So even if it helped us in the fight to keep Makasini it’s pointless?Not sure if the $300,000 is pointless for a team like the Tigers who don’t have veterans outside of Api & Klemmer who are both coming to the end of their careers. And if you need to win the battle with Union for a kid like Makasini it helps unless you downgrade or release other guys. But yes all teams have kids who they could put that money towards.I think that's up to the club but can't confirm. There is an allowance of $300,000 for veteran and developed players. Developed that make top 30 is all that I've been able to find, and players who have been a top 30 player for at least 8 years at the club or a top 30 player for at least 10 years across the game. I'd guess the Tigers might use that for Makasini 2026 and maybe Klemmer next year that's purely a guess.https://www.weststigers.com.au/news/2024/10/23/new-deals-for-faataape-and-porter/
Can someone refresh my memory....development Contract players are guaranteed promotion to Top 30 in future years?
The long serving and developed players allowance has nothing to do with development players.
Basically a developed player for this allowance is any player that played juniors at your club. I believe they count form flegg. The 8 years to qualify for the allowance then start from that point instead of when they debuted.
It's a pointless allowance anyway as all it does is add $300k to the salary cap of any club that has at least one player that qualifies. It doesn't matter how many players you have that qualify you still only get $300k.
Development players do not automatically get upgraded to top 30 spots. That is just how we have structured our junior contracts.
The money doesn't go to kids?
It is pointless as all it does is add $300k to each team's cap. Every team would qualify and it is no reward for developing your own juniors.
So even if it helped us in the fight to keep Makasini it’s pointless?Not sure if the $300,000 is pointless for a team like the Tigers who don’t have veterans outside of Api & Klemmer who are both coming to the end of their careers. And if you need to win the battle with Union for a kid like Makasini it helps unless you downgrade or release other guys. But yes all teams have kids who they could put that money towards.I think that's up to the club but can't confirm. There is an allowance of $300,000 for veteran and developed players. Developed that make top 30 is all that I've been able to find, and players who have been a top 30 player for at least 8 years at the club or a top 30 player for at least 10 years across the game. I'd guess the Tigers might use that for Makasini 2026 and maybe Klemmer next year that's purely a guess.https://www.weststigers.com.au/news/2024/10/23/new-deals-for-faataape-and-porter/
Can someone refresh my memory....development Contract players are guaranteed promotion to Top 30 in future years?
The long serving and developed players allowance has nothing to do with development players.
Basically a developed player for this allowance is any player that played juniors at your club. I believe they count form flegg. The 8 years to qualify for the allowance then start from that point instead of when they debuted.
It's a pointless allowance anyway as all it does is add $300k to the salary cap of any club that has at least one player that qualifies. It doesn't matter how many players you have that qualify you still only get $300k.
Development players do not automatically get upgraded to top 30 spots. That is just how we have structured our junior contracts.
The money doesn't go to kids?
It is pointless as all it does is add $300k to each team's cap. Every team would qualify and it is no reward for developing your own juniors.
It doesn't help us keep makasini.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
Makasini risk seems to have receded a lot. He will be playing NRL by the end of next year and still have another year until he can even negotiate with other clubs. If we are still bad in 2026 then we will have more problems than makasini
The Veteran & Development player allowance might also help in this way for example. If you have a spot to fill but only $600,000 in cap & have not used the allowance elsewhere and a top class veteran is available but will cost around $800,000 you have a chance to get them. Other clubs might’ve used their allowance elsewhere & not have enough funds or perhaps the $800,000 is what u need to pay because it’s the greatest offer.
You deal with that if it eventuates, right now you get as much right as you can.Makasini risk seems to have receded a lot. He will be playing NRL by the end of next year and still have another year until he can even negotiate with other clubs. If we are still bad in 2026 then we will have more problems than makasini
The Veteran & Development player allowance might also help in this way for example. If you have a spot to fill but only $600,000 in cap & have not used the allowance elsewhere and a top class veteran is available but will cost around $800,000 you have a chance to get them. Other clubs might’ve used their allowance elsewhere & not have enough funds or perhaps the $800,000 is what u need to pay because it’s the greatest offer.
That is just like any cap money you have remaining. All this allowance does is increase the cap of EVERY club by $300k.
There needs to be a better system that actually rewards clubs for developing players.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
The Veteran & Development player allowance might also help in this way for example. If you have a spot to fill but only $600,000 in cap & have not used the allowance elsewhere and a top class veteran is available but will cost around $800,000 you have a chance to get them. Other clubs might’ve used their allowance elsewhere & not have enough funds or perhaps the $800,000 is what u need to pay because it’s the greatest offer.
That is just like any cap money you have remaining. All this allowance does is increase the cap of EVERY club by $300k.
There needs to be a better system that actually rewards clubs for developing players.
It would be awesome if there was a genuine benefit in the cap to having your own local juniors. Roosters would block it for sure 😂
Wests Tigers Podcast - Talking everything Wests Tigers!
I agree with you in that it gives u no advantages over other NRL clubs. Perhaps it might if your club is successful & stable thereby giving you a better chance of using it for a veteran. But in the recent u18s Union test between the Wallabies & NZ which the Wallabies won there were 3 or 4 kids in NRL systems who look highly promising league or union players. That allowance, if not used elsewhere in your cap could prove beneficial in terms of fighting off Union & retaining those kids at your club. As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.The Veteran & Development player allowance might also help in this way for example. If you have a spot to fill but only $600,000 in cap & have not used the allowance elsewhere and a top class veteran is available but will cost around $800,000 you have a chance to get them. Other clubs might’ve used their allowance elsewhere & not have enough funds or perhaps the $800,000 is what u need to pay because it’s the greatest offer.
That is just like any cap money you have remaining. All this allowance does is increase the cap of EVERY club by $300k.
There needs to be a better system that actually rewards clubs for developing players.
It would be awesome if there was a genuine benefit in the cap to having your own local juniors. Roosters would block it for sure 😂
As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.
If we get to 2027 and don't have any long term players that meet the criteria then we don't get the $300k, I can't imagine that happening though.
I don't think you are really understanding the point that I am making. I'm saying that the system is pointless, it does nothing to reward clubs or players for developing players or staying at a club long-term.
It doesn't allow us to spend anymore on players than any other club, every club still has the same amount as each other to spend.
A better system would be to have a sliding system that as a player spends more time at the club an increasing percentage of their salary is cap exempt.
That would allow clubs that develop their own players and players that show loyalty to be rewarded for that.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
I’d argue in this circumstance it’s rewarded the Tigers in being able to keep Makasini and to allow them to plan 2027, and maybe 2026, without worrying how they are to use the allowance. They’ve used it so now they can budget for the rest of the roster a little better.As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.
If we get to 2027 and don't have any long term players that meet the criteria then we don't get the $300k, I can't imagine that happening though.
I don't think you are really understanding the point that I am making. I'm saying that the system is pointless, it does nothing to reward clubs or players for developing players or staying at a club long-term.
It doesn't allow us to spend anymore on players than any other club, every club still has the same amount as each other to spend.
A better system would be to have a sliding system that as a player spends more time at the club an increasing percentage of their salary is cap exempt.
That would allow clubs that develop their own players and players that show loyalty to be rewarded for that.
The only issue I have with the sliding system you suggest is it still favours successful clubs more than those who have a history of instability and a lack of success. Crichton & Luai would probably still be at the Panthers under that system. The Rorters would be able to spend more for good young players from other less successful clubs because they would not have to pay as much as they do now for guys like Tedesco, JWH, Radley etc. The Sharks wouldn’t be as worried about losing some of their gun players. Manly would be paying peanuts for a few of their highly paid players.
I’d argue in this circumstance it’s rewarded the Tigers in being able to keep Makasini and to allow them to plan 2027, and maybe 2026, without worrying how they are to use the allowance. They’ve used it so now they can budget for the rest of the roster a little better.As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.
If we get to 2027 and don't have any long term players that meet the criteria then we don't get the $300k, I can't imagine that happening though.
I don't think you are really understanding the point that I am making. I'm saying that the system is pointless, it does nothing to reward clubs or players for developing players or staying at a club long-term.
It doesn't allow us to spend anymore on players than any other club, every club still has the same amount as each other to spend.
A better system would be to have a sliding system that as a player spends more time at the club an increasing percentage of their salary is cap exempt.
That would allow clubs that develop their own players and players that show loyalty to be rewarded for that.
The only issue I have with the sliding system you suggest is it still favours successful clubs more than those who have a history of instability and a lack of success. Crichton & Luai would probably still be at the Panthers under that system. The Rorters would be able to spend more for good young players from other less successful clubs because they would not have to pay as much as they do now for guys like Tedesco, JWH, Radley etc. The Sharks wouldn’t be as worried about losing some of their gun players. Manly would be paying peanuts for a few of their highly paid players.
But it doesn't help us keep him. If the allowance didn't exist we would have $300k less to spend but so would all the other clubs so the situation would be exactly the same.
You don't think a development club like the Panthers should get some cap relief for the players they have brought through their system and developed?
What about Galvin, TDS and co, should we get some salary cap relief in 5-6 years because we developed them or should another club be able to come in and poach them?
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
Once again, and this is the final time I will state it, it allowed us to keep Makasini from going to Union and that was our biggest competition in this circumstance. I agree with you the allowance is for all clubs but how they are able to use it, or choose to use it, will differ but they all can use it. You disagree the allowance had any impact upon whether or not he signed with us or Union, I get it & I disagree.I’d argue in this circumstance it’s rewarded the Tigers in being able to keep Makasini and to allow them to plan 2027, and maybe 2026, without worrying how they are to use the allowance. They’ve used it so now they can budget for the rest of the roster a little better.As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.
If we get to 2027 and don't have any long term players that meet the criteria then we don't get the $300k, I can't imagine that happening though.
I don't think you are really understanding the point that I am making. I'm saying that the system is pointless, it does nothing to reward clubs or players for developing players or staying at a club long-term.
It doesn't allow us to spend anymore on players than any other club, every club still has the same amount as each other to spend.
A better system would be to have a sliding system that as a player spends more time at the club an increasing percentage of their salary is cap exempt.
That would allow clubs that develop their own players and players that show loyalty to be rewarded for that.
The only issue I have with the sliding system you suggest is it still favours successful clubs more than those who have a history of instability and a lack of success. Crichton & Luai would probably still be at the Panthers under that system. The Rorters would be able to spend more for good young players from other less successful clubs because they would not have to pay as much as they do now for guys like Tedesco, JWH, Radley etc. The Sharks wouldn’t be as worried about losing some of their gun players. Manly would be paying peanuts for a few of their highly paid players.
But it doesn't help us keep him. If the allowance didn't exist we would have $300k less to spend but so would all the other clubs so the situation would be exactly the same.
You don't think a development club like the Panthers should get some cap relief for the players they have brought through their system and developed?
What about Galvin, TDS and co, should we get some salary cap relief in 5-6 years because we developed them or should another club be able to come in and poach them?
One final scenario regarding the veteran & development player allowance. Say you have Joey Manu being offered $1mill to go to Union in 2 years time. There’s no allowance, just a cap of 12 mill. You have to find that money in your cap to compete with Union for him. But if the cap is 11.7 mill & you have an allowance of $300,000 & he isn’t a development player you will still have to find that $1mill by using the allowance on a veteran or young development players who you might have doubts over. But if Manu is a development player you can use the allowance on him because you don’t have any doubts about him & use the rest of your cap ($11.3 mill instead of $11 mill) more judicially on players you believe will provide your roster with a better balance.
One final scenario regarding the veteran & development player allowance. Say you have Joey Manu being offered $1mill to go to Union in 2 years time. There’s no allowance, just a cap of 12 mill. You have to find that money in your cap to compete with Union for him. But if the cap is 11.7 mill & you have an allowance of $300,000 & he isn’t a development player you will still have to find that $1mill by using the allowance on a veteran or young development players who you might have doubts over. But if Manu is a development player you can use the allowance on him because you don’t have any doubts about him & use the rest of your cap ($11.3 mill instead of $11 mill) more judicially on players you believe will provide your roster with a better balance.
The allowance doesn't have anything to do with development players.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
I agree with you in that it gives u no advantages over other NRL clubs. Perhaps it might if your club is successful & stable thereby giving you a better chance of using it for a veteran. But in the recent u18s Union test between the Wallabies & NZ which the Wallabies won there were 3 or 4 kids in NRL systems who look highly promising league or union players. That allowance, if not used elsewhere in your cap could prove beneficial in terms of fighting off Union & retaining those kids at your club. As present the only veteran on our list for 2027 is Twal & who knows if he’ll still be here then, & we can’t be sure about our other development players so putting that money into a kid we want to make sure is here up until at least that time is not pointless imo. It makes sense to me.The Veteran & Development player allowance might also help in this way for example. If you have a spot to fill but only $600,000 in cap & have not used the allowance elsewhere and a top class veteran is available but will cost around $800,000 you have a chance to get them. Other clubs might’ve used their allowance elsewhere & not have enough funds or perhaps the $800,000 is what u need to pay because it’s the greatest offer.
That is just like any cap money you have remaining. All this allowance does is increase the cap of EVERY club by $300k.
There needs to be a better system that actually rewards clubs for developing players.
It would be awesome if there was a genuine benefit in the cap to having your own local juniors. Roosters would block it for sure 😂
The thing is the allowance isnt used here, there, elsewhere or anywhere. Its just part of the one big pot. Its not used on "juniors". "Development" or "veteran" players, its not "used" on anyone or anything, it just makes the pot bigger.
