Blue Bombers Forum

The Extra Point => Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum => Topic started by: theaardvark on May 06, 2022, 01:56:55 PM



Title: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 06, 2022, 01:56:55 PM
Is anyone else having big bouts of dread seeing the tweets coming out about the state of the negotiations?  Is this just early round sabre rattling?  Or are both sides seriously overplaying their hands, and not realizing the exterior threats the league faces? 

Do the CFLPA realize that over 700 jobs depend on them coming to a reasonable agreement?

Does the CFL realize that 100+ years of history hinges on having a great 2022 season to fend off USFL/XFL threats?



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 06, 2022, 02:27:11 PM
I don't have access to tweets so I don't know what you've read and / or from either side.

Can you give some examples where the main issues look to be causing the concern?

Generally I'm not concerned and this may just be the saber rattling or not. Coming out of a missed 2020 season and an abbreviated 2022 season, it's not the time to mess around. I don't see either the USFL or XFL as any threat.

The CFL was already in a declining revenue string prior to Covid.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 06, 2022, 02:46:30 PM
The link below provides some insight into the CBA/CFL discussions...

https://3downnation.com/2022/05/05/cfl-wants-to-eradicate-canadian-ratio-in-cba-proposal-to-players-association/


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 06, 2022, 02:49:10 PM
Quote
In the CFL?s proposal to date, a number of key issues still concern your bargaining committee:
? A ten-year agreement with zero increases in the cap.
? A revenue sharing program which will not likely show any significant growth by the CFL?s own accord, until the TSN contract is renewed in five years
? Although earlier discussions around guaranteed contracts were held, the CFL has now removed the PA?s proposal to allow players to negotiate guaranteed contracts.
? The CFL demands our members go back to padded practices, even with a decrease of 35% of on-field injuries, yet refuses to support our proposal for coverage for those same on field injuries.
? Various proposals on the table aimed at what appears to be an effort to try to lock as many players as they can into contracts.
? Full elimination of the Canadian ratio and Veteran American Ratio. As well as a reduction of Canadians on the Roster. 
?  The league wants full discretion on practice time that varies during the week (increasing and decreasing hours). Which will create lack of certainty for members.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 06, 2022, 02:53:26 PM
It's the CFL. A deal will get done. The players can't afford not to play and the teams can't either. If I had to straight up guess, a few of the league's hardline positions seem to be in there to allow the players to feel they've got a "good" deal. No way the league thinks the players will sign a 10 year deal with no escalations. I doubt the league truly wants to reimplement padded practices, but threating to take it away and then giving it back might be a decent bargaining ploy. I am hopeful that the ratio gets dramatically reduced but we all know there's mostly disagreement on here with me about that. Either way, I'm glad to see it on the table even though I doubt that is entirely sincere either although perhaps they can get it further reduced. If they could ever get it so there are less than 50% of Canadians in the PA it would make it far easier in negotiations to slam through in a future CBA.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 06, 2022, 03:01:08 PM
Yikes Those are some big huddles to overcome.

SMS level and ratio are the biggest areas to deal with I'd think.

Total elimination of the ratio? Ratio comes up every CBA. IMO the size of the roster could be smaller if there were less Canadians and a few more DI's. That would allow the SMS to be spread over a smaller group. In a perfect world I'd like to see the roster increased by 4 ( Canadians ) but that's a problem financially. Increasing the number of Canadians ( by me ) is suggested only because of the current ratio. If the number of Americans is increased, then I'd suggest the opposite as I did above.

In year 1 of new agreement:

I'd like to see another 3 year deal with no increase to SMS.

I'd like to see 2 more DI's added and the global designation eliminated. Globals kept would just be classified as imports.

I'd like to see a reduction of 4 Canadians on the roster with the combined roster reduced to 44, all dressed.

In the next 2 years, I'd like to add one more DI and eliminate 1 more Canadian each year.

Number of starters to remain at 7 for the next 3 years but 4 more Americans and 4 less Canadians over this time frame.

Let the yelling begin.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 06, 2022, 03:02:59 PM
It's the CFL. A deal will get done. The players can't afford not to play and the teams can't either. If I had to straight up guess, a few of the league's hardline positions seem to be in there to allow the players to feel they've got a "good" deal. No way the league thinks the players will sign a 10 year deal with no escalations. I doubt the league truly wants to reimplement padded practices, but threating to take it away and then giving it back might be a decent bargaining ploy. I am hopeful that the ratio gets dramatically reduced but we all know there's mostly disagreement on here with me about that. Either way, I'm glad to see it on the table even though I doubt that is entirely sincere either although perhaps they can get it further reduced. If they could ever get it so there are less than 50% of Canadians in the PA it would make it far easier in negotiations to slam through in a future CBA.

That's one thing I'm pretty sure they do want back.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: the paw on May 06, 2022, 03:31:17 PM
The loss of the ratio will sacrifice the main competitive advantage that the CFL has, and the gradual diluting of the ratio any further that it already has been, will just make it a lingering death.  

Its a real short term view, based on some misguided belief that a faster, higher scoring game with gimmicky rules will hold fan interest more than national identity.  It's deluded thinking and not based on the evidence of many years.

Think, if you will, about what the extinguishing of the ratio would have meant to earlier eras.  Ask yourself the following questions:

1.  Statistically, James Murphy was a better and more productive receiver than Joe Poplawski.  I love James Murphy and the fact that he settled in Winnipeg and made a home here.  But does anyone truly believe that he enjoys a higher regard with the fans than Joe Pop?

2.  Without the ratio, I doubt anyone would have invested the time and effort to convert a defensive lineman from Div 2 Dickinson State into an offensive lineman.  Chris Walby went on to become one of the best OTs in the history of the CFL, but without the ratio he probably doesn't get to start his storied career.

3.  Does anyone really think Nic Demski would have been able to stick around to develop after his first 3 years in the league?  He is a top notch talent now, but without the ratio, he most likely goes the way of Charles Nelson or a thousand other receivers who were moved on from after a slow start.  

4.  Rick House put up 8000 yards as a CFL receiver.  He was buried on special teams until he developed.  No way he has that career without the ratio.

5.  Estimate the percentage of fan discussion dedicated to ratio management, projecting the 7 starters, the draft, which player may "go home" in free agency etc.  Probably at least half of the off-season discussion revolves around that.  Heck, with no ratio, is there even a reason to have a Canadian draft?  Probably not.  

6.  Do Kyle Walters and Mike O'Shea become football executives/coaches at the professional level without the ratio?  Probably not, as neither of them would likely have had a professional football career without it.  Without that entry into the league, both those guys are probably selling insurance or real estate.  

I could go on, but I'm either preaching to the choir or talking past people who don't accept the premise.  But I think it is an absolute disgrace that Wade Miller is leading a negotiating committee that takes this stance.  If he has convinced himself that fans want to relinquish the leagues national identity so we can get a couple more NFL cuts who can run a 4.4 40, then he has forgotten where he came from.  

If this CBA guts the ratio, that finishes me.  I kept my season tickets last year, even though I didn't attend a single game, because I wanted to support the team.  A game that relegates Canadian content to special team duty has no interest for me.  If I want to watch all Americans, I'll watch the best Americans.  Giving up the "game day event" isn't a huge sacrifice for me, I go to 9 games in person a year, but I watch about 60.  I can convert my ticket spend into a speciality channel that will give me as much NFL content as I can handle.  Maybe I'm a relic, but I think if the CFL believes that they can replace a fan like me with some Gen-Z kid who wants to bet the over-under on sacks from his phone, I think they are going to be disappointed.  


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: BLUEBOMBER on May 06, 2022, 04:03:59 PM
The CFL has always been in danger of folding for the past 30 or 40 years.  The days where the CFL reign supreme are gone with all the sports available on TV.  If the CFL doesn't change their marketing approach to target kids and youth as well as make game day experiences more lively and entertaining, it doesn't matter how much the players make or what rule changes they have.  The CFL will not be able to survive another century or even decade if it doesn't take steps now to address the many issues it faces.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: dizzycamper on May 06, 2022, 04:26:04 PM
The loss of the ratio will sacrifice the main competitive advantage that the CFL has, and the gradual diluting of the ratio any further that it already has been, will just make it a lingering death.  

Its a real short term view, based on some misguided belief that a faster, higher scoring game with gimmicky rules will hold fan interest more than national identity.  It's deluded thinking and not based on the evidence of many years.

Think, if you will, about what the extinguishing of the ratio would have meant to earlier eras.  Ask yourself the following questions:

1.  Statistically, James Murphy was a better and more productive receiver than Joe Poplawski.  I love James Murphy and the fact that he settled in Winnipeg and made a home here.  But does anyone truly believe that he enjoys a higher regard with the fans than Joe Pop?

2.  Without the ratio, I doubt anyone would have invested the time and effort to convert a defensive lineman from Div 2 Dickinson State into an offensive lineman.  Chris Walby went on to become one of the best OTs in the history of the CFL, but without the ratio he probably doesn't get to start his storied career.

3.  Does anyone really think Nic Demski would have been able to stick around to develop after his first 3 years in the league?  He is a top notch talent now, but without the ratio, he most likely goes the way of Charles Nelson or a thousand other receivers who were moved on from after a slow start.  

4.  Rick House put up 8000 yards as a CFL receiver.  He was buried on special teams until he developed.  No way he has that career without the ratio.

5.  Estimate the percentage of fan discussion dedicated to ratio management, projecting the 7 starters, the draft, which player may "go home" in free agency etc.  Probably at least half of the off-season discussion revolves around that.  Heck, with no ratio, is there even a reason to have a Canadian draft?  Probably not.  

6.  Do Kyle Walters and Mike O'Shea become football executives/coaches at the professional level without the ratio?  Probably not, as neither of them would likely have had a professional football career without it.  Without that entry into the league, both those guys are probably selling insurance or real estate.  

I could go on, but I'm either preaching to the choir or talking past people who don't accept the premise.  But I think it is an absolute disgrace that Wade Miller is leading a negotiating committee that takes this stance.  If he has convinced himself that fans want to relinquish the leagues national identity so we can get a couple more NFL cuts who can run a 4.4 40, then he has forgotten where he came from.  

If this CBA guts the ratio, that finishes me.  I kept my season tickets last year, even though I didn't attend a single game, because I wanted to support the team.  A game that relegates Canadian content to special team duty has no interest for me.  If I want to watch all Americans, I'll watch the best Americans.  Giving up the "game day event" isn't a huge sacrifice for me, I go to 9 games in person a year, but I watch about 60.  I can convert my ticket spend into a speciality channel that will give me as much NFL content as I can handle.  Maybe I'm a relic, but I think if the CFL believes that they can replace a fan like me with some Gen-Z kid who wants to bet the over-under on sacks from his phone, I think they are going to be disappointed.  


I totally agree with you, other than spending time watching 4 down & NFL boring football. Secondly, I'm not that crazy about the rule changes for excitement, because in my mind it supports those that like to wager and of course pleases the Greater Toronto Area, including that media out there. A good defensive cfl football game is exciting as well, geeze. Do tell me, such is life, now a days and buy into that crazy stuff (could use a different word).

But, before I go of the edge, I would like to know the details of these negotiations between the two sides. If Wade Miller is indeed supporting the venture of removing/downsizing Cdn talent, I would like to hear it from him in front of a camera. If the answer is yes, this will be my last year as a Bomber supporter in the stands.

 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 06, 2022, 04:38:23 PM
The loss of the ratio will sacrifice the main competitive advantage that the CFL has, and the gradual diluting of the ratio any further that it already has been, will just make it a lingering death.  

Its a real short term view, based on some misguided belief that a faster, higher scoring game with gimmicky rules will hold fan interest more than national identity.  It's deluded thinking and not based on the evidence of many years.

Think, if you will, about what the extinguishing of the ratio would have meant to earlier eras.  Ask yourself the following questions:

1.  Statistically, James Murphy was a better and more productive receiver than Joe Poplawski.  I love James Murphy and the fact that he settled in Winnipeg and made a home here.  But does anyone truly believe that he enjoys a higher regard with the fans than Joe Pop?

2.  Without the ratio, I doubt anyone would have invested the time and effort to convert a defensive lineman from Div 2 Dickinson State into an offensive lineman.  Chris Walby went on to become one of the best OTs in the history of the CFL, but without the ratio he probably doesn't get to start his storied career.

3.  Does anyone really think Nic Demski would have been able to stick around to develop after his first 3 years in the league?  He is a top notch talent now, but without the ratio, he most likely goes the way of Charles Nelson or a thousand other receivers who were moved on from after a slow start.  

4.  Rick House put up 8000 yards as a CFL receiver.  He was buried on special teams until he developed.  No way he has that career without the ratio.

5.  Estimate the percentage of fan discussion dedicated to ratio management, projecting the 7 starters, the draft, which player may "go home" in free agency etc.  Probably at least half of the off-season discussion revolves around that.  Heck, with no ratio, is there even a reason to have a Canadian draft?  Probably not.  

6.  Do Kyle Walters and Mike O'Shea become football executives/coaches at the professional level without the ratio?  Probably not, as neither of them would likely have had a professional football career without it.  Without that entry into the league, both those guys are probably selling insurance or real estate.  

I could go on, but I'm either preaching to the choir or talking past people who don't accept the premise.  But I think it is an absolute disgrace that Wade Miller is leading a negotiating committee that takes this stance.  If he has convinced himself that fans want to relinquish the leagues national identity so we can get a couple more NFL cuts who can run a 4.4 40, then he has forgotten where he came from.  

If this CBA guts the ratio, that finishes me.  I kept my season tickets last year, even though I didn't attend a single game, because I wanted to support the team.  A game that relegates Canadian content to special team duty has no interest for me.  If I want to watch all Americans, I'll watch the best Americans.  Giving up the "game day event" isn't a huge sacrifice for me, I go to 9 games in person a year, but I watch about 60.  I can convert my ticket spend into a speciality channel that will give me as much NFL content as I can handle.  Maybe I'm a relic, but I think if the CFL believes that they can replace a fan like me with some Gen-Z kid who wants to bet the over-under on sacks from his phone, I think they are going to be disappointed.  

And nobody wants to read a rehashing of this so I won't respond again but my rebuttal would be:

1. James Murphy and Joe Pop are entirely irrelevant to the game today. Even more so to future fans who need to come on board. Who cares who you think should be in higher regard (I don't mean that rudely).

2. It may have not worked out for Walby but it would have worked out for someone else. A star is a star and every football team can celebrate talented offensive lineman.

3. Demski probably would not have developed now, but someone else would have and they would be a recognizable name/face. If we're playing the 'what if' game 'what if' that player was even better?

4. There are plenty of players who develop into stars in all professional sports. The story of a player earning his dues is not unique to the CFL. The NFL makes entire reality shows about them and they have no ratio. But yes, if you have a deep connection with Rick House that could be alarming. New fans don't care or potential new fans don't care one wink who or what is a Rick House.

5. If eliminating the ratio made the Canadian draft irrelevant, then oh boy is that not the biggest incitement of talent I have ever seen. In addition, every single popular sports league has a TON of rumors and speculation around free agency. You absolutely do not need a country of origin rule to generate that.

6. Speculation at best. You could be right. Maybe Walters isn't a GM which would be a shame because he is good at it. However, other than that he is good at it, what else would be a loss that it wasn't 'him' specifically. Basically zero.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Waffler on May 06, 2022, 04:43:48 PM
A strike in pre-season would not surprise me. Losing league games would though.

The CFL is just asking for too much. How do you even negotiate with that "offer"? Not much time left and we are miles apart.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 06, 2022, 04:46:27 PM
All the things that make the CFL Canadian are important to preserve.

SMS is a concern, and unfortunately, the majority of the bargaining committee are not getting ELC / min wage money.  The reason I mention that is that it could be a double edged sword... players getting paid more than min want even more than that... wheres a min wage / elc player might just be happy to have a job, and see that wage as worth protecting.  

The CFL is the second highest paying football league on the planet, and has the most to offer young players.  When CFL teams can sign over 100 players to the roster in the off season, I'm not thinking that money is a big issue.  It seems, though, most people make it a big deal.

NAT's do two things, first, they spark local interest and keep the game alive in USports,  Second, they provide much of the periphery players that are developmental and special teams / backups at an affordable rate, to offset the top end talent getting compensated as "stars".  Getting paid in $CAN and many living at home / close to home makes that minimum wage more liveable.  

The fact that we have no issue keeping 10-15 players on PR's at far less than ELC/Min salary shows that money is not the big issue some make it out to be.  I guess we will see how many players we lose next year to the XFL / USFL if either play.  Regardless if we do lose some periphery players, I can't see it affecting the CFL talent pool that much.

I get that the CFLPA has to "fight" for more money, but I really wish they focused more on quality of life for the players.  

I get the need for padded practices from a team perspective, and the increased injury issues they entail.  THAT is a fight that needs to be fought, and I truly think the CFL needs a better post injury / post career health care window.  

There are logical points to debate, and there are emotional ones. Unfortunately, money is emotional.  I do not begrudge the players trying to maximize their earning potential from a dangerous career that can be short lived, but they need to realize they cannot get blood from a stone, they are getting a very decent wage compared to other leagues, and if they concentrate on post injury/career health care... it will serve them a whole lot better.  

One thing that surprised me about the USFL was their "Every one gets a free education" spiel.  I'm guessing its mostly an online thing, and that the USFL is getting a serious deal on it in exchange for publicity for the offering university, but shouldn't just about every player have a degree from his NCAA/USports days?  Would this be something to work into the CFL CBA?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 06, 2022, 04:47:23 PM
I don't think a complete elimination of the ratio is really in the cards. I do believe a re-distribution of the ratio will be the final solution.

It makes no sense to me to have 7 Canadian starters backed up by 14 Canadians while only 4 imports ( 5 if you count the 2nd QB ) backing up 17 starters.

Level / balance this out more on the roster. Keep the 7 Canadian starters. I suggested a movement towards 4 less Canadians and 4 more imports.  A 2nd step might to a change to the breakdown for the ratio on the PR.

If we re-balance the ratio on the AR then we could take an opposite approach on the PR. IE: A higher number of Canadians and a lesser number of imports.

That gets a bit more complicated because the PR was increased from 10 to 12 to accommodate Global players. Then it was increased by 5 more due to covid.

Global players eliminate Canadian players since the number of Imports doesn't change. So pro ratio folks should be in favour of just making then imports or getting rid of them all together.

If they're counted as imports we could then reduce the size of the PR and make that part of a breakdown there.

I'd suggest a PR of 12 with 8 Canadians and 4 imports.

All that seems like a reasonable trade off. It retains the Canadian starters, the next man up Canadian back ups on the AR and the next next man up on the PR.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 06, 2022, 04:54:25 PM
A strike in pre-season would not surprise me. Losing league games would though.

The CFL is just asking for too much. How do you even negotiate with that "offer"? Not much time left and we are miles apart.

A strike in preseason would surprise me. It's a part of how teams decide on final rosters It's not something you want to decide completely just in TC. It also prepares veterans for the regular season.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 06, 2022, 07:07:56 PM
I really hope, in the end, neither group is 100% happy with the deal, because that means it is fair. 

I hope that it is 10 years, I hope that ratios do not get obliterated, I hope padded practice returns, and that post injury/career health protocols improve.

I hope the health care includes free health care for one additional year for every year completed, and cost sharing for health care for 5 years after that for those without in their post CFL careers.  THAT is something worth fighting for.

As to SMS levels and revenue sharing.  This is a league on a budget to start with, and coming off some very hard times.  Suggesting they have money to spare or that someone is getting rich off the players is crazy talk.  Do the players want a flat pay scale like the USFL?  Or do they want to opportunity to earn what they are worth?  As to non-TSN revenue, any work stoppage puts a big dent in that, both lost revenue from any gates that are missed, and lost fans.  Less of something is more than lots of nothing. 

This is not the NFL, but it is also not the USFL/XFL.  It is tradition, it is history and it is exciting.  The greatest game on a grid. 

As to ratios, yes, they maintain the Canadian part of the game... ratio at 7 is about right... might adjust the DI's a bit, but ratios make this league unique and they make GM'ing a real job.  EE will be a good example of that this year...  we have seen the benefits of a long term GM and coach building our NAT talent pool...



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 06, 2022, 07:35:24 PM
The loss of the ratio will sacrifice the main competitive advantage that the CFL has, and the gradual diluting of the ratio any further that it already has been, will just make it a lingering death.  

Its a real short term view, based on some misguided belief that a faster, higher scoring game with gimmicky rules will hold fan interest more than national identity.  It's deluded thinking and not based on the evidence of many years.

Think, if you will, about what the extinguishing of the ratio would have meant to earlier eras.  Ask yourself the following questions:

1.  Statistically, James Murphy was a better and more productive receiver than Joe Poplawski.  I love James Murphy and the fact that he settled in Winnipeg and made a home here.  But does anyone truly believe that he enjoys a higher regard with the fans than Joe Pop?

2.  Without the ratio, I doubt anyone would have invested the time and effort to convert a defensive lineman from Div 2 Dickinson State into an offensive lineman.  Chris Walby went on to become one of the best OTs in the history of the CFL, but without the ratio he probably doesn't get to start his storied career.

3.  Does anyone really think Nic Demski would have been able to stick around to develop after his first 3 years in the league?  He is a top notch talent now, but without the ratio, he most likely goes the way of Charles Nelson or a thousand other receivers who were moved on from after a slow start.  

4.  Rick House put up 8000 yards as a CFL receiver.  He was buried on special teams until he developed.  No way he has that career without the ratio.

5.  Estimate the percentage of fan discussion dedicated to ratio management, projecting the 7 starters, the draft, which player may "go home" in free agency etc.  Probably at least half of the off-season discussion revolves around that.  Heck, with no ratio, is there even a reason to have a Canadian draft?  Probably not.  

6.  Do Kyle Walters and Mike O'Shea become football executives/coaches at the professional level without the ratio?  Probably not, as neither of them would likely have had a professional football career without it.  Without that entry into the league, both those guys are probably selling insurance or real estate.  

I could go on, but I'm either preaching to the choir or talking past people who don't accept the premise.  But I think it is an absolute disgrace that Wade Miller is leading a negotiating committee that takes this stance.  If he has convinced himself that fans want to relinquish the leagues national identity so we can get a couple more NFL cuts who can run a 4.4 40, then he has forgotten where he came from.  

If this CBA guts the ratio, that finishes me.  I kept my season tickets last year, even though I didn't attend a single game, because I wanted to support the team.  A game that relegates Canadian content to special team duty has no interest for me.  If I want to watch all Americans, I'll watch the best Americans.  Giving up the "game day event" isn't a huge sacrifice for me, I go to 9 games in person a year, but I watch about 60.  I can convert my ticket spend into a speciality channel that will give me as much NFL content as I can handle.  Maybe I'm a relic, but I think if the CFL believes that they can replace a fan like me with some Gen-Z kid who wants to bet the over-under on sacks from his phone, I think they are going to be disappointed.  

Good post, problem is the CFL is asking people who don't currently follow, support or care about the league what changes they would like to see made to make the game more appealing to them.  Even if the CFL follows up with these changes, the disinterested people who offered suggestions are unlikely to step up and support the league anyway, they will probably keep on ignoring it, just as they always have.  Meanwhile the long-term supporters will be pissed-off with the arbitrary rules changes, it's very close a no-win situation.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 06, 2022, 07:43:23 PM
And nobody wants to read a rehashing of this so I won't respond again but my rebuttal would be:

1. James Murphy and Joe Pop are entirely irrelevant to the game today. Even more so to future fans who need to come on board. Who cares who you think should be in higher regard (I don't mean that rudely).

2. It may have not worked out for Walby but it would have worked out for someone else. A star is a star and every football team can celebrate talented offensive lineman.

3. Demski probably would not have developed now, but someone else would have and they would be a recognizable name/face. If we're playing the 'what if' game 'what if' that player was even better?

4. There are plenty of players who develop into stars in all professional sports. The story of a player earning his dues is not unique to the CFL. The NFL makes entire reality shows about them and they have no ratio. But yes, if you have a deep connection with Rick House that could be alarming. New fans don't care or potential new fans don't care one wink who or what is a Rick House.

5. If eliminating the ratio made the Canadian draft irrelevant, then oh boy is that not the biggest incitement of talent I have ever seen. In addition, every single popular sports league has a TON of rumors and speculation around free agency. You absolutely do not need a country of origin rule to generate that.

6. Speculation at best. You could be right. Maybe Walters isn't a GM which would be a shame because he is good at it. However, other than that he is good at it, what else would be a loss that it wasn't 'him' specifically. Basically zero.

Your post comes across as if you don't care about the CFL's past history, is this correct?  What do you think we will be left with when they've wiped the CFL clean of all it's tradition?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Nic16 on May 06, 2022, 08:27:08 PM
The CFL runs on a tight budget and is in the business to make money. And how do they do that?

The majority of the young fans don?t follow the game close enough to know how the ratio works and who is Canadian or American. All they want to know is who is good and what name & number do I put on my jersey.

So why not keep the ratio rules rather simple?

1. Add more exciting players. And unfortunately for the CFL diehards that means more Americans.

2. Drop the ratio down to 5 Canadian starters. And if you want to start more go ahead, but with no advantages.

3. Americans who remain on the same team for 2 yrs are an adopted Canadian in yr 3 - unless they leave the team.

4. Americans in the league for 5 yrs on different teams are an adopted Canadian in yr 6.

5. Split backups 50/50.

6. Specialty positions - Kicker, Punter and LS can be whomever you want with zero effect to the ratio.

7. Get rid of the territorial pick in the draft.

8. Supplemental drafts should only take place if a player didn?t register until after the draft.

9. A rule change should be no single is awarded for a missed FG within 30 yards unless conceded by the team.

10. Punts must be conceded or go thru the back of the end zone from more than 40 yds to count as a single point.

11. Highest salary 400G

12. Entry level 70G

13. Guaranteed salary in your 5th yr but with a 2 yr max.

14. Minimum 2 yr contracts with an NFL tryout escape clause. Team retains rights.

15. Reduce the 6 game IR to 4 game IR. If player is removed early his salary counts against the cap.

Bottom line is takes the needed steps to help improve the game, fan to player connection and the overall entertainment value.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Waffler on May 06, 2022, 08:54:03 PM
A strike in preseason would surprise me. It's a part of how teams decide on final rosters It's not something you want to decide completely just in TC. It also prepares veterans for the regular season.

That gives them roughly 2 weeks to make a deal or lose preseason games. Rookie camp is what? A few days from now.They are that close? I don't see it.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 06, 2022, 09:00:45 PM
That gives them roughly 2 weeks to make a deal. They are that close? I don't see it.

If the asks on both sides are even close to what they think they are going to get, we're not even in the same area codes.  This season has no chance of starting on time.. which is very, very sad, because they've had forever to work this out.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 06, 2022, 10:25:00 PM
That gives them roughly 2 weeks to make a deal or lose preseason games. Rookie camp is what? A few days from now.They are that close? I don't see it.

It would be suicide to lose the pre season 2 years in a row. OTOH, they could delay a few weeks and have play offs later as in 2022. Not what I want to see but could be an end result.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 06, 2022, 10:31:01 PM
The CFL runs on a tight budget and is in the business to make money. And how do they do that?

The majority of the young fans don?t follow the game close enough to know how the ratio works and who is Canadian or American. All they want to know is who is good and what name & number do I put on my jersey.

So why not keep the ratio rules rather simple?

1. Add more exciting players. And unfortunately for the CFL diehards that means more Americans.

2. Drop the ratio down to 5 Canadian starters. And if you want to start more go ahead, but with no advantages.

3. Americans who remain on the same team for 2 yrs are an adopted Canadian in yr 3 - unless they leave the team.

4. Americans in the league for 5 yrs on different teams are an adopted Canadian in yr 6.

5. Split backups 50/50.

6. Specialty positions - Kicker, Punter and LS can be whomever you want with zero effect to the ratio.

7. Get rid of the territorial pick in the draft.

8. Supplemental drafts should only take place if a player didn?t register until after the draft.

9. A rule change should be no single is awarded for a missed FG within 30 yards unless conceded by the team.

10. Punts must be conceded or go thru the back of the end zone from more than 40 yds to count as a single point.

11. Highest salary 400G

12. Entry level 70G

13. Guaranteed salary in your 5th yr but with a 2 yr max.

14. Minimum 2 yr contracts with an NFL tryout escape clause. Team retains rights.

15. Reduce the 6 game IR to 4 game IR. If player is removed early his salary counts against the cap.

Bottom line is takes the needed steps to help improve the game, fan to player connection and the overall entertainment value.

Some good ideas and some are not.

Creating more loopholes as in items 3, 4,5  and 6 to water down what a NI means or how it qualifies is a cop out. Change the ratio, change the number starting or on the roster are fair game.

This is the KISS principle. The CFL already has too many designations and work around rules to the ratio.

You say make the ratio rules simple than you suggest otherwise.

Suggestion # 11 might be illegal. Raising the minimum only works if you can afford it. It doesn't prevent players from leaving. Lawler, Richardson and Whitehead to name a few.

The rouge is an important aspect of the Canadian game. Leave that suggestion off the table.

EDIT: Bombers on our current roster that have been with the team discussed in suggestion 3: Bryant, Hardrick, Bailey, Collaros, Alexander, Bighill, Jefferson, Jeffcoat, Wilson, Maston, Rose, Taylor and Grant

That's 13 players at the moment that suggestion # 3 would convert to NI's on the roster. Even if you kept 5 NI starters that would eliminate nearly all Canadian back ups.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 08, 2022, 04:40:18 AM
Scary?  This may be just in reference to the ratio issue but it is clearly important to the players.

Adam Bighill
@Bighill44
Bob, the CFLPA negotiating team works on behalf of the members, who are the ones that actually vote to approve a CBA. There is a reason why we don?t have a deal yet. There?s nothing there we can recommend our members even consider.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 08, 2022, 11:43:23 AM
Your post comes across as if you don't care about the CFL's past history, is this correct?  What do you think we will be left with when they've wiped the CFL clean of all it's tradition?

Tradition can and will always be celebrated by most businesses in some way or another. Lots of advantages to that. What doesn't and shouldn't last is persisting with the status quo for the sake of tradition itself. What worked 20, 30 and 50 years ago may not work now. The current results are the results.

Again, not going to rehash it until next off season when we're all bored and looking for something to chat about but since you asked directly I wanted to briefly respond.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Lincoln Locomotive on May 08, 2022, 01:57:01 PM
Strong arm tactics?   The owner/player relationship, which was slowly improving,  is in serious jeopardy according to this article.   

https://3downnation.com/2022/05/07/the-cfl-is-threatening-to-fundamentally-change-canadian-football-cflpa-leadership-sounds-alarm-over-leagues-cba-proposal-negotiation-tactics/


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 08, 2022, 03:16:05 PM
I doubt a total elimination of the ratio will come to pass. We're not getting details of exactly what the proposal looks like over a 10 year span. A shorter agreement with some reductions to the ratio might be the end result. Any change to the ratio would need to be gradual.

Can't imagine any 10 year deal comes together and no increase in the SMS over that time is not reasonable.

It appears Wednesday and the start of TC will be tipping points. Pandora's box more or less. Once it's open it will be difficult to close.

I've already commented earlier in this thread string what I'd like to see as the end result over a 3 year deal.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 08, 2022, 07:18:25 PM
I get the "initial offer" part of negotiating, and I've done it myself many times, knowing that there is no way the opening offer will be considered, let alone accepted.  They are meant to create an ability to come down from the opening, and meet in the middle.

The CFL did open at a ridiculous level, and in retrospect, probably did so in error, not realizing it would end up causing this backlash.

I don't think the CFLPA did themselves any favours by releasing details of that initial offer.  They have created an adversarial aspect that was un-necessary.

So both parties need to restart this at a lower level of aggression. 

We know that there will not be a blanket guaranteed contract capability, but there should be some option for longer term players to be allowed to negotiate a fully guaranteed contract (not just the veteran cutdown assurance).  Say, 5 years CFL or 3 with the same team, and you can have the option of asking the team for a fully guaranteed contract.  But only in resigning with your current team...

We know there will never be an elimination of ratio / Nat roster spots.  Instead of a 10 year plan to zero, maybe a reduction...

We know there will not be a zero SMS increase over 10 years.  Just as we know there will never be true revenue sharing (players would probably shortchange themselves if that happened with the CFL revenue streams) 

Padded practices are part of football, as are injuries.  If injuries are a concern re:padded practice, address that.  I am all for increasing the health care / rehab portion of the CBA.  I really think that players need to be protected, especially INT players, who may not have any health care after the game.  There should be provisions for extending health care after a career is over, and for as long as they are rehabbing injuries sustained when under contract.  THAT is what the players deserve, not more cash.  Life insurance, health insurance, educational support... if the CFLPA cared about its members, it would be demanding these items for ALL, not just a way to make more cash.

I really want the "we want the pay we deserve" argument to end, because this is not MLB, NHL, NBA and especially not the NFL.  Players currently are compensated better than any other non-NFL football league.  And the CFL has had a few very, very lean years that are going to be tough to recover from.   

With the financial transparency opening up, if the CFLPA takes a more reasonable stance, and the CFL comes down off the ledge they have walked out onto, there is a deal here to be made where all parties can survive, and none be 100% happy.

The CFL did not do themselves any favours starting with what they did.  But the CFLPA did not help their cause running to the media.  Its time for both parties to put on their big boy pants and make a deal.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 08, 2022, 07:42:44 PM
OK, talk about unnecessarily inflammatory...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FSQitKiXMAAixh-?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

We have instructed all veteran quarterbacks not to attend voluntary sessions held this week and to align with the decisions our Association will make regarding training camps.   The directive has been given across the league with the exception of one club, where there is a concern by our association over the pattern of retribution toward players by team management"

What the fizzie?  Singling out a team for a "pattern of retribution" without mentioning which team?  Or referencing grievances? 

One way to instantly lose 1/9th of the potential support votes you need to ratify an agreement.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 08, 2022, 09:12:58 PM
Why is the CFLPA negotiating in the media?  That leads to nothing good.

Starting QB's not attending voluntary sessions is not unusual or that big a deal.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 08, 2022, 10:16:15 PM
Why is the CFLPA negotiating in the media?  That leads to nothing good.

Starting QB's not attending voluntary sessions is not unusual or that big a deal.

A couple of key reasons that I can determine:

1. They have no power. Their membership will cave easily if there is a stoppage and players don't start getting paid. So they need to get fans on their side to create some pressure on the league.

2. I think because of the transience of the league, they don't have contact information for many members - and this is honestly a practical way of getting information out to players.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 08, 2022, 10:40:38 PM
A couple of key reasons that I can determine:

1. They have no power. Their membership will cave easily if there is a stoppage and players don't start getting paid. So they need to get fans on their side to create some pressure on the league.

2. I think because of the transience of the league, they don't have contact information for many members - and this is honestly a practical way of getting information out to players.



Perhaps. Nobody needs another season of no season or a reduced schedule. It not good for the players, the league or the fans.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 08, 2022, 10:49:13 PM
Perhaps. Nobody needs another season of no season or a reduced schedule. It not good for the players, the league or the fans.

No one wants that.

But the owners are using that to make egregious demands so the players are forced to use whatever leverage they have.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 08, 2022, 10:55:44 PM
Why is the CFLPA negotiating in the media?  That leads to nothing good.

Starting QB's not attending voluntary sessions is not unusual or that big a deal.

I wish they would change the timeline and sit down to negotiations right after the G.C. and hammer out a deal ideally before Christmas or end of Jan. at the latest, leaving negotiations to the last minute is such a bad plan.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 08, 2022, 11:08:46 PM
I wish they would change the timeline and sit down to negotiations right after the G.C. and hammer out a deal ideally before Christmas or end of Jan. at the latest, leaving negotiations to the last minute is such a bad plan.

It's 100% intentional. They want to get players in the cities so they are unable to travel home and just vote to sign as opposed to strike.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 08, 2022, 11:36:20 PM
It's 100% intentional. They want to get players in the cities so they are unable to travel home and just vote to sign as opposed to strike.

If the CFLPA doesn't want to cede the CFL all the power in negotiations, THEY would demand the CBA gets done ASAP after the GC... it is on them for leaving it until they have no power...

The CFL head office and teams front offices are full of season lawyers and negotiators.  The CFLPA is not...

It is unfortunate, but the CFLPA represents players that make a total of less than $50mil/year.  They don't have the resources to hire the big guns, they are manned by current and past players.  Not saying they aren't good people, but its really not a fair fight. 

Not sure if there is anything in the CBA about the league funding the CFLPA, but that would be a great thing for them to add, a budget that would allow them to hire top notch representation to negotiate.  Getting a small percentage of the SMS cap direct from the league would be a lot easier than trying to rake it out in member fees... and more equitable.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 08, 2022, 11:53:55 PM
If the CFLPA doesn't want to cede the CFL all the power in negotiations, THEY would demand the CBA gets done ASAP after the GC... it is on them for leaving it until they have no power...

The CFL head office and teams front offices are full of season lawyers and negotiators.  The CFLPA is not...

It is unfortunate, but the CFLPA represents players that make a total of less than $50mil/year.  They don't have the resources to hire the big guns, they are manned by current and past players.  Not saying they aren't good people, but its really not a fair fight. 

Not sure if there is anything in the CBA about the league funding the CFLPA, but that would be a great thing for them to add, a budget that would allow them to hire top notch representation to negotiate.  Getting a small percentage of the SMS cap direct from the league would be a lot easier than trying to rake it out in member fees... and more equitable.

They demand all off season, the league doesn?t come to the table until the week before TC. Happens every time.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 09, 2022, 12:05:24 AM
They demand all off season, the league doesn?t come to the table until the week before TC. Happens every time.

Again, pretty poor negotiating if you can't get the other side to the table.  If the CFL won't come to the table, you just tell them you won't be coming to the table if negotiations aren't started by Jan 1.  Fire off your opening offer, and if they do not respond, or at least at the table by then, its strike time.   

If the CFL plays hard ball, you have to play it harder...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 09, 2022, 03:36:53 AM
John Hodge
@JohnDHodge
Per sources, the CFLPA has scheduled a meeting with team player reps for Monday afternoon.

They will update reps on the status of CBA negotiations before communicating with the entire membership later on Monday.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 09, 2022, 12:32:38 PM
Negotiations are adversarial by nature.

Starting negotiations with a stupid offer makes it significantly harder to get any contract signed, sealed and delivered. It's not hardball. It's a terrible negotiating tactic.

The players have as much power as management. No players = no games = no revenue = big losses for both sides.

When negotiations stall, going to the media can get them going again. The players releasing the offer info was a smart move in my mind. I'm sure that most fans are on their side right now.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: the paw on May 09, 2022, 02:39:57 PM
Again, pretty poor negotiating if you can't get the other side to the table.  If the CFL won't come to the table, you just tell them you won't be coming to the table if negotiations aren't started by Jan 1.  Fire off your opening offer, and if they do not respond, or at least at the table by then, its strike time.   

If the CFL plays hard ball, you have to play it harder...

You are way out of your depth again, making stuff up as you go along. 

An employee group that isn't currently "in production" has absolutely no leverage to bring the employer to the table during the off season.  You can't withdraw your labour, you can't work to rule, all you can do is play the public relations game. 

You can't just start striking whenever you feel like it.  The term of the agreement according to the 2019 CBA is until May 31st or the first day of training camp.  The players aren't even in a legal position to strike before then, even if "striking" before training camp actually meant something. 

It isn't a question of "playing harder".  Negotiations are about leverage and finding mutual interest.  The power relationship is not equal, and the owners have a long history of squeezing the players as hard as they can.  They do that by taking it down to the wire.  If players are willing to not report, then the owners have to decide if they want to risk losing a whole or partial season.   


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 09, 2022, 02:56:01 PM
You are way out of your depth again, making stuff up as you go along. 

An employee group that isn't currently "in production" has absolutely no leverage to bring the employer to the table during the off season.  You can't withdraw your labour, you can't work to rule, all you can do is play the public relations game. 

You can't just start striking whenever you feel like it.  The term of the agreement according to the 2019 CBA is until May 31st or the first day of training camp.  The players aren't even in a legal position to strike before then, even if "striking" before training camp actually meant something. 

It isn't a question of "playing harder".  Negotiations are about leverage and finding mutual interest.  The power relationship is not equal, and the owners have a long history of squeezing the players as hard as they can.  They do that by taking it down to the wire.  If players are willing to not report, then the owners have to decide if they want to risk losing a whole or partial season.  

Leverage.  Exactly my point.

The CFLPA had members give them authorization to strike.  They did that this week.  They could have done that Jan 1.  So that the CFL knew that training camps would not open without a CBA in place.  All the things the CFLPA is doing now to apply leverage could have been done months ago. 

Making the CBA expire after rookie camps start is silly.  CBA should expire in February, giving them 2 months post GC to get it done, and before FA and draft, where CBA changes might make large differences in contracts offered and players chased. 

Negotiations are adversarial by nature.

Starting negotiations with a stupid offer makes it significantly harder to get any contract signed, sealed and delivered. It's not hardball. It's a terrible negotiating tactic.

The players have as much power as management. No players = no games = no revenue = big losses for both sides.

When negotiations stall, going to the media can get them going again. The players releasing the offer info was a smart move in my mind. I'm sure that most fans are on their side right now.

Yup, these offers, from both sides, are nuts.  I bet a handful of us forum pundits could sit down with both offers, and hammer out a compromise for each that would be much closer to agreeable, and an easy negotiation.  Each is going to have to give a lot from their initial position, where and how muc is the key.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 09, 2022, 03:47:36 PM
Leverage.  Exactly my point.

The CFLPA had members give them authorization to strike.  They did that this week.  They could have done that Jan 1.  So that the CFL knew that training camps would not open without a CBA in place.  All the things the CFLPA is doing now to apply leverage could have been done months ago. 

Making the CBA expire after rookie camps start is silly.  CBA should expire in February, giving them 2 months post GC to get it done, and before FA and draft, where CBA changes might make large differences in contracts offered and players chased. 

Yup, these offers, from both sides, are nuts.  I bet a handful of us forum pundits could sit down with both offers, and hammer out a compromise for each that would be much closer to agreeable, and an easy negotiation.  Each is going to have to give a lot from their initial position, where and how muc is the key.

Aardvark, league owners are never going to negotiate in February. Ever. It makes no sense for virtually any realistic perspective.

To add to the mix, here's a letter the Bombers just emailed to players:

Quote
We are looking forward to your arrival shortly at Rookie or Training Camp. Despite rumours that you might have heard, we want to assure you that, as we advised your union on May 4, 2022, we are committed to house and feed you at our expense even if the union decides to take lawful strike action. Therefore, you will not be stranded at training camp.

As you know, the CFL and CFLPA are engaged in Collective Bargaining negotiations. The current Collective Agreement is due to expire at midnight on May 14th but not all teams will be in a lawful strike position at that time according to provincial labour laws.

Our first priority is to negotiate a new Collective Agreement with the CFLPA by the expiry date and we are hopeful that a new Collective Agreement can be in place so we can play football this season without a labour disruption.

The purpose of this letter is to clearly confirm that in the event of a lawful strike, we will continue to house and feed you at our expense until the conclusion of the strike or the end of training camp, whichever occurs first.

We look forward to your arrival at Rookie Camp or Training Camp but please let us know if you have any questions.

https://3downnation.com/2022/05/09/cfl-teams-commit-to-house-feed-players-until-conclusion-of-strike-or-end-of-training-camp/


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 09, 2022, 05:19:08 PM
It would be suicide to lose the pre season 2 years in a row. OTOH, they could delay a few weeks and have play offs later as in 2022. Not what I want to see but could be an end result.

Ya, Ambrosie & league moaning on how bad the onfield product was in 2021, admitted some of it was due to no preseason/TC... then turns around and is willing to risk losing 2022 preseason games?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 09, 2022, 05:34:03 PM
Aardvark, league owners are never going to negotiate in February. Ever. It makes no sense for virtually any realistic perspective.

To add to the mix, here's a letter the Bombers just emailed to players:

https://3downnation.com/2022/05/09/cfl-teams-commit-to-house-feed-players-until-conclusion-of-strike-or-end-of-training-camp/

Never is a long time... and I think all parties involved want stability, and if negotiating in Feb aides that, there is a reason to discuss it.

The CFLPA is losing a lot of their bargaining points with this statement from the Bombers, and I would guess other teams have done so or will follow.  No reason for players under contract to the Bomber to not report... guaranteed food and housing... I do note that they do not guarantee a return flight at any specified time... so we will feed an house you, but if you want to go home, that's on your dime...  makes sense...

I can see this CBA term to be a lot shorter than 10 years, probably sync'd with the TSN deal, giving both side the opportunity to adjust based on the reality of that contract, or whatever replaces that.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 10, 2022, 03:34:50 PM
John Hodge
@JohnDHodge
CFLPA advises players not to travel for training camp, CFL to make new CBA offer Wednesday

https://3downnation.com/2022/05/10/cflpa-advises-players-not-to-travel-for-training-camp-cfl-to-make-new-cba-offer-wednesday/


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 10, 2022, 03:55:01 PM
It's so lame we have to go through this every time.  Does no one negotiate in good faith for a combined purpose anymore?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 10, 2022, 04:09:28 PM
... Does no one negotiate in good faith for a combined purpose anymore?
Did anyone ever negotiate like that? Certainly not in my time, I'm 65 & my Dad was on union negotiation teams a bunch when I grew up.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 10, 2022, 04:11:40 PM
Flights to Winnipeg should have been already planned. Telling them to not show up sounds counter productive since the teams said players would be housed and paid.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 10, 2022, 04:54:55 PM
As a player you fly out to Canada with whatever cash you can scrape up. They'll feed and house you, but not send you home. You don't get a paycheck if you're on strike, so you don't have any kind of life. It's great for management because they have the players right where they want them. Ready to sign pretty much anything to get some money and start playing.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 10, 2022, 05:34:42 PM
Flights to Winnipeg should have been already planned. Telling them to not show up sounds counter productive since the teams said players would be housed and paid.

