Never thought i'd mutter those words but is it time to change how the salary cap works?
I've always been a strong believer in the cap but in it's currently guise it is hindering those that can go beyond it and not preventing those that can't from financial problems, in short it's a compromise that helps no-one.

Wakefield, Salford, Bradford, Hull KR, Crusaders have all been clubs in SL subject to cap rules and it hasn't done them any favours.

With the increase in the cap down under and with the union vultures circling the clubs that can afford to ward off don't have any power to due to restrictions. We currently have 9 teams with big pockets surely we should bring in a rule of declaring what you can afford without damaging your club and allowing clubs to spend to that.

It should be based purely on income. If you're generating more money you should be able to spend more, if not then you can't.

It's time to raise the cap & let clubs pay what they can.

There are far too many creative accounting methods to get around that. You would get Moran invoicing 'Moranovich Holdings PLC' for £5,000,000 a season for consultancy services, thus falsely inflating the club's profits.

Any reward for income, size, success or finance just makes the problem worse. If you let the strong spend more, the strong become stronger. If you limit the weak, they can't improve.

Given the financial performance of the clubs in Super League, there is a good arguement that cap is too high currently. When clubs like Wigan, Warrington and Saints can't make a profit, what chance do the likes of Salford, Wakefield and Cas have?

Just because the profit and loss account says 'loss', it can be rather misleading to say Warrington did not make a profit last year. Firstly we wrote off all the 'image rights' liability and secondly we wrote off a chunk of the value of the stadium (depreciation) to the profit and loss account (we have already paid for the stadium, depreciation is an accounting tool).

If you subtract money going out of the club versus money coming in, we were positive.

However, I would have to agree with your sentiments in general. A salary cap, if operated properly, should limit the ability of wealthy clubs / owners to cherry pick all the best players and coaches. Much as the Wiganers may have enjoyed their string of CC wins, it made the competition boring for other fans and spectators.

The thing is though WO we have 9 clubs with wealth

Wire
Leeds
Wigan
Widnes
Hull FC
Huddersfield
Saints
London
Catalans.

A higher proportion of the league is being held back by other clubs, Bradford and their new owners might be able to raise their profile again, who knows but look at Cas, Wakey, Salford and Hull KR, because of those 4 clubs the rest are suffering. Cas and Wakey if they weren't so pig headed could help each other out and share a stadium, same goes for KR who could quite easily move in to the KC. They won't so we suffer.
I feel for Wigan in a way, they have the means to keep Tomkins and match both union and NRL but because of a lack of ambition or common sense they'll lose him because someone in Cas won't share a stadium, it's BS of the highest order, the salary cap was designed to keep everyone equal and it's working, it's keeping everyone equally s--t.

I'd agree with most of what Yed says. we currently have the weak clubs virtually deciding how the game moves forward. I think Wakey, the Bulls and HKR are actually starting to turn the corner. HKR will have capacity of over 14,000 next year, compared to just over 9,000 this year, and a better stadium should lead to better crowds. Wakefield have made big steps forward and if they can keep the impetus going then they should be ok, as (hopefully) should the Bulls. Apparently Salford are in negotiation re some money coming into the club, which leaves Castleford.
If they can't resolve the stadium issue, then they should be out, that's all there is to it.

London are losing money hand over fist and it's only a matter of time before they pull the plug, it's not a sustainable business now, never mind if they spent more money. They've just never pulled in the punters, even when they were an established play off side.

I'd also question Saints involvement in that list. Although there are some very wealthy men involved, I don't think they are as committed to wasting all their money as some of the other owners.

Well, lets pretend that a super rich Sheikh ( Mustafa Cash ) is forced to emigrate to the UK along with his billions, takes a liking to rugby league and buys Salford. The RFL has scrapped the cap in the pre-season, Mustafah buys up all the best players available in season one, then strengthens further in season2. Salford go on to win 9 CC's in a row and 7 of the 8 GF's. Are you really saying that as a fan, you would be happy with this situation ?

You wouldn't find me complaining.

Ah, but that's because you are a true RL fan with a generous disposition. What would the Leeds club do with all that empty trophy cupboard space ?

It wouldn't happen though, we have rich owners, enough for SL. At the very least these owners could be capped at NRL levels, if not i think we are shortly going to see a talent drain.
If the prospect of a move to a sunny, sport conscience country with a higher profile and higher standard and double your money offer comes in how many players can truly refuse that. How's it fair if the likes of Moran could only offer 50% of what an Aussie club could for a player yet be considerably richer?