BC Lions / Nathan Rourke discussion

[RebusRankin]

So that injury is supposed to lay you up for 3-6 months and Rourke is going to play in 2? BC is lying or rushing him.

[GOLDMEMBER]

So that injury is supposed to lay you up for 3-6 months and Rourke is going to play in 2? BC is lying or rushing him.

I cannot disagree with medical history.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Ya, the Rourke/BC "is the next Flutie or '78-'82 Eskimos" people all seem to forget the easy trouncing we put on Rourke/BC mid-season.  We shut that kid down big time.

It's not just Rourke vs our D, it's Maksymic vs Hall.  It's a battle of the brains as much as brawn.  My money is on Hall's brain.  Dude is my hero.  No matter how good Rourke is, he's still basically a 1st year starter and is susceptible to all the 1st year starter mistakes and confusion that Hall can induce.  All we'll need is our D to execute at a consistent level and keep their heads.  And for Zach to keep up with any scoring that even a great D can't stop.

In the Bombers most impressive wins this year including the early win over BC, it's been Zach and the offence that  lead the charge.  I listened to a CFL podcast this week with 4 panelists from around the CFL, and they all agreed that the Bomber offence is now the driving force in most of their victories, were as in 2019 and 2021 it was the defence doing most of the heavy lifting.  Have to give Buck credit, he's stepped out from behind LaPo's apron and made the offence much more explosive this season.

[TecnoGenius]

In the Bombers most impressive wins this year including the early win over BC, it's been Zach and the offence that  lead the charge.  I listened to a CFL podcast this week with 4 panelists from around the CFL, and they all agreed that the Bomber offence is now the driving force in most of their victories, were as in 2019 and 2021 it was the defence doing most of the heavy lifting.  Have to give Buck credit, he's stepped out from behind LaPo's apron and made the offence much more explosive this season.

Agree on all points.  Good points.  The fun part will be what if in playoffs/GC the defense plays (near) up to their '19-'21 level... If they can get to 80% 2021 and our O is clicking, other teams are doomed.

My hunch is we do it like we've done since '19, one phase will step up when one other is sputtering a bit.  But odds say the O shines.

[Blue In BC]

Lions want to extend Rourke before the end of the season. While that's a great idea I think it's against the CBA? I was under the impression that players in their 1st contracts cannot be re-negotiated?

Is that correct or just a myth?

Rourke showed a talent we haven't seen from a rookie QB in a long time. The catch is his injury and brief career as the Lions starter. While the injury isn't a long term injury issue, how do you determine his new value? He might play in the last regular season game but that would only be his 10th game.

Does Rourke wait until he sees if he gets any NFL offers from his NFL option window?

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Lions want to extend Rourke before the end of the season. While that's a great idea I think it's against the CBA? I was under the impression that players in their 1st contracts cannot be re-negotiated?

Is that correct or just a myth?

Rourke showed a talent we haven't seen from a rookie QB in a long time. The catch is his injury and brief career as the Lions starter. While the injury isn't a long term injury issue, how do you determine his new value? He might play in the last regular season game but that would only be his 10th game.

Does Rourke wait until he sees if he gets any NFL offers from his NFL option window?

If Rourke is willing to listen to offers, the Lions should pay him whatever they can afford to keep him in the CFL for at least 2-3 more years.  $500k per season isn't out of line IMO, it's not a gamble, he's proven what he can do.

[theaardvark]

Lions want to extend Rourke before the end of the season. While that's a great idea I think it's against the CBA? I was under the impression that players in their 1st contracts cannot be re-negotiated?

Is that correct or just a myth?

Rourke showed a talent we haven't seen from a rookie QB in a long time. The catch is his injury and brief career as the Lions starter. While the injury isn't a long term injury issue, how do you determine his new value? He might play in the last regular season game but that would only be his 10th game.

Does Rourke wait until he sees if he gets any NFL offers from his NFL option window?

Not sure, but isn't it "The Wilder Rule" that the contracts can be renegotiated mutually?

No reason a player can't be cut, and then re-signed to a longer/better deal if both parties agree...

[Blue In BC]

Not sure, but isn't it "The Wilder Rule" that the contracts can be renegotiated mutually?

No reason a player can't be cut, and then re-signed to a longer/better deal if both parties agree...

No, I think the CBA dictates that the ELC's can't be re-negotiated. It had nothing to do with mutual agreement. At least that has been my understanding. It would prevent a 1st or 2nd year player doing that.

Yes there is a reason a player can't be cut and then re-signed to a longer deal. The league has to approve contracts and I don't think they'd accept using that kind of loophole.

All of that just creates roster instability with the SMS. In a word, chaos.

There is a post suggesting $500K is not unreasonable if it could be done. I think we had similar comments about new QB's like Arbuckle and even Fajardo after success in year 1. Rourke's 9 games were more impressive but it still shows a risk in an early determination.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

No, I think the CBA dictates that the ELC's can't be re-negotiated. It had nothing to do with mutual agreement. At least that has been my understanding. It would prevent a 1st or 2nd year player doing that.

Yes there is a reason a player can't be cut and then re-signed to a longer deal. The league has to approve contracts and I don't think they'd accept using that kind of loophole.

All of that just creates roster instability with the SMS. In a word, chaos.