CFLPA sabre rattling... while players will be house and fed (not sure they are being "paid" should they strike), they still are "stuck" here without the teams paying for transport to and from home should the labour disagreement stretch out...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 12, 2022, 03:25:15 AM
May 11, 2022 update on CBA Negotiations.  League and players are still talking and will continue to negotiate tomorrow May 12th.

https://3downnation.com/2022/05/11/cflpa-unsatisfied-with-new-cfl-cba-offer-directs-players-to-report-for-possible-work-stoppage/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: BLUEBOMBER on May 12, 2022, 07:10:43 AM
Clearly it's not a good time for the players to negotiate imho.  The CFL is not in great shape and the players should know it.  Best is to negotiate a short contract and hope in a few years, the league will still be around and do better and then try to get more at that time.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 12, 2022, 12:17:56 PM
The fans don't need this happening either. Come to an agreement that makes sense. Shorter contact with some increase to the SMS based on revenue stream projections.

The ratio question might be the biggest issue and I don't know where the league intends to draw the line.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 13, 2022, 04:35:23 AM
Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
Hearing that the @CFL and @CFLPA have ended another long day of bargaining in Toronto. They are scheduled to meet again tomorrow. Current CBA expires Saturday at midnight.#CFL #CFLPA


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 13, 2022, 01:29:05 PM
Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
Hearing that the @CFL and @CFLPA have ended another long day of bargaining in Toronto. They are scheduled to meet again tomorrow. Current CBA expires Saturday at midnight.#CFL #CFLPA

The threat of a disruption was over the second the PA told players earlier this week to report and that if required they'd fly them all home. Obviously they aren't going to do that and everyone knows a deal will get done. As usual, neither side can afford to not play so after the usual sabre rattling and media bravado a deal that looks similar to all the other recent deals will be announced in the next few days, I'm sure.

I am interested to see where we land on ratio rules and if a reduction was actually something the league fought for, or if it was just a negotiation ploy to get the players to use some negotiating capital on something that the owners were fine with anyway. We shall see.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: DM83 on May 13, 2022, 01:32:15 PM
As an adult working for the province, I am in a Union.  They just finished negotiating a contract for three years ago.  They finally settled this past yr Only this yr is the end of the contract.  So now I guess they have to do it all over again. I think that is BS. Bur at least I get retroactive pay.

The players in he CFL are treated like crap.

Plus if paid in Canadian dollars, its only worth 75%.
Of course the players are following the dream.  The CFL is pretty much a last resort.

The benefit, is they get to play, and it is a professional league.  A place to play for tape on their performance. However, the everyday guy, earns about 50,000.00 for his  year.  Which is only six months.  Sounds good.  But after rent, expenses, etc, it doesnt amount to much.  Plus he then has to go back home to nothing.  

The job in the CFL is short term.

So lets get them a decent wage with medical, and the clubs should get them job opportunities and even fund job training.
Termination benefits should be fair, with at least the same for any employee in Canada

As a young man chasing the NFL dream, the CFL s excellent


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 13, 2022, 02:46:23 PM
Anyone have predictions?

Term:  matching TSn deal

Ratio: status quo 2 years, then a reduction of NAT starters to 6, and add 2 DI's for remainder. 

Globals 2 dressed, vet Globals 2+ years can be paid more, but the base is non-sms.

Extended health coverage for up to min of three years for players injured while under contract, and/or 1 year extended heath coverage after retirement for every season a player dresses on an active roster for at least one game.

Expansion of current "vet cutdown" making contracts guaranteed 3 games sooner that the current rules.  Tenure requirements remain the same, with the exception of continuity bonus of one year.  If a player has 4 years in the league, but they are all with one team, for the purposes of "vet cutdown" he is considered to have 5 years service.   

Limited padded practice through the season, 10 days to be used at each team's preference, but dates announced by the end of week one.  Up to 2 practices can be rescheduled at the teams request, with 2 weeks prior notice.

Increase in the limits of the soft cap penalties from $100K increments to $200k increments.

SMS to remain static for 2 years as post COVID revenue streams rationalize, with an adjustment of SMS based on total gate revenue recovery to pre-pandemic levels, going up if gate revenue increases from 2019 levels, but not going down if recovery does not eclipse 2019 gate.  Players share in success, but not penalized if revenues do not recover.

Revenue sharing of merch sales, % sales of player branded merch returned to PA for distribution, 50% split evenly among members, 50% directly to players whose merch is sold.


If they agreed to this deal, I think its a win/win...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: VictorRomano on May 13, 2022, 02:54:06 PM

Globals 2 dressed, vet Globals 2+ years can be paid more, but the base is non-sms.

Extended health coverage for up to min of three years for players injured while under contract, and/or 1 year extended heath coverage after retirement for every season a player dresses on an active roster for at least one game.

I like this.  Might give teams cap room to convince quality globals like Hansen who take regulars reps to stick around for the long term.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 13, 2022, 02:57:10 PM
As an adult working for the province, I am in a Union.  They just finished negotiating a contract for three years ago.  They finally settled this past yr Only this yr is the end of the contract.  So now I guess they have to do it all over again. I think that is BS. Bur at least I get retroactive pay.

The players in he CFL are treated like crap.

Plus if paid in Canadian dollars, its only worth 75%.
Of course the players are following the dream.  The CFL is pretty much a last resort.

The benefit, is they get to play, and it is a professional league.  A place to play for tape on their performance. However, the everyday guy, earns about 50,000.00 for his  year.  Which is only six months.  Sounds good.  But after rent, expenses, etc, it doesnt amount to much.  Plus he then has to go back home to nothing.  

The job in the CFL is short term.

So lets get them a decent wage with medical, and the clubs should get them job opportunities and even fund job training.
Termination benefits should be fair, with at least the same for any employee in Canada

As a young man chasing the NFL dream, the CFL s excellent

Whether a young man is a football player or not, he has to pay rent and expenses wherever he is living. $50K usd for a 22 - 26 year old male is not bad. Let him tell his sob story to a young person working in McDonalds in Alabama for $8 and hour. In the US, the minimum wage often falls below $10 / hour range. Only a few hit the $15 / hour mark. All of those are essentially below the poverty level.

The football player can get another job during the off season to increase his income.

Players in their 1st contact mostly get the CFL minimum but it can increase quite quickly in their next contact. Those that become starters are likely to earn $90K+ by year 3. The outcry to get them " decent " pay and benefits is over the top. I know many young people working 3 jobs for minimum wage. I know someone that worked for the Bay for 20+ years and was never a " full time " employee getting benefits.

Google the USA poverty level. Across the country approx 37M people live below the poverty level.

So cry me a river.



State Minimum Wage Rates
State    2011    2012    2013    2014    2015    2016    2017    2018    2019    2020    2021    2022    
Alabama    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Alaska    $7.75    $7.75    $7.75    $7.75    $8.75    $9.75    $9.80    $9.84    $9.89    $10.19    $10.34    $10.34    Order Poster
Arizona    $7.35    $7.65    $7.80    $7.90    $8.05    $8.05    $10.00    $10.50    $11.00    $12.00    $12.15    $12.80    Order Poster
Arkansas    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.50    $8.00    $8.50    $8.50    $9.25    $10.00    $11.00    $11.00    Order Poster
California    $8.00    $8.00    $8.00    $9.00    $9.00    $10.00    $10.50    $11.00    $12.00    $13.00    $14.00    $15.00 1    Order Poster
Colorado    $7.36    $7.64    $7.78    $8.00    $8.23    $8.31    $9.30    $10.20    $11.10    $12.00    $12.32    $12.56    Order Poster
Connecticut    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.70    $9.15    $9.60    $10.10    $10.10    $10.10    $12.00    $13.00    TBD    Order Poster
Delaware    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.75    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.75    $9.25    $9.25    $10.50    Order Poster
District of Columbia    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $9.50    $10.50    $11.50    $12.50    $13.25    $14.00    $15.00    $15.20    $16.10    Order Poster
Florida    $7.31    $7.67    $7.79    $7.93    $8.05    $8.05    $8.10    $8.25    $8.46    $8.56    $8.65    $10.00    Order Poster
Georgia    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Hawaii    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.75    $8.50    $9.25    $10.10    $10.10    $10.10    $10.10    $10.10    Order Poster
Idaho    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Illinois    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $10.00    $11.00    $12.00    Order Poster
Indiana    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Iowa    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Kansas    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Kentucky    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Louisiana    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Maine    $7.50    $7.50    $7.50    $7.50    $7.50    $7.50    $9.00    $10.00    $11.00    $12.00    $12.15    $12.75    Order Poster
Maryland    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $8.00    $8.75    $9.25    $10.10    $10.10    $11.00    $11.75    $12.50    Order Poster
Massachusetts    $8.00    $8.00    $8.00    $8.00    $9.00    $10.00    $11.00    $11.00    $12.00    $12.75    $13.50    $14.25    Order Poster
Michigan    $7.40    $7.40    $7.40    $8.15    $8.15    $8.50    $8.90    $9.25    $9.45    $9.65    $9.65    $9.87    Order Poster
Minnesota    $6.15    $6.15    $6.15    $8.00    $9.00    $9.50    $9.50    $9.65    $9.86    $10.00    $10.08    $10.33 2    Order Poster
Mississippi    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Missouri    $7.25    $7.25    $7.35    $7.50    $7.65    $7.65    $7.70    $7.85    $8.60    $9.45    $10.30    $11.15    Order Poster
Montana    $7.35    $7.65    $7.65    $7.90    $8.05    $8.05    $8.15    $8.30    $8.50    $8.65    $8.75    $9.20    Order Poster
Nebraska    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $8.00    $9.00    $9.00    $9.00    $9.00    $9.00    $9.00    $9.00    Order Poster
Nevada    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $8.25    $9.00    $9.75    $10.50 3    Order Poster
New Hampshire    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
New Jersey    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $8.25    $8.38    $8.38    $8.44    $8.60    $10.00    $11.00    $12.00    $13.00    Order Poster
New Mexico    $7.50    $7.50    $7.50    $7.50    $7.50    $7.50    $7.50    $7.50    $7.50    $9.00    $10.50    $11.50    Order Poster
New York    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $8.00    $8.75    $9.00    $9.70    $10.40    $11.10    $11.80    $12.50    $13.20 4    Order Poster
North Carolina    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
North Dakota    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Ohio    $7.40    $7.70    $7.85    $7.95    $8.10    $8.10    $8.15    $8.30    $8.55    $8.70    $8.80    $9.30    Order Poster
Oklahoma    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Oregon    $8.50    $8.80    $8.95    $9.10    $9.25    $9.75    $10.75    $10.75    $11.25    $12.00    $12.75    TBD 5    Order Poster
Pennsylvania    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Puerto Rico    $6.55    $6.55    $6.55    $6.55    $6.55    $6.55    $6.55    $6.55    $6.55    $6.55    $6.55    $8.50    Order Poster
Rhode Island    $7.40    $7.40    $7.75    $8.00    $9.00    $9.00    $9.60    $10.10    $10.50    $11.50    $11.50    $12.25    Order Poster
South Carolina    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
South Dakota    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $8.50    $8.50    $8.65    $8.65    $9.10    $9.30    $9.45    $9.95    Order Poster
Tennessee    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Texas    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Utah    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Vermont    $8.15    $8.46    $8.60    $8.73    $9.15    $9.60    $10.00    $10.50    $10.78    $10.96    $11.75    $12.55    Order Poster
Virginia    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $9.50    $11.00    Order Poster
Washington    $8.67    $9.04    $9.19    $9.32    $9.47    $9.47    $11.00    $11.50    $12.00    $13.50    $13.69    $14.49    Order Poster
West Virginia    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $8.00    $8.75    $8.75    $8.75    $8.75    $8.75    $8.75    $8.75    Order Poster
Wisconsin    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
Wyoming    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    $7.25    Order Poster
 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 13, 2022, 03:00:29 PM
I like this.  Might give teams cap room to convince quality globals like Hansen who take regulars reps to stick around for the long term.

Having non cap SMS for global players flies in the face of declining revenues and wanting to have no SMS increases for a new 10 year deal. Globals directly take the place of Canadians on the roster. That flies in the face of pro ratio people wanting to protect Canadians on the roster.

I'm tired of all the loopholes created that just add to the confusion. I never did figure out what the " American Veteran Ratio " really meant. It seems that is another exception the CFL wants to eliminate after its 1st year.

I agree that players should be considered as Nationals or Non Nationals. 



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 13, 2022, 03:09:24 PM
There is no chance that any part of player salaries fall outside the SMS. If they wanted to pay players more, they would just raise the cap. The players who are voting for the deal will look to enrich themselves so they aren't going to vote for 'globals can get paid more and outside the cap but we don't'. It makes no sense.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 13, 2022, 03:15:48 PM
There is no chance that any part of player salaries fall outside the SMS. If they wanted to pay players more, they would just raise the cap. The players who are voting for the deal will look to enrich themselves so they aren't going to vote for 'globals can get paid more and outside the cap but we don't'. It makes no sense.

The global players both on the AR and PR have been paid outside of the SMS. The level of pay was a lower ELC as well.  Whether that is proposed to continue in the new agreement is unknown.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 13, 2022, 03:17:16 PM
Having non cap SMS for global players flies in the face of declining revenues and wanting to have no SMS increases for a new 10 year deal. Globals directly take the place of Canadians on the roster. That flies in the face of pro ratio people wanting to protect Canadians on the roster.



There is no chance that any part of player salaries fall outside the SMS. If they wanted to pay players more, they would just raise the cap. The players who are voting for the deal will look to enrich themselves so they aren't going to vote for 'globals can get paid more and outside the cap but we don't'. It makes no sense.

The global player initiative is limited and tiny.  The non-SMS portion is designed to separate their development cycle from the mainstream players.  The non-SMS nature of their salary is already established.  The key is what to do with them after they have developed.  My idea was to keep them in that niche after development, but upon reflection, I think a better way of addressing the issue is by allowing a Global player to renounce his special status after 2 years on a roster, and be treated as an INT, and allowed to win a spot and salary commensurate with his abilities, regardless of status.  

2 years of a "free ride" should be more than enough to get them to the make or break moment.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 13, 2022, 03:24:20 PM
Whether a young man is a football player or not, he has to pay rent and expenses wherever he is living. $50K usd for a 22 - 26 year old male is not bad. Let him tell his sob story to a young person working in McDonalds in Alabama for $8 and hour. In the US, the minimum wage often falls below $10 / hour range. Only a few hit the $15 / hour mark. All of those are essentially below the poverty level.

The football player can get another job during the off season to increase his income.

Players in their 1st contact mostly get the CFL minimum but it can increase quite quickly in their next contact. Those that become starters are likely to earn $90K+ by year 3. The outcry to get them " decent " pay and benefits is over the top. I know many young people working 3 jobs for minimum wage. I know someone that worked for the Bay for 20+ years and was never a " full time " employee getting benefits.

So cry me a river.

While I agree the CFL can only pay so much based on what they bring in (Edmonton posted its third consecutive loss this year, losing $1.1M) your rationale is terrible and your lack of compassion is at 'old man screams at clouds' levels of bad.

For one, we shouldn't compare a professional athlete to a front line service worker. For two, just because the US has an abhorrently low working-poor wage for some front line service worker positions (in some states) does not strengthen your argument or win you any favours. The vast majority of CFL players come to the league with degrees from great colleges and are delaying the start of their career to pursue the game and provide us with entertainment. So show some contrition and put down your onion belt. It would be great if we could pay them more. They certainly deserve it based on their level of commitment to get to this point and the toll it takes on their bodies, at a bare minimum.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 13, 2022, 03:51:33 PM
What surprises me is the debate over the fact that CFL salaries are too high or too low.  The league has an SMS, based on revenue, that prevents haves/havenots.  Without NFL revenue sharing (or NFL revenue, for that matter), this is the system that works. 

That said, you can't raise SMS without raising revenue.  And for those suggesting a revenue split where the players get x% of total revenue, like 50/50, economies of scale factor in.  Overhead (stadium, management, facilities, travel, etc) for an NFL team as a % of total revenue is tiny compared to CFL.  So while the NFL or NBA could offer such a split, the CFL would go broke doing so.  And trying to find that % number would actually be embarrassing.

Regardless what the SMS is, and want ELC's pay, and what the minimum salary is, there will be a line up of players waiting to sign a CFL contract.  If they dropped the wages to $1500/game flat across the board regardless position, I have no doubt we could find 700 players to take the field.  Would one of those players be Bo Levi, or Willie Jefferson?   Probably not.  But this is why the present system works. 

Every fan, every player, wishes there were more $$$ for salaries.  And every CFL beancounter wishes there were too.  But the reality is, there are only so many beans to count.  No one is getting rich off the CFL.  Players or owners.  So painting the CFL as cheap on salaries is patently false.  Some team might be able to pay more, but most are struggling to pay current salaries. 

Sure, comparing CFL to NFL, CFL salaries are a joke.  When on NFL player makes more than the 700 players in the CFL combined, you can take any comparisons and throw them away.  But compared to AFL, XFL, USFL, NCAA, the CFL pays a fair wage, and allows "stars" to develop and make very good money, as well as get noticed by the NFL and get those opportunities.  Only a handful get those shots, but none of the rest are forced to accept contracts offered, and all get paid at the end of the day their agreed upon amounts. 

Fighting for a few extra duckets today at the expense of killing 700 CFLPA jobs is shortsighted.   Fight the fight you can win, go after benefits, healthcare, retirement, education... the CFLPA needs to serve the majority of their members who are not $100k+ earners. 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 13, 2022, 03:53:11 PM
While I agree the CFL can only pay so much based on what they bring in (Edmonton posted its third consecutive loss this year, losing $1.1M) your rationale is terrible and your lack of compassion is at 'old man screams at clouds' levels of bad.

For one, we shouldn't compare a professional athlete to a front line service worker. For two, just because the US has an abhorrently low working-poor wage for some front line service worker positions (in some states) does not strengthen your argument or win you any favours. The vast majority of CFL players come to the league with degrees from great colleges and are delaying the start of their career to pursue the game and provide us with entertainment. So show some contrition and put down your onion belt. It would be great if we could pay them more. They certainly deserve it based on their level of commitment to get to this point and the toll it takes on their bodies, at a bare minimum.


Poverty exists in Canada as well. Minimum wage in BC raised to just over $15 / hour. That's below the poverty level.

Nearly five million people in Canada ? that?s one out of every seven individuals ? currently live in poverty. Poverty is a widespread issue across the country and the world, but vulnerable groups such as people living with disabilities, single parents, elderly individuals, youth, and racialized communities are more susceptible. The effects of poverty can be expressed in different aspects of a person?s life, including food security, health, and housing. The following statistics show the different manifestations of poverty in Canada.

Football players are well paid. The fact they are professional athletes is their choice and deserves no special consideration.  Lots of jobs take severe physical and mental tolls on people in many industries.

As I said, players going into their 3rd season make more and can rapidly increase to substantial money. Take Oliveria or Augustine as examples who move from $64K to $90K in their new deals.  That's the reward for the risk they take to chase the dream. How about Lawler getting $300K in his 3rd year in the CFL.

Your comment about " old man that screams at clouds " is absurd and not founded.  My rationale is fine.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 13, 2022, 03:59:11 PM
What surprises me is the debate over the fact that CFL salaries are too high or too low.  The league has an SMS, based on revenue, that prevents haves/havenots.  Without NFL revenue sharing (or NFL revenue, for that matter), this is the system that works. 

That said, you can't raise SMS without raising revenue.  And for those suggesting a revenue split where the players get x% of total revenue, like 50/50, economies of scale factor in.  Overhead (stadium, management, facilities, travel, etc) for an NFL team as a % of total revenue is tiny compared to CFL.  So while the NFL or NBA could offer such a split, the CFL would go broke doing so.  And trying to find that % number would actually be embarrassing.

Regardless what the SMS is, and want ELC's pay, and what the minimum salary is, there will be a line up of players waiting to sign a CFL contract.  If they dropped the wages to $1500/game flat across the board regardless position, I have no doubt we could find 700 players to take the field.  Would one of those players be Bo Levi, or Willie Jefferson?   Probably not.  But this is why the present system works. 

Every fan, every player, wishes there were more $$$ for salaries.  And every CFL beancounter wishes there were too.  But the reality is, there are only so many beans to count.  No one is getting rich off the CFL.  Players or owners.  So painting the CFL as cheap on salaries is patently false.  Some team might be able to pay more, but most are struggling to pay current salaries. 

Sure, comparing CFL to NFL, CFL salaries are a joke.  When on NFL player makes more than the 700 players in the CFL combined, you can take any comparisons and throw them away.  But compared to AFL, XFL, USFL, NCAA, the CFL pays a fair wage, and allows "stars" to develop and make very good money, as well as get noticed by the NFL and get those opportunities.  Only a handful get those shots, but none of the rest are forced to accept contracts offered, and all get paid at the end of the day their agreed upon amounts. 

Fighting for a few extra duckets today at the expense of killing 700 CFLPA jobs is shortsighted.   Fight the fight you can win, go after benefits, healthcare, retirement, education... the CFLPA needs to serve the majority of their members who are not $100k+ earners. 

Even the NFL is unfair. The players at the bottom get $700K while those at the top get $45M. The level of any SMS is tied to revenue but only partially relevant. Obviously the bottom end of NFL salaries is significant but its the scale from top to bottom that makes no sense. Most pro sports have similar issues.

In a perfect world the minimum salaries are raised but the top end is clipped lower within a given SMS in any league. Unfortunately that's not what happens in a free market.

Just for the sake of argument, a new SMS could raise the minimum in 2022 without actually increasing the amount of the SMS. That forces the top salaries down to keep the spend within the SMS.

Where you draw that line is debatable as to a given view on how much you think what ELC players should earn. IIRC even players that are not starters get scaled increases going into year 3? The downside it that those players may lose their jobs to the new 1st year players.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 13, 2022, 04:04:59 PM
Poverty exists in Canada as well. Minimum wage in BC raised to just over $15 / hour. That's below the poverty level.

Nearly five million people in Canada ? that?s one out of every seven individuals ? currently live in poverty. Poverty is a widespread issue across the country and the world, but vulnerable groups such as people living with disabilities, single parents, elderly individuals, youth, and racialized communities are more susceptible. The effects of poverty can be expressed in different aspects of a person?s life, including food security, health, and housing. The following statistics show the different manifestations of poverty in Canada.

Football players are well paid. The fact they are professional athletes is their choice and deserves no special consideration.  Lots of jobs take severe physical and mental tolls on people in many industries.

As I said, players going into their 3rd season make more and can rapidly increase to substantial money. Take Oliveria or Augustine as examples who move from $64K to $90K in their new deals.  That's the reward for the risk they take to chase the dream. How about Lawler getting $300K in his 3rd year in the CFL.

Your comment about " old man that screams at clouds " is absurd and not founded.

The entire thesis of your first post on this matter was that young Americans who come to Canada for our entertainment and take home extremely modest compensation after conversion and tax should be lucky because you know McDonalds workers in Alabama make less, and other people you know work 'three jobs' or have to take even more drastic measures to make a living. You even used the ol' 'cry me a river' because someone else has got it 'worse'. It is an out of touch position likely reinforced by your own privilege.

 I agree with you that the CFL can't afford to pay any more. That doesn't mean that it should sit well with anyone. I've never met a McDonalds worker who got CTE or lost the use of their arm permenately as a result of working there (Jonathan Hefney)


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 13, 2022, 04:19:19 PM
The entire thesis of your first post on this matter was that young Americans who come to Canada for our entertainment and take home extremely modest compensation after conversation and tax should be lucky because you know McDonalds workers in Alabama make less, and other people you know work 'three jobs' or have to take even more drastic measures to make a living. You even used the ol' 'cry me a river' because someone else has got it 'worse'.

It is an out of touch position likely reinforced by your own privilege. I agree with you that the CFL can't afford to pay any more. That doesn't mean that it should sit well with anyone. I've never met a McDonalds working who got CTE or lost the use of their arm permenately as a result of working there (Jonathan Hefney)

Ever hear of Workers Compensation? Workers in construction and manufacturing jobs lose their lives or suffer permanent injuries all too often. While they may not get CTE, some will end up unable to ever work again. Police, firemen, military, healthcare workers all can be severely injured or killed.

I recall working for a candy company in the mid 70's. First week on the job a worker cut 3 fingers on off her hand. In my 1st job the person I replaced lost an arm in a large printing press accident.

One of my staff nearly killed another employee by careless operation of a forklift.

After a lifetime of work I remember many life altering accidents to friends and co-workers.

In fact I've worked for a very large company where deaths occurred at work. Paint vapour explosion in a truck manufacturing plant paint booth in the mid 1980's. IIRC 4 people died.

Ask around. I would think somebody you know, knows somebody that has had a serious life changing injury at work.







Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 13, 2022, 04:30:53 PM
Ever hear of Workers Compensation? Workers in construction and manufacturing jobs lose their lives or suffer permanent injuries all too often. While they may not get CTE, some will end up unable to ever work again. Police, firemen, military, healthcare workers all can be severely injured or killed.

I recall working for a candy company in the mid 70's. First week on the job a worker cut 3 fingers on off her hand. In my 1st job the person I replaced lost an arm in a large printing press accident.

One of my staff nearly killed another employee by careless operation of a forklift.

After a lifetime of work I remember many life altering accidents to friends and co-workers.

In fact I've worked for a very large company where deaths occurred at work. Paint vapour explosion in a truck manufacturing plant paint booth in the mid 1980's. IIRC 4 people died.

Ask around. I would think somebody you know, knows somebody that has has a serious life changing injury at work.





...CFL players don't get 'workers compensation'. Just because you had to walk to school uphill both ways is no reason why someone else should too. When you were growing up you could buy a brand new house in Winnipeg for $65,000. Times change.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 13, 2022, 04:41:00 PM
...CFL players don't get 'workers compensation'. Just because you had to walk to school uphill both ways is no reason why someone else should too. When you were growing up you could buy a brand new house in Winnipeg for $65,000. Times change.

Times change? Nothing like deflecting the discussion.

Injured players get their full salary on the IR. That may be as an ELC salary or a veteran salary like Collaros in 2019 after 3 plays. Teams have medical and rehab people to assist those players during and post season.

Could benefits be better? Certainly but just listen to the news. Numerous strikes going on in BC at the moment. Workers wanting the same thing. More money and better benefits.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 13, 2022, 04:42:43 PM
Times change? Nothing like deflecting the discussion.

Injured players get their full salary on the IR. That may be as an ELC salary or a veteran salary like Collaros in 2019 after 3 plays. Teams have medical and rehab people to assist those players during and post season.

Could benefits be better? Certainly but just listen to the news. Numerous strikes going on in BC at the moment. Workers wanting the same thing. More money and better benefits.

Deflecting? You are out to lunch man!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 13, 2022, 04:44:01 PM
Deflecting? You are out to lunch man!

You pay. I pay for the beer.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 13, 2022, 05:07:51 PM
Yes, top to bottom, salaries in any league make no sense.  It has come back a little in QB's in the CFL, although Lawler's contact last year shows the position players moving up a bit into that range.

Minimum salaries in the NFL change, PR eligibility changes... it cycles through players that are working their way into a lineup, vs. the fringe players that just hang on..  once you start having to pay them "veteran's" salary, they become a lot less interesting than younger players with potential. 

Do we end up with ELC/min salary and min vet salary at different levels?  Do we have to have a matrix of PR + IR + AR games = Min Vet Salary, and if that is less than 24 any contract can be at ELC rate? 





Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 13, 2022, 05:50:06 PM
Yes, top to bottom, salaries in any league make no sense.  It has come back a little in QB's in the CFL, although Lawler's contact last year shows the position players moving up a bit into that range.

Minimum salaries in the NFL change, PR eligibility changes... it cycles through players that are working their way into a lineup, vs. the fringe players that just hang on..  once you start having to pay them "veteran's" salary, they become a lot less interesting than younger players with potential. 

Do we end up with ELC/min salary and min vet salary at different levels?  Do we have to have a matrix of PR + IR + AR games = Min Vet Salary, and if that is less than 24 any contract can be at ELC rate? 






To some degree it's simple math regardless of how high the SMS is set.

If you increase the bottom minimum, then either there are less at the top or those at the top have lower ceilings.

Like any job it's a question of how good do you want your benefits to be and how much less salary are you willing to give up for better salary? That's a common discussion in new negotiations.

It becomes a trade off money versus benefits. Benefits are a direct cost to employers and a benefit to employees.

I'd say younger people in general live more in the now and benefits are less important to some. That's not necessarily the best idea but the reality of youth. It needs to be a fair mix of those two factors.

Bombers lost Lawler, Desjarlais, M. Jones and a few others coming off of their ELC's to much better salaries on new teams. It's not like the real world where many workers might be lucky to get a 2% annual raise.  As mentioned a player coming off an ELC that is at the bottom skill set on the roster could easily be replaced by a new player getting an ELC deal.

There is no perfect formula. Where a player's earning curve is unpredictable in year 1. Turnover happens for many reasons.

If a team has 10 players on ELC's raising the minimum to $70K is only a $70K increase in the spend on their salaries against the SMS. That seems almost inconsequential in the big picture of total SMS spend.

OTOH giving M. Reilly an increase from about $450K to $700K in 2019 is incomprehensible. Or Lawler going from $63K to $300K as examples.

There was a report that many teams had spent close to current SMS by the time free agency was over. So if there is no or very little increase to the new SMS, any increase to the ELC will be very difficult. They go hand in hand.

That makes the suggestion of negotiating much earlier ( prior to free agency ) have more weight.

You mentioned scaled vet salaries at different levels. I don't think that works because free agency market decides how the 3rd year player will be valued somewhere in free agency.

OTOH, do we want to give a 3rd or 4th year player and increase he may not have deserved by mandate in the CBA? If he didn't earn it, chances are he gets replaced by the new ELC player.

If there is an increase to the 2022 SMS I think that money is spent late in the season renewing contracts ( prior to free agency ) as we've seen in the past. Or for players returning from NFL for example. Current players already have contracts in place.  I don't imagine an increase would be retroactive towards ELC's for example.

Each off season we see higher priced players displaced in order to pay other that deserve to get more.

I've worked in unions and I've worked in management. Paying someone based on time or job classification has both pros and cons. OTOH the CFL is both a union and a free market environment with free agency.











Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: blue_gold_84 on May 13, 2022, 06:55:10 PM
You pay. I pay for the beer.

What, no invite for the rest of us? I like beer.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 13, 2022, 07:46:38 PM
What, no invite for the rest of us? I like beer.

Come to Vancouver and I'll buy you a beer.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 13, 2022, 10:06:59 PM

To some degree it's simple math regardless of how high the SMS is set.

If you increase the bottom minimum, then either there are less at the top or those at the top have lower ceilings.

Like any job it's a question of how good do you want your benefits to be and how much less salary are you willing to give up for better salary? That's a common discussion in new negotiations.

It becomes a trade off money versus benefits. Benefits are a direct cost to employers and a benefit to employees.

I'd say younger people in general live more in the now and benefits are less important to some. That's not necessarily the best idea but the reality of youth. It needs to be a fair mix of those two factors.

Bombers lost Lawler, Desjarlais, M. Jones and a few others coming off of their ELC's to much better salaries on new teams. It's not like the real world where many workers might be lucky to get a 2% annual raise.  As mentioned a player coming off an ELC that is at the bottom skill set on the roster could easily be replaced by a new player getting an ELC deal.

There is no perfect formula. Where a player's earning curve is unpredictable in year 1. Turnover happens for many reasons.

If a team has 10 players on ELC's raising the minimum to $70K is only a $70K increase in the spend on their salaries against the SMS. That seems almost inconsequential in the big picture of total SMS spend.

OTOH giving M. Reilly an increase from about $450K to $700K in 2019 is incomprehensible. Or Lawler going from $63K to $300K as examples.

There was a report that many teams had spent close to current SMS by the time free agency was over. So if there is no or very little increase to the new SMS, any increase to the ELC will be very difficult. They go hand in hand.

That makes the suggestion of negotiating much earlier ( prior to free agency ) have more weight.

You mentioned scaled vet salaries at different levels. I don't think that works because free agency market decides how the 3rd year player will be valued somewhere in free agency.

OTOH, do we want to give a 3rd or 4th year player and increase he may not have deserved by mandate in the CBA? If he didn't earn it, chances are he gets replaced by the new ELC player.

If there is an increase to the 2022 SMS I think that money is spent late in the season renewing contracts ( prior to free agency ) as we've seen in the past. Or for players returning from NFL for example. Current players already have contracts in place.  I don't imagine an increase would be retroactive towards ELC's for example.

Each off season we see higher priced players displaced in order to pay other that deserve to get more.

I've worked in unions and I've worked in management. Paying someone based on time or job classification has both pros and cons. OTOH the CFL is both a union and a free market environment with free agency.

Yes, true.  Raising the minimums will drop the top, or reduce the number getting more than min. 

The question remains, is the current minimum too low. Is it an unreasonable salary for what is being asked of players. 

The answer is quite clear, nope.  There are no shortages of players that are willing to play for that. 

Now, I know the next argument.  "If we offered more money, we'd get better players."

Would we?  Would we upgrade the talent pool significantly by offering $70k/yr instead of $63K?  I don't think it would make one whit of a difference.

I also think dropping the base to $55k wouldn't make much of a difference in players we attract or retain.  In fact, dropping the base and adding 2 more roster spots would not affect the SMS total, and give the CFLPA more jobs for their members.  $55k/yr is the equivalent of someone making $27.50/hr for the entire year.  I don't think there would be any shortage of players willing to work for that, and the opportunity to play pro ball and potentially get a Lawler type contract or a Dejarlais type opportunity.

As soon as the CFLPA starts thinking this is a major league sport that can demand more money in the face of declining revenues because teams haven't gone broke yet, we will see one or more teams fail.

I like the USFL's idea of education incentives for all players, *that* is the kind of thing the CFL and CFLPA should be working towards. And while half the PA is covered by universal health care, the other half needs it. Taking care of the players longer term, not the PA just squeezing a few more bucks out of a broke league today.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 13, 2022, 10:27:14 PM
The other half needing better health care is a problem for the population of the USA. It's not something the CFL can resolve, even for just those players. Not sure the CFL can or should be responsible and doing more for just the Canadians wouldn't be a good precedent.

I think part of the idea of option out clauses for players to get an NFL offer had some merit when 1st year players stand out. Alford for example. OTOH that's really an exception for a 1st or even 2nd year player to strike NFL gold. Most players don't make it past a PR spot and often are back by LD.

Realistically I don't think it changed the real landscape but was a carrot of sorts for some players.

As you said there are hundreds of new players coming to TC every year. The majority of those that do well stay in the CFL. The very very good get drafted in the NFL and don't end up in the CFL for the most part.

Most players are university grads so education incentives probably not on their minds.

The USFL raised the minimum due to shorter season and similar ELC's. Players going into their 2nd season ( if there is one ) may have earned a raise but it's a flat amount. Aside from using an NFL offer as a way out, there is little upside.

At least in the CFL a player going into his 2nd contract could get substantially more.  The rookies in the CFL all could have decided to register for the draft in the USFL but they didn't.

I've suggested reducing the roster by 2 in order to use that money elsewhere within the roster. The problem is that more money by in large will go to a few top earners.

Maybe we'll hear how the negotiations are going tomorrow or whether players will show up for TC on Sunday etc etc.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 14, 2022, 04:02:35 AM
The other half needing better health care is a problem for the population of the USA. It's not something the CFL can resolve, even for just those players. Not sure the CFL can or should be responsible and doing more for jusI think part of the idea of option out clauses for players to get an NFL offer had some merit when 1st year players stand out.


If you're going to take that stance at least know what you're talking about. The CFL currently provides support for injured players for 12 months after an injury through insurance provided by the team.

After that, no matter if the player is healthy or not, no further care is provided if they aren't on an active roster (if a player has suffured a long term injury lasting more than 12 months they probably have close to a 0% chance to be on an active  roster). This means lingering head injuries, further surgeries, etc, the player is on their own. Canadians still have access to healthcare which may help if the surgery is deemed necessary but no CFL player, Canadian or American is eligible for any workers' health benefits as a result of injuries sustained playing in the CFL.

So all those examples you threw out earlier about fireman and military service workers, if they can't work as a result of an injury suffered on the job have various forms of on-going assistance. CFL players who have mobility issues immediately or later in life do not. Guys with CTE do not. Guys with one and a half arms do not.

The CFL could absolutely do more by providing better and longer lasting and/or more thorough coverage for Canadians and Americans (like the NFL) but it's expensive so they don't. 

It may not bother you because you grew up in factories watching people get maimed but it bothers me and I wish we had the means, as a league, to take care of the players who get hurt playing for us making fairly pedestrian incomes.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: DM83 on May 14, 2022, 04:44:10 AM
Hey Blue,

Have you met any of the players at least with the Bombers?
They may have played at a University, but I think many of the guys I have met, are not the sharpest stick in the drawer.

It actually scared me.  As a condition of playing at the U of M, or maybe even to stay in a  Faculty, you had to have a certain grade point average. Everyone must have heard of past Great junior players who play out their junior eligibility, then go to university.  Finally a few years ago then CIS placed an age restriction in it. That was Canada.

 I met and practiced against super American athletes, who were either going to, or had just played pro and didn?t make the team for one reason or another.( I couldn?t believe they didn?t make it, they were great) but they didn?t have anything of substance to fall back on, and seeing that was  scary.  Football was their ticket , and then it was gone. Some guys stayed in Winnipeg and have become entrepreneurs, that was the good. 

However as an educator myself,  I would like to think some guys without education might benefit like a program like junior hockey provides.  Not sure if guys who were cut could access it, but certainly, younger guys making the team, with the only priority for a young man is playing, partying  and having fun, Is awesome in your early to mid twenties, but after that, you need to plan on the post playing days.  Some sort of tuition paid for for just an example first year of a program, could  a return to working at McDs.

So, I disagree with your comment about all the guys being university educated??? I would be dubious of the accuracy of that. Our Canadian guys are better suited to post playing days, because at least for the Bisons you had to have  a passing grade in at least three courses, to continue.  Hence my comment that it would be nice to take care of the guys afterward.to a certain degree.  On my wish list!  Lol!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 14, 2022, 12:43:01 PM
Hey Blue,

Have you met any of the players at least with the Bombers?
They may have played at a University, but I think many of the guys I have met, are not the sharpest stick in the drawer.

It actually scared me.  As a condition of playing at the U of M, or maybe even to stay in a  Faculty, you had to have a certain grade point average. Everyone must have heard of past Great junior players who play out their junior eligibility, then go to university.  Finally a few years ago then CIS placed an age restriction in it. That was Canada.

 I met and practiced against super American athletes, who were either going to, or had just played pro and didn?t make the team for one reason or another.( I couldn?t believe they didn?t make it, they were great) but they didn?t have anything of substance to fall back on, and seeing that was  scary.  Football was their ticket , and then it was gone. Some guys stayed in Winnipeg and have become entrepreneurs, that was the good. 

However as an educator myself,  I would like to think some guys without education might benefit like a program like junior hockey provides.  Not sure if guys who were cut could access it, but certainly, younger guys making the team, with the only priority for a young man is playing, partying  and having fun, Is awesome in your early to mid twenties, but after that, you need to plan on the post playing days.  Some sort of tuition paid for for just an example first year of a program, could  a return to working at McDs.

So, I disagree with your comment about all the guys being university educated??? I would be dubious of the accuracy of that. Our Canadian guys are better suited to post playing days, because at least for the Bisons you had to have  a passing grade in at least three courses, to continue.  Hence my comment that it would be nice to take care of the guys afterward.to a certain degree.  On my wish list!  Lol!

I met many players in the past in my younger days. I played in the touch league in Vancouver and " pick up " games when I was younger. In some cases that included tackle with no equipment against a few that were in the CFL but it was during the off season.

At times I played with players from UBC that ended up in the CFL a year later for example.  Yes some were not very bright and others were on the path to become doctors, lawyers and very technical positions. That's true with any group in society. Some don't get a chance at a university education and some are not as smart as others. Some billionaires didn't finish high school.

All of that was between mid 1970's and 1993.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 14, 2022, 01:48:39 PM
Just heard on the local news that there was a full day of negotiations and that will continue today as well. Nothing specific either positive or negative but the two sides are talking.

Crunch day for some trimming of roster, down to 85 today and then again on Tuesday, down to 75. Hard to tell how many players are non counters at the moment, but probably going to see 15 or so released in the next few days.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 14, 2022, 03:44:28 PM
We can't solve the US health care issues, but we can take care of our players after they leave the league.  Its not that expensive, and it is the right thing to do.  Extending health care removes the issue we saw with Hefney.

As to DM83's comment about players not being the sharpest stick in the drawer, most drafted players have completed a university programme.  Some are glorified basket weaving courses designed to keep grade point eligibility for sports, while others get legit degrees that they use the rest of their lives.  Some even become doctors...

But not all finish their education, or get one that serves them post career.  Hence the opportunity to finish or redo their schooling will have a very positive outcome for many players.  Again, like healthcare, not all will benefit, but those that need it, it could be a vital support mechanism post career.  If the USFL can put together such a programme, I am sure the CFL can find a way, I'm sure, if negotiated correctly, the cross promotion opportunity could make it almost cost neutral.

I forgot about NFL windows in my original CBA.  There should be a NFL opt out window for *every player* between Jan 1 and Jan 21 each year.  That give everyone a chance to get a look, and teams a chance to re-sign players aftger the NFL window and before FA starts 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 14, 2022, 04:00:33 PM
We can't solve the US health care issues, but we can take care of our players after they leave the league.  Its not that expensive, and it is the right thing to do.  Extending health care removes the issue we saw with Hefney.

As to DM83's comment about players not being the sharpest stick in the drawer, most drafted players have completed a university programme.  Some are glorified basket weaving courses designed to keep grade point eligibility for sports, while others get legit degrees that they use the rest of their lives.  Some even become doctors...

But not all finish their education, or get one that serves them post career.  Hence the opportunity to finish or redo their schooling will have a very positive outcome for many players.  Again, like healthcare, not all will benefit, but those that need it, it could be a vital support mechanism post career.  If the USFL can put together such a programme, I am sure the CFL can find a way, I'm sure, if negotiated correctly, the cross promotion opportunity could make it almost cost neutral.

I forgot about NFL windows in my original CBA.  There should be a NFL opt out window for *every player* between Jan 1 and Jan 21 each year.  That give everyone a chance to get a look, and teams a chance to re-sign players aftger the NFL window and before FA starts 


So it's not that expensive but the USA won't provide good healthcare to it's own citizens? It may be the right thing to do but unless you have revenue like the NFL it is not feasible. Not every CFL team is currently showing a profit.

Now if the CFLPA wants to " take "$5K - $10K from every player and put it into an insurance kind of fund for seriously injured players, then maybe that's part of a solution. An offset from a pension entity.

CTE may not become known for years or decades. Broken legs, arms, leg injuries and other common injuries can also have long term impacts. Very few instances of issues like the Hefney example.

Matt Dunigan could have increased cognitive issues as he gets older including CTE. A few others come to mind. I know a former DT that I coached with died of suspected CTE.  A couple of CFL names come to mind that died after a hit during a game. Also a couple in the NFL.

Zack Collaros could be a player that might suffer some level of CTE down the road. There could be a number of players in that category.

Regardless it's a very small number and I don't know what the CFL can do to cover the unknown issues down the road. Some injuries are career ending but are non cognitive problems: Theisman's compound broken leg. Horrifying to watch.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 14, 2022, 04:54:16 PM
OTOH giving M. Reilly an increase from about $450K to $700K in 2019 is incomprehensible. Or Lawler going from $63K to $300K as examples.

That escapade did serve a very useful purpose: it demonstrated to the league and the players that pay like that will kill a team.  Never again will you see a team overpay by that percentage for a QB.  The repercussions for those involved were quite severe.  Lions had a horrifically bad 2 years.  Claybrooks will probably never HC again.  Hervey lost his job.  Fans were unhappy.  Everyone suffered, even M.Reilly; taking a huge number of sacks.

Maybe you need an episode like that once in a generation to remind people why it's a bad idea.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 14, 2022, 05:51:53 PM
That escapade did serve a very useful purpose: it demonstrated to the league and the players that pay like that will kill a team.  Never again will you see a team overpay by that percentage for a QB.  The repercussions for those involved were quite severe.  Lions had a horrifically bad 2 years.  Claybrooks will probably never HC again.  Hervey lost his job.  Fans were unhappy.  Everyone suffered, even M.Reilly; taking a huge number of sacks.

Maybe you need an episode like that once in a generation to remind people why it's a bad idea.


.....and yet the Elks double all reasonable expectations of what a CFL receiver could earn by signing Lawler to a $300k/season contract, this coming after the worst season of attendance in their history....I'm not sure the CFL ever learns from it's lessons.  It's somewhat like watching a friend go out and blow $100k on a luxury auto while being underwater on a huge mortgage.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 14, 2022, 06:12:44 PM
Farhan Lalji
@FarhanLaljiTSN
1h
The latest memo from @CFLPA
 to @CFL
. I?ve heard from a few sources that the two sides are getting closer to a deal but a MOU has not been signed yet. As players begin physicals with their teams, bargaining continues & additional updates expected later today. @CFLonTSN


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 14, 2022, 08:28:57 PM
https://www.cfl.ca/2022/05/14/a-letter-from-commissioner-randy-ambrosie-to-cfl-fans-players/

Some of the info was a little on the vague side. If I interpreted this correctly, kicks in for 2023.

1. Going back to 3 QB's any nationality. If teams roster 2 Globals that eliminates another Canadian by adding back a 3rd QB in 2023. No mention whether that increases the roster by 1 more or whether there is still a non dressed player at # 46?

2. One veteran American will be classified as a National starting in 2023. Technically that reduces the number of actual starting Canadians by 1.

3. Minimum salary increases twice. Once in 2023 to $70K and to $75K in 2027. You think there would be annual raises between 2023 and 2027 rather than  3 years with no raise?

