Tinkerman23 wrote:Liam Watts isn't going to be Rovers marquee signing , or any other super league teams, but lets say Leigh decided to make Watts they marquee signing after promotion, how much are they really going to pay him over the 150k? thens it purely down to the player if he wants to go for the money, its a very unrealistic scenario anyway. But I do quite like the thought of say Leigh tempting the Wigan captain with a marquee offer! Assuming Sam Tomkins is Wigans marquee player. I think its exciting and innovative. I can see peoples arguments against it, but Im yet to hear one that as convinced me its not a good idea.
Why is it so unrealistic? At the moment the cap prevents excessive offers. The basic idea of marquee signings will allow clubs to pay over the odds for a player.
Is Hodgson the new Griffin, or is it all about pace?
ccs wrote:Why is it so unrealistic? At the moment the cap prevents excessive offers. The basic idea of marquee signings will allow clubs to pay over the odds for a player.
So you think Rovers would use they 1 Marquee signing on Watts? Think it would be pretty foolish myself
deslawson wrote:Dont agree with it at all,the well off clubs will vote for it,and the poor clubs wont. Simples.
But will it make that much difference to what it is now. The rich clubs having better players than the poorer ones. Just will give the poorer clubs to at least attract one top class player, which in doing so, will make them a better team
Tinkerman23 wrote:But will it make that much difference to what it is now. The rich clubs having better players than the poorer ones. Just will give the poorer clubs to at least attract one top class player, which in doing so, will make them a better team
You'll have to explain that one to me.
Is Hodgson the new Griffin, or is it all about pace?
For example, Wakefield, instead of signing 4 5 average super league players, they sign 3, promote a couple of youth players who are on the fringes. Sign 1 Marquee player, Wakefield fans are excited by signing J Thurston also happy to see the young kids coming through. Actually think it will encourage teams to bring through the youngsters so they can put more money into a marquee signing. Its not a perfect example, but its along the lines of how I think it can benefit even the smaller clubs
Tinkerman23 wrote:For example, Wakefield, instead of signing 4 5 average super league players, they sign 3, promote a couple of youth players who are on the fringes. Sign 1 Marquee player, Wakefield fans are excited by signing J Thurston also happy to see the young kids coming through. Actually think it will encourage teams to bring through the youngsters so they can put more money into a marquee signing. Its not a perfect example, but its along the lines of how I think it can benefit even the smaller clubs
... and where does the money come from? They could do what you're suggesting now within the salary cap, with one player earning substantially more than the others. The word Marquee doesn't magically conjure up more money.
Is Hodgson the new Griffin, or is it all about pace?
ccs wrote:... and where does the money come from? They could do what you're suggesting now within the salary cap, with one player earning substantially more than the others. The word Marquee doesn't magically conjure up more money.
Like I said not a perfect example, but you cant just risk losing all our best players to the Nrl or rugby union for the sake of Wakefield, Most teams spend close to the cap, Wakefield probably worst example I could of used to be fair, replace Leigh with wakefield, and I reckon every team would make use of the marquee signing
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum