Originally Posted by
willhelm
Each position would have a set budget as a proportion of the total cap based on the club's analysis of its relative value to the overall composition and balance of the squad. That means the recruitment of a forward would have no impact on the budget allocated to the hooker position. I imagine there would also be a bit of reserve budgeted, maybe around 5% of the total cap in case a marquee player comes on the market. For example, if Brandon Smith is available and you have budgeted 800k to the starting hooker position but he will only come for 1m, you're not going to pass on him because of that extra 200k and need to have it available. Budgeting timeframes would probably be 3 to 5 years in advance and contract lengths would be derived from this (again with a bit of flexibility for the right player). The poorly managed teams tend to get their recruitment strategy wrong and end up having to pay players to move on to rebalance (lol Broncos), like a poorly weighted stock portfolio. That's why they say premierships start in the front office. From what I can see, our club is now being run like a professional organisation with some very shrewd recruitment and retention decisions without kneejerk high risk buys like the Tigers did when they went on their (short) bus ride.
This is just my speculation based on general budgeting principles.