4. 7 year deal with a $2M SMS increase over 7 years = about $285K per year which is significantly more than in recent years.

5. Partially guaranteed contracts for some veterans possible. At the discretion of the team. Not sure how this varies from current deal with veteran cut off dates.

6. Revenue sharing above a set level.


Sounds like a deal the CFLPA would accept.  Anybody think of any areas of contention?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: The Zipp on May 14, 2022, 09:28:34 PM
Sounds like a strike is imminent, and that will not be good for the CFL.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 14, 2022, 09:45:48 PM
Current: Minimum 21 NI's, 7 guaranteed starters.
Offer: 20 or 21 NI's, 6 guaranteed Starters.

Current: 2 QB's, NI QB is only an NI if he starts.
Offer: 3 QB's, NI QB is only an NI if he starts.

Current: Max 20 American's.
Offer: 19 American's. 1 of which, who has 4 years with the league or 3 years with the same team is a designated NI.

Offer: If 1 Global then 21 NI's & no NI jobs lost. If 2 Globals then 20 NI's and 1 NI job lost.

My take:

I hate the designated American NI. If the Yankee NI gets hurt they will have to be replaced by a real NI to keep the ratio. If they drop the guaranteed NI starters by 1 he could be replaced by either a DI or an NI.

Lets see if the Players accept it.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: gobombersgo on May 14, 2022, 10:43:00 PM
Current: Minimum 21 NI's, 7 guaranteed starters.
Offer: 20 or 21 NI's, 6 guaranteed Starters.

Current: 2 QB's, NI QB is only an NI if he starts.
Offer: 3 QB's, NI QB is only an NI if he starts.

Current: Max 20 American's.
Offer: 19 American's. 1 of which, who has 4 years with the league or 3 years with the same team is a designated NI.

Offer: If 1 Global then 21 NI's & no NI jobs lost. If 2 Globals then 20 NI's and 1 NI job lost.

My take:

I hate the designated American NI. If the Yankee NI gets hurt they will have to be replaced by a real NI to keep the ratio. If they drop the guaranteed NI starters by 1 he could be replaced by either a DI or an NI.

Lets see if the Players accept it.

Last season they implemented a new rule where a veteran American could replace an injured starting National. I didn't like the rule as it just further complicates the roster and some teams like Hamilton abused the rule.

Hopefully they get ride of it in the new CBA.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 14, 2022, 10:44:08 PM
Current: Minimum 21 NI's, 7 guaranteed starters.
Offer: 20 or 21 NI's, 6 guaranteed Starters.

Current: 2 QB's, NI QB is only an NI if he starts.
Offer: 3 QB's, NI QB is only an NI if he starts.

Current: Max 20 American's.
Offer: 19 American's. 1 of which, who has 4 years with the league or 3 years with the same team is a designated NI.

Offer: If 1 Global then 21 NI's & no NI jobs lost. If 2 Globals then 20 NI's and 1 NI job lost.

My take:

I hate the designated American NI. If the Yankee NI gets hurt they will have to be replaced by a real NI to keep the ratio. If they drop the guaranteed NI starters by 1 he could be replaced by either a DI or an NI.

Lets see if the Players accept it.

I don't like the idea of the designated American NI either. Every team will have one and it effectively eliminates 1 Canadian player. I say that even though I'm an anti ratio guy.

Adding an extra import starter if fine with me but why go to a work around to create a Designated American? Most teams will roster 3 import QB's and 4 DI's bringing the total to 23. It's ridiculous to call one of the Americans ( probably the QB ) a NI when he's not.

Regardless I still don't see any reason the CFLPA wouldn't accept the offer. OTOH reports are that talks have broken off?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 14, 2022, 11:04:31 PM
.....and yet the Elks double all reasonable expectations of what a CFL receiver could earn by signing Lawler to a $300k/season contract, this coming after the worst season of attendance in their history....I'm not sure the CFL ever learns from it's lessons.  It's somewhat like watching a friend go out and blow $100k on a luxury auto while being underwater on a huge mortgage.

The highest-paid SB in recent memory was who, D.Walker (but not in SSK)?  I thought he was earning $220k?  $250k?  Someone can help me out here... but top WRs were already seeing close to $250k.

Yes, $50k above that to $300k for Lawler is a bit crazy, however $50k jump is incomparable to the $200k-$250k jump M.Reilly got over the next-highest paid QB at the time (BLM?).  $50k is a cap burp.  $250k ruins your whole cap.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 14, 2022, 11:06:06 PM
Last season they implemented a new rule where a veteran American could replace an injured starting National. I didn't like the rule as it just further complicates the roster and some teams like Hamilton abused the rule.

I was looking (hoping) for "abuse" of that in 2021 but I don't recall seeing any?  Nothing mentioned here on this forum anyway(?).  Can you let me know how HAM abused it?  AFAIK and remember I didn't see any team making use of it.  Certainly WPG didn't... we always seemed to have 7 starting (real) NATs on field, never a fake-NAT.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 14, 2022, 11:12:11 PM
https://www.cfl.ca/2022/05/14/a-letter-from-commissioner-randy-ambrosie-to-cfl-fans-players/

3. Minimum salary increases twice. Once in 2023 to $70K and to $75K in 2027. You think there would be annual raises between 2023 and 2027 rather than  3 years with no raise?

CFLPA should publicly release their position, too.  The league position seems reasonable.  If CFLPA holds out, we should know why.  I'm sure they would have their (good) reasons.

My take: fake-NAT change is fine with me.  Limiting it to 1 player actually seems like a good idea.  Less complicated.  As someone already said, it's not a panacea as he would have to be spelled/injury-replaced by a real-NAT anyhow.  For us, we probably wouldn't make Bryant or Yoshi our 1 guy.  Best to do it at a position we have ample NAT talent as backup.  Maybe Bailey or Alexander?

As for min salary, the increase is pretty weak given that reported inflation (CPI) is over 8% per year (that they admit to) and will not drop any time soon.  They are offering 8% increase every 4-ish years when you need 8% per year just to keep up with inflation?  What if inflation goes to 15%?  Your $70k ELC will look horrific.  Any wage increase should be tied to COLA/CPI.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: gobombersgo on May 14, 2022, 11:19:34 PM
I was looking (hoping) for "abuse" of that in 2021 but I don't recall seeing any?  Nothing mentioned here on this forum anyway(?).  Can you let me know how HAM abused it?  AFAIK and remember I didn't see any team making use of it.  Certainly WPG didn't... we always seemed to have 7 starting (real) NATs on field, never a fake-NAT.

For a couple of games Hamilton started a National offensive lineman. A few plays later he would be replaced with arguably a more skilled American.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 14, 2022, 11:23:09 PM
For a couple of games Hamilton started a National offensive lineman. A few plays later he would be replaced with arguably a more skilled American.

Did they at least fake an injury?  I'm pretty sure the rule was tied to "injury".  Did they fake it on-field or just say "dude is on the bench with injury"?

Surprised the much-vaunted "Coach O" would permit such chicanery.  Austin, sure... but "O" is supposed to walk on water.  Thanks for the deets.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 14, 2022, 11:28:25 PM
CFLPA should publicly release their position, too.  The league position seems reasonable.  If CFLPA holds out, we should know why.  I'm sure they would have their (good) reasons.

My take: fake-NAT change is fine with me.  Limiting it to 1 player actually seems like a good idea.  Less complicated.  As someone already said, it's not a panacea as he would have to be spelled/injury-replaced by a real-NAT anyhow.  For us, we probably wouldn't make Bryant or Yoshi our 1 guy.  Best to do it at a position we have ample NAT talent as backup.  Maybe Bailey or Alexander?

As for min salary, the increase is pretty weak given that reported inflation (CPI) is over 8% per year (that they admit to) and will not drop any time soon.  They are offering 8% increase every 4-ish years when you need 8% per year just to keep up with inflation?  What if inflation goes to 15%?  Your $70k ELC will look horrific.  Any wage increase should be tied to COLA/CPI.


Seems like the league is trying to hide revenue. Not counting Grey Cup profits or concessions in the pie.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Big Daddy on May 14, 2022, 11:35:21 PM
Any wage increase should be tied to COLA/CPI.

[/quote]

If the incoming revenue could be guaranteed tied to the rate of COLA/CPI, I would agree.

The problem with the expectations of the players being given at least a reasonable increase is that there is no guarantee revenue is going up.  So the league offers 25% of revenue increase (above an agreed upon threshold) to the players at least addresses the situation if there is good growth.

Not all teams even broke even last year, and that was with huge concessions in salary.  Add to that, no team made money in the lost season, and presumably are still trying to stay afloat.

This league isn't a license to print money like the NFL, as everyone here knows.  Is it realistic to expect teams that have lost a lot of money over the past few years (or decades) to commit to increases with little reason to think the revenue will increase according to inflation?

And by the way, not all jobs have salary increases consistent with inflation.  Some in health care have had annual increases 0, 0 and 1% as a contract, which was in place long before covid came along.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: gobombersgo on May 14, 2022, 11:40:02 PM
Did they at least fake an injury?  I'm pretty sure the rule was tied to "injury".  Did they fake it on-field or just say "dude is on the bench with injury"?

Surprised the much-vaunted "Coach O" would permit such chicanery.  Austin, sure... but "O" is supposed to walk on water.  Thanks for the deets.


Yeah, the guy was legit injured. He wouldn't have been rostered if not for the rule in place.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: gobombersgo on May 15, 2022, 12:43:00 AM
Seems like the league is trying to hide revenue. Not counting Grey Cup profits or concessions in the pie.
Grey Cup profits go to the host team. It's a chance for them off set their losses from seasons they don't host the game. I have no problem with the Grey Cup being excluded.

What the players should be asking for (and I'm not sure if they did) is an increase in playoff money. The current payouts haven't increased for a few years now.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 15, 2022, 12:43:58 AM
Grey Cup profits go to the host team. It's a chance for them off set their losses from seasons they don't host the game. I have no problem with the Grey Cup being excluded.

What the players should be asking for (and I'm not sure if they did) is an increase in playoff money. The current payouts haven't increased for a few years now.

I believe the host team has to buy the game from the league.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 15, 2022, 01:00:37 AM
Letter sent by the Commissioner to the players..,

Dear CFL Players:

This document summarizes the CFL's offer that was presented to the union today, for your consideration.

It?s designed to build a true partnership with you, our talented, hard working, community minded CFL players.

It increases total player compensation by more than $24 million over the term of the agreement ? plus an opportunity to share in revenue increases as we successfully work together to grow the league.

It protects jobs for Canadian players, the bedrock of the CFL.

It offers partially guaranteed contracts, for the first time in our league?s history.

It recognizes the contribution of veteran Americans, with a new opportunity to extend their careers with their team, without restricting free agency in any way.

It includes two increases in the league?s minimum salary.

It provides certainty and stability, with a 7-year-term.

Here are the details:

* $18.9 million in total guaranteed increases to the salary cap league-wide.

* $5.94 million in guaranteed compensation paid for community outreach and promotional appearances league-wide.

* An opportunity for twenty-five per cent of all revenue growth over an agreed upon threshold, to be added to the salary cap starting in 2023.

* Clubs would be permitted to re-sign their veterans to partially guaranteed contracts, a first for the CFL.

* A club would be allowed to choose one American player (non-quarterback), who has been in the league for at least four years or has played with the same team for at least three years, who would be considered a Nationalized American.

* This one Nationalized American would count as a National on the roster. He would join 20 or 21 Canadians who also count as Nationals on the roster.

* Each roster would have a minimum of seven National starters. This would include at least six Canadian players. The seventh starter could be either the Nationalized American or an additional Canadian.

* The roster would also include three quarterbacks of any nationality, 19 Americans and up to two Global players.

* A starting Canadian quarterback would count as a National (Canadian).

* These roster changes would kick in as of 2023.

* The minimum salary would increase to $70,000 in 2023 and $75,000 in 2027.

* An updated Code of Conduct that applies to all members of the CFL Community, including fans, instead of just players.

* A seat for your union on the Board of CFL Ventures, the commercial arm of the league, will allow us to work together on marketing our league and building our business.

An agreement based on this offer helps everyone across the CFL. Fans can expect improved roster continuity, something that has been a top priority for them for years. Our clubs will be able to consistently market their star players, with more confidence they could re-sign.

But this is about you and your career, first and foremost. That's why this offer protects roster spots for our great Canadian players who mean so much to the CFL, it celebrates the veteran American players who have built careers here, and it includes increases for all players, including players paid the league minimum.

This is a win-win offer. It creates a stronger partnership, so we can work together to further improve our game and build our business. And it comes at a critical time. Our league, our clubs, and especially our players have been through so much during the pandemic. We turned the corner in 2021, working together to get back on the field. Now we have an opportunity to accelerate towards a brighter future.

Let's seize that opportunity, together.

Commissioner Randy Ambrosie


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: gobombersgo on May 15, 2022, 01:30:05 AM
I believe the host team has to buy the game from the league.
Sure but that's just a formality as all teams buy the game. I know the cost used to be around 3 million.

If it's a deal breaker maybe the players can ask for the cost of the game to go up to 3.5m (using the number as an example) and the players split up the 500k.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 15, 2022, 02:16:28 AM
All good points.  If players can capture % of ticket revenue and there's big inflation, ticket prices will rise with inflation.  I noticed the single-ticket prices were already up a lot vs 2019.  I guess the player risk looks greater because the time frames being discussed are so long.  Who knows what will be going on in 5 years.  Do they have to lock in such a long term CBA?  Can't they just haggle on a short-term one (like 3 years)?

So no word on today's results yet?  Are they still talking?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: The Zipp on May 15, 2022, 02:33:08 AM
No training camp tomorrow


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 15, 2022, 03:12:49 AM
CFLPA should publicly release their position, too.  The league position seems reasonable.  If CFLPA holds out, we should know why.  I'm sure they would have their (good) reasons.


The CFL makes the offer to the union... this is basically their offer.  Unless teh PA is putting together a counter, they don't have "a position".  There is an offer on the table that the PA members have to vote on.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 15, 2022, 03:16:16 AM
Sure but that's just a formality as all teams buy the game. I know the cost used to be around 3 million.

If it's a deal breaker maybe the players can ask for the cost of the game to go up to 3.5m (using the number as an example) and the players split up the 500k.

The reason the team "buys" the game from the league is to assure the league has the cash to pay the players the playoff bonuses... they are already splitting more than a 2.5 million from the GC revenue.

"This payment comes from revenue from the playoff and Grey Cup games and a minimum of $469,200 is paid to 46-man rosters of 3 teams (2 semi-finalists, 1 bye) for each of the division semi-finals ($938,400 total), $331,200 to 2 teams for each of the division finals ($662,400 total) and $1.104 million for the Grey Cup.  Oct 22, 2021"


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 15, 2022, 04:55:20 AM
CFL Headlines
@CFL_Headlines
2h
CFLPA directs players with seven of nine CFL teams to commence strike on Sunday: The Canadian Football League Players? Association (CFLPA) bargaining committee has informed the CFLPA membership under contract with seven of nine clubs? https://3downnation.com/2022/05/14/cflpa-directs-players-with-seven-of-nine-cfl-teams-to-commence-strike-on-sunday/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
 via @3DownNation


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 15, 2022, 12:10:34 PM
I don't get what the CFLPA isn't getting that they want? I was actually quite surprised on the all the new things the players were getting.

What am I missing?  Best guess is they want the effective date for 2022 and not 2023. After losing the 2020 season and part of 2021, I don't think that's a reasonable position. The 7 year deal might be the sticking point but there is a lot of money going forward.

A strike may result in another shortened season. Pre season may be toast which is bad for the teams and rookies.

Roster cut down for another 10 players would have been Tuesday. Unfortunately those players probably just lost any opportunity to make a real impression. May as well send them home today with the other cuts that were scheduled for yesterday.

All in all it's a depressing outcome.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 15, 2022, 01:50:16 PM
I don't get what the CFLPA isn't getting that they want? I was actually quite surprised on the all the new things the players were getting.

What am I missing?  Best guess is they want the effective date for 2022 and not 2023. After losing the 2020 season and part of 2021, I don't think that's a reasonable position. The 7 year deal might be the sticking point but there is a lot of money going forward.

A strike may result in another shortened season. Pre season may be toast which is bad for the teams and rookies.

Roster cut down for another 10 players would have been Tuesday. Unfortunately those players probably just lost any opportunity to make a real impression. May as well send them home today with the other cuts that were scheduled for yesterday.

All in all it's a depressing outcome.



1. They think the league is hiding money

2. If the league wants to add padded practices back, they need to increase healthcare.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 15, 2022, 02:20:59 PM
1. They think the league is hiding money

2. If the league wants to add padded practices back, they need to increase healthcare.

1. Even if that was true, the new offer is a significant increase to previous SMS. Many teams are public companies and financial records are available.  Nothing to see here. It's obvious that attendance has dropped from earlier times.

If they think the league is hiding money, where do they think this money is coming from. The TV deal was already in place and known amount.

2. CFL had padded practices for decades. Canadian health care is not an issue. Veterans injured in TC go on IR with full pay.  Rookie imports in TC are not as protected but this is nothing new in the 100 years the CFL has existed. If an import makes the roster and is injured he goes on IR at full pay and are protected.

Like any business, healthcare benefits are part of the total package. Wages versus benefits is a question that comes up in any union situation.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 15, 2022, 03:18:35 PM
Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
The @CFLPA is expected to hold a town hall meeting today at which they will provide more information and direction to their membership on Day 1 of the strike.#CFL #CFLPA
6:27 AM ? May 15, 2022


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 15, 2022, 04:16:01 PM
I've seen tweets about how the league has money, that half the teams are owned by billionaires.  This information may be true, but billionaires owning teams means they can break even or even lose a little and not hurt their owners.  The majority of teams are not owned by billionaires, and many have a lot of red ink, and some have gone bankrupt in our recent memory.

It seems like players think there are people getting rich off their pain, effort and potential injury.  The fact that the league has offered as much as they have is astounding to me.  This deal, as it sits, will put some teams in trouble.  The league is optomistic about the future rebound the economics of the sport, and I hope they are right.

If the sticking point is padded practice and extended health care, they need to get it done.  The league should be all over extending healthcare, because it is only an actual cost for Int players returning to the states.   And it could be very easy to strike a deal with Blue Cross or some such to cover those players.  NAT's and GLB's (not residing in the US) are covered by gov't healthcare.

Either back off on padded practices, or step up on healthcare.  With everything else you've offered up, doing the right thing on healthcare should be the easiest decision of the negotiations.  Especially with the Hefney precedent.  We don't want/need a repeat of that.  How the CFL left this out of their offer is befuddling.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Tiger on May 15, 2022, 04:22:35 PM
Per 3DownNation - CFLPA leaked communication

CFL has take it or leave it stance and ends negotiations


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 15, 2022, 04:38:18 PM
I found this over on Lionbackers. Kiss a full season goodbye. If this is the position of the CFLPA it's not going to get resolved soon. I'm surprised the CFL offered as much as they did. I wasn't in favour of a 7 year deal but shorter deal if no rev share fix, doesn't fix a perceived problem by the CFLPA. 

Barking up the wrong tree IMO.


The 3 sticking points for @CFLPA:
- @CFL wants 12 padded practices. PA wants improved health & safety package if they?re to agree
- Revenue sharing needs to include all revenue. Not selected buckets. Statements need to be audited.
- Term of deal (if rev share doesn?t get fixed)


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 15, 2022, 04:56:31 PM
If the sticking point is padded practice and extended health care, they need to get it done.

Adding back a few (or even many) padded practices just takes us back to the way we were a few short years ago.  Why this would be a big problem is beyond me.

1. Play quality and scoring went down precisely when they reduced/dropped padded practice.  Not proof of causation, but it's easy to put 2 & 2 together.  It would seem the league agrees as they did a complete 180 on this now that they are emphasizing scoring.

2. 2021 had the worst rash of achilles and other injuries the CFL has ever seen in TC.  Zero padded practices.  I doubt the return of padded practice will affect injury rate compared to 2021.  In other words, if you want better health coverage, it should be its own demand, not tied to pads or not.

CFL needs pads back.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 15, 2022, 05:26:04 PM
12 Padded practices shouldn't be a sticking point. That's less than 1 a week.

Revenue sharing is ridiculous when at least some teams are losing money and the CFL is propping up teams. Share a % of net income and you're sharing nothing. Sharing a % of gross income and you're making the problem worse for the owners and teams. That's a hill for management to die on.

Term of the deal seems too long to me. I'm sure that management would bend on that one.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 15, 2022, 07:43:16 PM
Improved health care/disability needs to be part of any CBA, regardless padded practices.  Why the CFL balks at this, I have no idea.  Its one thing I will hold their feet to the fire on.

Revenue sharing, sure, if you're willing to take a pay cut when revenue isn't there.  But no, sounds like they want extra if one team makes money, even if the rest lose.  and they want the "billionaires" that own some of the teams to reach into their deep pockets.  I have no respect for that part of the negotiations.

The league has offered a seat on the board of the new partnership with that marketing group.  So they can see what is going on and be involved in the decisions.  Totally unexpected and benefits the CFLPA.

SMS and min salary increases, even if the league loses money.  How can the PA not love this? 

We know the privately owned by bilionaires teams are not cash cows, by any stretch.  Were it not for a billionaire's kindness (thank you Mr. Braley), we'd have 7 teams right now, and who knows where MTL would be if not for another angel investor.   The league is broke, and getting broker.  The concessions the CFLPA has gotten in this contract offer seem optomistic at best, and they are crazy to let it pass. 

If healthcare and such are the concern, the CFL should introduce a comprehensive healthcare package, like I had outlined previously, and take the SMS increases and min salary increases back. 

Again, $$$ should not be an issue. I would love to pay players more, but they are getting at least "what they are worth", and probably more, as a component in the product that is the CFL.   The fact that the league is turning away hundreds of players each TC says the wages are fair, and that there are plenty of players willing to come play for that.   So, if they players are gonna die on the "get what we deserve" thinking the league is flush with cash, I have zero respect for that.

Will the product be inferior if the pay structure decreases / remains the same?  I don't think it will appreciably change.  Can the league bring in scabs and bust the union?  I m certain that would be an easy task.  Anyone remember "The Replacements"?  Except in this case, many of the replacements may actually be better players... its the last thing I'd like to see happen, but the union has to understand it does not have the bargaining power the NHL. MLB, NFL, MLS PA's do.  These leagues employ the best of the best.  The CFL is the best of the rest, and there are tonnes of players out there in that category. 

No business wants to union bust... no team wants to field replacement players.  Just saying, the players have to realize that is a real possibility in this instance.  I bet every team could field a competitive roster of players willing to take $50k for the season, most teams will have a list they can comb right now and assemble that. 









Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 15, 2022, 08:23:05 PM
Lol -- Aardvark. "Every team could field a competive roster of players willing to play for $50,000"

That's crazy even for you.

For starters, teams could not find one quality starting national each let alone seven that isn't already under contract.

Playing with a field of brand new QBs who are willing to come to Canada for $50,000 and learn the game in two weeks? You'd be watching a game worse than American high school. Speaking of which, that's about what you could expect from replacement imports too.

It's fine if you want to be on team owners but you cannot possibly believe what you're saying or you are just so incredibly incorrect in your assessment it borders on delusion.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 15, 2022, 09:07:31 PM
Lol -- Aardvark. "Every team could field a competive roster of players willing to play for $50,000"

That's crazy even for you.

For starters, teams could not find one quality starting national each let alone seven that isn't already under contract.

Playing with a field of brand new QBs who are willing to come to Canada for $50,000 and learn the game in two weeks? You'd be watching a game worse than American high school. Speaking of which, that's about what you could expect from replacement imports too.

It's fine if you want to be on team owners but you cannot possibly believe what you're saying or you are just so incredibly incorrect in your assessment it borders on delusion.

Of course I'm not talking a ratio based, CFL roster rules team... I'm talking purely scabs / replacement players.  Put out a cattle call promising $50 for the season, with $10k up front, and you will have have a line out the door... yes, it will be horrible football, akin to USFL, and might end up with a cigarette smoking englishman kicking field goals and a convict running back, but hey... it'll be football.

My point wasn't that the CFL *should* do it, but rather that they *could* do it.  The CFLPA is no where near as strong in their bargaining position, and bargaining to put the league deeper into the red is stupid. 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 15, 2022, 09:20:32 PM
Of course I'm not talking a ratio based, CFL roster rules team... I'm talking purely scabs / replacement players.  Put out a cattle call promising $50 for the season, with $10k up front, and you will have have a line out the door... yes, it will be horrible football, akin to USFL, and might end up with a cigarette smoking englishman kicking field goals and a convict running back, but hey... it'll be football.

My point wasn't that the CFL *should* do it, but rather that they *could* do it.  The CFLPA is no where near as strong in their bargaining position, and bargaining to put the league deeper into the red is stupid. 

I'm sure fans and sponsors will love that! It would also certainly help with the legitimacy optics of the league too. Definitely a solid option, Aardvark.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 15, 2022, 10:37:37 PM
Adding back a few (or even many) padded practices just takes us back to the way we were a few short years ago.  Why this would be a big problem is beyond me.

1. Play quality and scoring went down precisely when they reduced/dropped padded practice.  Not proof of causation, but it's easy to put 2 & 2 together.  It would seem the league agrees as they did a complete 180 on this now that they are emphasizing scoring.

2. 2021 had the worst rash of achilles and other injuries the CFL has ever seen in TC.  Zero padded practices.  I doubt the return of padded practice will affect injury rate compared to 2021.  In other words, if you want better health coverage, it should be its own demand, not tied to pads or not.

CFL needs pads back.


At the start of this, the PA said injuries had reduced by 31%


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Mikerahl on May 15, 2022, 11:14:26 PM
Scabs are prohibited by labour laws in BC and Quebec so right away you are down two teams.

That is one of many problems with that 'solution'


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: 3rdand1.5 on May 16, 2022, 01:33:00 AM
All this is fine and dandy.....but riddle me this, isn't half the league (+/-) losing money and facing drops in attendance numbers?





Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: the paw on May 16, 2022, 02:07:08 AM
All this is fine and dandy.....but riddle me this, isn't half the league (+/-) losing money and facing drops in attendance numbers?





We only know the finances of the three community owned teams (which pre Covid were all making modest surpluses.  The private owners want to claim losees, but don't want to open the books to verify either their historical losses or even the actual revenues going forward. 

The league also has the new joint venture tied to gambling revenues.  They are offering a board seat, but including that as revenue in a revenue-sharing formula used to set SMS would be better.

The players aren't asking for all the increases up front, but if they base them on revenue growth, they have a right to ask for audits.  Remember, this is a league whose history of private owners includes Nelson Skalbania, Bruce McNall, Murray Pezim and the Gliebermans.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: DM83 on May 16, 2022, 04:42:27 AM
Oh you mean thieves!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 16, 2022, 05:18:07 AM
Negotiations are necessary but the bottom line is the league cannot afford a prolonged strike after coming off a cancelled season and a shortened season in consecutive seasons. A further loss of revenue and fan interest at this stage would be hard to recover from.  They have to settle and very quickly or the league may not recover.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 16, 2022, 12:17:00 PM
Improved health care/disability needs to be part of any CBA, regardless padded practices.  Why the CFL balks at this, I have no idea.  Its one thing I will hold their feet to the fire on.

Revenue sharing, sure, if you're willing to take a pay cut when revenue isn't there.  But no, sounds like they want extra if one team makes money, even if the rest lose.  and they want the "billionaires" that own some of the teams to reach into their deep pockets.  I have no respect for that part of the negotiations.

The league has offered a seat on the board of the new partnership with that marketing group.  So they can see what is going on and be involved in the decisions.  Totally unexpected and benefits the CFLPA.

SMS and min salary increases, even if the league loses money.  How can the PA not love this? 

We know the privately owned by bilionaires teams are not cash cows, by any stretch.  Were it not for a billionaire's kindness (thank you Mr. Braley), we'd have 7 teams right now, and who knows where MTL would be if not for another angel investor.   The league is broke, and getting broker.  The concessions the CFLPA has gotten in this contract offer seem optomistic at best, and they are crazy to let it pass. 

If healthcare and such are the concern, the CFL should introduce a comprehensive healthcare package, like I had outlined previously, and take the SMS increases and min salary increases back. 

Again, $$$ should not be an issue. I would love to pay players more, but they are getting at least "what they are worth", and probably more, as a component in the product that is the CFL.   The fact that the league is turning away hundreds of players each TC says the wages are fair, and that there are plenty of players willing to come play for that.   So, if they players are gonna die on the "get what we deserve" thinking the league is flush with cash, I have zero respect for that.

Will the product be inferior if the pay structure decreases / remains the same?  I don't think it will appreciably change.  Can the league bring in scabs and bust the union?  I m certain that would be an easy task.  Anyone remember "The Replacements"?  Except in this case, many of the replacements may actually be better players... its the last thing I'd like to see happen, but the union has to understand it does not have the bargaining power the NHL. MLB, NFL, MLS PA's do.  These leagues employ the best of the best.  The CFL is the best of the rest, and there are tonnes of players out there in that category. 

No business wants to union bust... no team wants to field replacement players.  Just saying, the players have to realize that is a real possibility in this instance.  I bet every team could field a competitive roster of players willing to take $50k for the season, most teams will have a list they can comb right now and assemble that. 








What exactly do you think needs improving in health care? It never hurts to improve health care but I don't see exactly what your sticking point is at the moment. The league has a number of season ending injuries for players that end up on 6 game IR at full pay. Those include achilles, broken legs or torn up knees. Some of those could be career ending and create some movement or pain issues for life.

Long term damage from concussions is difficult to assess or point directly to cognitive issues.

It's not unusual for a rookie to get cut in TC after a hamstring or generally minor injury that prevents him from continuing. Short term sports injury. The team has medical staff to deal with any of those issues.

Give me an example of any player any team that didn't get treated well medically to better explain your point of view.





Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 16, 2022, 12:48:57 PM
What exactly do you think needs improving in health care? It never hurts to improve health care but I don't see exactly what your sticking point is at the moment. The league has a number of season ending injuries for players that end up on 6 game IR at full pay. Those include achilles, broken legs or torn up knees. Some of those could be career ending and create some movement or pain issues for life.

Long term damage from concussions is difficult to assess or point directly to cognitive issues.

It's not unusual for a rookie to get cut in TC after a hamstring or generally minor injury that prevents him from continuing. Short term sports injury. The team has medical staff to deal with any of those issues.

Give me an example of any player any team that didn't get treated well medically to better explain your point of view.





Johnathon Hefney

https://winnipegsun.com/sports/football/cfl/winnipeg-bluebombers/former-bombers-teammates-lament-severe-injury-that-led-jonathan-hefney-down-road-to-prison-sentence-for-cocaine-trafficking

We see players cut every TC due to injury, how are they cared for?  Once the season starts, and you get injured, there is the IR, but not in TC.

My concern is that heath care in the US is horrible, worse if you don't have insurance.  If we wanted to truly show we cared about the players, we would proposed extending their heath care after their careers, by a set amount (say 5 years), with a rehab rider that may even extend further, or at least for a number of years based on seasons played.

They want health coverage due to potential injury from padded practices.  Big sticking point apparently.  This fills that, and more. 

We have no idea


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 16, 2022, 12:52:07 PM
What exactly do you think needs improving in health care? It never hurts to improve health care but I don't see exactly what your sticking point is at the moment. The league has a number of season ending injuries for players that end up on 6 game IR at full pay. Those include achilles, broken legs or torn up knees. Some of those could be career ending and create some movement or pain issues for life.

Long term damage from concussions is difficult to assess or point directly to cognitive issues.

It's not unusual for a rookie to get cut in TC after a hamstring or generally minor injury that prevents him from continuing. Short term sports injury. The team has medical staff to deal with any of those issues.

Give me an example of any player any team that didn't get treated well medically to better explain your point of view.






Jonathan Hefney is the most egregious recent example.

I do need to clarify and apologize on one point with you. I incorrectly stated that medical player insurance only covers one year. That was true Hefney played and was injured in 2017 but is now three years (two were added in the last round of negotations) and the current offer from the league would increase it to four years. So it's not as bad as I was making it out before and three or four years of comprehensive medical coverage is a lot easier to stomach than one. Sorry about that!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 16, 2022, 01:12:37 PM
Johnathon Hefney

https://winnipegsun.com/sports/football/cfl/winnipeg-bluebombers/former-bombers-teammates-lament-severe-injury-that-led-jonathan-hefney-down-road-to-prison-sentence-for-cocaine-trafficking

We see players cut every TC due to injury, how are they cared for?  Once the season starts, and you get injured, there is the IR, but not in TC.

My concern is that heath care in the US is horrible, worse if you don't have insurance.  If we wanted to truly show we cared about the players, we would proposed extending their heath care after their careers, by a set amount (say 5 years), with a rehab rider that may even extend further, or at least for a number of years based on seasons played.

They want health coverage due to potential injury from padded practices.  Big sticking point apparently.  This fills that, and more. 

We have no idea

Horrible situation but you also mention the horrible US health care system which is true.  Fortunately this isn't something that happens often. As mentioned the CFL has extended the coverage to 4 years in the current deal. Hefney was more the exception than the rule regarding long term injury.  Leading to a life of drug trafficking I can't respond to.

I don't know the CFL can be held to account for the lack of US health care. Like any type of insurance doesn't some of the responsibility fall to the player to insure himself?

How much does this kind of insurance cost?

It was already mentioned how many extensive injuries happened in TC without padded practices. The veterans were protected as far as I can tell. The injuries to rookies being released might be worth a further discussion. 

This is not something that has not just come up in the 100 year existence of the CFL.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 16, 2022, 01:40:08 PM
Horrible situation but you also mention the horrible US health care system which is true.  Fortunately this isn't something that happens often. As mentioned the CFL has extended the coverage to 4 years in the current deal. Hefney was more the exception than the rule regarding long term injury.  Leading to a life of drug trafficking I can't respond to.

I don't know the CFL can be held to account for the lack of US health care. Like any type of insurance doesn't some of the responsibility fall to the player to insure himself?

How much does this kind of insurance cost?

It was already mentioned how many extensive injuries happened in TC without padded practices. The veterans were protected as far as I can tell. The injuries to rookies being released might be worth a further discussion. 

This is not something that has not just come up in the 100 year existence of the CFL.



I wonder how often a player gets injured in TC, cut, and left to his own devices.

But we simply don't hear about it because they're not an all-star like Hefney.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 16, 2022, 02:07:49 PM
Horrible situation but you also mention the horrible US health care system which is true.  Fortunately this isn't something that happens often. As mentioned the CFL has extended the coverage to 4 years in the current deal. Hefney was more the exception than the rule regarding long term injury.  Leading to a life of drug trafficking I can't respond to.

I don't know the CFL can be held to account for the lack of US health care. Like any type of insurance doesn't some of the responsibility fall to the player to insure himself?

How much does this kind of insurance cost?

It was already mentioned how many extensive injuries happened in TC without padded practices. The veterans were protected as far as I can tell. The injuries to rookies being released might be worth a further discussion. 

This is not something that has not just come up in the 100 year existence of the CFL.

Yes, it is up to the player to insure himself in the US.  But insurance is expensive, especially if you are not on a plan.  Obamacare helped a lot, but still, it costs.  And we know, not all pro football players are financial wizards like Adam Bighill, many don't have much left saved after a career in the CFL. 

We are using Int players, and taking advantage of their talents, and then effectively tossing the on the trashpile when we are done with them.  My point is to take care of players after their careers.  Some stay in Canada and become great spokespeople for the CFL, we see those guys.  But until someone like a Hefney hits the newspapers, we don't hear about them.  His is an extreme case, but I bet there are a lot of players whose stories are similar. 

If the CFLPA is concerned about extended health care, and are using padded practices to fight for that, I say "give it to them now".   Instead of doubling the SMS increase, commit to taking care of the players outside the paycheck (which I contend, again, is more than sufficient to attract good players at the present levels). 

Add in benefits (health care including counseling / rehab, 401k/RRSP matching, education subsidies) instead.  Commit to the players in a "partnership for life" rather than a "hired gun, dispense with when empty" relationship.  Also, with the size of the insured group, the league should be able to either come up with a pretty special rte with a carrier, or even create a self insured pool.   

Again, many NAT players and Globals who live in Canada and abroad will have national health coverage, so that might be moot for them, although RRSP / education subsidies might apply.  But they have benefits INTs don't have in the ratio and salary vs. ability.  So this kind of levels the playing field for the Ints as well.

Signing a CFL TC contract should also include 1 year heath insurance /counseling / rehab premiums as well.  For those guys that get injured day one of TC and get released. 

These are expenses that make sense to increase.  Just tossing cash at the SMS is a shallow way to buy the players, and short sighted for players to accept.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: DM83 on May 16, 2022, 02:18:23 PM
Hefney's case sticks out in my mind also.
The injury if I remember correctly, really turned out to be severe.  Nothing is worth maiming yourself, and then being abandoned by your team.

Maybe the length of insurance could be related  to years of service.
Additionally, couldn't the club have offered him office employment, for him to continue to either get or be covered by their medical insurance, provide an income, and as mentioned earlier establish an educational fund for these guys.

Many people in society need  the same "back-up" support.
In 1974, going to University, The Federal government provided both bursaries and low interest loans, which were to be begin paying back when employment was found.

As a society, do we really care about the homeless/helpless.  In Hefneys case, when  there is nothing to rely on, turning to ilegal activities is his only option.

Really if this was your son, what would you do? (to support/care for him)

The collective agreement should be developed so some sort of fund be created  to assist the injured to transition, to life away from playing.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 16, 2022, 02:33:36 PM
To lighten the mood...

Rob Vanstone@robvanstone
CFL Power Rankings (Premiere Edition): 1. Calgary Stampeders; 2. Edmonton Elks.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 16, 2022, 03:00:52 PM
Yes, it is up to the player to insure himself in the US.  But insurance is expensive, especially if you are not on a plan.  Obamacare helped a lot, but still, it costs.  And we know, not all pro football players are financial wizards like Adam Bighill, many don't have much left saved after a career in the CFL. 

We are using Int players, and taking advantage of their talents, and then effectively tossing the on the trashpile when we are done with them.  My point is to take care of players after their careers.  Some stay in Canada and become great spokespeople for the CFL, we see those guys.  But until someone like a Hefney hits the newspapers, we don't hear about them.  His is an extreme case, but I bet there are a lot of players whose stories are similar. 

If the CFLPA is concerned about extended health care, and are using padded practices to fight for that, I say "give it to them now".   Instead of doubling the SMS increase, commit to taking care of the players outside the paycheck (which I contend, again, is more than sufficient to attract good players at the present levels). 

Add in benefits (health care including counseling / rehab, 401k/RRSP matching, education subsidies) instead.  Commit to the players in a "partnership for life" rather than a "hired gun, dispense with when empty" relationship.  Also, with the size of the insured group, the league should be able to either come up with a pretty special rte with a carrier, or even create a self insured pool.   

Again, many NAT players and Globals who live in Canada and abroad will have national health coverage, so that might be moot for them, although RRSP / education subsidies might apply.  But they have benefits INTs don't have in the ratio and salary vs. ability.  So this kind of levels the playing field for the Ints as well.

Signing a CFL TC contract should also include 1 year heath insurance /counseling / rehab premiums as well.  For those guys that get injured day one of TC and get released. 

These are expenses that make sense to increase.  Just tossing cash at the SMS is a shallow way to buy the players, and short sighted for players to accept.

Before Covid the last couple of years we travelled a lot. It cost us about $1000 for a year. If I went to Vegas and tripped getting out of a bus and broke my arm I was covered. If I was younger and tore up a knee surfing in Hawaii I was covered.

Obviously that's not directly the same as a pro sports related injury but shows to some degree the personal responsibility to insure.

The " assist the injured to transition " to life away from playing. I'm not sure how many players that really is an issue. Hefney was legitimate example. I remember James Bell in Edmonton with a life changing neck injury as well. Beyond that we don't really hear what injuries exist during and beyond football.

Canadian LB Lowes was apparently injured in mini camp and released. No specific reports of what the injury was or whether it is long term or short term. He's not a veteran so he's not likely going to be added to the IR to start the season. He may or may not be added back on the PR later this season. We have seen rookies injured in TC that the team wanted to keep around and were placed on IR to begin the season.

Anything is possible from career ending injury to fractured wrist?

There is no transparency to the fans ( nor should there be ) but that makes it difficult to see the bigger picture. All sports have injuries to deal with.

IMO the padded practices are not specifically causing injuries. We often hear of players injuring themselves untouched as in last year's rash of achilles problems.

Maston was one of those and he spent the season on the IR. Now he's back projected to be a starter. That's a TBD to see if he can perform to the level he used to be able or whether it is in fact career ending. Odds are in his favour compared to earlier decades. Improved surgery and treatment, but it's not guaranteed either.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 16, 2022, 03:07:55 PM
No news of any continuing discussions today. Bombers would have been the 1st team to have an pre season game on the 23rd against Regina. That's toast. Their 2nd game along with most other teams 1st game was scheduled for the 27th.

Most of the 2nd games could potentially be played IF, IF, IF the CBA is resolved in the very near future. Just a guess but no later than this Friday would be my best guess to allow those games to proceed.

If this continues beyond that date then we're likely going to not have any pre season games. That's not good for anybody.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Lincoln Locomotive on May 16, 2022, 03:15:25 PM
If you are able please join the players as they picket IGF....they are encouraging fans to support them.   I'd be there if I lived in the Peg...

https://winnipegsun.com/sports/football/cfl/winnipeg-bluebombers/i-stand-with-my-teammates-blue-bombers-players-are-on-strike


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 16, 2022, 03:18:26 PM
Before Covid the last couple of years we travelled a lot. It cost us about $1000 for a year. If I went to Vegas and tripped getting out of a bus and broke my arm I was covered. If I was younger and tore up a knee surfing in Hawaii I was covered.

Obviously that's not directly the same as a pro sports related injury but shows to some degree the personal responsibility to insure.

The " assist the injured to transition " to life away from playing. I'm not sure how many players that really is an issue. Hefney was legitimate example. I remember James Bell in Edmonton with a life changing neck injury as well. Beyond that we don't really hear what injuries exist during and beyond football.

Canadian LB Lowes was apparently injured in mini camp and released. No specific reports of what the injury was or whether it is long term or short term. He's not a veteran so he's not likely going to be added to the IR to start the season. He may or may not be added back on the PR later this season. We have seen rookies injured in TC that the team wanted to keep around and were placed on IR to begin the season.

Anything is possible from career ending injury to fractured wrist?

There is no transparency to the fans ( nor should there be ) but that makes it difficult to see the bigger picture. All sports have injuries to deal with.

IMO the padded practices are not specifically causing injuries. We often hear of players injuring themselves untouched as in last year's rash of achilles problems.

Maston was one of those and he spent the season on the IR. Now he's back projected to be a starter. That's a TBD to see if he can perform to the level he used to be able or whether it is in fact career ending. Odds are in his favour compared to earlier decades. Improved surgery and treatment, but it's not guaranteed either.



Insurance is not designed to benefit everyone, by definition, it is to provide assistance to the few who need it by having everyone pay into a central fund that the few get paid out of.  It does not have to have a universal usage, but rather coverage for those in need.

Players are claiming they are nothing but pieces on a board that are used and sacrificed as the league sees fit (my analogy).  By accepting a partnership role, during and after playing careers changes that dynamic.  

  


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 16, 2022, 03:26:30 PM
Derek Taylor
@DTonSC
?
52m
At least 80 Bombers players together for an informal workout this morning.
It looks a lot like a regular camp practice, but being led by vets. #ForTheW


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 16, 2022, 03:46:39 PM
Insurance is not designed to benefit everyone, by definition, it is to provide assistance to the few who need it by having everyone pay into a central fund that the few get paid out of.  It does not have to have a universal usage, but rather coverage for those in need.

Players are claiming they are nothing but pieces on a board that are used and sacrificed as the league sees fit (my analogy).  By accepting a partnership role, during and after playing careers changes that dynamic.  

  

 I don't see it that way post career beyond the new 4 year limit of the proposed CBA. I can see some ground for injuries during TC discussions. The post career issue is an extreme situation and IMO some of that risk has to be taken by any player in any pro sport.

CTE is the biggest long term health issue but it could be decades before it becomes obvious and / or directly attributed to football career. The most immediate long term injury would be neck compression injury like Hefney or James Bell.  I can't think of any others in the CFL besides those 2 at the moment.

Somebody needs to come up with more examples of what exactly the CFLPA wants IMO. I'm not saying there aren't some things that could be done but everything has it's limits. Knowing where to draw the line as fair is the question.

I think your idea of partnership goes too far. As I mentioned that in any business benefits versus wages are a trade off situation. Young people tend to sacrifice benefits for money money NOW. That may not be the wisest decision but it's a reality.

The current agreement is about $300K more per year starting in 2023. Would the CFLPA balk at reducing that to $200K with the other $100K going into some version of improved healthcare benefits? Or a $150K split of more wages and more benefits?

Keep in mind that many players will have very short and injury free careers. Just a guess but new players will probably want cash now more.

That's the choice at hand isn't it?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 16, 2022, 04:29:10 PM
More on Hefney



Article content

Just three months before that, he underwent the first in an anticipated series of operations, with its $88,000 cost covered by CFL-provided medical benefits.


This time, though, there was no CFL medical coverage. Those benefits lapsed Oct. 1, 2016, one year from the date of his injury, as stipulated by the collective agreement between the league and the CFL Players? Association. So, although Hefney eventually received a $200,000 Cdn disability insurance payout, its converted value of $120,000 U.S. was consumed by another $88,000 surgery bill and associated fees for physicians and services such as anesthesia.


Unbelievable high cost of health care in the USA.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 16, 2022, 04:35:33 PM
More on Hefney



Article content

Just three months before that, he underwent the first in an anticipated series of operations, with its $88,000 cost covered by CFL-provided medical benefits.


