Watkins signs for Gold Coast Titans

[HuddsTigers]

Confirmed. Last game is v Catalans and leaves on July 1st.

[nottinghamtiger]

Confirmed. Last game is v Catalans and leaves on July 1st.

The thing I find “unusual” about this whole situation is how it’s working with the salary cap.
To prevent ‘back ended’ deals, a player’s salary cap value is calculated by taking the value of his entire contract and dividing it by the number of years the contract lasts.
So if a player signs a three-year contract worth 100k in year 1, 150k in year 2 and 200k in year 3 (a total of 450k), the salary cap value each year would be 150k a year.
It seems pretty accepted that Watkins is leaving because he was promised a higher contract next season and now Leeds can’t fit that under the cap. But in reality, his cap value should be exactly the same each year. This suggests that Leeds haven’t disclosed the contract increase to the RFL for salary cap reasons, as it should have increased his value on the cap from the beginning of his contract.
There’s something fishy going on in my opinion.

[HuddsTigers]

Nothing sinister.

The story is that Watkins is set to become a marquee player next season - so his salary would go above £175k but as he’s an English player he would only count as £75k. Leeds tried renegotiating his deal so he wouldn’t be any more (and subsequently a lower salary of equivalent value) which I’d imagine is because you can only have two marquee players, which they have in Hurrell and Merrin.

I wonder if Merrin is off and so rather than hand it over to Watkins, they want to try and attract another NRL player with the marquee.

All will become clear over next few months I would imagine.

[nottinghamtiger]

Nothing sinister.

The story is that Watkins is set to become a marquee player next season - so his salary would go above £175k but as he’s an English player he would only count as £75k. Leeds tried renegotiating his deal so he wouldn’t be any more (and subsequently a lower salary of equivalent value) which I’d imagine is because you can only have two marquee players, which they have in Hurrell and Merrin.

I wonder if Merrin is off and so rather than hand it over to Watkins, they want to try and attract another NRL player with the marquee.

All will become clear over next few months I would imagine.

It wouldn’t be counted as 75k though. As you say, they can’t have three marquee players, so Leeds would have to count every penny of either Merrin’s, Hurrell’s or Watkins’ salary on the cap.
But even with the Marquee exemption, Watkins’ contract should be equal value every season in terms of the salary cap. Sounds to me like they have tried to “back-end” a deal and it’s not gone as they planned.

[HuddsTigers]

There’s nothing in the salary cap regulations talking about what you do. It just says it’s calculated based on the year. It says if a club tries to defer or delay payments, the payment still counts in that year.

[lurcher]

he's the first sacrificial lamb at the alrar of the emerald carnegie stadium. disgraceful treatment of a loyal clubman.

[mart0042]

he's the first sacrificial lamb at the alrar of the emerald carnegie stadium. disgraceful treatment of a loyal clubman.

Agree, over 10 years and thrown out. The thing is that there are a few wide than him there.

[lurcher]

he's the first sacrificial lamb at the altar of the emerald carnegie stadium. disgraceful treatment of a loyal clubman.

Agree, over 10 years and thrown out. The thing is that there are a few wide than him there.

[mart0042]

he's the first sacrificial lamb at the alrar of the emerald carnegie stadium. disgraceful treatment of a loyal clubman.

Agree, over 10 years and thrown out. The thing is that there are a few wide than him there.

U
Wide = worse, width is not an issue.

[old cas lass]

Bit harsh on Watkins.

https://www.superleague.co.uk/article/8 ... tain-leeds

[Nobody]

Must of really upset someone at Leeds way he's been treated.