Blue Bombers Forum
August 18, 2019, 09:00:09 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7  All
  Print  
Author Topic: CFL and Players Association Reach New Deal  (Read 3763 times)
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23137


« 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: 7480



« 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: 23137


« 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: 10145


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: 23137


« 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: 7480



« 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: 23137


« 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: 7480



« 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: 28418



« 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: 23137


« 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: 3063


« 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: 6502



« 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: 28418



« 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: 12692


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
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 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!