Argo QB, Chad Kelly sited in harassment/wrongful dismissal charges

[TecnoGenius]

Whatever is decided, however, should be codified as a rule and consistently applied for all off-field suspensions. The league should communicate publically what that is and why. It's not something that should be dealt with at the club level in private.

Great point.  In the last couple of seasons the penalties just get harsher and harsher and it always feels like they're pulling the "how many weeks" punishment out of Ambrosie's butt.  Hence the "unprecedented".

I would be nice if there was a basic groundwork laid for what players can expect as punishment for X infraction.

[TecnoGenius]

Anyone saying TOR should have Kelly's $300k SMS excused needs to tell me why the same wouldn't have applied to Durant in WPG?

If anything, the Durant situation was far less of a CFL fiasco then Kelly, so why should we "reward" Argos/Kelly with SMS relief for the worst behavior whilst WPG got royally shafted for no bad behavior whatsoever?

AND if Kelly DOES step on the field again, then certainly there can't be ANY SMS relief, or TOR is getting one big freebie!!  If that happens then I could:

1. Sign Zach for '25 for $600k signing bonus, $0 salary.
2. Arrange for Zach to be "naughty" to get a 3-6 month suspension.
3. CFL forgives the $600k SMS
4. Buy $600k of gravy players to make my team the best ever
5. I roll with Strev for week 1-4ish (probably .500)
6. Zach returns and him + the $600k of free SMS players steamroll everyone in the post-season

No, there can be no SMS relief in this case or you reward bad behavior, and if Kelly returns in week 10 and the CFL did give them SMS relief, I'll be livid.

Finally: if TOR gets the $300k SMS relief and Kelly gets to keep the $300k in his pocket, then you're rewarding absolutely everyone involved, including the worst offender!

[theaardvark]

The only reason for $SMS "forgiveness" is if the contract gets nullified.  If the Argos manage to get out of the deal for breach in some way, the "the contract never happened" and no $SMS hit.

If he plays for them, of course, no forgiveness.  They will have made their bed and have to sleep in it.

[Pete]

there has been a trend in recent years at the qb position to renegotiate contracts to aid the salary cap, ie players taking a cut in salary but being offset by bonus benefits.
the Kelly situation is a prime example of how trying to do this can backfire on you

[Lincoln Locomotive]

At the time I first posted this on Chad Kelly, I wasn't surprised by the allegations regarding his behaviour as I've never really liked his persona!  Now the chickens have finally come home to roost and the Argos will pay the price as they should because their response to this entire debacle was reprehensible at best. 

[TecnoGenius]

The only reason for $SMS "forgiveness" is if the contract gets nullified.  If the Argos manage to get out of the deal for breach in some way, the "the contract never happened" and no $SMS hit.

If he plays for them, of course, no forgiveness.  They will have made their bed and have to sleep in it.

But therein lies the rub: How does anyone know if he'll play in week 10?  The only way you can guarantee he won't is if he is cut with some guarantee he can't be re-signed by TOR.

The league would have to protect against a nullification, an SMS relief attempt, and a re-sign with new terms in week 10.

Keep in mind throughout all of this, no matter what happens, Kelly keeps that $300k in his pocket!!  If Kelly plays again, he'll be able to charge his (whatever) team $300k less because he already pocketed half his salary!  And if he doesn't play again until 2025, he makes $300k for sitting on his couch a full year... not a bad gig!

And again, why does the Kelly situation get SMS relief and not the Durant (or any other) situation?  Better question: has any team ever gotten any special-exemption SMS relief?  If no, why are we even talking about this?

[Jesse]

There should never be SMS forgiveness. That's the risk of giving out bonuses. You know there's a chance the player could be injured/suspended/play poorly.

[Blue In BC]

There should never be SMS forgiveness. That's the risk of giving out bonuses. You know there's a chance the player could be injured/suspended/play poorly.

Never can't cover all the possibilities. The advance money is to create an advantage to both sides. More money in the pocket for the player because of the tax advantage. Less total contract cost to the team.

Collaros got $300K advance money. Fill in any other highly paid player. If he's injured day 1 in TC and lst for the season, why should something like this penalize the team?

I can't believe there shouldn't be some exceptions beyond negating a contract.

The Kelly instance may not be one where this should apply. However since I don't know all the details of what happened of what the organization knew, I'm trying to be impartial. It's an enormous hit that hurts the team more than the player.

Kelly gets $300K to not play.

Note: I have no issue with a player injured getting his entire contract on the 6 game IR. The player needs that protection. I see a suspension for other issues than injury may fall outside that concept. That would include whether the team or league suspended a player and the reason involved.

[theaardvark]

But therein lies the rub: How does anyone know if he'll play in week 10?  The only way you can guarantee he won't is if he is cut with some guarantee he can't be re-signed by TOR.

The league would have to protect against a nullification, an SMS relief attempt, and a re-sign with new terms in week 10.

