Blue Bombers Forum

The Extra Point => Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum => Topic started by: The Zipp on April 17, 2019, 07:00:04 PM



Title: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: The Zipp on April 17, 2019, 07:00:04 PM
https://3downnation.com/2019/04/17/cflpa-informs-cfl-that-players-will-not-report-to-training-camp-without-new-cba-in-place/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter (https://3downnation.com/2019/04/17/cflpa-informs-cfl-that-players-will-not-report-to-training-camp-without-new-cba-in-place/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on April 17, 2019, 07:56:01 PM
Interesting. I still think things get done. I think a good portion of the membership will not want to miss game cheques. I don't think the players will win a game of chicken with the owners.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TBURGESS on April 17, 2019, 07:57:42 PM
Well crap! I hope they still come to an agreement before then.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Fire101 on April 18, 2019, 03:10:10 AM
The ugly side of the business has reared it's head.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TecnoGenius on April 18, 2019, 04:25:50 AM
It'll be fine.  They'll work it out.  It helps no one to have something like the NFL lockout year.  Many teams, and thus the CFL, might not survive such an outcome.  Then both the players and the CFL get nothing.

I would be shocked if this drags on much longer than May.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: buckzumhoff on April 18, 2019, 12:47:03 PM
Let them sit. Players threaten to not show up.  They are paid well. They know it's not a wealthy league . So many players under performed last year. Mainly the star players. Most quarterbacks and running backs under performed. Nichols. Reilly, Wilder,  I agree they should get their bonuses but if they want more. They can look to the new league. They don't practice as much. And it shows on how the poor tackling is becoming a sore sight every game


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: SSC on April 18, 2019, 02:06:56 PM
I suppose there's people who believe that an employer has the right to put the screws to their employees by not paying what has been contractually agreed upon, but I certainly am not one of them. Bo Levi Mitchell announced he will not be attending training camp until a deal is reached. Good for him, I hope other's will stand pat as well.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 18, 2019, 02:20:25 PM
I suppose there's people who believe that an employer has the right to put the screws to their employees by not paying what has been contractually agreed upon, but I certainly am not one of them. Bo Levi Mitchell announced he will not be attending training camp until a deal is reached. Good for him, I hope other's will stand pat as well.

Easy for BLM to say, he's got his nice fat long term contract in place. Guys coming for 50k a year can't afford to sit. That's why a strike vote is likely rejected by the CFL players. Empty threats.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: kkc60 on April 18, 2019, 02:36:05 PM
The league wanted to push negotiations back....probably so Randy could do some more photo ops.

Keep in mind the league stopped players from getting their bonuses. So why should the players just ignore that and report to camp?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: SSC on April 18, 2019, 03:20:06 PM
Easy for BLM to say, he's got his nice fat long term contract in place. Guys coming for 50k a year can't afford to sit. That's why a strike vote is likely rejected by the CFL players. Empty threats.

Except if BLM doesn't get paid a cent if he doesn't show up so your point is mute. The rest of the players will continue with their off-season employment. Most of these players are educated and skilled to work outside of football.
The B.S. hubris that the league's owners are displaying will certainly bite them in the a-- when the XFL is a viable alternative for a great many of the players in the CFL.
I have a free ticket available for the Bombers-Lions season opener which I will gladly pass on if the league doesn't pay the bonuses owed to the players.

 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Tehedra on April 18, 2019, 03:48:46 PM
The league wanted to push negotiations back....probably so Randy could do some more photo ops.

Keep in mind the league stopped players from getting their bonuses. So why should the players just ignore that and report to camp?

The same argument can be made that the CFLPA wanted to wait until the last minute to start negotiations in the first place.  This is typical of union negotiations in a tit for tat environment. 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: SSC on April 18, 2019, 04:22:45 PM
The same argument can be made that the CFLPA wanted to wait until the last minute to start negotiations in the first place.  This is typical of union negotiations in a tit for tat environment. 

I wasn't aware that the CFLPA deliberately delayed negotiations. Could you please send me a link that supports this info?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: kkc60 on April 18, 2019, 05:00:44 PM
Let them sit. Players threaten to not show up.  They are paid well. They know it's not a wealthy league . So many players under performed last year. Mainly the star players. Most quarterbacks and running backs under performed. Nichols. Reilly, Wilder,  I agree they should get their bonuses but if they want more. They can look to the new league. They don't practice as much. And it shows on how the poor tackling is becoming a sore sight every game
Ah yes. So the league is not wealthy...yet the league wants to add more roster spots, more draft picks AND another franchise. They aren't wealthy but can fly team reps to Mexico, fly players in from Europe, etc.

As for the practice part, that's to reduce injuries. I haven't noticed tackling issues league wide. Sure there are some guys who aren't great at it but if you think lack of tackling at practice is affecting the quality of play....you're wrong.

Also to say the players are paid well is also uninformed. Sure, the STARS are paid well. But not all the players. A rookie can come to camp, tear his ACL, get cut and be covered by the team for a year. Then it's all on him. If you think thats fair, give your head a shake


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 18, 2019, 05:58:50 PM
Apparently the right to hold bonuses is actually written into most CFL contracts since 2017...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: kkc60 on April 18, 2019, 06:02:43 PM
Apparently the right to hold bonuses is actually written into most CFL contracts since 2017...
Sure but just because you have the right to do it doesn't mean you should. Its greasy.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 3rdand1.5 on April 18, 2019, 07:03:58 PM
My 2 cents....Go a-head don't report players have every right to that decision.

My guess though is that enough players do not have enough "out of football" income to agree to this. Many players with well paying secondary jobs or guys who have been paid well in the past and have a nest egg can "weather an unpaid storm" but many of the guys in the CFL do not make a-lot of money and rely on that income to survive not reporting and potentially missing out on what money they could make is too significant for them.

As to SSC's comment about the XFL, sure valid point but many players in the CFL do not have the ability to make much money outside of the game (and still train), or do not have large nest eggs that would allow them to train and stay in top shape to play in the XFL for almost an entire year, so IMO the XFL thought could only work for a guy like BLM (a few top end high paid stars with good money sense and even for them this would be tough)


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on April 19, 2019, 02:40:11 AM
My 2 cents....Go a-head don't report players have every right to that decision.

My guess though is that enough players do not have enough "out of football" income to agree to this. Many players with well paying secondary jobs or guys who have been paid well in the past and have a nest egg can "weather an unpaid storm" but many of the guys in the CFL do not make a-lot of money and rely on that income to survive not reporting and potentially missing out on what money they could make is too significant for them.


Agreed, players that have a career on the go or well paying secondary jobs would be few and far between.  Not many would find employers willing to let them bugger off for 6 months of the year and have their job waiting for them when they return home in Nov.  The luckiest might have family or a friend that runs a business and are willing to accommodate their schedule.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TecnoGenius on April 19, 2019, 03:25:27 AM
The B.S. hubris that the league's owners are displaying will certainly bite them in the a-- when the XFL is a viable alternative for a great many of the players in the CFL.

After the AAF fiasco, XFL should not be worth even a thought in anyone's mind.  Once bitten, twice shy.  And every football player in N.America just saw how AAF screwed over its players.  Any CFL player contemplating the XFL as a viable alternative to the CFL needs their head examined.  Any CFL player who quit a potential CFL job to go to AAF is looking pretty stupid right about now.

If the AAF with their innovative website/gambling and territorial/college affinity ideas couldn't make it work, how on earth is "NFL-lite" XFL(2.0) going to do it?  And whatever happened to that SJW-league someone was dreaming up?  That's going to be the worst of the lot.

CFL players need to think about CFL.  The top-10 elite can still dream for NFL.  But that's it.  Binary choice.  AAF has proven this hard reality to those who dreamt of alternatives.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: SSC on April 19, 2019, 02:28:27 PM
After the AAF fiasco, XFL should not be worth even a thought in anyone's mind.  Once bitten, twice shy.  And every football player in N.America just saw how AAF screwed over its players.  Any CFL player contemplating the XFL as a viable alternative to the CFL needs their head examined.  Any CFL player who quit a potential CFL job to go to AAF is looking pretty stupid right about now.

If the AAF with their innovative website/gambling and territorial/college affinity ideas couldn't make it work, how on earth is "NFL-lite" XFL(2.0) going to do it?  And whatever happened to that SJW-league someone was dreaming up?  That's going to be the worst of the lot.

CFL players need to think about CFL.  The top-10 elite can still dream for NFL.  But that's it.  Binary choice.  AAF has proven this hard reality to those who dreamt of alternatives.


I guess the Jaime Elizondo thing just flew right over your head. The XFL hasn't played a game yet you are certain it will fail. I'll tell you what fails, businesses who treat their employees like s---.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Ridermania on April 19, 2019, 09:33:35 PM
Strike vote set for Wednesday!

https://3downnation.com/2019/04/19/cfl-players-to-hold-strike-vote-on-wednesday/


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In Edmonton on April 19, 2019, 10:21:57 PM
I'm a bit perplexed by this strike vote. Strike votes are taken under the authority of provincial labour law. I'm assuming that since the league is headquartered in Ontario (and that the CFLPA is headquartered there as well) that this vote is taking place under Ontario law, of which I am not overly familiar. I do suspect that these types of labour situations are relatively similar across jurisdictions in Canada. Here in Alberta, a union or an employer is required to seek the services of an appointed mediator prior to seeking authorization for a strike vote. I have not heard that there is a mediator involved in this dispute. The union membership would have to also authorize a supervised strike vote.

I suspect this is what is happening, additionally, as it makes zero sense to go on strike now. What services are they withholding in April? Of course, a strike vote doesn't mean that a strike is happening the next day. There's a cooling off period, and then the vote remains active for 120 days (depending on jurisdiction).

My hunch is that this is designed to be a show of force to the employer. If the PA gets a significant mandate (probably has to be over 85% of the membership voting in favour of strike), then this enhances their position in bargaining. If they've miscalculated and their number is lower than that, it will embolden the employer. The players better know what they're doing, or else they're looking at their BOHICA moment.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: buckzumhoff on April 20, 2019, 12:50:40 AM
They should pay the bonuses they owe and personally quit offering bonuses in the future. I wouldn't put it in the negotiation just not offer. . Here's your salary. It's a team game. No bonuses. Bonus is you win the championship then you get the playoff money .


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: buckzumhoff on April 20, 2019, 01:00:08 AM
Ah yes. So the league is not wealthy...yet the league wants to add more roster spots, more draft picks AND another franchise. They aren't wealthy but can fly team reps to Mexico, fly players in from Europe, etc.

As for the practice part, that's to reduce injuries. I haven't noticed tackling issues league wide. Sure there are some guys who aren't great at it but if you think lack of tackling at practice is affecting the quality of play....you're wrong.

Also to say the players are paid well is also uninformed. Sure, the STARS are paid well. But not all the players. A rookie can come to camp, tear his ACL, get cut and be covered by the team for a year. Then it's all on him. If you think thats fair, give your head a shake


Some players are making 180 k at receiver and o- line  position. Lab ate was making 200 k. Hey ifthey can make more money doing something else they should. .  Injuries- that's part of sports and injuries heal and no one is guaranteed a certain amount of years of play in the league. If they're worried about injuries sports is part of the game unfortunately.  It's beginning to be
Ike these fighters in hockey who all of a sudden say they are damaged after they play yet they made a lot of money doing it. Only a few make an issue


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TecnoGenius on April 20, 2019, 03:23:21 AM
I guess the Jaime Elizondo thing just flew right over your head. The XFL hasn't played a game yet you are certain it will fail. I'll tell you what fails, businesses who treat their employees like s---.

Yes, I am certain it will fail.  I was one of the people who gave AAF a chance, remember?  I watched every game I could obtain on Shaw.  I was rooting for it to succeed.  It was no competitor/threat to the CFL.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.  XFL is the Nth instalment of insanity.  Like AAF, it'll be dead within 2 years, regardless of whether I root for it or not.

Any CFL player who thinks the grass is greener in the XFL will end up in the same boat as Bass, Wynn, Sinkfield: SOL.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: kkc60 on April 20, 2019, 04:23:39 AM
They should pay the bonuses they owe and personally quit offering bonuses in the future. I wouldn't put it in the negotiation just not offer. . Here's your salary. It's a team game. No bonuses. Bonus is you win the championship then you get the playoff money .
Uh no. Players want bonuses and CFL teams have used bonuses to aid their future cap (pushing bonuses up a year, etc). Get rid of bonuses and you're getting rid of restructuring contracts.

Also the idea that bonuses and playoff money should become one thing is so out there I can't tell if you're serious. Football is a team sport. So why should guys get punished financially for the fact their GM isn't good enough at his job. Should the GM have to re-pa the team a players salary from his personal money if the player doesn't work out? See how fun these are?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: kkc60 on April 20, 2019, 04:40:37 AM

Some players are making 180 k at receiver and o- line  position. Lab ate was making 200 k. Hey ifthey can make more money doing something else they should. .  Injuries- that's part of sports and injuries heal and no one is guaranteed a certain amount of years of play in the league. If they're worried about injuries sports is part of the game unfortunately.  It's beginning to be
Ike these fighters in hockey who all of a sudden say they are damaged after they play yet they made a lot of money doing it. Only a few make an issue

And some players are making 54k. And I agree they should go where the money is. That being said, players earning higher salaries here deserve it for the most part. Teams are choosing to pay them. But you're looking at the smaller group of players and using them as a reason why the players should just grin and bear it.

As for your injury opinion, I'm assuming you have never played a contact sport. Some injuries heal in months. Others require waaaaay more time. Knee injuries can require physio for a long time, sometimes past the one year that teams are on the hook for. As for spinal injuries, just look at how Johnathan Hefny had to use GoFundMe to pay for procedures.

As for concussions, don't get me started. I can tell you've never had a concussion. These "fighters" you're talking about made a ton of money for the most part, sure. But sometimes concussions and other brain injuries last a lot longer. I got a few concussions when I was with the Rifles and in high school years ago and still get some of the side effects. Have your opinion on the players but don't act like every injury is just a boo boo.

At the end of the day what it all comes down to is this: if the league was to follow your lead and treat the players like crap, well don't be surprised when AAF highlights are more entertaining than CFL games


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: ModAdmin on April 20, 2019, 04:48:41 AM
It always comes down to what the players feel is fair and and needed and what the CFL/owners are able to pay.  The future Als owners are already in a situation of absorbing losses for at least a few years.  It's a very delicate balance.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: buckzumhoff on April 20, 2019, 12:45:24 PM
Uh no. Players want bonuses and CFL teams have used bonuses to aid their future cap (pushing bonuses up a year, etc). Get rid of bonuses and you're getting rid of restructuring contracts.

Also the idea that bonuses and playoff money should become one thing is so out there I can't tell if you're serious. Football is a team sport. So why should guys get punished financially for the fact their GM isn't good enough at his job. Should the GM have to re-pa the team a players salary from his personal money if the player doesn't work out? See how fun these are?

You don't have to offer players bonuses.   A bonus is exactly what it says. A bonus is usually given to someone who has gone beyond his play expectations.  Unless.  Every player in every position should receive one at the year's end . If you want to be a union then they should be a union. Treat every player the same. Also quarterbacks shouldn't be making the same as what 8 players make. They are asking for the wrong things. They want extra  time off . They don't want practices more than 1.5 hrs more than 3 times a week. They want 3 days off after a game. . they want bonuses .  I would raise the practice roster salary alot more than what it is. And pay the bonuses but then I wouldn't be offering bonuses . The league isn't doing exactly that great at attendance. But if that's all they want is bonuses give it to them and then tell them to end the strike vote.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 20, 2019, 01:34:47 PM
It is starting to get acrimonious....  not looking good on the CFL, but the players need to realize it takes two to negotiate.  Just because the CFL walked from the table dosn't mean you can't still work on your proposals, and even submit them to the league.  I'm sure that a reasonable compromise will be met (this is Canada), but it would be interesting to see what the CFLPA demands were that forced the CFL to walk...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 20, 2019, 02:43:48 PM
Bonus's are an advantage to the player ( tax implications for imports  ) and to the member team. Teams get to use up remaining SMS to re-sign players and get lower contract values as part of the trade off. Reportedly the current agreement provided for bonus money to be held back.

Why the CFLPA would agree to that or why the league would want that is less clear. Even less clear why they choose to hold back coming out of 2018.

I could see a possible change in the new agreement allow legal redress against players taking signing bonus's and then retiring or forced out of CFL. IE: Durant situation for example. That was slimy and should be prevented IMO.

In any case I don't think the bonus issue is the problem at the moment. What the negotiation issues are is puzzling. I suppose it deals with money in the general sense but aside from raising the ELC , what is the direction of the talks?

The new SMS will include more money in total. How much is a question but it's not like the CFLPA can expect it double or something.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue girl on April 20, 2019, 04:45:12 PM
I believe that the reason that bonuses have been withheld has to do with the league not wanting players to have extra money if they go on strike. Hopefully some common sense will make both sides realize that a strike benefits no one.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TBURGESS on April 20, 2019, 05:01:08 PM
I suspect that the non-payment of bonuses is a sticking point in the negotiations. I can't see the CFLPA allowing that to stand in the new agreement and I can't see the CFL wanting to give it up because it provides a huge incentive for players to sign the deal.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 20, 2019, 06:51:18 PM
I suspect that the non-payment of bonuses is a sticking point in the negotiations. I can't see the CFLPA allowing that to stand in the new agreement and I can't see the CFL wanting to give it up because it provides a huge incentive for players to sign the deal.

Calling it a non payment is perhaps not the correct phrase to apply. It's a delayed payment and might even have an interest clause written into the agreement.

Like I mentioned, a delay is in the agreement already. Why that got put in is a question. However not every player has a bonus in their contract so what % of players that do would be interesting to know.

It wouldn't seem teams withholding before a new CBA suggests not wanting players to have " extra money " to be able to go on strike. There are a lot of players on ELC's that didn't get bonus in their 1st contract. Others may only be getting small amounts.

So IMO the majority aren't making this the " big " issue?

Aside from when a new CBA is being negotiated, when / or why else might the league want to do this year to year? I don't see the benefit for the league or a reason to rock the boat by either side.

Clear up some details if necessary, sure. If there is a push to eliminate it IMO I believe it would hurt players more than the league. Being able to use up remaining SMS + the tax implications are good advantages to the players. It effectively adds to the following year SMS money available.

Yes the league has advantages as well but there are risks involved as well. We were hurt by the " retirement " problem last year. If a significant player gets a significant bonus and misses some or all of the season on the IR, that has a negative impact on SMS spending for value received within a given season.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 20, 2019, 06:56:10 PM
It was reported that the CFLPA and the league were in agreement to revise the ratio regarding starting Canadians.

That's where I would have thought there could be a major disagreement in making that change. Were the reports incorrect and this is where a problem exists?

Keeping in mind their are more imports in the CFL than Canadians. The imports aren't going to vote against something that favors them and their opportunities.

Hopefully the strike vote is just a negotiating tool by the CFLPA and everything gets worked out.

Ultimately I don't see a delay helping anybody.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: the paw on April 20, 2019, 08:09:18 PM
Calling it a non payment is perhaps not the correct phrase to apply. It's a delayed payment and might even have an interest clause written into the agreement.

Like I mentioned, a delay is in the agreement already. Why that got put in is a question. However not every player has a bonus in their contract so what % of players that do would be interesting to know.


I think you have incorrect information.  There is no delay of of bonus payment language in the collective agreement.  The delay of payment was a policy directive from the league to the teams (originating with Orridge in preparation for bargaining).  It was imposed unilaterally, without agreement by the CFLPA, in contravention of the collective agreement, which exactly why everyone is so hacked off.

The owners rationale is that the bonus payments are basically advance pay for work to be performed during the 2019 season, and without a CBA, they can?t be certain the players will perform the work.  So they are protecting themselves by withholding pmt.  the flaw, to my way of thinking, is that the owners are not feeling bound to comply with individual player contracts that cover periods outside the CBA.  By that reasoning, players wouldn?t be bound by their individual contracts either.  That seems like anarchy.

Oh, and the players aren?t refusing to report.  They?re just delaying when they?ll report...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 20, 2019, 09:35:15 PM
I think you have incorrect information.  There is no delay of of bonus payment language in the collective agreement.  The delay of payment was a policy directive from the league to the teams (originating with Orridge in preparation for bargaining).  It was imposed unilaterally, without agreement by the CFLPA, in contravention of the collective agreement, which exactly why everyone is so hacked off.

The owners rationale is that the bonus payments are basically advance pay for work to be performed during the 2019 season, and without a CBA, they can?t be certain the players will perform the work.  So they are protecting themselves by withholding pmt.  the flaw, to my way of thinking, is that the owners are not feeling bound to comply with individual player contracts that cover periods outside the CBA.  By that reasoning, players wouldn?t be bound by their individual contracts either.  That seems like anarchy.

Oh, and the players aren?t refusing to report.  They?re just delaying when they?ll report...


Aardvark mentioned that earlier in this string. I'm not sure where he got that information. So the policy directive from the league may have just been utilizing something in the agreement. That's IF that's in the agreement and if so wouldn't have been a unilateral action per se.

I can't confirm or deny whether it's in the agreement or not.

It's a bit foolish to use the players aren't refusing to report and are just delaying when they'll report back hand. Clearly those are fixed dates and there would be no provision for arbitrary arrivals.

Maybe you meant to add a sarcasm emoji and didn't.

Again I didn't make the original comment about something in the agreement. It seemed odd to have something like that and more probable it was incorrect information.

You're last paragraph about the owners rationale and counter argument seems both correct and incorrect. I don't agree with the anarchy comment at all. Many teams are community owned teams and in all cases teams have the business liabilities that go along with running the CFL.

So the question is what is in the agreement and what is not.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on April 20, 2019, 10:36:37 PM
It was reported that the CFLPA and the league were in agreement to revise the ratio regarding starting Canadians.

That's where I would have thought there could be a major disagreement in making that change. Were the reports incorrect and this is where a problem exists?

Keeping in mind their are more imports in the CFL than Canadians. The imports aren't going to vote against something that favors them and their opportunities.

Hopefully the strike vote is just a negotiating tool by the CFLPA and everything gets worked out.

Ultimately I don't see a delay helping anybody.

while correct in stating that their are more imports than Canadians players in the league, the CFLPA is empowered to negotiate terms and conditions on behalf of the collective... meaning, the CFLPA is not required to obtain majority consensus of the collective in order to negotiate specific terms and conditions and could have very well came to an agreement with the CFLPRC independent of an actual player vote in regards to changes to the ratio...

I think you have incorrect information.  There is no delay of of bonus payment language in the collective agreement.  The delay of payment was a policy directive from the league to the teams (originating with Orridge in preparation for bargaining).  It was imposed unilaterally, without agreement by the CFLPA, in contravention of the collective agreement, which exactly why everyone is so hacked off.

