Chris Jones Watch - Front Office SMS

[theaardvark]

How did Khari lose his job, but Chris hasn't? 

Not keeping up with the Jones'


Anyone who thinks the front office SMS has been anything positive for the league is delusional.  It is literally killing the CFL.  It should be abolished immediately.  There is zero benefit to having it in place. 

Teams that NEED to make a change cannot.  Edmonton is getting killed at the gate.  They could easily afford to eat Jone's salary IF they could get rid of Jones.  Likewise any other struggling team that needs a front office adjustment.

The only reason for front office adjustments is poor play.

Poor play kills gate.

Restricting teams from making adjustments to their front office dooms them to financial hardship far beyond having to eat some salary.

This madness has to stop.

This is NOT financial control/security.  This is financial suicide.

[Waffler]

Jim Toth was just saying on CJOB he doesn't think Jones survives this loss. I have to agree.

[theaardvark]

Jim Toth was just saying on CJOB he doesn't think Jones survives this loss. I have to agree.

But they have their HC, GM and DC $ all tied up in him...

Geroy to GM, Maxie to DC, but who to HC?  Macadoo?  Jim Barker?  Paul Lapolice?

[Sir Blue and Gold]

I don't think they'll fire him now if they didn't get rid of him during the bye. I know the game did not go as expected but did anyone really think beforehand they would win? Edmonton obviously must have come in realizing it was going to be a tall task.

I know they blew a 22 point lead and that stings...but clearly the plan was to keep going with Jones out of the bye so I'm not sure why another home loss to the Bombers makes it suddenly urgent.

[theaardvark]

I don't think they'll fire him now if they didn't get rid of him during the bye. I know the game did not go as expected but did anyone really think beforehand they would win? Edmonton obviously must have come in realizing it was going to be a tall task.

I know they blew a 22 point lead and that stings...but clearly the plan was to keep going with Jones out of the bye so I'm not sure why another home loss to the Bombers makes it suddenly urgent.

Nothing to do with losing to the Bombers, that was expected.  I had people suggesting to me that -14 was too small.  I had one guy want to bet me at -28. 

Its HOW they lost.  22 points up.  Penalty after penalty, a 60 yard drive for TD after a fumble where we actually gained 10 yards, the rest being penalties. 

It was a 3 phase breakdown of beyond epic proportions, at home.  Sure there have been larger comebacks, but not when facing 22 losses at home IN A ROW.  How Jones handed this to the Bombers is the key.  Not that he did, but how he did...

He has been under the microscope all year, and this just takes the cake.

[Jesse]

Jim Toth was just saying on CJOB he doesn't think Jones survives this loss. I have to agree.

I don't think they financially can. Especially this year.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Nothing to do with losing to the Bombers, that was expected.  I had people suggesting to me that -14 was too small.  I had one guy want to bet me at -28. 

Its HOW they lost.  22 points up.  Penalty after penalty, a 60 yard drive for TD after a fumble where we actually gained 10 yards, the rest being penalties. 

It was a 3 phase breakdown of beyond epic proportions, at home.  Sure there have been larger comebacks, but not when facing 22 losses at home IN A ROW.  How Jones handed this to the Bombers is the key.  Not that he did, but how he did...

He has been under the microscope all year, and this just takes the cake.

Why is blowing a 22 point lead so much more fireable than getting shut out twice by the same divisional opponent? They've been disappointing all year. Yesterday was more of the same.

It's an emotional loss for sure. But you don't run your front office or make very important, long term decisions on emotion. If they were going to keep him out of the bye, I don't know why you'd change now.

[The Zipp]

I don't think they financially can. Especially this year.

Blow the cap and take the penalty??  I dunno this is a tricky one - the season is over for the Elks, they are into pre-season for next season.  I am sure they have crunched the numbers and thought about canning him - how can you not??

[RebusRankin]

Is it on one year deal that he's on or are there two more years after this one? Both have been reported. If you owe him for the next 2.5 years, its tough to axe him. Toth mentioned today on CJOB that the staff is made up of Jones's buddies so that the overall approach likely would not change. I think they're better off firing him but I'm a fan sitting at a computer.

[GOLDMEMBER]

Jim Toth was just saying on CJOB he doesn't think Jones survives this loss. I have to agree.

Jim I gotta giant useless flapper Toth. Consider the source LOL

[ichabod_crane]

Why they even brought Jones in the first place was a bizarre decision! He bolts on the team a few years ago on the midnight train to Regina. Then does almost a similar thing with the riders. This is the guy you want heading up your franchise? Maybe Looking for a quick fix instead or a proper rebuild.