This time, though, there was no CFL medical coverage. Those benefits lapsed Oct. 1, 2016, one year from the date of his injury, as stipulated by the collective agreement between the league and the CFL Players? Association. So, although Hefney eventually received a $200,000 Cdn disability insurance payout, its converted value of $120,000 U.S. was consumed by another $88,000 surgery bill and associated fees for physicians and services such as anesthesia.

Exactly... but selling that to 700 members that "This may happen to you" is tough... as has been said, "Show me the money NOW" is too prevalent.  They need leaders like Bighill that understand the long game to explain how they can get more out of a CBA than just extra dollars that put them in a higher tax bracket now...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 16, 2022, 04:48:19 PM
Exactly... but seeling that to 700 member that "This may happen to you" is tough... as has been said, "Show me the money NOW" is too prevalent.  They need leaders like Bighill that understand the long game to explain how they can get more out of a CBA than just extra dollars that put them in a higher tax bracket now...

There are more players that fall into the 1 - 4 year as players than long term veterans. Even leaders like Bighill aren't going to win that argument with majority in a vote. Of course it's usually veterans that are part of the CFLPA negotiation team.

In theory they could have asked for / or suggested less money now as the trade off for more benefits now. $300K is $300K whether you spend it as wages or benefits. Insurance payouts ( when needed ) are higher than cost of insurance. It's the actualization calculation done by insurers to assess risk and payouts.

Note that the proposed SMS increase over 7 years is $2.1M ( $300K per year ). That's a lot more than the previous agreement which only raised the SMS by $50K in each of the last 2 years IIRC?

CFLPA doesn't like the 7 year deal and neither do I. $300K per year for 3 years or 5 years or 7 years can be adjusted to the shorter deal. Of course longer agreements tend to pay more than shorter deals.

So would a 5 year deal that only averaged $250K per year be worth it to players for the shorter deal? Or $220K per year for a 3 year deal?
I only vaguely remember my benefits while employed. I've some that were better than others. That said I seem to recall losing an arm or eye was worth about $10K. Losing your life might have been worth $25K?? 

It's a similar issue dealing with automotive insurance for a life altering injury. You need a good lawyer and he takes 30%.

DID THE PLAYERS VOTE ON THE OFFER? If not, when?  I know the CFLPA said to reject the offer but doesn't it still require a league wide vote?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 16, 2022, 06:09:46 PM
Exactly... but selling that to 700 members that "This may happen to you" is tough... as has been said, "Show me the money NOW" is too prevalent.  They need leaders like Bighill that understand the long game to explain how they can get more out of a CBA than just extra dollars that put them in a higher tax bracket now...

Your suggestion of "partnership for life" is a bit steep, seeing as the average CFL player career is probably less than 4 years long.  If players want the benefits of our tax-payer funded health care system, they're welcome to apply for citizenship while they're playing here.  A few do, most don't.

Choosing football as a career is a high risk occupation, especially if you come from the impoverished Deep South or a  inner-city ghetto and have a very poor education to begin with.  The US allows this system to persist by underfunding education and health care and also allowing their high-school and college systems to exploit student athletes for profit without ensuring they provide them with a solid education to fall back on.  A large percentage of Import players do not have degrees after playing College football for 4 years, and an equal percentage graduate with "easy degrees" that do not aid them in pursuit of an after college football career. The CFL is happy to pick up on the fallout of this system by offering temporary employment to players with slim to no other options.

Happily Canadian schools do not allow college athletes to get by on athleticism alone, hopefully it stays that way.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 16, 2022, 06:42:20 PM
5 year deal to co-incide with the TSN revenue stream seems more appropriate, and I think that's what they will meet at.  

Give the players a chance to improve their ask should revenue increase, but it also gives teams the ability to cry poor if they do not...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 16, 2022, 06:46:26 PM
Your suggestion of "partnership for life" is a bit steep, seeing as the average CFL player career is probably less than 4 years long.  If players want the benefits of our tax-payer funded health care system, they're welcome to apply for citizenship while they're playing here.  A few do, most don't.

Choosing football as a career is a high risk occupation, especially if you come from the impoverished Deep South or a  inner-city ghetto and have a very poor education to begin with.  The US allows this system to persist by underfunding education and health care and also allowing their high-school and college systems to exploit student athletes for profit without ensuring they provide them with a solid education to fall back on.  A large percentage of Import players do not have degrees after playing College football for 4 years, and an equal percentage graduate with "easy degrees" that do not aid them in pursuit of an after college football career. The CFL is happy to pick up on the fallout of this system by offering temporary employment to players with slim to no other options.

Happily Canadian schools do not allow college athletes to get by on athleticism alone, hopefully it stays that way.



Again, not interested in supporting a player or his healthcare for his entire life, but rather to support him in his career, and his transition to post playing days.  To better prepare him for life.  And for the CFLPA to offer support for life, as long as they pay thier dues.  No reason the CFLPA can't offer extended healthcare once the CFL policies exhaust.  They have a large enough membership to get a good rate.  And they should be eager to offer mentorship and counseling to members.  A union shouldn't only represent you when you are of use to them... its supposed to be a brotherhood.

For life.

Teh CFL andf CFLPA should be working together towards this goal.  No player left behind.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 16, 2022, 07:13:43 PM
At the start of this, the PA said injuries had reduced by 31%

Maybe "all injuries" including minor ones.  There's no way that the entirety of 2021 experienced less "season ending" injuries.  No one here has ever seen that many in one year.

Maybe they fudge it by saying "TC wasn't practice"... as technically it's TC, not practice.  I would say you have to look at the whole season (including pre and post season) in its entirety.  Almost all the achilles occurred in TC.

They may also be talking specifically about practice injuries (with or without TC) and excluding gameday injuries.  It could be the case that practice injuries were reduced but gameday injuries increased.  Who is to say that the lack of "rough practice" didn't prime players (less loose, in shape, etc) for the gameday injuries.

I don't have the answers, but I know what I saw in 2021 and I know that major injuries were not down 31% in 2021 as a whole.  I also agree with a vast majority (strangely, even Ambrosie) that play quality has suffered from lack of pads.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 16, 2022, 07:18:18 PM
https://winnipegsun.com/sports/football/cfl/winnipeg-bluebombers/i-stand-with-my-teammates-blue-bombers-players-are-on-strike

This is a very good article and Biggie lays out what the CFLPA's problems are.  I find myself agreeing with almost everything he says and, as usual, Biggie presents a reasonable argument.

And these issues aren't really that big a gap, so I'm optimistic both sides will get it done.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Lincoln Locomotive on May 16, 2022, 07:40:55 PM
This is a very good article and Biggie lays out what the CFLPA's problems are.  I find myself agreeing with almost everything he says and, as usual, Biggie presents a reasonable argument.

And these issues aren't really that big a gap, so I'm optimistic both sides will get it done.

Agreed


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 16, 2022, 08:04:26 PM
I don't agree on revenue sharing audits, unless the CFLPA is willing to share in losses as well as revenue. We all know they're not interested in that.

I don't believe the 33% reduction in injuries and would like to see the data that they are using. The CFL isn't a touch football league. Both players and management know that. Players need to practice giving and taking hits. Lineman especially need padded practices. Adding less than 1 padded practice a week isn't unreasonable even if injuries go up a bit.

I agree with Bighill/CFLPA on term and expiry date.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 16, 2022, 08:11:18 PM
I don't agree on revenue sharing at the best of times. Any of the players pay for the building and up keep of stadiums? Football players still fall into the category of employees not owners. They don't share in losses so why should they share in revenue?

Also don't know why the league should support a player in his transition beyond football. A football career could be a year of 15 years. College, off season jobs are what players should be looking into. If any player gets to the end of his sports career and doesn't have a plan that's on him.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 16, 2022, 10:36:41 PM
Maybe "all injuries" including minor ones.  There's no way that the entirety of 2021 experienced less "season ending" injuries.  No one here has ever seen that many in one year.

Maybe they fudge it by saying "TC wasn't practice"... as technically it's TC, not practice.  I would say you have to look at the whole season (including pre and post season) in its entirety.  Almost all the achilles occurred in TC.

They may also be talking specifically about practice injuries (with or without TC) and excluding gameday injuries.  It could be the case that practice injuries were reduced but gameday injuries increased.  Who is to say that the lack of "rough practice" didn't prime players (less loose, in shape, etc) for the gameday injuries.

I don't have the answers, but I know what I saw in 2021 and I know that major injuries were not down 31% in 2021 as a whole.  I also agree with a vast majority (strangely, even Ambrosie) that play quality has suffered from lack of pads.


2021 was an anomaly, as most players hadn't played football or run drills in over a year, the rash of injuries that occurred in TC and early in the season should be excluded from their calculations.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 17, 2022, 12:09:03 AM
I don't agree on revenue sharing audits, unless the CFLPA is willing to share in losses as well as revenue. We all know they're not interested in that.

I don't believe the 33% reduction in injuries and would like to see the data that they are using. The CFL isn't a touch football league. Both players and management know that. Players need to practice giving and taking hits. Lineman especially need padded practices. Adding less than 1 padded practice a week isn't unreasonable even if injuries go up a bit.

I agree with Bighill/CFLPA on term and expiry date.


Didn't they share in losses in 2020 when all their contracts were cancelled for the year?

And in 2021 when not only did they renegotiate their deals, but then also were cut again with the loss of games?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 17, 2022, 12:15:39 AM
Both sides look like a bunch of losers right now! Especially the Commish and PA head person.

First chance at a normal season in years left in peril what a bunch of turkeys!

I lean to the owners as being less foolish. Players stance is sucky on key issues to me.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 17, 2022, 12:39:11 AM
Didn't they share in losses in 2020 when all their contracts were cancelled for the year?

And in 2021 when not only did they renegotiate their deals, but then also were cut again with the loss of games?

That would be a hard no. The players didn't get paid and didn't work. The owners/teams continued to pay for building leases, front office salaries, building upkeep, electricity, rebrandings, etc.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Pete on May 17, 2022, 12:54:11 AM
The players seem to feel that they have been taken advantage of in past agreements, but I don't see the teams getting any richer. There certainly not new owners lining up to buy teams. Trying to get more share of revenues doesn't make sense.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Big Daddy on May 17, 2022, 02:01:50 AM
I don't agree on revenue sharing at the best of times. Any of the players pay for the building and up keep of stadiums? Football players still fall into the category of employees not owners. They don't share in losses so why should they share in revenue?

Also don't know why the league should support a player in his transition beyond football. A football career could be a year of 15 years. College, off season jobs are what players should be looking into. If any player gets to the end of his sports career and doesn't have a plan that's on him.



Gotta agree with Blue here.  If you share in the revenue, you share in the losses, proportionately.

No the players did not share in the losses for the lost season.  They didn't get an income from football but they didn't share the expenses of running a football club with no revenue coming in.  Bang on, Sir Blue and Gold.

Pete - very good point as well.  The players are acting like they have been taken advantage of, yet no teams are posting any huge profits that will sustain the league.  Why on earth would anyone invest in this league by buying a team, given the revenue record?  It's only because of love for the cfl - it certainly isn't a way to get rich.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 17, 2022, 02:30:23 AM
I'm fine with the league's idea on revenue sharing.  It's only if they increase it past a certain point.  Consider it a "windfall" sharing.  And it's only a small portion.

I'm all for creating incentives for players (and all parties actually) to work towards improving everyone's position.  Giving the players a shot at extra income if the CFL goes gangbusters is no different than tech startups offering share plans or option incentives; a practice they all do.  Giving people an ownership stake, no matter how small, gives them an added incentive to work to help the whole group succeed.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 17, 2022, 11:25:56 AM
The players seem to feel that they have been taken advantage of in past agreements, but I don't see the teams getting any richer. There certainly not new owners lining up to buy teams. Trying to get more share of revenues doesn't make sense.

The problem is, the owners aren't being transparent. They're saying this is the number, trust us.

I feel like we'd have a deal if the league negotiated in good faith, rather than trying to run roughshod over the players.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 11:55:08 AM
The problem is, the owners aren't being transparent. They're saying this is the number, trust us.

I feel like we'd have a deal if the league negotiated in good faith, rather than trying to run roughshod over the players.

Transparent? All you have to do is look at the attendance in stadiums. In the good old days the Lions would get 45K in the stands. Now they are lucky to get 25K. Toronto attracts flies. Montreal used to sellout in the days of AC, now it's obviously never a filled stadium.

Running roughshod over the players? That's something union's like to say. It's a feeling of entitlement which is out to lunch.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 17, 2022, 12:33:49 PM
The problem is, the owners aren't being transparent. They're saying this is the number, trust us.

I feel like we'd have a deal if the league negotiated in good faith, rather than trying to run roughshod over the players.

Somewhat true, however, Winnipeg, Saskatchewan and Edmonton are required to be completely transparent on their financial performance every year as community-owned entities. Anyone can look at their annual reports at any time. It's not like other clubs do significantly better, (and some do far worse) so there is a lot more known than unknown. Nobody is getting rich off of CFL ownership. Edmonton lost over a million dollars last year and the league says they lost 60-80 million during the pandemic which, even if inflated, is still a lot of losses for a league that doesn't make a lot.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 17, 2022, 12:41:02 PM
Somewhat true, however, Winnipeg, Saskatchewan and Edmonton are required to be completely transparent on their financial performance every year as community-owned entities. Anyone can look at their annual reports at any time. It's not like other clubs do significantly better, (and some do far worse) so there is a lot more known than unknown. Nobody is getting rich off of CFL ownership. Edmonton lost over a million dollars last year and the league says they lost 60-80 million during the pandemic which, even if inflated, is still a lot of losses for a league that doesn't make a lot.

And that's fine, I understand all of that.

But given those factors, I wonder why it's so hard for the CFL to open their books and say this is exactly what we're working with.

This was the determining factor in the federal handout as well. The league refused to open their books and didn't receive additional funding - which directly affected the players as that was the final nail in the coffin on the season.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 17, 2022, 12:41:57 PM
Transparent? All you have to do is look at the attendance in stadiums. In the good old days the Lions would get 45K in the stands. Now they are lucky to get 25K. Toronto attracts flies. Montreal used to sellout in the days of AC, now it's obviously never a filled stadium.

Running roughshod over the players? That's something union's like to say. It's a feeling of entitlement which is out to lunch.

I struggle to see how you can look over some of the terms of the first deal the league handed out and describe it any differently.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 17, 2022, 01:42:31 PM
I struggle to see how you can look over some of the terms of the first deal the league handed out and describe it any differently.

True. Although I'm not really pro player or owner in this so far, that first "deal" wasn't an actual, realistic deal and since the players went on strike it may have been a real miscalculation instead of a successful strong-armed tactic that will help them. We will see. I still think everything gets set right pretty quick, but I didn't think there would be a strike either, so here we are.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 17, 2022, 02:08:31 PM
Profit and loss isn't what matters. It's not what offers are based on. Therefore, it's none of the players business.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 02:23:24 PM
I struggle to see how you can look over some of the terms of the first deal the league handed out and describe it any differently.

We don't know what the CFLPA's first demands were. Regardless the 1st deal is not the current deal. Extreme 1st " offers " " positions " are typical in union negotiations, that just a reality.

In the expired CBA, players earned ELC's of $63K and the top players earned about $500K+. In the new deal the ELC's would rise to $70K in 2023 and the union isn't satisfied.  

There seems to be a lot of smoke and mirrors from the CFLPA IMO but no real details of exactly they want, as least in the public forum. I've already tried to ask / suggest how wages / versus benefits come out of the same pocket. Pick the ratio you want if players feel greater need for more benefits and less wages.  You can't keep adding to the ask.

What are the details of their position?

Padded practices? This isn't flag football. Does the NFL practice with pads?

You don't think taking a strike vote is the CFLPA trying to run roughshod over the CFL?



Google info about NFL and padded practices starting on 8th day of TC.


There will be contact, but teams aren't going to get overly physical or tackle each other to the ground in a training camp setting. But McCarthy did make the obvious point that putting on pads will allow the more physical aspects of the game, such as offensive and defensive line play, to shine.

Now teams are allowed 14 practices in pads each season, once a week through the first 11 weeks. The other three are parceled out over the final six weeks, preventing a coach from hording sessions for December. A coach can put his team in pads twice in one week only once during the first 11 weeks, and players help monitor whether teams follow the rules.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 02:31:31 PM
More NFL comparison info regarding lack of more padded practices. Note that the NFL allows more padded practices than what the CFL is asking for. The NFL has a slightly shorter regular season after increasing to 17 games in 2021. Note there were comments about the lack of padded practices leads to lesser conditioning which leads to injuries.


Coaches are having difficulty melding their long-held philosophies with the league's new approach. Proponents of hard-hitting football cultivated by rugged practices are upset with the mandated scaled-back approach. They assert the lack of contact will leave their squads unprepared for the intensity and physicality of the game.

How else will these rule changes affect teams? Here are three possibilities:

1. Tackling could suffer. Defensive coaches are worried about the prospect of shoddy tackling without full-speed contact drills on a consistent basis. Although defenders have spent years crafting their skills, the frenetic pace of the game requires players to work on proper angles and tackling fundamentals regularly. Granted, some defenses have been able to flourish without banging daily, but it's hard to replicate the tempo, aggressiveness and angle discipline needed without contact.

2. Running game will feel a pinch. From an offensive standpoint, the lack of hitting could hurt run-heavy attacks without the benefit of intense nine-on-seven drills that focus on execution. To be successful on the ground, offenses must own the line of scrimmage and generate consistent push. This requires the offensive line to move defenders off the ball. While elements can be simulated without pads, the best rushing attacks sharpen timing and execution by pummeling scout team defenders in a series of brutal team sessions.

3. The reduction of full-contact practices will also impact the passing game. Teams will find it challenging to refine pass protection under the current circumstances. Offenses will have limited opportunities to work against pressures in live contact blitz periods. This will lead to more miscues and blown assignments in protection, which could result in quarterbacks taking a pounding. With blockers unable to learn how to handle the speed, strength and power of attacking defenders through repetition, building up the necessary toughness to win physical confrontations could become an issue. That fortitude is only


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 17, 2022, 02:35:57 PM
See, and I feel as if the CFL is being vague and it's the CFLPA who are simply asking for clarity.

CFL promises an increase of 18+ million for the salary cap, when it's 100k/year starting in year 2. PA asks for clear language.

CFL promises revenue sharing. PA wants revenue defined. Or shorten the length of the deal so they can renegotiate once the new TSN deal is finalized.

CFL wants padded practices. PA wants medical assurances (this is the least clearly defined stance. I' not sure what they want, but media indicates they are willing to deal on this point).


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 17, 2022, 02:41:56 PM
Revenue sharing... there is one spot that I think does need to be addressed, and that is in player identified licensed merchandise sales.  

If the team makes a t-shirt with your name on it, the CFLPA should get a chunk of those sales, with the named player getting half.  If the team sells a jersey with your name on the namebar, same.  These are incentives that give the players a reason to stay team loyal, and build a brand, as well as rewarding them for doing so.  The other half the revenue from these sales that is given to the CFLPA should be distributed equally among players based on games played that year.  A small "dividend" cheque or a credit towards their union fees.  THAT is revenue sharing that makes sense.

Trying to justify other revenue sharing, or create a profit sharing model, just too much paperwork and potential for disputes.  Give the CFLPA a cut of parking, or beer sales, or some other revenue stream with easy to monitor metrics, that players can enhance by improving overall revenue streams by bringing an improved product to the table.  Maybe even a cut of the sale of the GC game.  Players appearing in the game get a taste, but 7 teams worth of players get diddly.  Set the GC price at X amount, with a premium if it sells out, giving that premium to the CFLPA to distribute.

I agree with enhanced healthcare, and if the CFL gets padded practices in return for that, I'd say its a win/win.  

Term should be the same as the TSN deal, and CBA should expire Jan 1, although for the terms of contracts in force, they should survive the CBA until FA day, unless adjusted in a new CBA arrived at between Jan 1 and FA day.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 02:43:37 PM
See, and I feel as if the CFL is being vague and it's the CFLPA who are simply asking for clarity.

CFL promises an increase of 18+ million for the salary cap, when it's 100k/year starting in year 2. PA asks for clear language.

CFL promises revenue sharing. PA wants revenue defined. Or shorten the length of the deal so they can renegotiate once the new TSN deal is finalized.

CFL wants padded practices. PA wants medical assurances (this is the least clearly defined stance. I' not sure what they want, but media indicates they are willing to deal on this point).

The CFL issued an outline of their proposal. The details would be more specific in the actual written offer.

In the outline I saw nothing suggesting $100K in year 2. I saw an increase to $70K in 2023 and $75K in or by 2027. Whether there were annual increases of just a lump increase in 2027 was vague in the CFL outline, but it would have to be clear in the written offer.

Revenue sharing. How complicated can it be: TV revenue, attendance revenue, local stadium advertising and merchandising.  That's if you think players are even entitled to revenue sharing which I don't

Padded practices I covered in my 2 posts above. The number the CFL asked for is less than in the NFL, so it's not outrageous.

I also covered the aspect of medical assurances: here's the pot, split it however they want. I also pointed out that younger players will almost certainly opt for more money NOW.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 02:52:05 PM
Revenue sharing... there is one spot that I think does need to be addressed, and that is in player identified licensed merchandise sales.  

If the team makes a t-shirt with your name on it, the CFLPA should get a chunk of those sales, with the named player getting half.  If the team sells a jersey with your name on the namebar, same.  These are incentives that give the players a reason to stay team loyal, and build a brand, as well as rewarding them for doing so.  The other half the revenue from these sales that is given to the CFLPA should be distributed equally among players based on games played that year.  A small "dividend" cheque or a credit towards their union fees.  THAT is revenue sharing that makes sense.

Trying to justify other revenue sharing, or create a profit sharing model, just too much paperwork and potential for disputes.  Give the CFLPA a cut of parking, or beer sales, or some other revenue stream with easy to monitor metrics, that players can enhance by improving overall revenue streams by bringing an improved product to the table.  Maybe even a cut of the sale of the GC game.  Players appearing in the game get a taste, but 7 teams worth of players get diddly.  Set the GC price at X amount, with a premium if it sells out, giving that premium to the CFLPA to distribute.

I agree with enhanced healthcare, and if the CFL gets padded practices in return for that, I'd say its a win/win.  

Term should be the same as the TSN deal, and CBA should expire Jan 1, although for the terms of contracts in force, they should survive the CBA until FA day, unless adjusted in a new CBA arrived at between Jan 1 and FA day.

Are we certain the CFLPA or players don't get some of the revenue from merchandise? Note that not all merch has players names and players don't own the team name etc. There should be no issue with named players stuff getting some amount of that revenue. OTOH, that's something that should be / could be handled on a given players contact, not at at CFLPA level.

CFL teams don't all own the parking and concessions.  Even if they did, teams have to pay stadium costs etc etc.


As has been mentioned countless times, CFLPA wants a slice of any pie that generates revenue. They don't share any of the loss / cost pie. It's not reasonable.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 17, 2022, 03:24:17 PM
The CFL issued an outline of their proposal. The details would be more specific in the actual written offer.

In the outline I saw nothing suggesting $100K in year 2. I saw an increase to $70K in 2023 and $75K in or by 2027. Whether there were annual increases of just a lump increase in 2027 was vague in the CFL outline, but it would have to be clear in the written offer.

Revenue sharing. How complicated can it be: TV revenue, attendance revenue, local stadium advertising and merchandising.  That's if you think players are even entitled to revenue sharing which I don't

Padded practices I covered in my 2 posts above. The number the CFL asked for is less than in the NFL, so it's not outrageous.

I also covered the aspect of medical assurances: here's the pot, split it however they want. I also pointed out that younger players will almost certainly opt for more money NOW.

For the record, none of this is my opinion, I'm sharing what I'm reading from Bighill et al. The players want more clarity, so I don't think there are more details in the actual proposal, which is one of the major issues.

100k refers to the increase in salary cap, not the minimum salary. You are absolutely correct about the minimum numbers.

In regards to revenue sharing - the league wants to retain the definition from the previous CBA - I think the players don't want to risk being shorted from any new revenue over the next 7+ years. It's a key difference. Probably a big sticking point.

I agree that the padded practices is a fair ask in the amount that they're asking. I'm not sure what the counter is from the players? Perhaos just a guarentee they'll be fully covered in the event of a tragic injury such as Hefney?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 17, 2022, 03:29:21 PM
Is the sticking point gambling?  Is the CFLPA worried about CFL single game wagering and other gambling revenue becoming a substantial part of league revenue?

Are they concerned about the new marketing arm of the league, the splitting off of the TV revenue into a new partnership, that the CFL has offered the a board seat on?

It seems like it is deeper than padded practices and a cut of hot dog sales...



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 03:39:37 PM
For the record, none of this is my opinion, I'm sharing what I'm reading from Bighill et al. The players want more clarity, so I don't think there are more details in the actual proposal, which is one of the major issues.

100k refers to the increase in salary cap, not the minimum salary. You are absolutely correct about the minimum numbers.

In regards to revenue sharing - the league wants to retain the definition from the previous CBA - I think the players don't want to risk being shorted from any new revenue over the next 7+ years. It's a key difference. Probably a big sticking point.

I agree that the padded practices is a fair ask in the amount that they're asking. I'm not sure what the counter is from the players? Perhaos just a guarentee they'll be fully covered in the event of a tragic injury such as Hefney?


I didn't see the $100K increase to the SMS in year 2.. My impression was that none of the increases would be done until 2023. Since the increase was $18M over that 6 years that's $300K increase on average 2023-2027. You may be correct.

Now that's just an average and it there may have been a proposed smaller increase in 2022?  I'm not sure it really matters, since player contracts are in place already. It would give teams more room to add NFL returnees at the end of the year but it's after the fact at the moment.

If the $100K is an actual fact and they agreed to use that to increase the ELC in 2022 that's a different option. I'd guess most teams only have a dozen or so ELC's? That would consume that $100K and I'd have no issue with some explanation of the increase on a year to year basis. However I assumed an equal amount each year.

What you're saying is that the annual increase starts off on a smaller curve and rises through the agreement length. Previous CBA only had $50K increases in the last 2 years IIRC. So $100K in year 2 seems to follow that path except for nothing in 2021.

In theory the SMS could increase by $1M in 2021. It doesn't mean teams will spend any or all of it. That's a catch 22.

Even if the duration is reduced to 5 years from 7, then the total would reduced proportionately. $300K X 5 instead of $300K X 7


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: 3rdand1.5 on May 17, 2022, 03:50:29 PM
I am not siding with one side here but to me a community owned team walks away and the taxpayers pick up the tab. The remaining owners claim to be losing money, but they walk away and are still multi millionaires/billionaires, the veterans and star players walk away with potentially some signing bonus money they earned to get them by into a new chapter, it's the rest, the majority of the players, the ones who are barely making ends meet, just starting out, trying to put food on the table, make a better life for their families etc. those are ones with the most to lose. Many of them can't get $60k with benefits a year outside of football and those that have the education and can, it's the mental damage they suffered having it "the dream" taken away from them.

No disrespect to Adam Bighill and the rest of the guys leading the charge, but they could "afford" to stop work, they have other careers, roots in the community they have received signing bonuses that will hold them over. I want to hear from the "foot soldiers" who are counting on even $60k/year to pay their bills or guys like Lawler who is set to make monster money but didn't get anything upfront, I want to know what a guy like him thinks if this drags out and he starts bringing in zero income having that monster contract, the one that could change his life oh so close, yet slipping away from him every day that passes by.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 17, 2022, 03:59:52 PM
And that's fine, I understand all of that.

But given those factors, I wonder why it's so hard for the CFL to open their books and say this is exactly what we're working with.

This was the determining factor in the federal handout as well. The league refused to open their books and didn't receive additional funding - which directly affected the players as that was the final nail in the coffin on the season.

Could be that some of the private owners are opposed to opening their books up to audit, especially if they're not single entities and integrated with other businesses as in the case of the Stamps and Argos.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 04:09:16 PM
Could be that some of the private owners are opposed to opening their books up to audit, especially if they're not single entities and integrated with other businesses as in the case of the Stamps and Argos.

The union has no right to see the books of private owners. Doesn't matter if they are making millions or not. The leagues isn't intended as a non profit organization. All indications are that making any money is not easy on a yearly basis. The reno's to BC Place in 2010-2011 were about $630M. While that was absurd and the stadium is used for other functions, stadium costs and maintenance fall in some part to each team.

I haven't heard anyone comment on whether the players were required to vote on the offer or whether that happened.

Dead silence at the moment including nothing about new discussions planned.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 17, 2022, 04:20:08 PM
Could be that some of the private owners are opposed to opening their books up to audit, especially if they're not single entities and integrated with other businesses as in the case of the Stamps and Argos.

That must be it, but man, there has to be a way to show just the one aspect of the business.


I didn't see the $100K increase to the SMS in year 2.. My impression was that none of the increases would be done until 2023. Since the increase was $18M over that 6 years that's $300K increase on average 2023-2027. You may be correct.

Now that's just an average and it there may have been a proposed smaller increase in 2022?  I'm not sure it really matters, since player contracts are in place already. It would give teams more room to add NFL returnees at the end of the year but it's after the fact at the moment.

If the $100K is an actual fact and they agreed to use that to increase the ELC in 2022 that's a different option. I'd guess most teams only have a dozen or so ELC's? That would consume that $100K and I'd have no issue with some explanation of the increase on a year to year basis. However I assumed an equal amount each year.

What you're saying is that the annual increase starts off on a smaller curve and rises through the agreement length. Previous CBA only had $50K increases in the last 2 years IIRC. So $100K in year 2 seems to follow that path except for nothing in 2021.

In theory the SMS could increase by $1M in 2021. It doesn't mean teams will spend any or all of it. That's a catch 22.

Even if the duration is reduced to 5 years from 7, then the total would reduced proportionately. $300K X 5 instead of $300K X 7

I'm having some trouble understanding the math as well (Which might be a problem the players are having as well).

18.9 works out to 350k increase per year.

But Naylor says it's 100k (which only amounts to 5.4 million)

https://www.tsn.ca/dave-naylor-a-closer-look-at-the-cfl-s-latest-cba-offer-1.1800031


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 04:56:27 PM
The guaranteed contract issue is interesting. ELC's are 2 year contracts and the trend for players now is towards 1 year deals. I think 1st rounders sign 3 year ELC's?. Even on 2 year deals there is an NFL opt out in the 2nd year.

So this is a little like wanting your cake and eating it too.

If a 2nd contact is another 2 years, then asking for a 50% guarantee in the 4th year is not out of the question on one hand. On the other hand there are already veteran cut down dates that cover this to some degree.

The downside for a team is that that they can't release a player in TC that is going into year 4 without a 50% cost and SMS hit as well. That's a function no go IMO. It reduces the chance of a veteran player being released because of the associated costs.

Players should win or lose their roster spots based on performance.  They lose their roster spots relative to performance / over cost decisions.

The link doesn't mention the $18.9M. It only mentions the SMS to increase a minimum increase of $100K starting in 2023.

$18.9 divided by 9 teams = $2.1M / per team divided by 7 years = $300K?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 17, 2022, 05:06:21 PM
$100k/per year SMS increase per team. 

So, from the base point, 100k in 2023, 200k in 2024, 300k in 2025, 400k in 2026, 500k in 2027, 600k in 2028.

1+2+3+4+5+6= 2.1million per team over 7 years

2.1mil * 9 = $18.9million league wide.

There's the math for you... that's guaranteed, not including any other money that may come into play.

As some players have mentioned, that 100k in 2023 will not cover the added $5k in the minimum salaries for those players on minimum, so some vets will take a small haircut... tiny really.. yo have to have 20 players making minimum to use up all the SMS increase year one, and for the next few years, the increases more than cover it until 2027, when it goes up another $5k...  so overall, there might be a little penny pinching at the top, but nothing like some players are suggesting.

Were I a CFLPA player, this is NOT something I'd quibble about... in the face of probable declining revenue, a guarantee raise every year in $$$ available is a no doubt slam dunk "Yes please".


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 17, 2022, 05:19:22 PM
$100k/per year SMS increase per team. 

So, from the base point, 100k in 2023, 200k in 2024, 300k in 2025, 400k in 2026, 500k in 2027, 600k in 2028.

1+2+3+4+5+6= 2.1million per team over 7 years

2.1mil * 9 = $18.9million league wide.

There's the math for you... that's guaranteed, not including any other money that may come into play.

As some players have mentioned, that 100k in 2023 will not cover the added $5k in the minimum salaries for those players on minimum, so some vets will take a small haircut... tiny really.. yo have to have 20 players making minimum to use up all the SMS increase year one, and for the next few years, the increases more than cover it until 2027, when it goes up another $5k...  so overall, there might be a little penny pinching at the top, but nothing like some players are suggesting.

Were I a CFLPA player, this is NOT something I'd quibble about... in the face of probable declining revenue, a guarantee raise every year in $$$ available is a no doubt slam dunk "Yes please".

THAT was it!

It's the accumulative difference of the cap.

100k in year 1 + 100k in year 2 doesn't cost 200k, it costs 300k. That's how the math works to 18.9.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 17, 2022, 05:26:24 PM
https://www.tsn.ca/dave-naylor-a-closer-look-at-the-cfl-s-latest-cba-offer-1.1800031

Term ? The CFL is proposing a seven-year term for the new collective agreement. The players have requested that the deal expire 30 days before the opening of training camp in 2029, as opposed to the day before the opening of camps.

Roster changes beginning in 2023 ? There will be seven (7) National Starters, one (1) of whom can be a Nationalized American as defined as any American player who has three years with the same team or four in the CFL. Teams have a choice between 20 or 21 nationals and one or two global players. Each team will have three quarterbacks.

Guaranteed Contracts ? A player who has completed a CFL contract with his team may have the final year of his next contract 50 per cent guaranteed if he re-signs with existing team. If a player is released before final season of that contract, can collect 50 per cent guarantee and still sign with another CFL team.

Not sure how a "Nationalized
Salary Cap ? Beginning in 2023, cap will go up a minimum of $100,000 per season (double that of previous CBA). If 25 per cent of revenue growth sharing formula amount is greater than $100,000 then that number will be applied to cap annually.

Community appearances ? Each team commits $110,000 per season to players for community appearances (in addition to salary cap).

Definition of revenue ? Will use definition from previous CBA which gives union audit rights. The union and accountant have access to all financial records for review and audit.

Minimum Salary ? Goes from $65,000 to $70,000 in 2023. Goes to $75,000 in 2027.

Padded Practices ?  Teams may have one hour of padded practice per week in one day during the Club?s regular season to a maximum of twelve.

Player Rehab and Medical Costs ? League will extend coverage from three years post-playing to four years, beginning in 2025.

Timing of season ? The CFL can start the season up to 30 days earlier, commencing with the 2023 season.

Canadians Returning from the NFL ? Any Canadian player returning from the NFL after three or more seasons collecting a salary would not be restricted to the CFL rookie scale and have full rights to negotiate a contract with team owning his CFL rights. Each year in the NFL counts for one year on the CFL rookie contract grid. (Three years).

Flexible Practice times ? Teams may hold longer practices at certain times of the week, balanced by shorter sessions at other times. No overall increase in total practice time.

Increases in pre-season and post-season compensation based on hitting revenue threshold of $300 million. Increases of $100 per week for pre-season, $500 for post-season participation, $2,000 for Grey Cup losers and $4,000 for winners.


Truly, I don't see anything here to quibble with, maybe term, and maybe rehab/medical to 5 from 4, or 4 plus an additional year for every season competed in over 5...

The return from NFL looks good, no mention of changes to GLB status... would like to have seen that, might be in the CBA, just not mentioned here

50% guarantee of final year sounds great for the PA... again, designed to reward players for team loyalty.  

Not sure how "Nationalized American" works, is it a designation done one time for an entire contract length, or can it be a designation that changes week to week?  If a "Nationalized American" goes to the IR, can a team designate another?

As to the tweets I see out there that "The players just want to be respected" and "get what they deserve", I'm really sorry, but that's your agent's job.  This is a business, there are budgets, its up to you to take "what you deserve" from that.  The teams are "respecting you" by giving you a contract.  If you do not feel no team is offering what you deserve, you are free to seek employment elsewhere.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 05:33:41 PM
THAT was it!

It's the accumulative difference of the cap.

100k in year 1 + 100k in year 2 doesn't cost 200k, it costs 300k. That's how the math works to 18.9.

Yes and no. Year 1 is 2022 and there is no raise currently. The 2nd year of the deal is the 1st year with a raise and so on. That's math too. lol

That said, no raise in 2022 but $600K in the last year? That could be spread out something closer to an average over the length of the contract. Most of the players in the league in 2022 won't be in the league at the back end of the contract.

Even the $5K 2nd increase in ELC in 2027 won't impact very many on current rosters. Any player that survives into their 5th year won't be on an ELC level salary.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 17, 2022, 05:37:08 PM
Yes and no. Year 1 is 2022 and there is no raise currently. The 2nd year of the deal is the 1st year with a raise and so on. That's math too. lol

I just meant year 1 of raises.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 17, 2022, 06:31:18 PM
Yes and no. Year 1 is 2022 and there is no raise currently. The 2nd year of the deal is the 1st year with a raise and so on. That's math too. lol

That said, no raise in 2022 but $600K in the last year? That could be spread out something closer to an average over the length of the contract. Most of the players in the league in 2022 won't be in the league at the back end of the contract.

Even the $5K 2nd increase in ELC in 2027 won't impact very many on current rosters. Any player that survives into their 5th year won't be on an ELC level salary.

Its not $600k *in* the last year, it is a cumulative $600k as of the last year.  Just another $100k, so each year they get $100 raise in SMS, $5.5mil in 2022 up to $6.1mil total SMS in 2028

As to the min salaries, its not ELC, but the minimum you can pay.  ELC prevent you from paying more on first contracts, but the min salary is for any player in any year of their contract... there are many players that are ST specialists or NAT veterans who will get that minimum.  Yo can play 15 years and never get a contract over the minimum... but you will always get at least the minimum.

The changes to the "return from NFL" clauses means players coming in from the NFL are not subject to ELC's, which could have prevented guys from even bothering with the CFL after the NFL...  not sure which players it has affected, but I'm sure it has in the past.   


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 07:43:45 PM
Its not $600k *in* the last year, it is a cumulative $600k as of the last year.  Just another $100k, so each year they get $100 raise in SMS, $5.5mil in 2022 up to $6.1mil total SMS in 2028

As to the min salaries, its not ELC, but the minimum you can pay.  ELC prevent you from paying more on first contracts, but the min salary is for any player in any year of their contract... there are many players that are ST specialists or NAT veterans who will get that minimum.  Yo can play 15 years and never get a contract over the minimum... but you will always get at least the minimum.

The changes to the "return from NFL" clauses means players coming in from the NFL are not subject to ELC's, which could have prevented guys from even bothering with the CFL after the NFL...  not sure which players it has affected, but I'm sure it has in the past.  


It's $2.1M increase over 7 years per team. Not a $600K increase over 7 years. Even you said it the quoted line below this.

1+2+3+4+5+6= 2.1million per team over 7 years

 $18.9 million in total guaranteed increases to the salary cap league-wide.


Obvious comment about the ELC but I doubt anybody would ever get less than an ELC after their 1st contact. I also doubt many wouldn't be getting more after their 1st contract. An ELC doesn't prevent you from paying more. It's the floor not the ceiling.

I'm not sure that any player that managed 3 years in the NFL was going to sign at rock bottom prices. Even if that was true, so be it.

EDIT: $600K over 7 years would make more sense. That number X 9 teams is $5.4M. So it's not accumulating to a $6.1 SMS in year 7 according to that unless the $18.9 M was a large typo.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 17, 2022, 07:53:15 PM

It's $2.1M increase over 7 years per team. Not a $600K increase over 7 years.


? $18.9 million in total guaranteed increases to the salary cap league-wide.


Obvious comment about the ELC but I doubt anybody would ever get less than an ELC after their 1st contact. I also doubt many wouldn't be getting more after their 1st contract.

I'm not sure that any player that managed 3 years in the NFL was going to sign at rock bottom prices. Even if that was true, so be it.

You can't get less than an ELC, except by being on the PR.

When you pay players like Collaros, Jefferson, and the like, you also have to have players making league minimums.  So, either players on ELCs or vets glad to have a job, even at $65k/yr.

In past CBA's, players had to sign ELC's if they had no CFL experience.  I remember there being issues with players interested in coming to the league, but balking at the allowed salaries.  I don't remember specifics, I'm sure someone out there knows.  This change allows teams to recruit players and start them at a reasonable "star" salary rather than an ELC, based on their NFL time.  There have been ex-NFL players interested in just playing, regardless salary, but this opens things up a little for CFL teams to pay "twilight" NFL players more than ELC to finish up here...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 07:58:41 PM
You can't get less than an ELC, except by being on the PR.

When you pay players like Collaros, Jefferson, and the like, you also have to have players making league minimums.  So, either players on ELCs or vets glad to have a job, even at $65k/yr.

In past CBA's, players had to sign ELC's if they had no CFL experience.  I remember there being issues with players interested in coming to the league, but balking at the allowed salaries.  I don't remember specifics, I'm sure someone out there knows.  This change allows teams to recruit players and start them at a reasonable "star" salary rather than an ELC, based on their NFL time.  There have been ex-NFL players interested in just playing, regardless salary, but this opens things up a little for CFL teams to pay "twilight" NFL players more than ELC to finish up here...


I don't think that is correct. Even Mourtada was listed as earning more than the minimum salary as a 1st CFL player.

Wednesday was the deadline needed in order to start pre season on time. No talks today so scratch the 1st pre season game.

5 games would have been played by May 28th so that's looking like those will be gone in a few days as well.


Strong possibility of no pre season games 2 years in a row.

Tick, tick, tick.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 17, 2022, 08:36:18 PM
OK, just looked at the CBA, and the entry contract is for NAT players... they are required to sign for 2 + 1 at $65 plus a modest optional bonus based on draft round selection.   If, for instance, Laurent Duvernay-Tardif flamed out in the NFL and came north in 2021, he would have to sign a 2+1 year deal at $65k max, plus $12.5k bonuses for the first 2 years (based on being drafted in the 3rd round).  Now, with his NFL experience, he would be free to sign whatever deal he wanted, with Calgary, his drafted team.


https://media.cfldb.ca/documents/cfl-cflpa-collective-agreement-2019.pdf


Section 9


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: the paw on May 17, 2022, 08:39:03 PM
The union has no right to see the books of private owners. Doesn't matter if they are making millions or not. The leagues isn't intended as a non profit organization. All indications are that making any money is not easy on a yearly basis. The reno's to BC Place in 2010-2011 were about $630M. While that was absurd and the stadium is used for other functions, stadium costs and maintenance fall in some part to each team.

I haven't heard anyone comment on whether the players were required to vote on the offer or whether that happened.

Dead silence at the moment including nothing about new discussions planned.

The union has a right to see the books if they negotiate a CBA with the provision included.  In fact, the old CBA requires clubs to provide financial stmts to he CFLPA (some audited, some not) although that was more for SMS verification than examining revenues.

But if owners want to base SMS raises on revenue growth, they have to be willing to have those revenues verified.  Otherwise its a meaningless provision.  If the owners don't want to provide financial transparency, then they should shorten the deal length and commit to more substantial concrete additions to cap.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 17, 2022, 09:26:18 PM
The union has a right to see the books if they negotiate a CBA with the provision included.  In fact, the old CBA requires clubs to provide financial stmts to he CFLPA (some audited, some not) although that was more for SMS verification than examining revenues.

But if owners want to base SMS raises on revenue growth, they have to be willing to have those revenues verified.  Otherwise its a meaningless provision.  If the owners don't want to provide financial transparency, then they should shorten the deal length and commit to more substantial concrete additions to cap.

The weren't basing SMS raises on revenue growth. They offered $2.1M per team over 7 years. The CFLPA essentially wanted revenue / profit sharing info too as far as I can tell. It's been discussed that you can't have a share of the good times if you aren't willing to take a cut in bad times. Nor should you have that compete access which is not what they had previously. You even said so.

Also, sports players or not, players are employees and not partners as they would have you believe. The why has been spoken about several times.  They've taken the position that the CFL lies to them in their financial statements.

As you said that provision was more about verification for SMS than looking at revenues owned by private business.

I'll ask again. How much did each team have to spend to pay coaches and their admin in 2020 ( Coaching SMS was $2.2M IIRC ). How much player SMS was spent in signing bonus's going into the expected 2020 season? The list of losses goes on and on in 2020.





Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 17, 2022, 10:07:07 PM

It's $2.1M increase over 7 years per team. Not a $600K increase over 7 years. Even you said it the quoted line below this.

1+2+3+4+5+6= 2.1million per team over 7 years

 $18.9 million in total guaranteed increases to the salary cap league-wide.


Obvious comment about the ELC but I doubt anybody would ever get less than an ELC after their 1st contact. I also doubt many wouldn't be getting more after their 1st contract. An ELC doesn't prevent you from paying more. It's the floor not the ceiling.

I'm not sure that any player that managed 3 years in the NFL was going to sign at rock bottom prices. Even if that was true, so be it.

EDIT: $600K over 7 years would make more sense. That number X 9 teams is $5.4M. So it's not accumulating to a $6.1 SMS in year 7 according to that unless the $18.9 M was a large typo.



It is 600k over 7 years per team.

I don't know what the salary cap is? 5.4M? That would mean the cap would increase to 6M by the end of the deal.

The union has a right to see the books if they negotiate a CBA with the provision included.  In fact, the old CBA requires clubs to provide financial stmts to he CFLPA (some audited, some not) although that was more for SMS verification than examining revenues.

But if owners want to base SMS raises on revenue growth, they have to be willing to have those revenues verified.  Otherwise its a meaningless provision.  If the owners don't want to provide financial transparency, then they should shorten the deal length and commit to more substantial concrete additions to cap.

This is what I mean. If you bring revenue sharing into the negotiation room, you need to share those revenues.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 17, 2022, 10:09:16 PM
OK, just looked at the CBA, and the entry contract is for NAT players... they are required to sign for 2 + 1 at $65 plus a modest optional bonus based on draft round selection.   If, for instance, Laurent Duvernay-Tardif flamed out in the NFL and came north in 2021, he would have to sign a 2+1 year deal at $65k max, plus $12.5k bonuses for the first 2 years (based on being drafted in the 3rd round).  Now, with his NFL experience, he would be free to sign whatever deal he wanted, with Calgary, his drafted team.


