd be ****ed. Or they go more logically for some cheaper, but still cost effective reserves as well so that they have backup.
Any more posts about the salary cap that don't actually address one or more of the problems associated with it will be deleted. So sick of opening this thread and seeing people just say the same thing without addressing the issues.
That was just what I was about to point out. Logically, the only incentive is a 1st team place, so then it's all down to members? I like the idea of a salary cap that would inhibit one team having all the gun players though.
Personally, if 1 team gets all the gun players i then think it's up to Cribb to work out what he wants to do to benefit the sim.
So your forcing people that want to play together, not being able too? Back in the day when me Tyson, Wilson, Davis, Jeffy, Hayes etc etc wanted to play together, we would have raged if we weren't allowed too.