[Jesse]

Is it on one year deal that he's on or are there two more years after this one? Both have been reported. If you owe him for the next 2.5 years, its tough to axe him. Toth mentioned today on CJOB that the staff is made up of Jones's buddies so that the overall approach likely would not change. I think they're better off firing him but I'm a fan sitting at a computer.

Cui confirmed he was on a 4 year deal with 2 left after this one.

[theaardvark]

Why is blowing a 22 point lead so much more fireable than getting shut out twice by the same divisional opponent? They've been disappointing all year. Yesterday was more of the same.

It's an emotional loss for sure. But you don't run your front office or make very important, long term decisions on emotion. If they were going to keep him out of the bye, I don't know why you'd change now.

Why?  Because when you put up a donut, losing is expected.  But when you jump out to a 22 point lead while hanging that donut on your opponent, knock out their starting QB, at home, where you haven't won in years, AND you manage to lose... that takes some skill... at losing.

Cui confirmed he was on a 4 year deal with 2 left after this one.

When he first signed, everyone reported it was a series of 4 1 year deals.  Cui said this year it was a 4 year deal.  Hodge was on 680 today and speculated that in the offseason, Cui converted the deal.  Plus, many of Jones' cronies are on multiyear deals.

If you sign a player to a guaranteed contract and he is declared physically unable to perform, you get SMS relief on the contract you still have to pay.

Maybe the Elks can look into getting Jones declared incompetent (in a legal form), and designate him as long term injured... 

The CFL has to fix the front office SMS issue... I know its to prevent the haves from hiring everyone away from the have nots, and I can see there needs to be a cap, but like the provisions for injured players and the SMS, there has to be a provision for firing coaches/GM's that are killing your franchise, and revitalizing the gate.

[bunker]

Why?  Because when you put up a donut, losing is expected.  But when you jump out to a 22 point lead while hanging that donut on your opponenet, at home, where you haven't won in years, AND you manage to lose... that takes some skill... at losing.

When he first signed, everyone reported it was a series of 4 1 year deals.  Cui said this year it was a 4 year deal.  Hodge was on 680 today and speculated that in the offseason, Cui converted the deal.  Plus, many of Jones' cronies are on multiyear deals.

If you sign a player to a guaranteed contract and he is declared physically unable to perform, you get SMS relief on the contract you still have to pay.

Maybe the Elks can look into getting Jones declared incompetent (in a legal form), and designate him as long term injured... 

The CFL has to fix the front office SMS issue... I know its to revent the haves from hiring everyone away from the have nots, and I can see there needs to be a cap, but like the provisions for injured players and the SMS, there has to be a provision for firing coaches/GM's that are killing your franchise, and revitalizing the gate.

Why in the world would Cui convert him to a 4 year deal in the off-season after their horrendous record? Makes no sense.

[theaardvark]

Just an FYI...

Attendance (in thousands):

Team   2018 2023   % change
SSK   32.1   28.1   -12.5
EDM   31.1   24.7   -20.6
BC   20   22.9   14.5
MTL   17.3   17.4   0.6
OTT   23.3   18.2   -21.9
TOR   14.2   14.2   0.0
WPG   26.9   28.5   5.9
HAM   23.5   22.9   -2.6
CGY   26.3   21.4   -18.6


Winning teams have more gate.  Teams stuck with bad coaches do not win.  Self fulfilling prophecy.

[TecnoGenius]

Attendance (in thousands):

Wow, it's like good teams turning into bad teams tanks the attendance.  Go figure.

The sad part is Riderville, because they funded and built that stadium under the assumption they'd get 30k+ in the stands every game forever.

[TecnoGenius]

Anyone who thinks the front office SMS has been anything positive for the league is delusional.  It is literally killing the CFL.  It should be abolished immediately.  There is zero benefit to having it in place. 

The coaches SMS is a huge failure.  It was always a stupid idea.  Everyone here has voiced concerns even before the big downsides starting showing up.  Not only do they limit what you can spend, but they hamstring you with bad choices for years after as you have to pay the fired coaches/staff!

I think the "teams are going to run out of money paying coaches" was never actually a thing.  They tried to fix a problem that wasn't a problem.  Who here ever heard or thought about teams going broke paying coaches before they put this rule in place?  Ya, people parrot the line "the teams will go broke!", but show me one team that went broke.  Show me one team that this dumb rule "saved" or made better.  And did the CFL, as a whole, get better?  Ha.