That clause probably contributed to 2nd round draft pick Andy Mulamba deciding not to sign with the Bombers after he couldn't catch on in the NFL.  It would be great to see it eliminated.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: buckzumhoff on May 17, 2022, 10:37:48 PM
They want revenue sharing. They have their own agents negotiate their own contracts. Can go to other teams for more money. The league don't have the money to give the players when teams like Toronto and alot of teams don't have good attendance. What do they want to share. Half of everything. The league will never get off the ground . They should maybe get rid of teams who can't put people in the stands . Then there will be less jobs.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 18, 2022, 12:13:22 AM
It is 600k over 7 years per team.

I don't know what the salary cap is? 5.4M? That would mean the cap would increase to 6M by the end of the deal.

This is what I mean. If you bring revenue sharing into the negotiation room, you need to share those revenues.

No the increase is about @24M in total according to what Ambroise said.

There is $600K in total to be used for public appearances. $600K X 9 = $5.4 M give or take. This was a response to Aardy's saying SMS only increases by $600K which was incorrect.

The other $18.9M divided for each team = $2.1M adjustment to the SMS over 7 years per team, or about $300K / year on average.

Re-read the Ambroise published on CFL.CA

I / we only suggested that's a considerable increase compared to the initial offer over 10 years. Over and above that it's about a 40% increase in total to the current SMS.

My comment was that IMO a $600K increase over 7 years would make more sense in the current financial situation.



Here is the line from what Ambrosie said.

It increases total player compensation by more than $24 million over the term of the agreement ? plus an opportunity to share in revenue increases as we successfully work together to grow the league.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: the paw on May 18, 2022, 12:52:56 AM
No the increase is about @24M in total according to what Ambroise said.

There is $600K in total to be used for public appearances. $600K X 9 = $5.4 M give or take. This was a response to Aardy's saying SMS only increases by $600K which was incorrect.

The other $18.9M divided for each team = $2.1M adjustment to the SMS over 7 years per team, or about $300K / year on average.

Re-read the Ambroise published on CFL.CA

I / we only suggested that's a considerable increase compared to the initial offer over 10 years. Over and above that it's about a 40% increase in total to the current SMS.

My comment was that IMO a $600K increase over 7 years would make more sense in the current financial situation.



Here is the line from what Ambrosie said.

It increases total player compensation by more than $24 million over the term of the agreement ? plus an opportunity to share in revenue increases as we successfully work together to grow the league.



Ambrosie is purposely conflating total compensation as a cumulative total, with the increase to the cap, in order to make it sound like big money.

As you say Naylor's math makes more sense.  A $100k increase to the cap is more than in some recent years, so it ain't nothing.  But it isn't overly generous either. Its a 1.9% increase annually, which is tracking well below inflation.

I actually think the players might go for it though IF the revenue share can be sorted.  The pool for appearance money is a smart offer, and good for both sides.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 18, 2022, 01:43:06 AM
No the increase is about @24M in total according to what Ambroise said.

There is $600K in total to be used for public appearances. $600K X 9 = $5.4 M give or take. This was a response to Aardy's saying SMS only increases by $600K which was incorrect.

The other $18.9M divided for each team = $2.1M adjustment to the SMS over 7 years per team, or about $300K / year on average.

Re-read the Ambroise published on CFL.CA

I / we only suggested that's a considerable increase compared to the initial offer over 10 years. Over and above that it's about a 40% increase in total to the current SMS.

My comment was that IMO a $600K increase over 7 years would make more sense in the current financial situation.



Here is the line from what Ambrosie said.

It increases total player compensation by more than $24 million over the term of the agreement ? plus an opportunity to share in revenue increases as we successfully work together to grow the league.



Salary cap: 5.4M

2022+0
2023+100=5.5(+100 from 5.4)
2024+100=5.6(+200 from 5.4)
2025+100=5.7(+300 from 5.4)
2026+100=5.8(+400 from 5.4)
2027+100=5.9(+500 from 5.4)
2028+100=6.0(+600 from 5.4)

100+200+300+400+500+600= 2.1M

It is not 300k per year (that would be an insane increase). They are using real cost. How much it has increased from the original cap, and then the accumulated cost over the length of the deal.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 18, 2022, 03:09:10 AM
The changes to the "return from NFL" clauses means players coming in from the NFL are not subject to ELC's, which could have prevented guys from even bothering with the CFL after the NFL...  not sure which players it has affected, but I'm sure it has in the past.   

Ya, but it only applies to NFL washouts who played in the NFL for 3 years.  That's basically nobody.  Who had 3+ years in the NFL recently and came back to the CFL?  I can only think of "Rouge" Ryan as an example in recent memory.  Most players pull a Bighill and spend 0.5 to 2 seasons in the NFL then come back.

In theory, though, it is a good idea and could incentivize future players to consider the CFL.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 18, 2022, 03:11:56 AM
Regarding "opening the books" / audits... isn't that already going to be a feature of the CFL given the new "team revenue sharing" model?  Otherwise, how can "have" teams trust that the "have not" teams aren't crying "poor" and ripping us off?  We just going to take Ambrosie's word for what "have not" teams are making?  Pffft.

If the books are open for team "equalization payments" then they should simultaneously be open for player revenue sharing.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 18, 2022, 12:39:46 PM
Salary cap: 5.4M

2022+0
2023+100=5.5(+100 from 5.4)
2024+100=5.6(+200 from 5.4)
2025+100=5.7(+300 from 5.4)
2026+100=5.8(+400 from 5.4)
2027+100=5.9(+500 from 5.4)
2028+100=6.0(+600 from 5.4)

100+200+300+400+500+600= 2.1M

It is not 300k per year (that would be an insane increase). They are using real cost. How much it has increased from the original cap, and then the accumulated cost over the length of the deal.


I can't disagree that $300K a year would be insane and certainly hope your interpretation is correct. Then I take issue with the league letter from Ambrosie as very misleading. That letter is supposed to be about the offer and it says $24M increase.

It's difficult to read that last line in my post and to think otherwise.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 18, 2022, 01:06:28 PM
The 24M is concerning the revenue sharing, I believe.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 18, 2022, 01:15:49 PM
The 24M is concerning the revenue sharing, I believe.

Here's the quote from the CFL letter. Does it matter if the money comes from the left pocket or the right pocket so to speak? While I think we all agree $300K a year would be nuts considering the financial status of the league. OTOH, it's a 6% increase. The current inflation in Canada is 6.8%. I've lived through the days of 12% annual inflation.

Note that is includes an opportunity to include revenue sharing over and above the guaranteed increases.

Here are the details:
? $18.9 million in total guaranteed increases to the salary cap league-wide.

? $5.94 million in guaranteed compensation paid for community outreach and promotional appearances league-wide.


It increases total player compensation by more than $24 million over the term of the agreement ? plus an opportunity to share in revenue increases as we successfully work together to grow the league.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 18, 2022, 02:20:25 PM
Keep in mind it is not going up 300k per year, it is increasing by 100k each year starting in 2023.

It's the same thing with the 5.94M - each club contributes 110k per year (for a total pot of 990k). You multiple that by the final 6 years of the deal (starting in 2023) - you get the 5.94 number.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 18, 2022, 02:27:57 PM
$5.5mil this year, will be guaranteed $6.1mil in year 7...  with no guarantees the league will increase revenue during that time.

Saw Derrick Dennis tweet out about the XFL's pay structure, etc... and comment that it will put a damper on rookie players coming north and that we need to treat our vets well.  Not sure there is a shortage of guys wanting to come up on a 2 year deal for min salary for an option to eventually make a lot more (as a CFL vet or NFL), Lawler is the posterboy for that.  

Yes, USFL and XFL do draw down on the talent pool.  And the CBA will cause that to worsen in some cases.  like with Dobson and other NAT talent especially.  Have to wonder if the NAT part of the CBA with NFL "time served" exemption should be extended to XFL/USFL.... its one thing to lose players to the NFL, but if we're going to lose them to those other leagues, lets at least open the path back afterwards.

That said, the pool of players that "just miss" the NFL talent wise is broad and deep.  Like Lalji said recently, just because CFL players get paid less than 10% of NFL players doesn't mean they are only 10% as good... many are 95% as good... the difference in talent is not that big.

With the league's setup, the coaching, the fans... even if we end up with lesser rookies and a lower overall talent pool than we presently have, the product will remain far superior to USFL and XFL, for sure.  Much deeper playbooks, much more intensive coaching, much more continuity with players/coaches will keep our game much more watchable and enjoyable.  Watching this weeks USFL games took me about an hour.  The play has not improved, the playbooks have not been extended, if anything, they seem to be simplifying to try and improve effectiveness, which does not seem to be happening.  Lots of blown coverages, lots of dropped balls, lots of DLine blasting through.  And a lot of confused looking QB play.  

The CFL is going to remain the best football league for players to showcase their talents for the NFL, and to improve their play to try and make that jump.  It will be interesting to see how many USFL players get NFL looks, and more importantly, how many get AR spots.  CFL stars will have actual game film of players in competent systems making plays.  USFL players will get to showcase raw talent in being able to make athletic plays, but showing the ability to make plays as part of a finely tuned system like the NFL, not so much.  Scouting USFL talent is akin to watching a very good player dominate a pickup game in a schoolyard.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 18, 2022, 03:13:10 PM
$5.5mil this year, will be guaranteed $6.1mil in year 7...  with no guarantees the league will increase revenue during that time.

Saw Derrick Dennis tweet out about the XFL's pay structure, etc... and comment that it will put a damper on rookie players coming north and that we need to treat our vets well.  Not sure there is a shortage of guys wanting to come up on a 2 year deal for min salary for an option to eventually make a lot more (as a CFL vet or NFL), Lawler is the posterboy for that.  

Yes, USFL and XFL do draw down on the talent pool.  And the CBA will cause that to worsen in some cases.  like with Dobson and other NAT talent especially.  Have to wonder if the NAT part of the CBA with NFL "time served" exemption should be extended to XFL/USFL.... its one thing to lose players to the NFL, but if we're going to lose them to those other leagues, lets at least open the path back afterwards.

That said, the pool of players that "just miss" the NFL talent wise is broad and deep.  Like Lalji said recently, just because CFL players get paid less than 10% of NFL players doesn't mean they are only 10% as good... many are 95% as good... the difference in talent is not that big.

With the league's setup, the coaching, the fans... even if we end up with lesser rookies and a lower overall talent pool than we presently have, the product will remain far superior to USFL and XFL, for sure.  Much deeper playbooks, much more intensive coaching, much more continuity with players/coaches will keep our game much more watchable and enjoyable.  Watching this weeks USFL games took me about an hour.  The play has not improved, the playbooks have not been extended, if anything, they seem to be simplifying to try and improve effectiveness, which does not seem to be happening.  Lots of blown coverages, lots of dropped balls, lots of DLine blasting through.  And a lot of confused looking QB play.  

The CFL is going to remain the best football league for players to showcase their talents for the NFL, and to improve their play to try and make that jump.  It will be interesting to see how many USFL players get NFL looks, and more importantly, how many get AR spots.  CFL stars will have actual game film of players in competent systems making plays.  USFL players will get to showcase raw talent in being able to make athletic plays, but showing the ability to make plays as part of a finely tuned system like the NFL, not so much.  Scouting USFL talent is akin to watching a very good player dominate a pickup game in a schoolyard.



There is nothing "for sure" about that in the XFL context. The USFL does seem flawed but if the XFL launches successfully it could very easily supplant the CFL as the "next best" league outside of the NFL. And quite quickly, too. They have a giant market to work with, a massive media partner and could scale salaries quickly. Again, it's also failed twice and could certainly do so again, but the ingredients for a successful launch are there. I certainly wouldn't be making any "for sure" statements about it.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 18, 2022, 03:16:52 PM
XFL suddenly has Disney behind it.

I tell you this, I laugh at these spring/start up leagues as much as anyone, but if it's on Disney+ or Prime, I'd probably watch it.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 18, 2022, 03:58:44 PM
The differentiating factor between CFL ans XFL is history and competition.

If XFL does become an NFL feeder league, and has big marketing behind it, and is run primarily as content for streaming services, then they will survive long enough to sap away some talent. 

But remember this...  every year, the NCAA has 130 teams in the FBS and 127 in FCS, each with 25 scholorship seniors on those teams.  That's 6500 NCAA players graduating each year. 

Professional players job market

NFL - about 2000 total
CFL - about 700 total
USFL - 500ish
XFL - 500ish

Total paid roster in 4 leagues - less than 4000 players, being replenished by 6500 NCAA players each year plus USports, and others.  Even at a 25% attrition rate, that makes 7 players available for each opening...

Not going to be an issue...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sec227 on May 18, 2022, 04:39:15 PM
The differentiating factor between CFL ans XFL is history and competition.

If XFL does become an NFL feeder league, and has big marketing behind it, and is run primarily as content for streaming services, then they will survive long enough to sap away some talent. 

But remember this...  every year, the NCAA has 130 teams in the FBS and 127 in FCS, each with 25 scholorship seniors on those teams.  That's 6500 NCAA players graduating each year. 

Professional players job market

NFL - about 2000 total
CFL - about 700 total
USFL - 500ish
XFL - 500ish

Total paid roster in 4 leagues - less than 4000 players, being replenished by 6500 NCAA players each year plus USports, and others.  Even at a 25% attrition rate, that makes 7 players available for each opening...

Not going to be an issue...


Interesting very valid point. And lots of them that are passed over from the "big" league. Aren't that bad of players.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 18, 2022, 04:46:14 PM
Day 4 of no discussions. Nobody has blinked yet and that's not good. You can't get beyond an impasse without new discussions. Are both sides really doing to die on their respective hills?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: M.O.A.B. on May 18, 2022, 05:06:37 PM
Farjan said there were talks last night and there's a possibility of getting an update today.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 18, 2022, 05:07:28 PM
Day 4 of no discussions. Nobody has blinked yet and that's not good. You can't get beyond an impasse without new discussions. Are both sides really doing to die on their respective hills?

Multiple reporters have said talks are continuing and there has been positive movement.

Some have speculated on a deal, or at least an official update today or tomorrow.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sec227 on May 18, 2022, 05:11:32 PM
From Kelly Moore CJON

Am hearing there has been "movement" in the CFL labour talks. But nothing in detail. That's a least more promising than "the two sides aren't talking at all."


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 18, 2022, 05:12:09 PM
Multiple reporters have said talks are continuing and there has been positive movement.

Some have speculated on a deal, or at least an official update today or tomorrow.

Good to know. We don't need negotiating thru the media but it would have been nice to make the public more aware that they are talking.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 18, 2022, 05:14:42 PM
Good to know. We don't need negotiating thru the media but it would have been nice to make the public more aware that they are talking.

Let's hope this means they are in serious portion of talks now, and not the fake extreme ask position where we lambast each other on socials.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sec227 on May 18, 2022, 05:23:46 PM
Teams refunding the preseason game cost $$. Lost concession cost $$. Why not call it 2mil or so at least for a team like the riders.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 18, 2022, 06:57:20 PM
Teams refunding the preseason game cost $$. Lost concession cost $$. Why not call it 2mil or so at least for a team like the riders.

Not sure preseaon games are money makers, while ticket sales and concessions are nice, there are expenses incurred, and I'm not sure the preseason turnout covers costs.

On the other hand, players are missing out on minor preseaon payments... housing and food are being covered, but no payments.

https://cfldb.ca/faq/compensation/

"Per 2014 Article 11 of the CBA, players who qualified as a veteran of one year received $525/week, a veteran of two years $625/week and a veteran of three years or more $725/week for a minimum of three weeks of training camp/pre-season compensation. A pre-season subsistence allowance may also be provided to players.

Players are also compensated with a per diem when travelling, free and discounted tickets, playoff and Grey Cup compensation and pension contributions. Full obligations to players can be found in the Collective Agreement."

Also, noticed in that article, SMS was $5.8mil for 2021, not $5.5 as I had previously stated.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 18, 2022, 07:04:44 PM
Not sure preseaon games are money makers, while ticket sales and concessions are nice, there are expenses incurred, and I'm not sure the preseason turnout covers costs.

On the other hand, players are missing out on minor preseaon payments... housing and food are being covered, but no payments.

https://cfldb.ca/faq/compensation/

"Per 2014 Article 11 of the CBA, players who qualified as a veteran of one year received $525/week, a veteran of two years $625/week and a veteran of three years or more $725/week for a minimum of three weeks of training camp/pre-season compensation. A pre-season subsistence allowance may also be provided to players.

Players are also compensated with a per diem when travelling, free and discounted tickets, playoff and Grey Cup compensation and pension contributions. Full obligations to players can be found in the Collective Agreement."

Also, noticed in that article, SMS was $5.8mil for 2021, not $5.5 as I had previously stated.

It's part of the season ticket package isn't it?

Missed games would have to be refunded.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 18, 2022, 09:07:25 PM
Not sure preseaon games are money makers, while ticket sales and concessions are nice, there are expenses incurred, and I'm not sure the preseason turnout covers costs.

Good question.  However, if they consistently lost money, why would they ever open PS games to the public at all?  No law says they can't just play to an empty stadium and TV crews.  If so, what is the rationale for having fans there?  I guess it starts to build hype and buzz and might result in a higher week 1 attendance?  Not sure.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: pdirks67 on May 18, 2022, 09:20:07 PM
Lalji is saying that the sides are talking and they are getting close.

Farhan Lalji  @FarhanLaljiTSN 1h
Here?s where things stand: The two sides are still in discussions. All negotiations being done remotely. Getting closer to a deal. If they get there, a vote would still need to take place, which could come tonight


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: teddygmr on May 19, 2022, 12:18:34 AM
Jeff Hamilton
@jeffkhamilton
?
16m
The Bombers are preparing to return to IG Field tomorrow. Coaches across the league are being told to prepare for Thursday. All signs suggest an agreement has been reached. But players haven't seen it and nothing has been voted on. #wfp
Quote Tweet
Jeff Hamilton
@jeffkhamilton
 ? 26m
I'm hearing there's been a lot of positive movement between the CFL and CFLPA towards a new CBA and I'm told teams are getting ready for practice Thurs., with one league official saying it's "likely." Nothing confirmed but that's as positive a report as I've heard in days. #wfp


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 19, 2022, 12:57:59 AM
Reports say the league and the CFLPA have reached an agreement and it will go the players for ratification.

Reported to be a 7 year deal.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 19, 2022, 01:39:37 AM
Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
16m
Hearing Monday May 23rd preseason game (@Wpg_BlueBombers
at @sskroughriders) will be moved. Announcement expected Thursday. #CFL #CFLPA


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 02:15:09 AM
Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
16m
Hearing Monday May 23rd preseason game (@Wpg_BlueBombers
at @sskroughriders) will be moved. Announcement expected Thursday. #CFL #CFLPA

That will be interesting. Bombers 2nd game is on the 27th against the Elks.  The last few games for everybody are on June 3.

So I could see maybe a 2 shift to the 25th for the 1st game but then the same for the 2nd game two days later. Overall it impacts the Riders and Elks schedule as well.

Hopefully it's still one of the televised games, which could be in doubt.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 19, 2022, 03:56:36 AM
Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
8m
If you put this @CFL
 CBA beside any recent one, it's not close. Better for the players and better for the @CFL. Measurable gains including new areas (guaranteed contracts) while addressing key league issues - like roster turnover and Canadians returning from the @NFL
 #CFL #CFLPA

Kelly Moore
@KMooreCJOB
1h
A very tired sounding @Bighill44 says 7 year #CFL deal includes term ending 30 days prior to when training camp starts. Increased long term rehab coverage, and real revenue sharing for the players. He also expects Monday's pre season opener to be rescheduled.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 19, 2022, 04:01:05 AM
Derek Taylor
@DTonSC
47m
Bombers players who we believe can be 'Nationalized' (based on 3 years w/WPG or 5 in CFL):

Alexander
Bighill
Bryant
Collaros
Ellingson
Hardrick
Jeffcoat
Jefferson
Taylor
Wilson

Love the thought of a reward/benefit for guys who come here long-term.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 12:01:29 PM
Derek Taylor
@DTonSC
47m
Bombers players who we believe can be 'Nationalized' (based on 3 years w/WPG or 5 in CFL):

Alexander
Bighill
Bryant
Collaros
Ellingson
Hardrick
Jeffcoat
Jefferson
Taylor
Wilson

Love the thought of a reward/benefit for guys who come here long-term.

After the 3rd year or in the 3rd year?

You can only do that for one and that's starts in 2023?  I'd guess we'd do that for Bryant or Hardrick. Since we'd have to replace that player with a National for an in game injury. Bombers have 1 or 2 Canadian OL on the AR for depth and that OL would shift into the OL as a starter.





Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: 3rdand1.5 on May 19, 2022, 12:05:42 PM
Can someone explain what the heck this 49-51 rule is with CDN's and nationalized CDN's?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 19, 2022, 12:21:18 PM
Can someone explain what the heck this 49-51 rule is with CDN's and nationalized CDN's?

I'm not 100% sure but if you are asking about the paragraph from 3down, which stats:

Quote
Three additional nationalized Americans will be permitted to rotate with national starters provided that they do not play more than 49 percent of the total offensive or defensive snaps in a game. These additional nationalized Americans cannot play on the same side of the ball.

To me, this means that, in 2023, teams will be able to designate 3 Americans (who have been on one team for 3 years or 5 years in the CFL) as rotational nationalized Americans (or some such nomenclature). They would be allowed to sub in and out for actual nationals so long as they don't exceed 49% of the total offensive or defensive snaps. I believe it also means you cannot have two rotated in on either offense or defense at the same time.

Further clarification will help, but that's what I take from it anyway.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 12:35:58 PM
I'm not 100% sure but if you are asking about the paragraph from 3down, which stats:

To me, this means that, in 2023, teams will be able to designate 3 Americans (who have been on one team for 3 years or 5 years in the CFL) as rotational nationalized Americans (or some such nomenclature). They would be allowed to sub in and out for actual nationals so long as they don't exceed 49% of the total offensive or defensive snaps. I believe it also means you cannot have two rotated in on either offense or defense at the same time.

Further clarification will help, but that's what I take from it anyway.

This is going to take some more thought. I wasn't aware of the 49/51 rule context. Most imports are already starting nearly every play barring injury. So that leaves the DI's or someone that would have been a DI that isn't starting every play? Given the players on the list, there isn't anybody we'd want to restrict to 49% of plays.

Going to have to see this happening and how teams use the new idea.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: 3rdand1.5 on May 19, 2022, 01:18:29 PM
It is confusing, but could say a team play CDN's as "normal" most of the season and come playoffs manipulate the 49/51 rule and play mostly Americans in the do or die games even though the ratio is off for that game/s but it would be allowed as they could manipulate it due to cumulative snap counts?

If so that could be very advantages, and how the heck would the on field or even command center catch that in a game, if a team "cheats" it and win say the Western Final with too many Americans what happens?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 01:21:36 PM
I pulled this info from 3rddown on google. The movement from 7 to 8 national starters concerns me if that nationalized American can only play 51% of the snaps.

There will also be a change made to the ratio as of 2023 that will see the number of national starters raised from seven to eight. One of these players can be a ?nationalized American,? which is defined as an American player who has been on the same team for three years or in the CFL for five years.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 19, 2022, 01:23:59 PM
Dumb ratio rules.

8 NI starters instead of 7, 1 of which is a Yankee NI. 3 more Yankee NI's who can play up to 49% of the plays. How are they going to figure this out in game? What kind of penalty will there be for playing 50%+? Is the Yankee NI also a DI? If so can they play 49% as an NI and 51% as a DI?



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 19, 2022, 01:25:14 PM
So GAME ON! Good blue bombers can you send me my tickets yet?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 19, 2022, 01:33:03 PM
Dumb ratio rules.

8 NI starters instead of 7, 1 of which is a Yankee NI. 3 more Yankee NI's who can play up to 49% of the plays. How are they going to figure this out in game? What kind of penalty will there be for playing 50%+? Is the Yankee NI also a DI? If so can they play 49% as an NI and 51% as a DI?



Agree. Also, a big difference is how that rule is calculated. Do they mean that the 3 rotational Americans cannot exceed 49% of snaps EACH or as a group? My guess is each. Which means that basically there is 1.5 more tenured Americans allowed on the field after an increase of 1 national. The net difference in that scenario is .5 less Canadian content if all teams do math jujitsu on the sidelines to maximize those American snaps.

The league can be its own worst enemy sometimes. They need to make things easier to understand not harder. Will anyone actually be policing those snaps in a game? How do teams even stay onside with that rule? No one knows how many offensive and defensive snaps there is going to be in a game. Offences can go hurry up to effectively not allow substitutions. Obviously it's not something that can be flagged mid-game, so disputes will be resolved after by fines or warnings or what?

Just find a way to reduce the ratio. Perpetually watering it down with all these complex loopholes is the opposite of what I suspect most fans want. Certainly me.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: M.O.A.B. on May 19, 2022, 01:38:28 PM
Dumb ratio rules.

8 NI starters instead of 7, 1 of which is a Yankee NI. 3 more Yankee NI's who can play up to 49% of the plays. How are they going to figure this out in game? What kind of penalty will there be for playing 50%+? Is the Yankee NI also a DI? If so can they play 49% as an NI and 51% as a DI?



Agree. That's TURRIBLE!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 19, 2022, 01:53:36 PM
They won't be handing out any penalties in game for going over the % because it will be % of the plays overall in the game. It can't be a running total with a penalty every time a Yankee NI is above 50%. Example: Play 1, start your Yankee NI, they are now over 50% of the plays.

My guess is that there won't be any penalty for going over the snap % limit. That will allow teams to start more imports.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 01:57:40 PM
Using the 2022 roster, can somebody come up with an example of this in functional practice? I don't see how it works if there is a " snap count " limit.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: the paw on May 19, 2022, 02:02:24 PM
The new ratio rule will be a nightmare to track and enforce.  Any penalty will only be applied as a fine after the game when snap counts are determined.  It is a cumbersome effort to split the difference between a disastrous ratio reduction and the status quo.  It might be more palatable if he simultaneously reduce or eliminate DIs, but that is me speculating.

In practical terms, it would shake out something like this.  You can now platoon Jake Thomas with Ricky Walker, so defensive snaps for Jesse Briggs disappear.  You can now drop wolitarsky for a TE or h-back who is primarily a blocker, and platoon him with someone like Saunders or Janarion Grant on passing downs.  You can now cut Johnny Augustine in favor of an American tailback who platoons with Olivera (who will see fewer snaps).  

Its not the worst case scenario, and I will reserve final judgement until I see the language, but I bet this is revised 2 years into the agreement because it is so cumbersome.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 19, 2022, 02:19:57 PM
Sounds like it starts with 8 Nats in 2023... including a NATionalized Int...

Regardless, we have a year to figure out the actual who's what's and where's of it, for now it is business as normal.

It will mean Nats lose a bit of negotiating power... and vet Int DI's might gain a little...  the 40/51 rule will eliminate INT starters from being Nationalized...

Extending healthcare for 3 years post career to 5 is great for the players. 

7 year term means stability...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 02:21:24 PM
The new ratio rule will be a nightmare to track and enforce.  Any penalty will only be applied as a fine after the game when snap counts are determined.  It is a cumbersome effort to split the difference between a disastrous ratio reduction and the status quo.  It might be more palatable if he simultaneously reduce or eliminate DIs, but that is me speculating.

In practical terms, it would shake out something like this.  You can now platoon Jake Thomas with Ricky Walker, so defensive snaps for Jesse Briggs disappear.  You can now drop wolitarsky for a TE or h-back who is primarily a blocker, and platoon him with someone like Saunders or Janarion Grant on passing downs.  You can now cut Johnny Augustine in favor of an American tailback who platoons with Olivera (who will see fewer snaps).  

Its not the worst case scenario, and I will reserve final judgement until I see the language, but I bet this is revised 2 years into the agreement because it is so cumbersome.

The nationlized imports are still imports. There is no increase in that combined group. The nationalized player that has to " start " might work in the Walker example if he or Sayles are with the team in 2023. That's not a given.

Grant is a 3rd player but he's not going to see 51% of plays on offence unless there is an in game injury.

This rule is nuts.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 02:23:34 PM
Sounds like it starts with 8 Nats in 2023... including a NATionalized Int...

Regardless, we have a year to figure out the actual who's what's and where's of it, for now it is business as normal.

It will mean Nats lose a bit of negotiating power... and vet Int DI's might gain a little...  the 40/51 rule will eliminate INT starters from being Nationalized...

Extending healthcare for 3 years post career to 5 is great for the players. 

7 year term means stability...


That's the problem. There are only 4 imports that aren't starters and they are DI's.  Many DI's don't often survive into year 3.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 19, 2022, 02:37:06 PM
The CFL announced today it is rescheduling the pre-season game between the Saskatchewan Roughriders and the visiting Winnipeg Blue Bombers that had been planned for Monday, May 23 to a new date and time: Tuesday, May 31 at 6:30 p.m. local/8:30 p.m. ET.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 19, 2022, 02:42:20 PM
The CFL announced today it is rescheduling the pre-season game between the Saskatchewan Roughriders and the visiting Winnipeg Blue Bombers that had been planned for Monday, May 23 to a new date and time: Tuesday, May 31 at 6:30 p.m. local/8:30 p.m. ET.

Hopefully TSN can still do it! Edit: the answer is yes! https://www.tsn.ca/2021-cfl-on-tsn-broadcast-schedule-1.1655021

TSN broadcast schedule just got updated!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 19, 2022, 02:45:38 PM
That's the problem. There are only 4 imports that aren't starters and they are DI's.  Many DI's don't often survive into year 3.

Exactly, which is why it will need a year to figure out how to best take advantage of this. 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: the paw on May 19, 2022, 04:09:50 PM
That's the problem. There are only 4 imports that aren't starters and they are DI's.  Many DI's don't often survive into year 3.

The more I think about it, the more logical it is that the "nationalized Americans" replace the DIs.  So, even thought there is a loss of snap count, there isn't a roster reduction in the number of Canadians.  If you had nationalized Americans plus DI's, then you would have to shrink the number of rostered Canadians, and I don't think that's the case (it would be bad if it was).

In effect, that might mean the nationalized Americans become spots where you play super versatile veterans.  They can split reps with a CDN starter, and then come in as a DI for another American.  So, for example, you could have a veteran DT splitting reps with Jake Thomas, but if Sayles needs a rest, that vet can come in for him. 

Or you could have a veteran DB like Nick Taylor or Mercy Maston be splitting reps with the new CDN DB Rene, but they could also slide in and replace Kyrie Taylor if you wanted to go into a dime situation in 2nd and long. 

I'm still not crazy about the loss of Canadian reps or the enforceability, but at least I can see the logic a little more clearly now. 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 19, 2022, 04:29:32 PM
First thing I'd like to know is how the snap count actually works. Is it 49% of the defensive snaps for a defensive player or 49% of all the snaps in the game? If it's all the snaps, then the Yankee NI could play the whole game without going over 50% unless the defence is on the field for more snaps than the offence.

Are the Yankee NI's simply DI's who can come on for either NI's or Imports?
Are they part time starters who share their snaps with a real NI? (I can't believe I have to call them that)




Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 19, 2022, 04:34:23 PM
Who pushed for this rule change, the CFL or the PA?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 04:50:02 PM
The more I think about it, the more logical it is that the "nationalized Americans" replace the DIs.  So, even thought there is a loss of snap count, there isn't a roster reduction in the number of Canadians.  If you had nationalized Americans plus DI's, then you would have to shrink the number of rostered Canadians, and I don't think that's the case (it would be bad if it was).

In effect, that might mean the nationalized Americans become spots where you play super versatile veterans.  They can split reps with a CDN starter, and then come in as a DI for another American.  So, for example, you could have a veteran DT splitting reps with Jake Thomas, but if Sayles needs a rest, that vet can come in for him. 

Or you could have a veteran DB like Nick Taylor or Mercy Maston be splitting reps with the new CDN DB Rene, but they could also slide in and replace Kyrie Taylor if you wanted to go into a dime situation in 2nd and long. 

I'm still not crazy about the loss of Canadian reps or the enforceability, but at least I can see the logic a little more clearly now. 

I still don't get it. You can only start 12 on offence or defence. Now we have to start an extra Nationalized American to make the starting 8. At the start of the game he's going to have to replace an import that would have already been starting.

If it were just to maintain the 7 Canadian starters then that would be doable. Changing it to 8 is an issue IMO.

The using DI's theory has too many flaws. The first being is that they aren't already starting. The 2nd is that not many DI's exist as 3rd year players.

Look at our DI's from 2021: Grant, Moutada, Brown and a few guys that played at times from the PR ( now gone ) except Houston.

ALSO: Globals can only replace imports. Now we have to consider whether the import is a Nationalized import or just an import.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 19, 2022, 05:05:24 PM
First thing I'd like to know is how the snap count actually works. Is it 49% of the defensive snaps for a defensive player or 49% of all the snaps in the game? If it's all the snaps, then the Yankee NI could play the whole game without going over 50% unless the defence is on the field for more snaps than the offence.

Are the Yankee NI's simply DI's who can come on for either NI's or Imports?
Are they part time starters who share their snaps with a real NI? (I can't believe I have to call them that)




I guess you would have to designate the NI that the American is replacing. And compare snaps at the end of the game.

My question though: Can it be a shady practice where you put random american X at DE, and then put Jeffcoat or Jefferson (who fit the naturalized canadian criteria) in to replace Jake Thomas.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Pete on May 19, 2022, 05:08:34 PM
While there is 8 canadian starters, 1 of which will be an nationalized american , so in effect you still have 7 canadian starters.
For the other 3 nationalized americans according to dave naylor, the 49% of snaps may be cumalative over the season and not done on a game by game basis. It does look like you would have to utilize a veteran import in this role and one that is not needed as a full time player . It might mean less import rookies as DI
As far as putting a jeffcoat/jefferson in that role ,,then they could only play 49% of snaps.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: 3rdand1.5 on May 19, 2022, 05:50:31 PM
I guess you would have to designate the NI that the American is replacing. And compare snaps at the end of the game.

My question though: Can it be a shady practice where you put random american X at DE, and then put Jeffcoat or Jefferson (who fit the naturalized canadian criteria) in to replace Jake Thomas.

That's kinda what I was asking earlier...hypothetically if the 49/51 is cumulative you could get away with playing Thomas (and I don't mean this as a knock on him) in a nothing game the last game of the season, then use Jeffcoat and Jefferson only in the Western Final as an example as long as the cumulative total equals less than 49% of snaps.

...and say using my example if you win the West final as an example and after the game it is determined that you used an American too much what happens? Can't replay the game, can't forfeit, if it's a fine, well a fine to help your chances of getting into the cup.....


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 05:52:02 PM
While there is 8 canadian starters, 1 of which will be an nationalized american , so in effect you still have 7 canadian starters.
For the other 3 nationalized americans according to dave naylor, the 49% of snaps may be cumalative over the season and not done on a game by game basis. It does look like you would have to utilize a veteran import in this role and one that is not needed as a full time player . It might mean less import rookies as DI
As far as putting a jeffcoat/jefferson in that role ,,then they could only play 49% of snaps.

That doesn't answer the question or resolve the problem, even if you use a 3rd year player that is / was a DI. So in 2023 we sit Bailey for half the game so we can let Grant get reps as the 8th starter?

Or we do that with Bryant of Hardrick and Kolankowski plays half the snaps?

A veteran import is starting and not generally sitting as a DI and he'd have to replace an import to be on the field in any case. We have to replace and actual import starter with a nationalized starter to qualify as the 8th Canadian starter.  And he can only play half the reps.

Cumulative snaps over the course of the season is even more of a nightmare.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 19, 2022, 06:03:26 PM
That doesn't answer the question or resolve the problem, even if you use a 3rd year player that is / was a DI. So in 2023 we sit Bailey for half the game so we can let Grant get reps as the 8th starter?

Or we do that with Bryant of Hardrick and Kolankowski plays half the snaps?

A veteran import is starting and not generally sitting as a DI and he'd have to replace an import to be on the field in any case. We have to replace and actual import starter with a nationalized starter to qualify as the 8th Canadian starter.  And he can only play half the reps.

Cumulative snaps over the course of the season is even more of a nightmare.

My best guess is that what will end up happening is the game will be exactly the same as it is now but teams will be able to replace/sub Canadians with the three Americans throughout the game who meet the criteria. The league isn't going to crunch numbers on snap counts for the rotation so as long as teams don't just flat out start an American and play him there all game no one will care or say anything.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Pete on May 19, 2022, 06:15:32 PM
That doesn't answer the question or resolve the problem, even if you use a 3rd year player that is / was a DI. So in 2023 we sit Bailey for half the game so we can let Grant get reps as the 8th starter?

Or we do that with Bryant of Hardrick and Kolankowski plays half the snaps?

A veteran import is starting and not generally sitting as a DI and he'd have to replace an import to be on the field in any case. We have to replace and actual import starter with a nationalized starter to qualify as the 8th Canadian starter.  And he can only play half the reps.

Cumulative snaps over the course of the season is even more of a nightmare.
the nationalized starter can play all the reps. So we can designate Byrant/Bighill?leffcoat in that role. The other 3 would be rotational ie Maston rotating with Rene. I don't believe you have to designate all three its only if its your advantage to do so.You wouldnt designate Bryant as one of the three as you want to play him more than 49% (at least thats what I read into it)


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 06:18:26 PM
My best guess is that what will end up happening is the game will be exactly the same as it is now but teams will be able to replace/sub Canadians with the three Americans throughout the game who meet the criteria. The league isn't going to crunch numbers on snap counts for the rotation so as long as teams don't just flat out start an American and play him there all game no one will care or say anything.

Subbing for Canadians doesn't add the 8th player intended. What you suggested might work using a DI if only 7 Canadian starters were necessary and if a DI was here long enough.

At the moment only Grant would fall into that category.  We're trying to squeeze in another entity within a very small group at best. Instead of 17 import starters ( including the QB ) now we have to tweak in somebody else.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 06:23:17 PM
the nationalized starter can play all the reps. So we can designate Byrant/Bighill?leffcoat in that role. The other 3 would be rotational ie Maston rotating with Rene. I don't believe you have to designate all three its only if its your advantage to do so.You wouldnt designate Bryant as one of the three as you want to play him more than 49% (at least thats what I read into it)

Like DI's I think you do have to designate who they are. A nationalized starter CAN'T play all reps otherwise it would be easy. Bryant, Hardrick or Bighill.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 06:26:10 PM
The CFL announced today it is rescheduling the pre-season game between the Saskatchewan Roughriders and the visiting Winnipeg Blue Bombers that had been planned for Monday, May 23 to a new date and time: Tuesday, May 31 at 6:30 p.m. local/8:30 p.m. ET.

That's mostly good news. A slight disadvantage in that the time after our last pre season game and our 1st regular season game is 4 days less. Coming out of TC having a few more days helps getting the timing down and play book installed. 4 more days of recovery from TC bumps and bruises also useful.

Not the end of the world but I'm sure the extra 4 days would have been nice.

We'll see more of the actual starters in what is now the 2nd game instead of the 1st game against our arch rival Regina. Might generate a few more folks out to the game.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Pete on May 19, 2022, 06:33:23 PM
Like DI's I think you do have to designate who they are. A nationalized starter CAN'T play all reps otherwise it would be easy. Bryant, Hardrick or Bighill.


Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
* Ratio Update* : 8 starting Canadians, 1 of whom is nationalized Canadian (vet American, at least 3 years same team, or *5* in league). 3 other nationalized Americans can play up to 49 per cent of all snaps on offence or defence.#CFL #CFLPA
So the nationalized canadian could be Bryant, Hardrick or Bighill and play just like a canadian ie all reps


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 19, 2022, 07:17:55 PM
So mostly good news.  I knew they'd get it done.  Bit miffed it moves back the WPG@SSK game, but c'est la vie.

The snap-count idea is kind of out of the blue.  Can't tell from the comments whether this applies in 2022 or just 2023??  Maybe this was done to allow the FAKE-NAT (or FAKE-NI -- FAKENI? -- if you prefer) implementation to proceed whilst closing the door on HAM-type cheating.

Maybe this sets up CFL games to have pseudo-"power plays": series where you pull all your NATs and put in your vet FAKENATs to gain a tangible advantage (almost like having an extra player).  Or like DRS in F1: a contrivance to get more of what the fans want.

It actually might be more exciting, and it gives more dimension to O- (or D-) coordinator strategy.  Now, do Hall and Buck have to have a cage match to see who gets more of the extra FAKENATs?  ;)

Like someone said, won't this mostly impact the carrying of rookie ELCs IMPs as DIs?  It would make more sense to start your promising IMP rookies and make your IMP vets the FAKENAT-DIs.  If this keeps more vets in the league and players with the same team, I'm all for it.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 19, 2022, 07:20:50 PM
That's mostly good news. A slight disadvantage in that the time after our last pre season game and our 1st regular season game is 4 days less. Coming out of TC having a few more days helps getting the timing down and play book installed. 4 more days of recovery from TC bumps and bruises also useful.

Not the end of the world but I'm sure the extra 4 days would have been nice.

We'll see more of the actual starters in what is now the 2nd game instead of the 1st game against our arch rival Regina. Might generate a few more folks out to the game.

A workable application might be if a receiver like Grant qualified as a Natl. (he currently doesn't) and they brought him in as a replacement for Wolitarsky in the second half of games.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 19, 2022, 07:50:45 PM
Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
* Ratio Update* : 8 starting Canadians, 1 of whom is nationalized Canadian (vet American, at least 3 years same team, or *5* in league). 3 other nationalized Americans can play up to 49 per cent of all snaps on offence or defence.#CFL #CFLPA


I read that and still don't totally get it. 3 other nationalized Americans can play 49 per cent of all snaps on offence or defense.

...so they can play half of the defense's total snaps? Individually?

More Naylor:

@TSNDaveNaylor
To be honest, I?m not crazy about how complicated this makes the sport. Hard for fans to understand ? vet Americans? Ratio is 7 or 8 if you?re including nationalized Canadian, 49 per cent of snaps? Many will say ? Huh?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 07:50:55 PM
Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
* Ratio Update* : 8 starting Canadians, 1 of whom is nationalized Canadian (vet American, at least 3 years same team, or *5* in league). 3 other nationalized Americans can play up to 49 per cent of all snaps on offence or defence.#CFL #CFLPA
So the nationalized canadian could be Bryant, Hardrick or Bighill and play just like a canadian ie all reps


That clears it up a bit. In this case I'd designate one of the 2 import OL as the nationalized Canadian. That's a net zero change to the starters UNTIL he is injured during the game. In the case of the Bombers an actual Canadian OL would be pushed into a starting role. We roster 1 or possibly 2 back up Canadian OL on the AR each game. Neufeld slides to OT and the Canadian back up to OG.

I'd be a little more hesitant to make Bighill or Wilson that designation because that would force a Canadian LB to start if an injury happened. I'd say our depth and strength to start another Canadian is on the OL more than elsewhere on the roster.

That said, it becomes a choice based on the perceived best Canadian next man up. In 2021 we were a lot stronger depth wise on the OL than we are at the moment.

Now the other 3 nationalized Canadians still means it would be a DI that gets to rotate in more often, if they qualify. That's the fly in the pie so a degree.

If we had a 3 year import DE or DT as a DI he could replace Thomas ( for example ) in a 3 or 4 import DL without impacting the ratio.

In 2023 if Grant is still here, he could be used at times to replace a Canadian receiver. Keeping in mind that would be Demski or Woli. That might work in some specific formations or field position but I don't see that happening often.

Naylor is right. I don't like it and it makes understanding more complicated for many fans, me included. I don't the the point or any real advantage.




Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 19, 2022, 08:48:35 PM
Changes to Nationalized players, DI's etc aren't until next year.  In the meantime, all your questions are going to be answered.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 19, 2022, 08:49:24 PM
Naylor is right. I don't like it and it makes understanding more complicated for many fans, me included. I don't the the point or any real advantage.

Maybe it's a subtle/sneaky way to return teams like EDM to competitiveness?  Teams that are weak on NAT talent due to poor past decisions are instantly stronger if they load up on vets IMPs.  I can see C.Jones just drooling over the idea.  CGY has also let a lot of NAT talent walk.  This could help them, too.

It won't help WPG much because our NAT base is so strong, at least on O.

My guess is most FAKENATs (both types) will be used on O in most teams.  You can still win games with your O "weak" half the game, but you cannot win games with your D "weak" for half a game (on average).  As we well know, one weak cog on D and it's explosion city as O's exploit.  You could really make hay with your used-to-be-superstar FAKENAT DIs on O at points in the game that really matter (last 2 mins, etc).

When your "weak O" is out, just tell them not to turn the ball over and leave it to the D to keep them in the game until the powerplay crew come out.

At the league level, this will encourage vet IMPs to stay with their team, encourage higher pay for them, and keep them in the league longer.  All good things.  On the downside, might this mean reduced salary for the mid-level NATs?  Demski would be unaffected, but someone like Petermann or Augustine might be less attractive.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 09:09:23 PM
Changes to Nationalized players, DI's etc aren't until next year.  In the meantime, all your questions are going to be answered.



If it can't be answered now, it can't be answered later.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 19, 2022, 09:14:56 PM
Maybe it's a subtle/sneaky way to return teams like EDM to competitiveness?  Teams that are weak on NAT talent due to poor past decisions are instantly stronger if they load up on vets IMPs.  I can see C.Jones just drooling over the idea.  CGY has also let a lot of NAT talent walk.  This could help them, too.

It won't help WPG much because our NAT base is so strong, at least on O.

My guess is most FAKENATs (both types) will be used on O in most teams.  You can still win games with your O "weak" half the game, but you cannot win games with your D "weak" for half a game (on average).  As we well know, one weak cog on D and it's explosion city as O's exploit.  You could really make hay with your used-to-be-superstar FAKENAT DIs on O at points in the game that really matter (last 2 mins, etc).

