Marquee Players - A Change of Heart by Tom

Last night we reposted my blog from a few weeks ago which detailed my thoughts on the idea of a marquee player exemption for Super League teams.

Having re read this blog myself I found that I have actually come around to a new way of thinking about this controversial proposal. 

I am in no way in favour of the blanket proposal made by Dr Koukash. I find it to be self serving and solely in his interests. He hides behind the shield of "I want to improve the sport" when I suspect what he actually means is "I want to improve the playing staff at Salford and see some return on my investment".

Dr Koukash, is of course, perfectly entitled to his opinions and I won't engage in the horrendous sour-grapes style Koukash-bashing that goes on over twitter every time he puts his ideas forward.

Since I've now gone some way to demonstrating my pro-Koukash proclivities, it's probably time I show my hand. But first, a little context...

Our sport is set to lose one of its three best players. England is about to lose its best player (sorry Mark, I don't mean little Sam). 

When Sam Burgess takes the field for Bath next season a body blow to English rugby league will have been fully delivered.

Five of our six best forwards, (Jammer, The Burgess', Cooper, and Mossop) ply their trade in the NRL. As does our best half back, Widdop. Our most exciting prospect in several years, Daryl Clark, is being linked with a move down under, as are the majority of Leeds outside backs at one time or another. 

Super League faces a talent drain from both the game in Australia and the other code. It seems that we cannot compete financially with our current structures in place.

The answer, to me, is to implement the Marquee Player Exemption. But only for players from THIS hemisphere. 

This would effectively kill two birds with the same stone. Firstly we would have a genuine means by which to more effectively retain the top 0.5% of talent in our game. This would help improve the overall quality of the sport as no team could hold a monopoly by virtue of their bank balance. It would also stem the flow of talent away from the English game.

It would also stop teams from investing in mediocre Aussies/Kiwis/Samoans/Tongans as marquee players and therefore reducing the options for our home grown talent.

The Northern Hemisphere Marquee Exemption would also have a beneficial effect on developmental rugby league and our junior systems. Teams would be behoved to develop their young talent because in the event they unearth a superstar, he can be exempt and therefore retained by the club that developed him during his formative years. The impetus then goes into improving structures and relationships away from the first teams so that a wider stream of young talent can come through the doors of each club. 

There will, of course be players that WANT to play in Australia, and try their hand at the NRL, it is after all, the sports premier competition. But at least we would have a carrot to dangle on our sticks. Rather than just a stick.

We can't stop players from moving away from our sport if they really want to. But we need a way to encourage them to stay. 

Tom
Super League Pod

PS. Don't forget to get in touch and listen to our latest show. All the links are in the sidebar!

Marquee Players? Not For Tom

Last week we re-posted a piece Mark had written about the salary cap that effectively addressed the question of Marquee Players as the Super League clubs built up to voting on Marwan Koukash's proposals. Mark basically concluded they wouldn't have much of an impact on competitive balance so the positives outweighed the negatives and he was in favour of the idea.

Tom has a different perspective and in an unprecedented manner, there is disagreement between the hosts of UK Rugby League's premier podcast. In the interest of balance, here is Tom's view:

I feel differently to Mark about the idea of Marquee Players and the effect they would have on Super League. That said I'm not sure how voraciously I need to make my point since the majority of Super League chairmen agree that, at the very least, the timing of such a proposal is inappropriate.

Let's begin with the comparisons being made to Rugby Union. Kick-and-Clap has a Marquee Player system in place. It also has higher attendances, a more lucrative sponsorship deal, wider television coverage, an international game that is competitive beyond three leading nations, and a network of leagues across the world where players can earn similar amounts of money. Players move more freely around the sport (unless you want to play for the All-Blacks) and can look forward to experiencing a similar level of competition in one of five or six domestics competitions. That's before they gain the opportunity to play in either the Rugby Championship (formerly Tri-Nations), Six Nations or a World Cup. Union is, for me, the happy medium between the Super League and top flight association football - it lives within its means, and it's means ALLOW a Marquee Player to be part of it's make up.

Don't get me wrong, Rugby League is the better product, but despite tentative growth in South Africa, the USA, and Eastern Europe, no one can argue that as a sport we aren't some way behind Union in terms of a wider global appeal.

The gap in financial clout between the NRL and Super League is also wider than we would like it to be. The NRL has broad nationwide coverage as Australia's number one winter sport, it has a higher salary cap and players can earn tonnes more cash though lucrative sponsorships and endorsements. These, coupled with the lifestyle and climate in Oz make playing over there a highly attractive proposition for our home grown talent and the trend for bringing over northern hemisphere players is growing.

The pro Marquee Player chairmen that exist in Super League come from the financially most able clubs, and it's understandable they want to flex their fiscal muscles so that they might improve and develop their squads and reap the potential benefits of having a marquee player. However, away from the East Lancs Road, the HJ and the Trafford Centre car park *wink-wink*, the idea of a marquee player should be filling clubs with dread. Only the most foolhardy and poorly run teams would try to sign a Marquee Player in the hope that one man could have such an impact as to turn them into a top four side (so I fully anticipate the Bulls will sign up SBW on a three million a year deal fairly soon!). 

The clamour to remain competitive could well outweigh the need to grow sustainably. As a Bulls fan, I know first hand just how valuable even £600k (half the current Sky TV money) can be to a team in need. If we suddenly make that market value to tempt players over from down under then we are putting our institutions at risk.

The argument that this system will improve the quality of the competition holds little water for me. I'll use Luke Walsh as an example. Let's say for the sake of this hypothetical that he is St Helens' Marquee Player. He certainly costs them enough in wages, and his early performances in Super League have been of a very high quality. In Super League.

In the NRL, however, he lost his place in an average Penrith team that finished tenth in 2013. Take nothing away from him in Super League, but he is hardly Marquee in the eyes of the Aussies. And maybe that's the problem. Our idea or marquee is their idea of average. 

Maybe there is more catching up to be done in terms of financial growth, but allowing clubs to rack up a massive strain on their already tight budgets puts teams under undue pressure and at unnecessary risk. If teams start folding as a result of signing up  average NRL players at inflated prices,then the game as a whole will suffer.

If teams don't live within their means they fail. If teams are forced to overreach to be competitive they will not be living within their means and they will fail. Marwan Koukash is no doubt doing great things for Salford but as yet they haven't shown that having bags of money to throw at people will pay off. This week they were butchered by Saints having previously seen off a poor London side and nearly letting a strong lead go against Wakefield. 

If the RFL doesn't administrate these proposals properly, we will very quickly see an insurmountable gap open up between the richest and poorest sides.

So, you've read some of the things that formed our opinion, now we want you to get in touch with yours too. We'll discuss all this and more on Episode 7 of Super League Pod.