KEY POINTS:
Proverb - a simple saying that expresses a truth, based on common sense or the practical experience of humanity.
Here's one the Counties Manukau rugby union could probably identify with: You get what you pay for.
The Steelers ended their second season back in the top flight of New Zealand rugby without a win in 10 matches.
They notched just two competition points courtesy of a draw with North Harbour.
They didn't manage a bonus point for scoring four tries in a match and, that draw aside, they never once finished within seven points of their opponents.
Quite frankly, they sucked.
Their coach, Kevin Putt, did the honourable thing and fell on his sword before yesterday's final humiliation by Taranaki.
Putt's act of mental self-preservation, however, only served to obscure the real reason Counties were so utterly awful this season.
That was revealed by the NZRU several weeks ago when they, in what can only be described as an uncharacteristic fit of openness, released the results of the season's salary cap audit.
The salary cap is an unwieldy beast at best but there are a couple of bottom lines that reveal some proverbial home truths.
Counties' raw spend on salaries was $730,650.
The next lowest figure came from - no surprise here - second-from-bottom Bay of Plenty, who spent $1,008,500. Auckland, who finished top, spent the most, $1,739,900.
No surprises then that Auckland looked about a million dollars better than Counties this season.
Hawkes Bay, the Cinderella story of this year's competition, splashed $1,388,875 on players' wages - more than North Harbour, Northland, Taranaki, Tasman, Manawatu, Bay of Plenty and Counties, all teams they finished above.
The other revealing salary cap nugget is the "headroom" figure.
This is the outstanding amount the unions could have spent after their raw figures are adjusted by various discounts and penalties.
If they'd had the money, Counties could have spent more than $1.2m extra on players.
Given that salaries begin at about $30,000 for an untested fringe player and go up from there, it's fair to say they had room under the cap to bring in one or 15 decent new players.
The fact that they didn't suggests one of two things: Either they didn't have the money to spend, or they wanted to come last.
Any criticism of Putt's coaching tenure needs to be considered in this light.
It wouldn't be too great a stretch to argue that Putt and his assistant Errol Brain actually did quite a good job at Counties this season.
Not once was their side involved in a fair fight. Their players were always up against more accomplished, more talented and more expensive players.
On the occasions that they did manage to compete, such as the first 60 minutes of their season opener against Auckland or the draw with North Harbour, they played above themselves.
They seldom had their fair share of the ball and, when they did, most of them weren't capable of doing much with it. But you couldn't often fault their effort.
A key test of a coach is whether they can get the best out of their players. At times, Putt and Brain clearly did. And it still wasn't anywhere near good enough.
On the other hard, it's hard to know just how sorry to feel for Putt, whose coaching reputation has clearly been tarnished by the results of the last two seasons.
Surely he had to be aware, at some level at least, of the problems bedevilling the Counties union?
If he took the job with his eyes wide open, then he probably has to take the consequences of failure on the chin.
Because there's another proverb that neatly applies to the travails of Putt and Counties this season: If you take a knife to a gunfight, don't be surprised if you get shot.