The owners rationale is that the bonus payments are basically advance pay for work to be performed during the 2019 season, and without a CBA, they can?t be certain the players will perform the work.  So they are protecting themselves by withholding pmt.  the flaw, to my way of thinking, is that the owners are not feeling bound to comply with individual player contracts that cover periods outside the CBA.  By that reasoning, players wouldn?t be bound by their individual contracts either.  That seems like anarchy.

Oh, and the players aren?t refusing to report.  They?re just delaying when they?ll report...

 

you are absolutely correct, per an article on 3downnation.com:

"Canadian Football League team owners are holding approximately $6 million in off-season payments due to players, per sources.

The CFLPA issued a memo to all players and their agents in December 2017 stating the league was directing the nine teams not to pay off-season bonuses ? including signing, roster and report and pass bonuses ? starting Jan. 1, 2019, in an attempt to ?add pressure on the CFLPA and its membership to rush a settlement at the bargaining table.?

As a result, contracts signed after the directive was issued included language that made bonuses only payable upon ratification of the CBA ? a significant departure from the league?s usual practice and one designed to apply financial strain on players.

?The CFL?s directive states that while Players and Clubs can enter such arrangements for the 2019 season, payment for the pre‐season bonuses cannot occur until a new Collective Bargaining Agreement has been reached between the CFLPA and the CFL,? the memo reads."


you would have to think that since these terms are not in the ratified CBA, the CFL could be considered to be in breach of contract by not paying contractually agreed upon bonus money... also, while the teams may want to say that these off season bonus payments are for work to be performed in the 2019 season we know that isn't necessarily they case. Teams could make that payment as required yet cut that player before the start of the season, or any time during the season. if they want, or, like Durant did last year, get paid then retire...

You don't have to offer players bonuses.   A bonus is exactly what it says. A bonus is usually given to someone who has gone beyond his play expectations.  Unless.  Every player in every position should receive one at the year's end . If you want to be a union then they should be a union. Treat every player the same. Also quarterbacks shouldn't be making the same as what 8 players make. They are asking for the wrong things. They want extra  time off . They don't want practices more than 1.5 hrs more than 3 times a week. They want 3 days off after a game. . they want bonuses .  I would raise the practice roster salary alot more than what it is. And pay the bonuses but then I wouldn't be offering bonuses . The league isn't doing exactly that great at attendance. But if that's all they want is bonuses give it to them and then tell them to end the strike vote.

are these some of the 'asks' by the CFLPA? I wasn't able to find any of the talking points online anywhere, but if so, they seem a little ridiculous in all honesty... 3 days off after a game?  you would have to think that it becomes rather difficult to develop players and have them progress skill wise with the current length of camps and practice restrictions in place now, such as on 1 contact practice per week...

the NFL does the same during the regular season, only 1 contact practice per week, but they also have a 9 week voluntary camp, several different mini camps, and then pre season training camp which starts 2 weeks before pre season games, which is another 4 weeks, and is full pads and contact daily... before they get into the regular season routine... oh, and per their CBA they receive 4 days off per month during the season... here are a couple of links to what their schedule looks like during the season:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1756606-an-inside-look-at-game-week-in-the-nfl (https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1756606-an-inside-look-at-game-week-in-the-nfl)

and this one has more detail:

https://www.newsday.com/sports/football/a-week-in-the-life-of-the-nfl-1.9218497 (https://www.newsday.com/sports/football/a-week-in-the-life-of-the-nfl-1.9218497)

you make a good point too about the recent jump in starting QB pay that occurred this off season... could really be trouble for teams moving forward as while the top of the scale moved up for 'elite' QBs, it will also mean that the bottom of the scale moves up as well for starters, and then you have the back ups who will be wanting more too... I also agree that they should pay the PR players more as well, it's a tough deal living the season collecting only 1 or 2 game checks... an argument could be made to apply salary caps by position as well, because moving forward there will be a limit as to how much SMS can realistically grow compared to actual revenue, especially for teams that are already in a down market... also, it would make sense to create some type of pay scale for drafted players, as it is now, they are being paid a premium and may not play a down for a couple of seasons... creating some type of player pay scale could also help reduce having to pay a premium for national talent and help teams retain players longer and move away from the large turnover in players that consistently seems to happen each year... as it is now, we are starting to see quality players that have or may be released due to one reason, can't afford to sign them... and it's not necessarily that they are asking for way too much money, there just isn't enough money to go around so he will be replaced by a league minimum salary player in order to meet the SMS cap requirement...

obviously pay scales won't be popular among the players, and it may not be a realistic option, but, something is going to have to be done or else we end up with 3 or 4 players making a lot of money and then a roster full of minimum pay players... several here said that the AAF was paying players too much at $70K per year and that is wasn't a financially feasible model to do so, however, 54 players at $70K per year came out to $3.8M a year which is quite a bit less than the current $5.4M cap for the CFL... I understand that part of the reason that was said was because it was a first year start up, but, I think there is some reasonable logic there in theory to help create equity among the players and control overall cost... but I think that we all thought in the back of our minds when we saw players getting $700K for a season that trouble could be brewing...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on April 20, 2019, 10:45:15 PM
Aardvark mentioned that earlier in this string. I'm not sure where he got that information. So the policy directive from the league may have just been utilizing something in the agreement. That's IF that's in the agreement and if so wouldn't have been a unilateral action per se.

I can't confirm or deny whether it's in the agreement or not.


So the question is what is in the agreement and what is not.



I read the current CBA document today, a couple of times actually, and couldn't find any provision that allowed teams, or the league, to withhold contractual payments or that allows them to add language to the standard player contract to do so either... now I will say that it is possible that I missed it, but I don't think I did or they are using language that may not be specific to this off season pay to create authority to do so in their minds...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: the paw on April 20, 2019, 10:48:53 PM
Aardvark mentioned that earlier in this string. I'm not sure where he got that information. So the policy directive from the league may have just been utilizing something in the agreement. That's IF that's in the agreement and if so wouldn't have been a unilateral action per se.

I can't confirm or deny whether it's in the agreement or not.

It's a bit foolish to use the players aren't refusing to report and are just delaying when they'll report back hand. Clearly those are fixed dates and there would be no provision for arbitrary arrivals.

Maybe you meant to add a sarcasm emoji and didn't.

Again I didn't make the original comment about something in the agreement. It seemed odd to have something like that and more probable it was incorrect information.

You're last paragraph about the owners rationale and counter argument seems both correct and incorrect. I don't agree with the anarchy comment at all. Many teams are community owned teams and in all cases teams have the business liabilities that go along with running the CFL.

So the question is what is in the agreement and what is not.



I refer you to article 3.06 of the CBA, which clearly states that the date for payment of bonuses can be specified within the standard players agreement and this date will take precedence over the default date in the CBA.

https://media.cfldb.ca/documents/cfl-cflpa-collective-agreement-2014-text.pdf

For newly signed contracts, the clubs will have added language to the player contract making signing and roster bonuses deferrable, in line with the directive. So the owners have a strategically suspect, but legally defensible position.   But for players in the midst of a multi year contract who are due a scheduled bonus payment, they don?t have a leg to stand on.

To be fair, I haven?t seen a clear case where a mid contract bonus has definitely been withheld.  The references to these payments are general, sweeping, and most often on Twitter.  

But in the final analysis, there is no language in the CBA that allows this deferral of payment.  They can only insert such language into individual player contracts, and would only be able to do that with contracts signed this off season.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on April 21, 2019, 01:14:15 AM
I refer you to article 3.06 of the CBA, which clearly states that the date for payment of bonuses can be specified within the standard players agreement and this date will take precedence over the default date in the CBA.

https://media.cfldb.ca/documents/cfl-cflpa-collective-agreement-2014-text.pdf

For newly signed contracts, the clubs will have added language to the player contract making signing and roster bonuses deferrable, in line with the directive. So the owners have a strategically suspect, but legally defensible position.   But for players in the midst of a multi year contract who are due a scheduled bonus payment, they don?t have a leg to stand on.

To be fair, I haven?t seen a clear case where a mid contract bonus has definitely been withheld.  The references to these payments are general, sweeping, and most often on Twitter.  

But in the final analysis, there is no language in the CBA that allows this deferral of payment.  They can only insert such language into individual player contracts, and would only be able to do that with contracts signed this off season.

I'm sure that it becomes a matter of interpretation, however, when I read that specific article, I took that passage to be referring to monies earned for pre-season camps and play off/Grey Cup payments, based upon the context of the entire document. Because when you're reading it, it is descriptive in regards to the time tables that these you potentially earn the bonus and the time the team has to pay you. It would hardly make sense that if you earn a roster bonus in January, or like Nichols did this year, that the team can wait until 72 hours of the first game to make good on paying you.

then, I refer you to page 46 of the CBA under section 4, item 2, you will find language that reads: "It is understood and agreed that the following Rules and Regulations shall not be amended or added to throughout the term of this Agreement:" and then if you look under the heading of "By Laws of the CFL" you see it references "Section 7-Standard Player Contract"

I think that it would be safe to say that by adding the language that they did in regards to deferral of payment would put them in direct violation of this statement...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: buckzumhoff on April 21, 2019, 11:30:43 AM
Players used to practice on the Monday following a game on Saturday. Sometimes I believe it pushed back til Tuesday. Now it's Wednesday. Use to go watch the practices because you saw a lot . There was drills for receivers. Running backs. Defensive line. Practices would start at 11 go to 1 pm.  Now it's 11. And goes  to 12:30. Mainly scrimmage play. Only separation for drills is the punter or field goal kicker practicing. Since Flory became a rep looks to be 2014, that's when it was scaled back. Seems players played  60 minutes  before then and were prepared . Not as many dropped balls missed assignments etc. Players also used to hang around after to talk to reporters and some did extra practice on their own. They say it was to prevent injuries. Injuries still happen.  I haven't seen to many injuries in a practice and still they happen and a lot more in a game now because they aren't used to going full out. When it's time to go full out , other teams are going to hit you and you're on the other end .


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 3rdand1.5 on April 21, 2019, 01:07:00 PM
After spending some time reading and looking at different articles, correct me if I am wrong but;

CFLPA goes to the media to say the league is withholding 6mil. in off season bonuses. By doing this attenpting to make the league look "shady"

Orridge a number of years ago put that stipulation in place that no CBA no payments. So this is not a "current regime" tactic that came out of the blue.

These bonuses are beneficial to both the league and the players, so the negotiation isn't about eliminating them.

The bonus payments in question were negotiated for the 2019 season, and technically there is no 2019 season without a CBA so in theory if the players do not attend camp or delay the year the the "bonuses" would be reduced to match the amount earned.

In short, if my understanding is correct the league is/has at no point said they are not honoring the bonuses due in 2019 but rather that they will not pay them until a CBA for 2019 is in place. (Which was an agreement since 2014, I believe)

So if the CFLPA and it's members delay the season then these bonuses will/should be reduced accordingly to reflect time missed.

While I do see the players frustration in this situation, delaying the season would IMO be more detrimental to them, half the teams are community owned and close to half loose money every year. We are almost at a TV contract negotiation, should the players delay and a TV contract gets affected or reduced, gone will be all the high paying contracts in the CFL,(hello, Reilly, BLM,m Soli) as simply put the coffers will be empty. The CFL barely makes a profit and outside of the NFL is the only "proven" league a player could make a living playing in (XFL today does not exist)

The delay/hard ball tactics work when the owners are raking in money like the majority of owners in the NBA, NHL, NFL, but IMO will not/can not work against a league which barely scrapes by.

As to this CFL 2.0....sure it's nice but drop the **** charade if CFL 1.0 isn't functioning. While I admire the new Commish's outside the norms thinking, too me it's like starting to paint and decorate a house before the framing is even completed.......



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 21, 2019, 01:16:25 PM
Ok, Worst case scenario is the delay of payments was illegal, immoral and unfair. What were the stumbling blocks from having meeting and / or coming to an agreement between December and now?

It's an oversimplification but what stopped a new CBA in December from happening before Jan 1 payments were delayed?  The delay in beginning negotiations seemed voluntary.

I don't see the delay as a cause of the problem only a consequence. Something else is the trigger point for not coming to an agreement. The longer there is no agreement, the longer the delay potentially.

Next meeting is scheduled for April 29. Why weren't they talking on April 2? Better yet, the entire month of February or March.

Fingers are crossed for progress and a quick resolution.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 21, 2019, 01:24:28 PM
Quoting part from Chevelle66 ( didn't want to quote the entire long original post )

while correct in stating that their are more imports than Canadians players in the league, the CFLPA is empowered to negotiate terms and conditions on behalf of the collective... meaning, the CFLPA is not required to obtain majority consensus of the collective in order to negotiate specific terms and conditions and could have very well came to an agreement with the CFLPRC independent of an actual player vote in regards to a change

Even if a vote is not required it would be reasonable to believe the CFLPA would do what is in the interest of the majority. The majority is still and will be imports.

Regarding the $6M in off season bonus's. It's an interesting and very large number. How much of it was due and when? Bonus's are often due early after the beginning of the year. Many others would have not existed until after new contracts were signed after free agency.  Even more bonus's are for arriving at TC and passing physicals.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on April 21, 2019, 02:48:31 PM
Regarding the $6M in off season bonus's. It's an interesting and very large number. How much of it was due and when? Bonus's are often due early after the beginning of the year. Many others would have not existed until after new contracts were signed after free agency.  Even more bonus's are for arriving at TC and passing physicals.

I thought the same thing, $6M is a bunch of money, more than an entire team's SMS for a year... before I saw the amount of bonus that was pending, I was thinking that teams were structuring deals in such a manner that would allow them to take advantage of prior year left over SMS cap, make a large 1 time payment out of the balance remaining to lower SMS cap in the upcoming year...  it's either that, or, they are 'robbing Peter to pay Paul', teams are paying what they owe a player what is due on their contract, signing another player today that they can't really afford due to cap balance so they are pushing a late payment that will be taken out of the next year's SMS... kind of like kiting a check, lol... admittedly so, I don't know what the fiscal year start and end date is SMS payments or specific rules regarding player payment and allocating cost...

I've been troubled since the end of the season with what I felt was an overall lack of urgency on either parties part to start talks on the CBA.  Especially when you think about the CFLPA, their whole existence is to take care of these matters so while wait until basically 75 days before your current agreement is about to expire?

With that in mind, I assumed that the CFLPA felt that there wasn't going to be any/many modifications that could become stumbling blocks in getting the new deal done. The league is saying that it was the CFLPA that originally delayed opening talks until March. And honestly, CFL financial operations are pretty transparent to anyone concerned, so, the CFLPA has to know that there is a limited to what can be asked for and what the league can actually do.

I wasn't able to find anything that has been published that outlines what the CFLPA is asking for or league's position on any of the ongoing negotiation topics so it hard to understand why both sides have taken on this 'play hardball' type of position, players threatening to not report to camp... league withholding bonus money and delaying the continuation of negotiations... it's not like we are talking about the NFL here where there is so much money being generated and players could honestly feel like the league could and should do more and aren't just because they're greedy...

and when you think that the league is claiming that they can't meet again until at least April 29th due to other pending matters... I say that's crap, after all the league has created their own entity, the CFLPRC, that seems it's sole responsibilities are to take care of these matters...

but you would think that both sides are smart enough to see that optics matter and a work stoppage hurts both sides considerably... I would love to know what has been put on the table for consideration and why we are headed into the 11th hour without an agreement...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 21, 2019, 04:05:43 PM
Here is an interesting point.  The majority of the CFLPA bargaining team are veteran players.  Most players with bonuses due are vets and I'd bet that the majority in the bargaining committee are missing money.

On the other hand most players in the league and all the rookies, camp invites and draft picks will not have bonuses owing.  For the elite players who are bargaining for everyone to encourage action based on their person gains...  well there is a wedge issue for the league to use.  Sure vets won't get their bonuses until a CBA is signed but players trying to earn a spot won't get a chance to unless a CBA is signed.   Both want a deal done, but from opposite agendas.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 21, 2019, 05:31:17 PM
Negotiations in a union environment can be ugly. I spent over 20 years is some big unions ( as a union member ) and experienced strikes 1st hand a few times.

That said, as ugly as things can be / seem, sometimes there is more bluster than fire. Deals can be done in a few days when push comes to shove.

That doesn't always happen but can happen before the red line is crossed and paychecks lost.

Since we really don't know what the real obstacles are it's difficult to know what it will take to get it done.

Let the cooler heads prevail on both sides and find the solutions. I'm ready for TC to start on time.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TBURGESS on April 21, 2019, 05:39:44 PM
https://3downnation.com/2019/04/21/list-of-players-who-say-they-arent-going-to-training-camp-continues-to-grow/

...  Andrew Harris, RB, Winnipeg Blue Bombers


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on April 21, 2019, 07:15:17 PM
Negotiations in a union environment can be ugly. I spent over 20 years is some big unions ( as a union member ) and experienced strikes 1st hand a few times.

That said, as ugly as things can be / seem, sometimes there is more bluster than fire. Deals can be done in a few days when push comes to shove.

That doesn't always happen but can happen before the red line is crossed and paychecks lost.

Since we really don't know what the real obstacles are it's difficult to know what it will take to get it done.

Let the cooler heads prevail on both sides and find the solutions. I'm ready for TC to start on time.

I'm like you, without knowing what the issues being discussed are, it's really hard to gauge the seriousness of the situation...  I have a hard time coming up with 'deal breakers' that may be involved that has one side saying "i'm not going to show up" and the other side saying "well, were done talking for now, and we're still not going to pay you any bonus money until we agree"... I feel confident that the players in the CFL are very aware of the economics involved, just as I believe that teams would love to pay players better and do more for them if it were actually possible... so why the impasse?

for me, it's like if my daughter and I were out and about and she were to 'dad, I'm hungry', so I wheel into a drive thru only to realize I left my money clip at home, however, I do a $5 bill in my pocket, so... I say to her, 'hey all I got is $5, what you want?'... it's not that I'm unwilling to buy something different or more, I just don't have the money to do so... she understands, orders off the bargain menu and all is good... lol...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: buckzumhoff on April 21, 2019, 09:50:58 PM
Unions in sports was a bad idea to begin with. It's ruined hockey and baseball. And it gives a bad name to industries who really need Unions. QBs like Wilson on the Seahawks 20 mil plus. They think he's going to win a superbowl. Good luck. Oakland cheaped out paying a good linebacker half that amount and Chicago has the best linebacker in football.  Baltimore payed their qb Flacco a bunch of money and they had to get rid of their receivers.  I can't see the CFL players holding out for too much. One of their players jacked Winnipeg for 7O k and the players association made no attempt to get that money back. Paid Adaruus Bowman 180 k for 8 catches in 9 games.  But they want bonuses?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: buckzumhoff on April 21, 2019, 10:07:13 PM
I don't know what the players are wanting. I'm guessing it's the amount of Canadian players per team and bonus money. Other than that not much of an issue. I can't see why they are going on saying they won't show up. If it's bonuses minor issue. Must be more to it. Ticket prices went up 3 per cent they deserve a 3 per cent . I an see salary cap going up 3 per cent


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: kkc60 on April 21, 2019, 10:42:25 PM
Unions in sports was a bad idea to begin with. It's ruined hockey and baseball. And it gives a bad name to industries who really need Unions. QBs like Wilson on the Seahawks 20 mil plus. They think he's going to win a superbowl. Good luck. Oakland cheaped out paying a good linebacker half that amount and Chicago has the best linebacker in football.  Baltimore payed their qb Flacco a bunch of money and they had to get rid of their receivers.  I can't see the CFL players holding out for too much. One of their players jacked Winnipeg for 7O k and the players association made no attempt to get that money back. Paid Adaruus Bowman 180 k for 8 catches in 9 games.  But they want bonuses?
What does Wilson have to do with a union? He wasn't even holding out, he just gave them a deadline to agree on an extension. And he won a superbowl and carried them this past year. Of course signing players to super high contracts can cause issues. But that's on the team not the player. Wilson wouldn't ask for 35 mil if Rodgers wasn't making 30 mil.
As for Oakland, yeah they cheaped out. Chicago has a QB on a rookie deal. As for Baltimore, if I remember correctly none of the superbowl receivers went on to do much.

As for Durant jacking that 70k. Why would the CFLPA fight that? They represent the players. And guess who gave Durant that bonus and paid Bowman that money? The team. Players deserve bonuses. Teams like bonuses. If the best teo examples you can give are a sleazebag jacking 70k and a team signing an aging receiver on the decline to a dumb deal, you are proving this whole "get rid of bonuses" thing is pointless.

Don't like how much players are making? Then don't support the league. Watch the NCAA if you really wanna watch players get screwed


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: kkc60 on April 21, 2019, 10:43:32 PM
I don't know what the players are wanting. I'm guessing it's the amount of Canadian players per team and bonus money. Other than that not much of an issue. I can't see why they are going on saying they won't show up. If it's bonuses minor issue. Must be more to it. Ticket prices went up 3 per cent they deserve a 3 per cent . I an see salary cap going up 3 per cent
They don't want to show up and work for free which they would be doing if they dont get their bonuses. They want a CBA. Keep in mind the league pushed back negotiations


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TecnoGenius on April 22, 2019, 05:31:07 AM
After spending some time reading and looking at different articles, correct me if I am wrong but;
[...]
As to this CFL 2.0....sure it's nice but drop the **** charade if CFL 1.0 isn't functioning. While I admire the new Commish's outside the norms thinking, too me it's like starting to paint and decorate a house before the framing is even completed.......

Your whole post is 100% bang on and the best post on the topic I've read all year.

Putting aside politics, both the players and the league need to stop messing around and hammer something out, pronto.  If this actually leads to no players at TC, I'm not going to be happy at either side.  Again, this is the CFL, this shouldn't be that hard.

Does no one have any insight as to what the stumbling blocks are?  Why are there no leaks?  The only thing I could see being impossible for the league to cave on is if the players want some sort of head-injury admission / concession.  The CFL, and even magic unicorn Ambrosie, have made it clear they will not admit to any head-injury liability.  Surely we're not waiting with bated breath over some piddly normal SMS and/oor ELC increase or ratio issue.  There's got to be something big causing the rift.

We want leaks and we want them now!!  Or a deal.  Get 'er done guys!


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: buckzumhoff on April 22, 2019, 01:33:00 PM
What does Wilson have to do with a union? He wasn't even holding out, he just gave them a deadline to agree on an extension. And he won a superbowl and carried them this past year. Of course signing players to super high contracts can cause issues. But that's on the team not the player. Wilson wouldn't ask for 35 mil if Rodgers wasn't making 30 mil.
As for Oakland, yeah they cheaped out. Chicago has a QB on a rookie deal. As for Baltimore, if I remember correctly none of the superbowl receivers went on to do much.

As for Durant jacking that 70k. Why would the CFLPA fight that? They represent the players. And guess who gave Durant that bonus and paid Bowman that money? The team. Players deserve bonuses. Teams like bonuses. If the best teo examples you can give are a sleazebag jacking 70k and a team signing an aging receiver on the decline to a dumb deal, you are proving this whole "get rid of bonuses" thing is pointless.

