Blue Bombers Forum
August 17, 2019, 10:56:44 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 7 [All]
  Print  
Author Topic: CFL and Players Association Reach New Deal  (Read 3719 times)
Ridermania
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 960



« on: May 15, 2019, 11:15:59 AM »

CFL and players have reached a new agreement.

Let the training camps proceed!!!

https://www.tsn.ca/cfl-cflpa-reach-tentative-agreement-on-new-collective-bargaining-agreement-1.1306016
« Last Edit: May 19, 2019, 07:00:48 AM by The Zipp » Logged
3rdand1.5
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3366


« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2019, 11:23:18 AM »

Yah!
Logged
The Zipp
Global Moderator
*****
Posts: 12682


Who gives a flying Buck...


« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2019, 11:29:06 AM »

Great news!!


Will be interesting to see the details..
Logged
Jesse
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 13160



« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2019, 12:24:25 PM »

Great news.
Logged

My wife is amazing!
TBURGESS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7473



« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2019, 12:36:29 PM »

Excellent news.
Logged

Being right never gets old.
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21370



« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2019, 12:40:00 PM »

Sounds good. I'm most interested in changes to ratio and the status of international players. Hoping we get some clarification on that soon!
Logged
ModAdmin
Administrator
*****
Posts: 10140


Reaves,Cameron,Riley,Walby - Blue Bomber Legends


« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2019, 12:47:15 PM »

Board of Govenors have to approve (vote today apparently) and the players have to ratify the agreement.  But hopefully this all gets done.  Like any labour agreement, not everyone will be happy.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2019, 12:49:45 PM by ModAdmin » Logged

"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one." - John Wooden
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #7 on: May 15, 2019, 12:48:21 PM »

Good to hear and more or less expected an agreement to happen before TC.

I also want to hear about any changes to ratio / implementation time frame, global players and whether there is any net change to roster size.
Logged

No more excuses.
Darwinismyhomeboy
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1936


« Reply #8 on: May 15, 2019, 01:04:49 PM »

Board of Govenors have to approve (vote today apparently) and the players have to ratify the agreement.  But hopefully this all gets done.  Like any labour agreement, not everyone will be happy.

No one will be happy.  That's a compromise for you.
Logged
blue_gold_84
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 28318


Fort Hew


« Reply #9 on: May 15, 2019, 01:27:28 PM »

This is a massive development. Great news!
Logged

#forthew

#risetogether

You can't fix stupid.
GOLDMEMBER
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21737


R.I.P. BLUE BONGER


« Reply #10 on: May 15, 2019, 01:37:13 PM »

YAY!
Logged

I LOSHT MY MEMBER IN AN UNFORTUNATE SHMELTING ACCSHIDENT!
Donny C
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3858



« Reply #11 on: May 15, 2019, 03:26:08 PM »

I guess in the last week, no news was good news!
Logged
blue newt
Full Member
***
Posts: 235



« Reply #12 on: May 15, 2019, 03:43:40 PM »

*happy dance*

Great news!
Logged
rubanski
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1649


« Reply #13 on: May 15, 2019, 04:34:34 PM »

Early reports are:

3 year deal.
Ratio unchanged, at least in year 1.
Cap continues to rise 50k per year.
Minimum salary going up to 65k in year 2 and 3.
Logged
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21370



« Reply #14 on: May 15, 2019, 04:41:15 PM »

Early reports are:

3 year deal.
Ratio unchanged, at least in year 1.
Cap continues to rise 50k per year.
Minimum salary going up to 65k in year 2 and 3.


That's a big deal if true. It will have a big impact on top end salaries.
Logged
the paw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3630


« Reply #15 on: May 15, 2019, 04:50:36 PM »

Some of the leaked details have conflicting versions, so I'm waiting for fuller information to really assess the deal.

But Dunk just posted a video at 3down saying that the concept of a strike in 2 waves (due to differing labour legislation in various provinces) would have led to such competitive imbalance that the owners upped their offer to get a deal.  Interesting that the CFLPA was able to leverage that inconsistency (which would normally be seen as a disadvantage) into an asset in negotiations.  I would not be at all surprised to find that some of the advice from Steelworkers may have been helpful in framing that tactically. 
Logged

grab grass 'n growl
GCn18
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23517


« Reply #16 on: May 15, 2019, 05:51:25 PM »

The teams that paid out huge for QBs and receivers this year were obviously thinking the cap would go up by more than 50k and that the rookie increase would not be as much. The Lions and Stamps must be really uncomfortable with their SMS right now. Edmonton too.
Logged

Some people take this forum way too seriously.
GOLDMEMBER
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21737


R.I.P. BLUE BONGER


« Reply #17 on: May 15, 2019, 05:58:19 PM »

Early reports are:

3 year deal.
Ratio unchanged, at least in year 1.
Cap continues to rise 50k per year.
Minimum salary going up to 65k in year 2 and 3.

wow 50-65k per a year ain?t much. Could be a problem for big ticket QB teams?
Logged

I LOSHT MY MEMBER IN AN UNFORTUNATE SHMELTING ACCSHIDENT!
trapper
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 8577


« Reply #18 on: May 15, 2019, 06:06:11 PM »

I can only imagine there is lots of improvements in medical benefits....or else what was the point in all this?
Logged
rubanski
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1649


« Reply #19 on: May 15, 2019, 06:22:36 PM »

I can only imagine there is lots of improvements in medical benefits....or else what was the point in all this?

The point is, the players want more of the money and the owners want more of the money. Every single negotiating point is a tug-of-war between this.

You think players would be happy if they got benefits and a 15% shrinkage of all salaries across the board to pay for it? (yes I made that number up)
Logged
blue_or_die
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6992



« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2019, 06:33:36 PM »

The teams that paid out huge for QBs and receivers this year were obviously thinking the cap would go up by more than 50k and that the rookie increase would not be as much. The Lions and Stamps must be really uncomfortable with their SMS right now. Edmonton too.

Works well with me.
Logged
3rdand1.5
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3366


« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2019, 06:34:34 PM »

Yikes, good luck balancing the roster for the teams who spent huge on QB's. The odd outlier at WR, LB, OL, DB etc. that we saw will be balanced out, reduced/released as needed but how the heck do you balance out multi year 700-800k QB salaries with a total increased cap of $150k over 3 years and a 15k per minimum contract increase. Quick math says next year the salary cap available even with the 50k increase will drop at least $150k for "middle players" due to the minimums increasing.

Those teams with the high end QB's will have a really tough time with non QB veteran salaries moving forward IMO
Logged
the paw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3630


« Reply #22 on: May 15, 2019, 06:42:32 PM »

The teams that paid out huge for QBs and receivers this year were obviously thinking the cap would go up by more than 50k and that the rookie increase would not be as much. The Lions and Stamps must be really uncomfortable with their SMS right now. Edmonton too.

Agreed. But it gets complicated.  If you figure half the roster is at minimum or near-minimum, that's maybe 22 guys who need a $10k bump by 2020.  That's $220k less $100k raise in salary cap ($50k x2), so a needed net adjustment of $120k. 

Teams like the Lions and Stamps can get most of the way there if they can talk their QB into taking a major haircut. The Bombers will have to tag  6-8 of their higher paid players for lesser amounts.   Neither is necessarily easy, but if Bo or Reilly dig in and refuse, those teams won't have a lot of wiggle room. 
Logged

grab grass 'n growl
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6496



« Reply #23 on: May 15, 2019, 07:05:01 PM »

Farhan Lalji

Verified account
 
@FarhanLaljiTSN
 17m17 minutes ago
More
More CBA details:
1. Players will receive revenue sharing of 20% of the TSN deal, 2.0 & more.
2. 3 yrs of medical coverage.
3. Canadian QBs will now be in the ratio
4. Among the American starters, 3 of them must have played 3 yrs with their existing teams or 4 yrs in #CFL. This in an effort to protect veteran players & build continuity.