The CFL has to fix the front office SMS issue... I know its to prevent the haves from hiring everyone away from the have nots, and I can see there needs to be a cap

Again, show me evidence of this "have/have nots" (vis a vis coaches) theory in reality before the idiotic cap.  People parrot this line too, but I never saw it!  And coaches aren't like players.  You can't apply the same caps and ideas to the ~10 man coaching corps as the 45+ player roster!  It simply doesn't work.  Because coaches aren't players.  A "good coach" isn't as easy to spot as a good player.  The measurables are more vague, especially for a new/prospective coach.  I think the whole concept is flawed.  I think it's more that good coaches are made by winning teams, not that teams will hoard good coaches to become good.

At the very, very least, they should drop the dumb keep-paying-them-after-they-are-fired nonsense.  Keep the cap if you must, but let coaches get fired without screwing them for years to come.

[TecnoGenius]

Blow the cap and take the penalty??  I dunno this is a tricky one - the season is over for the Elks, they are into pre-season for next season.  I am sure they have crunched the numbers and thought about canning him - how can you not??

But they aren't.  EDM roster-changed only 3 players in our game, and only 1 was anything "new" I think.  EDM is playing like they are on the right track.  And you know what, I think they are inching up.  They gave us a huge run for our money and had everyone sweating (whether they admit it or not).  They put up 31 on TOR!

They've had a pretty tough schedule so far.  I could see them pulling out some wins as their remaining games are against weaker teams (minus the 2 TOR, 1 BC and 1 WPG game).

I might worry more about SSK right now than EDM.  If it was SSK@EDM tonight, EDM probably would have won.

[TecnoGenius]

Is it on one year deal that he's on or are there two more years after this one? Both have been reported. If you owe him for the next 2.5 years, its tough to axe him. Toth mentioned today on CJOB that the staff is made up of Jones's buddies so that the overall approach likely would not change. I think they're better off firing him but I'm a fan sitting at a computer.

I read somewhere (maybe here) that EDM is still paying Elizondo and one other guy from that era.  If true that is truly insane and it is completely impossible to fire Jones before FA.  There is no way they can afford to pay Zondo, Jones and some new guy!!

[TecnoGenius]

It's funny, in Formula 1 there's always chatter of conspiracies that when a favored team gets strong (better engine, trick aero, whatever) the FIA locks the rules/specs so that that team can exploit and win everything for a few years.  They institute new rules/locks to lock in the status quo.  Often this is Ferrari, then later Mercedes, now Red Bull.  Who knows if there's money under the table, etc, but you can speculate.

What if the CFL brought in these dumb coaches cap rules that on the surface "help the have-not teams" but in reality were intended to do the opposite?  Ya, wild tin foil on this one.  But what bad team has benefited?  Throughout all these changes WPG has remained the big powerhouse...  Even without intent, I don't see this rule to have helped any team vastly improve their coach corps.

Let's be honest, if the coaches cap wasn't in place would these guys still be with their current team?
- C.Jones
- J.O'Day
- Dickerson The Lesser
- for fun let's throw in Dickerson The Greater if he misses the playoffs

Second question: could those teams be better tomorrow if they were allowed fresh blood and a fresh start?  Almost certainly.  You cannot run a team with GMs and HCs that have lost the room.  So why are we trying to force it?

Third question: have the teams that took the cap pain and fired coaches/GMs done better?  MTL, OTT, BC: yes!  Can you imagine if BC still had tummy-rubber tongue-shower as HC??  Who are the sad sack teams right now?  Oh look, teams who can't fire coaches/GMs: EDM, SSK.

Aards is right.  Abolish or massively revamp the coach limiations.  Until then I'll happily take the free W's against the doomed teams; but I'll shed a tear for the league.

[Waffler]

I read somewhere (maybe here) that EDM is still paying Elizondo and one other guy from that era.  If true that is truly insane and it is completely impossible to fire Jones before FA.  There is no way they can afford to pay Zondo, Jones and some new guy!!

The way he throws around big money for players, how can you afford not to fire him?  Corny is making good coin for instance. Look at the stands, look at how they can't win with a 22 point lead, look at how there is just no hope. An almost season long 13 game losing streak. The paying customers have not seen a win in years. The panel picks them to win a game soon. Ok. I expect them to lose both ends of the Labor Day home and home. Will they fire him then? He ran a once proud franchise into the ground. He just needs to be gone and hang the cost.