Don't like how much players are making? Then don't support the league. Watch the NCAA if you really wanna watch players get screwed
[/quote.


You miss the point . The CFL cannot afford a hell of alot more. They're already paying QBs 500 k a season. On a 4 million dollar pay roll. Could it be 4 and a half million. Attendance in Toronto is very low,Hamilton is not selling out. Winnipeg doesn't sell out. Edmonton doesn't come close to what they used to draw. BC.   18,000?  Montreal. doesn't draw more than 25000. If their lucky. How are NCAA players getting screwed. I don't want players getting screwed but if you watch what is happening to the NFL. . I don't really care if they settle or not. It's not a union. You are they call it one. But when they pay a player 750 dollars a week to play on the practice roster. If that is a union. .  I would call it a pyramid. Those at the top get all the money. The players who stand in ready to play in case of Injhry get paid less than 20 dollars an hour. 40 x 20 is 800. So they  get the oughly 18.00 Canadian per hour. Great union. But their focus is on bonuses for the player making 500 k or 200 k a year.  Tickets go up in price you will see a reduction in attendance. That's why having these other leagues was good for all. Good for the fans and the players. NFL keeps trying to make their qb the highest paid player yet it was Brady who gave up part of his salary do other players cc ould stay on the team. Guess who won the superbowl. . check ticket prices to a Vikings game   I did. I won't be going for 200 American dollar's to sit in nose bleed section. 1700 for front row .the union or association just has their priorities in reverse order.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 22, 2019, 01:50:47 PM
I don't know what the players are wanting. I'm guessing it's the amount of Canadian players per team and bonus money. Other than that not much of an issue. I can't see why they are going on saying they won't show up. If it's bonuses minor issue. Must be more to it. Ticket prices went up 3 per cent they deserve a 3 per cent . I an see salary cap going up 3 per cent

We don't know all the details in the proposed ratio change. However reducing the # of Canadian starters doesn't automatically reduce the number of Canadians on the roster.

For example we could dress all 46 players adding 2 imports that were on the DR. Those 2 could be the additional 2 import starters ( non DI's ) while 21 Canadians remain on the 46 man roster.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TBURGESS on April 22, 2019, 03:16:07 PM
We don't know all the details in the proposed ratio change. However reducing the # of Canadian starters doesn't automatically reduce the number of Canadians on the roster.

For example we could dress all 46 players adding 2 imports that were on the DR. Those 2 could be the additional 2 import starters ( non DI's ) while 21 Canadians remain on the 46 man roster.
They could also keep the same number of NI's and imports as they have now. 2 DI's end up being starters.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 22, 2019, 04:34:12 PM
They could also keep the same number of NI's and imports as they have now. 2 DI's end up being starters.

That's another of several possible options but wouldn't be the most functional one to pick IMO. Using the Bombers as the example our DI's have been DE, DB, LB and kicker. Aside from starting at import at safety, those positions are already manned by imports.

However if the number of Canadian starters is reduced, why do we need 16 back up's / ST players for 5 Canadian starters? Currently we have 14 for 7 starters.

It comes down to size of roster against SMS costs.

I've previously suggested reducing the total roster size to 44 and eliminating the 2 man DR. Replace 2 Canadians with 2 starting imports on the AR 44. That adds a bare minimum of 2 ELC's in salary saved that could be used to increase ELC's for example.

Any solution that has a 2 man DR that doesn't dress seems counter productive. I'm ok with retaining the 46 man roster is everyone dresses for all games. That's a status quo financially but leaves open how to add 2 non DI imports to the AR and retain cumulative number of players and Canadians IF THAT is the goal.

I'm not sure that is the goal or whether it's part of impasse. In any case my suggestion about dressing the 46 man roster would seem to address that problem.

The fly in the ointment is I don't know where the global player fits into the roster. Adding an extra roster spot and cost also seems counter productive. Especially considering we currently don't dress the 2 man DR.

The additional question is how does a global player fit into the ratio? I doubt he'd be better than the import and if he is replacing a Canadian isn't that opposite to maintaining Canadian content, IF THAT is the goal?

The general assumption is that SMS will go up and ELC will probably rise as part of that result. How much is somewhat irrelevant. It will be what is affordable more or less.

Bigger size rosters is an advantage at many levels but that spreads the SMS over a greater number of players. You can do that in the NFL with HUGE SMS spends. In the CFL not so much.

I think all fans would be pleased to see bigger rosters. It just doesn't appear to be a financially sound part of the current situation.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 22, 2019, 04:43:33 PM
We've seen some very large increase in salaries for top QB's this off season. That's a bit of a tough pill to swallow for the rest of roster. Those increases may have taken up the bulk of the SMS increase.

Has that created some of the impasse? IE: Yes SMS is going up $250K this year but we spent it on our top 2 players. So no increase for ELC etc etc.

Note: That comment is just a speculation about new SMS level and consequence by me. Nothing I've read / heard has suggested how much new SMS might be going up etc.

I'm just wondering what GM's knew when they awarded these big contracts in free agency. More money has to come from somewhere.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue girl on April 22, 2019, 06:34:10 PM
I'd like to know what it is that the players are willing to take job action over. I can't believe that it's because the league doesn't want to negotiate for a couple of weeks because that's just silly. I honestly don't think that the league would bring the players here and then have a lockout because that would be a waste of money. When I know what the issues are then I'll decide who I support.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 22, 2019, 07:20:44 PM
The CFLPA keeps tweeting about respect and how they have solidarity and much stronger position now than ever... and I'm starting to lose any sympathy for them. 

How are they being disrespected?  What are their concerns?  What are they "fighting" for?  They've had it pretty good, and the league started negotiations by floating a huge raise in minimum contracts.  Huge.  And there has been a continuing improvement in player safety, and no doubt the "Hefney clause" will be inserted into this CBA. 

So what's the big deal?  What was the ask that made the CFL walk?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 22, 2019, 09:51:04 PM
The CFL is not a bunch of billionaires splitting TV contracts worth about a billion per team.  There are a few teams making money, more that are breaking even, and some that lose money constantly regardless their efforts. 

I'm not sure what the CFLPA wants, or what more they think the CFL can give, but no one in the CFL is getting rich.  When the average franchise value of an NFL team is $2.57BILLION, sure, they can have some leeway to bargain.  But they still don't have guaranteed contracts...  In Canada, franchise value hovers around zero... Montreal is reported to have a price tag of "take over MOST of the debt". 

I'm sure the league wants to do well by the players, just not sure what they can do with the limited resources available.  Can't get blood from a stone...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 23, 2019, 12:05:56 PM
Wow, what a depressing read.  The NFL, with an annual payroll for players of of over 3 billion dollars, has benefit plans for players that are really, really poor, with most requiring 2 seasons to qualify. 

https://www.playsmartplaysafe.com/resource/nfl-benefits/

Yikes.  I hope the CFLPA has reviewed this document....


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 23, 2019, 05:32:51 PM
Justin DunkVerified account @JDunk12

Report and pass bonuses at risk if #CFL players don?t show up for camp: sources
#CFLPA #Riders #Ticats #Argos #AlsMTL #Redblacks #CalStampeders #Esks #Bombers #BCLions


https://3downnation.com/2019/04/23/report-and-pass-bonuses-at-risk-if-players-dont-show-up-for-camp-sources/

And the plot thickens... the held back roster bonuses will be due once the CBA is signed, as they are contingent on just being on teh roster.  These are different bonuses (I'm guessing incentives for getting guys to show up for camp).  These are part of the total compensation package for players, but I can't see them being paid out if the player does not qualify for them...  which means basically showing up...



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on April 23, 2019, 06:23:23 PM
Justin DunkVerified account @JDunk12

Report and pass bonuses at risk if #CFL players don?t show up for camp: sources
#CFLPA #Riders #Ticats #Argos #AlsMTL #Redblacks #CalStampeders #Esks #Bombers #BCLions


https://3downnation.com/2019/04/23/report-and-pass-bonuses-at-risk-if-players-dont-show-up-for-camp-sources/

And the plot thickens... the held back roster bonuses will be due once the CBA is signed, as they are contingent on just being on teh roster.  These are different bonuses (I'm guessing incentives for getting guys to show up for camp).  These are part of the total compensation package for players, but I can't see them being paid out if the player does not qualify for them...  which means basically showing up...



camp bonus would depend on whether or not teams still hold camp in the event that there is a delay due to work stoppage... I mean if you show up to camp, regardless if has been rescheduled, you still showed up...  any bonus that was due back in January and up to camp are still due and should be paid regardless...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Fire101 on April 23, 2019, 11:09:20 PM
TSN's television contract reportedly pays $40 million annually to the CFL, and they own the Toronto Argonauts (Parent company Bell Media). There is no way that they would allow any kind of work stoppage right ??!!??!!! ???


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 24, 2019, 02:38:13 AM
camp bonus would depend on whether or not teams still hold camp in the event that there is a delay due to work stoppage... I mean if you show up to camp, regardless if has been rescheduled, you still showed up...  any bonus that was due back in January and up to camp are still due and should be paid regardless...

Teams are holding camps, if the CFLPA players decide to strike, they will lose their camp bonuses.  Pretty cut and dried, really.  I think you might see a softening of the stance to they won't play preseason games... but when regular season games start and game cheques start being missed....  they should just get back to the table and hash out a deal.  Not a lot has changed since the last CBA, Hefney's story, the addition of the Schooners, but revenues are not up.. they are down...  so asking for more from a league that is struggling, not great bargaining chips...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 24, 2019, 01:22:57 PM
Teams are holding camps, if the CFLPA players decide to strike, they will lose their camp bonuses.  Pretty cut and dried, really.  I think you might see a softening of the stance to they won't play preseason games... but when regular season games start and game cheques start being missed....  they should just get back to the table and hash out a deal.  Not a lot has changed since the last CBA, Hefney's story, the addition of the Schooners, but revenues are not up.. they are down...  so asking for more from a league that is struggling, not great bargaining chips...


I don't believe they won't play preseason games even if there is a delay. Those games are the opportunities for players to make the roster and for getting ready for the regular season.

There is also the revenue aspect of preseason games.

How much of any delay might be possible is the only question. I would expect TC bonus's would also be paid even if there is a delay in the start date. There would be no need to stir that pot of anger.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 24, 2019, 02:30:39 PM
The CFLPA keeps tweeting about respect and how they have solidarity and much stronger position now than ever... and I'm starting to lose any sympathy for them. 

How are they being disrespected?  What are their concerns?  What are they "fighting" for?  They've had it pretty good, and the league started negotiations by floating a huge raise in minimum contracts.  Huge.  And there has been a continuing improvement in player safety, and no doubt the "Hefney clause" will be inserted into this CBA. 

So what's the big deal?  What was the ask that made the CFL walk?

Why would you think current CFLPA members want an increase to rookie salaries? It wouldn't apply to current contracts and the people who would benefit from it aren't CFLPA members yet. It makes the pie available for veterans smaller. It might add a touch more job security for older vets but that's about the only benefit to any current CFLPA member for that. Also, the "Hefney clause" is by no means a certainty and will almost definitely be a fight. The union and media would love it but the owners will fight tooth and nail to keep it from happening. Book it.
The CFLPA is fighting for a guaranteed share of revenues, like they used to have. It was stripped away from them before you were a CFL fan so there's a little history lesson for you. It has been the bone of contention the past 3 CBA negotiations and is and always will be the main ask of the CFLPA.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 24, 2019, 02:33:06 PM
There is absolutely zero chance there will be any work stoppage. Every CBA we hear the same old crap about a work stoppage and the CBA is always ratified in time for the season to start because the CFLPA caves every time.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 24, 2019, 03:49:05 PM
Why would you think current CFLPA members want an increase to rookie salaries? It wouldn't apply to current contracts and the people who would benefit from it aren't CFLPA members yet. It makes the pie available for veterans smaller. It might add a touch more job security for older vets but that's about the only benefit to any current CFLPA member for that. Also, the "Hefney clause" is by no means a certainty and will almost definitely be a fight. The union and media would love it but the owners will fight tooth and nail to keep it from happening. Book it.
The CFLPA is fighting for a guaranteed share of revenues, like they used to have. It was stripped away from them before you were a CFL fan so there's a little history lesson for you. It has been the bone of contention the past 3 CBA negotiations and is and always will be the main ask of the CFLPA.

If they are interested in revenue based SMS, they are crazy...  they'd lose money.

The CFLPA is going on about the future of the league, if they are negotiating only for the current vet's best interest (no increase in rookie deals) then they are total hypocrites and deserve to lose bonuses and gamechecks...

The "Hefney clause" is a super easy one for the leauge, they can self insure for a lot less than actually buying insurance, and make the treatment be only in Canada where it is cheap... or even make a deal with our new partners in Mexico... ;)


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on April 24, 2019, 04:19:07 PM
There is absolutely zero chance there will be any work stoppage. Every CBA we hear the same old crap about a work stoppage and the CBA is always ratified in time for the season to start because the CFLPA caves every time.

There's a bit of a feeling that "It could be different this time," but you're right, I'm sure it will all get smoothed over. Neither side has enough resources to shoulder not playing.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: the paw on April 25, 2019, 04:28:17 PM
3downnation reporting that the strike vote was 97% in favour.

That's not atypical of strike votes, when members try to give their bargaining committee a strong mandate.  But I don't ever recall the CFLPA ever taking a strike vote before, much less publicizing the results.

I'm not saying they will hit the picket lines, but the players aren't rolling over this time.  The league and teams better offer something substantial. 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 25, 2019, 04:33:44 PM
If they are interested in revenue based SMS, they are crazy...  they'd lose money.

The CFLPA is going on about the future of the league, if they are negotiating only for the current vet's best interest (no increase in rookie deals) then they are total hypocrites and deserve to lose bonuses and gamechecks...

The "Hefney clause" is a super easy one for the leauge, they can self insure for a lot less than actually buying insurance, and make the treatment be only in Canada where it is cheap... or even make a deal with our new partners in Mexico... ;)

A revenue based salary cap is EXACTLY what they want and that is a well known fact.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 3rdand1.5 on April 25, 2019, 07:46:47 PM
3downnation reporting that the strike vote was 97% in favour.

That's not atypical of strike votes, when members try to give their bargaining committee a strong mandate.  But I don't ever recall the CFLPA ever taking a strike vote before, much less publicizing the results.

I'm not saying they will hit the picket lines, but the players aren't rolling over this time.  The league and teams better offer something substantial. 

I just do not see the benifit of a strike. The CFL barely makes money and players "potentially" damaging the TV contract the only real revenue source for the CFL would pretty well guarantee a decrease in salaries, and benefits.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: the paw on April 25, 2019, 09:04:31 PM
I just do not see the benifit of a strike. The CFL barely makes money and players "potentially" damaging the TV contract the only real revenue source for the CFL would pretty well guarantee a decrease in salaries, and benefits.

No strike appears worth it in the short term analysis, workers/players lose money that takes years to recoup. But if workers or players aren't willing to draw a line in the sand (and back it up if necessary) then they don't get any respect in bargaining and pay through the nose by accepting suboptimal deals.  The history of the CFLPA has historically been one of talking a good game, but essentially taking what's on offer.  This time sounds different.

The players would love a SMS tied to a percentage of revenues, and that's not the worst formula for the owners either, if its the right number. But it isn't realistic to look at a percentage of revenues deal in the same range as other professional sports leagues, its comparing apples to oranges.  I think there are lots of areas where players could achieve significant improvements without breaking the league. 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 25, 2019, 10:11:24 PM
No strike appears worth it in the short term analysis, workers/players lose money that takes years to recoup. But if workers or players aren't willing to draw a line in the sand (and back it up if necessary) then they don't get any respect in bargaining and pay through the nose by accepting suboptimal deals.  The history of the CFLPA has historically been one of talking a good game, but essentially taking what's on offer.  This time sounds different.

The players would love a SMS tied to a percentage of revenues, and that's not the worst formula for the owners either, if its the right number. But it isn't realistic to look at a percentage of revenues deal in the same range as other professional sports leagues, its comparing apples to oranges.  I think there are lots of areas where players could achieve significant improvements without breaking the league. 

With a TV contract expiring before the end of the new CBA that becomes hard to calculate. Attendance revenues are down as well.

What happens if these factors result in a significantly reduced TV contract? Not everything goes up. A possible new franchise within this time frame also means splitting any pot in 9 pieces instead of 8.
 
Players at the top of the pay scale and getting massive increases this off season. 

There is a lot to consider in this scenario of SMS tied to revenue. The overall size of pie is not like the bigger sports where the pie could feed a small country.

CFL teams are not reaping big paydays.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: the paw on April 25, 2019, 10:42:31 PM
With a TV contract expiring before the end of the new CBA that becomes hard to calculate. Attendance revenues are down as well.

What happens if these factors result in a significantly reduced TV contract? Not everything goes up. A possible new franchise within this time frame also means splitting any pot in 9 pieces instead of 8.
 
Players at the top of the pay scale and getting massive increases this off season. 

There is a lot to consider in this scenario of SMS tied to revenue. The overall size of pie is not like the bigger sports where the pie could feed a small country.

CFL teams are not reaping big paydays.

If they agreed upon a share of revenue formula, you don?t have to predict the amount any particular revenue stream goes up.  If league revenues go up 10%, then the SMS goes up proportionately.  It doesn?t matter if the gate is down 2 percent while streaming is up 45 percent, the sum is the indicator.  That part is fairly straightforward.

The trickier part is setting the baseline, when some clubs are financially healthy, and some are money losers.  But that is an issue in setting SMS, even if you don?t tie it to a specific percentage.

And if a 10th team is added (I will believe it when I see it), TSN will be getting more games, and you can expect them to pay for that.  As much as we like to beak off at the CFL head office, they aren?t idiots, the deal with TSN has to anticipate this possibility.

I have no response to the massive jump in top end compensation.  I tend to agree it doesn?t appear sustainable.  But for the teams to sign those deals, they have to be confident the cap is going up significantly.  Which leads me to believe the owners made out pretty well under the last CBA, and they are not in as much financial hardship as they let on.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue_or_die on April 26, 2019, 01:03:34 PM
I'm fine with giving the players as much as possible, whether it's tied to revenue or whatever. As mentioned though, this has to come after the bottom line has been achieved. Clubs need to have their costs covered and house in order (e.g. contribute to a contingency fund for leaner years) and then sure, whatever is left beyond a base SMS agreement, give to the players.

My guess is that remainder is zero or less pretty often, though.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 26, 2019, 02:09:02 PM
If they agreed upon a share of revenue formula, you don?t have to predict the amount any particular revenue stream goes up.  If league revenues go up 10%, then the SMS goes up proportionately.  It doesn?t matter if the gate is down 2 percent while streaming is up 45 percent, the sum is the indicator.  That part is fairly straightforward.

The trickier part is setting the baseline, when some clubs are financially healthy, and some are money losers.  But that is an issue in setting SMS, even if you don?t tie it to a specific percentage.

And if a 10th team is added (I will believe it when I see it), TSN will be getting more games, and you can expect them to pay for that.  As much as we like to beak off at the CFL head office, they aren?t idiots, the deal with TSN has to anticipate this possibility.

I have no response to the massive jump in top end compensation.  I tend to agree it doesn?t appear sustainable.  But for the teams to sign those deals, they have to be confident the cap is going up significantly.  Which leads me to believe the owners made out pretty well under the last CBA, and they are not in as much financial hardship as they let on.

I understand the math. My point is that live and TV viewership seems to be dropping. If players want more when more is available are they willing to take less when less is available if that happens.

The Als are on the verge of having the CFL take over the team. The Lions have been on the market for several years now. Not every team is currently profitable. That doesn't sound like astute reasoning to want to tie SMS to revenue.

To a large degree that's already part of the calculation of setting the SMS. IE: this is what we can pay.

The Als used to sell out every game. The Lions used to get 40K+ for every game, now 25K is a big gate. What is the revenue loss of 15K+ for every game in Vancouver for a 10 game home season?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 26, 2019, 02:34:51 PM
Part 2:

Total operating revenue reached $33.4 million (an increase of $970,000 over 2017) and is attributable to the Club's decision to internalize food and beverage operations at Investors Group Field in 2018, thus not only improving the game day experience but also earning 100% of the revenues, less the associated expenses. This was offset by decreases in game revenue which was down $1.4 million (10.5%) as the Club did not host a home playoff game in 2018, and stadium management revenue which was down $1.8M in comparison to 2017. 

So game revenue down $1.4M ( 10.5% ) in 2018. Stadium management down $1.8M.

Not good trends.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on April 26, 2019, 02:44:26 PM
Part 2:

Total operating revenue reached $33.4 million (an increase of $970,000 over 2017) and is attributable to the Club's decision to internalize food and beverage operations at Investors Group Field in 2018, thus not only improving the game day experience but also earning 100% of the revenues, less the associated expenses. This was offset by decreases in game revenue which was down $1.4 million (10.5%) as the Club did not host a home playoff game in 2018, and stadium management revenue which was down $1.8M in comparison to 2017. 

So game revenue down $1.4M ( 10.5% ) in 2018. Stadium management down $1.8M.

Not good trends.


One year isn't a trend. It's great they're maximizing revenue through concessions. They will likely become even more efficient and profitable this year, having learned from their first-year mistakes. Non-playoff home game years will always look less good compared to playoff years. It's somewhat difficult to say based on only those numbers how concerning it is. Revenues have always fluctated year-to-year. What is stadium management revenue the result of? Not landing any touring acts or big one-offs?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 26, 2019, 03:09:28 PM
No strike appears worth it in the short term analysis, workers/players lose money that takes years to recoup. But if workers or players aren't willing to draw a line in the sand (and back it up if necessary) then they don't get any respect in bargaining and pay through the nose by accepting suboptimal deals.  The history of the CFLPA has historically been one of talking a good game, but essentially taking what's on offer.  This time sounds different.

The players would love a SMS tied to a percentage of revenues, and that's not the worst formula for the owners either, if its the right number. But it isn't realistic to look at a percentage of revenues deal in the same range as other professional sports leagues, its comparing apples to oranges.  I think there are lots of areas where players could achieve significant improvements without breaking the league. 

The players used to have a % of revenues at around 31% I believe. The CFL broke the union a couple CBAs ago and threatened a lockout if they didn't dump the revenue bases salaries. The CFLPA folded and has since gotten roughly 23-25% of the revenues in the non revenue based SMS. The CFLPA wants that 31% assurity back...and that is quite likely the bone of contention this round of talks.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 26, 2019, 03:23:03 PM
One year isn't a trend. It's great they're maximizing revenue through concessions. They will likely become even more efficient and profitable this year, having learned from their first-year mistakes. Non-playoff home game years will always look less good compared to playoff years. It's somewhat difficult to say based on only those numbers how concerning it is. Revenues have always fluctated year-to-year. What is stadium management revenue the result of? Not landing any touring acts or big one-offs?

Clearly attendance levels are dropping as is TV viewership. That impacts value of sponser's which leads to lower value of broadcast rights. New stadiums have gotten smaller.