The 3 yrs of medical coverage & revenue sharing are meaningful gains for players. @CFLonTSN

#4 is a kicker, 3 years with a club or 4 years in the league and an Import is considered a Natl.

This would make Jefferson, Bighill, Nichols, Adams and almost every other long-term vet. in the league a Natl.  They've effectively destroyed the ratio.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2019, 07:10:41 PM by Throw Long Bannatyne » Logged
blue_or_die
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6992



« Reply #24 on: May 15, 2019, 07:22:19 PM »

Farhan Lalji

Verified account
 
@FarhanLaljiTSN
 17m17 minutes ago
More
More CBA details:
1. Players will receive revenue sharing of 20% of the TSN deal, 2.0 & more.
2. 3 yrs of medical coverage.
3. Canadian QBs will now be in the ratio
4. Among the American starters, 3 of them must have played 3 yrs with their existing teams or 4 yrs in #CFL. This in an effort to protect veteran players & build continuity.

The 3 yrs of medical coverage & revenue sharing are meaningful gains for players. @CFLonTSN

#4 is a kicker, 3 years with a club or 4 years in the league and an Import is considered a Natl.

This would make Jefferson, Bighill, Nichols, Adams and almost every other long-term vet. in the league a Natl.  They've effectively destroyed the ratio.


This is super, super weird....

Sounds like an Ambrosie idea.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2019, 07:24:46 PM by blue_or_die » Logged
the paw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3630


« Reply #25 on: May 15, 2019, 07:26:28 PM »

Farhan Lalji

Verified account
 
@FarhanLaljiTSN
 17m17 minutes ago
More
More CBA details:
1. Players will receive revenue sharing of 20% of the TSN deal, 2.0 & more.
2. 3 yrs of medical coverage.
3. Canadian QBs will now be in the ratio
4. Among the American starters, 3 of them must have played 3 yrs with their existing teams or 4 yrs in #CFL. This in an effort to protect veteran players & build continuity.

The 3 yrs of medical coverage & revenue sharing are meaningful gains for players. @CFLonTSN

#4 is a kicker, 3 years with a club or 4 years in the league and an Import is considered a Natl.

This would make Jefferson, Bighill, Nichols, Adams and almost every other long-term vet. in the league a Natl.  They've effectively destroyed the ratio.

I don't think #4 means what you think it means.

I think they are just saying that your game day roster has to have 3 or 4 guaranteed veteran spots for Americans.  It's an offset to insure that teams don't dump all the veteran Americans to pay for the higher minimum salaries. 
Logged

grab grass 'n growl
blue_or_die
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6992



« Reply #26 on: May 15, 2019, 07:30:58 PM »

I don't think #4 means what you think it means.

I think they are just saying that your game day roster has to have 3 or 4 guaranteed veteran spots for Americans.  It's an offset to insure that teams don't dump all the veteran Americans to pay for the higher minimum salaries. 

Oh, I thought that part that I bolded was part of Lalji's tweet and not TLB's interpretation.

Your take is how I read it also initially.
Logged
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6496



« Reply #27 on: May 15, 2019, 07:32:04 PM »

I don't think #4 means what you think it means.

I think they are just saying that your game day roster has to have 3 or 4 guaranteed veteran spots for Americans.  It's an offset to insure that teams don't dump all the veteran Americans to pay for the higher minimum salaries. 

I hope you're right, will wait to see the official text.
Logged
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21370



« Reply #28 on: May 15, 2019, 07:33:55 PM »

I hope you're right, will wait to see the official text.

I actually hope it's your interpretation but I think the paw is correct.
Logged
kkc60
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4182


« Reply #29 on: May 15, 2019, 07:43:00 PM »

I hope you're right, will wait to see the official text.
Its gotta be. It's just for continuity and so veterans don't just get tossed the second they ask for a little more. You just need the 3. It doesn't subtract from Nationals, just is a part of the International group
Logged
blue girl
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3688



« Reply #30 on: May 15, 2019, 07:52:15 PM »

This is great news. I'm sure that we'll get more details once the deal is ratified by both sides.
Logged
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #31 on: May 15, 2019, 08:05:08 PM »

Canadian QB's are now part of the ratio. Ok but what exactly does that mean? On the AR 44 we used to have 21 Canadians. If a team has a Canadian QB does that eliminate 1 player that would have been on the roster or does that just allow a 22nd Canadian??

No problem in counting a Canadian QB starting as one of the starting 7. That may happen with several Canadian QB's hitting TC rosters and even AR 44's.

3 year deal is a bit of a surprise but it allows a new CBA after a new TV happens and puts the revenue sharing in a better position.

Only a $50K increase each year for 3 years was lower than I expected. Add that into the progressive increase to minimum salary in year 2 & 3 will be create a ripple effect.

Nothing mentioned yet covers how the ratio works with global players although it appeared they were listed as imports on our roster.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2019, 08:09:36 PM by Blue In BC » Logged

No more excuses.
TBURGESS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7473



« Reply #32 on: May 15, 2019, 08:08:19 PM »

Canadian QB's are now part of the ratio. Ok but what exactly does that mean? On the AR 44 we used to have 21 Canadians. If a team has a Canadian QB does that eliminate 1 player that would have been on the roster or does that just allow a 22nd Canadian??

No problem in counting a Canadian QB starting as one of the starting 7. That may happen with several Canadian QB's hitting TC rosters and even AR 44's.
You can already have more than the minimum number of Canadians on the team. I assume that a Canadian QB is simply going to be counted as one of the 21 if they are a backup and one of the 7 if they are a starter. (The way I think it should have been all along)
Logged

Being right never gets old.
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #33 on: May 15, 2019, 08:15:01 PM »

You can already have more than the minimum number of Canadians on the team. I assume that a Canadian QB is simply going to be counted as one of the 21 if they are a backup and one of the 7 if they are a starter. (The way I think it should have been all along)

I know you can but most teams don't. Imports take 23 of 44 roster spots. Previously a Canadian QB would have just been one of 3 QB's. Now on a roster of 44 it effectively eliminates another Canadian

Probably not after thinking about it. The previous 23 imports included 3 import QB's. So a team with a Canadian QB would only have 22 imports and 22 Canadians. A Canadian back up wouldn't be eliminated.

The big difference or possible incentive would be a starting Canadian QB would be a ratio advantage as a non traditional Canadian starter. That all good when his play warrants starting.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2019, 08:20:48 PM by Blue In BC » Logged

No more excuses.
Colton
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 13647


« Reply #34 on: May 15, 2019, 08:23:50 PM »

I hope you're right, will wait to see the official text.

There's literally nothing in that tweet that suggests veteran American players will be counted as Nationals.
Logged
Fire101
Guest
« Reply #35 on: May 15, 2019, 08:54:11 PM »

I'm really happy for the players that they got 3 years of medical coverage. They put their bodies on the line and deserve to be looked after.
Logged
kkc60
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4182


« Reply #36 on: May 15, 2019, 09:08:45 PM »

I'm really happy for the players that they got 3 years of medical coverage. They put their bodies on the line and deserve to be looked after.
Yeah that is my highlight too
Logged
Fire101
Guest
« Reply #37 on: May 15, 2019, 09:19:42 PM »

Some key points in the new CBA, according to 3DownNation & Farhan Lalji's twitter:


Three-year deal with a $50,000 increase in the salary cap each season.

Minimum salary stays the same in 2019 ($53,000) then jumps to $65,000 in 2020 and 2021.

The three-year deal times up with the expiration of the league's TV contract with TSN.

Some form of revenue sharing on any new TV deal and CFL 2.0.

Medical coverage for up to three years for injured players.

Canadian quarterbacks will be part of the ratio.

Some protection for veteran American players, including three of the international starters must have played three years with their current team or four years in the CFL.

The ratio will remain the same through the duration of the CBA.