Keep in mind throughout all of this, no matter what happens, Kelly keeps that $300k in his pocket!!  If Kelly plays again, he'll be able to charge his (whatever) team $300k less because he already pocketed half his salary!  And if he doesn't play again until 2025, he makes $300k for sitting on his couch a full year... not a bad gig!

And again, why does the Kelly situation get SMS relief and not the Durant (or any other) situation?  Better question: has any team ever gotten any special-exemption SMS relief?  If no, why are we even talking about this?

OK, let me rephrase that,

"If the Argos INTEND for him to play this year, and leave his contract intact, then of course no relief".

You can't have relief and keep him.

If they terminate his contract for cause, they should be able to claw back his bonus, and should be given relief on what they claw back. 

Have to wonder, post the Durant retirement, if teams are now including a "Durant clause" that is "if a player does not take a snap for the team after signing, his bonuses are considered monies accepted under false pretenses and must be returned".

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Reasons why SMS should be forgiven after off-field incidents(in general, not just this case):

When substantial amounts of SMS become forfeit it is bad for the parity of the league and ultimately it is the fans who lose, not being able to see the most competitive product possible. How much would it suck as an Argo fan?

A bad off-field decision by a player can happen anytime. Not just with people who have had troubles before. To some degree, a team could be the most progressive, forward-thinking and pro-active club in North America and can still be a victim of circumstance for which they have no control.

Reasons why SMS should be forgiven after off-field incidents (in general, not just this case):

You want to discourage teams from signing guys who may be problems. You sign a guy with a checkered past, you take the risk.

The SMS system controls all costs with good reason. There should never really be a scenario where one team can legally spend $x more than the other teams.

A potential solution to bridge the gap:
When a player is found to have broken CFL policies and is subsequently suspended by the league for those actions, his club, within 3 days of the announcement of the suspension, may release the player and receive an SMS exemption for paid dollars to that player, pro-rated to the number of games already played that season. If a club does so, they may not resign that player for a period of 365 days or until the suspension is lifted, whichever is greater.  If the club elects to keep the player on their roster, the entire contract shall apply.

[Blue In BC]

OK, let me rephrase that,

"If the Argos INTEND for him to play this year, and leave his contract intact, then of course no relief".

You can't have relief and keep him.

If they terminate his contract for cause, they should be able to claw back his bonus, and should be given relief on what they claw back. 

Have to wonder, post the Durant retirement, if teams are now including a "Durant clause" that is "if a player does not take a snap for the team after signing, his bonuses are considered monies accepted under false pretenses and must be returned".

Too many variables. What if Kelly goes through the conditions in his contract and the Argos expect him to play the 2nd half of the season. Kelly could potentially decide to walk away from football.

Either way the organization takes a bigger hit than the player.

We've seen many players get injured in early TC and lost for the season ( achilles for example ). Some of those players had large signing bonus's involved. I don't see why the team should be penalized because money was paid early.

Whether it's $600K or $100K, it should be calculated in a pro rated basis.

[theaardvark]

Too many variables. What if Kelly goes through the conditions in his contract and the Argos expect him to play the 2nd half of the season. Kelly could potentially decide to walk away from football.

Either way the organization takes a bigger hit than the player.

We've seen many players get injured in early TC and lost for the season ( achilles for example ). Some of those players had large signing bonus's involved. I don't see why the team should be penalized because money was paid early.

Whether it's $600K or $100K, it should be calculated in a pro rated basis.

For the team to get any $SMS foregivness, it must terminate the contract.  SB&G's point of not resigning the player makes sense as well, for at least that contract year.

If they leave the contract open with the intent of him returning, of course there is no forgiveness.  The must cut ties completely.

Injuries are part of the game, and a gamble when you sign players to bonuses.  They are a quantifiable factor, and players histories will also factor in.  I don't think Masoli will ever get a signing bonus again.

Off field issues should be written into every contract, as well as into the CBA and league rules.  Whether it be criminal or civil or even immigration issues that prevent a player from taking the field, these are not "normal football issues" or quantifiable.  Injuries also have the players protected, getting insurance and treatment under their contracts.  Criminal/civil/immigration issues do not involve the club/league assisting the player, quite the opposite.

Injuries are part of football.  Bad behaviour is not.

[gobombersgo]

Kelly is at Argos practice this morning. He on the field without an uniform on.

Pinball is to speak after practice.

The drama continues....

[1chad]

Many of the commentators seem to be forgetting that the coach in question complained to the Argos after this happened and was told "you don't want to open this can of worms" or words to that effect.  That tells me that the Argos were made aware of Kelly's alleged behaviour and not only did nothing to Kelly, but fired the coach!

If the CFL also finds that the Argos were made aware, did nothing about the allegations, and then fired the complainant, the Argos should be penalized severely.  You cannot fire someone for making a complaint.

[blue_gold_84]

Kelly is at Argos practice this morning. He on the field without an uniform on.

Pinball is to speak after practice.

The drama continues....