When your "weak O" is out, just tell them not to turn the ball over and leave it to the D to keep them in the game until the powerplay crew come out.

At the league level, this will encourage vet IMPs to stay with their team, encourage higher pay for them, and keep them in the league longer.  All good things.  On the downside, might this mean reduced salary for the mid-level NATs?  Demski would be unaffected, but someone like Petermann or Augustine might be less attractive.


You still only have 20 imports that aren't QB's. 16 are already starting. The QB's are still a separate classification group. An import that qualifies as a national will largely still be a national on another teams. Not all but many, so it's not an advantage to them. Every team will have several players that are 3+ years on their roster.

Veteran imports MAY still change teams in free agency if more money is offered.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: bludan on May 23, 2022, 10:11:57 PM
https://3downnation.com/2022/05/23/cfl-players-association-votes-to-reject-tentative-cba-report/


Oh boy...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: The Zipp on May 23, 2022, 10:18:42 PM
Death of the CFL...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 23, 2022, 10:26:23 PM
Pretty sure the fringe Canadians got enough votes together to not accept. As much as I like the CFL, I'd lock them out them out and throw away the key. There's no good option here.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 23, 2022, 10:50:57 PM
Sure, a few Nat jobs get lost over the contract, which I still do not know how the ratio ends up... never saw not of that... but how do they get INT's to vote against it? 

Still don't know if they changed the Global situation... did they vote against too?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 23, 2022, 10:59:02 PM
Sure, a few Nat jobs get lost over the contract, which I still do not know how the ratio ends up... never saw not of that... but how do they get INT's to vote against it? 

Still don't know if they changed the Global situation... did they vote against too?

Most didn't. My guess (and I'm sure more details will be coming soon) is that Americans and Canadians are fighting and the Americans voted mostly for and many Canadians voted against. Most people on here seem to love all those fringe guys the CFL rules are endlessly protecting so this is an interesting twist. I guess we'll see just how much everyone likes those guys now.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 23, 2022, 11:04:57 PM
@Simoni_Lawrence
Daaaamn so your telling me the Canadians don?t wanna play football in 2022? That?s crazy call up some CIS players !!! Let?s goooo


..it could get ugly. I went from disliking the ratio and begrudgingly tolerating the fringe Canadians to downright hating them. Contrary to what they might have been told, they do not make the CFL special and never have.

Canadians voting down the CBA = what happens when you get the inside lane in a race, and a head start, and get paid more. And then someone finally tells you that you might only get a head start and paid more and you're no longer guaranteed the inside lane so you throw a tantrum.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: CrazyCanuck89 on May 23, 2022, 11:13:21 PM
@Simoni_Lawrence
Daaaamn so your telling me the Canadians don?t wanna play football in 2022? That?s crazy call up some CIS players !!! Let?s goooo


..it could get ugly. I went from disliking the ratio and begrudgingly tolerating the fringe Canadians to downright hating them. Contrary to what they might have been told, they do not make the CFL special and never have.

Canadians voting down the CBA: what happens when you get the inside lane in a race, and a head start, and get paid more. And then someone finally tells you that you might only get a head start and you're no longer guaranteed the inside lane and you throw a tantrum.

We don't know the percentage that voted it down. Stop speculating.  American players would also have had to vote against it.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 23, 2022, 11:15:18 PM
We don't know the percentage that voted it down. Stop speculating.  American players would also have had to vote against it.

Lots of people already speculating. Reporters and American players already.

@TimCBaines
An absolutely horrible decision, stoked by Canadian players. This will cost #CFL players money. If I'm the league, I take back all money concessions given.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 23, 2022, 11:15:50 PM
I have been 100% behind the players, but this is BS.

The league bent on every issue, this is the best deal the players have ever seen and voting this down is just a smack right across the face of the PA and American members.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 23, 2022, 11:16:39 PM
We don't know the percentage that voted it down. Stop speculating.  American players would also have had to vote against it.

We don't know that. I kind of doubt it.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 23, 2022, 11:19:44 PM
We don't know the percentage that voted it down. Stop speculating.  American players would also have had to vote against it.

They aren't going to publish it (maybe it gets leaked) and maybe a few American players voted no but it is pretty clear already a Canadian issue with the ratio. They want those guaranteed spots and extra salary for being worse. Enough is enough. It's either a pro league or it's not. 



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 23, 2022, 11:35:43 PM
@FarhanLaljiTSN
Now imagine being an US player on the verge of losing a pay check & looking across the dressing room at the CDN player who caused it. Even though the CND job was protected


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 23, 2022, 11:44:09 PM
Didn't see this coming. I'm not at a loss for words but whatever I'm thinking can't be posted.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 23, 2022, 11:48:51 PM
@DougBrown97
Well this is something new.  I?ve never heard of a player membership voting down a recommendation from both their bargaining committee, and player reps.  Those locker rooms are gonna be heated.  One step forward, two steps back.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 12:01:49 AM
I have been 100% behind the players, but this is BS.

The league bent on every issue, this is the best deal the players have ever seen and voting this down is just a smack right across the face of the PA and American members.

But how will Drew Wolitarsky, Geoff Gray and Jake Thomas get on the field?! *Shocked face* it wouldn't be a league without them! Vote it down! No tickets will be sold if Gray were to get beat out by a bit better offensive lineman!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 12:17:46 AM
We don't know the percentage that voted it down. Stop speculating.  American players would also have had to vote against it.

...even Milt.

@MiltStegallTSN
So are we afraid to compete now? Do we want everything just handed to us?
@cfl @cflpa #PaperPlates


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 12:29:10 AM
...even Milt.

@MiltStegallTSN
So are we afraid to compete now? Do we want everything just handed to us?
@cfl @cflpa #PaperPlates


I could have guessed his opinions on this.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 12:31:25 AM
But how will Drew Wolitarsky, Geoff Gray and Jake Thomas get on the field?! *Shocked face* it wouldn't be a league without them! Vote it down! No tickets will be sold if Gray were to get beat out by a bit better offensive lineman!

I'm a strong proponent of the ratio and I dislike that they watered it down in this cba.

But the league also gave in on a number or other critical issues which were beneficial to all players, so seeing another delay to the season doesn't sit well.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 12:37:05 AM
I'm a strong proponent of the ratio and I dislike that they watered it down in this cba.

But the league also gave in on a number or other critical issues which were beneficial to all players, so seeing another delay to the season doesn't sit well.

It shouldn't. It was voted down to save fringe Canadians' playing time. That means we might not get to see a full season of Willie Jefferson, Adam Bighill and Zach Collaros so that those 6th and 7th Canadian starters ( Gray and Wolitarsky for us, probably) get guaranteed spots and above average pay compared to their American mates.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 12:39:15 AM
I could have guessed his opinions on this.

An import who sold more tickets and merch than the bottom three quarters of the national depth chart combined for every year that he played, more than likely.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 01:05:55 AM
Harsh but I'd lock them out and send them home. Enough is enough. 4 pre season games were scheduled for this Friday and Saturday. No cushion left for more rescheduling without major problems.

There were no pre season games in 2021 so that would be unfortunate if that happens in 2022. May as well trim rosters down to about 65 and get rid of the excess number of players. No practices or pre season games probable so no need to keep 100 players around.

One strike delay was somewhat reasonable. Two not so much.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 01:26:51 AM
Harsh but I'd lock them out and send them home. Enough is enough. 4 pre season games were scheduled for this Friday and Saturday. No cushion left for more rescheduling without major problems.

There were no pre season games in 2021 so that would be unfortunate if that happens in 2022. May as well trim rosters down to about 65 and get rid of the excess number of players. No practices or pre season games probable so no need to keep 100 players around.

One strike delay was somewhat reasonable. Two not so much.

Send the Canadians home and ask the Americans to keep playing. You can't hire temporary workers in BC and Quebec but everywhere else you can. Contacts aren't guaranteed so there are probably enough Americans in camp to play in all markets.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: The Zipp on May 24, 2022, 01:36:02 AM
Miss a whole season
Shortened season
Strike impacted season

CFL can only take so much...markets like Toronto and Vancouver aren't going to bounce back. Fans will start to lose patience in strong markets as well.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 02:00:23 AM
Pretty interesting convos on twitter. League is getting unmasked a bit with this vote. You got Shawn Gallant claiming that Canadians (like him, I suppose) are the reason the league is succesful and then you have Milt Stegall telling him he's wrong. They played together for a few years.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Pete on May 24, 2022, 02:08:49 AM
So much for player solidarity  Its americans vs canadians -- a terrible look for the cflpa, and its not going to get better the longer it drags on.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 24, 2022, 02:37:50 AM
Very disappointed. Fix this **** asap you bloody scaly wags.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 24, 2022, 03:23:15 AM
Darren Cameron
@Darren_Cameron
?
2h
Tomorrow's practice (Tuesday) is approximately 9:30 a.m. - 12:40 p.m. at IG Field. Open to the public.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 24, 2022, 03:29:06 AM
No one here knows beans.  Only speculation.  Anyone read the actual CBA?  No?  Then sssshhhhh.

Something in there must have sucked big time for it to be voted down.  If Solly & Biggie et al liked it (enough) but the players didn't, then something must be rotten.

The league brought this on itself by purposely setting the CBA expiration at a week before TC.  It backfired, as for once the players grew a spine and said screw it.  The league now has egg on their face and will miss games at a time when everyone knows they can't.  I'll bet the league thinks twice before making this mistake again.

I'm with the players on this one.  Something in there got them angry enough to endanger the CFL and they stood up for themselves.  Good for them.  This isn't about the fans, it's between the league and the players.  To win at negotiations, you have to be willing to walk away.  The league thought the players would never, thus the CFPA always got bullied.  Now they've shown they will walk.  This only makes them stronger.

You know what's going to happen now?  The league will offer the players more of what they wanted on Tuesday, the players will make no more concessions, and they'll get it ratified as fast as possible.  The pain and pressure is on the league now.

For those dissing the Canadians here (like it's all their fault?)... I don't know what to say.

The useful discussion to have right now, is what are the things the league will cave on to get a deal?  I bet the 3-FAKENATs thing is dropped.  Future CBAs to be negotiated far earlier.  And maybe more ELC/cap money immediately in 2022.  It's too bad the CFPA doesn't better publicize their positions so we're not all guessing...

The next question, is how fast they can get it signed and play ball if the league caves to demands tomorrow.  Does this set us back only a week... or more?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Rouge2019 on May 24, 2022, 03:53:58 AM
I am with Techno on this one.  The fact that training camps will still be continuing on Tuesday tells me that this is not "the end of days" that people are making it out to be.  If it was a complete deal breaker then it would not be business as usual. Everyone needs to chill a bit.

As far as the players voting down the tentative deal, anyone with any experience in business will tell you that a rejection may mean that the devil was in the details and there is something that may just need to be tweaked, which is important in a multi-year deal.  To suggest that the player reps need to resign, as some like Farhan Lalji did, belies a complete lack of understanding of how collective bargaining works.  Techno makes a good point in pointing out that the league was playing Russian Roulette with the timing of the negotiations (funny that seems to be missing in a lot of comments blaming the players).  The league fully expected the players to roll over and they didn't - now the discussions continue.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 24, 2022, 04:04:56 AM
Then there is this....

Simoni Lawrence
@Simoni_Lawrence
 ? 28m
I?m boiling right now I can?t even sleep.  Over 30% of members didn?t even vote!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Pete on May 24, 2022, 04:07:54 AM
Its pretty obvious that the canadian ratio is what caused the nay vote Everything else is just window dressing. The fact remains that the players bargaining commitee and its reps supported the agreement, that it was shot down is a massive disconnect with ite members.
And yes I do blame the cfl players on this one and while we dont have the exact wording there has been enough reporting to indicate that this was a fair deal. Has there ever been an agreement put forward by the bargaining committee and supported by the reps in any league that was rejected in this manner?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 24, 2022, 04:13:21 AM
Keep the communication going...

CFLPA
@CFLPA
5h
Attention #TeamCFLPA members, a new membership communication was just sent to all of you.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Lincoln Locomotive on May 24, 2022, 04:18:42 AM
No one here knows beans.  Only speculation.  Anyone read the actual CBA?  No?  Then sssshhhhh.

Something in there must have sucked big time for it to be voted down.  If Solly & Biggie et al liked it (enough) but the players didn't, then something must be rotten.

The league brought this on itself by purposely setting the CBA expiration at a week before TC.  It backfired, as for once the players grew a spine and said screw it.  The league now has egg on their face and will miss games at a time when everyone knows they can't.  I'll bet the league thinks twice before making this mistake again.

I'm with the players on this one.  Something in there got them angry enough to endanger the CFL and they stood up for themselves.  Good for them.  This isn't about the fans, it's between the league and the players.  To win at negotiations, you have to be willing to walk away.  The league thought the players would never, thus the CFPA always got bullied.  Now they've shown they will walk.  This only makes them stronger.

You know what's going to happen now?  The league will offer the players more of what they wanted on Tuesday, the players will make no more concessions, and they'll get it ratified as fast as possible.  The pain and pressure is on the league now.

For those dissing the Canadians here (like it's all their fault?)... I don't know what to say.

The useful discussion to have right now, is what are the things the league will cave on to get a deal?  I bet the 3-FAKENATs thing is dropped.  Future CBAs to be negotiated far earlier.  And maybe more ELC/cap money immediately in 2022.  It's too bad the CFPA doesn't better publicize their positions so we're not all guessing...

The next question, is how fast they can get it signed and play ball if the league caves to demands tomorrow.  Does this set us back only a week... or more?

I'm with you on this Techno....having been in bargaining sessions for a good dozen years....you have to show management that you're prepared to walk at some point.  I know we all want to watch football but players are finally standing up for themselves and I'm with them.  


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 24, 2022, 04:55:49 AM
I'm with you on this Techno....having been in bargaining sessions for a good dozen years....you have to show management that you're prepared to walk at some point.  I know we all want to watch football but players are finally standing up for themselves and I'm with them.  

Not saying you are wrong, but,

- The players' committee worked out a deal that they negotiated and believed was a viable compromise to the players demands,

- The league has weathered a cancelled season and a reduced season and a resulting loss of fan interest and are still operating.

- The league is on the verge of a "regular" season with a fair level of excitement for a few of the previous "have-not" teams.

- It's been reported that 30+ percent of the players did not even vote on the package.

And you and others support the players?  The players made some gains in this package.  In the circumstances they cannot expect everything they ask for. given the above.  IMHO.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: CrazyCanuck89 on May 24, 2022, 05:08:35 AM
Not saying you are wrong, but,

- The players' committee worked out a deal that they negotiated and believed was a viable compromise to the players demands,

- The league has weathered a cancelled season and a reduced season and a resulting loss of fan interest and are still operating.

- The league is on the verge of a "regular" season with a fair level of excitement for a few of the previous "have-not" teams.

- It's been reported that 30+ percent of the players did not even vote on the package.

And you and others support the players?  The players made some gains in this package.  In the circumstances they cannot expect everything they ask for. given the above.  IMHO.

So the players who didn't vote, who's fault was that?

Just because you reps iron out a deal, doesn't make a fair deal.  Players, have the right to vote No, just like your average Joe.

Canadian players shouldn't have to stand by and be treated like second class citizens in their own country.  We all know that the league is dwindling away at the ratio slowly and will one day replace the Canadian players with cheap American talent, who will then one day also be replaced by younger, cheaper Americans.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: DM83 on May 24, 2022, 07:40:45 AM
Wow! You have passed me on the negative scale.
I don't think adding more Americans is the answer. They should actually go the other way. I mean imagine having players that live here year round, and you can see them in the community......yup love those old days.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 09:42:11 AM
So the players who didn't vote, who's fault was that?

Just because you reps iron out a deal, doesn't make a fair deal.  Players, have the right to vote No, just like your average Joe.

Canadian players shouldn't have to stand by and be treated like second class citizens in their own country.  We all know that the league is dwindling away at the ratio slowly and will one day replace the Canadian players with cheap American talent, who will then one day also be replaced by younger, cheaper Americans.

Second class citizens? Are you mad? They get every advantage and then some. The reason Americans are "cheaper" is because the rules artificially inflate the value of Canadians who actually make the product worse. The average fan couldn't tell you who the 5th , 6th and 7th Canadian starters on each team are.
 
Man, Canadians who play hockey have to earn their way. Nothing is given. They play in the NHL because they earned it. CFL players cannot say the same. Second class citizens? More like the most entitled, privileged citizens.

Shawn Gallant still thinks he's what makes the league great. 3/4 of the people on this forum (the Canadian diehards) would still have to look up what he played or how he did. It makes no sense to hold up the season or fight to keep the rules the same so more of him can play.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 11:03:29 AM
Second class citizens? Are you mad? They get every advantage and then some. The reason Americans are "cheaper" is because the rules artificially inflate the value of Canadians who actually make the product worse. The average fan couldn't tell you who the 5th , 6th and 7th Canadian starters on each team are.
 
Man, Canadians who play hockey have to earn their way. Nothing is given. They play in the NHL because they earned it. CFL players cannot say the same. Second class citizens? More like the most entitled, privileged citizens.

Shawn Gallant still thinks he's what makes the league great. 3/4 of the people on this forum (the Canadian diehards) would still have to look up what he played or how he did. It makes no sense to hold up the season or fight to keep the rules the same so more of him can play.

The gripe is less about the "fringe Canadians" as you call them and more about salary.

The naturalized Canadian and snap sharing devalues Canadians and raises the value of vet Americans (As discussed on the forum, not many teams have 3 year vets in non-starting roles).

Justin Palardy talked about fighting for Canadian identity and what they're "owed financially".

Justin Sorenson brought up National sports leagues from other countries and how the ratio of nationals is usually much higher to help grow grass roots, keep jobs in the country, and keep money in the country local - not exporting it out.

These aren't bad points. No, they have little to do with what happens on the field - which upsets people trying to make us into the NFL - but given how much government assistance it takes to keep the league going, we need to consider the national implications.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 11:41:49 AM
The gripe is less about the "fringe Canadians" as you call them and more about salary.

The naturalized Canadian and snap sharing devalues Canadians and raises the value of vet Americans (As discussed on the forum, not many teams have 3 year vets in non-starting roles).

Justin Palardy talked about fighting for Canadian identity and what they're "owed financially".

Justin Sorenson brought up National sports leagues from other countries and how the ratio of nationals is usually much higher to help grow grass roots, keep jobs in the country, and keep money in the country local - not exporting it out.

These aren't bad points. No, they have little to do with what happens on the field - which upsets people trying to make us into the NFL - but given how much government assistance it takes to keep the league going, we need to consider the national implications.

Of course the value of American players will go up if you only have to start five Canadians. This would represent a shift closer to their true value, not an unfair advantage. Canadians get disproportionately high CFL salaries compared to their impact because there aren't enough of them. They are a scarce commodity, created artificially, because of the ratio rules. Making some of them compete with Americans so that the best player plays is scary to them because it's a competition they will likely lose. That in a nutshell is what is wrong with the CFL in my opinion.

The CBA, by the way, isn't even getting rid of those Canadians, the roster split remains intact. The league is just saying that teams should have the right to play in games the best player in 3 of the 8 national spots if the American has played in Canada for 5 (or same team for 3). Americans who play five years in Canada do as much for this league as most Canadians do.

Why would the league want that? Because the quality of the play would be better. Why wouldn't the Canadian players want that? Because the fringe would have to compete with Americans and their pay would be reflected more closely to their talent level.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Waffler on May 24, 2022, 11:47:59 AM
The player reps are out of touch with the players, at least the ones that vote. Who is anyone here to criticize unless you are a current player? They have time to fix it and there will be a season.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 12:27:35 PM
Wow! You have passed me on the negative scale.
I don't think adding more Americans is the answer. They should actually go the other way. I mean imagine having players that live here year round, and you can see them in the community......yup love those old days.

Your definition of "players living around here so you can see them in the community" is not a good one for the ratio or American debate, but let's go down that road with one modicum of common sense for a second so you can see how foolish it is:

1) Justin Jefferson and Adam Bighill live in Winnipeg year round. They are Americans.
2) Michel Couture lives in BC and Drew Wolistarsky lives in California. They are nationals.

It is just so stupid.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 24, 2022, 12:40:03 PM
Your definition of "players living around here so you can see them in the community" is not a good one for the ratio or American debate, but let's go down that road with one modicum of common sense for a second so you can see how foolish it is:

1) Justin Jefferson and Adam Bighill live in Winnipeg year round. They are Americans.
2) Michel Couture lives in BC and Drew Wolistarsky lives in California. They are nationals.

It is just so stupid.

Willie does not live near full time. He only arrived in winnipeg in April. This is what he told me 2 weeks ago in person.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 12:46:20 PM
Your definition of "players living around here so you can see them in the community" is not a good one for the ratio or American debate, but let's go down that road with one modicum of common sense for a second so you can see how foolish it is:

1) Justin Jefferson and Adam Bighill live in Winnipeg year round. They are Americans.
2) Michel Couture lives in BC and Drew Wolistarsky lives in California. They are nationals.

It is just so stupid.


You are cherry picking examples. And they aren't even good ones as Jefferson literaly just moved here. We have no idea what his long term plans are.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 01:00:25 PM
Willie does not live near full time. He only arrived in winnipeg in April. This is what he told me 2 weeks ago in person.

https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sports/football/bombers/welcome-to-winterpeg-willie-576394452.html

"Winnipeg is a nice city. It?s a nice atmosphere to grow your family, extend your family, and just do some things to grow as individuals. I like the city, the city likes me and my family, and I don?t necessarily want to go anywhere. Right now, Winnipeg is home." - Willie Jefferson


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 01:01:06 PM
You are cherry picking examples. And they aren't even good ones as Jefferson literaly just moved here. We have no idea what his long term plans are.

You are right. He did JUST move here. But he did move here. Which means he is much more of a full time resident than a whole bunch of nationals on our roster. I prefaced the whole thing by saying it's not a good way to evaluate status, but even if you do, it's wrong.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 01:07:09 PM
I still think the nationalized Americans was a bad idea. I'm anti ratio but this isn't going to get those nationalized players on the field or reduce turnover.

My preference was always to just add 2 more DI's for depth behind starting imports. The net result of that would be to eliminate 2 Canadians from the roster.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 01:09:41 PM
You are right. He did JUST move here. But he did move here. Which means he is much more of a full time resident than a whole bunch of nationals on our roster. I prefaced the whole thing by saying it's not a good way to evaluate status, but even if you do, it's wrong.

It's a nonsense thing for us to try and argue as there's no way for either us to prove anything, but I can pretty confidently say that Canadians generally live in Canada and Americans generally live in America.

With the usual amount of moves that people make given family, career opportunities, etc.

***As an aside, we want to reward Americans who stay long term (both those who stay in the league and those who move here full time). That was one of the good things about the CBA.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 01:13:49 PM
It's a nonsense thing for us to try and argue as there's no way for either us to prove anything, but I can pretty confidently say that Canadians generally live in Canada and Americans generally live in America.

With the usual amount of moves that people make given family, career opportunities, etc.

***As an aside, we want to reward Americans who stay long term (both those who stay in the league and those who move here full time). That was one of the good things about the CBA.


I fail to see how Americans are rewarded for long term stay with a team in the new CBA. That's an illusion IMO. Money talks and if a player reaches free agency, being a nationalized player isn't going to change that.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 01:21:18 PM

I fail to see how Americans are rewarded for long term stay with a team in the new CBA. That's an illusion IMO. Money talks and if a player reaches free agency, being a nationalized player isn't going to change that.

The ratio changes slightly devalue Canadian players and increases the value of the "nationalized" American.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Waffler on May 24, 2022, 01:36:57 PM
The ratio changes slightly devalue Canadian players and increases the value of the "nationalized" American.

Yes, it is an erosion that would be sought to be built on in the next contract.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 02:02:39 PM
And honestly, whether you are for are against the ratio - with the players or against them - the new nationalized rules and the 51/49 split was stupid and confusing and everyone is better off if they simplify it.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 24, 2022, 02:21:54 PM
Apparently, rookies (mostly INT) were not allowed to vote... as per the union's decision. 

So, that could have made it a lot easier for the NATs to defeat the CBA...

Its a real shame that the CFL gives the players the best deal ever, and they shoot themselves in the foot and start looking greedy and start playing the birth certificate card...

Saw a tweet about how silent O'Shea and Miller are, guys who would might not have had the opportunity to have the careers they did were it not for their passports. 



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Waffler on May 24, 2022, 02:40:17 PM
Apparently, rookies (mostly INT) were not allowed to vote... as per the union's decision. 

How could you though? Many of these guys are cut and home in 2 or 3 weeks.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 24, 2022, 02:48:30 PM
How could you though? Many of these guys are cut and home in 2 or 3 weeks.

I guess it depends on whether they have to pay CFLPA union dues while they are in TC.  If dues don't kick in until they make a roster, you are correct.  But if they are paying dues, they get a vote. 

We know how Americans are about taxation without representation... they had some hub-bub in Boston a while back about that...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 02:53:05 PM
I guess it depends on whether they have to pay CFLPA union dues while they are in TC.  If dues don't kick in until they make a roster, you are correct.  But if they are paying dues, they get a vote. 

We know how Americans are about taxation without representation... they had some hub-bub in Boston a while back about that...

I'm 95% sure none of that happens until they make the roster and collect game cheques.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Tee42 on May 24, 2022, 02:59:40 PM
Apparently, rookies (mostly INT) were not allowed to vote... as per the union's decision. 

So, that could have made it a lot easier for the NATs to defeat the CBA...

Its a real shame that the CFL gives the players the best deal ever, and they shoot themselves in the foot and start looking greedy and start playing the birth certificate card...

Saw a tweet about how silent O'Shea and Miller are, guys who would might not have had the opportunity to have the careers they did were it not for their passports. 



If it was the best deal ever.   Why did the get another offer so quickly? Games?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 03:01:27 PM
If it was the best deal ever.   Why did the get another offer so quickly? Games?

The two aren't mutually exclusive. It's a comprehensive document and there's obviosly a lot of pressure on both sides to not delay the season anymore.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 03:13:51 PM
The ratio changes slightly devalue Canadian players and increases the value of the "nationalized" American.

I've covered this in great detail in earlier posts. Imports are already starting. 16 of them + the QB for nearly every team. That leaves the DI's and most of those aren't on the roster for 3 years. Needing to nationalize one of those that's already starting changes nothing since there is a requirement to start 8 instead of 7. Bryant, Hardick, Bighill, Wilson, Alexander, Bailey, are going to be replaced by a Canadian due to an in game injury because the DI's don't generally fill those spots. Even if they did, they aren't more 3+ year nationalized imports. Next game an import off the PR would be activated.

In the case of the Bombers, Grant could qualify in 2023 if he stays with the team. The other DI's in 2022 could be Mourtada a 2nd year DT ( if not replaced by a rookie this season ) and a rookie DE.

In 2021 we had Brown and and a few imports that played a game or two. Now gone because veteran DI's if a team does roster them is a short term rental not a long term plan.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 03:19:48 PM
News about the new proposal. A small raise the the salary cap leaves possible room at the end of the season for returning players from NFL for example. Everybody else already has a contract.

This new proposal has eliminated the clause allowing three ?nationalized Americans? to replace Canadian players for up to 49 percent of plays in a game. It also includes a small raise to the salary cap.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 24, 2022, 03:20:44 PM
Sounds like the NATS got their ratio back, and a small ratification bonus... probably a vote tonight and game on Friday...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 24, 2022, 03:21:33 PM
News about the new proposal. A small raise the the salary cap leaves possible room at the end of the season for returning players from NFL for example. Everybody else already has a contract.

This new proposal has eliminated the clause allowing three ?nationalized Americans? to replace Canadian players for up to 49 percent of plays in a game. It also includes a small raise to the salary cap.

"Salary cap raise" is apparently a small amount distributed to the teams as a ratification bonus...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 03:35:12 PM
"Salary cap raise" is apparently a small amount distributed to the teams as a ratification bonus...

That would make more sense I suppose. Not unusual in new union contracts.  There was no mention of the 8th nationalized import that had to start in 2023 being eliminated?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 24, 2022, 04:20:53 PM
Yes, it is an erosion that would be sought to be built on in the next contract.

Erosion of the ratio is the right description, over time the ratio has been flipped, from allowing 5 imports on the field at one time, to today were it's almost the opposite.  Interesting that as early as 1952 they explored the "Naturalized Canadian" rule, a.k.a., the "Canadianized American".

Here is a brief history.

The rules on imports were wide open in the CFL?s formative years, until the Winnipeg Pegs became the first western team to win the Grey Cup in 1935 with eight imports on the roster, led by the legendary Fritzie Hanson.

Residency requirements were established the following year, which led to the 1936 western champ Regina Roughriders declining their trip to the Grey Cup rather than play without five key imports.

Finally in 1946, the Canadian Rugby Union ? the precursor to the CFL ? allowed five imports. In 1950, the limit was raised to seven. In 1952 it was changed again to allow seven imports as well as allowing Americans with four years of experience to be counted as non-imports.

In 1954 ? generally recognized as the start of the modern era of Canadian football ? the quota was raised to 10 non-imports. In 1955 the four year rule was scrapped but western teams carried 12 Americans. By 1959 both the Eastern Big Four and the Western Interprovincial Rugby Football Union were up to 12 Americans on a roster of 27.

A landmark decision was made in 1961 with the ?Naturalized Canadian? rule, a.k.a., the ?Canadianized American?. The rule granted non-import status to players who had acquired Canadian citizenship after five years of residency in the country. Essentially this meant that rosters were set at 34, with 15 imports.

Of course, teams started to take advantage of this rule, so in 1965 number of Naturalized Canadians on each roster was limited to three. However, one player who was released due to this new quota went marching off to the Ontario Human Rights Commission, which ruled that it was unlawful to discriminate employment based on citizenship, threatening all roster management.

Cue Bora Laskin, who was the Dean of Law at Osgoode Hall in Toronto, and later the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. Laskin found a way out for the newly formed Canadian Football League. The solution was to base any distinction not on a player?s nationality, citizenship or residence but on his early football training.

If the training was received inside Canada, he was a ?non-import?. Outside of Canada, he was an ?import?. The definition has withstood challenges from the Canadian and Ontario Human Rights Commissions since 1965.

From there, through the 1970?s, the number of imports slowly crept upward. From 14 to 15 in 1972, to removing quarterbacks from the ratio mix in 1986 with the import number falling to 13, then edging its way upward to the present day of a roster ratios. Today teams are made up of 42 players, including three quarterbacks and 39 other players, of which 19 may be imports. Essentially this leaves teams with 22 imports total and only seven Canadian starters.

https://www.cfl.ca/2011/02/11/mullin-changing-the-game-the-ratio/


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 24, 2022, 04:42:19 PM
Winnipeg Blue Bombers
@Wpg_BlueBombers
40m
We are optimistic that Friday's pre-season game will be played as scheduled. Once we have further information, we will provide you with more details. 

Wade Miller
President and CEO


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 05:25:30 PM
News about the new proposal. A small raise the the salary cap leaves possible room at the end of the season for returning players from NFL for example. Everybody else already has a contract.

This new proposal has eliminated the clause allowing three ?nationalized Americans? to replace Canadian players for up to 49 percent of plays in a game. It also includes a small raise to the salary cap.

Hopefully it goes back to the 6:1 rule from the previous round of negotiating and not a total status quo.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 24, 2022, 05:41:29 PM
I think the 49% rule is stupid and unworkable. I too hope they go back to 6:1 proposal.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 05:47:18 PM
I've covered this in great detail in earlier posts. Imports are already starting. 16 of them + the QB for nearly every team. That leaves the DI's and most of those aren't on the roster for 3 years. Needing to nationalize one of those that's already starting changes nothing since there is a requirement to start 8 instead of 7. Bryant, Hardick, Bighill, Wilson, Alexander, Bailey, are going to be replaced by a Canadian due to an in game injury because the DI's don't generally fill those spots. Even if they did, they aren't more 3+ year nationalized imports. Next game an import off the PR would be activated.

In the case of the Bombers, Grant could qualify in 2023 if he stays with the team. The other DI's in 2022 could be Mourtada a 2nd year DT ( if not replaced by a rookie this season ) and a rookie DE.

In 2021 we had Brown and and a few imports that played a game or two. Now gone because veteran DI's if a team does roster them is a short term rental not a long term plan.

I understand that - hence the devaluation of Canadians and higher emphasis on Vet Americans.

Under old rules, Canadian salaries are inflated, making it hard to keep those extra Americans. If these new rules were kept, I can imagine a new emphasis on getting those vets onto the back half of the roster to exploit the ratio - which would cause an equivalent decrease in Canadian salaries.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 05:50:17 PM
I understand that - hence the devaluation of Canadians and higher emphasis on Vet Americans.

Under old rules, Canadian salaries are inflated, making it hard to keep those extra Americans. If these new rules were kept, I can imagine a new emphasis on getting those vets onto the back half of the roster to exploit the ratio - which would cause an equivalent decrease in Canadian salaries.

Most likely they will have gone from 7 starters to 6 after they finally sign. Almost got through 5 which would have been way better.

Imagine if there was no ratio and salaries were completely reliant on how good you are no matter where you went to high school or where your parents were born? Shudder. Imagine how unfair that would be for Canadian players.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 06:38:57 PM
Most likely they will have gone from 7 starters to 6 after they finally sign. Almost got through 5 which would have been way better.

Imagine if there was no ratio and salaries were completely reliant on how good you are no matter where you went to high school or where your parents were born? Shudder. Imagine how unfair that would be for Canadian players.

Again - this is a national league - they exist all over the world.

We have a mandate that is completely separate from football. It is absolutely an objective to field the best team possible, but within a framework that protects and drives National interests.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 06:40:26 PM
@TSNDaveNaylor
Just spoke to commissioner @RandyAmbrosieand got details on @CFL?s new offer to players:
? league provides $1 million ratification bonus to players. But removes $450k from 2022 cap and $675 in guarantees in ?28. The ?28 cap may not be affected if revenue sharing kicks-in#CFL

@TSNDaveNaylor
League also proposes moving back to ratio model of 6 true Canadians and one Naturalized American. (Which was in their May 14th proposal). #CFL #CFLPA

@TSNDaveNaylor
Ambrosie said if latest offer rejected and games are missed, offer will suffer. ?There is no way we can get back to the quality of deal that we have on the table today.? #CFL #CFLPA

@TSNDaveNaylor
Deadline for players to accept latest offer is Thursday midnight ? Eastern time. #CFL #CFLPA


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 06:44:22 PM
Again - this is a national league - they exist all over the world.

We have a mandate that is completely separate from football. It is absolutely an objective to field the best team possible, but within a framework that protects and drives National interests.

What are you talking about? Who is "we"? What "mandate" are you you referring? From where does this "mandate" come from?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 06:46:06 PM
I prefer the 6+1 to the other way - but it's still a compromise to the ratio. So we'll see how it plays out.

I didn't realize the bonus issue was a big deal, but I guess it pays players now as opposed to later when those who are currently voting may not be around. Might get those unsatisfied Americans on board.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 06:47:16 PM
What are you talking about? Who is "we"? What "mandate" are you you referring? From where does this "mandate" come from?

Why do you think the ratio exists? Why do you think Government funds are used to build stadiums?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 06:52:39 PM
I understand that - hence the devaluation of Canadians and higher emphasis on Vet Americans.

Under old rules, Canadian salaries are inflated, making it hard to keep those extra Americans. If these new rules were kept, I can imagine a new emphasis on getting those vets onto the back half of the roster to exploit the ratio - which would cause an equivalent decrease in Canadian salaries.

Have you looked at what we pay many of our starting imports?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 06:56:48 PM
Why do you think the ratio exists? Why do you think Government funds are used to build stadiums?

You think the ratio exists because government(s) provided funds to build the stadium or stadiums around the country?

And the building the Jets now play in got funds (and continue to get $40M+ a year in tax breaks) because the AHL and NHL have a ratio or have I been overlooking that rule? Additionally, it is usually provincial governments who provide support to stadium/arena projects not Ottawa.

The only mandate(s) the league has is set by the league under the direction of Ambrosie. They aren't the government and they wrap their marketing in Canadiana because that's what historically has worked. It isn't working so good anymore.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 07:03:16 PM
@TSNDaveNaylor
Just spoke to commissioner @RandyAmbrosieand got details on @CFL?s new offer to players:
? league provides $1 million ratification bonus to players. But removes $450k from 2022 cap and $675 in guarantees in ?28. The ?28 cap may not be affected if revenue sharing kicks-in#CFL

@TSNDaveNaylor
League also proposes moving back to ratio model of 6 true Canadians and one Naturalized American. (Which was in their May 14th proposal). #CFL #CFLPA

@TSNDaveNaylor
Ambrosie said if latest offer rejected and games are missed, offer will suffer. ?There is no way we can get back to the quality of deal that we have on the table today.? #CFL #CFLPA

@TSNDaveNaylor
Deadline for players to accept latest offer is Thursday midnight ? Eastern time. #CFL #CFLPA


It was reported that most teams already spent most of the 2022 SMS. How do you reduce it under those circumstances? $1M is not a small ratification bonus!! I assume that only the AR and IR players would qualify?

Still don't like the naturalized American idea even though teams no longer need that 7th actual Canadian starting.

I'm guessing either Bryant or Hardrick will be that player. If there is an in game injury we'd have one of the two back up Canadian OL step up. Next game either one of the import OL is back or he's replaced by an import OL off the PR. Whichever import OL wasn't the nationalized player would switch to the other one still standing.

Picking another import veteran would be more problematic IMO.

The real question is which Canadian no longer starts? Wolitarsky or Thomas seem to be the only choices.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 07:05:25 PM
Have you looked at what we pay many of our starting imports?

Not sure the point you're trying to make here. Can you expand?


You think the ratio exists because government(s) provided funds to build the stadium or stadiums around the country?

And the building the Jets now play in got funds (and continue to get $40M+ a year in tax breaks) because the AHL and NHL have a ratio or have I been overlooking that rule?

The only mandate(s) the league has is set by the league under the direction of Ambrose. They aren't the government and they wrap their marketing in Canadiana because it sells.

Two separate points. If the league didn't have a mandate to: help grow the game of football in Canada, employ Canadians, try to keep Canadian funds in Canada - why would there be a ratio? There is a ratio, because that is one of the mandates of the league.

Because there is that ratio, that mandate, the government provides money to help that goal.

Now, obviously there is a different level of commitment to hockey in our Country. We do not have a hockey league like the CFL in Canada - our guys go straight to the NHL. Not sure if comparisons work between the two.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 07:11:20 PM
Not sure the point you're trying to make here. Can you expand?

Two separate points. If the league didn't have a mandate to: help grow the game of football in Canada, employ Canadians, try to keep Canadian funds in Canada - why would there be a ratio? There is a ratio, because that is one of the mandates of the league.

Because there is that ratio, that mandate, the government provides money to help that goal.

Now, obviously there is a different level of commitment to hockey in our Country. We do not have a hockey league like the CFL in Canada - our guys go straight to the NHL. Not sure if comparisons work between the two.

The starting imports take the largest portion of the total SMS. Yes Canadians starting can get well paid as well due to the league supply and demand. They are a small group on the entire roster in that category. There must be some sort of scale based on time in the league.

Couture and A. Harris gets $160K IIRC. While you could technically replace them with an import for less, at some point that import wants that big paycheck. Lawler at $300K in season 3. Richardson about $160K as well. If there was no ratio that would be less of an issue.


Whether there are 5 or 7 true Canadian starters none of that changes. The top dog gets a bigger piece of the pie and even then may choose a new city in free agency. Seller's market.
Teams spend their SMS every year making decisions across the entire roster.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 07:16:29 PM
The starting imports take the largest portion of the total SMS. Yes Canadians starting can get well paid as well due to the league supply and demand. They are a small group on the entire roster in that category.

Couture and A. Harris gets $160K IIRC. While you could technically replace them with an import for less, at some point that import wants that big paycheck. Lawler at $300K in season 3. Richardson about $160K as well. If there was no ratio that would be less of an issue.


Whether there are 5 or 7 true Canadian starters none of that changes. The top dog gets a bigger piece of the pie and even then may choose a new city in free agency. Seller's market.
Teams spend their SMS every year making decisions across the entire roster.

I think it'd be more along the lines of paying Jake Thomas less to pay a [insert back-up American DT] more.

Probably not a lot of movement on the top end guys.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 07:28:58 PM
I think it'd be more along the lines of paying Jake Thomas less to pay a [insert back-up American DT] more.

Probably not a lot of movement on the top end guys.

Except that the back up DT is probably either a 1st or 2nd year player on an ELC. Thomas might not be getting a big paycheck but based on the Oliveria and Augustine getting $90K, he can't be to far off?

But. There is always a but. If Thomas was a potential free agent in 2023 and offered less money, another team might offer him more due to their specific need across their roster.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: bludan on May 24, 2022, 07:49:59 PM
I expect the new deal to be ratified. The 30% who didn't vote likely due to thinking it was a sure thing will send in their ballots.  The front loading bonus will help as not that many players will even still be in the league 4 years from now.  All the frustration fans feel will be gone with preseason games, and in a month, we'll no longer remember this happened.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 07:52:24 PM
Except that the back up DT is probably either a 1st or 2nd year player on an ELC. Thomas might not be getting a big paycheck but based on the Oliveria and Augustine getting $90K, he can't be to far off?

But. There is always a but. If Thomas was a potential free agent in 2023 and offered less money, another team might offer him more due to their specific need across their roster.

But you?d construct your roster differently. Teams would attempt to get Vets in those roles and any increase in their pay would come at the expenses of some of your Canadians. If Thomas and Woli can have their snaps cut in half, you could pay them less (or bring in cheaper players) and invest in Grant and [insert American tackle] to play those snaps.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 07:53:19 PM
Not sure the point you're trying to make here. Can you expand?

Two separate points. If the league didn't have a mandate to: help grow the game of football in Canada, employ Canadians, try to keep Canadian funds in Canada - why would there be a ratio? There is a ratio, because that is one of the mandates of the league.

Because there is that ratio, that mandate, the government provides money to help that goal.

Now, obviously there is a different level of commitment to hockey in our Country. We do not have a hockey league like the CFL in Canada - our guys go straight to the NHL. Not sure if comparisons work between the two.

Second part first. The provincial -- not federal -- government provided money for our stadium. They did so because football is popular here and the NDP usually favors big spending projects. If the ratio was a big factor, why is Calgary playing in a crumbling stadium? Don't they have Canadians on their roster too?  Provncial governments are the main supporters of stadiums. They are less concerned about national identity. In fact, I've never ever heard one say that's ever been a priority in my lifetime.

You are getting the league's tactics confused with their goal. The CFL is a for-profit business. Ambroise's job is the same as every other sports commissioner: maximize profit for the owners/teams. Growing the game of football is Canada has been a tactic they feel will help them do that. They support youth football in the hopes of growing their profits. The ratio is also something they have tried to reduce during every CBA and tried to even more aggressively reduce the number of Canadians this time too. Clearly, they don't feel the ratio is helping to grow the league. Their actions could not be more crystal clear.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 24, 2022, 07:59:26 PM
It was reported that most teams already spent most of the 2022 SMS. How do you reduce it under those circumstances? $1M is not a small ratification bonus!! I assume that only the AR and IR players would qualify?

Still don't like the naturalized American idea even though teams no longer need that 7th actual Canadian starting.

I'm guessing either Bryant or Hardrick will be that player. If there is an in game injury we'd have one of the two back up Canadian OL step up. Next game either one of the import OL is back or he's replaced by an import OL off the PR. Whichever import OL wasn't the nationalized player would switch to the other one still standing.

Picking another import veteran would be more problematic IMO.

The real question is which Canadian no longer starts? Wolitarsky or Thomas seem to be the only choices.

I'm sure it can be ANY player who meets the criteria and it won't have to be declared. It will be Bryant and Hardrick and all the rest of them. The league is trying to cut out mandatory Canadians so it will be in their interest to inforce and interpret it as loosely as possible. The reality is that teams will start 6 Canadians and then just have to make sure they have at least one player on the field who has been in the league for five years or three years on your team. Won't be hard.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 08:07:31 PM
I'm sure it can be ANY player who meets the criteria and it won't have to be declared. It will be Bryant and Hardrick and all the rest of them. The league is trying to cut out mandatory Canadians so it will be in their interest to inforce and interpret it as loosely as possible. The reality is that teams will start 6 Canadians and then just have to make sure they have at least one player on the field who has been in the league for five years or three years on your team. Won't be hard.

Yeah I suppose that's what will happen in practice. It would have been easier to reduce the number of starting Canadians then coming up with the nationalized import. Every team has a number of 3+ years on the team or 5 in the CFL.

I just want to listen to the game on Friday so hopefully no more bumps in the road.

In 2023 they are adding back a 3rd QB which will in theory eliminate one more Canadian from the roster. In 2022 teams may choose to roster 2 Globals every game which eliminates another Canadian.





Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 24, 2022, 08:10:11 PM
The SMS is the SMS

The roster is the roster

How a GM distributes his budget will vary minorly depending on ratio

A change of one NAT roster spot will mean a minor adjustment in how much a few players get paid...

It does not change the entire dynamic of the league, or mean that NAT's won't have jobs... or that there will suddenly be a plethora of INT vet's being retained or getting raises...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 24, 2022, 08:19:56 PM
@TSNDaveNaylor
Just spoke to commissioner @RandyAmbrosieand got details on @CFL?s new offer to players:
? league provides $1 million ratification bonus to players. But removes $450k from 2022 cap and $675 in guarantees in ?28. The ?28 cap may not be affected if revenue sharing kicks-in#CFL

$1M per team?  or $1M shared over the whole league?  Who pays the $1M?  The league?

$450k cap reduction, is for sure per-team right?

If the $1M is per team right now vs a $450k cap reduction, and they are dropping the 3-FAKENAT rule, then you sign this deal right now.  It's a good deal.  I'm glad to see Ambrosie is playing ball.  No one wants missed games.