[Jesse]

It's funny, in Formula 1 there's always chatter of conspiracies that when a favored team gets strong (better engine, trick aero, whatever) the FIA locks the rules/specs so that that team can exploit and win everything for a few years.  They institute new rules/locks to lock in the status quo.  Often this is Ferrari, then later Mercedes, now Red Bull.  Who knows if there's money under the table, etc, but you can speculate.

What if the CFL brought in these dumb coaches cap rules that on the surface "help the have-not teams" but in reality were intended to do the opposite?  Ya, wild tin foil on this one.  But what bad team has benefited?  Throughout all these changes WPG has remained the big powerhouse...  Even without intent, I don't see this rule to have helped any team vastly improve their coach corps.

Let's be honest, if the coaches cap wasn't in place would these guys still be with their current team?
- C.Jones
- J.O'Day
- Dickerson The Lesser
- for fun let's throw in Dickerson The Greater if he misses the playoffs

Second question: could those teams be better tomorrow if they were allowed fresh blood and a fresh start?  Almost certainly.  You cannot run a team with GMs and HCs that have lost the room.  So why are we trying to force it?

Third question: have the teams that took the cap pain and fired coaches/GMs done better?  MTL, OTT, BC: yes!  Can you imagine if BC still had tummy-rubber tongue-shower as HC??  Who are the sad sack teams right now?  Oh look, teams who can't fire coaches/GMs: EDM, SSK.

Aards is right.  Abolish or massively revamp the coach limiations.  Until then I'll happily take the free W's against the doomed teams; but I'll shed a tear for the league.

Where is this "have/have not" nonsense coming from?

The salary cap is to make teams more profitable and easier to sell. Teams were firing staffs every other year and paying (like the Elks) three staffs at once. Meanwhile the league was trying to find owners for BC and Montreal and an Atlantic team. You can't sell a team that's paying a bunch of people to not work for you.

[TBURGESS]

The management SMS system is stupid. All it does is doom bad teams to being bad until they can afford to change out bad coaches. Bad teams are bad for the CFL.

If they absolutely want to keep some SMS system for management, at least let teams fire coaches and take those salaries out of the SMS system. In short, teams can only pay X amount for coaches per year.

[Jesse]

The management SMS system is stupid. All it does is doom bad teams to being bad until they can afford to change out bad coaches. Bad teams are bad for the CFL.

If they absolutely want to keep some SMS system for management, at least let teams fire coaches and take those salaries out of the SMS system. In short, teams can only pay X amount for coaches per year.

That would defeat the purpose.

I don't feel bad for a team like Edmonton, to be honest. It was a dumb decision to make Jones every position for that long and now they're paying the price. This is the kind of stupid mistake that led to the cap and maybe it will save some teams from their own ignorance.

[theaardvark]

On reflection, I think Jones was one of the reasons the cap came in.  His move from Edm to SSK ws primarily for a paycheck, if I remember correctly. 

Granted, with no SMS cap, we'd see a lot more movement in the coaching ranks, I can't imagine how much MOS and crew would get offered.  I'm sure we'd have matched, but maybe not if it was really, really high. 

There is a place for SMS with players that have "cut anytime, except when injured and salary isn't in the cap anyway" contracts.  SMS in a system where contracts are guaranteed is stupid.

Maybe, hear me out, they should have an "active cap", where the current roster of coaches / executives can only make the SMS limit.  Anyone fired comes off that cap, as their replacements go in.  $$ given to the fired coaches while they were active still count, contracts prorated by games active.

[Jesse]

On reflection, I think Jones was one of the reasons the cap came in.  His move from Edm to SSK ws primarily for a paycheck, if I remember correctly. 

Granted, with no SMS cap, we'd see a lot more movement in the coaching ranks, I can't imagine how much MOS and crew would get offered.  I'm sure we'd have matched, but maybe not if it was really, really high. 

There is a place for SMS with players that have "cut anytime, except when injured and salary isn't in the cap anyway" contracts.  SMS in a system where contracts are guaranteed is stupid.

Maybe, hear me out, they should have an "active cap", where the current roster of coaches / executives can only make the SMS limit.  Anyone fired comes off that cap, as their replacements go in.  $$ given to the fired coaches while they were active still count, contracts prorated by games active.

If they wanted to do that, they?d remove the cap.

The point is to make running a CFL team cheaper.