No more unpaid bonuses in the lead up to a new CBA.

The addition of an extra roster spot for a global player

« Last Edit: May 15, 2019, 09:46:38 PM by Fire101 » Logged
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #38 on: May 15, 2019, 10:07:19 PM »

Addition of an extra roster spot for a global player doesn't impress me. It's an arbitrary bias adding a player from a small pool that may not deserve a roster spot. It adds additional cost against the SMS. Effectively it takes up the entire 3 years of increases.

Not sure I agree with Ambrosie on his idea.

Since the global players show as imports does that make them a 5th DI?
« Last Edit: May 15, 2019, 10:09:12 PM by Blue In BC » Logged

No more excuses.
the paw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3630


« Reply #39 on: May 15, 2019, 10:22:35 PM »

You can already have more than the minimum number of Canadians on the team. I assume that a Canadian QB is simply going to be counted as one of the 21 if they are a backup and one of the 7 if they are a starter. (The way I think it should have been all along)

I am interested to see how the word the rule change.  Instead of 3 QBs, 21 Cdns and 20 imports (Including 4 DIs), will they go to 22 Cdns and 22 imports?  If so, will they add another DI?

If they add another DI, then the #2 QB is a DI, and the balance stays similar.

If they don?t increase the number of DIs, then a team will still use a DI spot for the #2 QB, but every team will be in the market for a Cdn short yardage and placekick holder specialist. that will free up another import (non DI), which will have the net effect of reducing the starter ratio by one.  This could be a sneaky way of impacting the ratio indirectly.
Logged

grab grass 'n growl
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #40 on: May 16, 2019, 12:15:12 AM »

I am interested to see how the word the rule change.  Instead of 3 QBs, 21 Cdns and 20 imports (Including 4 DIs), will they go to 22 Cdns and 22 imports?  If so, will they add another DI?

If they add another DI, then the #2 QB is a DI, and the balance stays similar.

If they don?t increase the number of DIs, then a team will still use a DI spot for the #2 QB, but every team will be in the market for a Cdn short yardage and placekick holder specialist. that will free up another import (non DI), which will have the net effect of reducing the starter ratio by one.  This could be a sneaky way of impacting the ratio indirectly.

It gets slightly more complicated since they are adding a position for a global player. So I see this 24 imports and 21 Canadians on a 45 man roster. IMO the global player becomes a 5th DI.

For a team with a Canadian QB then there would be 23 imports and 22 Canadians but 5 DI's.

I would have preferred dressing all 46 players and eliminating the extra player on the total roster.

That way they could have added one more import ( global player ) and 1 more Canadian while retaining the SMS costs for 46 rather than 47 players.

At least it sounds as the global makes the game day roster 45 instead of 46.
Logged

No more excuses.
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #41 on: May 16, 2019, 12:18:18 AM »

BTW. For a sneaky approach you could make Medlock the # 2 QB on the depth chart because the # 2 QB can do kicking duties. The # 2 or # 3 QB can enter games but not necessarily in that order.

Ta Da. One free DI spot. How often do we really need 3 QB's to play in a game as QB's? The # 3 normally is the short yardage guy and / or plays ST's. In the case of the Bombers, Streveler is both the short yardage and the # 2. It's only a " title " as far as # 2 or # 3 though.
Logged

No more excuses.
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6496



« Reply #42 on: May 16, 2019, 01:46:16 AM »

There's literally nothing in that tweet that suggests veteran American players will be counted as Nationals.

Well I didn't make it up, the rumour originally came from a Canadian Press story.

https://medicinehatnews.com/sports/national-sports/2019/05/15/tentative-deal-gives-americans-incentive-to-remain-with-cfl-teams/

"According to two sources, the proposed three-year deal includes provisions for Americans to be deemed Canadian after as little as three years. Internationals who spent three years on one CFL team will be considered Canadian in their fourth years while Americans who spent four seasons north with more than one club will be considered a national upon their fifth season."

I don't honestly think this will happen, I hope for the sake of transparency the CFL would not announce "the ratio will remain the same through the duration of the CBA" and then attempt a work around like this.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2019, 02:52:39 AM by Throw Long Bannatyne » Logged
TecnoGenius
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3055


« Reply #43 on: May 16, 2019, 04:58:58 AM »

Knew it.  Knew they'd get it done, and with time to spare.  My hat goes off to both sides.  Now let's all enjoy some good 2019 football!

Cap continues to rise 50k per year.

The teams that paid out huge for QBs and receivers this year were obviously thinking the cap would go up by more than 50k and that the rookie increase would not be as much. The Lions and Stamps must be really uncomfortable with their SMS right now. Edmonton too.

wow 50-65k per a year ain?t much. Could be a problem for big ticket QB teams?

You guys said it!  PAIN PAIN PAIN for the over-$600k QB clubs.  And I'm loooovin' it!

1. Players will receive revenue sharing of 20% of the TSN deal, 2.0 & more.

How exactly is a 20% TSN share going to work?  Is that in addition to the salaries from SMS?  Or does it arbitrarily increase the SMS each time a new TSN deal is reached?  Confused.

As for 2.0... will the players share in the losses if (when) 2.0 turns into a money-pit boondoogle?

3. Canadian QBs will now be in the ratio

I'm fine with this now.  Let the teams attempting to field a Canadian starter QB gain an extra starter IMP.  Brandon Bridge was so awful they'll lose anyway.

And if some great NAT QB comes along, I'd be fine with that as it would really spice up the game, I think.  Anything that makes the GM chess match more interesting is ok with me.

4. Among the American starters, 3 of them must have played 3 yrs with their existing teams or 4 yrs in #CFL. This in an effort to protect veteran players & build continuity.

I like this, but has anyone worked out what current rosters fit within this rule?  And do they really mean starters, not just AR?  Wow.  And this rule applies now, in year 1 of the new CBA?  That's a bitter pill to swallow for any teams afoul who already have their re-signings and FA acquisitions set.

I see this as kind of an anti-CGY rule.  They are the ones that never pay up for FA vets.  They are the ones always bringing in the new blood and underpaying.

And... could mean someone is hiring Dressler any moment now.

#4 is a kicker, 3 years with a club or 4 years in the league and an Import is considered a Natl.

No.  As everyone said, this is impossible.  The news article stating it just doesn't understand the wording.  Such a thing would be the end of the CFL.  There would literally be no NATs on field anymore.

I think we can all be happy with this new contract.
Logged
ModAdmin
Administrator
*****
Posts: 10140


Reaves,Cameron,Riley,Walby - Blue Bomber Legends


« Reply #44 on: May 16, 2019, 04:50:07 PM »


David William Naylor
‏Verified account @TSNDaveNaylor
6m6 minutes ago

? global players ... 1 on each roster this season, 2 on each roster for 2020.  2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
David William Naylor
‏Verified account @TSNDaveNaylor
7m7 minutes ago

A few more details from the CFL?s new CBA (still yet to be ratified by players)
? Pending free agent players will be able to talk with any teams for 9 days in advance of opening of free agency.
? training camp padded practices ... was 10 in ?18, 5 this year, 3 in 2020. 1/2
Logged

"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one." - John Wooden
The Zipp
Global Moderator
*****
Posts: 12682


Who gives a flying Buck...


