CBA negotiations

[TecnoGenius]

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.

[TecnoGenius]

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.

[Lincoln Locomotive]

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

[TBURGESS]

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.

[Blue In BC]

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.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

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.

[Jesse]

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?

[GOLDMEMBER]

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.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

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.

[Pete]

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.

[Big Daddy]

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.

[TecnoGenius]

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.

[Jesse]

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.

[Blue In BC]

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.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

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.