There is a post suggesting $500K is not unreasonable if it could be done. I think we had similar comments about new QB's like Arbuckle and even Fajardo after success in year 1. Rourke's 9 games were more impressive but it still shows a risk in an early determination.

I do believe it's happened before in rare circumstances, BC would be wise to rip up his current contract and renegotiate now if they can. Playing hardball with Rourke will just encourage him to exit stage left at the first opportunity.

[Blue In BC]

I do believe it's happened before in rare circumstances, BC would be wise to rip up his current contract and renegotiate now if they can. Playing hardball with Rourke will just encourage him to exit stage left at the first opportunity.

Do you have an example? Or do you see something in the CBA that allows that to happen? I don't suggest playing hardball with him but I question whether teams can do that. The other question would be how much is the right amount to increase?

I'm not against teams being able to do this but I see the downside as well.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Do you have an example? Or do you see something in the CBA that allows that to happen? I don't suggest playing hardball with him but I question whether teams can do that. The other question would be how much is the right amount to increase?

I'm not against teams being able to do this but I see the downside as well.

It's been so long ago I could be wrong about this, but I believe Wally ripped up Jonathan Jennings contract going into the second year of his rookie contract after taking over the starting job from Travis Lulay.

Here it is:

"Jennings made $52,000 as a rookie last year and was slated to make $55,000 this season and $57,000 in 2017 under the terms of his original deal."

"The Lions? boss did give Jennings, 23, a significant boost in pay. According to TSN?s Farhan Lalji, the pivot originally from Columbus, Ohio has a base salary of $150,000 this coming season, followed by $175,000 in 2017 and $300,000 in 2018. There?s also up to $60,000 in bonuses each season, according to Lalji."

"The 24-year-old more than validated the faith shown in him by former coach Jeff Tedford during the quarterback?s first season with Wally Buono on the sidelines. Jennings threw for 5,226 yards, the third-highest total in franchise history, and started every game as a sophomore."

Quite amazing how quickly Jennings career came undun after a couple of good seasons in BC.

[Blue In BC]

It's been so long ago I could be wrong about this, but I believe Wally ripped up Jonathan Jennings contract going into the second year of his rookie contract after taking over the starting job from Travis Lulay.

Here it is:

"Jennings made $52,000 as a rookie last year and was slated to make $55,000 this season and $57,000 in 2017 under the terms of his original deal."

"The Lions? boss did give Jennings, 23, a significant boost in pay. According to TSN?s Farhan Lalji, the pivot originally from Columbus, Ohio has a base salary of $150,000 this coming season, followed by $175,000 in 2017 and $300,000 in 2018. There?s also up to $60,000 in bonuses each season, according to Lalji."

"The 24-year-old more than validated the faith shown in him by former coach Jeff Tedford during the quarterback?s first season with Wally Buono on the sidelines. Jennings threw for 5,226 yards, the third-highest total in franchise history, and started every game as a sophomore."

Quite amazing how quickly Jennings career came undun after a couple of good seasons in BC.

I always thought that situation was in place more for Canadian players in order to allow for longer development times and overall ratio issues. Because we have to draft Canadians but not imports there is a different risk and cost associated potentially.

More and more Canadians are becoming starters much earlier in their careers, this may need to be changed. Rourke, Ford ( Elks ) and the Phipots come to mind. OTOH the ratio protects them from being replaced by equal imports on ELC's.

CFL ratio is a unique situation. Supply and demand always favours starting quality Canadians.

On one hand the rules should be the same for all players, but we have various mandates for Canadians, Imports and Globals.

In fact we had the same question come up about Hansen and the inability to increase his contact in 2022.

Interesting that Jennings was about to get a new deal during his ELC years. Didn't remember that until you mentioned it.

[TBURGESS]

IIRC BC can't renegotiate Rourke's contract because he's on his first contract after being drafted. Canadian draft picks have special rules & the Lions asked the league for an out on this contract because he's worth way more than he's being paid.  

[Blue In BC]

IIRC BC can't renegotiate Rourke's contract because he's on his first contract after being drafted. Canadian draft picks have special rules & the Lions asked the league for an out on this contract because he's worth way more than he's being paid.  

That's what I thought was in place for Canadians. It's an unusual situation that doesn't come up often.

[theaardvark]

I always thought that situation was in place more for Canadian players in order to allow for longer development times and overall ratio issues. Because we have to draft Canadians but not imports there is a different risk and cost associated potentially.

More and more Canadians are becoming starters much earlier in their careers, this may need to be changed. Rourke, Ford ( Elks ) and the Phipots come to mind. OTOH the ratio protects them from being replaced by equal imports on ELC's.

CFL ratio is a unique situation. Supply and demand always favours starting quality Canadians.

On one hand the rules should be the same for all players, but we have various mandates for Canadians, Imports and Globals.

In fact we had the same question come up about Hansen and the inability to increase his contact in 2022.

Interesting that Jennings was about to get a new deal during his ELC years. Didn't remember that until you mentioned it.

Hansen was a completely different issue.  Global players had a hard cap on their contracts, regardless what the term was, how long they'd player, or even what the team wanted to pay them.  Which was addressed in this CBA, so Hansen got a big raise, starting next year...