« Reply #45 on: May 16, 2019, 04:53:20 PM »

David William Naylor
‏Verified account @TSNDaveNaylor
6m6 minutes ago

? global players ... 1 on each roster this season, 2 on each roster for 2020.  2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
David William Naylor
‏Verified account @TSNDaveNaylor
7m7 minutes ago

A few more details from the CFL?s new CBA (still yet to be ratified by players)
? Pending free agent players will be able to talk with any teams for 9 days in advance of opening of free agency.
? training camp padded practices ... was 10 in ?18, 5 this year, 3 in 2020. 1/2


Pretty substantial drop in number of padded practices at training camp.  Can't say I have ever participated in one but to have only 3 practices during that whole time with pads on seems pretty low
Logged
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21370



« Reply #46 on: May 16, 2019, 04:54:34 PM »

David William Naylor
‏Verified account @TSNDaveNaylor
6m6 minutes ago

? global players ... 1 on each roster this season, 2 on each roster for 2020.  2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
David William Naylor
‏Verified account @TSNDaveNaylor
7m7 minutes ago

A few more details from the CFL?s new CBA (still yet to be ratified by players)
? Pending free agent players will be able to talk with any teams for 9 days in advance of opening of free agency.
? training camp padded practices ... was 10 in ?18, 5 this year, 3 in 2020. 1/2


Wow, almost no padded practices for training camp. That's going to be different. Must be a bit harder to evaluate the lines.
Logged
The Zipp
Global Moderator
*****
Posts: 12682


Who gives a flying Buck...


« Reply #47 on: May 16, 2019, 05:17:42 PM »

Doug brown has some thoughts on only 3 padded practices in TC:

Seriously, though.  What do the linemen do?  Work on hypothetical scenarios with one another?

I feel like a dinosaur.  Dave Ritchie would break that rule on day 3 of camp.
Logged
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 28412



« Reply #48 on: May 16, 2019, 08:23:40 PM »

Global players must make exactly the minimum, no other concessions...  wonder if Maher qualifies as Global now if he likes?  That'd be a score, getting him on the roster for free...
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #49 on: May 16, 2019, 08:33:30 PM »

Global players must make exactly the minimum, no other concessions...  wonder if Maher qualifies as Global now if he likes?  That'd be a score, getting him on the roster for free...


Adding global players means they'll have to have global players on the PR to cover for depth. In the event a global player actually wins a starting role players will be needed to move up and to the AR etc.

We'll see what the talent is like for these players. IMO it's a horrible decision to create roster spots for players that didn't actually win a roster spot.

Bombers have 4 global players. 1 has be on the AR. At least 1 will need to be on the PR?
« Last Edit: May 16, 2019, 08:35:19 PM by Blue In BC » Logged

No more excuses.
blue_or_die
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6992



« Reply #50 on: May 17, 2019, 11:49:17 AM »

Global players must make exactly the minimum, no other concessions...  wonder if Maher qualifies as Global now if he likes?  That'd be a score, getting him on the roster for free...


 Huh
Logged
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21370



« Reply #51 on: May 17, 2019, 12:57:26 PM »

Adding global players means they'll have to have global players on the PR to cover for depth. In the event a global player actually wins a starting role players will be needed to move up and to the AR etc.

We'll see what the talent is like for these players. IMO it's a horrible decision to create roster spots for players that didn't actually win a roster spot.

Bombers have 4 global players. 1 has be on the AR. At least 1 will need to be on the PR?

We've been doing that with Canadians since the ratio existed.
Logged
TBURGESS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7473



« Reply #52 on: May 17, 2019, 01:05:32 PM »

https://3downnation.com/2019/05/17/cflpa-sends-detailed-memo-to-players-on-new-cba-terms/




Good article that outlines exactly what's in the new CBA.

Of special interest (at least to me):

The ability for veteran American players with three years of service with their existing club or four years of CFL experience to substitute for injured national players.

Players can sign with another club if they are released after the trade deadline.

BTW: If anyone knows how to fix the image size, let me know and I'll be happy to change it.

« Last Edit: May 17, 2019, 02:05:52 PM by TBURGESS » Logged

Being right never gets old.
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #53 on: May 17, 2019, 01:31:20 PM »

Maximum fines now maximum is 1/2 of game check. Not sure if that impacts suspension length or same rule applies. IE, is a suspension considered a fine?

Global player salary on PR exempt from SMS? So what? Not much of a hit.

NFL option comes into play each year beginning in 2020.

2 a day workouts reduced from 10 to 5 in 2019 and to 3 in 2020??!!!!!!!!

I wonder how they will apply the 3 - 4 year American substitution rule for injured national players. IE: If Neufeld is injured can Foketi replace him in the next game for example?

Many of these rules are to reduce injury risk in theory. OTOH reduced practices and reduced practices with pads may have the exact opposite impact.

I guess we'll see.
Logged

No more excuses.
Colton
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 13647


« Reply #54 on: May 17, 2019, 01:54:03 PM »

BTW: If anyone knows how to fix the image size, let me know and I'll be happy to change it.

If you edit your comment and change the initial [img] tags to [img width=700] or whatever size in pixels you want, it'll resize it
Logged
TBURGESS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7473



« Reply #55 on: May 17, 2019, 02:06:19 PM »

If you edit your comment and change the initial [img] tags to [img width=700] or whatever size in pixels you want, it'll resize it
Worked like a charm! Thanks.
Logged

Being right never gets old.
TBURGESS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7473



« Reply #56 on: May 17, 2019, 02:11:05 PM »

I wonder how they will apply the 3 - 4 year American substitution rule for injured national players. IE: If Neufeld is injured can Foketi replace him in the next game for example?
I'm guessing it just in game. In your example, Foketi can replace him for the rest of the game, but we'd have to reset the ratio going forward.

My question would be... Could we 'start' an 'injured' NI say at safety and then replace him after the first play with a AVR to get around the ratio rules?
Logged

Being right never gets old.
blue_or_die
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6992



« Reply #57 on: May 17, 2019, 02:29:21 PM »

I'm guessing it just in game. In your example, Foketi can replace him for the rest of the game, but we'd have to reset the ratio going forward.

My question would be... Could we 'start' an 'injured' NI say at safety and then replace him after the first play with a AVR to get around the ratio rules?

Slow down there, Chris Jones!
Logged
blue_or_die
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6992



« Reply #58 on: May 17, 2019, 02:31:04 PM »

The Foketi example is interesting. Does the American vet need to have been a starter for all/a specific portion of their tenure? I.e., even though Foketi has been a backup his whole career with us, does he still count as a vet in the eyes of this clause?
Logged
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #59 on: May 17, 2019, 02:34:02 PM »

I'm guessing it just in game. In your example, Foketi can replace him for the rest of the game, but we'd have to reset the ratio going forward.

My question would be... Could we 'start' an 'injured' NI say at safety and then replace him after the first play with a AVR to get around the ratio rules?

With only a limited number of DI's ( I'm assuming 5 now with adding the global player ), there aren't enough to cover every position.

We never have an import OL as a DI. He might be on the DR but not a DI.
Recently we've struggled having an import receiver or RB as a DI although we might have a receiver / returner this year?

Safety seems the most possible in game injury where we'd probably have a DI choice.

The rule seems a bit slippery. Teams could change their DI's game to game to prepare for a nicked Canadian not being able to complete or perform during the game.
Logged

No more excuses.
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #60 on: May 17, 2019, 02:35:53 PM »

The Foketi example is interesting. Does the American vet need to have been a starter for all/a specific portion of their tenure? I.e., even though Foketi has been a backup his whole career with us, does he still count as a vet in the eyes of this clause?

Well he's been on the DR for the last 2 seasons although he didn't play in 2017. He did play 3 games in 2016 so I think the answer is yes in this example. I'm not certain whether he ended up on the IR or DR for the balance of 2016 but he was under contract it would seem.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2019, 02:41:06 PM by Blue In BC » Logged

No more excuses.
TBURGESS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7473



« Reply #61 on: May 17, 2019, 03:52:42 PM »

With only a limited number of DI's ( I'm assuming 5 now with adding the global player ), there aren't enough to cover every position.

We never have an import OL as a DI. He might be on the DR but not a DI.
Recently we've struggled having an import receiver or RB as a DI although we might have a receiver / returner this year?

Safety seems the most possible in game injury where we'd probably have a DI choice.

The rule seems a bit slippery. Teams could change their DI's game to game to prepare for a nicked Canadian not being able to complete or perform during the game.
No mention of any 'extra' DI's even with the global player so I doubt it's changed.