[theaardvark]

Why in the world would Cui convert him to a 4 year deal in the off-season after their horrendous record? Makes no sense.

Why would he sign Jones period.  Jones had laid the groundwork, and Cui probably thought that it was a good idea at the time.  Isure bet he regrets it now, whether it was originally signed that way, or converted...

Blow the cap and take the penalty??  I dunno this is a tricky one - the season is over for the Elks, they are into pre-season for next season.  I am sure they have crunched the numbers and thought about canning him - how can you not??

Penalties for "blowing the cap...

"Introduced in 2019, the CFL has a football operations employee and salary cap. The cap for 2019 and 2020 was $2.588 million and limits coaches to 11 and other football operations staff to 14, excluding doctors and athletic therapists. Fines are in place for teams that exceed the cap and the loss of draft picks occur after exceeding the cap by $100,000. Personal fines are also possible, though in the first year, teams were self-reporting and only team fines were a possible punishment. Initial reports stated a coach limit of 11, football operations staff limit of 17, and total expenditures capped at $2.738 million. The cap was enacted to control the fastest expense growth area across the league, which outpaces revenue growth."   

Not only can you lose draft picks, a GM or President could personally get fined...

This was a terrible decision day one, and Ambrosie has to fix it.  I know it was to prevent teams from spending themselves into insolvency, but I can't imagine the powers that be could have forseen this.  

[theaardvark]

If they wanted to do that, they?d remove the cap.

The point is to make running a CFL team cheaper.

The key is, by having an "active cap", you are essentially mimicing the players SMS.  The only difference is paying coaches when they are cut, but not players.  So, IF a President/GM decides the business decision of moving on from a coach/GM makes *business* sense, and that the potential improved gate will cover the costs of paying out a fired coach, they have the OPTION to make that decision.  And, potentially, affect the gate for years to come in a positive way.

An "Active" cap prevents teams from stealing away coaches, prevents teams from over paying at any coaching position.  But it allows for firing coaches before they cost the team huge money in lost gate...  especially if you promise free tickets if you don't win... I can't imagine how much Jones has cost the team in that way alone.  I am sure moving on from Jones will, at least, create a game or two dead cat bounce effect where they win a game, and get fans back in the stands. 

Firing Jones today could increase gate the rest of the year, probably more than enough to cover his cost.

[theaardvark]

On another front, making a bad team better means recruiting.  How hard will it be to get good players to come to EDM at a reasonable price?  Sure, you can overpay them to come, basically assuring them playoff money you know they aren't going to qualify for, but that puts you behind the 8 ball before you hit the field.  Lawler took less to get out of EDM and back to WPG. 

The teams need the best possible leadership to make the best product on the field.  Once a GM/Coach has "lost the room" or worse, on field is going to suffer, and gate is going to suffer, and eventually viewership is going to suffer.

The more I think about it, the more an "Active Cap" makes total sense.  Cost assuredness for your front office, no one can outbid you, BUT the freedom to make moves that will make you competitive and keep gate revenue, which can offset the cost of firing and paying out a coach.

[pdirks67]

If Chris Jones was going to be fired in midseason, I would have expected it to happen after Game 5 when the Elk returner conceded a single in the endzone against the Riders with less than a minute left.

That was as good an example of poor coaching as I have ever seen. I literally could not believe what I was seeing when I saw the returner lollygagging his way to pick up the ball in the endzone. He clearly didn't understand CFL rules, and clearly didn't know that his primary objective was to get the ball out of the endzone. That is pure tactical coaching - they are supposed to discuss a clear gameplan on every special teams play on the sidelines before it happens.

If I was Cui, I would have fired Jones on the spot if it was feasible from an SMS perspective. Losing to Winnipeg pales in comparison to the loss against the Riders. I don't think there's any way Jones gets fired any time soon.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

On reflection, I think Jones was one of the reasons the cap came in.  His move from Edm to SSK ws primarily for a paycheck, if I remember correctly. 

Granted, with no SMS cap, we'd see a lot more movement in the coaching ranks, I can't imagine how much MOS and crew would get offered.  I'm sure we'd have matched, but maybe not if it was really, really high. 

There is a place for SMS with players that have "cut anytime, except when injured and salary isn't in the cap anyway" contracts.  SMS in a system where contracts are guaranteed is stupid.

Maybe, hear me out, they should have an "active cap", where the current roster of coaches / executives can only make the SMS limit.  Anyone fired comes off that cap, as their replacements go in.  $$ given to the fired coaches while they were active still count, contracts prorated by games active.