Now, on to bookkeeping: most teams have spent to their 2022 cap already... so how do they retroactively change contracts to achieve the $450k reduction??  Sounds like a big headache for GMs.

P.S. Who cares about 2028


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 24, 2022, 08:23:39 PM
So we won?t know till Thursday now if there is a deal or not?

How the heck is GOLDIE gonna plan his Friday night now?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 24, 2022, 08:25:22 PM
$1M per team?  or $1M shared over the whole league?  Who pays the $1M?  The league?

$450k cap reduction, is for sure per-team right?

If the $1M is per team right now vs a $450k cap reduction, and they are dropping the 3-FAKENAT rule, then you sign this deal right now.  It's a good deal.  I'm glad to see Ambrosie is playing ball.  No one wants missed games.

Now, on to bookkeeping: most teams have spent to their 2022 cap already... so how do they retroactively change contracts to achieve the $450k reduction??  Sounds like a big headache for GMs.

P.S. Who cares about 2028

The CFL seems to word things from a league perspective.

I?m guessing the 450 cap reduction is actually 50k per team.

The million would also be divided across the league (bonuses based on some sort of seniority scale?).


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 24, 2022, 08:38:17 PM
The CFL seems to word things from a league perspective.

I?m guessing the 450 cap reduction is actually 50k per team.

The million would also be divided across the league (bonuses based on some sort of seniority scale?).

Well, if the cap and bonus changes are either both league-wide or both per-team, then it's a good deal, sign it.  If the cap is per-team and the bonus league-wide, then it's a bum deal taking advantage of the math-challenged.

You must be right... teams can adjust for a 50k cap reduction, but how would you adjust for a 450k one!

Sign it!  And all the IMPs that abstained (due to laziness), get off yer butts and vote this time.  Call all your IMP friends.  Don't just moan about it, do something.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 09:33:01 PM
The CFL seems to word things from a league perspective.

I?m guessing the 450 cap reduction is actually 50k per team.

The million would also be divided across the league (bonuses based on some sort of seniority scale?).

Must be a league wide spend, so about $110K per team with a $50K reduction in SMS per team.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 24, 2022, 09:36:49 PM
But you?d construct your roster differently. Teams would attempt to get Vets in those roles and any increase in their pay would come at the expenses of some of your Canadians. If Thomas and Woli can have their snaps cut in half, you could pay them less (or bring in cheaper players) and invest in Grant and [insert American tackle] to play those snaps.

SMS doesn't really work that way. Teams spend the SMS. Who gets what will vary team to team. A team with better than average Canadians will spend more on Canadians. Teams with a great QB will spend $550K for a great QB and there will be less to go around the rest of the roster.  IE: Lions in 2019 and 2021 with Reilly.

Rosters are different every season as free agents leave and new ones are signed. Some team free agents re-sign generally for more money than the previous year.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 01:20:44 AM
@TSNDaveNaylor
A rejection of the latest offer by @CFLPA and a decision to strike would result in teams no longer housing and feeding players. A rejection without a strike would see the league pull its offer and unclear where things would go from there.#CFL #CFLPA

@sportsdanbarnes
#CFL commissioner Randy Ambrosie said if #CFLPA rejects new proposal, training camps will shut down. League will no longer house and feed players, as they had been doing during four-day work stoppage.

...Looks like if this offer is not accepted things get ugly.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 25, 2022, 02:29:06 AM
The deal will get done.  Between the league conceding the 3-FAKENAT thing and sweetening the pot, and add in the fact that a whackton of IMPs didn't vote, this latest offer will be approved.  I would bet the farm on it.

No worries.  We play on Friday!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 25, 2022, 01:22:58 PM
The deal will get done.  Between the league conceding the 3-FAKENAT thing and sweetening the pot, and add in the fact that a whackton of IMPs didn't vote, this latest offer will be approved.  I would bet the farm on it.

No worries.  We play on Friday!

I hope you are right Tecno?.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 25, 2022, 03:27:16 PM
There are rumours saying the PA won't have a vote before Friday...  if they are holding out for a return to 7 NAT + 1 Nationalized INT, that is just short sighted and to put it bluntly, dumb.

They got $1mil ratification bonus (depending on how that is split, $1500-3000/player), they lose 7 NAT starting jobs (but those players will still be on rosters), and maybe a scootch less bargaining power for having the right birth certificate.

At risk is everything, this contract offer is even better than the best one ever offered the CFLPA.  Voting it down, or not voting at all is risking killing games (lost revenue for all parties), and players losing fan support because not accepting this looks like 100% greed, with no respect for the game, the league, and the fans. 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 03:58:18 PM
There are rumours saying the PA won't have a vote before Friday...  if they are holding out for a return to 7 NAT + 1 Nationalized INT, that is just short sighted and to put it bluntly, dumb.

They got $1mil ratification bonus (depending on how that is split, $1500-3000/player), they lose 7 NAT starting jobs (but those players will still be on rosters), and maybe a scootch less bargaining power for having the right birth certificate.

At risk is everything, this contract offer is even better than the best one ever offered the CFLPA.  Voting it down, or not voting at all is risking killing games (lost revenue for all parties), and players losing fan support because not accepting this looks like 100% greed, with no respect for the game, the league, and the fans. 

I agree. All wild speculation on my part coming up but it's fun to try. My guess is this is the league's best and final offer. If they vote no, or if the players try and stretch this out and politic their way to something different the league will lock them out. I think the league would prefer the ratio gone or dramatically reduced (like in their initial, initial offer) but are willing to do it incrementally over time. If the players hit the nuclear button it's going to hurt the league for sure so  they'll play their only card left which is to take things away from the players at regular intervals. They players don't have any leverage left, I don't think.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 04:11:33 PM
This is bad if both sides have found a hill to die on:

@TSNDaveNaylor
The @CFL says this is the best offer they will make. Will the players call their bluff? High drama as we move to the Thursday at midnight deadline. #CFL #CFLPA

@TSNDaveNaylor
The @CFL is concerned that @CFLPA  leadership may not put their latest offer to a vote of its membership. League is strongly encouraging them to do so. #CFL #CFLPA

@TSNDaveNaylor
Scenario brewing that would be very bad for an on-time start to the @2022 @CFLseason: If the @CFLPA leadership decides they won?t put league?s proposal to a vote of because it reduces 7 Canadian starters to 6, and if league won?t move off 6?well, we can all go home. #CFL #CFLPA

I can't believe that players would vote no just to protect a guy from maybe losing his starter's job to someone better. The CFL really is a second rate league if the players decide to do that as far as I'm concerned.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: gordo on May 25, 2022, 04:15:31 PM
I agree. All wild speculation on my part coming up but it's fun to try. My guess is this is the league's best and final offer. If they vote no, or if the players try and stretch this out and politic their way to something different the league will lock them out. I think the league would prefer the ratio gone or dramatically reduced (like in their initial, initial offer) but are willing to do it incrementally over time. If the players hit the nuclear button it's going to hurt the league for sure so  they'll play their only card left which is to take things away from the players at regular intervals. They players don't have any leverage left, I don't think.

So pre-season game on Friday way up in the air.  Or have they made an announcement on it that I missed? I assume if they vote and settle by Thursday it's on.

I love the CFL but this is another shot in the foot. Wade Miller needs to be the next commissioner.  Amrosie always seems to be in over his head.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 04:17:03 PM
So pre-season game on Friday way up in the air.  Or have they made an announcement on it that I missed? I assume if they vote and settle by Thursday it's on.

I love the CFL but this is another shot in the foot. Wade Miller needs to be the next commissioner.

Wade is on the negotiating team on behalf of the owners. His voice is heard. Pre-season games are up in the air, yes. Yesterday, we got timed media releases from Winnipeg and Calgary saying they were 'optimistic'. Ultimately it will come down to the vote (or non vote) of the players.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: gordo on May 25, 2022, 04:19:46 PM
Wade is on the negotiating team on behalf of the owners. His voice is heard. Pre-season games are up in the air, yes. Yesterday, we got timed media releases from Winnipeg and Calgary saying they were 'optimistic'. Ultimately it will come down to the vote (or non vote) of the players.
So sounds like they won't decide to cancel until last possible minute to keep the game alive.  Could hear on Friday at 4PM the game is off (or on hopefully).


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 25, 2022, 04:22:56 PM
So sounds like they won't decide to cancel until last possible minute to keep the game alive.  Could hear on Friday at 4PM the game is off (or on hopefully).


Yeah. League said they needed an answer by Thursday night. CFLPA sounds like they won't be ready with an answer until Friday. By definition that means the league will not move forward with the game.

Now the CFLPA might move the answer up before the league deadline or not. One team needs to put together or cancel travel plans, so you can't wait until 1/2 before game time.

As much as I want this game to go ahead, I think if the CFLPA stalls the game should be cancelled.

The next level caveat is that they provide an answer before the deadline but the answer is NO. Then what happens is a giant question.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 04:25:57 PM
So sounds like they won't decide to cancel until last possible minute to keep the game alive.  Could hear on Friday at 4PM the game is off (or on hopefully).


My guess is we'll know Friday morning, at the latest, maybe earlier if the league thinks the players are not going to vote or if the vote would be no. Realistically, there are so many moving parts to a CFL game (sponsors, fans, players, employees, buses, other partners like restaurants). It may be slightly toned down because of a pre-season game but only slightly.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: gordo on May 25, 2022, 04:31:24 PM
Yeah. League said they needed an answer by Thursday night. CFLPA sounds like they won't be ready with an answer until Friday. By definition that means the league will not move forward with the game.

No the CFLPA might move the answer up before the league deadline or not. One team needs to put together or cancel travel plans, so you can't wait until 1/2 before game time.

As much as I want this game to go ahead, I think if the CFLPA stalls the game should be cancelled.

The next level caveat is that they provide an answer before the deadline but the answer is NO. Then what happens is a giant question.



Good point - Edmonton needs to travel so would need definitive answer for them by Thursday latest.  Based on your and Sir Blue posts I'm no longer optimistic we're going to enjoy our Bombers and 5 dollar beers on Friday.  Was really looking forward to it and forecasting 25C on Friday.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: the paw on May 25, 2022, 05:21:45 PM
I can't believe the league and owners are willing to jeopardize the season for the sake of a single "naturalized national" position.  It is only token lip service to the "contributions of our American players" and it does literally nothing to improve the business case of the CFL.  The impact on the "quality of play" would be imperceptible.  One can only conclude they are trying to get the thin end of the wedge in here, as part of a strategy to keep chipping away at the ratio.

If they really wanted to value the contribution of veteran American players, why not add a stipulation that all DI positions must be veterans of at least 3 years?  That gives a tangible incentive to keep aging veterans who have some flexibility in positions.  it could extend the careers of guys like Charleston Hughes, or Ed Gainey, or William Powell. 

Honestly, if I had been the league, I think I would have come back with 7 Canadian starters, one nationalized American position, and a $2 million signing bonus.  I bet that would have passed with flying colours. 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 25, 2022, 05:35:43 PM
I can't believe the league and owners are willing to jeopardize the season for the sake of a single "naturalized national" position.  It is only token lip service to the "contributions of our American players" and it does literally nothing to improve the business case of the CFL.  The impact on the "quality of play" would be imperceptible.  One can only conclude they are trying to get the thin end of the wedge in here, as part of a strategy to keep chipping away at the ratio.

If they really wanted to value the contribution of veteran American players, why not add a stipulation that all DI positions must be veterans of at least 3 years?  That gives a tangible incentive to keep aging veterans who have some flexibility in positions.  it could extend the careers of guys like Charleston Hughes, or Ed Gainey, or William Powell. 

Honestly, if I had been the league, I think I would have come back with 7 Canadian starters, one nationalized American position, and a $2 million signing bonus.  I bet that would have passed with flying colours. 

But you can accept that the CFLPA is willing to do the same? Why would they offer even more money? It's like putting lipstick on a pig. That won't make it any more prettier.

It's the same hill.

Earlier I thought perhaps moving the minimum wage up into 2022 might have been the carrot that made sense. Compared to giving signing bonus's to a large number of CFL players already making $100K+ along with those at the bottom.





Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 05:50:12 PM
I can't believe the league and owners are willing to jeopardize the season for the sake of a single "naturalized national" position.  It is only token lip service to the "contributions of our American players" and it does literally nothing to improve the business case of the CFL.  The impact on the "quality of play" would be imperceptible.  One can only conclude they are trying to get the thin end of the wedge in here, as part of a strategy to keep chipping away at the ratio.

If they really wanted to value the contribution of veteran American players, why not add a stipulation that all DI positions must be veterans of at least 3 years?  That gives a tangible incentive to keep aging veterans who have some flexibility in positions.  it could extend the careers of guys like Charleston Hughes, or Ed Gainey, or William Powell. 

Honestly, if I had been the league, I think I would have come back with 7 Canadian starters, one nationalized American position, and a $2 million signing bonus.  I bet that would have passed with flying colours. 

The owners clearly see the ratio (or at the very least, the current extent of the ratio) as a net negative on the league and future of the CFL. You and others on here may disagree with their assessment but their actions are the best evidence of this. Don't forget the first offer they tendered was a no ratio league. I still can't fathom why on earth football fans would have a problem with the league wanting the best players they can possibly find from wherever they happen to be from. Makes no sense to me. You want credibility? That's how you get it.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 06:04:02 PM
@FarhanLaljiTSN
At this point PA leadership has been told by their members they don?t want to vote on a package that includes a ratio change. The league definitely wants them to put it to a vote


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: the paw on May 25, 2022, 06:18:53 PM
The owners clearly see the ratio (or at the very least, the current extent of the ratio) as a net negative on the league and future of the CFL. You and others on here may disagree with their assessment but their actions are the best evidence of this. Don't forget the first offer they tendered was a no ratio league. I still can't fathom why on earth football fans would have a problem with the league wanting the best players they can possibly find from wherever they happen to be from. Makes no sense to me. You want credibility? That's how you get it.

That's certainly the dominant owner narrative, and you are correct, I really don't see the logic to it.  I know you are convinced otherwise, but let me offer 3 points on this:

1.  Even if one accepts that getting rid of Canadian starters "improves the product", one position doesn't make any impact on that. So then its about some of the owners making an ideological stand on this.  Cause there is no business case for it in the next 7 years.

2.  the owners bargaining strategy has clearly been to drive a wedge between American and Canadian players and create disharmony in the CFLPA, and their media shills have been tweeting about "Locker room problems" incessantly.  I have to wonder if there aren't two camps among the owners on the ratio, and that while the anti-ratio owners are currently in ascendance, if the players hold the line, the other owners might rein in free market libertarian corporate types. 

3.  If I was a member of the CFLPA, the ratification bonus would have been the first thing I gave up.  It's ridiculous.  The problem is that the owners used a ratification bonus (in conjunction with a vote that included rookies) as a way to grease the acceptance of a crappy deal last time.  The CFLPA wised up to the strategy of buying off rookies with no skin in the game, but now all the members think the ratification bonus is a given thing.  It was a mistake last time, and now its turning around and biting both parties in the butt. 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 25, 2022, 06:19:30 PM
Both sides have dug in over the ratio position.

I hate talking about worst case scenarios because both sides need each other too much to let it come to that point, but this is not ideal.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 06:26:14 PM
That's certainly the dominant owner narrative, and you are correct, I really don't see the logic to it.  I know you are convinced otherwise, but let me offer 3 points on this:

1.  Even if one accepts that getting rid of Canadian starters "improves the product", one position doesn't make any impact on that. So then its about some of the owners making an ideological stand on this.  Cause there is no business case for it in the next 7 years.

2.  the owners bargaining strategy has clearly been to drive a wedge between American and Canadian players and create disharmony in the CFLPA, and their media shills have been tweeting about "Locker room problems" incessantly.  I have to wonder if there aren't two camps among the owners on the ratio, and that while the anti-ratio owners are currently in ascendance, if the players hold the line, the other owners might rein in free market libertarian corporate types. 

3.  If I was a member of the CFLPA, the ratification bonus would have been the first thing I gave up.  It's ridiculous.  The problem is that the owners used a ratification bonus (in conjunction with a vote that included rookies) as a way to grease the acceptance of a crappy deal last time.  The CFLPA wised up to the strategy of buying off rookies with no skin in the game, but now all the members think the ratification bonus is a given thing.  It was a mistake last time, and now its turning around and biting both parties in the butt. 

It absolutely makes a difference. If the owners really want a reduction/elimination, they will eventually get it, the only difference is how.

The first way is the continuation of a gradual reduction through a process like this. The second is a scorched earth policy of a lock-out followed by an aggressive large one time reduction. The third is probably the most unlikely and would be a strategy to break the union altogether through a hostile policy of trying to play with those in camp who show up. Might not be possible in all markets due to labour laws but the league could possibly go down that road if there was enough conviction.

Only the owners know how strongly they are united and how strongly they feel they need to do this for the long term success of the league.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 25, 2022, 06:42:57 PM
Saw a tweet supporting players, saying its not rght for Canadian players to be treated as second class citizens in their own country.

I was shocked at that thought.  The irony of it.

Every Canadian on a roster gets paid more than an equally talented American.

There are Canadians on rosters who have jobs instead of an equally or more talented American.

Purely due to a ratio that requires about 50% of a CFL roster have a link to Canada through some arcane set of rules.

So, literally, Americans are being treated as second class citizens.

Canadian players should be darned happy with all the gains made, they will continue to get paid more, will have jobs they otherwise wouldn't have, and get a ratification bonus.  And for the pseudo "Canadians" who qualify as Nats but do not reside in Canada, they get extended health care. 

If the CFLPA does not ratify by Thursday, they lose more than some TC time.  They put the league (and Canadian jobs) in jeopardy.

Right now, the CFL has a lot to lose.  But as soon as they lose even a pre-season game, then I can see them going for a union busting ratio change.  Instead of the NAT players losing 1 in 21 jobs, (which they probably pick back up on the PR), they could lose most of their jobs, most of their NAT pay disparity, and the security of the Ratio.  Because if the CFL has to re-negotiate, you can bet any ratio is off the table.  If you're gonna risk dying, get what you need to survive the impending XFL / USFL competition.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 06:53:28 PM
Aardvark -- what the heck -- you nailed it!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: the paw on May 25, 2022, 07:02:02 PM


So, literally, Americans are being treated as second class citizens.



At the risk of pointing out the obvious, the American players aren't citizens at all.  If they were, they's be Nationals..... ::)


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 07:04:37 PM
At the risk of pointing out the obvious, the American players aren't citizens at all.  If they were, they's be Nationals..... ::)

Well... some of the American players are nationals. Everyone knows the best Canadians come from California.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 25, 2022, 07:15:28 PM
At the risk of pointing out the obvious, the American players aren't citizens at all.  If they were, they's be Nationals..... ::)

They are citizens, American citizens. 

And there could be Canadian citizens that do not qualify to be NATs.   Many US players who have moved permanently to Canada to play here would seek a Canadian citizenship rapidly if they could get NAT status with it, but they wouldn't qualify.

So, would "Canadian" CFLPA players accept a new definition of "NAT"?  That you must have Canadian Citizenship at the time you sign your current contract as the only requisite. 

Instead of:

National (N, NAT)
    The 2019 CBA defines as National player thusly:
    (a) Canadian citizens at the time of signing the Player?s first C.F.L. Standard Player Contract or Practice Roster Agreement;
    (b) A Player classified as a National prior to May 21st, 2019; or
    (c) A Player who was physically resident in Canada for an aggregate period of five years prior to attaining the age of 18 years.
    2019 ? An American or Global Player who is draft eligible no earlier than the 2021 Draft and has played football for a minimum of three (3) year at a USports institution and has graduated with a degree at that institution.
    2020 ? In addition to the 2019 amendment above, the following will take effect the day before the start of training camp in 2020:
    An American player on a roster with the same CFL team after three (3) consecutive years or four (4) years in the CFL. These players apply only to the starter ratio and not the roster allocation.
    Introduced with the ratification of the 2014 CBA, a National player was defined from 2014 to 2019 as:
    (a) was a Canadian citizen at the time of signing his first contract,
    (b) was classified as a non-import prior to May 31, 2014,
    (c) or was physically resident in Canada for an aggregate period of five years prior to reaching the age of 18.
    The National designation replaces the Non-import designation used before 2014.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 25, 2022, 08:19:35 PM
@FarhanLaljiTSN
At this point PA leadership has been told by their members they don?t want to vote on a package that includes a ratio change. The league definitely wants them to put it to a vote

A vote could have been held immediately after practice yesterday or today and sent to CFLPA. That didn't happen and may not happen from the sounds of it.

Sad day for the CFL.

I'm still trying to figure out how the one nationalized american would really be implemented into an additional import starter. There is no addition to the roster of imports to the overall roster. Best guess is that Grant becomes a full time starter ( in place of Woli ) or a 2nd import DT start ( in place of Thomas ). That would leave 3 imports backing up 18 starters and 14 Canadians backing up 6 starters. Makes no sense.

That's not much of a plan to be set in motion changing the ratio  for the next 7 years. Logically they should have just added one more import and eliminated 1 more Canadian. From the starting position of totally eliminating the ratio over the length of the CBA, the one nationalized import is a big step back.

Lock them out.




Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 25, 2022, 08:21:23 PM
A vote could have been held immediately after practice yesterday or today and sent to CFLPA. That didn't happen and may not happen from the sounds of it.

Sad day for the CFL.
what a bunch of idiots!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 08:31:53 PM
@TSNDaveNaylor
Hearing the @TorontoArgos have postponed tomorrow?s scheduled flight to Ottawa for their Friday preseason game against the @REDBLACKS. Team will wait for the @CFLPA to make a decision on league?s offer. If accepted, Argos will fly Friday day-of-game to Ottawa. #CFL #CFLPA


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 08:37:28 PM
@TSNDaveNaylor
The question is often asked ?why does the @CFL want to reduce the # of Canadian starters?? Answer: it believes it would improve product. And its research says 2 groups they want to reach: younger fans and general sports fans prefer to see best players over Cdns.#CFL #CFLPA

...least shocking research ever.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Waffler on May 25, 2022, 08:42:45 PM
would be a strategy to break the union altogether

My take is this. Union busting. Once they have reduced Canadian content enough they only have to deal with the hired gun American player that comes and goes.

Send me a songwriter
Who's drifted far from home
And make sure that he's hungry
Make sure he's alone

- Neil Young (Crime in the City)


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 25, 2022, 09:00:05 PM
My take is this. Union busting. Once they have reduced Canadian content enough they only have to deal with the hired gun American player that comes and goes.

Send me a songwriter
Who's drifted far from home
And make sure that he's hungry
Make sure he's alone

- Neil Young (Crime in the City)

It could devolve into that but I don't think it's been the strategy so far. If they were trying to do that they would be trying to increase the US roster spots so they outnumber the Canadians and therefore have a majority in the PA for the next CBA negotiation. I also think they'd be angling for a shorter term than 7 years although you'd have to know the inner workers of any out clauses to say for sure on that point.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 25, 2022, 09:13:43 PM
USFL Canada division coming to your town in 2023. :(


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 25, 2022, 09:19:32 PM
Like Sir Golden Hat stated no good news by tomorrow morning than it could be the beginning of the end for this league.

I hope the bloody players know that?

Go back to day jobs you turkeys.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 25, 2022, 09:27:55 PM
This is insanity. 

CFL thinks a 6+1 ratio makes a better product, which will grow the league and make survival more likely, and revenue sharing a possibility.

CFLPA thinks that making 9 "Canadians" earn their spot over an American rather than being gifted a job is worth killing the league over.  How did the 180+ "Canadians" in the league get so insecure about their abilities to think that it is worth causing this labour shutdown over whether one less of them on each team gets a job over a more qualified, less expensive American option.

This dispute is over preserving the jobs of the nine worst "Canadian" players in the league, which, by definition, would be the nine worst players in the league.  And its not the loss of the job completely, just a move from that job being filled by a "Canadian" to being filled by a better player.

 



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Waffler on May 25, 2022, 09:52:43 PM
its not the loss of the job completely, just a move from that job being filled by a "Canadian" to being filled by a better player.

So you go from one equal playing field to another. How does that noticeably improve entertainment enough that younger fans become drawn to the league, as the CFL says it will? To me it seems clear that they are trying to sick it the Canadian that has the nerve to block their desire for cheaper labor. It becomes a question of who does the league belong to? Players or owners.  It's that basic.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Pete on May 25, 2022, 09:55:54 PM
Hearing that the cflpa wont even put the new offer to a vote or any offer that reduces the ratio

To the owners; having one less Canadian is in no way going to impact revenues so whats the point?

To the canadian players: refusing to even budge on this, when you are not losing any roster positions, rather than using it  to get a better cba for all players is idiotic too.

I was just getting excited about the season too, now it looks like I may as well just look forward to something else. Call me when you've come to your senses and I'll see if I answer




Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 25, 2022, 10:17:41 PM
So you go from one equal playing field to another. How does that noticeably improve entertainment enough that younger fans become drawn to the league, as the CFL says it will? To me it seems clear that they are trying to sick it the Canadian that has the nerve to block their desire for cheaper labor. It becomes a question of who does the league belong to? Players or owners.  It's that basic.

It is basic and the players don't own the league, the owners do. You can cut any player at any time. Find new owners willing to lose money? Not so easy.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Waffler on May 25, 2022, 10:21:33 PM
It is basic and the players don't own the league, the owners do.

Do they? The league began as an amateur organization for local players and community ownership continues in the west to this day. I think it is an open question about to be resolved.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: buckzumhoff on May 25, 2022, 10:31:39 PM
Owners are ruining the game . Reducing Canadian players.i wonder which owners want this move. I'll bet it's the private owners with the worst attendance while the teams with good attendance can make it work either way


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 25, 2022, 11:37:14 PM
Owners are ruining the game . Reducing Canadian players.i wonder which owners want this move. I'll bet it's the private owners with the worst attendance while the teams with good attendance can make it work either way

Reducing by one per team... eliminating the worst player on the team.  Tiny ask for all the CFL gave the PA...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Pete on May 25, 2022, 11:50:10 PM
For the conspiracy nuts  ....Unless the reason the owners want to reduce the ratio is a plan to merge with the xfl and want to lessen the competitive disadvantage of having to play 7 canadians


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 26, 2022, 12:57:47 AM
Reducing by one per team... eliminating the worst player on the team.  Tiny ask for all the CFL gave the PA...
I am with Ardy


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 01:00:07 AM
Do they? The league began as an amateur organization for local players and community ownership continues in the west to this day. I think it is an open question about to be resolved.

Yes they do. They foot the bills and are the ones that risk losing money. Players are employees and get paid for services rendered. Simple as that.

Pick any team you like and tell me which PLAYER owns the rights to the name of their team or logos?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 01:03:06 AM
For the conspiracy nuts  ....Unless the reason the owners want to reduce the ratio is a plan to merge with the xfl and want to lessen the competitive disadvantage of having to play 7 canadians

Personally I don't think the XFL sees the light of day again. Seeing how poorly the USFL is doing from a business point of view ( not enough revenue ) and previous failures of spring leagues, I smell toast.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 01:07:37 AM
Owners are ruining the game . Reducing Canadian players.i wonder which owners want this move. I'll bet it's the private owners with the worst attendance while the teams with good attendance can make it work either way

Most teams are privately owned.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Big Daddy on May 26, 2022, 02:22:17 AM
Yes they do. They foot the bills and are the ones that risk losing money. Players are employees and get paid for services rendered. Simple as that.

Pick any team you like and tell me which PLAYER owns the rights to the name of their team or logos?

This is exactly the point.  The owners pay for everything, in terms of money, risk, everything.

I know players risk a lot more with their physical ability and injury risk.  However, this is fully voluntary to play a game for a paycheck.

Many play this game without any compensation and love it.  Playing professionally is obviously a different level.  Ideally anyone working gets compensated appropriately. 

But one only needs to look at the economics of this league.  This is a league of owners that mostly are not making money from their investment - they are doing this for the love of the game.  Demand enough and eventually it just isn't worth it for some owners to keep losing money on a pet project.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 02:42:21 AM
Looks like neither side has blinked tonight. Interested to see what tomorrow holds. I think they either hold a vote or get locked out. Lalji on TSN says the league has reiterated it will not entertain anymore more than 6+1. He said it's more than just one roster spot, it's a philosophical issue that aligns with the future direction of the league. I know it's not the kind of excitement anyone wants from the CFL, but get your popcorn ready for tomorrow.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 26, 2022, 03:44:29 AM
Hearing that the cflpa wont even put the new offer to a vote or any offer that reduces the ratio

To the owners; having one less Canadian is in no way going to impact revenues so whats the point?

To the canadian players: refusing to even budge on this, when you are not losing any roster positions, rather than using it  to get a better cba for all players is idiotic too.

I was just getting excited about the season too, now it looks like I may as well just look forward to something else. Call me when you've come to your senses and I'll see if I answer.

John Hodge
@JohnDHodge
7h
My understanding is the CFLPA executive has not yet presented the league's latest CBA proposal to its player reps. It sounds as though there is a plan to do so this evening.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 26, 2022, 11:36:23 AM
John Hodge
@JohnDHodge
7h
My understanding is the CFLPA executive has not yet presented the league's latest CBA proposal to its player reps. It sounds as though there is a plan to do so this evening.
oh my word. Why the delay? Players playing hard ball.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 12:03:41 PM
oh my word. Why the delay? Players playing hard ball.

More like stupidity. 

I said it earlier this week: If the pre season games are not going to happen, they should start trimming the roster. Pre season games help rookies win a roster spot. That means they have lost that additional chance.

The regular season starts June 9 which is only 14 days. Final rosters are usually determined a week before the start of the season.  Bombers have 100 players and IMO should trim down to 75 on Saturday.

Who actually gets to vote on the CBA? Veterans only or rookies as well? There are certainly more imports at the moment than Canadians on every roster.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 12:53:08 PM
More like stupidity. 

I said it earlier this week: If the pre season games are not going to happen, they should start trimming the roster. Pre season games help rookies win a roster spot. That means they have lost that additional chance.

The regular season starts June 9 which is only 14 days. Final rosters are usually determined a week before the start of the season.  Bombers have 100 players and IMO should trim down to 75 on Saturday.

Who actually gets to vote on the CBA? Veterans only or rookies as well? There are certainly more imports at the moment than Canadians on every roster.

Rookies (those who have not played a regular season game) do not get it vote this time around. They did get to vote last CBA which really worked in favour of the league so the union changed that policy. It is probably not a good idea to cut a large number of players before the CBA is settled. More players nearby may provide more options for the league.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 01:01:02 PM
Rookies (those who have not played a regular season game) do not get it vote this time around. They did get to vote last CBA which really worked in favour of the league so the union changed that policy. It is probably not a good idea to cut a large number of players before the CBA is settled. More players nearby may provide more options for the league.


I don't know what options the league would have if the CBA isn't settled. Nobody wants to see a bunch of rookies comprising a complete roster and all the veterans sitting out. I don't want other options.

That's even worse than watching a pre season game.

If the vote is no and there is no pre season game tomorrow that would also suggest they aren't practising either. Therefore I see zero downside to my suggested trimming down to 75 from 100.

Either we're gearing up to a regular season without a pre season set of games or we've reached the end of the road.

Coaches already have a good idea of the bottom 1/4 of those in camp. 75 still leaves enough for final roster of 46, plus PR of 12, a few on IR and about 15 over and above that.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: M.O.A.B. on May 26, 2022, 01:23:11 PM
Jeff Hamilton
@jeffkhamilton
Hearing from people around the league that still no movement from the CFLPA to bring the current proposal to a vote, w/ some suggesting they wont. Teams are preparing for potential cancellation of games this weekend. Both sides appear equally committed to stand their ground. #wfp


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 01:28:52 PM

I don't know what options the league would have if the CBA isn't settled. Nobody wants to see a bunch of rookies comprising a complete roster and all the veterans sitting out. I don't want other options.

That's even worse than watching a pre season game.

If the vote is no and there is no pre season game tomorrow that would also suggest they aren't practising either. Therefore I see zero downside to my suggested trimming down to 75 from 100.

Either we're gearing up to a regular season without a pre season set of games or we've reached the end of the road.

Coaches already have a good idea of the bottom 1/4 of those in camp. 75 still leaves enough for final roster of 46, plus PR of 12, a few on IR and about 15 over and above that.

You are right. If there is no vote a lockout and perhaps even prolonged labour dispute comes to pass. However, if the league wanted to be super aggressive (and I don't know all the legal ins and outs here), having a bunch of Americans rookies still in CFL cities may provide more them more options.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 01:35:31 PM
You are right. If there is no vote a lockout and perhaps even prolonged labour dispute comes to pass. However, if the league wanted to be super aggressive (and I don't know all the legal ins and outs here), having a bunch of Americans rookies still in CFL cities may provide more them more options.

I don't think fans would take kindly to veteran or even rookies playing during a lockout per se.

I was a union member in 3 different unions for the 1st 25 years of my working career. Can't say I was ever pro union but I understand the mechanics.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 01:42:05 PM
I don't think fans would take kindly to veteran or even rookies playing during a lockout per se.

I was a union member in 3 different unions for the 1st 25 years of my working career. Can't say I was ever pro union but I understand the mechanics.

For context, I've never been been in a union ever. But it wouldn't bother me for one second if a bunch of Canadians and a few veterans sat out but games still were played.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Waffler on May 26, 2022, 01:47:17 PM
For context, I've never been been in a union ever. But it wouldn't bother me for one second if a bunch of Canadians and a few veterans sat out but games still were played.

Suicide for the league. They would lose tons on gate revenue, which they can't afford. The other thing everyone wants to build is continuity, this is the opposite of that. Are you ok your scabs playing Ottawa's scabs, losing and the game counts in the standings? NO thanks.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 26, 2022, 01:48:10 PM
I definitely wouldn't watch if there were relacement players.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: DM83 on May 26, 2022, 01:55:41 PM
Why not? Everyone has to start someplace.
Relatively speaking, they would likely be smaller faster more exciting guys.  CIS players have the same skills in most cases as Div 3 players from the states.
Make it four downs on the wide field
 A chance for revolutionary new ideas and if it fails, blame it on the Canadian players.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: bluengold204 on May 26, 2022, 01:57:34 PM
I definitely wouldn't watch if there were relacement players.

I would


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Waffler on May 26, 2022, 01:58:35 PM
Why not? Everyone has to start someplace.
Relatively speaking, they would likely be smaller faster more exciting guys.  CIS players have the same skills in most cases as Div 3 players from the states.
Make it four downs on the wide field
 A chance for revolutionary new ideas and if it fails, blame it on the Canadian players.
IF it fails?  you would draw in the hundreds. no more.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 02:03:27 PM
I definitely wouldn't watch if there were relacement players.

Hypothetically speaking, you wouldn't watch if the Canadian players didn't play but the Americans did?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: DM83 on May 26, 2022, 02:25:00 PM
Well, I am sure yokels in Manitoba and Sask would watch.
Losers in Toronto would still get their 2000 people
Montreal would.  Just staff the team with names that sound French.
Edm and Calg already have Canadians at QB, as does Vanc
Hamilton has the entire Western section of Ontario.

If Toronto is allowed to participate with their 4000 people attending, then expand to The Maritimes, Quebec city,  Windsor, and Saskatoon.
Remember this ain't the 80's.  Toronto is allowed to participate with nowhere near the proper economic base, the above cities could draw at least that amount.  Additionally, some of those cities have major resources/industries where the company could own the franchise., and cover the costs.

Just do it!

Who can identify the mjor company in those towns?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: gordo on May 26, 2022, 04:03:01 PM
For a league that is constantly teetering on financial collapse and fighting a never-ending battle to attract a dedicated fan base, the situation they now find themselves in is ridiculous.  Randy Amrosie and his crew needs to consider the big picture of league survival and do whatever it takes to settle this now.  Even losing pre-season games is a huge blow. 

This is not the NFL or any other league that can afford to piss away games and fans with a protracted negotiation. 

And at this point, still no word on Friday's game.  I'm assuming it's cancelled if the Elks aren't flying yet.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 04:14:09 PM
For a league that is constantly teetering on financial collapse and fighting a never-ending battle to attract a dedicated fan base, the situation they now find themselves in is ridiculous.  Randy Amrosie and his crew needs to consider the big picture of league survival and do whatever it takes to settle this now.  Even losing pre-season games is a huge blow. 

This is not the NFL or any other league that can afford to piss away games and fans with a protracted negotiation. 

And at this point, still no word on Friday's game.  I'm assuming it's cancelled if the Elks aren't flying yet.


That assumption isn't correct, yet. The Argos also have a pre-season game tomorrow and they released a statement they aren't flying today but would fly day-of should there be a game. I imagine Edmonton would take the same approach. The league imposed deadline was set to tonight at 11:00 pm CST so they knew it would come down to the wire.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 04:46:07 PM
Hypothetically speaking, you wouldn't watch if the Canadian players didn't play but the Americans did?

It's a tough call but I support the players to the extent of not using replacements. To be clear, I'm not a pro union guy and I don't support their position. However, that's where I'd choose to draw the line. BTW, I've never heard of a union not putting forward an offer even if they expected it to not succeed. Take that 1st step and go from there.

Now if the league folds and a new start-up is created on a permanent kind of basis that would be different I suppose. Not preferable but if they don't come to an agreement soon, things look dark.

Going back to my earlier comment about roster reduction. It's not that long ago that rosters were trimmed somewhat after the 1st exhibition game. So I'm just reverting to that plan if no exhibition games are played tomorrow, or at all. Get on with deciding the final roster with the hope of actually having a season start on June 9.

Now if there are no practices, that further suggests trimming now. Like I said, season is due to start June 9 in 2 weeks.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 05:00:13 PM
@FarhanLaljiTSN
Im hearing the @CFL @CFLPA are still in discussions. There is a belief that there will be a vote today as it would be highly unlikely they strike without one. The way both sides have dug in on the current ratio proposal makes me wonder if the rolling ratio (49%) is back in play

@jeffkhamilton
Told there's been progress in the last while. Negotiations are ongoing, Adam Bighill has left Bombers walkthrough. Definitely a shift from this morning. Players seem confident we'll reach a vote at least. #wfp

@JohnDHodge
As @FarhanLaljiTSN  first reported, I've also heard the 49 percent ratio clause could be back in play under a new proposal. However, it sounds like it may only apply to two "nationalized Americans" instead of three as per the tentative agreement from last week.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 05:27:10 PM
@FarhanLaljiTSN
Im hearing the @CFL @CFLPA are still in discussions. There is a belief that there will be a vote today as it would be highly unlikely they strike without one. The way both sides have dug in on the current ratio proposal makes me wonder if the rolling ratio (49%) is back in play

@jeffkhamilton
Told there's been progress in the last while. Negotiations are ongoing, Adam Bighill has left Bombers walkthrough. Definitely a shift from this morning. Players seem confident we'll reach a vote at least. #wfp

@JohnDHodge
As @FarhanLaljiTSN  first reported, I've also heard the 49 percent ratio clause could be back in play under a new proposal. However, it sounds like it may only apply to two "nationalized Americans" instead of three as per the tentative agreement from last week.

Re: The John Hodge comment.

I thought they got rid of all 3 in the last offer but kept the 1st one requiring starting him starting as an 8th Canadian. That never made sense anyway since it's a net zero change.

If they didn't like that, why would they go back to the 2 with a 49% playing time constraint.

Considering the Bombers probable roster we'd only have 1 import that would qualify in the 1st place. That would be Grant in theory. Moutada if he makes the roster won't qualify. The other 2 DI's probably are rookies.

If they want to change the ratio can't they just make it simple. Canadian starters 6, 1 additional import added to roster and 1 less Canadian.  None of this years with team or in the CFL with restricted playing time.

That's simple.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 26, 2022, 05:28:44 PM
Hypothetically speaking, you wouldn't watch if the Canadian players didn't play but the Americans did?

I'm not sure how that would work legally - so I don't think it's possible - but I get what you're saying/asking.

Like Blue in BC said, I would not support a league that would go around the players. I would boycott until a settlement was reached.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: bomb squad on May 26, 2022, 05:31:19 PM
I support maintaining the Canadian content, but if the league has determined a slight reduction or tweak is better for the future of the league overall, then I support that as well. I trust they have done their research and in the end it is their business. I'm surprised that the players have as much say and leverage as they apparently do in the matter. I'm not sure they should.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 05:36:49 PM
I'm not sure how that would work legally - so I don't think it's possible - but I get what you're saying/asking.

Like Blue in BC said, I would not support a league that would go around the players. I would boycott until a settlement was reached.

The problem is that you can't give the union all the cards either. The ownership group has to have some recourse as well. An arbitrator as we see in public and even private conflicts? Of course that should have been in place before it came down to this.

What if they union said we want 10 Canadian starters and that was their final position? They haven't done that but you see my point?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 05:44:18 PM
It's really stupid that the ratio is part of the CBA at all. The rules of the game should be amendable by the league. The players have no say in where kickoffs start or where hashmarks are, even though it may affect their performance and therefore livelihood. The ratio rule is a big deal to the league because they think reducing it will help increase viewership. It makes no sense they get a voice at all in that aspect of it.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: CrazyCanuck89 on May 26, 2022, 05:44:50 PM
I support maintaining the Canadian content, but if the league has determined a slight reduction or tweak is better for the future of the league overall, then I support that as well. I trust they have done their research and in the end it is their business. I'm surprised that the players have as much say and leverage as they apparently do in the matter. I'm not sure they should.

A slight reduction allows the league to just reduce it more next time.  It's time Canadians stood up for Canadians, we let Mulroney screw us with NAFTA, we won't let the CFL, do it to Canadians.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 05:53:43 PM
@CFL_News
"I feel there is going to be a deal done today. I feel there has to be a deal done today. So hopefully, the rest of the membership will be happy with it." - @chris_ackie

@TSNDaveNaylor
So with less than 10 hours before the start of the @CFL pre-season gets axed, I hope no one is still asking why the 2 sides couldn?t just sit down in January and get the CBA out of the way? #CFL #CFLPA
 

@CFL_News
"We've heard some of the terms. Not all the terms. But from what is said, guys understand they're not going to be 100% happy.  But, it's going to be good enough." -
@chris_ackie
 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 06:12:06 PM
A slight reduction allows the league to just reduce it more next time.  It's time Canadians stood up for Canadians, we let Mulroney screw us with NAFTA, we won't let the CFL, do it to Canadians.

Next time is 7 years from now. Poor argument.  NHL or NBA has no ratio so why does that not fall into your thinking?

What about the 100's if not 1,000's of team staff, coaches,  parking, concessions, advertisers, ticket takers, ticket sellers, maintenance that have jobs due to the CFL.

Bars, restaurants, hotels, airlines, apartment rentals by players.





Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 06:38:31 PM
For what it's worth, and you can definitely take it with a grain of salt, I believe the current thinking is the  season is going to be a go, including tomorrow's pre-season game. :)


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: gordo on May 26, 2022, 07:00:10 PM
That assumption isn't correct, yet. The Argos also have a pre-season game tomorrow and they released a statement they aren't flying today but would fly day-of should there be a game. I imagine Edmonton would take the same approach. The league imposed deadline was set to tonight at 11:00 pm CST so they knew it would come down to the wire.

Never assume I guess?.



John Hodge
@JohnDHodge
BREAKING: the CFL and CFLPA have come to a new tentative collective bargaining agreement. Details coming soon to
@3DownNation

2:43 PM ? May 26, 2022?Twitter Web App

.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Pigskin on May 26, 2022, 07:11:18 PM
Never assume I guess?.



John Hodge
@JohnDHodge
BREAKING: the CFL and CFLPA have come to a new tentative collective bargaining agreement. Details coming soon to
@3DownNation

2:43 PM ? May 26, 2022?Twitter Web App

Well if this is true, because we thought this was done a week ago, it would be excellent news.

.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 07:30:22 PM
We'll be interested in the details but the reality is we'll be happy they've come to an agreement.

Let the games begin.

EDIT: Only info I can find is an increase in ratification bonus from $1M to $1.25M. Requires a vote today.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 26, 2022, 08:24:12 PM
Told y'all they'd get it done.  Both sides lose if they miss the PS games and go back to the clean slate drawing board.

Bonus going up is the smart, cheap, easy move by the league.  Keep upping it by 1/4 mil until it's too hard to resist.

Bringing back the 51/49 thing is asinine.  I hope that's just mis-reporting.  6+1 will be fine, but players are right, it is the camel's nose in the tent.  League will want another +1 next time.  But I think that battle is lost for now; fight it later.  As previous posts pointed out, the ratio has been tweaked many times over the years and we're still good, so maybe it'll be ok this time too.

Lalji on TSN says the league has reiterated it will not entertain anymore more than 6+1. He said it's more than just one roster spot, it's a philosophical issue that aligns with the future direction of the league.

Not sure what the league's actual words were, but letting that tidbit out is a mistake as it proves the slippery slope is real.  Maybe they really do want to abolish the ratio and become "mini NFL north".  Regardless, the league should have kept that part unsaid.  If I was a NAT looking at this contract, that type of statement might really make me stop and think.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 08:38:56 PM
Told y'all they'd get it done.  Both sides lose if they miss the PS games and go back to the clean slate drawing board.

Bonus going up is the smart, cheap, easy move by the league.  Keep upping it by 1/4 mil until it's too hard to resist.

Bringing back the 51/49 thing is asinine.  I hope that's just mis-reporting.  6+1 will be fine, but players are right, it is the camel's nose in the tent.  League will want another +1 next time.  But I think that battle is lost for now; fight it later.  As previous posts pointed out, the ratio has been tweaked many times over the years and we're still good, so maybe it'll be ok this time too.

Not sure what the league's actual words were, but letting that tidbit out is a mistake as it proves the slippery slope is real.  Maybe they really do want to abolish the ratio and become "mini NFL north".  Regardless, the league should have kept that part unsaid.  If I was a NAT looking at this contract, that type of statement might really make me stop and think.


