CBA negotiations

[Blue In BC]

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.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

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.

[Pete]

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)

[Blue In BC]

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.

[Blue In BC]

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.

[Blue In BC]

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.

[Pete]

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

[TecnoGenius]

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.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

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.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

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?

[Blue In BC]

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.

[theaardvark]

Changes to Nationalized players, DI's etc aren't until next year.  In the meantime, all your questions are going to be answered.

[TecnoGenius]

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.

[Blue In BC]

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.

[Blue In BC]

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.