Jones time in Sask. is why the coaching cap was brought in initially, the Riders were rolling in money at the time and Jones was spending it wildly on extra coaching staff and a secret PR roster he housed in Moose Jaw.  Don't know which owners complained, but think it may have been Tanenbaum who also whined for revenue sharing to be brought in around the same time.  I think the CFLPA also wanted to see some level of accountability for football ops spending to share the burden of the hardship the league was claiming during negotiations.

[DM83]

Jones is an enigma.
Edmonton can?t fire him as his contract extends for a couple more years.

What about re-assigning him.  An effective way of saying he is removed from head coaching.

Bring in Barker? As Interim GM, or bump Jones up to that position, and bring in Lapo for either this year( impractical) so promote an assistant as a tentative coach.

They need a Quarterback, and some defensive players with ?heart?.
I suspect they will be bringing in lots of NFL cuts.

The back up QBs in the league are all better than what Edmonton has.

They have to do something.  How Jones lasts is amazing.  They need a QB, and if they have to pay a real one and go over the cap who cares.  They need a real guy there.

[theaardvark]

Jones is an enigma.
Edmonton can?t fire him as his contract extends for a couple more years.

What about re-assigning him.  An effective way of saying he is removed from head coaching.

Bring in Barker? As Interim GM, or bump Jones up to that position, and bring in Lapo for either this year( impractical) so promote an assistant as a tentative coach.

They need a Quarterback, and some defensive players with ?heart?.
I suspect they will be bringing in lots of NFL cuts.

The back up QBs in the league are all better than what Edmonton has.

They have to do something.  How Jones lasts is amazing.  They need a QB, and if they have to pay a real one and go over the cap who cares.  They need a real guy there.

Have to say, reading that first sentence, I first saw "enema".  And thought... that's an interesting analogy...

[DM83]

Lol! Lol!

[TecnoGenius]

Where is this "have/have not" nonsense coming from?

The salary cap is to make teams more profitable and easier to sell.

I think it was Aards who first borught up "have nots".  But I've seen it before, too.  I hate that phrase and concept, but I ran with it for the thread.

The "easier to sell the team" idea might be more key.  Especially since this was only instituted when MTL and then BC were having ownership problems.  But those problems may have been somewhat rare blips.  We change the whole structure of the league to make it easier for Ambrosie to sell the Als?  And now we see all the unforseen downsides... pretty typical of "best intention" changes.

It's funny, the GC and the league have been around centuries/decades without any nonsensical coach cap and for some reason right now the league can't survive without it?  More arrogance from Ambrosie and the "change" crowd.

Well, now that the teams have been sold, can we just go back to the way it was? 

[TecnoGenius]

On reflection, I think Jones was one of the reasons the cap came in.  His move from Edm to SSK ws primarily for a paycheck, if I remember correctly. 

[...]

Maybe, hear me out, they should have an "active cap", where the current roster of coaches / executives can only make the SMS limit.  Anyone fired comes off that cap, as their replacements go in.  $$ given to the fired coaches while they were active still count, contracts prorated by games active.

We talk as though losing cap space is the only punishment, but in the same breathe talk about teams being unsaleable because they are paying coaches too much.  What really matters here, the cap$$ or the real$$?

It seems like no one complains or cares about real$$ unless the team is needing a new owner, then all of a sudden it's paramount.  So right now with no team needing to be sold, can we assume no one gives a hoot about the real$$?  I say this because I've never seen an existing long-term owner, or a community team moan and whine about the real$$ for coaches.  It's simply not a thing.

The billionaire owners, and board-accountable community teams, will not be fiscally imprudent or blow their wad indiscriminately on coaching staff.  And if they do, the deserve to lose their hard earned money or be fired by their boards.  We have to remember that this is real$$ and losing it hurts whoever had that money before; even if you're Bob Young you don't like to pee away $2M unnecessarily without a ROI, otherwise you don't tend to get rich in the first place.  In other words, I think the real$$ aspect is self-policing and never needed to be regulated except in the rare once-every-decade case of an unsaleable team.

And if teams are providing guaranteed multi-year contracts to coaches then they either need to be real darn sure on their due diligence about what they're buying, or they deserve the consequences.  Again, this is real$$ hurting someone's pocket or risking someone's job.