This is not new and is a downward trend across the CFL. Only hit 27K+ once in the last 4 years but 4 times in the previous ( 2011-2014 ) years.

2011: 29558
2012: 27981
2013: 30637
2014: 28314
2015: 26745
2016: 25935
2017: 27681
2018: 26880

During the 2010s, CFL attendance has consistently exceeded 25,000 fans per game. An average of 25,286 fans watched CFL games in 2014. CFL attendance has been depressed during the middle of the current decade by short-term issues, most notably the lack of stadium availability in Toronto and Hamilton. By 2018, attendances in Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver were consistently below 20,000 fans, prompting long-term concerns in those markets.[1]

BC Lions attendance:

1986: 46637
2011: 29725
2018: 19975

Keeping in mind the upper bowl is closed but the stadium actually could hold close to 60K



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue_or_die on April 26, 2019, 04:00:49 PM
I don't think SB&G was contesting that CFL attendance/viewership is down necessarily, but that your Winnipeg example was weak. Get rid of a few losses and host a playoff game and we are in the black (not counting the extra attendance we likely would have had from those who gave up on the team during the mid-season losing streak).

It's not a trend, just a leaner year.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 26, 2019, 04:07:23 PM
I don't think SB&G was contesting that CFL attendance/viewership is down necessarily, but that your Winnipeg example was weak. Get rid of a few losses and host a playoff game and we are in the black (not counting the extra attendance we likely would have had from those who gave up on the team during the mid-season losing streak).

It's not a trend, just a leaner year.

I gave attendance levels for the last 8 years and the last 4 indicate a downward trend. I don't know how much clear that can be. You can't blame it on just a leaner year and no home playoff game. Historically home playoff games are not big draws in cold weather.  I just added some info on the Lions attendance. Similar patterns are available for every CFL team in google.

One stat showed overall CFL attendance down 750 per game on average from 2017.

Where do you want to draw a line?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on April 26, 2019, 04:26:56 PM
I gave attendance levels for the last 8 years and the last 4 indicate a downward trend. I don't know how much clear that can be. You can't blame it on just a leaner year and no home playoff game. Historically home playoff games are not big draws in cold weather.  I just added some info on the Lions attendance. Similar patterns are available for every CFL team in google.

One stat showed overall CFL attendance down 750 per game on average from 2017.

I was more referring to your previous post that compared 2018 to 2017 to draw a bunch of conclusions from a Winnipeg perspective only. It's also good to have some context. Let's look at your numbers a little more closely:


2011: 29558 - Bombers made it to the Grey Cup (Marketed as last season for the old stadium)
2012: 27981 - Actual last year of the old stadium
2013: 30637 - Highest average game attendance in Bomber History (IGF field opens)
2014: 28314
2015: 26745
2016: 25935
2017: 27681
2018: 26880

Let's use your numbers and go back to 2008 and provide a 10-year average for attendance to see how good or bad the last couple years really were.

2009: 25,720
2010: 26,083

A 10-year average is: 27,553.

In other words, in 2017 we exceeded the ten-year average by 128 attendees. In 2018 we were off by 673. These fluctuations are very normal. Keep in mind these averages include the anomaly of a new stadium opening which subsequently resulted in the best years in the organization's history. Where is the trend?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 3rdand1.5 on April 26, 2019, 04:28:33 PM
All these are proving the point further that the CFLPA will IMO not gain anything by a strike. Call it a trend call it a blip call it a pink unicorn it doesn't really matter, the reality is close to half the league is losing money close to a quarter of the leagues teams are for sale, and no one is making large profits. If the league can't break even at 25% giving the players 31% is not possible period. Again the league is so tight that there isn't wiggle room. As I have said this hard stance works with most NBA, NHL, NFL teams as owners in most markets are making massive profits, but it doesn't with CFL profits.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on April 26, 2019, 04:39:37 PM
BC Lions attendance:

1986: 46637
2011: 29725
2018: 19975

Keeping in mind the upper bowl is closed but the stadium actually could hold close to 60K



Also, the numbers you provided seem correct but are misleading. In 1983, 1984, and 1985 and 1991 the Lions appear to have crowds of 40K plus. In nearly every other year, their attendance has been between 25-35k  typically. Even in 2011 when they won the Grey Cup, they averaged 29K fans. No doubt the recent numbers are down but it's not nearly as bad as it would seem.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: the paw on April 26, 2019, 04:52:27 PM
The players used to have a % of revenues at around 31% I believe. The CFL broke the union a couple CBAs ago and threatened a lockout if they didn't dump the revenue bases salaries. The CFLPA folded and has since gotten roughly 23-25% of the revenues in the non revenue based SMS. The CFLPA wants that 31% assurity back...and that is quite likely the bone of contention this round of talks.

At those numbers, I think there is a deal to be made.  The cflpa may not get all the way back to 31% in one agreement, but the recent top end signings are an indicator the owners did well under the current CBA and can afford to nudge that percentage up.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 26, 2019, 04:57:13 PM
Also, the numbers you provided seem correct but are misleading. In 1983, 1984, and 1985 and 1991 the Lions appear to have crowds of 40K plus. In nearly every other year, their attendance has been between 25-35k  typically. Even in 2011 when they won the Grey Cup, they averaged 29K fans. No doubt the recent numbers are down but it's not nearly as bad as it would seem.

I live in Vancouver. I was at the opening game in 1983 where there were nearly 60K in attendance. In the late 80's I went to games where attendance was below 15K.  IIRC it was in 2017 where the upper bowl was closed totally. Prior the upper deck was limited to a few sections.

These are all indications. BC Place is the largest active stadium in the CFL as far as capacity and as such plays a large role in the overall health of the CFL revenue.

Winning seasons tend to have better attendance but for every team winning there is a team losing where attendance goes down.

I'm not basing my opinions solely on the difference between 2017 and 2018. I used to be part of a 50 person group of season tickets back in 2003-2011 timeframe. I no longer have season tickets and half of that group or more no longer have season tickets. Those were hardcore fans and they no longer are regular attendees.

I think if you're honest you'll find the same within your group of fans. Season ticket holders are down across the league. More people that go might be more inclined to cheaper end zone seats = lower attendance and lower revenues.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 26, 2019, 05:03:12 PM
At those numbers, I think there is a deal to be made.  The cflpa may not get all the way back to 31% in one agreement, but the recent top end signings are an indicator the owners did well under the current CBA and can afford to nudge that percentage up.

I think it shows the value of a top QB that go a long way to determine success. Not always but mostly. I don't necessarily agree with it indicates the owners did well.

In fact the Lions were the big spenders and we can quite easily see that's not the case in Vancouver. It was a gamble taken to get the top QB. Whether it pays off is uncertain.

Part of that gamble was the need to shed other highly paid performers such as Elimimian ( pending ) and 20 players from their 2018 roster.

Lions are trying to re-build interest. The team is for sale as are the Als.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue_or_die on April 26, 2019, 07:15:35 PM
I gave attendance levels for the last 8 years and the last 4 indicate a downward trend. I don't know how much clear that can be. You can't blame it on just a leaner year and no home playoff game. Historically home playoff games are not big draws in cold weather.  I just added some info on the Lions attendance. Similar patterns are available for every CFL team in google.

One stat showed overall CFL attendance down 750 per game on average from 2017.

Where do you want to draw a line?

I'm not saying necessarily that there isn't a recent downward trend (although SB&G argues that point pretty well); I am saying that your use of Winnipeg from '17 to '18 as evidence is not good evidence at all for the reasons I listed.

At those numbers, I think there is a deal to be made.  The cflpa may not get all the way back to 31% in one agreement, but the recent top end signings are an indicator the owners did well under the current CBA and can afford to nudge that percentage up.

You could be right but there is the possibility that some teams have gone off their rocker and are promising any expected (reasonably expected or not) is going 100% to QBs to keep them happy and that actual increased revenue isn't actually as high as this might indicate. Perhaps I'm being too cynical. I mean, we like to think the owners aren't stupid...

...right?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: the paw on April 26, 2019, 08:48:39 PM


You could be right but there is the possibility that some teams have gone off their rocker and are promising any expected (reasonably expected or not) is going 100% to QBs to keep them happy and that actual increased revenue isn't actually as high as this might indicate. Perhaps I'm being too cynical. I mean, we like to think the owners aren't stupid...

...right?

There is strong historical evidence that at any point in time, one or two of the owners can objectively be seen to have lost all reason. But on average, most of them are rational....

I considered the "off the rocker" hypothesis, and IMHO, there is too much countervailing evidence.  BC and Calgary both gave huge offers to their QBs, and Edmonton gave a monster offer to try to keep Reilly and a still-pretty-darn-high offer to Harris.  But it wasn't just QBs.  The Bighill and Derel Walker deals (and to a lesser extent Brandon Banks) both demonstrate the same kind of big splash signing.  That's 5 teams, 2 of which are community owned, and Calgary which is notoriously frugal.    I don't think they are just re-distributing the cap, they are anticipating a substantial hike. 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue_or_die on April 26, 2019, 09:09:07 PM
There is strong historical evidence that at any point in time, one or two of the owners can objectively be seen to have lost all reason. But on average, most of them are rational....

I considered the "off the rocker" hypothesis, and IMHO, there is too much countervailing evidence.  BC and Calgary both gave huge offers to their QBs, and Edmonton gave a monster offer to try to keep Reilly and a still-pretty-darn-high offer to Harris.  But it wasn't just QBs.  The Bighill and Derel Walker deals (and to a lesser extent Brandon Banks) both demonstrate the same kind of big splash signing.  That's 5 teams, 2 of which are community owned, and Calgary which is notoriously frugal.    I don't think they are just re-distributing the cap, they are anticipating a substantial hike. 

I have also gone through that same thought process and while it is very rational, I just can?t wrap my head around those insane deals. Gonna have to wait and see.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on April 26, 2019, 11:44:56 PM
has anyone factored in the impact of the football operations cap that goes into effect this year? I know that it will impact some more than others...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 27, 2019, 01:03:22 AM
has anyone factored in the impact of the football operations cap that goes into effect this year? I know that it will impact some more than others...

No but it shows the league is trying to be more organized / efficient in reducing costs which include this part of overhead. It's also makes it a more competitive field when private owners are restricted from over spending on large coaching staffs at high costs that public teams don't.

It's the same reason an SMS was put in place for players so rich owners didn't just buy all the best talent regardless of cost per se.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on April 27, 2019, 02:00:00 AM
No but it shows the league is trying to be more organized / efficient in reducing costs which include this part of overhead. It's also makes it a more competitive field when private owners are restricted from over spending on large coaching staffs at high costs that public teams don't.

It's the same reason an SMS was put in place for players so rich owners didn't just buy all the best talent regardless of cost per se.

oh, I get that... I was just wondering if the players association might think there is 'more on the table' with the coaching cap in place. i.e., less spent on coaches could mean more spent on players with a net zero effect...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: the paw on April 27, 2019, 02:33:16 AM
oh, I get that... I was just wondering if the players association might think there is 'more on the table' with the coaching cap in place. i.e., less spent on coaches could mean more spent on players with a net zero effect...

I don?t know if the players will think that way, but it seems clear that the owners/league instituted an ops cap so they could credibly say to the players that they are trying to control costs.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TecnoGenius on April 27, 2019, 04:01:10 AM
This was offset by decreases in game revenue which was down $1.4 million (10.5%) as the Club did not host a home playoff game in 2018,
So game revenue down $1.4M ( 10.5% ) in 2018. Stadium management down $1.8M.

Not good trends.

9 games instead of 10 in '18.  There's your missing 10% revenue (roughly speaking).  A better comparison would be WFC game revenue in '16 vs '18 -- both no-home-playoff years.  The '18 WSF was pretty well attended.  Same as a normal non-SSK Thursday summer game at IGF.

BC Lions attendance:

1986: 46637
2011: 29725
2018: 19975

I live in Vancouver. I was at the opening game in 1983 where there were nearly 60K in attendance. In the late 80's I went to games where attendance was below 15K.  IIRC it was in 2017 where the upper bowl was closed totally. Prior the upper deck was limited to a few sections.

So what you're saying is BC attendance is highly variable with a high standard deviation.  Those are some crazy fluctuations.  And without much rhyme or reason?  Vancouver sure is one strange place!  If we had similar attendance variation in WPG people would be freaking out.

I don?t know if the players will think that way, but it seems clear that the owners/league instituted an ops cap so they could credibly say to the players that they are trying to control costs.

Bingo.  Coaches cap only helps CFL in their negotiation ("see, we're not just giving it all to the overpaid coaches").  But the other huge component is convincing the Schooners to open shop...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 27, 2019, 01:16:26 PM
9 games instead of 10 in '18.  There's your missing 10% revenue (roughly speaking).  A better comparison would be WFC game revenue in '16 vs '18 -- both no-home-playoff years.  The '18 WSF was pretty well attended.  Same as a normal non-SSK Thursday summer game at IGF.

So what you're saying is BC attendance is highly variable with a high standard deviation.  Those are some crazy fluctuations.  And without much rhyme or reason?  Vancouver sure is one strange place!  If we had similar attendance variation in WPG people would be freaking out.

Bingo.  Coaches cap only helps CFL in their negotiation ("see, we're not just giving it all to the overpaid coaches").  But the other huge component is convincing the Schooners to open shop...


How do you get only 9 games in 2018? One of the pre-season games was a home game against Edmonton.

Vancouver has so many other things to do and spend discretionary money. Fans complain about lack of good marketing and high ticket prices. From an optics point of view 40K fans @ $50 tickets would look better than 20K @ $100 tickets.  That's an exaggeration but fans in the stands is better for advertisers and broadcasters.

Local hockey and soccer teams compete for the same fan base. I attribute part of the changes to all games now on TV, HD big screens in every house and every bar drawing fans away from stadiums in all CFL cities. Perhaps more so in Vancouver.

I also mentioned Montreal which used to sell out every game when AC played. Obviously when you finish at the top of the standing every season that impacts attendance. However for every team at or near the top there is a team at or near the bottom.

Just showing stats that attendance is dropping. Blame it on whatever you want. Inflation, increased taxes, gas prices.  BTW, gas in Vancouver hit as high at $1.78 a litre. That's going to keep some fans from driving downtown.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 27, 2019, 06:26:45 PM
Some information regarding previous CBA. Overall an $800K increase over 5 years.About 18%

?         Increases the current salary cap per team from $4.4 million to $5 million this year and an additional $50,000 a year in subsequent years to a total of $5.2 million in 2018.
?        Sets the minimum any team must spend on players? salaries at $4.4 million this year, and an additional $50,000 a year in subsequent years, to a total of $4.6 million in 2018.
?        Increases the minimum pay for players from the current $45,000 to $50,000 this year and an additional $1,000 a year to a total of $54,000 in 2018.
?        Increases pension contributions from the current $3,600 for clubs and $3,600 for players to $3,700 each in 2014 and an additional $100 each a year to a total contribution of $4,100 each in 2018.
?        Provides a $1,500 ratification bonus per each rookie player, and $7,500 per each veteran player for ratification bonuses, with the union to determine the scale on which veterans will receive bonuses (with all such bonuses to be paid to players on team rosters as of June 22,

However, if the nine teams? aggregate revenues (excluding Grey Cup) increase by more than $27 million in any year of the agreement, both sides will renegotiate an increase to the salary cap starting in the 2016 season.

NOTE: The aggregate revenues didn't increase by more than $27M during this CBA for whatever that info is worth. I can't find any information about aggregate increases during this time frame. That might be an interesting metric.

If there is a similar 1st year bump to SMS in the $600K-$800K ( inflation ) that makes it easier to understand what seemed like wild off season spending during free agency. Makes you think a $1M+ increase over 5 years might be some sort of target?

OTOH a $600K 1st year increase ( for example ) is a big number if every team wasn't profitable.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 28, 2019, 07:07:19 PM
If there was going to be a substantial bump in the SMS, you'd think Hervey would be holding onto Solly.  As it stands, one of two things must be going on.  Either he really, really overspent, or he fears Solly is not 100%, or will not complete a substantial part of the season.  Which are all valid concerns / reasons.

But this release will be a rallying cry for the CFLPA... If a defensive star can be released, a top player in the league just a year ago, and he took a salary drop last year (although he did play just 4 games), then who's contract is safe?  No doubt this will entail a call for guaranteed deals, but we all know that isn't going to happen, especially in an SMS league.  

I hope they choose some bargaining points based on what is good for all members, not just the few that represent the players, like Solly.  Choosing his example of "a problem that needs to be addressed in the CBA" would be a disservice to the players most affected by these negotiations.  Longterm health insurance, educational and job / small business counseling, pension plan and money management services...  alll hese are more important than guaranteed contracts, because very few players get cut for SMS issues.

And for those saying it is unfair when a player gets cut midseason, it is usually because he is not performing, and while it may seem unfair to the player, is it less fair to the team to have to pay a player that is not earning his way?   There is a set amount of SMS money out there, and members of the CFLPA are going to be the beneficiary of every penny of available SMS money.  If one player gets cut, another will take his place, and that SMS money will still find its way into a CFLPA members pocket.  So, as an association representing ALL its members, guaranteed contracts are not a hill worth dying on.  

Now, if you want to start off at that point, and then say  "Ok, we will back off of that demand if you give us x, y, z... " then sure... but don't cause a work stoppage over something that only benefits overpaid players not earning their money...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on April 28, 2019, 08:16:23 PM
Elimimian had a hand injury which is hardly a career ending situation.

It may be more a desire to spend more money elsewhere and the play of Herdman. Good players get released all the time. SMS is a cumulative set of decisions.

None of this is going to turn into guaranteed contracts in the CFL during negotiations.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 29, 2019, 11:44:23 AM
Elimimian had a hand injury which is hardly a career ending situation.

It may be more a desire to spend more money elsewhere and the play of Herdman. Good players get released all the time. SMS is a cumulative set of decisions.

None of this is going to turn into guaranteed contracts in the CFL during negotiations.

Guaranteed contract are never, ever, going to happen. They would be the demise of our league.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 29, 2019, 11:46:00 AM
There is strong historical evidence that at any point in time, one or two of the owners can objectively be seen to have lost all reason. But on average, most of them are rational....

I considered the "off the rocker" hypothesis, and IMHO, there is too much countervailing evidence.  BC and Calgary both gave huge offers to their QBs, and Edmonton gave a monster offer to try to keep Reilly and a still-pretty-darn-high offer to Harris.  But it wasn't just QBs.  The Bighill and Derel Walker deals (and to a lesser extent Brandon Banks) both demonstrate the same kind of big splash signing.  That's 5 teams, 2 of which are community owned, and Calgary which is notoriously frugal.    I don't think they are just re-distributing the cap, they are anticipating a substantial hike. 

I would imagine that they are anticipating that the new TV deals will be factored into the new CBA SMS.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on April 29, 2019, 12:29:01 PM
I would imagine that they are anticipating that the new TV deals will be factored into the new CBA SMS.

The current TSN agreement with the CFL extends through the 2021 season, so it would be somewhat difficult to predict the terms of a future agreement at this point.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 29, 2019, 01:18:20 PM
The current TSN agreement with the CFL extends through the 2021 season, so it would be somewhat difficult to predict the terms of a future agreement at this point.

There is the new ESPN deal that has not yet been accounted for in CBA SMS calculations.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 29, 2019, 02:51:14 PM
So, what does "fairly and with respect" mean to the players union?  How are the players disrespected right now, and what more can the league (which is barely solvent as a whole) offer them?  And what are they willing to give up to pay for the new asks.

If they want a % of revenue, that is one thing.  If they think it is going to be 50% like other leagues, I can't see that happening.  CFL overhead costs as a percentage of total revenue is a lot higher than leagues operating on a completely different scale. 

Here's an idea.  Profit sharing.  Teams that make money kick 10% into a players fund, and all players will get a bonus based on a combination of games played, games on the PR and maybe, just maybe, a small factor based on actual game cheque size.  I say game cheque because any bonuses are just that, they already got their bonus, giving a bonus based on bonuses is kinda redundant.

This gives them a little taste of success of the league, yet doesn't hurt the team owners too much. 

Not revenue sharing, but something akin to it.  And unlike revenue sharing, it can't cause the cap to actually lower if league revenue decreases...

We all know that there will be enhancements to the pension / health portions of the CBA going forward, that is a no brainer.  And an increase in the min salary for contracted players.  Whether there will be enhancements for PR players, or their expenses, we will see.  And there will be an increase in money allocated for player safety, independent doctors, spotters, etc. 

With the league having the SMS, and the SMS for front office, the league is making cost certainty an issue going forward.  Good to balance the have and have nots, and keep the on field product competitive.  But these are rules that protect the league from itself, and I'd like to see an individual player pay cap invoked.  AAF had a flat pay structure for all players, from Long Snapper to QB, everyone got the same pay.  I don't think it needs to go that far, but I don't see why they can't invoke $500k max for QB's, $200k max for "skill positions" and $175K max for everyone else.  What the definition of "skill position" can be is up for discussion.  But by imposing these more than reasonable limits, it eliminates bidding wars that help no one but the individual player, at the expense of other players.  Mike Reilly's contract cost Solly his job.  Why should one very overpaid player (compared to the league average) cause another star player to lose his job?  This is for the good of all players, really.  It may cost a few of the very top players a little, but they are still making a large amount for playing a game, and it makes all teams more competitive.

2 cents



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Norm W on April 29, 2019, 03:17:27 PM
So, what does "fairly and with respect" mean to the players union? 

You have to read the entire post, buts its an interesting perspective. My knee jerk reaction? Tough sell telling your union membership that they are athletes, not just football players and that makes them equals. Follow that with telling them BTW its best for all involved if we allow the owners to set the CAP limit for QB's to be 4x what a DB can make  :o


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TBURGESS on April 29, 2019, 03:26:33 PM
So, what does "fairly and with respect" mean to the players union?  How are the players disrespected right now
By having their bonuses taken away until they sign.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 29, 2019, 03:47:22 PM
You have to read the entire post, buts its an interesting perspective. My knee jerk reaction? Tough sell telling your union membership that they are athletes, not just football players and that makes them equals. Follow that with telling them BTW its best for all involved if we allow the owners to set the CAP limit for QB's to be 4x what a DB can make  :o

The AAF met with accolades in having a flat, fair pay structure, supplemented with heath, education and pension benefits that were for all the players.  I'm not saying adopt that philosophy, just embrace some of the concept.  Level the playing field a bit.  Take a smidge off the top of what the top players make, and distribute it to the rest.  Make competition for franchise players a level playing field from a compensation standpoint, and make it about culture.  Make teams treat players more "respectfully" in order to sign them. 

As to telling a DB he can only make 25cents on the dollar what a QB makes if the QB is capped, I'd bet most would say "Sign me up at that rate", because if a QB can only suck up 10% of the total SMS instead of 15%, then that's another 5% that a DB CAN make...

By having their bonuses taken away until they sign.

