CBA negotiations

[TecnoGenius]

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.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

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.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

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.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

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/

[Jesse]

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.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

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

[Sir Blue and Gold]

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.

[Blue In BC]

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?

[Jesse]

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.

[Blue In BC]

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.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

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:

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.

[theaardvark]

No global maximum, but is there any Global SMS relief? 

[TecnoGenius]

This is what you are looking for: https://twitter.com/AaronWilson_NFL/status/1529982310489235457/photo/1

That is awesome, thanks.  Poring through it now.

[TecnoGenius]

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). 

[TecnoGenius]

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"?