Not the league's actual words. Lalji's words which was a reporting of a conversation he must have had with someone.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 08:39:57 PM
@FarhanLaljiTSN
Here?s the CBA ratio adjustments: Rolling ratio (Nationalized US can play up to 49% of snaps): 2 in 2023.@CFL has the right to move it to 3 in 2024 if they believe it is working. The 2 teams with the most # of cdn snaps in any given season will be given an extra 2nd round pick

But it is staying at 7 not 8 like negotiating before:

@FarhanLaljiTSN
Yes. So 5 and 2 in 2023, likely followed by 4 and 3 in 2024

Down to mandatory 4 Canadian starters by 2024! I am happy!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: bluengold204 on May 26, 2022, 08:42:02 PM
Told y'all they'd get it done.  Both sides lose if they miss the PS games and go back to the clean slate drawing board.

Bonus going up is the smart, cheap, easy move by the league.  Keep upping it by 1/4 mil until it's too hard to resist.

Bringing back the 51/49 thing is asinine.  I hope that's just mis-reporting.  6+1 will be fine, but players are right, it is the camel's nose in the tent.  League will want another +1 next time.  But I think that battle is lost for now; fight it later.  As previous posts pointed out, the ratio has been tweaked many times over the years and we're still good, so maybe it'll be ok this time too.

Not sure what the league's actual words were, but letting that tidbit out is a mistake as it proves the slippery slope is real.  Maybe they really do want to abolish the ratio and become "mini NFL north".  Regardless, the league should have kept that part unsaid.  If I was a NAT looking at this contract, that type of statement might really make me stop and think.


Unless if I?m missing something but it?s not a done deal yet, they players can still vote no?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 08:43:57 PM
Unless if I?m missing something but it?s not a done deal yet, they players can still vote no?

Correct. Players are voting now. Results should be in by 9 PM est. Source:

@sportsdanbarnes
Have been told that the result of the #CFLPA membership vote on the tentative CBA with the #CFL should be known by about 9 p.m. eastern. Well within the CFL deadline of midnight.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 09:08:15 PM
Another new relevant detail.

@FarhanLaljiTSN
3 completed years on 1 team or 6 completed years in the league



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 26, 2022, 09:21:12 PM
So we are playing tomorrow?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Pigskin on May 26, 2022, 09:24:25 PM
@FarhanLaljiTSN
Here?s the CBA ratio adjustments: Rolling ratio (Nationalized US can play up to 49% of snaps): 2 in 2023.@CFL has the right to move it to 3 in 2024 if they believe it is working. The 2 teams with the most # of cdn snaps in any given season will be given an extra 2nd round pick

But it is staying at 7 not 8 like negotiating before:

@FarhanLaljiTSN
Yes. So 5 and 2 in 2023, likely followed by 4 and 3 in 2024

Down to mandatory 4 Canadian starters by 2024! I am happy!

I am not happy about only having 4 mandatory Canadian starters. Terrible idea.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Pigskin on May 26, 2022, 09:27:02 PM
So we are playing tomorrow?

We should know by 9/9:30 tonight. Either leaving for the lake in the morning, or get ready for some football.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 09:41:23 PM
I am not happy about only having 4 mandatory Canadian starters. Terrible idea.

It's fantastic. If the players vote for this one they are a bit daft though. They rejected a bunch of deals that kept more of the ratio intact already.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 09:49:44 PM
@FarhanLaljiTSN
Here?s the CBA ratio adjustments: Rolling ratio (Nationalized US can play up to 49% of snaps): 2 in 2023.@CFL has the right to move it to 3 in 2024 if they believe it is working. The 2 teams with the most # of cdn snaps in any given season will be given an extra 2nd round pick

But it is staying at 7 not 8 like negotiating before:

@FarhanLaljiTSN
Yes. So 5 and 2 in 2023, likely followed by 4 and 3 in 2024

Down to mandatory 4 Canadian starters by 2024! I am happy!

So they balked at one nationalized American but accept this version? Sold out for the extra signing bonus?

I'm in favour of less mandatory Canadian starters. Still need to see how this works in practice when not actually adding imports to the roster. There will be a seller's market in free agency to add players that would have been / could have been DI's that have CFL experience. More import vets could be sitting on the PR for additional depth.

In the med to long term this will hinder development of new import talent due to needing to retain older vets.  Roster selections will be decided / earned by tenure and not necessarily best talent or even lowest cost talent available.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 26, 2022, 10:03:26 PM
So they balked at one nationalized American but accept this version? Sold out for the extra signing bonus?

I'm in favour of less mandatory Canadian starters. Still need to see how this works in practice when not actually adding imports to the roster. There will be a seller's market in free agency to add players that would have been / could have been DI's that have CFL experience. More import vets could be sitting on the PR for additional depth.

In the med to long term this will hinder development of new import talent due to needing to retain older vets.  Roster selections will be decided / earned by tenure and not necessarily best talent or even lowest cost talent available.



Reading trough Lalji's replies, yes. It seems as though they declined:

7 starters comprised of 6 Canadians, 1 Naturalized Americans (6:1)
8 starters comprised of 6 Canadians, 2 Naturalized Americans  (playing 49% of snaps)

And now may accept:
7 starters comprised 5 Canadians, 2 Naturalized Americans (playing 49% of snaps) in 2023 AND then 7 starters comprised of 4 Canadians, 3 Naturalized Americans (playing 49% of snaps) in 2024.

Two things though, one, this assumes Lalji's reporting is dead on. The second, it appears the latest version may make being a naturalized American a bit harder: after 3 years with one team or after 6 years in CFL.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 26, 2022, 10:35:46 PM
Reading trough Lalji's replies, yes. It seems as though they declined:

7 starters comprised of 6 Canadians, 1 Naturalized Americans (6:1)
8 starters comprised of 6 Canadians, 2 Naturalized Americans  (playing 49% of snaps)

And now may accept:
7 starters comprised 5 Canadians, 2 Naturalized Americans (playing 49% of snaps) in 2023 AND then 7 starters comprised of 4 Canadians, 3 Naturalized Americans (playing 49% of snaps) in 2024.

Two things though, one, this assumes Lalji's reporting is dead on. The second, it appears the latest version may make being a naturalized American a bit harder: after 3 years with one team or after 6 years in CFL.

It's a sloppy idea with too many " if's " for my liking even though it's going in a direction I'm in favour.

Essentially I believe any import on any teams roster for 3 years is already starting.

Looking at our current roster, projected or otherwise, this would allow Grant to see more offensive reps over Woli or possibly Demski due to injury situations. I can't see one import that will be on defence that isn't starting or a probable DI that fits the bill.

My expectation is a rookie DE and possibly a new rookie DT ( if Walker is beat out ). Neither of these candidates would fit the bill in 2023 as 3rd year players. The other DI's are going to be Grant and Moutada?


EDIT: On 3rdownnation is says ratio stays the same in 2022.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: buckzumhoff on May 26, 2022, 10:42:24 PM
League doesn't sound like they know what they want. Ever since the new commissioner you would think with all the time off they would know and finish what they want to do not a day before the league starts . There wasn't enough time off.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 26, 2022, 11:11:03 PM
This waiting to this hour is killing me golden nuggets! Get it done and friggin announce it already! My word!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 27, 2022, 12:42:40 AM
Down to mandatory 4 Canadian starters by 2024! I am happy!

This is a really really dumb move by the league.  Like SB&G said, it's a Darth Vader deal... getting worse all the time.

Worse than that, they are purposely complicating the scenarios as they go on in order to confuse players.

The direction they are moving in is more likely to get a "no" vote than it stood yesterday.  I would probably vote no if I was a NAT player.

League doesn't sound like they know what they want. Ever since the new commissioner you would think with all the time off they would know and finish what they want to do not a day before the league starts . There wasn't enough time off.

This.  Worse, during all the highly publicized/leaked "discussions" in 2021, and all of Ambrosie's talks, I don't recall any mention of this 51/49 idea nor shafting so many NATs per team.  This stuff is going off the deep end fast.

Maybe the league wants the players to vote no in order to pull off some other nefarious plan?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 12:46:39 AM
It's a sloppy idea with too many " if's " for my liking even though it's going in a direction I'm in favour.

Essentially I believe any import on any teams roster for 3 years is already starting.


Looking at our current roster, projected or otherwise, this would allow Grant to see more offensive reps over Woli or possibly Demski due to injury situations. I can't see one import that will be on defence that isn't starting or a probable DI that fits the bill.

My expectation is a rookie DE and possibly a new rookie DT ( if Walker is beat out ). Neither of these candidates would fit the bill in 2023 as 3rd year players. The other DI's are going to be Grant and Moutada?


EDIT: On 3rdownnation is says ratio stays the same in 2022.

There are 23 starting spots on offense and defense (not counting QB which is factored separately). There are 20 Americans on each roster. Right now, only 16 can start. Next year 18 can start. In 2024, 19 can start. They will be backed up on game day by Canadians by necessity, but they will be replaced long term by Americans off of the PR. Practically speaking for us this means that in 2023 Jake Thomas will absolutely a back-up and so will Wolitarsky. In 2024, either the a offensive lineman or the running back spot could also flip. It also means when Canadians get injured it won't be near as bad. Think of all the terrible years we had prior to our recent stretch. The rebuild and competitive balance will be better with 4. Teams can also better build depth behind four Canadian starting positions if they want. Right now they have to take Canadians wherever they can find them and one injury to a Canadian usually cascades into several other changes. Now you can run three offensive lineman, one receiver and fill the rest with better depth and special teams players. Americans can do the rest.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 12:47:58 AM
This is a really really dumb move by the league.  Like SB&G said, it's a Darth Vader deal... getting worse all the time.

Worse than that, they are purposely complicating the scenarios as they go on in order to confuse players.

The direction they are moving in is more likely to get a "no" vote than it stood yesterday.  I would probably vote no if I was a NAT player.

This.  Worse, during all the highly publicized/leaked "discussions" in 2021, and all of Ambrosie's talks, I don't recall any mention of this 51/49 idea nor shafting so many NATs per team.  This stuff is going off the deep end fast.

Maybe the league wants the players to vote no in order to pull off some other nefarious plan?


49% practically speaking just means offense OR defense but not special teams. It takes literally no time to explain or understand.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 27, 2022, 12:55:17 AM
You guys were talking about simplifying the ratio/etc because the complicated-ness was putting off the younger fans.  Now you're ok with some really really dumb 51/49 rule that zero fans will understand or care about or be able to track?

Who is going to track all of this?  I'm pretty sure the league does not currently track who's on field at all times for every play.  They going to hire an extra stats guy to track this?  Or is it going to be on the honor system?  And will teams hire extra staff to track this?

An award (lame 2nd rounder) for playing the most NAT snaps?  Dumb.  Do losing teams start nothing but NATs at the end of the year in order to win that lame prize?

Again, who's going to track this?  Even if the league does, do they share their data?  Some poor sod has to sit there and watch all film and track every player and run reports.

All these new stats going to be posted somewhere?  Transparency?

It's a ton of bother, for what?  They should have just said 6+1 or 5+2 or whatever.  No snap crap.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 27, 2022, 12:56:33 AM
Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
1m
The
@CFLPA
 members have ratified the new CBA. #CFL #CFLPA


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 12:57:07 AM
Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
1m
The
@CFLPA
 members have ratified the new CBA. #CFL #CFLPA


FANTASTIC! The start of a new and better era!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 27, 2022, 12:59:27 AM
Dave Naylor
@TSNDaveNaylor
1m
The
@CFLPA
 members have ratified the new CBA. #CFL #CFLPA

I honestly don't get why they would vote no on the last one but yes on this one.

Must be the pressure of games being missed?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 27, 2022, 01:00:50 AM
GAME ON!

-Wayne Campbell


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 27, 2022, 01:02:15 AM
I honestly don't get why they would vote no on the last one but yes on this one.

Must be the pressure of games being missed?
who cares. we get a full CFL season 2X defending champions. Lets do this!!!! ;D ;D


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: ModAdmin on May 27, 2022, 01:03:35 AM
Players Ratify Revised CBA...

https://3downnation.com/2022/05/26/cfl-players-vote-to-ratify-new-collective-bargaining-agreement/


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 27, 2022, 01:09:33 AM
Well, good news that now we'll play.

Bad news that in the end it all turned silly.  What did the players gain?  Short-termism of more bribe money right now, plus put off the worst of the ratio nonsense until "down the road" where hopefully other players (not them) will have to deal with it.

Does the full CBA text ever get published, or a very good and detailed summary??  I want to see precisely what they agreed to here.  There could be slight reporting inaccuracies.

In any event, I am happy it's done.  If one side (or both sides!) made a mistake, that's on them now.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 01:10:49 AM
I honestly don't get why they would vote no on the last one but yes on this one.

Must be the pressure of games being missed?

Pick some of these:

Players bonus (but it's not really a bonus because it comes out of future cap dollars) went up to $1.25M. Money in your pocket is good. We'll have to see but it sounds like they made the nationalized American a bit harder to attain (I'm sure that's the first thing the league will roll back next CBA). The players, despite the tough talk, didn't really have any leverage and most needed/wanted to play. All of the Americans probably voted this time too, it was leaked that 30% of players didn't vote last time and many of those, one could guess, were Americans. Voting no would have just got them a worse deal later. Despite some of them saying they'd "never" agree to a deal that touched the ratio there was nowhere near the level of commitment from the majority of members on that front.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 01:11:57 AM
Well, good news that now we'll play.

Bad news that in the end it all turned silly.  What did the players gain?  Short-termism of more bribe money right now, plus put off the worst of the ratio nonsense until "down the road" where hopefully other players (not them) will have to deal with it.

Does the full CBA text ever get published, or a very good and detailed summary??  I want to see precisely what they agreed to here.  There could be slight reporting inaccuracies.

In any event, I am happy it's done.  If one side (or both sides!) made a mistake, that's on them now.


Sometimes: https://media.cfldb.ca/documents/cfl-cflpa-collective-agreement-2010.pdf

But all of the roster rules will for sure.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 01:47:41 AM
3Down is reporting a slight variation to what Lalji reported earlier.

Ratio stayed the same this year.

In 2023, national starters go to 8, but one can be a nationalized American who can play an unlimited number of snaps. Two additional nationalized Americans can play 49% of snaps but cannot play the same side of the ball (so one offense, one defense, no special teams)
In 2024, the league can add another nationalized American.

So
This year is 7 Canadian starters.
Next year is 8 but 5 Canadians and one nationalized American plus two other nationalized Americans who play opposite sides of the ball and not special teams
The year after is 8 but 4 Canadians and one nationalized American plus two other nationalized Americans who play opposite side of the ball and not special teams PLUS an additional nationalized American that I assume can play 49% of snaps on either side of the ball but that is not exactly clear.

...Got all that? Good.

Bonus tidbit: Commencing in 2023, the CFL will have the option to move the season up by as much as 30 days


https://3downnation.com/2022/05/26/details-of-the-cfls-new-cba-salary-cap-increases-ratio-changes-and-guaranteed-contracts/


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 27, 2022, 01:57:26 AM
3Down is reporting a slight variation to what Lalji reported earlier.

Ratio stayed the same this year.

In 2023, national starters go to 8, but one can be a nationalized American who can play an unlimited number of snaps. Two additional nationalized Americans can play 49% of snaps but cannot play the same side of the ball (so one offense, one defense, no special teams)
In 2024, the league can add another nationalized American.

So
This year is 7 Canadian starters.
Next year is 8 but 5 Canadians and one nationalized American plus two other nationalized Americans who play opposite sides of the ball and not special teams
The year after is 8 but 4 Canadians and one nationalized American plus two other nationalized Americans who play opposite side of the ball and not special teams PLUS an additional nationalized American that I assume can play 49% of snaps on either side of the ball but that is not exactly clear.

...Got all that? Good.


https://3downnation.com/2022/05/26/details-of-the-cfls-new-cba-salary-cap-increases-ratio-changes-and-guaranteed-contracts/

Have we seen it confirmed that it's 49% of game snaps? And not 49% of the snaps they are sharing with a Canadian player who plays 51% of snaps?

Other bonus tidbit: no more Global salary - everyone makes the same minimum.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 02:01:27 AM
Well, good news that now we'll play.

Bad news that in the end it all turned silly.  What did the players gain?  Short-termism of more bribe money right now, plus put off the worst of the ratio nonsense until "down the road" where hopefully other players (not them) will have to deal with it.

Does the full CBA text ever get published, or a very good and detailed summary?? 
I want to see precisely what they agreed to here.  There could be slight reporting inaccuracies.

In any event, I am happy it's done.  If one side (or both sides!) made a mistake, that's on them now.


This is what you are looking for: https://twitter.com/AaronWilson_NFL/status/1529982310489235457/photo/1


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 02:08:15 AM
Have we seen it confirmed that it's 49% of game snaps? And not 49% of the snaps they are sharing with a Canadian player who plays 51% of snaps?

Other bonus tidbit: no more Global salary - everyone makes the same minimum.

Could be, maybe. But then a lot of journalists are interpreting it wrong. I'll keep trying to poke around. That would be a lot different, obviously.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 27, 2022, 02:11:07 AM
There are 23 starting spots on offense and defense (not counting QB which is factored separately). There are 20 Americans on each roster. Right now, only 16 can start. Next year 18 can start. In 2024, 19 can start. They will be backed up on game day by Canadians by necessity, but they will be replaced long term by Americans off of the PR. Practically speaking for us this means that in 2023 Jake Thomas will absolutely a back-up and so will Wolitarsky. In 2024, either the a offensive lineman or the running back spot could also flip. It also means when Canadians get injured it won't be near as bad. Think of all the terrible years we had prior to our recent stretch. The rebuild and competitive balance will be better with 4. Teams can also better build depth behind four Canadian starting positions if they want. Right now they have to take Canadians wherever they can find them and one injury to a Canadian usually cascades into several other changes. Now you can run three offensive lineman, one receiver and fill the rest with better depth and special teams players. Americans can do the rest.

Only if the previously non starting imports meet the criteria and that's where I see a problem. As I suggested if that rule went in place this season only Grant would qualify. Well I suppose you could say Ellingson would qualify if he was a DI and not a full time starter. He signed a 2 deal IIRC so I suppose in 2023 he could see a reduced role?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 27, 2022, 02:15:11 AM
Only if the previously non starting imports meet the criteria and that's where I see a problem. As I suggested if that rule went in place this season only Grant would qualify.

But it also doesn't come into effect this year.

Next year, you may see more of a run on qualifying Americans in FA.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 27, 2022, 02:21:02 AM
But it also doesn't come into effect this year.

Next year, you may see more of a run on qualifying Americans in FA.


It still falls within the group of 4 DI's. In theory what you suggest is correct. However many teams have had an import Kicker as one of the DI's. We will probably do that this year and beyond?

Now you're down to 3 positions to fill correctly building your roster and within the criteria of a veteran CFL player.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 02:23:19 AM
Have we seen it confirmed that it's 49% of game snaps? And not 49% of the snaps they are sharing with a Canadian player who plays 51% of snaps?

Other bonus tidbit: no more Global salary - everyone makes the same minimum.

You might be right, actually. If so, that's too bad:

Quote
According to sources, CFL teams will have seven Canadian starters and 21 in total on rosters this year. In 2023, that number increases to eight with one being a nationalized Canadian ? an American who has spent either five years in the CFL or at least three with the same team.

Clubs will also be able to rotate two nationalized Canadians for up to 49 per cent of snaps. Teams can move to three nationalized Canadians in 2024 but the two franchises that play the most Canadians at the end of the season will receive additional second-round draft picks.

And the seven pure Canadian starters per game will remain intact throughout the term of deal, which can be reopened after five years when the CFL's broadcast agreement with TSN expires.

https://www.tsn.ca/cfl-cflpa-collective-bargaining-agreement-cba-1.1805062

If that's actually the scenario, then by 2024 teams would have reduced the Canadians by 1.5. Meaning you'd have to start 5.5 a game. I don't really like that. Farhan did answer a question with this, though:

@FarhanLaljiTSN
Yes. So 5 and 2 in 2023, likely followed by 4 and 3 in 2024

Not sure which is correct. Sounds like the former based on the most recent TSN article.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 27, 2022, 03:04:04 AM
No global maximum, but is there any Global SMS relief? 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 27, 2022, 04:05:47 AM
This is what you are looking for: https://twitter.com/AaronWilson_NFL/status/1529982310489235457/photo/1

That is awesome, thanks.  Poring through it now.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 27, 2022, 04:11:22 AM
The change to forcing the 2 x 49%FAKENATs onto separate sides of the ball is counter-productive.  I get why they are doing it, to make things fair, and head off a run on O FAKENATs.

But the league wanted more O as job #1!!  I would have let teams play both FAKENATs on O.  Allowing power-play series with an all-IMP (minus OL) O would have increased scoring.

I guess by 2024 you could create an all-IMP power-play O by using your 1x 100%FAKENAT + 2x 49%FAKENATs in critical series.  This still might lead to an increased demand for vet IMP O.  Maybe we should have held onto Adams, especially with Saunders a bust...

Haha, maybe they got the "both sides" concession for 2023 because so many of the CFLPA reps are D (a la Biggie and Solly).  ;D ;D ;D


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 27, 2022, 04:29:53 AM
The CBA summary on twatter that SB&G provided is pretty good.  The deal sounds pretty good.  There are some nice points in there the players and us forum fans will like, like rehab going to 4-5 years.

The FAKENAT changes are pretty much as described in the last 1 page of this thread.  I don't really like it, but it's locked in (can't get worse) through 2027.  2024 will be interesting to see what the CFL decides, though I'm guessing most assume they'll opt for the 3rd 49%FAKENAT.  I don't really like any of it, but it's not horrific.

It actually works in WPG's favor for a guy like Fatboi because we only want to play him 51% of the time anyhow!  It will make GMs' jobs that much harder as they not only have to plan out the FAKENATs but also the NATs that are optimal when not playing every snap.

And hey, what the heck is a "green zone helmet"?   ???


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: GOLDMEMBER on May 27, 2022, 11:23:06 AM
3Down is reporting a slight variation to what Lalji reported earlier.

Ratio stayed the same this year.

In 2023, national starters go to 8, but one can be a nationalized American who can play an unlimited number of snaps. Two additional nationalized Americans can play 49% of snaps but cannot play the same side of the ball (so one offense, one defense, no special teams)
In 2024, the league can add another nationalized American.

So
This year is 7 Canadian starters.
Next year is 8 but 5 Canadians and one nationalized American plus two other nationalized Americans who play opposite sides of the ball and not special teams
The year after is 8 but 4 Canadians and one nationalized American plus two other nationalized Americans who play opposite side of the ball and not special teams PLUS an additional nationalized American that I assume can play 49% of snaps on either side of the ball but that is not exactly clear.

...Got all that? Good.

Bonus tidbit: Commencing in 2023, the CFL will have the option to move the season up by as much as 30 days


https://3downnation.com/2022/05/26/details-of-the-cfls-new-cba-salary-cap-increases-ratio-changes-and-guaranteed-contracts/
thanks Golden Hat but I can tell you really get off on this stuff. I sure as heck don?t!


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 11:27:17 AM
thanks Golden Hat but I can tell you really get off on this stuff. I sure as heck don?t!

Ha! I'm not even sure if that's true anymore. It might also be:

8 starters next year, 7 Canadians but one nationalized American who can play as much as they want and two nationalized Americans who play opposite sides of the ball can platoon with any of the 7 starters for half of their snaps. But that is kinda weird too.

If this is the case then in defensive line Canadians are the best kind, because they platoon anyway.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 27, 2022, 11:58:21 AM
I think my take on the 49% i that you still need 7 NAT's with the chops to start 51% of the snaps, but when you need that little more from your wide side WR or your DT, you can sub in. 

So, those 7 NAT starters still need jobs, still get "starters" pay, but now can have half the game (49%) off while a better, lower paid American carries the water.

I get how it improves the play on the field, while maintaining the NAT paychecks.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Tee42 on May 27, 2022, 12:12:15 PM
I think my take on the 49% i that you still need 7 NAT's with the chops to start 51% of the snaps, but when you need that little more from your wide side WR or your DT, you can sub in. 

So, those 7 NAT starters still need jobs, still get "starters" pay, but now can have half the game (49%) off while a better, lower paid American carries the water. Will

I get how it improves the play on the field, while maintaining the NAT paychecks.



I would like to see how this is monitored. Who is going to keep track? What will the penalty be? A fine? Will it be called out during a game and be a yardage penalty?

Everyone is going to be paid the same entry salary next year. 70K...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 12:26:39 PM
I think my take on the 49% i that you still need 7 NAT's with the chops to start 51% of the snaps, but when you need that little more from your wide side WR or your DT, you can sub in. 

So, those 7 NAT starters still need jobs, still get "starters" pay, but now can have half the game (49%) off while a better, lower paid American carries the water.

I get how it improves the play on the field, while maintaining the NAT paychecks.



Probably right. Although it would be good if that was confirmed. If that is the case then Canadian defensive lineman become the more valuable but somewhat paradoxically will also probably play less. In 2023, the Bombers will probably split Jake Thomas' spot with an American. On offense it's a little more tricky but could be Wolitarsky's spot or even running back (along the OL too, if there's injuries). In 2024, you probably make a second defensive line spot "Canadian" and rotate through another American there 49/51.

If 2024 was today then, you'd have 2 Canadian DL starters rotating 51/49 and then you have your three OL which means only two spaces left to fill for skilled positions.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 27, 2022, 01:49:02 PM
Info that we need:

1. What does the 51/49 split refer to? Game or total with the player roatating with?

2. Can you rotate with one designated player, or multiple? as long as you only come on for no more than 49% of the total snaps?

3. Game by game, 3 game chunks, whole season? When are they reviewing the snap counts?

4. Shenanigans - we have many vets who count as "nationalized" - but they're already starters. Will teams be able to sub in "random american" for Jefferson, and then have Jefferson come in for Thomas' snaps? Or will they define the rule so that can't happen?


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 02:03:44 PM
Info that we need:

1. What does the 51/49 split refer to? Game or total with the player roatating with?

2. Can you rotate with one designated player, or multiple? as long as you only come on for no more than 49% of the total snaps?

3. Game by game, 3 game chunks, whole season? When are they reviewing the snap counts?

4. Shenanigans - we have many vets who count as "nationalized" - but they're already starters. Will teams be able to sub in "random american" for Jefferson, and then have Jefferson come in for Thomas' snaps? Or will they define the rule so that can't happen?

All good questions. Here's a couple more:

1. Is it on a player basis or position basis? Jake Thomas starts and plays the first quarter. He gets hurt and doesn't return. Does that mean the platooning American can only play 49% of the snaps he took? Or Can Thomas be replaced by another Canadian and the tally continues from there? Or can the platooning American play 49% of all defensive snaps with no regard to how much or little Jack Thomas plays (using him as an example)

2. Can DIs, who replace an American, replace a naturalized American? Or only if the DI is also naturalized? Or if the naturalized American is in injured? Never?

3. If it's 49% of snaps of the Canadian player, does it count if the naturalized American plays on special teams in a spot where the Canadian wouldn't be playing? Jefferson subs in for Jake Thomas on defense. Jefferson also plays on the line of scrimmage attempting to block a field goal. Thomas doesn't usually play there. What happens to that count on that snap? Is that allowed, even? Are special teams completely seperate?

I'm sure I'll think of more :D



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 27, 2022, 02:06:05 PM
Info that we need:

1. What does the 51/49 split refer to? Game or total with the player roatating with?

2. Can you rotate with one designated player, or multiple? as long as you only come on for no more than 49% of the total snaps?

3. Game by game, 3 game chunks, whole season? When are they reviewing the snap counts?

4. Shenanigans - we have many vets who count as "nationalized" - but they're already starters. Will teams be able to sub in "random american" for Jefferson, and then have Jefferson come in for Thomas' snaps? Or will they define the rule so that can't happen?

Sounds like player must be designated O or D, and then it is 49% of the O or D snaps, depending on their designation.  

Query.  ST trick play snap, is that still a ST snap, or are all snaps with possession of the ball (including ST) considered O, and all snaps without possession considered D?  I would think the later would make the most sense.

Yes, monitoring who is out for what snap might be cumbersome, but they've been doing it to the second in the NHL for years.  Penalties will be interesting, I would suggest the penalty for exceeding the 49% with a player would be a 2 game suspension of that player's right to be the Naturalized NAT.  So the team loses its NN player on that side of the ball for 2 games.  Easily adjudicated after the game and before the next.  

Means a new statistical tracker on each team, guessing the video guy gets this piled on to his role.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 02:13:16 PM
Sounds like player must be designated O or D, and then it is 49% of the O or D snaps, depending on their designation.  

Query.  ST trick play snap, is that still a ST snap, or are all snaps with possession of the ball (including ST) considered O, and all snaps without possession considered D?  I would think the later would make the most sense.

Yes, monitoring who is out for what snap might be cumbersome, but they've been doing it to the second in the NHL for years.  Penalties will be interesting, I would suggest the penalty for exceeding the 49% with a player would be a 2 game suspension of that player's right to be the Naturalized NAT.  So the team loses its NN player on that side of the ball for 2 games.  Easily adjudicated after the game and before the next.  

Means a new statistical tracker on each team, guessing the video guy gets this piled on to his role.

If the league retains the right to enforce and discipline rule violations then I'm sure it won't be anything so drastic. Maybe formal warning, then team fine, then possibly loss of draft picks. I don't think they can or will mess with players play time. You can't really discipline the player if they go over the snap percentage if the coach tells them to play there, which they will, because they control who plays, when.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 27, 2022, 02:13:33 PM
Sounds like player must be designated O or D, and then it is 49% of the O or D snaps, depending on their designation.  

Query.  ST trick play snap, is that still a ST snap, or are all snaps with possession of the ball (including ST) considered O, and all snaps without possession considered D?  I would think the later would make the most sense.

Yes, monitoring who is out for what snap might be cumbersome, but they've been doing it to the second in the NHL for years.  Penalties will be interesting, I would suggest the penalty for exceeding the 49% with a player would be a 2 game suspension of that player's right to be the Naturalized NAT.  So the team loses its NN player on that side of the ball for 2 games.  Easily adjudicated after the game and before the next.  

Means a new statistical tracker on each team, guessing the video guy gets this piled on to his role.

I think that's how it will work with the snaps, but no one has said one way or the other. Media doesn't want to speculate and are hearing conflicting things, so I really don't think they've hammered it out yet.

ST plays will not count, imo. Related to the first point.

I see player snap counts at the end of every NFL game - but it suggests there wont be in-game penalties - which could lend itself to abuse. They will need to figure out a way to keep teams honest in the play-offs, especially.



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 27, 2022, 02:14:31 PM
If the league retains the right to enforce and discipline rule violations then I'm sure it won't be anything so drastic. Maybe formal warning, then team fine, then possibly loss of draft picks. I don't think they can or will mess with players play time. You can't really discipline the player if they go over the snap percentage of the coach tells them to play there.

N, of course not. Definitely a team penalty of some kind.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 27, 2022, 02:50:18 PM
I know this doesn't take affect until 2023. Does a player under contract in 2020 count as a year with the team?

Current players that would be eligible in 2023 excluding QB's: Bryant, Hardrick, Ellingson, Bailey, Taylor, Jeffcoat, Jefferson, Rose, Alexander, Maston, Wilson, Bighill and Grant

Questions:

1. Will all of these players be returning in 2023

2. Do we expect any of these players to be taking a reduced role and agree to cap friendly contracts?

Possiblities of older players taking a reduced role:

1. Bryant could take a step back next year and become a back up OL. He's 36 at the moment.

2. Nick Taylor is the 2nd oldest import on the roster at 34 years old.

3. Ellingson is a seasoned veteran and one of the 3rd oldest import on the roster at 33 years old

4. Bighill same age as Ellingson and tied as the 3rd oldest import on the roster.

Now I'm not suggesting any of these players won't be with the team in 2023 or that they won't still be starters. This is just a list considering age, SMS, continuing role etc etc.

Each of these players could potentially be candidates based purely on our current roster.

It will be interesting to see how this works out and whether teams target older veterans willing to take a reduce role in 2023 free agency.

Note that technically anyone on the complete list is eligible but IMO less likely not to be full time starters in 2023 IMO. We could lose a couple in free agency potentially.
 


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 27, 2022, 03:00:07 PM
The loss of the use of the offending Naturalize NAT is a team penalty.  The player gets aid one way or the other.  Draft picks or fines do notseem appropriate, and warnings not enough.  

It should be a penalty that is related to and of appropriate scope.  

A formal warning for first offense, loss of the use of a natnat for one game on the second offense, 2 games for third offense, rest of the season including playoffs for a forth offense.

This is a rule that is easy for a team to track, and there is no reason to exceed the snaps.  Its 2 players you have to track.  There is no reason to exceed the snaps except

A: disregard for rules (the Jones excuse) or
B: an honest mistake

If its A, you lose your rights to the opportunity pretty quick.
If its B, you don't make the mistake again.


Next question (after penalty for, and definition of O and D snaps)

How are NatNat's designated? 

Are they designated in the game roster, and able to be changed as desired through the year?
Are they designated for the year, and then if they are on the IR, can they only then be replaced temporarily, with the replacement designated permanently should the original not return to play?
Will players have contract clauses for bonuses for games played as natnat?
If a player is injured in game, can a new natnat be designated for that game?  Does an alternate natnat have to be declared prior to game, or even multiple alternate natnats (with snaps cumulative for designated players)



Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 27, 2022, 03:13:14 PM
Aards

- the player doesn't decide when to go in - can't penalize them. Period.
- the rules you're suggesting, fair or not, aren't really in line with how the league has done things. We never see them take that hard of a line so it's unreasonable to expect them to start - especially when they're the ones pushing for fakenats.
- The rules of the game are set - you can't change them for one team as a penalty.

Blue in BC

- Our team is a veteran one, we should expect to see a lot of turn over in the coming years.
- If they are with our team for 3 years, they ualify, doesn't matter when they join or no one would have any naturalized players until 3 years from now.
- I think we'll see FA priority change as we move forward. A lot of times, borderline vets would be cut in favour of a cheaper prospects, but now they have additional value.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 27, 2022, 03:14:16 PM
My immediate take on deployment of natnats is DL and WR.  Those make the most sense.  To borrow the previously mentioned "power play", those positions can be manned by a Nat starter for most of the game, and the additional oomph of a natnat inserted on certain plays of importance.

The other option is an OL on the jumbo team.  Last year we brought in Eli on Jumbo, can you imagine bringing in another OT the status of Hardrick on Jumbo?  Would mean carrying another NatNat OL on the active roster, which isn't a bad thing.  You could have a veteran natnat OT on the sidelines, ready to sub in for injury to a younger INT rather than pushing Neufeld out to OT, come in on Jumbo, and even sub in at OG on occasion.  Changes the Oline dynamic.  

I can't see us using one at RB, unless you want to bring in a Grant as a tailback...

There will no be a shortage of players you can designate natnat on the Bombers (because we retain players so well), but it might be a little harder for some GM's.  

All in all, it will incrementally improve the game, but not hugely.  Or possibly even noticeably.    

Wondering if the chyron's will now show %natnat Osnaps/Dsnaps like they track timeouts...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 27, 2022, 03:25:54 PM
Aards

- the player doesn't decide when to go in - can't penalize them. Period.
- the rules you're suggesting, fair or not, aren't really in line with how the league has done things. We never see them take that hard of a line so it's unreasonable to expect them to start - especially when they're the ones pushing for fakenats.
- The rules of the game are set - you can't change them for one team as a penalty.

Blue in BC

- Our team is a veteran one, we should expect to see a lot of turn over in the coming years.
- If they are with our team for 3 years, they ualify, doesn't matter when they join or no one would have any naturalized players until 3 years from now.
- I think we'll see FA priority change as we move forward. A lot of times, borderline vets would be cut in favour of a cheaper prospects, but now they have additional value.

Losing the ability to use a natnat is not penalizing a player, but rather penalizing a team.  It is an advantage.  It would be like losing a NAT starter and having to play a less talented NAT the next game. 

The use of 49% natnat snaps is a privilege.  Abuse it, you lose it.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 27, 2022, 03:33:10 PM
Losing the ability to use a natnat is not penalizing a player, but rather penalizing a team.  It is an advantage.  It would be like losing a NAT starter and having to play a less talented NAT the next game. 

The use of 49% natnat snaps is a privilege.  Abuse it, you lose it.

Benching a player for something they don't have control over is 100% penalizing the player. Yes, it also hurts the team.

Again, the CFL has never taken this kind of hard line - so suddenly expecting them to start is...silly.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 03:45:20 PM
Losing the ability to use a natnat is not penalizing a player, but rather penalizing a team.  It is an advantage.  It would be like losing a NAT starter and having to play a less talented NAT the next game. 

The use of 49% natnat snaps is a privilege.  Abuse it, you lose it.

This is one of those times where you think it's a good idea, but it's really not and doubling down won't help. Salaries are tied to performance and sometimes snaps played, other incentives hinge on being out there. If a team accidently went over the % the players will never be the ones accountable for that. And they shouldn't. Are players responsible now if teams misuse the DI or don't actually start 7 Canadians? Of course not. Won't happen with this new part of the roster rules either.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Blue In BC on May 27, 2022, 04:06:05 PM
Aards

- the player doesn't decide when to go in - can't penalize them. Period.
- the rules you're suggesting, fair or not, aren't really in line with how the league has done things. We never see them take that hard of a line so it's unreasonable to expect them to start - especially when they're the ones pushing for fakenats.
- The rules of the game are set - you can't change them for one team as a penalty.

Blue in BC

- Our team is a veteran one, we should expect to see a lot of turn over in the coming years.
- If they are with our team for 3 years, they ualify, doesn't matter when they join or no one would have any naturalized players until 3 years from now.
- I think we'll see FA priority change as we move forward. A lot of times, borderline vets would be cut in favour of a cheaper prospects, but now they have additional value.

I was just using the 2022 possible roster looking at how the new policy could be used. It will be complicated and I was using examples broadly how it could develop. The names will be fluid and were not specifically important. A kind of look at a transition plan for a current starter into a reduced role.

Obviously A. Harris is Canadian but the same questions were asked. Is he willing to take a reduced role with a lower pay check. Some vets will make that change and others will need to dragged off the field screaming.

D. Adams might have had the same questions put to him for example. He might still have a season or two starting in Ottawa or perhaps he should have taken on a back up role that would fit this new idea in 2023.

Ellingson would be the current equivalent in 2023 of a player that could become that naturalized American that sees less reps. In passing downs where a Canadian RB comes off, or an injury to a Canadian receiver and so on.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 27, 2022, 05:07:22 PM
This is one of those times where you think it's a good idea, but it's really not and doubling down won't help. Salaries are tied to performance and sometimes snaps played, other incentives hinge on being out there. If a team accidently went over the % the players will never be the ones accountable for that. And they shouldn't. Are players responsible now if teams misuse the DI or don't actually start 7 Canadians? Of course not. Won't happen with this new part of the roster rules either.

A team "accidentally" going over the snaps will not be penalized.  If they repeat the accident, they get penalized.  If a player gets incentives based on natnat snaps, then he should make sure there is a rider that takes into account games where natnat snaps were lost due to coaching error.  Again, its not the player that is penalized, it is the right to designate a player as a natnat that is, it is a team penalty. 

If you have 6 players capable of being classed as a natnat, are the 4 that are not given the designation being penalized? 

I don't get how you think a specific player is penalized by a team forfeiting its privilege to utilize a natnat.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 05:43:22 PM
A team "accidentally" going over the snaps will not be penalized.  If they repeat the accident, they get penalized.  If a player gets incentives based on natnat snaps, then he should make sure there is a rider that takes into account games where natnat snaps were lost due to coaching error.  Again, its not the player that is penalized, it is the right to designate a player as a natnat that is, it is a team penalty. 

If you have 6 players capable of being classed as a natnat, are the 4 that are not given the designation being penalized? 

I don't get how you think a specific player is penalized by a team forfeiting its privilege to utilize a natnat.

First of all, stop saying natnat. Secondly, I know you dont get it but it isn't going to change the fact that the penalty won't be "you cannot play a roster position that is agreed upon under the CBA"

It is not realistic nor a good idea. It will probably be policed like the SMS which is fines/draft picks.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 27, 2022, 06:42:01 PM
First of all, stop saying natnat. Secondly, I know you dont get it but it isn't going to change the fact that the penalty won't be "you cannot play a roster position that is agreed upon under the CBA"

It is not realistic nor a good idea. It will probably be policed like the SMS which is fines/draft picks.

OK, give me a better term than natnat to use...

If the penalty is assessed as fines / DP's, then there will be no adherence to the rule.  No other in game infraction is adjudicated that way. especially one that will be monitored closely.  If there are no repercussions to the team play, then there will be rampant violations.  WBB will closely monitor their use and make sure not to "cheat", but do you think Jones will? 

Presently, if a DI plays for a NAT, the team gets a 25 yard penalty (if the refs notice).  In 2016, the Chris Jones led Riders were fined $15k for a violation of that rule when it was noticed weeks later https://3downnation.com/2016/08/05/cfl-right-punish-riders-skirting-ratio-rules/

Because this is a cumulative snaps rule, and until the game ends, you cannot ***** whether the team is in violation or not, a penalty would not be able to be assessed during the game.  But, the team breaking the rule has gained an advantage.  That advantage needs to be countered, not with a fine, because then you could effectively buy advantage, and not by DP's, because that would exacerbate the issue that the team has in not having sufficient NAT depth (like the Chris Jones led 2016 Riders).

Temporarily losing the advantage to abused seems, to me, to be the perfect penalty.  "You used too many natnat snaps last week, so this week, you get none".  And again, not for the first offense.  Scaling, 1st offense, warning, 2nd, 1 game suspension of the O/D (whichever was abused) natnat provision.  3rd offense, 2 games.  4th offense, you lose it altogether for the season, because you just don't want to use the exception as it was intended.

Appropriate and proportional penalty.

Until we know how the players will be designated as natnat, the argument that a player is being penalized for a coaches mistake is moot.  And, maybe, the natnat player should be monitoring how many snaps he has taken and how many his NAT counterpart have.  Not really a tough job...


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 27, 2022, 06:52:35 PM
Sigh.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 27, 2022, 08:51:27 PM
1. No in game penalty for going over 49%. That's completely unworkable. Example: 1st play, Yankee NI starts and is now over @ 50% of the snaps.
2. Each team will have to keep count of the snaps and how many went to Yankee NI's. Go over and risk an undefined penalty.
3. Giving the team that has the most NI snaps will reward the teams with the best NI's by giving them an extra 2nd round pick. Sounds backwards to me.
4. Turns out the negotiation problem was with the signing bonus, not the number of NI starters.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 27, 2022, 11:10:31 PM
1. No in game penalty for going over 49%. That's completely unworkable. Example: 1st play, Yankee NI starts and is now over @ 50% of the snaps.
2. Each team will have to keep count of the snaps and how many went to Yankee NI's. Go over and risk an undefined penalty.
3. Giving the team that has the most NI snaps will reward the teams with the best NI's by giving them an extra 2nd round pick. Sounds backwards to me.
4. Turns out the negotiation problem was with the signing bonus, not the number of NI starters.

Definitely how it seems


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 28, 2022, 05:05:31 AM
OK, give me a better term than natnat to use...

The problem with natnat is it could mean national-national, which is the opposite of what you intend: naturalized-national.

We had this thread back in '20 when the concept was first introduced... I like FAKENAT, because that's what they are.  Other ideas:
NATish
NATLITE
AMNAT (has a nice ring to it) (AM=American)

Gotta use NAT-something instead of NI-something for these FAKENATs because they can't be a NI-IMP.    :D

Maybe we should just call them:  49-PERCENTERs... or just 49ers.  Or Halfers?

I'm sure between us and the rabid fans on Riderfans we can come up with something.  Has to be short, has to roll off the tongue, has to be catchy.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 28, 2022, 05:09:17 AM
3. Giving the team that has the most NI snaps will reward the teams with the best NI's by giving them an extra 2nd round pick. Sounds backwards to me.

Maybe.  But that's us, so I won't complain.

It does incentivize teams to play their NATs in NAT spots rather than ride the knife's edge of 49% with the FAKENATs.  Teams with good NATs can use the FAKENATs more as spellers or for special sets, rather than cheat-starters.

If you player your FAKENATs as spellers, you don't even need to track the %, and you'll probably win the extra DP.

P.S. Reading the actual CBA summary on twatter you'll find they are actually going to give the NATtiest TWO (2) teams an extra DP!  Not just 1 team.  2.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Sir Blue and Gold on May 28, 2022, 02:28:31 PM
The extra NI draft pick if you play more NIs is kinda stupid but it is replacing the also stupid territorial exemption picks.

An extra draft pick and the end of the second round has never been of much value. It's safe to say I don't think teams are going to be rushing to start more Canadians just so they get the pick. Maybe the teams not making the playoffs in the last week or two maybe. But that's about the extent of it.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: Jesse on May 28, 2022, 04:29:35 PM
The extra NI draft pick if you play more NIs is kinda stupid but it is replacing the also stupid territorial exemption picks.

An extra draft pick and the end of the second round has never been of much value. It's safe to say I don't think teams are going to be rushing to start more Canadians just so they get the pick. Maybe the teams not making the playoffs in the last week or two maybe. But that's about the extent of it.

I agree. Teams that try to use as little nats as possible aren?t going to find value in draft picks. It?s  kind of meaningless.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TBURGESS on May 28, 2022, 05:33:28 PM
My guess is the bottom 2 teams won't play any Yankee NI's in the last couple of games to get the draft picks. At least that's what I would do.


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: theaardvark on May 28, 2022, 07:08:09 PM
Some teams have been playing 8 nats on a regular basis... trying to get nat snap count up by not playing 49%'s in teh last few games is not going to do much, I don't think....


Title: Re: CBA negotiations
Post by: TecnoGenius on May 28, 2022, 08:13:11 PM
My guess is the bottom 2 teams won't play any Yankee NI's in the last couple of games to get the draft picks. At least that's what I would do.

Don't forget they can use the DPs as trade-bait too.  So even if they don't want more 2nd rounders, they can possibly use it to get some wanted (even IMP) players.