As to taking away bonuses, they signed contracts that included that clause.  Nothing disrespectful about that.  If anything, the disrespect comes from players using this agreed upon contractual stipulation as disrespectful.  I guess their agents didn't see it as an issue when they signed, but now...   


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 29, 2019, 04:03:09 PM
The AAF met with accolades in having a flat, fair pay structure, supplemented with heath, education and pension benefits that were for all the players.  I'm not saying adopt that philosophy, just embrace some of the concept.  Level the playing field a bit.  Take a smidge off the top of what the top players make, and distribute it to the rest.  Make competition for franchise players a level playing field from a compensation standpoint, and make it about culture.  Make teams treat players more "respectfully" in order to sign them. 

As to telling a DB he can only make 25cents on the dollar what a QB makes if the QB is capped, I'd bet most would say "Sign me up at that rate", because if a QB can only suck up 10% of the total SMS instead of 15%, then that's another 5% that a DB CAN make...

As to taking away bonuses, they signed contracts that included that clause.  Nothing disrespectful about that.  If anything, the disrespect comes from players using this agreed upon contractual stipulation as disrespectful.  I guess their agents didn't see it as an issue when they signed, but now...   

Do you provide free education, health care, and pension benefits to all of your employees Aards? Just curious. If you do you must have incredible profit margins built into your products.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue_or_die on April 29, 2019, 04:18:05 PM
So, what does "fairly and with respect" mean to the players union?  How are the players disrespected right now, and what more can the league (which is barely solvent as a whole) offer them?  And what are they willing to give up to pay for the new asks.

If they want a % of revenue, that is one thing.  If they think it is going to be 50% like other leagues, I can't see that happening.  CFL overhead costs as a percentage of total revenue is a lot higher than leagues operating on a completely different scale. 

Here's an idea.  Profit sharing.  Teams that make money kick 10% into a players fund, and all players will get a bonus based on a combination of games played, games on the PR and maybe, just maybe, a small factor based on actual game cheque size.  I say game cheque because any bonuses are just that, they already got their bonus, giving a bonus based on bonuses is kinda redundant.

This gives them a little taste of success of the league, yet doesn't hurt the team owners too much. 

Not revenue sharing, but something akin to it.  And unlike revenue sharing, it can't cause the cap to actually lower if league revenue decreases...

We all know that there will be enhancements to the pension / health portions of the CBA going forward, that is a no brainer.  And an increase in the min salary for contracted players.  Whether there will be enhancements for PR players, or their expenses, we will see.  And there will be an increase in money allocated for player safety, independent doctors, spotters, etc. 

With the league having the SMS, and the SMS for front office, the league is making cost certainty an issue going forward.  Good to balance the have and have nots, and keep the on field product competitive.  But these are rules that protect the league from itself, and I'd like to see an individual player pay cap invoked.  AAF had a flat pay structure for all players, from Long Snapper to QB, everyone got the same pay.  I don't think it needs to go that far, but I don't see why they can't invoke $500k max for QB's, $200k max for "skill positions" and $175K max for everyone else.  What the definition of "skill position" can be is up for discussion.  But by imposing these more than reasonable limits, it eliminates bidding wars that help no one but the individual player, at the expense of other players.  Mike Reilly's contract cost Solly his job.  Why should one very overpaid player (compared to the league average) cause another star player to lose his job?  This is for the good of all players, really.  It may cost a few of the very top players a little, but they are still making a large amount for playing a game, and it makes all teams more competitive.

2 cents



I actually like this idea on first glance. "Profit sharing"= if there's anything left after expenses, then sure, top up the players. It would need more fine tuning obviously but it's a neat idea.

With the revenue-sharing model, the part I have trouble with is that it doesn't allow for the league to get ahead. In good times, it would be nice to have the extra $$ to accrue for new stadiums or other needed investments that you needed to make but couldn't afford in the lean years. Of course from the player's perspective it's not their problem. But with profit sharing, the investments needed by the club would be a cost and so not sharable. I'm sure the waters would get muddied with the owners always finding ways to cry poor so that they never have to give out more.

There's no perfect fix I guess


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 29, 2019, 04:33:15 PM
Do you provide free education, health care, and pension benefits to all of your employees Aards? Just curious. If you do you must have incredible profit margins built into your products.

I'm not talking about pet retail, I'm talking about pro sports.  But sure, my staff get free health care, a pension and subsidized education by their being Canadian...  available to any player that embraces our wonderful country.

AAF set a new standard with the forward looking stance of taking care of a players future at the expense on giving him wads of cash up front.  I'm just saying, if the CFLPA is interested in representing ALL of their members, these are things they should be advocating for.  These are the things that show respect.  Not waving wads of cash at players already getting more than their fair share.

Hey, how about the CFLPA taking 10% of player payments over min salary (bonuses and gamechecks) and putting them in a benevolent fund?  To be used as the CFLPA votes, on healthcare, education and pensions.  Everyone contributes equally, just the top players a little more equally ;)



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Jesse on April 29, 2019, 04:37:42 PM
I'm not talking about pet retail, I'm talking about pro sports.  But sure, my staff get free health care, a pension and subsidized education by their being Canadian...  available to any player that embraces our wonderful country.

AAF set a new standard with the forward looking stance of taking care of a players future at the expense on giving him wads of cash up front.  I'm just saying, if the CFLPA is interested in representing ALL of their members, these are things they should be advocating for.  These are the things that show respect.  Not waving wads of cash at players already getting more than their fair share.

Hey, how about the CFLPA taking 10% of player payments over min salary (bonuses and gamechecks) and putting them in a benevolent fund?  To be used as the CFLPA votes, on healthcare, education and pensions.  Everyone contributes equally, just the top players a little more equally ;)



The AAF is absolutely irrelevant to these discussions. All they did was prove it's impossible to pay for those things.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 29, 2019, 07:15:11 PM
The AAF is absolutely irrelevant to these discussions. All they did was prove it's impossible to pay for those things.

I really don't think so.  They are totally relevant, they just proved that a spring league with no financing and no TV money is not viable. 

Their new concepts in player compensation will be looked upon with interest by players associations going forward, for sure...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: wpg#1 on April 29, 2019, 07:25:41 PM
I really don't think so.  They are totally relevant, they just proved that a spring league with no financing and no TV money is not viable. 

Their new concepts in player compensation will be looked upon with interest by players associations going forward, for sure...

How is anything the AAF did relevant ? Their concept failed !!


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: RebusRankin on April 29, 2019, 08:03:26 PM
CFL teams have struggled to get by year to year through most of the league's history. We currently have three clubs (Toronto, BC and Montreal) with attendance and financial issues. I don't see the CFL having the ability to do what Aards suggests. NFL perhaps but not the CFL.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TBURGESS on April 29, 2019, 08:06:30 PM
The only choice that player had re bonus money was to sign the contract or don't sign. They couldn't sign with another team because the CFL brass made the decision, not the individual teams. Not sure what's hard about this concept or why anyone wouldn't think it isn't disrespectful to the players.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 29, 2019, 08:44:17 PM
How is anything the AAF did relevant ? Their concept failed !!

The league failed, but not because the ideas were bad, they executed them poorly, and had no finance surety and no fanbase.  They didn't fail because of the compensation package offered to players.

CFL teams have struggled to get by year to year through most of the league's history. We currently have three clubs (Toronto, BC and Montreal) with attendance and financial issues. I don't see the CFL having the ability to do what Aards suggests. NFL perhaps but not the CFL.

My suggestions are inexpensive, and structured right, almost cost neutral.   It means shifting money from high end players and profitable teams to balance the playing field a little, and getting every player to take a little less paycheck in exchange for group discounted insurance/pension benefits.  Pretty easy, really. 

The only choice that player had re bonus money was to sign the contract or don't sign. They couldn't sign with another team because the CFL brass made the decision, not the individual teams. Not sure what's hard about this concept or why anyone wouldn't think it isn't disrespectful to the players.

Any player is never forced to sign a deal, they can choose not to.  These contracts were free agent deals.  They agreed to the terms, and now that the league is actually invoking the clause, there is no disrespect involved.  It is just business. 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TBURGESS on April 29, 2019, 09:24:07 PM
If you want to play in the CFL, you ARE FORCED to sign.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 29, 2019, 10:10:15 PM
If you want to play in the CFL, you ARE FORCED to sign.

So, they could force every player to sign a deal for league minimum to, by your logic.  To my understanding, a clause allowing withholding of bonuses during a pending CBA negotiation was part of the standard contract.  So it should be no surprise when they actually invoke the clause for its intended purpose, right?  There is no "disrespect" there, just business... 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: RebusRankin on April 29, 2019, 10:37:40 PM
Aards, always easier to spend other people's money isn't? Do you offer your employees profit sharing?
You miss my point, your ideas aren't inexpensive for a league where many teams struggle to make $.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 29, 2019, 11:12:11 PM
Aards, always easier to spend other people's money isn't? Do you offer your employees profit sharing?
You miss my point, your ideas aren't inexpensive for a league where many teams struggle to make $.

Not looking at it as "spending other peoples money", more as more appropriately distributing a limited pool of assets.  And teams that make money will give up a little of that profit, but not enough to even tickle.  But it is an opportunity for players to be included in the success of the league.

Sure, I have used profit sharing for recruitment of employees in the past, it is a great incentive to make the company more profitable. 

Some teams don't struggle at all.  That's the point of profit sharing for the players.  "Have" teams share a little of the profit, have not teams are not "taxed" with paying more than they can.  Give the players a taste of the profits, everyone wins.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: RebusRankin on April 30, 2019, 12:19:17 AM
Not looking at it as "spending other peoples money", more as more appropriately distributing a limited pool of assets.  And teams that make money will give up a little of that profit, but not enough to even tickle.  But it is an opportunity for players to be included in the success of the league.

Sure, I have used profit sharing for recruitment of employees in the past, it is a great incentive to make the company more profitable. 

Some teams don't struggle at all.  That's the point of profit sharing for the players.  "Have" teams share a little of the profit, have not teams are not "taxed" with paying more than they can.  Give the players a taste of the profits, everyone wins.



1. I commend you for doing that with your employees.
2. Do you think Winnipeg, Saskatchewan and Edmonton, community owned teams that make $ (although not a lot quite often) are going to want to give up funds when they know that clubs like BC, Montreal and Toronto will not? Do you think that a guy like Bob Young who lost $$ for years is going to want to give up $ on years he actually finishes with a profit?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 30, 2019, 12:54:38 AM
1. I commend you for doing that with your employees.
2. Do you think Winnipeg, Saskatchewan and Edmonton, community owned teams that make $ (although not a lot quite often) are going to want to give up funds when they know that clubs like BC, Montreal and Toronto will not? Do you think that a guy like Bob Young who lost $$ for years is going to want to give up $ on years he actually finishes with a profit?


You are acting like it is a huge $ amount.  We're talking a 10% "prosperity" tax.  Talk to NFL owners about revenue sharing... they understand that if the league is healthy, they make more money.  No one likes to give up profits, for sure.  10% of net profit is a sniff (less than you would tip a wait staffer), but it is a hat tip to the players, thanking them for their efforts, sharing with them the success of the league, without harming the teams that are trying to just break even.... 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: RebusRankin on April 30, 2019, 01:18:21 AM
You are acting like it is a huge $ amount.  We're talking a 10% "prosperity" tax.  Talk to NFL owners about revenue sharing... they understand that if the league is healthy, they make more money.  No one likes to give up profits, for sure.  10% of net profit is a sniff (less than you would tip a wait staffer), but it is a hat tip to the players, thanking them for their efforts, sharing with them the success of the league, without harming the teams that are trying to just break even.... 

You seem oblivious to the fact that this is a league which historically and currently has struggled with revenue. You also seem ignorant of the fact that historically clubs like Winnipeg, Edmonton and Calgary have expressed unhappiness with bailing out teams. I think I'm done with this.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue_or_die on April 30, 2019, 12:13:15 PM
You seem oblivious to the fact that this is a league which historically and currently has struggled with revenue. You also seem ignorant of the fact that historically clubs like Winnipeg, Edmonton and Calgary have expressed unhappiness with bailing out teams. I think I'm done with this.

Profit/revenue sharing is exactly the direction professional sports is going.

The teams aren't in a survival of the fittest competition like you would see in the business world. They are not competing with themselves off the field but rather need to have a healthy league (the real business, that does actually have to compete with others) in order to survive. If Edmonton makes 1 billion dollars and Toronto loses so much that they flop, who does Edmonton then play, and how do they sustain that revenue?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 30, 2019, 12:20:47 PM
You seem oblivious to the fact that this is a league which historically and currently has struggled with revenue. You also seem ignorant of the fact that historically clubs like Winnipeg, Edmonton and Calgary have expressed unhappiness with bailing out teams. I think I'm done with this.

In a profit sharing scenario, no one is bailing anyone out.  The teams that make money pay a small luxury tax on those profits, for the betterment of the entire league, including their own players.  Teams that are not making profit are not affected at all, + or -.  No team gets money from any other team, players get a little taste of the success of the profitable teams, which hopefully becomes the majority.  If the total profit of the money making teams is $5mil, for instance, $500k goes to the players, which works out to less than $1k each...  not nothing, but not breaking the bank...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: BlueInCgy on April 30, 2019, 12:35:40 PM
Yeah, but under a profit sharing model where only the "have" teams pay in, you would likely see the "have" teams consuming their profits by doing things like making additional payments on stadium loan, thereby (validly) reducing their debt load in favour of paying out to other teams.  Which, in truth, is probably the better plan anyway, because over the lifetime of stadium build loan (and Wpg, Sask, Hamilton, and Ottawa all currently have those, no?), it's more prudent to pay down the debt additionally in the good years (if you can), because there will always be a revenue reduction in the bad years.

And if bailout money is required, it would effectively reduce the profit share anyways.

I'm not arguing for or against it, I just don't think it's that simple a model in the CFL due to the relatively small number of participants, and the ability of one or two underperformers to impact everyone else.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TBURGESS on April 30, 2019, 12:44:40 PM
In every profit sharing situation the richer bail out the poorer. It's the whole design concept in a nutshell.

If players want to 'get a taste' of profits, they have to be willing to cover the losses too and I can't see that happening.  

In the CFL, most teams show little if any profit and those profits are often used to prop up failing teams.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 30, 2019, 01:50:38 PM
Aards would you offer employer paid medical, pension, education, and a guaranteed % of all revenue if it meant that doing so would mean going in the hole every year. You wouldn't and you are silly to suggest that anyone else should. Whether it is pet store retail or sports is completely irrelevant, both are subject to the same fundamental rules of accounting. Your theory that the CFL will someday adopt the AAF pay schedule, for those reasons are just nonsense.

If we don't pay our QBs and high end talent what we pay them, they will move on and our league will become unwatchable just like the AAF was. It would be monumentally stupid for the CFL to adopt the AAF model of paying players. It is a sure fire way to ensure that a QB driven league never finds a decent QB again.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on April 30, 2019, 01:52:10 PM
Yeah, but under a profit sharing model where only the "have" teams pay in, you would likely see the "have" teams consuming their profits by doing things like making additional payments on stadium loan, thereby (validly) reducing their debt load in favour of paying out to other teams.  Which, in truth, is probably the better plan anyway, because over the lifetime of stadium build loan (and Wpg, Sask, Hamilton, and Ottawa all currently have those, no?), it's more prudent to pay down the debt additionally in the good years (if you can), because there will always be a revenue reduction in the bad years.

And if bailout money is required, it would effectively reduce the profit share anyways.

I'm not arguing for or against it, I just don't think it's that simple a model in the CFL due to the relatively small number of participants, and the ability of one or two underperformers to impact everyone else.


The thought of the 3 community owned teams making welfare payments to the likes of MLSE, Braley and the Bronfman family makes me gag.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 30, 2019, 01:55:20 PM
The thought of the 3 community owned teams making welfare payments to the likes of MLSE, Braley and the Bronfman family makes me gag.

It goes beyond the scope of silly to even suggest. Just a completely wing nut socialist based idea. Maybe Aards could profit share with other pet stores that are not profitable and absorb their losses for the betterment of their employees. That's basically what he's asking CFL member teams to do.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue_or_die on April 30, 2019, 02:21:39 PM
Isn't this exactly what's done in other pro sports leagues like the NHL? (I'm talking about revenue sharing between teams, not profit sharing distribution to players here).


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 30, 2019, 02:39:08 PM
Aards would you offer employer paid medical, pension, education, and a guaranteed % of all revenue if it meant that doing so would mean going in the hole every year. You wouldn't and you are silly to suggest that anyone else should. Whether it is pet store retail or sports is completely irrelevant, both are subject to the same fundamental rules of accounting. Your theory that the CFL will someday adopt the AAF pay schedule, for those reasons are just nonsense.

If we don't pay our QBs and high end talent what we pay them, they will move on and our league will become unwatchable just like the AAF was. It would be monumentally stupid for the CFL to adopt the AAF model of paying players. It is a sure fire way to ensure that a QB driven league never finds a decent QB again.
The thought of the 3 community owned teams making welfare payments to the likes of MLSE, Braley and the Bronfman family makes me gag.
It goes beyond the scope of silly to even suggest. Just a completely wing nut socialist based idea. Maybe Aards could profit share with other pet stores that are not profitable and absorb their losses for the betterment of their employees. That's basically what he's asking CFL member teams to do.

Wow... OK, my scenario has no team getting payments from any other.  None.  No "bailouts", no "welfare", so quit trying to put words in my mouth or twist what I am saying.

2nd, my suggestion is a way of offering a "revenue sharing" type of deal that the NFL/NBA does, without issues that revenue sharing entails for a league like the CFL, where overheads other than player wages are so much higher a % than in those other leagues.  It give the players a piece of the success of the league, paid for by the teams that are making money on the success of the league. 

As to the "employer paid medical, pension, education", I'm pretty sure that is going to be part of this CBA.  It will come at a cost to the players by a reduced SMS to pay for it, but it will end up being a benefit for all players, and a much needed one.

Lastly, QB compensation cap, there is not a QB in the league who would rather sit at home and not play than make $500k playing in the CFL.  I even think $400k is enough for the calibre of player that we are needing in this league to make it "watchable", but I'll give them the round number of $500k.  The only reason Riley got what he did was a bidding war, and the result?  Solly gets cut.  Is a team more watchable with Riley at QB and no Solly, or with Riley at QB and Solly?  Riley still chooses BC if there is a $500k cap on QB compensation, and they still have their star MLB.  So, sorry, your argument that we need to pay QB's 15% of the SMS or more to make the game watchable.  $500k is not an QB AAF salary, its more than the entire AAF starting QB's were scheduled to make.  And if the league can't attract quality players at $500k for QB, then how is it attracting quality players for all the other positions at less than $200k, and most at less than $70k...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on April 30, 2019, 04:53:58 PM
Wow... OK, my scenario has no team getting payments from any other.  None.  No "bailouts", no "welfare", so quit trying to put words in my mouth or twist what I am saying.

2nd, my suggestion is a way of offering a "revenue sharing" type of deal that the NFL/NBA does, without issues that revenue sharing entails for a league like the CFL, where overheads other than player wages are so much higher a % than in those other leagues.  It give the players a piece of the success of the league, paid for by the teams that are making money on the success of the league. 

As to the "employer paid medical, pension, education", I'm pretty sure that is going to be part of this CBA.  It will come at a cost to the players by a reduced SMS to pay for it, but it will end up being a benefit for all players, and a much needed one.

Lastly, QB compensation cap, there is not a QB in the league who would rather sit at home and not play than make $500k playing in the CFL.  I even think $400k is enough for the calibre of player that we are needing in this league to make it "watchable", but I'll give them the round number of $500k.  The only reason Riley got what he did was a bidding war, and the result?  Solly gets cut.  Is a team more watchable with Riley at QB and no Solly, or with Riley at QB and Solly?  Riley still chooses BC if there is a $500k cap on QB compensation, and they still have their star MLB.  So, sorry, your argument that we need to pay QB's 15% of the SMS or more to make the game watchable.  $500k is not an QB AAF salary, its more than the entire AAF starting QB's were scheduled to make.  And if the league can't attract quality players at $500k for QB, then how is it attracting quality players for all the other positions at less than $200k, and most at less than $70k...

I agree with you about the QB's being over-paid, capping the position at $400,000 isn't going to discourage any out of work QB's from chasing a starting job in professional football. It would also add a level of stability to the league in the most important position, I can't see how Reilly and Harris jumping ship is going to improve the fortunes of the CFL overall, BC may benefit but both the Esks. and the RB's have been diminished.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 30, 2019, 05:20:20 PM
Wow... OK, my scenario has no team getting payments from any other.  None.  No "bailouts", no "welfare", so quit trying to put words in my mouth or twist what I am saying.

2nd, my suggestion is a way of offering a "revenue sharing" type of deal that the NFL/NBA does, without issues that revenue sharing entails for a league like the CFL, where overheads other than player wages are so much higher a % than in those other leagues.  It give the players a piece of the success of the league, paid for by the teams that are making money on the success of the league. 

As to the "employer paid medical, pension, education", I'm pretty sure that is going to be part of this CBA.  It will come at a cost to the players by a reduced SMS to pay for it, but it will end up being a benefit for all players, and a much needed one.

Lastly, QB compensation cap, there is not a QB in the league who would rather sit at home and not play than make $500k playing in the CFL.  I even think $400k is enough for the calibre of player that we are needing in this league to make it "watchable", but I'll give them the round number of $500k.  The only reason Riley got what he did was a bidding war, and the result?  Solly gets cut.  Is a team more watchable with Riley at QB and no Solly, or with Riley at QB and Solly?  Riley still chooses BC if there is a $500k cap on QB compensation, and they still have their star MLB.  So, sorry, your argument that we need to pay QB's 15% of the SMS or more to make the game watchable.  $500k is not an QB AAF salary, its more than the entire AAF starting QB's were scheduled to make.  And if the league can't attract quality players at $500k for QB, then how is it attracting quality players for all the other positions at less than $200k, and most at less than $70k...

Way to move the goalposts. You went from paying all players equally like the AAF, to capping one position at 500k per year. At any rate, there are only 3 teams with QBs over 500k and the savings from the teams that are over wouldn't buy much for benefits for the entire team let alone providing a Hefney benefit for retired players with long term injuries.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 3rdand1.5 on April 30, 2019, 05:21:52 PM
I agree that a maximum salary should be implemented.  No player should be over x.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 30, 2019, 05:24:01 PM
The league failed, but not because the ideas were bad, they executed them poorly, and had no finance surety and no fanbase.  They didn't fail because of the compensation package offered to players.

My suggestions are inexpensive, and structured right, almost cost neutral.   It means shifting money from high end players and profitable teams to balance the playing field a little, and getting every player to take a little less paycheck in exchange for group discounted insurance/pension benefits.  Pretty easy, really. 

Any player is never forced to sign a deal, they can choose not to.  These contracts were free agent deals.  They agreed to the terms, and now that the league is actually invoking the clause, there is no disrespect involved.  It is just business. 