So what is really hobbling a few teams right now is the cap$$ and how fired coaches can hurt your immediate and next-season ability to hire new coaches.  That is a new problem that exists only because of the cap.  It's an unintended consequence and instead of helping the league it ended up hurting it.  As such Aards is right and we should eliminate the cap$$ hit for fired coaches to immediately solve the problem.  The real$$ paid to the fired coaches act as their own punishment and, as would be expected, gives an incentive to make better decisions and shorter contracts.

Finally, I'm not convinced "reducing poaching" was a valid rationale behind the coaches cap.  Just look at the results since the cap came in: I don't see any less coach movement inter-season than before.  Tons of HC movement, tons of position coach movement.  Again, I don't think this is a thing.  I don't think anyone really cared.  The sole example so far was C.Jones and SSK: but I would never hinge a massive league-wide change around anything C.Jones or people around him are involved with.  And just the fear of potential problems does not justify the nonsensical and downright harmful policies we have in place now.

(Thought exercise to counter the poaching fear: Did anyone poach MOS in his 6 years as HC before the cap came in?  Add in the fact that coaches often have a degree of loyalty, and purely mercenary ones like C.Jones are almost universally reviled.  More HCs get fired than abandon their teams for greener pastures...)

[TecnoGenius]

Will they fire him then? He ran a once proud franchise into the ground. He just needs to be gone and hang the cost.

$2.5M cap.  Let's say $750k is Jones.  Let's say Zondo is still getting $300k.  All the other staff taking up the rest.  So you fire Jones and still pay him $750k.... where on earth in the cap is there supposed to be room to hire a new GM and HC and DC?

Maybe the reason why Jones will be there until he decides to leave and cancel his contract is because EDM literally cannot do anything else.  Even if they scrounge $100-$200k on the cap, are you going to find a HC to take on that 16-hour a day, high-stress job for $150k especially for a completely disaster of a team that will likely destroy any young career?

It's clear that contracting guys to wear 2 or 3 hats for a huge chunk of cap$$ is death for a team if that guy doesn't pan out.  At least with the traditional one-hat-per-guy setup you have some hope of scrounging and scrimping to make up the salary for just 1 position you need to fire!

It's really an insane situation solving phantom problems that barely existed then and don't seem to exist now, whilst creating real and untenable situations that are ruining the league for everyone.

[TBURGESS]

Selling teams happens a few times a decade. The Management SMS happens every year for every team. Setting up a system based on selling teams instead of yearly gains is incredibly dumb.

Edmonton made a huge mistake hiring Jones for a bunch of positions. Not allowing them to fix that mistake for years makes the team worth way less and makes the games less enjoyable for all fans for years.

An active SMS for each year, where you must stay under the cap would stop teams from hiring a ton of coaches & puts teams on an equal basis salary wise each year.

Allow teams to fire coaches in the off season without any penalty to allow them to fix hiring mistakes. If you fire a coach during the season, then you won't have any money in the SMS to replace them and you'll have to replace them from within your own coaching ranks.

[Waffler]

Elks are community owned and not for sale, never have been. The value of the franchise means nothing, what does matter is that they don't bleed money too many years in a row. They are and will continue to with Jones there.  A change has to happen.

As far as poaching coaches, it definitely does matter. We can't have a bidding war like we have had for QB's. We have been lucky here that MOS stayed but I don't know what he makes or how much he would have made elsewhere. I can't say he'll be here forever. The point of the cap is to give teams an equal opportunity. This little 9 team league of ours is fragile, all for one and one for all or we don't have enough teams. The cap as it is is flawed but I think with tweaks it should be kept.

[dd]

As much as a hate Chris Jones, the problem in Edmonton isn?t coaching, it?s lack of talent and no bonafide starting Qb. To turn the bombers around, we had to go out and get Bryant,  bighill, Jefferson and Collaros, but also we picked up a Jeffcoat, and moved Alexander to safety and brought in a whole new secondary and o line.

So Edmonton has got to go get a stud left tackle, a stud MLB, a stud DE and a stud Qb and then restock the supporting cast shelves. That?s a massive job. Jones has been airlifting in tons of players to try and fill these voids but hasn?t got the results.

The immediate job this off season is to find a #1 Qb and I would bet anything they get their chequebook out for Dru Brown.

[KINGCHARLES]

As much as a hate Chris Jones, the problem in Edmonton isn?t coaching, it?s lack of talent and no bonafide starting Qb. To turn the bombers around, we had to go out and get Bryant,  bighill, Jefferson and Collaros, but also we picked up a Jeffcoat, and moved Alexander to safety and brought in a whole new secondary and o line.