The AVR is already a DI. The only difference is he can backup an NI too if he has 4 years in the league.
Logged

Being right never gets old.
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #62 on: May 17, 2019, 04:17:04 PM »

No mention of any 'extra' DI's even with the global player so I doubt it's changed.

The AVR is already a DI. The only difference is he can backup an NI too if he has 4 years in the league.

Just read the Training camp report string. It says the game day roster is increasing to 45 from 44 with a separate designation for the global player.

Will have to watch how this gets interpreted. I had already asked what happens if a global player actually starts does that mean we can only replace him on the AR 45 with another global player )?

It would seem that is the case. It would seem that makes him some sort of version of a DI.

If it's actually a new designation ( lets say not an " I " or " NI" but a " G ", does that allow him to freely replace any import or non import?

Interesting to hear Hansen say he wants to earn his roster spot, not just get it because there is a new global roster spot. Admirable.

That's the fly in the ointment. It will difficult to determine whether a global player earned a spot more than an American he might have been in competition with in TC.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2019, 01:07:52 PM by Blue In BC » Logged

No more excuses.
ModAdmin
Administrator
*****
Posts: 10140


Reaves,Cameron,Riley,Walby - Blue Bomber Legends


« Reply #63 on: May 17, 2019, 04:20:39 PM »

A few more details and background about the new deal are here!
Logged

"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one." - John Wooden
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #64 on: May 17, 2019, 04:25:39 PM »

A few more details and background about the new deal are here!

Notable info. 6 of 9 teams lost money. Global players get minimum salary and won't count against cap. So that's worth knowing considering the small SMS increase and the minimum going up next year.
Logged

No more excuses.
TBURGESS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7473



« Reply #65 on: May 17, 2019, 04:26:33 PM »

Lets see if I have this straight.

The CFL now has Imports, Non-Imports, Globals, QB's (NI's only count if they start), AVR's and DI's all with different rules that apply to them. SMH. This is way more complicated than it needs to or should be.

In the short term the Globals won't be starters. If they start, I guess they'd still be Globals and I doubt they'd be seen as NI's too. If injured, they would still be on the roster for the game so I doubt they would need to be backed up at all.

I don't see the Globals as an extra DI because they aren't imports. I don't see the 45th player as anything other than a Global.
Logged

Being right never gets old.
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #66 on: May 17, 2019, 04:38:28 PM »

Lets see if I have this straight.

The CFL now has Imports, Non-Imports, Globals, QB's (NI's only count if they start), AVR's and DI's all with different rules that apply to them. SMH. This is way more complicated than it needs to or should be.

In the short term the Globals won't be starters. If they start, I guess they'd still be Globals and I doubt they'd be seen as NI's too. If injured, they would still be on the roster for the game so I doubt they would need to be backed up at all.

I don't see the Globals as an extra DI because they aren't imports. I don't see the 45th player as anything other than a Global.

It's all very confusing and vague.

If a global player is injured and can't dress than a new global player has to be activated to maintain the AR 45.

At some point possibly even in 2019 we might see a global player starting during a game due to an in game injury.

Let's use Hansen as the example. The starting WIL gets injured and he fills in. To a certain degree that makes him a DI even if they don't call him that. He might be better than an import that might have been rostered as a DI to sub at WIL or MLB.

Taking that further. We expect the WIL to be an import. If Hansen fills in for more than an in game injury, in theory we'd be able to add another import that wouldn't be a DI. That's since the WIL would have been a starter and not a DI.

Yep. Confusing any way it's looked at. So to that end IMO that still makes him a DI regardless of what they call him from a designation point of view.
Logged

No more excuses.
TBURGESS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7473



« Reply #67 on: May 17, 2019, 05:39:07 PM »

It's all very confusing and vague.

If a global player is injured and can't dress than a new global player has to be activated to maintain the AR 45.

At some point possibly even in 2019 we might see a global player starting during a game due to an in game injury.

Let's use Hansen as the example. The starting WIL gets injured and he fills in. To a certain degree that makes him a DI even if they don't call him that. He might be better than an import that might have been rostered as a DI to sub at WIL or MLB.

Taking that further. We expect the WIL to be an import. If Hansen fills in for more than an in game injury, in theory we'd be able to add another import that wouldn't be a DI. That's since the WIL would have been a starter and not a DI.

Yep. Confusing any way it's looked at. So to that end IMO that still makes him a DI regardless of what they call him from a designation point of view.
A Global as defined isn't either an Import or a Non-Import. They are a Global. I don't know if they can take a Non-Import's spot or not, but my best guess is that they can.

A DI can only replace an import. Sometimes that means a couple of changes, but an import comes off of the field UNLESS the team is starting 8 or more NI's. In that case the DI can take an NI's spot as long as there are still 7 NI starters.

If we have a Global who is better than an import then they should start and we most likely get a big SMS advantage because they are being paid league minimum and outside the SMS rules. (This will surely change if any Global is good enough to be a starter.) Would they count like an import (DI) or non-import (Extra NI) or simply as the designated Global (DG)? 
Logged

Being right never gets old.
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 28412



« Reply #68 on: May 17, 2019, 05:46:31 PM »

So, do Global's dress?  Are they eligible to start?  
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #69 on: May 17, 2019, 05:52:41 PM »

A Global as defined isn't either an Import or a Non-Import. They are a Global. I don't know if they can take a Non-Import's spot or not, but my best guess is that they can.

A DI can only replace an import. Sometimes that means a couple of changes, but an import comes off of the field UNLESS the team is starting 8 or more NI's. In that case the DI can take an NI's spot as long as there are still 7 NI starters.

If we have a Global who is better than an import then they should start and we most likely get a big SMS advantage because they are being paid league minimum and outside the SMS rules. (This will surely change if any Global is good enough to be a starter.) Would they count like an import (DI) or non-import (Extra NI) or simply as the designated Global (DG)? 


The position a global player plays defines who he can realistically replace. Using Hansen as the example, he's only going to replace either the WIL or MLB for an in game injury. That pretty much sounds like a DI to me.

The question using Hansen as the example is whether we have an import LB as a DI as well. If not whether the global is next man up or whether a Canadian takes over.
Logged

No more excuses.
TecnoGenius
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3055


« Reply #70 on: May 18, 2019, 05:26:24 AM »

The ability for veteran American players with three years of service with their existing club or four years of CFL experience to substitute for injured national players.

This is pure insanity.  Remember SSK's '17 injury-gate shenanigans?  What on earth is to stop SSK from dressing Hurl and Solly for MLB, and starting Hurl; then on play #1 Hurl gets "injured" (stubbed toe or something), and Solly steps in and plays MLB the rest of the game?  SSK then is starting 7 NATs but effectively playing only 6 all game.

That's an unacceptable advantage.  And couldn't they repeat that for as many DIs as they have dressed?  Heck, they could possibly end up with just 1-3 NATs on field by the end of the game!

Thank the Lord that Chris Jones is not here anymore, because he'd be all over that mess of a rule.

I wonder how they will apply the 3 - 4 year American substitution rule for injured national players. IE: If Neufeld is injured can Foketi replace him in the next game for example?

In addition to the shady possibilities I posit above, I have exactly the same question regarding inter-game substitutions: Does the rule cross the weeks?  Can Hurl stub his toe in game #1 and then Solly starts the rest of the season?  Or do they have to fake a stubbed toe on play #1 of every game?

I'm guessing it just in game. In your example, Foketi can replace him for the rest of the game, but we'd have to reset the ratio going forward.

My question would be... Could we 'start' an 'injured' NI say at safety and then replace him after the first play with a AVR to get around the ratio rules?

I severely hope your first comment is right.  At least if you make them re-fake the stubbed toe in every game people will wise up to what's going on.  Fans will not stand for that.  It they can just stub it once per season and affect the ratio of ever other game, many fans won't get the con.