The above post you clearly state that money be shifted from profitable teams to other teams player benefits "balance" the scales. Despite your protests in your last post, the post above is what I called silly....and if you honestly think getting players making 30k US when starting in this league in order to get benefits that exist only while they are in this league is no big deal then you are crazy. Futhermore, I can pretty much guarantee that education amounts will NEVER be included in the CFL benefits....EVER. Do you have any idea how much that would cost? Shocking how a small business man could not see the cost of what he is proposing.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on April 30, 2019, 05:33:44 PM
In a profit sharing scenario, no one is bailing anyone out.  The teams that make money pay a small luxury tax on those profits, for the betterment of the entire league, including their own players.  Teams that are not making profit are not affected at all, + or -.  No team gets money from any other team, players get a little taste of the success of the profitable teams, which hopefully becomes the majority.  If the total profit of the money making teams is $5mil, for instance, $500k goes to the players, which works out to less than $1k each...  not nothing, but not breaking the bank...

In your scenario there wouldn't be enough money to buy even the cheapest and most garbage insurance for the league's players. There are only 3 reliably profitable teams in this league and they aren't all that profitable. In a year when only one or two teams are profitable....and that is quite often, the players get nothing? How do you negotiate that into a CBA. You are seriously overestimating the CFL's ability to provide benefits for it's employees. Do you have any idea how expensive health insurance is for a professional football player? How much education costs per year? How much ongoing treatment would be for a player like Hefney? This league would be bankrupt in less than a couple years if they did what you suggest they are going to do.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 30, 2019, 05:53:43 PM
Way to move the goalposts. You went from paying all players equally like the AAF, to capping one position at 500k per year. At any rate, there are only 3 teams with QBs over 500k and the savings from the teams that are over wouldn't buy much for benefits for the entire team let alone providing a Hefney benefit for retired players with long term injuries.

I guess you like only reading part of a paragraph...

"With the league having the SMS, and the SMS for front office, the league is making cost certainty an issue going forward.  Good to balance the have and have nots, and keep the on field product competitive.  But these are rules that protect the league from itself, and I'd like to see an individual player pay cap invoked.  AAF had a flat pay structure for all players, from Long Snapper to QB, everyone got the same pay. I don't think it needs to go that far, but I don't see why they can't invoke $500k max for QB's, $200k max for "skill positions" and $175K max for everyone else.  What the definition of "skill position" can be is up for discussion. But by imposing these more than reasonable limits, it eliminates bidding wars that help no one but the individual player, at the expense of other players.  Mike Reilly's contract cost Solly his job.  Why should one very overpaid player (compared to the league average) cause another star player to lose his job?  This is for the good of all players, really.  It may cost a few of the very top players a little, but they are still making a large amount for playing a game, and it makes all teams more competitive. "

I'll wait here for your reply...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 30, 2019, 06:05:52 PM
The above post you clearly state that money be shifted from profitable teams to other teams player benefits "balance" the scales. Despite your protests in your last post, the post above is what I called silly....and if you honestly think getting players making 30k US when starting in this league in order to get benefits that exist only while they are in this league is no big deal then you are crazy. Futhermore, I can pretty much guarantee that education amounts will NEVER be included in the CFL benefits....EVER. Do you have any idea how much that would cost? Shocking how a small business man could not see the cost of what he is proposing.

Teams making a profit will share a little bit of that profit with the players.  Those players will have played at least once in each stadium, and the tiny taste will be basically a part of the profit from that game.  Get it? 

As to non salary benefit packages, whther it stops at extended health care, or is health care + pension, or health care + pension + education, I am sure there will be a package added in this CBA that is outside the SMS cap money that teams will have to pay out as overhead.  Does this mean a reduction in SMS?  Or no increase?  It will be a negotiated part of the CBA. 

In your scenario there wouldn't be enough money to buy even the cheapest and most garbage insurance for the league's players. There are only 3 reliably profitable teams in this league and they aren't all that profitable. In a year when only one or two teams are profitable....and that is quite often, the players get nothing? How do you negotiate that into a CBA. You are seriously overestimating the CFL's ability to provide benefits for it's employees. Do you have any idea how expensive health insurance is for a professional football player? How much education costs per year? How much ongoing treatment would be for a player like Hefney? This league would be bankrupt in less than a couple years if they did what you suggest they are going to do.

For "insurance" for Hefney like situations, the CFL can self insure.  Its a pretty common thing.  Rather than paying a huge markup and premium against the risk, you build your own fund.  And set limits on the benefits.  This would be an easy fix for the Hefney type injuries / rehabs.  The issue is when we add in neuro.  That is going to be expensive and impossible to define if a player was injured in the CFL, or in college, or even in another league.  If you are including concussions, etc into the insurance, no... its not do-able.  But for physical injury, like Hefney, it is very easy.  The source of the injury is easy to define, and the scope of treatment is finite and manageable. 

And, of course, if the CFLPA wants this "benefit", they have to give something up.  That is called "negotiation".  The league can show them that they are not getting rich off the "slaves that are rebelling" as Duron Carter chooses to portray the players, so it is a give and take situation if they want the league to continue to exist and be able to employ CFLPA members.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on April 30, 2019, 07:11:07 PM
Way to move the goalposts. You went from paying all players equally like the AAF, to capping one position at 500k per year. At any rate, there are only 3 teams with QBs over 500k and the savings from the teams that are over wouldn't buy much for benefits for the entire team let alone providing a Hefney benefit for retired players with long term injuries.

Oh, and as to only 3 QB's getting over $500k, you think that will remain the case going forward?  Mitchell and Harris were not $500k QB's until this contract, and for the other sub $500k QB's out there, a winning season will put them over that, for sure.  I'm not saying that capping at $500k is going to change the league dramatically, but it will prevent bidding wars, and will make culture and winning a more important factor than which GM can cut enough SMS to fit in a QB's outrageous salary. 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue girl on April 30, 2019, 07:48:25 PM
IIRC back in the '70's the league had a gate equalization so that teams that had lower attendance got revenue from the higher drawing teams. The problem was that the community owned teams had bigger attendance so they were making payments to private owners. I don't want to see that again. As for having a healthcare plan after players retire I could see some form of that although I don't know how it would work. I wouldn't however be paying for their education. IMO they should have been getting that when they were in university.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 01, 2019, 06:56:07 AM
I agree that a maximum salary should be implemented.  No player should be over x.

Ever heard of the "free market"?  If a player (or worker) commands a high salary and an employer is willing to pay, who the heck are we to tell them "no".  Who are you (or Aards, or any "central planner") to decide what "X" should be?  And who does the deciding?  And what do you base your decision on?  The free market has served the CFL (et al) perfectly fine in determining individual player salary for, what, 106 years?  Let it work for another 106.

At any rate, there are only 3 teams with QBs over 500k and the savings from the teams that are over wouldn't buy much for benefits for the entire team let alone providing a Hefney benefit for retired players with long term injuries.

100% right GC.

I say let the teams (who aren't us BTW) overpay for QBs!  I was overjoyed when BC paid Reilly $750k because I knew at that moment BC was going to stink this year.  You can't pay a QB $750k, an OLman $200k+, and several receivers near-top in the CFL and have anything leftover to field all the other crucial, but under-the-radar, players.  I'm doubly overjoyed Solly must leave BC because of Reilly.  I'll be triply overjoyed if we score Solly for $150k  ;D  I don't know about you, but I want the other teams as weak as possible due to their own stupidity, while we clean up top of the West because we (Canadian Mafia) are more prudent managers.  Any student of war history will tell you the generals always say a big rule in war is make sure it's not fair.  Another rule is: never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake.

The beauty of pro football is having great players make great plays each week is only half the game.  The other half is in the GM/HC's office in the off-season.  That's why I love it.  2 parts chess (GM decisions + playcalling), one part athletics (great plays).

As for "profit sharing" between a specific team and its player(s) (not inter-team, and not forced on anyone by the league) that's the free market, and thus perfectly valid.  A team should be able to negotiate anything they want with a player, within the cap of course.  In business profit sharing incentivizes employees to try harder and do what's best for the company, as they will have more skin in the game.  That would work fine for football, too.  However, I don't expect it to be too popular with players because it's so nebulous and tenuous the link between their effort and club financial results.  Not useless or impossible, but probably not going to fly.

Luckily, this whole conversation has gotten really "out there" and I guarantee you there is no way in expletive that either the CFL or the CFPA are even considering neither an individual player-cap nor team/player-level profit sharing.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 3rdand1.5 on May 01, 2019, 10:20:30 AM
Ever heard of the "free market"?  If a player (or worker) commands a high salary and an employer is willing to pay, who the heck are we to tell them "no".  Who are you (or Aards, or any "central planner") to decide what "X" should be?  And who does the deciding?  And what do you base your decision on?  The free market has served the CFL (et al) perfectly fine in determining individual player salary for, what, 106 years?  Let it work for another 106.

100% right GC.

I say let the teams (who aren't us BTW) overpay for QBs!  I was overjoyed when BC paid Reilly $750k because I knew at that moment BC was going to stink this year.  You can't pay a QB $750k, an OLman $200k+, and several receivers near-top in the CFL and have anything leftover to field all the other crucial, but under-the-radar, players.  I'm doubly overjoyed Solly must leave BC because of Reilly.  I'll be triply overjoyed if we score Solly for $150k  ;D  I don't know about you, but I want the other teams as weak as possible due to their own stupidity, while we clean up top of the West because we (Canadian Mafia) are more prudent managers.  Any student of war history will tell you the generals always say a big rule in war is make sure it's not fair.  Another rule is: never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake.

The beauty of pro football is having great players make great plays each week is only half the game.  The other half is in the GM/HC's office in the off-season.  That's why I love it.  2 parts chess (GM decisions + playcalling), one part athletics (great plays).

As for "profit sharing" between a specific team and its player(s) (not inter-team, and not forced on anyone by the league) that's the free market, and thus perfectly valid.  A team should be able to negotiate anything they want with a player, within the cap of course.  In business profit sharing incentivizes employees to try harder and do what's best for the company, as they will have more skin in the game.  That would work fine for football, too.  However, I don't expect it to be too popular with players because it's so nebulous and tenuous the link between their effort and club financial results.  Not useless or impossible, but probably not going to fly.

Luckily, this whole conversation has gotten really "out there" and I guarantee you there is no way in expletive that either the CFL or the CFPA are even considering neither an individual player-cap nor team/player-level profit sharing.



Ummmm.......who is someone to decide.....you mean like the "central planner" who "decided' the overall salary cap....


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on May 01, 2019, 11:24:30 AM
Teams making a profit will share a little bit of that profit with the players.  Those players will have played at least once in each stadium, and the tiny taste will be basically a part of the profit from that game.  Get it? 

As to non salary benefit packages, whther it stops at extended health care, or is health care + pension, or health care + pension + education, I am sure there will be a package added in this CBA that is outside the SMS cap money that teams will have to pay out as overhead.  Does this mean a reduction in SMS?  Or no increase?  It will be a negotiated part of the CBA. 

For "insurance" for Hefney like situations, the CFL can self insure.  Its a pretty common thing.  Rather than paying a huge markup and premium against the risk, you build your own fund.  And set limits on the benefits.  This would be an easy fix for the Hefney type injuries / rehabs.  The issue is when we add in neuro.  That is going to be expensive and impossible to define if a player was injured in the CFL, or in college, or even in another league.  If you are including concussions, etc into the insurance, no... its not do-able.  But for physical injury, like Hefney, it is very easy.  The source of the injury is easy to define, and the scope of treatment is finite and manageable. 

And, of course, if the CFLPA wants this "benefit", they have to give something up.  That is called "negotiation".  The league can show them that they are not getting rich off the "slaves that are rebelling" as Duron Carter chooses to portray the players, so it is a give and take situation if they want the league to continue to exist and be able to employ CFLPA members.



The players already have pension so that is a non starter. Medical insurance post career are unlikely to get any meaningful package in the CBA, and education is laughable. Never going to happen. You can bang your gums all you like about your admiration for the AAF's contract terms but it was a recipe for bankruptcy and won't happen in the CFL. This CBA is, just like every other CBA in the past, about securing the highest amount of cash in pocket as possible for the players.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 01, 2019, 01:18:20 PM
The players already have pension so that is a non starter. Medical insurance post career are unlikely to get any meaningful package in the CBA, and education is laughable. Never going to happen. You can bang your gums all you like about your admiration for the AAF's contract terms but it was a recipe for bankruptcy and won't happen in the CFL. This CBA is, just like every other CBA in the past, about securing the highest amount of cash in pocket as possible for the players.

I have no love for the AAF salary structure, but it did put many new concepts on the table going forward for all leagues.

You can easily and affordably put together an insurance product that will address situations like Hefney's.  The leaguie could have easily paid his bills, but not without causing precedence for every player with a boo boo from making a claim.  But if it is written into a CBA with very defined rules, it is do-able, and a great reflection on both parties.

How many players have we heard are finishing degrees, in the CFL and other leagues.  Adding some sort of "scholarship" programme to the CBA would again be a fairly low cost yet reap benefits for league and players.  Many people join the forces to get the education subsidies they couildn't get elsewhere.  What is the harm in giving some sort of programme to the players?  It could even have a sliding scale based on the duration of service and compensation the player has received, a little higher % for min wage guys, less for big earners.

I think your claim that it is all about the $$$ is wrong, otherwise this deal is done day one.  There are plenty of moving parts, and hopefully there are members of the CFLPA looking out for the majority of players who are not getting $100k plus...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue_or_die on May 01, 2019, 01:22:17 PM

Ummmm.......who is someone to decide.....you mean like the "central planner" who "decided' the overall salary cap....


 :D :D :D


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TBURGESS on May 01, 2019, 02:16:53 PM
Everything you're suggesting costs money. Several of your ideas will be very expensive for the CFL.

Here's what's happened in a nutshell:

A few years back the league told all teams to put in a no bonus for you after Jan 1, 2019 into every contract so the players wouldn't have bonus money to live on if the talks dragged on.

No contract talks before the Jan 1 deadline. The league blamed the players.

The league played around with CFL 2.0 for January and February while the players didn't get the reported 6 million dollars in bonus money owed.

Talks started, but nothing about money.

The CFLPA took a strike vote in part because the negotiations were dragging. Got a 90%+ strike mandate.

They finally talked about money the last week in April and the league then told the players that most of them would be illegally striking if they don't show up for TC, even tho that's after the old contract was over. Not sure why they think a legal strike vote means an illegal strike or even if it's true or not (I'm no lawyer) but it's certainly a strong arm tactic.

Id say that the above facts mean that No... it wouldn't have been done already if it was just about money.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 01, 2019, 02:26:48 PM
I have no love for the AAF salary structure, but it did put many new concepts on the table going forward for all leagues.

You can easily and affordably put together an insurance product that will address situations like Hefney's.  The leaguie could have easily paid his bills, but not without causing precedence for every player with a boo boo from making a claim.  But if it is written into a CBA with very defined rules, it is do-able, and a great reflection on both parties.

How many players have we heard are finishing degrees, in the CFL and other leagues.  Adding some sort of "scholarship" programme to the CBA would again be a fairly low cost yet reap benefits for league and players.  Many people join the forces to get the education subsidies they couildn't get elsewhere.  What is the harm in giving some sort of programme to the players?  It could even have a sliding scale based on the duration of service and compensation the player has received, a little higher % for min wage guys, less for big earners.

I think your claim that it is all about the $$$ is wrong, otherwise this deal is done day one.  There are plenty of moving parts, and hopefully there are members of the CFLPA looking out for the majority of players who are not getting $100k plus...


And if the price of tickets, hot dogs and cheese ladels went up 5 bucks a game you'd be the first one screaming bloody murder on the forums.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 01, 2019, 02:41:54 PM
The league needs a deal that can allow its members to survive.  Not just make money, but actually survive.  With a new team coming on in a location that is going to be difficult at best to survive in, there has to be some financial responsibility in this deal.  I'd even say that current SMS levels are not sustainable with gate revenues potentially decreasing, and the TV rights getting watered down with streaming services and competing product.  

The players might not realize it, but their jobs depend on the league operating at a minimum of break even.  Other than the fans, the group that has the absolute most on the line for the leagues survival is the CFLPA.  There is no "bonus money" if there is no league.  When you have only 30% of the teams making money, that is not good.  When you have a team being surrendered to the league, and they have to assure the prospective new owners to take the turd, and the league will cover losses over $2Million, that's not a great sign.  David Braley continues to subsidize the league, only one money loser on his books still, which he would gladly divest himself of, but still.  

Compared to other leagues, sure, the CFL is small potatoes.  It cannot survive QB salaries over $500k.  It can't survive at the current SMS, never mind any kind of increase.  If CFLPA players want more value, then they should be looking at supplemental pay, like healthcare and enhanced pensions.  Things they can bank on after the game is gone for them.  

If it is all about $ in pockets, and not about "being treated fairly and with respect", then the CFL should play hardball, no SMS increase, no additional benefits, SMS 100% based on revenue, regardless of increase or decline.  If, as Duron Carter has chosen to express it, the "slave rebellion is at hand", cut them all and start over.  Bust the union.  AAF seemed to have little problem finding a plethora of players willing to risk it all for a promise of $70k... and most of the CFL is making that or less already,  I'm sure that there are sufficient players out there that WANT to play football here to make a league.  Not my first choice, but its better than a deal where the CFLPA kills the league.

But if the players are interested in working together to make the league and game stronger, then roll out the red carpet.  Work *together* to make a league that is competitive, enjoyable and healthy.  


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 01, 2019, 02:43:21 PM
Ever heard of the "free market"?  If a player (or worker) commands a high salary and an employer is willing to pay, who the heck are we to tell them "no".  Who are you (or Aards, or any "central planner") to decide what "X" should be?  And who does the deciding?  And what do you base your decision on?  The free market has served the CFL (et al) perfectly fine in determining individual player salary for, what, 106 years?  Let it work for another 106.

The CFL Board of Governors and the CFLPA agreed to implement the original salary cap in 2006, without which the CFL in the form we know it today probably does not exist.  Sometimes the smartest people in the room need to be protected from their own actions via regulation, as those wizards from Wall St. proved when they flew the world economy into the ground in 2008.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 01, 2019, 02:51:53 PM

And if the price of tickets, hot dogs and cheese ladels went up 5 bucks a game you'd be the first one screaming bloody murder on the forums.

If a team is making money, and chooses to do those things, for sure. If they are lining their pockets, absolutely.

But if they are essentially breaking even, and need a little increase in revenue to assure their existence, and believe that a price increase will be revenue positive, then I will make my choice to buy and support the team, or not.  

If they have to raise prices so that they can pay Riley $700k... that's a whole 'nother story.   Remember not long ago when $400k was outrageous for a QB?  How much have revenues increased since that time?  Have they increased?  

Regardless how good any player is, the league cannot afford this level of pay, nor can they justify the disparity between PR to ELC to $700k.  Just my feelings on the matter.  


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 01, 2019, 02:56:38 PM
The league needs a deal that can allow its members to survive.  Not just make money, but actually survive.  With a new team coming on in a location that is going to be difficult at best to survive in, there has to be some financial responsibility in this deal.  I'd even say that current SMS levels are not sustainable with gate revenues potentially decreasing, and the TV rights getting watered down with streaming services and competing product.  

The players might not realize it, but their jobs depend on the league operating at a minimum of break even.  Other than the fans, the group that has the absolute most on the line for the leagues survival is the CFLPA.  There is no "bonus money" if there is no league.  When you have only 30% of the teams making money, that is not good.  When you have a team being surrendered to the league, and they have to assure the prospective new owners to take the turd, and the league will cover losses over $2Million, that's not a great sign.  David Braley continues to subsidize the league, only one money loser on his books still, which he would gladly divest himself of, but still.  

Compared to other leagues, sure, the CFL is small potatoes.  It cannot survive QB salaries over $500k.  It can't survive at the current SMS, never mind any kind of increase.  If CFLPA players want more value, then they should be looking at supplemental pay, like healthcare and enhanced pensions.  Things they can bank on after the game is gone for them.  

If it is all about $ in pockets, and not about "being treated fairly and with respect", then the CFL should play hardball, no SMS increase, no additional benefits, SMS 100% based on revenue, regardless of increase or decline.  If, as Duron Carter has chosen to express it, the "slave rebellion is at hand", cut them all and start over.  Bust the union.  AAF seemed to have little problem finding a plethora of players willing to risk it all for a promise of $70k... and most of the CFL is making that or less already,  I'm sure that there are sufficient players out there that WANT to play football here to make a league.  Not my first choice, but its better than a deal where the CFLPA kills the league.

But if the players are interested in working together to make the league and game stronger, then roll out the red carpet.  Work *together* to make a league that is competitive, enjoyable and healthy.  

I think one of the negotiation problems has been the CFL private team owners refusal to throw open their books for the CFLPA to examine.  This refusal has created the perception among players that the owners are raking in profits, when in fact they are most likely taking substantial losses or just breaking even.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 01, 2019, 03:33:33 PM
If a team is making money, and chooses to do those things, for sure. If they are lining their pockets, absolutely.

But if they are essentially breaking even, and need a little increase in revenue to assure their existence, and believe that a price increase will be revenue positive, then I will make my choice to buy and support the team, or not.  

If they have to raise prices so that they can pay Riley $700k... that's a whole 'nother story.   Remember not long ago when $400k was outrageous for a QB?  How much have revenues increased since that time?  Have they increased?  

Regardless how good any player is, the league cannot afford this level of pay, nor can they justify the disparity between PR to ELC to $700k.  Just my feelings on the matter.  

Leaving your extreme service and price sensitivity aside for a second, why exactly are you bent out of shape about how the SMS is being carved up between players? So long as teams only spend to the cap how does it affect the profitability of the league? And just so you know, Reilly's valuation isn't really that extreme. The CFL works with smaller numbers but Reilly's star player valuation in relation to the cap is modest compared to other leagues and stars. Do you ever think before you write stuff?

NFL Cap is $188M. Aaron Rodgers gets paid $33.5M annually which is 17.8% of the team's cap.
NHL Cap is $79.5M. Connor McDavid gets paid $12.5M annually which is 15.72% of the team's cap.
CFL Cap is $5.2M. Mike Reilly gets paid $700,000 annually which is 13.46% of the team's cap.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: TBURGESS on May 01, 2019, 03:37:54 PM
I think one of the negotiation problems has been the CFL private team owners refusal to throw open their books for the CFLPA to examine.  This refusal has created the perception among players that the owners are raking in profits, when in fact they are most likely taking substantial losses or just breaking even.
Why is it any business of the players? What a team makes or doesn't make has very little to do with what they are willing to pay their employees.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 01, 2019, 03:57:03 PM
Why is it any business of the players? What a team makes or doesn't make has very little to do with what they are willing to pay their employees.

