Blue Bombers Forum
September 29, 2022, 12:29:30 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35
  Print  
Author Topic: CBA negotiations  (Read 18442 times)
GOLDMEMBER
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 25410


R.I.P. BLUE BONGER


« Reply #480 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!
Logged

I LOSHT MY MEMBER IN AN UNFORTUNATE SHMELTING ACCSHIDENT!
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23079



« Reply #481 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.
Logged
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 30981



« Reply #482 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.

Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
Tee42
Full Member
***
Posts: 223


« Reply #483 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...
Logged
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23079



« Reply #484 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.
Logged
Jesse
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 14704



« Reply #485 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?
Logged

My wife is amazing!
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23079



« Reply #486 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 Cheesy

« Last Edit: May 27, 2022, 02:10:35 PM by Sir Blue and Gold » Logged
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 30981



« Reply #487 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.
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 23079



« Reply #488 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.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2022, 02:15:23 PM by Sir Blue and Gold » Logged
Jesse
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 14704



« Reply #489 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.

Logged

My wife is amazing!
Jesse
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 14704



« Reply #490 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.
Logged

My wife is amazing!
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 28330


« Reply #491 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.
 
« Last Edit: May 27, 2022, 02:52:13 PM by Blue In BC » Logged

2019 Grey Cup Champions
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 30981



« Reply #492 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)

Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
Jesse
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 14704



« Reply #493 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.
Logged

My wife is amazing!
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 30981



« Reply #494 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...
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!