As for your second point: Bingo...

The Foketi example is interesting. Does the American vet need to have been a starter for all/a specific portion of their tenure?

No, I see nothing in the wording that the 3/4 years is as starter.  Foketi is a great example.  However, I don't see that aspect as a problem.  It could encourage teams to finally start their multi-year "project" / perennial backup IMPs.

The rule seems a bit slippery. Teams could change their DI's game to game to prepare for a nicked Canadian not being able to complete or perform during the game.

Bingo.  You know what I'd do right now if I wanted to win the GC in '19 and I had no morals?  I'd cut all my expensive NAT who aren't better than IMPs.  I'd hire the dirt cheapest barely-hanging-on NATs (like rookies, undrafteds, oldsters, and low-level STers) to replace them.  ELCs for everyone.  Then I'd take the savings and hire the best 4+ year IMPs I could find for key positions.  The cheap NATs would start at their positions and all get "injured" on play #1 (of each side).  Then the monster IMPs come on and it's lights out for the opponent.

Again, a team is only limited by the number of DIs, right?

Let's see if we get some sudden burst of dropped "good" NATs, and sudden hiring of ELC NATs.  That will be the tell.

Lets see if I have this straight.

The CFL now has Imports, Non-Imports, Globals, QB's (NI's only count if they start), AVR's and DI's all with different rules that apply to them. SMH. This is way more complicated than it needs to or should be.

This.  It was already so hard to follow that I've never bothered to learn it all before today.  Definitely won't bother learning it after today.  And I consider myself a "fan".

For even more fun... we've called Americans "imports" or "non-nats" for a long time now.  They always try to workaround calling them "American", for whatever dumb reason, even though 99% of them are from the US.  But now we are canonizing the term American in "AVR" and giving them special status?  What if a player comes to the CFL via the USA but is not a US citizen?  (Such a thing exist?)  Can they count towards the AVR?  Are we making these AVR players prove their citizenship status?  All seems a bit silly, and complicated.

I get the idea behind the AVR, I even like parts of it, but for a league that has for years bent over backwards not to put the "American" label on them, this seems like a step in the wrong direction.

But the AVR-for-NAT-substitution rules are completely insane and, if abused, could spell the end of the CFL as we know it.  In the worst case, only the NATs who truly are on par with IMPs (like AH33, Sinopoli, etc.) will be left on the (non-ST) field.

And, let me get this straight, if it's in the new CBA, then we're all stuck with it for 3 years even if it's clear it's being abused the ruining the league?

OK, so that's the worst case scenario... for fun, with Chris Jones gone, who will be the first GM/coach to abuse this (if any)?  Won't be the Canadian Mafia, that's for sure.
Logged
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6496



« Reply #71 on: May 18, 2019, 09:14:22 AM »

I wonder if this isn't a case of "reap what you sow" for the P.A.  First they pushed hard the last few years for short term contracts and freedom of movement within the league for their members, which obviously diminishes the identity and popularity of the teams through constant personnel turnover.  Now they're trying to protect their membership from job loss from the very rules they helped create by providing them with the permanency and stability they've denied CFL teams from establishing.  The entire idea goes against the logic of the over-all objective, which is to make the league more popular so everyone involved can make more money.

Now they're attempting to "eat their cake" by instituting ridiculous rules to manage the problematic situation they've created. This is "union think" all the way, first create a problem that cuts away at the objective, then implement a minutiae of rules designating player categorization and when and how they can be used that becomes so confusing nobody actually understands them. 






 insisting
« Last Edit: May 18, 2019, 09:18:32 AM by Throw Long Bannatyne » Logged
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 28412



« Reply #72 on: May 18, 2019, 03:46:28 PM »

I think the steelworkers might have had a hand in the AVR... many unions have what they call a "senior man rule" that ensures older union members will have jobs even thought there are younger, cheaper workers available. 

My Dad got dropped by a company he had worked for for 40+ years near the end of his career because the union negotiated away the senior man rule for other benefits, and they replaced him with a younger guy... he got snapped up by another company that was owned by two guys that had apprenticed under him, they put him alongside their apprentices, so he could train them and run jobs until he retired. 

Interesting to see a senior man clause in a pro league, not sure if it exists in any other sport. 
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
The Zipp
Global Moderator
*****
Posts: 12682


Who gives a flying Buck...


« Reply #73 on: May 18, 2019, 10:39:31 PM »

Hot off the press - they are back at the table - vote delayed. 


https://3downnation.com/2019/05/18/cfl-and-cflpa-re-open-negotiations-on-new-collective-agreement/

Rumors on the internet is that veteran American player is causing some issues

From Farhan:

Being told the issue is connected to the interpretation of the new American vet ratio of 3 🇺🇸 starters having to have played 3 seasons with same team or 4 in #CFL. @CFLonTSN
« Last Edit: May 18, 2019, 10:42:47 PM by The Zipp » Logged
Pigskin
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4587


« Reply #74 on: May 18, 2019, 10:47:05 PM »

I guess someone in Sask. jumped the gun. I have been on strike twice in my life and it's never done until the votes are in and counted.
Logged
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #75 on: May 18, 2019, 10:53:49 PM »

Even some of the players don't understand what's going on with these changes any more than we do. It will get resolved.
Logged

No more excuses.
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6496



« Reply #76 on: May 18, 2019, 11:47:42 PM »

Even some of the players don't understand what's going on with these changes any more than we do. It will get resolved.

Most of the changes made appear to be geared to appeasing American players, if they start voting as a block they could alter the game significantly.
Logged
66 Chevelle
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3964


« Reply #77 on: May 19, 2019, 02:17:24 AM »

during the current CBA negotiations, I took the time to read a lot of documents related to the league and the CBA itself... I think there are some things that could be done to appease players and teams both but probably wouldn't be favored by the CFLPA itself... for instance...

I wouldn't require players to pay into the CFL's pension plan, unless a player decided to, until year 3 of their playing career... seeing how these required player contributions adversely impact the lowest paid players the most, I'm sure that they would rather have the option to either keep this money, or invest it themselves elsewhere...

currently, the average CFL career is less than 3 years, where else would anyone work that they would expect a pension for less than 3 years of applicable work? currently players are required to pay $4100 annually into this pension fund, teams are required to match... $4100 represents 7.5% of a minimum wage player's salary, plus, given the number of new import players each year this could represent a significant savings for teams as well... some may see it as unreasonable, but even the place where I worked you weren't 'vested' and entitled to retirement benefits until you worked there for 5 years...

also, another not button topic, extended health care benefits... why? currently Canadian players would be covered under the current Canadian healthcare plan already at no additional cost, so, you're basically looking at import players again, right? again, average CFL career is less than 3 years... most of these players already have at least 8 years of game playing under their belt once they get to the CFL, why should the CFL be required to shoulder the cost?  not to mention, even though it is widely known and accepted that football is dangerous, we have to continue to create more and harsher penalties to keep players from playing in a dangerous, reckless, injury related manner... no different than for people that smoke, they know what they are signing up for...

maybe the CFLPA should try and leverage those union iron workers that came in on their behalf to help with this year's CBA and see if they can't get players eligible to participate in their health plans? Those from the states know that they are ultimately responsible for finding and paying for health insurance regardless, unless you're on welfare but that's another story... if you choose a career that makes obtaining affordable healthcare a problem for yourself, maybe you should review your life choices... I have a friend that races sprint cars for a living, over 130 mph on a 1/2 mile dirt oval, and he has no problem at all finding health insurance... sometimes, life is just a matter of choice, but, choosing not to be insured because you don't want to pay for it, well, seems like you need to make better life choices...

this last one is more of a question... I noticed that every player has to pay dues with each game check to the CFLPA... an amount that equates to over $660,000 league wide annually out of player salaries... other than in years when ironing out a new CBA, what else does the CFLPA do regularly?  I realize they have a limited amount of staff and a need to retain accounting and legal services... I'm not saying players shouldn't pay dues to their union, just wondering if anyone knew what other duties the CFLPA are responsible for in non CBA renewing years as I really couldn't find and resource outlining their on going duties...