Yet it does have an influence if the players have the perception that the owners are profiting greatly from their athleticism and sacrifice and not compensating adequately, they could vote to strike without having a complete understanding of the league's finances.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 01, 2019, 04:08:28 PM
Leaving your extreme service and price sensitivity aside for a second, why exactly are you bent out of shape about how the SMS is being carved up between players? So long as teams only spend to the cap how does it affect the profitability of the league? And just so you know, Reilly's valuation isn't really that extreme. The CFL works with smaller numbers but Reilly's star player valuation in relation to the cap is modest compared to other leagues and stars. Do you ever think before you write stuff?

NFL Cap is $188M. Aaron Rodgers gets paid $33.5M annually which is 17.8% of the team's cap.
NHL Cap is $79.5M. Connor McDavid gets paid $12.5M annually which is 15.72% of the team's cap.
CFL Cap is $5.2M. Mike Reilly gets paid $700,000 annually which is 13.46% of the team's cap.

What do the bottom players in each instance get?  A living wage?  Pretty sure that ELC's in the NFL or NHL make more than Reilly does...  balancing the SMS over the entire group getting paid is a little more important.

Also, the SMS in the CFL includes PR players, and expenses.  46 man AR, 6-10 man PR, and expenses.  So, % of total SMS is not going to be the same...

Regardless, there is no reason, for instance, that Riley deserves $700K and Bighill only $250k.  




Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 01, 2019, 04:11:42 PM
What do the bottom players in each instance get?  A living wage?  Pretty sure that ELC's in the NFL or NHL make more than Reilly does...  balancing the SMS over the entire group getting paid is a little more important.

Also, the SMS in the CFL includes PR players, and expenses.  46 man AR, 6-10 man PR, and expenses.  So, % of total SMS is not going to be the same...

Regardless, there is no reason, for instance, that Riley deserves $700K and Bighill only $250k.  




I would like to see the bottom CFL earners make more money but Reilly's evaluation isn't off or unsustainable. It's even modest compared to other leagues' stars. The market dictates the price and there is a reason why Reilly makes more than Bighill, even if you can't see it or don't understand.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 01, 2019, 04:32:51 PM
I would like to see the bottom CFL earners make more money but Reilly's evaluation isn't off or unsustainable. It's even modest compared to other leagues' stars. The market dictates the price and there is a reason why Reilly makes more than Bighill, even if you can't see it or don't understand.

Reilly was fine at $400k, Mitchell made even less (not including side money).  Nichols at $300k would be well paid.  Would these players leave if this was the compensation level they were offered?  QB salaries have increased due to scarcity, not performance.  GM's are overpaying because their jobs are on the line. 

SMS was implemented to keep parity.  To prevent GM's from getting into spending practices that would bankrupt most teams the league.  It was a way to self regulate. 

Capping positional pay is something the league desperately needs to prevent them from instances like the Riley/Eliminiam scenario.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In Edmonton on May 01, 2019, 04:50:36 PM
I am a professional negotiator. I do collective bargaining on the union side, and have done so for many years. In our organization, we strongly believe that bargaining does not and should not occur in the public sphere. We adhere to this fervently, until such time when we need to seek out wider public support for our position. This is generally the practice in bargaining, as it keeps the issues at the table where they belong.

I have posted in this thread previously about the strike vote that the players took. I have yet to see any information where that vote is actually binding. Taking a strike vote is actually a two-step process. Union members need to vote to authorize a supervised strike vote. Once they do this, then a supervised strike vote can happen. I don't believe that they have moved beyond the first step. From what I see, the first step has happened, but this does not authorize the players to walk out. I have seen nothing in the media about strike windows or timelines, which tells me that as of right now, players failing to show up for training camp would constitute an illegal strike. Because the CFL is not in a single provincial jurisdiction, the supervising authority would likely have to be a federal agency (I bargain public sector on a provincial level in Alberta, so I am not at all familiar with the details on the federal level). Nevertheless, any unionized workplace has to adhere to these types of rules, whether in the public sector, or in the private sector. The CFL would be private sector.

In bargaining, as you've seen if you've followed other high profile disputes (NHL, NFL, MLB) in sport, there is a lot of jockeying as the process unfolds. This is another reason why staying out of the media is a good thing.

At the end of the day, an employer has a legal obligation to release audited financial information. They don't have to "throw open their books" as some would argue. These are private businesses. Only Saskatchewan, Edmonton and Winnipeg operate differently as they don't have an owner but are operated by a public board (this also complicates bargaining, as there are essentially two different ownership structures at play). Of course, those three teams all make money. The BCs, Torontos, Montreals of the world create problems because they clearly do not make money.

Halifax is a red herring. They can't be bargaining for a franchise that doesn't exist.

A strike or a lockout does not benefit anyone, IMO. The players will lose money, and will not get it back (if games are missed). The owners need gate, concession and TV money. All sides need fan support.

Bargaining is hard. It should be. Both sides have legitimate issues that they want and need to address over the long term. This is their chance to do that.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 01, 2019, 05:01:29 PM
Reilly was fine at $400k, Mitchell made even less (not including side money).  Nichols at $300k would be well paid.  Would these players leave if this was the compensation level they were offered?  QB salaries have increased due to scarcity, not performance.  GM's are overpaying because their jobs are on the line. 

SMS was implemented to keep parity.  To prevent GM's from getting into spending practices that would bankrupt most teams the league.  It was a way to self regulate. 

Capping positional pay is something the league desperately needs to prevent them from instances like the Riley/Eliminiam scenario.

The only thing that prevents Elimimian from getting released is guaranteed contracts. It's no different than the Bombers releasing Chris Randle (I suppose we did it sooner, aren't we the nice guys?). Big contract. Aging player. BC could have signed Reilly and kept him if they wanted to. They also signed Chungh to a big deal and a few others. Elimimian's release IS the salary cap working. No "prevention" is necessary. Also, you are not the authority on how much a player is "fine" at. The market dictates what you can charge for your products just like it sets the value of athletes.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 01, 2019, 05:03:08 PM
The only thing that prevents Elimimian from getting released is guaranteed contracts. It's no different than the Bombers releasing Chris Randle (I suppose we did it sooner, aren't we the nice guys?). Big contract. Aging player. BC could have signed Reilly and kept him if they wanted to. They also signed Chungh to a big deal and a few others. Elimimian's release IS the salary cap working. No "prevention" is necessary.

So, if Riley could only be paid $500k, you think they still dump Solly?


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 01, 2019, 05:07:04 PM
So, if Riley could only be paid $500k, you think they still dump Solly?

The leaps of logic you make are astounding. How could anyone answer that question? Duh. We don't know.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on May 01, 2019, 05:10:16 PM
Whatever the SMS total is, teams always have to decide how and where to spend money. At times very good players get released as younger, less expensive players allow spending elsewhere on the roster.

In that sense I don't know if Reilly only got $500K whether Elimimian would still be with the Lions. It's not as black and white as that.

There were many Lions players not re-signed in free agency that had some fairly big contracts. Everything from age, injury history or performance relative to others on the roster came into play.

Just because a player is released doesn't mean a team couldn't afford the contract or the player was deficient. It's a series of decisions on the cumulative roster.

Locally I think there was a belief last year during the season that Solly wouldn't be back. Big contract, missing most of the season, others stepping up and the need to spend on other roster positions. That was long before they knew they would sign Reilly or Chungh.

New management was going to start the re-build across the entire roster.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue girl on May 01, 2019, 06:48:31 PM
I am a professional negotiator. I do collective bargaining on the union side, and have done so for many years. In our organization, we strongly believe that bargaining does not and should not occur in the public sphere. We adhere to this fervently, until such time when we need to seek out wider public support for our position. This is generally the practice in bargaining, as it keeps the issues at the table where they belong.

I have posted in this thread previously about the strike vote that the players took. I have yet to see any information where that vote is actually binding. Taking a strike vote is actually a two-step process. Union members need to vote to authorize a supervised strike vote. Once they do this, then a supervised strike vote can happen. I don't believe that they have moved beyond the first step. From what I see, the first step has happened, but this does not authorize the players to walk out. I have seen nothing in the media about strike windows or timelines, which tells me that as of right now, players failing to show up for training camp would constitute an illegal strike. Because the CFL is not in a single provincial jurisdiction, the supervising authority would likely have to be a federal agency (I bargain public sector on a provincial level in Alberta, so I am not at all familiar with the details on the federal level). Nevertheless, any unionized workplace has to adhere to these types of rules, whether in the public sector, or in the private sector. The CFL would be private sector.

In bargaining, as you've seen if you've followed other high profile disputes (NHL, NFL, MLB) in sport, there is a lot of jockeying as the process unfolds. This is another reason why staying out of the media is a good thing.

At the end of the day, an employer has a legal obligation to release audited financial information. They don't have to "throw open their books" as some would argue. These are private businesses. Only Saskatchewan, Edmonton and Winnipeg operate differently as they don't have an owner but are operated by a public board (this also complicates bargaining, as there are essentially two different ownership structures at play). Of course, those three teams all make money. The BCs, Torontos, Montreals of the world create problems because they clearly do not make money.

Halifax is a red herring. They can't be bargaining for a franchise that doesn't exist.

A strike or a lockout does not benefit anyone, IMO. The players will lose money, and will not get it back (if games are missed). The owners need gate, concession and TV money. All sides need fan support.

Bargaining is hard. It should be. Both sides have legitimate issues that they want and need to address over the long term. This is their chance to do that.
Thank you for providing some clarity on this. I do agree that a strike or lockout benefits nobody. Once games are lost that revenue is never coming back.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 01, 2019, 06:51:13 PM
The leaps of logic you make are astounding. How could anyone answer that question? Duh. We don't know.

OK, I will answer.  Pretty sure if Hervey has an extra $250k of SMS room he doesn't cut a star D player... 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: the paw on May 01, 2019, 06:54:01 PM


I have posted in this thread previously about the strike vote that the players took. I have yet to see any information where that vote is actually binding. Taking a strike vote is actually a two-step process. Union members need to vote to authorize a supervised strike vote. Once they do this, then a supervised strike vote can happen. I don't believe that they have moved beyond the first step. From what I see, the first step has happened, but this does not authorize the players to walk out. I have seen nothing in the media about strike windows or timelines, which tells me that as of right now, players failing to show up for training camp would constitute an illegal strike. Because the CFL is not in a single provincial jurisdiction, the supervising authority would likely have to be a federal agency (I bargain public sector on a provincial level in Alberta, so I am not at all familiar with the details on the federal level). Nevertheless, any unionized workplace has to adhere to these types of rules, whether in the public sector, or in the private sector. The CFL would be private sector.



I'm not an expert, but I did sit on some bargaining committees back in the day.  (my information may not be quite current).

I don't think strike votes necessarily need to be supervised in all jurisdictions.   As well, at least two provinces (Alta and Ont I think) have mandatory mediation periods before employees who have voted to strike can actually hit the picket lines.  

I would have thought that the CFL (operating in 5 provinces) would have fallen under some sort of federal labour code, but reading the league's position, it sounds like they think that each team has to comply with the provincial legislation in their province.   It seems odd that you could do central bargaining like this, but I guess the individual teams and not the league are the employers.

I suppose you could have staggered start dates for strikes in different provinces.  Hopefully it doesn't come to that...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 01, 2019, 07:34:18 PM
OK, I will answer.  Pretty sure if Hervey has an extra $250k of SMS room he doesn't cut a star D player... 

Your whole theory makes no sense Aardvark. Let's go down the rabbit hole for half a second. If all QBs capped out at say, 500K, then the vast majority would be paid at that level. This is really great for teams that have Bo Levi Mitchell and Mike Reilly. Not only do they have the best quarterbacks in the league but they don't have to pay them more than the average QBs like Matt Nichols and Trevor Harris. Instead of the tradeoff between a AAA quarterback and extra SMS room, they get both. That is obviously a huge advantage. Your rule may have spared Solly, but the SMS is in place to not only control costs but also redistribute talent based on market worth. If you arbitrarily cap a position the whole thing loses some of its power to equalize the clubs.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 01, 2019, 08:41:48 PM
Your whole theory makes no sense Aardvark. Let's go down the rabbit hole for half a second. If all QBs capped out at say, 500K, then the vast majority would be paid at that level. This is really great for teams that have Bo Levi Mitchell and Mike Reilly. Not only do they have the best quarterbacks in the league but they don't have to pay them more than the average QBs like Matt Nichols and Trevor Harris. Instead of the tradeoff between a AAA quarterback and extra SMS room, they get both. That is obviously a huge advantage. Your rule may have spared Solly, but the SMS is in place to not only control costs but also redistribute talent based on market worth. If you arbitrarily cap a position the whole thing loses some of its power to equalize the clubs.

I don't think all starting QB's would quickly cap out at $500,000, Reilly, BLM, Harris, Masoli and Nichols are already there but up and coming QB's like Jennings, Franklin and Streveler would still have to climb the ladder to get to that pay scale and that would take a number of years to prove their worth.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In Edmonton on May 01, 2019, 10:29:09 PM
I'm not an expert, but I did sit on some bargaining committees back in the day.  (my information may not be quite current).

I don't think strike votes necessarily need to be supervised in all jurisdictions.   As well, at least two provinces (Alta and Ont I think) have mandatory mediation periods before employees who have voted to strike can actually hit the picket lines.  

I would have thought that the CFL (operating in 5 provinces) would have fallen under some sort of federal labour code, but reading the league's position, it sounds like they think that each team has to comply with the provincial legislation in their province.   It seems odd that you could do central bargaining like this, but I guess the individual teams and not the league are the employers.

I suppose you could have staggered start dates for strikes in different provinces.  Hopefully it doesn't come to that...

You've dug a bit farther into the positions of each side in this dispute than I have. Interesting that it could be viewed that they'd have to adhere to five different provincial jurisdictions. I always wondered how a group like the postal workers dealt with those issues. Once I leave work, I tend to leave behind much interest in labour relations elsewhere.

You are absolutely correct about the requirement for a mediator. This isn't the Soviets at the Spectrum in the 1970s simply saying we're going home! A mediator needs to be involved in the dispute. The mediator the needs to write themselves out of the dispute, and this would only occur after multiple sessions with the parties and a determination that the sides were too far apart for the mediator to write terms of settlement. Then we get to the supervised strike vote. Then there's a window of time that the mandate of that vote remains valid for. During that time, the union or the employer can serve 72-hours notice of strike or lockout.

With camps open in a few weeks, achieving this in that timeline would be a challenge.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: BlueInCgy on May 02, 2019, 07:04:34 AM
Your whole theory makes no sense Aardvark. Let's go down the rabbit hole for half a second. If all QBs capped out at say, 500K, then the vast majority would be paid at that level. This is really great for teams that have Bo Levi Mitchell and Mike Reilly. Not only do they have the best quarterbacks in the league but they don't have to pay them more than the average QBs like Matt Nichols and Trevor Harris. Instead of the tradeoff between a AAA quarterback and extra SMS room, they get both. That is obviously a huge advantage. Your rule may have spared Solly, but the SMS is in place to not only control costs but also redistribute talent based on market worth. If you arbitrarily cap a position the whole thing loses some of its power to equalize the clubs.

If you cap QBs, theoretically, at 500K, Bo and Mike likely hold clipboards in the NFL for the rest of their careers.  There is a "love to play" factor for sure, but it only goes so far, and 30% below what either of them will be paid this year probably isn't it.

Solly isn't strictly an SMS victim.  It is, to some extent, the Hufnagel model being implemented by other teams.  Now I'm not saying Hervey is as good as Hufnagel, but good GMs make the tough calls before the best before date has passed.  Charleston Hughes is a prime example.  Still, on his worst days, a very good player.  Stamps did OK without him.

I suspect we find ourselves in a similar situation with Bighill and possibly Nichols next season, especially with Nichols and Strevelers contracts both coming due.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 02, 2019, 02:29:55 PM
Your whole theory makes no sense Aardvark. Let's go down the rabbit hole for half a second. If all QBs capped out at say, 500K, then the vast majority would be paid at that level. This is really great for teams that have Bo Levi Mitchell and Mike Reilly. Not only do they have the best quarterbacks in the league but they don't have to pay them more than the average QBs like Matt Nichols and Trevor Harris. Instead of the tradeoff between a AAA quarterback and extra SMS room, they get both. That is obviously a huge advantage. Your rule may have spared Solly, but the SMS is in place to not only control costs but also redistribute talent based on market worth. If you arbitrarily cap a position the whole thing loses some of its power to equalize the clubs.

If BLM and Reilly are at $500k, why would you pay Nichols/Collaros more than $400k?  Or any unproven QB even $300k...  just because you have a limit for the top doesn't mean every player is going to get that... just because Bighill gets $250k, does that mean every starting MLB in the league will now make $250k?  Your argument makes no sense...

If you cap QBs, theoretically, at 500K, Bo and Mike likely hold clipboards in the NFL for the rest of their careers.  There is a "love to play" factor for sure, but it only goes so far, and 30% below what either of them will be paid this year probably isn't it.

Solly isn't strictly an SMS victim.  It is, to some extent, the Hufnagel model being implemented by other teams.  Now I'm not saying Hervey is as good as Hufnagel, but good GMs make the tough calls before the best before date has passed.  Charleston Hughes is a prime example.  Still, on his worst days, a very good player.  Stamps did OK without him.

I suspect we find ourselves in a similar situation with Bighill and possibly Nichols next season, especially with Nichols and Strevelers contracts both coming due.


Pay for clipboard holding has not increased dramatically since the top QB's in our league were making $374-400k...  why would there suddenly be spots open that are more lucrative than $500k?  And if BLM or Reilly could get a job holding a clipboard in the NFL, you could't keep them here for any pay...  they are not here because the CFL pays them more, they are here because only the CFL will pay them...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 02, 2019, 03:43:21 PM
If BLM and Reilly are at $500k, why would you pay Nichols/Collaros more than $400k?  Or any unproven QB even $300k...  just because you have a limit for the top doesn't mean every player is going to get that... just because Bighill gets $250k, does that mean every starting MLB in the league will now make $250k?  Your argument makes no sense...

Good grief. BLM and Reilly are obviously worth more than $500K even if you set some sort of artificial cap on them. Let's say you do like you suggested. Nichols is set to earn $465,000 this year. How does a $500,000 cap change his value? It doesn't. If he's worth $465,000 today, then he's worth it tomorrow even if you cap the top income earners below what the market would otherwise offer them.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 02, 2019, 03:56:45 PM
Good grief. BLM and Reilly are obviously worth more than $500K even if you set some sort of artificial cap on them. Let's say you do like you suggested. Nichols is set to earn $465,000 this year. How does a $500,000 cap change his value? It doesn't. If he's worth $465,000 today, then he's worth it tomorrow even if you cap the top income earners below what the market would otherwise offer them.

How was BLM worth less than $400k 2 years ago, and with virtually the same SMS, now he's worth $700k?

Here is a QB salary listing from 2012...  when the SMS was 4.35mil, or 83% of the current...

Anthony Calvillo, Montreal: $400,000 (maximum salary)
Ricky Ray, Toronto: $400,000 (maximum salary)
Henry Burris, Hamilton: $300,000 (maximum salary)
Darian Durant, Saskatchewan: $300,000 (maximum salary)
Drew Tate, Calgary: $300,000 (maximum salary) ($200,000 base)
Steven Jyles, Edmonton: $250,000 (maximum salary) ($125,000 base, $75,000 signing bonus)
Travis Lulay, B.C.: $250,000 (maximum salary)


This would put Cavillo's salary, adjusted as % of SMS, at less than $480k. 

Are you suggesting that something has happened to make a QB worth 1.5 times as much % of SMS today as arguably the best QB of all time at the height of his career?  Or another hall of famer (Ray) coming off his 3rd GC?

It is an adjustment that needs to be made to stop GM's from ruining the league.




Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 02, 2019, 04:23:09 PM
How was BLM worth less than $400k 2 years ago, and with virtually the same SMS, now he's worth $700k?

Here is a QB salary listing from 2012...  when the SMS was 4.35mil, or 83% of the current...

Anthony Calvillo, Montreal: $400,000 (maximum salary)
Ricky Ray, Toronto: $400,000 (maximum salary)
Henry Burris, Hamilton: $300,000 (maximum salary)
Darian Durant, Saskatchewan: $300,000 (maximum salary)
Drew Tate, Calgary: $300,000 (maximum salary) ($200,000 base)
Steven Jyles, Edmonton: $250,000 (maximum salary) ($125,000 base, $75,000 signing bonus)
Travis Lulay, B.C.: $250,000 (maximum salary)


This would put Cavillo's salary, adjusted as % of SMS, at less than $480k. 

Are you suggesting that something has happened to make a QB worth 1.5 times as much % of SMS today as arguably the best QB of all time at the height of his career?  Or another hall of famer (Ray) coming off his 3rd GC?

It is an adjustment that needs to be made to stop GM's from ruining the league.

Yes - what's happened is that teams are willing to pay a higher premium for elite quarterbacks. That in itself means that those quarterbacks are worth more by definition. If those teams aren't competitive any longer, then you might see some sort of a correction, but that's an if not a when.

Since you're throwing out the "ruining the league" card, I'd invite you to stop hyperventilating and put things into perspective. Since you proclaimed $500,000 as acceptable payment for top end quarterbacks in "Aardvark reality", then you're only talking about two quarterbacks as outliers. Mike Reilly is about $225,000 over your stamp of approval and Bo Levi is about $175,000. While it's true that all QBs may creep up a bit as a result, this is not going to "ruin the league". Realistically, those teams are going to have to pay 1 or 2 extra players league minimum to make up for the change.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: BlueInCgy on May 02, 2019, 04:32:43 PM

Pay for clipboard holding has not increased dramatically since the top QB's in our league were making $374-400k...  why would there suddenly be spots open that are more lucrative than $500k?  And if BLM or Reilly could get a job holding a clipboard in the NFL, you could't keep them here for any pay...  they are not here because the CFL pays them more, they are here because only the CFL will pay them...

Well, let?s see.  In 2012 money, since you want to go there, the US and Canadian dollar were at par, so $400k was $400k in either currency.  In 2018 dollars, $400k CDN is $300k US.  So, ignoring all other factors, any QB collecting a $400k salary in 2012 would need to be collecting $520k CDN to take home the same amount, since 99% of all QBs are Americans and very few permanently repatriate and therefore need to plan for their future in their home currency.  Then taking that currency equivalency and then increasing it by the ratio of the SMS, the same QB would now be making $620k +.

So Calvillo?s value and Reilly/Mitchell are relatively close when considered in their native currency, which also happens to be the currency in which NFL players are paid.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 02, 2019, 04:37:36 PM
Yes - what's happened is that teams are willing to pay a higher premium for elite quarterbacks. That in itself means that those quarterbacks are worth more by definition. If those teams aren't competitive any longer, then you might see some sort of a correction, but that's an if not a when.

Since you're throwing out the "ruining the league" card, I'd invite you to stop hyperventilating and put things into perspective. Since you proclaimed $500,000 as acceptable payment for top end quarterbacks in "Aardvark reality", then you're only talking about two quarterbacks as outliers. Mike Reilly is about $225,000 over your stamp of approval and Bo Levi is about $175,000. While it's true that all QBs may creep up a bit as a result, this is not going to "ruin the league". Realistically, those teams are going to have to pay 1 or 2 extra players league minimum to make up for the change.

