Board index ‹ Welcome to RLFANS ‹ The Virtual Terrace ‹ Brian Carney suggests cutting the cap.

Levrier wrote:

He suggests £1 million per team. Is this the first move on behalf of his bosses at Sky to prepare us for a reduced deal in the future?

No. If you listen to the podcast, he uses pretty specious reasoning to suggest that if Widnes were operating in a lower cap, they would have ended up with more than £700 to their name.

He's talking VERY hypothetically and even then I doubt Carney is closely involved in TV negotiations.

[Fantastic Mr Catpiss]

bramleyrhino wrote:

No. If you listen to the podcast, he uses pretty specious reasoning to suggest that if Widnes were operating in a lower cap, they would have ended up with more than £700 to their name.

He's talking VERY hypothetically and even then I doubt Carney is closely involved in TV negotiations.

I would suggest that brian carney is an idiot if he genuinely believes widnes wouldnt have ended up in a similar position with james rule at the helm, and steve o connor asleep in Australia

bramleyrhino wrote:

No. If you listen to the podcast, he uses pretty specious reasoning to suggest that if Widnes were operating in a lower cap, they would have ended up with more than £700 to their name.

He's talking VERY hypothetically and even then I doubt Carney is closely involved in TV negotiations.

He does not have to have a hand in negotiations to follow the party line and given what we hear from Talksport I think that it is time to start looking for other backers.

Brian Carney is no businessman. He is a law student turned commentator. He is very much smarter than his colleagues Terence, Barry and Phillip Clark, but still not qualified to opine in public on business matters.

A higher cap, along with two marquee players outside the cap, seems to me a good idea because it allows rich owners like Argyle, Lenagan and Moran to retain existing rugby league talent and recruit new talent from rugby union.

Levrier wrote:

He does not have to have a hand in negotiations to follow the party line and given what we hear from Talksport I think that it is time to start looking for other backers.

You can look far and wide but if there is no other networks who are interested then it's a problem.

I actually think premier sports would be interested but they would probably pay less then sky.

BBC wouldn't be interested in a deal showing 2 games per week let alone 3. They would pay peanuts for 1 game per week.

Sky know that they are the only major player in the game so low offer is easy for them.

kobashi wrote:

You can look far and wide but if there is no other networks who are interested then it's a problem.

I actually think premier sports would be interested but they would probably pay less then sky.

BBC wouldn't be interested in a deal showing 2 games per week let alone 3. They would pay peanuts for 1 game per week.

Sky know that they are the only major player in the game so low offer is easy for them.

Premier Sports are a no go regardless of how much they offered.
If not Sky then you’re looking at BT or Channel 4 but no-one knows how much they’d be willing to pay.

It’s pretty much Sky and we have to accept a lower amount. Could anyone really justify Sky paying us more?

Maybe all those people who lambasted they clubs and the RFL that agreed to the previous deal may change their tune a bit.

People not listened to the full podcast on here taking his comments out of context. He makes a very valid, but hupothetical point. How much would our game lose if we halved the cap? How many players would be lost to RU, etc.? Would we still have a viable sport?

If we can significantly cut the amount of money we spend on players, we can ensure that all clubs are in a strong position off the field, and the extra money can go towards marketing, youth development, etc.