I know that to some what I've said here may sound 'harsh', and maybe it is, but I'm still on the fence on this whole concussion thing and who is actually responsible... like I said, at least at this point in any football players career, regardless of level, they know that football is a contact sport, that in playing football there is a high probability that you will sustain 1 or more concussions if you play, that their are medical opinion that experiencing a concussion(s) can have adverse and on going health issues/risks... even knowing this, players still lead with their helmet when tackling... they generally don't want to adhere to concussion protocols, such as sitting out games... they sustain a concussion, or multiple concussions and will still continue to play, knowing that repeated concussions is known to have a huge impact in regards to long term health issues...

there is equipment out there, helmets, that can reduce the chance of concussions... my friend had a son who played quarterback in high school and college and bought his son one of these helmets to help protect his son and reduce his chance of being concussed... notice I said that he bought his son the helmet, not the schools... he considered it no different than any career that required specialized equipment in order to perform and reduce the chance of work related injury...

also, why wasn't this an issue 'back in the day' with players? for gosh sakes, they played with a leather hat and no face guard for years and I don't recall masses of them committing suicide, or killing their families and such? maybe part of these brain injuries are a product of some of the 'performance enhancing drugs' that many of these guys take...

needless to say, I'm not sure accepting responsibility by the league is the prudent path to take, at least not yet... at what point does the responsibility fall to those that knowingly participate? I mean, if I'm an iron worker, working 100 stories in the air, and choose not to use a safety lead because it slows me down, and I fall and die, is that my company's fault?

if football is the devil, what does that make sports like boxing and MMA? surely they are way more dangerous than football...
Logged

just because you can doesn't mean you should...
66 Chevelle
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3964


« Reply #78 on: May 19, 2019, 02:29:55 AM »

while I'm on a roll, lol...

didn't I hear somewhere that the new CBA would also reduce the number of padded practices?  I didn't see anything mentioned about that in this thread? did I dream that?

if they are going to reduce the number of padded practices to the level I recall they were, how is a team supposed to be able to actually develop a young player?

also, when the last CBA was ratified, each player received a 'ratification bonus'... was that unique to the 2014 CBA being ratified or will players once again receive ratification bonus this time? why would they receive such a bonus? who pays these bonuses, the team? if I recall correctly, rookies were to receive $1500 each and veterans $7500 each... that's a lot of coin!
Logged

just because you can doesn't mean you should...
The Zipp
Global Moderator
*****
Posts: 12682


Who gives a flying Buck...


« Reply #79 on: May 19, 2019, 02:30:03 AM »

Lots of "info" on twitter but how much of it is accurate is really hard to figure out.  Hopefully cooler heads prevail.
Logged
ModAdmin
Administrator
*****
Posts: 10140


Reaves,Cameron,Riley,Walby - Blue Bomber Legends


« Reply #80 on: May 19, 2019, 04:24:07 AM »

Ratification is reportedly back on track.  Let training camps begin.  Cool

https://www.tsn.ca/cfl/video/lalji-on-unexpected-cfl-cba-back-and-forth-we-will-have-labour-peace%7E1686814
« Last Edit: May 19, 2019, 04:38:15 AM by ModAdmin » Logged

"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one." - John Wooden
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6496



« Reply #81 on: May 19, 2019, 05:26:00 AM »

while I'm on a roll, lol...

didn't I hear somewhere that the new CBA would also reduce the number of padded practices?  I didn't see anything mentioned about that in this thread? did I dream that?

if they are going to reduce the number of padded practices to the level I recall they were, how is a team supposed to be able to actually develop a young player?

also, when the last CBA was ratified, each player received a 'ratification bonus'... was that unique to the 2014 CBA being ratified or will players once again receive ratification bonus this time? why would they receive such a bonus? who pays these bonuses, the team? if I recall correctly, rookies were to receive $1500 each and veterans $7500 each... that's a lot of coin!

The link below provides the details of the agreement, #10 covers reduced padded practices but the wording suggests this may just be for T.C..

https://3downnation.com/2019/05/17/cflpa-sends-detailed-memo-to-players-on-new-cba-terms/
Logged
TecnoGenius
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3055


« Reply #82 on: May 19, 2019, 07:40:43 AM »

From Farhan:

Being told the issue is connected to the interpretation of the new American vet ratio of 3 🇺🇸 starters having to have played 3 seasons with same team or 4 in #CFL. @CFLonTSN

I hope the Canadians in the CFLPA are making a stink about that rule's 2nd clause regarding substitution!  They could be signing themselves out of jobs.  I hope the final text is very clear and not very lenient regarding these substitutions!  I hope it contains verbiage to protect against abuse.

We've already seen a handful of slightly surprising middle-tier NAT talent released since word about that rule hit the streets... exactly as I predicted would happen if teams were gearing up to "stub some NAT toes".
Logged
66 Chevelle
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3964


« Reply #83 on: May 19, 2019, 07:58:47 AM »

just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water...

https://3downnation.com/2019/05/19/the-cfl-reneged-on-elements-of-the-new-cba-and-almost-caused-a-strike/

however, things have been rectified...
« Last Edit: May 19, 2019, 08:20:14 AM by 66 Chevelle » Logged

just because you can doesn't mean you should...
KINGCHARLES
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3636



« Reply #84 on: May 19, 2019, 01:10:09 PM »

Crazy to point out that the Bombers have 7 maybe 8 guys that qualify as AVR.... Adams, Bighill, Jefferson, Medlock, Nichols, Hardrick, S.Bryant. (Foketi might count as an 8th). That rule should be altered in 2020 or next contract to make it so that you have to play 3 years with the same team. That way on other teams like (BC, EDM would have key players that wouldnt count towards the AVR like Reilly and Harris).
I like this idea but it needs tweeking.

For the sake of the next contract i wouldnt be surprised if they can maybe instill a QB Max. We will have to wait and see how BC, Calgary and EDM do with those minimum salary increases in 2020. Those 3 teams may need to work some OT on scouting and planning on developing young players.

The health coverage is good for players playing on BC, CGY, and EDM as due to those min salary increases in 2020 we will see tons of turnover of higher priced players.

Am I, Are We reading the Canadian QB spot wrong? I know it says if they start it counts towards the starter ratio but what if they are just on the AR does it count towards the 21 Canadians.

I think Global Players should be allowed to step in for a N or NI and have it not affect in game ratios.

I am an amateur level tackle coach and even i know there is plenty of things that can be done without full contact practices.
We get taught that their is 5 levels of contact...(Pros work on this too)
 0= Air, 1=Bags, 2= Control, 3= Thud, 4=Live (Full contact game speed).
 You can do levels 0-2 and maybe 3 even without Padded practices.
(I believe the Seattle Seahawks are known for having non padded practice 1 or 2 times a week)
Practicing the timing of plays, running routes, blocking, one on one pass coverage without tackling are lots of examples of things that can be done without padded practices.
Tackling can be done on bags or Thud level. Thud level is were a player can breakdown and use the proper form/technique of tackling a player without taking the player to the ground.
Logged

BEASTS OF THE EAST

I DON'T BRAKE FOR RIDER FANS
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23133


« Reply #85 on: May 19, 2019, 01:13:20 PM »

Crazy to point out that the Bombers have 7 maybe 8 guys that qualify as AVR.... Adams, Bighill, Jefferson, Medlock, Nichols, Hardrick, S.Bryant. (Foketi might count as an 8th). That rule should be altered in 2020 or next contract to make it so that you have to play 3 years with the same team. That way on other teams like (BC, EDM would have key players that wouldnt count towards the AVR like Reilly and Harris).
I like this idea but it needs tweeking.