Mike Reilly is being paid almost $800,000 per season, that's costing BC a lot more than 1 or 2 extra players earning league minimum as their recent cuts would indicate.  Signing Mike Reilly won't solve their attendance woes if BC misses the playoffs, Hervey bet the house.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 02, 2019, 04:47:15 PM
Mike Reilly is being paid almost $800,000 per season, that's costing BC a lot more than 1 or 2 extra players earning league minimum as their recent cuts would indicate.  Signing Mike Reilly won't solve their attendance woes if BC misses the playoffs, Hervey bet the house.

$2.9M over four years is $725,000 per season if it's dispersed evenly (that's the contract, look it up, it's one of the most publicized contracts in CFL history). $725,000 minus Aardvark's suggested $500,000 cap is $225,000 per year (or 5.2% of the cap) This is not an astronomical sum. You could obviously solve this problem a number of ways but you're looking at 1-2 fewer veteran players in the most likely scenario. BC also signed Suhk Chungh to what was rumored to be a big deal and made some other signings too. They are adjusting for a lot more than just the price of a higher QB. I'm sure the combination of Jennings and Lulay wasn't peanuts either.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: booch on May 02, 2019, 05:43:13 PM
BC is paying Reilly and Chungh a combined amount of 1 000 000  for the 2019 season...thats a lot of cheeze tied up into 2 players in a 5.5 million dollar cap league..not to mention the couple other guys they re-upped who are well over 150k...their peripheral talent is going to be first year guys and also ran's...it's gonna be interesting out there for sure


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 02, 2019, 05:45:05 PM
Well, let?s see.  In 2012 money, since you want to go there, the US and Canadian dollar were at par, so $400k was $400k in either currency.  In 2018 dollars, $400k CDN is $300k US.  So, ignoring all other factors, any QB collecting a $400k salary in 2012 would need to be collecting $520k CDN to take home the same amount, since 99% of all QBs are Americans and very few permanently repatriate and therefore need to plan for their future in their home currency.  Then taking that currency equivalency and then increasing it by the ratio of the SMS, the same QB would now be making $620k +.

So Calvillo?s value and Reilly/Mitchell are relatively close when considered in their native currency, which also happens to be the currency in which NFL players are paid.


Not talking real dollars, there was a time when CFL players got paid more than NFL players, so Reilly should get $35million, right?

Also, league min back then was similar to what it is today as a % of total cap space.  

Capping QB's at $500k stops the bidding wars that just happened for Reilly.  Edm was willing to pony up what BC did, and Harris was already paid more than $500k... and no doubt got a raise to go to Edm...
 
We have seen teams cut players to make room for QB salary, or in the past, ask QB's to take a paycut so that they can sign players (Harris in 2017 dropped $40k (10%) to let Desjardins sign players).

Caps are in place to stop GM's from shooting themselves in the feet.  NHL has a cap of 8 years for contracts to stop teams from getting stupid.  SMS in the CFL levels the playing field for the have/have not teams.  These limits have purposes, and the runaway bidding wars over 2 or 3 QB's is not beneficial for the league at all.  Where does it end?  With a team paying a QB 25% of the SMS, and 75% of the team on ELC's?  Sure, we want identifiable frontmen for the league, but it would be nice to have other identifiable players...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 02, 2019, 05:50:18 PM
Not talking real dollars, there was a time when CFL players got paid more than NFL players, so Reilly should get $35million, right?

Also, league min back then was similar to what it is today as a % of total cap space.  

Capping QB's at $500k stops the bidding wars that just happened for Reilly.  Edm was willing to pony up what BC did, and Harris was already paid more than $500k... and no doubt got a raise to go to Edm...
 
We have seen teams cut players to make room for QB salary, or in the past, ask QB's to take a paycut so that they can sign players (Harris in 2017 dropped $40k (10%) to let Desjardins sign players).

Caps are in place to stop GM's from shooting themselves in the feet.
 NHL has a cap of 8 years for contracts to stop teams from getting stupid.  SMS in the CFL levels the playing field for the have/have not teams.  These limits have purposes, and the runaway bidding wars over 2 or 3 QB's is not beneficial for the league at all.  Where does it end?  With a team paying a QB 25% of the SMS, and 75% of the team on ELC's?  Sure, we want identifiable frontmen for the league, but it would be nice to have other identifiable players...

They really aren't. A salary cap provides CEOs/owners with cost certainty. In theory, it allows all teams to be competitive. It does not (nor does it try to) stop GMs from overpaying on individual contracts, making bad decisions or prioritizing ineffectively. 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 02, 2019, 05:56:33 PM
They really aren't. A salary cap provides CEOs/owners with cost certainty. In theory, it allows all teams to be competitive. It does not (nor does it try too) stop GMs from overpaying on individual contracts, making bad decisions or prioritizing ineffectively. 

Sure it does, who are you trying to kid.  GM's can make dumb decisions, and then they have to deal with them.  They can sign a QB to $750K, and then have to cut a star D player.

NHL GM's used to be able to sign 15 year deals, ask @Strombo, they changed that because it was silly.  Had they not, Laine could be discussing a $150million contract right now...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 02, 2019, 06:09:47 PM
Sure it does, who are you trying to kid.  GM's can make dumb decisions, and then they have to deal with them.  They can sign a QB to $750K, and then have to cut a star D player.

You seem to have contradicted yourself or I don't understand whatever it is that makes sense in your head. Salary caps are designed to keep total costs down and to maintain a competitive balance between clubs of various profitabilities (larger market, more established, etc.) They don't often concern themselves with how much any one player can make because the market regulates that on its own. The NHL has a top end, but even McDavid didn't really come close to it, so it's mostly a sanity check and not something GMs have to worry about. If Calgary and BC are lousy (not likely) then the GMs and teams will adjust which could put some downward pressure on QB contracts. Contracts aren't guaranteed after all. If they excel (in large part due to the play of their QBs) then their value will be proven.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on May 02, 2019, 06:31:14 PM
You seem to have contradicted yourself or I don't understand whatever it is that makes sense in your head. Salary caps are designed to keep total costs down and to maintain a competitive balance between clubs of various profitabilities (larger market, more established, etc.) They don't often concern themselves with how much any one player can make because the market regulates that on its own. The NHL has a top end, but even McDavid didn't really come close to it, so it's mostly a sanity check and not something GMs have to worry about. If Calgary and BC are lousy (not likely) then the GMs and teams will adjust which could put some downward pressure on QB contracts. Contracts aren't guaranteed after all. If they excel (in large part due to the play of their QBs) then their value will be proven.

Exactly. The SMS was put in place to ensure competitive balance and prevent rich owners from spending a lot more cumulatively on their roster.  That in itself prevented private teams from just saying to Reilly, here's $1M. Come play here.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: GCn19 on May 02, 2019, 06:35:41 PM
So, if Riley could only be paid $500k, you think they still dump Solly?

Yes, I think they still dump Solly.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue72 on May 02, 2019, 08:47:59 PM
Reilly is now 34 and can't take the hits like he did before but still likes to run. Now say it gets hurt and is out for a couple to more games.  Bc saves on the SMS but having to  get rid of some good players to pay one QB and really no backup how will that fill the stands or help the league. As a new GM, spending crazy money (1 MIL) on just a couple guys is not a smart move. Even if he doesn't get hurt but has a couple bad games which he had last year again the team suffers because of lack of vets and more lower paid players.

Now this isn't only BC it also could be EDM as Harris is also being paid big dollars with no real backup. Calgary seems to always find a way to overcome this with a good overall team.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 02, 2019, 08:56:04 PM
Reilly is now 34 and can't take the hits like he did before but still likes to run. Now say it gets hurt and is out for a couple to more games.  Bc saves on the SMS but having to  get rid of some good players to pay one QB and really no backup how will that fill the stands or help the league. As a new GM, spending crazy money (1 MIL) on just a couple guys is not a smart move. Even if he doesn't get hurt but has a couple bad games which he had last year again the team suffers because of lack of vets and more lower paid players.

Now this isn't only BC it also could be EDM as Harris is also being paid big dollars with no real backup. Calgary seems to always find a way to overcome this with a good overall team.

Hervey isn't a new GM... he's been a GM since 2013...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: blue girl on May 02, 2019, 09:09:35 PM
BC wanted Reilly no matter what the cost so of course there were going to be other players released. The only surprise for me was that it came out that they wanted to trade him because you knew then that teams would wait for him to be released.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 02, 2019, 09:15:56 PM
Reilly is now 34 and can't take the hits like he did before but still likes to run. Now say it gets hurt and is out for a couple to more games.  Bc saves on the SMS but having to  get rid of some good players to pay one QB and really no backup how will that fill the stands or help the league. As a new GM, spending crazy money (1 MIL) on just a couple guys is not a smart move. Even if he doesn't get hurt but has a couple bad games which he had last year again the team suffers because of lack of vets and more lower paid players.

Now this isn't only BC it also could be EDM as Harris is also being paid big dollars with no real backup. Calgary seems to always find a way to overcome this with a good overall team.

Kevin Glenn hasn't yet decided on his new home.  :D


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue72 on May 02, 2019, 09:28:54 PM
Sorry this is Hervey's 2nd year as the BC GM but this is his team that he wants, so taking a chance on one guy and weakening the rest of your team is not that smart of a move. Plus pushing up the price of the QB's salaries in the league also doesn't help the league. Just think what Nichols will ask for next year even if he has a year like last year, he is not a $500,000 QB.
A QB is only as good as the team around him and if they have to spend that kind of money for one guy that weakens the rest of the team. It's guys like Huff that knows how to spend and build a good group of guys.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on May 04, 2019, 01:49:36 AM
you know, while I may not be sold on everything that Aards mentioned, I do believe, at least in theory, he is right at least in part, there is a need for some type of reform in the CFL in the way they compensate and or provide player benefit from a long term perspective as well as create financial stability for the member clubs and the league as a whole. Aards primarily focused on the player side of the equation but from my point of view one can't be had without the other...

Admittedly, there is no 'silver bullet' or overnjght solutions to the challenges that lie in front of the league, but, doing nothing surely isn't the right answer... and honestly, what 'we' are doing now doesn't seem to be bettering those that are currently less successful from a financial point of view, or, the entire league in regards to fan support overall...

Now, as 'johnny come lately', I won't sit here and try to claim to have a fix, as stated multiple times in this forum alone, many people smarter than I have come on gone and worked to make the CFL the best it can be... what I hope to offer is more of a 'fresh eyes' type of perspective from someone from the outside looking in perspective for your consideration and comments... after all, that's what we do here, think about, debate, provide opinion, etc....

First off, as much as I respect Ambrosie for his forward thinking and willingness to try new things, CFL 2.0 isn't the answer, at least not in the short term. To me, a global solution here isn't the answer, sure, it's icing on the cake in good times and when everyone is flush with cash, but for me it isn't something that is going to increase the fan base significantly enough, soon enough, to help some of the struggling clubs today.  For me, the CFL will have to be saved by the Canadian people as a whole... Canadians are the vested customer here, and rightly so, and the league should be attempting to understand what needs to be done to increase Canadian fan support. Easier said than done, I know...

Personally, I'm not in favor of decreasing the ratio, it doesn't make sense to me to take a Canadian product and intentionally make it less Canadian, lol... However, I don't think you can just add players if they don't deserve to be on the field either... for me, the problem with the ratio is the mind set that comes along with it... teams are only striving to meet the minimums because that is all they are required to do... therefore, there isn't an incentive for teams to further the Canadian product... I know that countless things have been done in the past and we're working with a limited supply currently, but, I have to believe that even within this group we could brainstorm things that haven't been tried before... sure, we could probably come up with 20 or 30 ideas, and probably most would suck, but, all it takes is one or two good ideas that could be built upon that could potentially reap huge rewards... but again, doing basically the same as has been done for recent years isn't making things better...

Ambrosie is looking towards a global solution in assisting Canadian players to become CFL ready, but maybe that reach doesn't have to be so far from home... It seems to be a common thought that Canadian players are at a disadvantage, football wise, due to the lack of access to quality coaches and facilities in Canada for various reasons, so... much like universities do for academic minded students, maybe there is an opportunity to work out something with US schools to create a sports type product much like the foreign exchange student program?  Maybe something could be worked out with some US schools that may not offer a strong curriculum in certain studies where they could go to a Canadian school to study there and in return, Canadian football players could come to the US become part of a stronger sports program?

one of the things that Aards mentioned was creating some sort of salary structure, potentially capping salaries based upon position, etc... I'm actually in favor of this because I don't think you can live by paying 1 player 15% of your overall available funds to pay all players... Today it's at 15%, but where does it stop? and, it's not a huge leap to consider that other key players on a team will believe that they contribute as large a part in overall team success as the QB does and will be wanting significant increases in pay as well... the pat answer to date has been 'well, those things sort of take care of itself' by the theory of 'pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered', meaning those players can priced themselves right out of a job... but, the league potentially losing a player like Solomon Elimimian because of a team having to make those tough business decisions doesn't help the league... Now, I'm pretty sure that someone will manage to find a way to afford him but I think it speaks volumes to the slippery slope that we may be embarking on in the not to distant future...

To be honest, the league has already placed positional salary caps on some players when you consider that all import players, outside of QBs, play their first 2 years in the CFL as league minimum... this was done out of necessity in order for a team to be able to afford to field a team... maybe the time has come that it needs to take a long hard look at what's going on at the other end of the spectrum as well... because what I see happening is, teams will have a handful of players making good money and then the team will be filled out with the revolving door players that can't play longer than 2 years because no one can afford them...

coming up with a fair and equitable solution for all concerned can actually create opportunity... for starters, doing so could help stabilize a team's roster... as it is now teams get into these bidding wars for key talent and when coupled with the 1 year contracts, teams have half their roster changing almost every year...  creating a structured salary solution could allow teams to hold onto the their draft talent and marquee names and create a team identity for fans to get behind.  At the same time, stabilizing the top end of player salaries could actually mean more money for those that are currently being paid at the bottom end... for me, following sports is as much about following players as it is following a team... I think it could go a long way in helping to growing the fan base as well as I believe the casual fan wants a team that they 'know' and can identify with, basically less player turn year in and year out... while the die hard CFL understands the ratio and can appreciate the complexity it creates for teams to field the best team possible, the causal fan likes the players and wants to see them there for longer than 1 season...

also, by stabilizing a teams roster you have an opportunity to also create more revenue. Not just because you hope to gain a few more fans but also through merchandise sales... it seems to me that fans are reluctant to buy player jerseys primarily because short of maybe 1 or 2 players you don't know if you're favorite is going to be here next year, especially when stitched jerseys are selling for almost $200!  A large part of the NFL league generated revenue is created by merchandise sales... this year along the league split $8 billion dollars, $255M per team, through revenue sharing where a key component to that is merchandise sales... Now I know the CFL isn't the NFL and they will never be able to replicate NFL types of numbers, but you have to believe that if you're looking, that's some pretty low hanging fruit...

for me, when Aards talked about profit sharing, this is what came to mind for me... if you create increased revenue through new sales that is a place where funds could be created to expand other player benefit without placing a strain on teams financially... the players are going to have to look at it from the perspective of 'whats good for the collective' because currently you can slice up and divide something that doesn't exist... this could also remove the need for teams subsidizing other teams out of their profits...  I believe that currently each team keeps their revenue generated by player merchandise, so, there may have to some change there, but it doesn't have to be overnight...

when I was working I found that looking at 'like businesses' or parallel types of service providers was key when considering process improvements or process change, learn from them instead of reinventing the wheel... looking at what the NFL does, taking from what they do right and understanding what they do wrong, has to be of some benefit to the CFL... again, not saying they should copy what they do wholesale, but, they are the single most successful professional league in the world... 



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on May 04, 2019, 01:27:20 PM
Not every import gets the lowest ELC on his 1st contract.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 04, 2019, 01:35:35 PM
Not every import gets the lowest ELC on his 1st contract.
Of course not, but those that do not will...  wait for it....  and by that I mean a new CBA so that they can optimize their contract.  A player willingly agreeing to a min wage deal has nothing to lose signing now.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on May 04, 2019, 01:43:59 PM
Of course not, but those that do not will...  wait for it....  and by that I mean a new CBA so that they can optimize their contract.  A player willingly agreeing to a min wage deal has nothing to lose signing now.

So you don't think Reilly or the 80 or so other veterans that changed teams in February " optimized " their contracts?

Have you even looked at Bombers that extended during free agency: Alexander, Bighill, S. Bryant, Hardrick, Jeffocoat, Medlock and Nevis to name a few.

You're out to lunch on this theme.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on May 04, 2019, 02:53:50 PM
Not every import gets the lowest ELC on his 1st contract.

are you sure? other than a QB what import player would get more than ELC? Maybe if you come here with years of experience from the NFL, and by experience I'm talking about actual game experience, not bouncing around from PR to PR...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: theaardvark on May 04, 2019, 05:03:19 PM
So you don't think Reilly or the 80 or so other veterans that changed teams in February " optimized " their contracts?

Have you even looked at Bombers that extended during free agency: Alexander, Bighill, S. Bryant, Hardrick, Jeffocoat, Medlock and Nevis to name a few.

You're out to lunch on this theme.

The whole bargaining situation has changed since FA day... they've had a strike vote for gosh sakes and the CFL walked away from the table... so, obviously the players are not getting what they figured they'd get back on FA day... 


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on May 04, 2019, 05:12:19 PM
are you sure? other than a QB what import player would get more than ELC? Maybe if you come here with years of experience from the NFL, and by experience I'm talking about actual game experience, not bouncing around from PR to PR...

Yes I'm sure.

Lot's of game experienced NFL players end up in the CFL eventually.  Just because there is a minimum level doesn't mean it's a mandatory level for a rookie.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on May 04, 2019, 05:19:59 PM
The whole bargaining situation has changed since FA day... they've had a strike vote for gosh sakes and the CFL walked away from the table... so, obviously the players are not getting what they figured they'd get back on FA day... 

There are only about 60 CFL free agents left from free agency day. Half are probably never going to play another CFL game. The rest are mostly role players. Only a few can remotely be considered of real interest in the CFL.

I seriously doubt any current free agent is considering waiting for a new CBA to optimize his next contract.

Obviously signing in free agency is partially a 1st come 1st served situation as SMS's are being spent around the league. What might have been available to some players that didn't sign then might now be lower even with a new CBA since other choices were made in February.

Aside from Solly who probably will get multiple offers, there are not exactly many players currently available that have the option.

Now it may be closer to take it or leave it situations for the majority.

You think Cox or Hebert are going to get better deals with a new CBA. They'll be lucky to get any deal now.


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on May 04, 2019, 07:50:59 PM
Yes I'm sure.

Lot's of game experienced NFL players end up in the CFL eventually.  Just because there is a minimum level doesn't mean it's a mandatory level for a rookie.



as noted in my reply, these would be the exception, not the rule... short of a hand full of true, ex-NFL players and QBs I would say that every rookie import player in the league began on an ELC contract... otherwise, why would there be one? it is said many times by many members here when discussing matters of compensation that "(insert player name here) is on an ELC so he doesn't cost us much", as it is/has been common knowledge...

you think any team is paying rookie imports any more than minimum? come on, you're smarter than that... why would they when they don't have to? after all, it's not like they can ask for more... by the time a contract is offered that player is on that team's negotiation list, he either signs and accepts the minimum or he doesn't play at all, or at least not for a year...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on May 04, 2019, 08:23:49 PM
as noted in my reply, these would be the exception, not the rule... short of a hand full of true, ex-NFL players and QBs I would say that every rookie import player in the league began on an ELC contract... otherwise, why would there be one? it is said many times by many members here when discussing matters of compensation that "(insert player name here) is on an ELC so he doesn't cost us much", as it is/has been common knowledge...

you think any team is paying rookie imports any more than minimum? come on, you're smarter than that... why would they when they don't have to? after all, it's not like they can ask for more... by the time a contract is offered that player is on that team's negotiation list, he either signs and accepts the minimum or he doesn't play at all, or at least not for a year...

Even the NFL has minimum contract values for AR and PR players.

The CFLPA negotiates a minimum contract level. There has to be a floor as well as a SMS cap.

I don't know the proportion of minimum ELC contracts but I do know many players signed in the CFL come with NFL game or significant NFL PR time.

Bombers haven't signed Whitehead yet as an example. Have to think he wants more than the min and perhaps some guarantees.



Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: 66 Chevelle on May 04, 2019, 08:38:31 PM
Even the NFL has minimum contract values for AR and PR players.

The CFLPA negotiates a minimum contract level. There has to be a floor as well as a SMS cap.

I don't know the proportion of minimum ELC contracts but I do know many players signed in the CFL come with NFL game or significant NFL PR time.

Bombers haven't signed Whitehead yet as an example. Have to think he wants more than the min and perhaps some guarantees.



I understand that there is a minimum contract level, as well as a need for one to help control cost, however, a rookie import player can 'want' all he wants to, doesn't give him any leverage... but it's common knowledge that for probably 98%+ of import players, it's either take it or leave it, there is another guy right behind you that will... and, I'm not knocking the league for doing so, I don't believe any team is out to actually screw any player over, it's just the reality of the economics...

but the gap between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' got a little wider with what happened over the off season... and the sad part about it is, it doesn't really hurt the 'have nots', they are already 'have nots', it's going to have the biggest impact on the middle tier of players who ultimately become affordable for teams and we start replacing more talented players with the more economical ones...


Title: Re: Players will not be reporting to camp unless a new deal is in place...
Post by: Blue In BC on May 04, 2019, 08:43:07 PM
I understand that there is a minimum contract level, as well as a need for one to help control cost, however, a rookie import player can 'want' all he wants to, doesn't give him any leverage... but it's common knowledge that for probably 98%+ of import players, it's either take it or leave it, there is another guy right behind you that will... and, I'm not knocking the league for doing so, I don't believe any team is out to actually screw any player over, it's just the reality of the economics...

but the gap between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' got a little wider with what happened over the off season... and the sad part about it is, it doesn't really hurt the 'have nots', they are already 'have nots', it's going to have the biggest impact on the middle tier of players who ultimately become affordable for teams and we start replacing more talented players with the more economical ones...

Depends on how much the new SMS increases. That will be a bigger indication. I mentioned that the last CBA had an $800K increase over 5 years with $600K in year 1.

I can't imagine there isn't going to be a significant increase. More? Less than previous?

No idea but the GM's must have had some idea of the more with how free agency was treated.

It's like ABC analysis ( 80 / 20  rule ). The bottom floor is set ( 15 ). The top 15 on each team may get multiple offers. The middle 15 probably get more but not giant leaps forward. That middle group is more likely to re-sign with current team. Even many of the top 15 do while turning down possibly more elsewhere.

Balancing act in SMS between those getting more and those departing in free agency and how to spend the SMS.