For the sake of the next contract i wouldnt be surprised if they can maybe instill a QB Max. We will have to wait and see how BC, Calgary and EDM do with those minimum salary increases in 2020. Those 3 teams may need to work some OT on scouting and planning on developing young players.

The health coverage is good for players playing on BC, CGY, and EDM as due to those min salary increases in 2020 we will see tons of turnover of higher priced players.

Am I, Are We reading the Canadian QB spot wrong? I know it says if they start it counts towards the starter ratio but what if they are just on the AR does it count towards the 21 Canadians.

I think Global Players should be allowed to step in for a N or NI and have it not affect in game ratios.

I am an amateur level tackle coach and even i know there is plenty of things that can be done without full contact practices.
We get taught that their is 5 levels of contact...(Pros work on this too)
 0= Air, 1=Bags, 2= Control, 3= Thud, 4=Live (Full contact game speed).
 You can do levels 0-2 and maybe 3 even without Padded practices.
(I believe the Seattle Seahawks are known for having non padded practice 1 or 2 times a week)
Practicing the timing of plays, running routes, blocking, one on one pass coverage without tackling are lots of examples of things that can be done without padded practices.
Tackling can be done on bags or Thud level. Thud level is were a player can breakdown and use the proper form/technique of tackling a player without taking the player to the ground.


My understanding is that a Canadian QB would add to the 21 total. That has always been the case IMO. In theory a team could have 3 Canadian QB's since QB's were always a separate classification.

The difference now is that a Canadian QB starting will be considered as 1 of the 7 starters.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2019, 03:32:09 PM by Blue In BC » Logged

No more excuses.
TBURGESS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7473



« Reply #86 on: May 19, 2019, 01:30:04 PM »

My understanding is that a Canadian QB would add a to the 21 total. That has always been the case IMO. In theory a team could have 3 Canadian QB's since QB's were always a separate classification.

The difference now is that a Canadian QB starting will be considered as 1 of the 7 starters.
That's my understanding as well.

Starters don't really matter in the AVR situation unless they can take a NI's spot during the game and another import can take their spot.
Logged

Being right never gets old.
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6496



« Reply #87 on: May 19, 2019, 02:11:56 PM »

I hope the Canadians in the CFLPA are making a stink about that rule's 2nd clause regarding substitution!  They could be signing themselves out of jobs.  I hope the final text is very clear and not very lenient regarding these substitutions!  I hope it contains verbiage to protect against abuse.

We've already seen a handful of slightly surprising middle-tier NAT talent released since word about that rule hit the streets... exactly as I predicted would happen if teams were gearing up to "stub some NAT toes".

A coach that used this tactic without merit could find himself refereeing a divided locker room.
Logged
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 28412



« Reply #88 on: May 19, 2019, 02:41:29 PM »

while I'm on a roll, lol...

didn't I hear somewhere that the new CBA would also reduce the number of padded practices?  I didn't see anything mentioned about that in this thread? did I dream that?

if they are going to reduce the number of padded practices to the level I recall they were, how is a team supposed to be able to actually develop a young player?

also, when the last CBA was ratified, each player received a 'ratification bonus'... was that unique to the 2014 CBA being ratified or will players once again receive ratification bonus this time? why would they receive such a bonus? who pays these bonuses, the team? if I recall correctly, rookies were to receive $1500 each and veterans $7500 each... that's a lot of coin!

Reduced 2 a day padded preseason practices....
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
Stats Junkie
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1403


Unofficial Blue Bombers Historian


« Reply #89 on: May 19, 2019, 04:59:57 PM »

also, another not button topic, extended health care benefits... why? currently Canadian players would be covered under the current Canadian healthcare plan already at no additional cost, so, you're basically looking at import players again, right? again, average CFL career is less than 3 years... most of these players already have at least 8 years of game playing under their belt once they get to the CFL, why should the CFL be required to shoulder the cost?  not to mention, even though it is widely known and accepted that football is dangerous, we have to continue to create more and harsher penalties to keep players from playing in a dangerous, reckless, injury related manner... no different than for people that smoke, they know what they are signing up for...
Basic health care is provided at no cost in all provinces except BC - we pay a nominal monthly fee here.

Extended health care is a taxable benefit that many employers provide to employees - some employers provide better coverage than others.
Logged

@Stats_Junkie
TecnoGenius
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3055


« Reply #90 on: May 20, 2019, 02:13:47 AM »

I think Global Players should be allowed to step in for a N or NI and have it not affect in game ratios.

Now that's a good idea.  Get rid of the idea of IMPs substuting for NATs and make it so GLOBs can sub for NATs.  They have to do something or GLOBs will never see the field.  Now I don't really care either way, but it seems Ambrosie wants them to play.

A coach that used this tactic without merit could find himself refereeing a divided locker room.

Would it be divided if all the players knew they were a shoe-in for GC rings?  Would they be divided if they won every season game?  Besides, if you fired all your middle-road NATs, and hired just ELC NATs to "take a dive" then who's going to complain?  Your top-star NATs would still play.

I sure hope you are right.
Logged
ModAdmin
Administrator
*****
Posts: 10140


Reaves,Cameron,Riley,Walby - Blue Bomber Legends


« Reply #91 on: May 22, 2019, 04:20:47 PM »

Bob Irving
‏ @BobIrvingCJOB
2h2 hours ago

Labor peace in the CFL formalized as Players and The league ratify new 3-year CBA. Whoopee Ding😀😀😀
Logged

"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one." - John Wooden
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6496



« Reply #92 on: May 22, 2019, 05:16:31 PM »

Bob Irving
‏ @BobIrvingCJOB
2h2 hours ago

Labor peace in the CFL formalized as Players and The league ratify new 3-year CBA. Whoopee Ding😀😀😀


I wonder if they will publish this agreement, almost impossible to give it a fair assessment and understand the context of the rule changes without reading the complete document.
Logged
TecnoGenius
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3055


« Reply #93 on: May 22, 2019, 06:49:42 PM »

I wonder if they will publish this agreement, almost impossible to give it a fair assessment and understand the context of the rule changes without reading the complete document.

Published or not, anything that is a "rule" (onfield or off) that teams need to follow will have to be published in full.  That's practically everything, right?

I really want to see the IMP vet substitution wording...

As soon as someone gets their hands on it, post it here!
Logged
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6496



« Reply #94 on: May 24, 2019, 07:01:23 PM »

CFLPA allowed rookie players to vote to help get new CBA ratified:

https://3downnation.com/2019/05/23/cflpa-allowed-rookie-players-to-vote-to-help-get-new-cba-ratified/

Pretty disturbing if true, many players who have never played a single game in the CFL were allowed to vote on the CBA.  This could largely skew the ratio of the vote in favour of Import/rookie players, many who will be cut before actually playing their first regular season game.  It also invites the likely possibility of uninformed rookies (who probably lack knowledge) voting exactly how their player rep. tells them to. 

« Last Edit: May 24, 2019, 07:04:49 PM by Throw Long Bannatyne » Logged
Fire101
Guest
« Reply #95 on: May 24, 2019, 07:26:49 PM »

That's disturbing. You shouldn't be allowed to vote until you start paying union dues.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but even on a National stage you can only vote if you are a Canadian citizen. Work permit, resident status, student etc. doesn't cut it.
Logged
Blue In Edmonton
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1895



« Reply #96 on: May 24, 2019, 08:04:23 PM »

If you are under contract (which the rookies are), and you are being compensated for providing service (such as having your travel and subsistence costs paid by the employer during training camp), then you are a member of the bargaining unit and eligible to vote.

When I was a brand-new member of the organization that I now work for, I was taken to a bargaining ratification meeting. I voted and I didn't have much of a clue what I was voting on. But I was a member, and I was entitled to my vote, just like everyone else was.
Logged

Posting Live From Home

If we score more points than them, we will probably win.
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 7 [All]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!