So Edmonton has got to go get a stud left tackle, a stud MLB, a stud DE and a stud Qb and then restock the supporting cast shelves. That?s a massive job. Jones has been airlifting in tons of players to try and fill these voids but hasn?t got the results.

The immediate job this off season is to find a #1 Qb and I would bet anything they get their chequebook out for Dru Brown.

Maybe even Mcleod Bethel Thompson, Dane Evans or Chris Streveler?

[dd]

I d take brown over any of those 3, younger and better skill set.MBT is done, he won?t come back to a tire fire

[3rdand1.5]

With out a proper o-line and scheme a shiny new QB won't change much.

[dd]

The CFL is a Qb lead league, and the first piece you have to put into place, is a good Qb. Teams with good Qb's- Wpg, BC and Toronto, do good, teams with bad Qb's - Edmonton, Ottawa and Saskatchewan do bad.

[theaardvark]

This is why they need an "Active operations staff" SMS, and ignore or at least have a seperate limit on fired personannel that are still being paid, but have no contact with the team.

This would not allow a bidding war for a coach/GM, but would allow for the firing of a poorly performing staff and replacing them with new personnel *at equivalent cost*.  You can upgrade the performance, but you can't increase the salary.

[TecnoGenius]

As far as poaching coaches, it definitely does matter. We can't have a bidding war like we have had for QB's. We have been lucky here that MOS stayed but I don't know what he makes or how much he would have made elsewhere. I can't say he'll be here forever. The point of the cap is to give teams an equal opportunity. This little 9 team league of ours is fragile, all for one and one for all or we don't have enough teams. The cap as it is is flawed but I think with tweaks it should be kept.

It sounds so nice "can't have a coach bidding war" and "fragile league", and it's parroted often, even by our commissioner.  But is it real?

Show me the epidemic of HC/GM bidding wars before they instituted the cap.  I don't recall any, except maybe mercenary Jones.

Show me the death of the CFL in its bazillion years of existence without a coaches cap.

It's literally inventing phantom problems that sound nice on paper when framed in a narrative.  They aren't actually helping anything in reality and they are causing (I hope) unintended problems that work against the (stated) original goal!

[TecnoGenius]

As much as a hate Chris Jones, the problem in Edmonton isn?t coaching, it?s lack of talent and no bonafide starting Qb. To turn the bombers around, we had to go out and get Bryant,  bighill, Jefferson and Collaros, but also we picked up a Jeffcoat, and moved Alexander to safety and brought in a whole new secondary and o line.

The immediate job this off season is to find a #1 Qb and I would bet anything they get their chequebook out for Dru Brown.

Ya, but chicken and egg... bringing in good players made the team good, or good character team lured in the good players?  The ball got rolling with Biggie and he has admitted several times he only came here because of MOS's vision and character.  If a team lacks intangibles and all they have is the "overpay option" to get good players, then it's hopeless to build a good team in the severely (player) SMS-limited CFL.

And EDM had a severely good roster on paper going into this season.  That's why I picked them to do well.  They cheaped out on QB in order to bring in the best WR, a ton of great SBs, decent OL, and a pretty good D.  Their R corps looked nearly as good as ours, on paper.

No, the main problem in EDM is losing the room, losing the hope, sub-par coaching, no culture, and a no-loyalty cut-throat GM+HC.  You never come back from that until you change the HC.  And at this rate even after doing that it'll take 1-3 years to build it back up to where players will want to play there for reasons other than just biggest-$$.

The severely SMS-limited and cheap CFL highlights that the MOS vision and method of offering more than just money is really the only way you can gain success, and keep it.  And it builds on itself and is self-reinforcing every season.  Every other team will just be a band of mercenaries looking out for #1.  I think this is the secret sauce to TOR's Pinball success, too.  It's so obvious.  Teams that don't foster this will not succeed (for long) in the current CFL era.

[TecnoGenius]

The CFL is a Qb lead league, and the first piece you have to put into place, is a good Qb. Teams with good Qb's- Wpg, BC and Toronto, do good, teams with bad Qb's - Edmonton, Ottawa and Saskatchewan do bad.

That's what tummy-rubbing tongue-wagging HC in BC thought in M.Reilly's final season.  I would argue the first piece is a good OL.  A good OL and decent receivers will give you the Matt Nichols era where you can win a ton of games whilst only having the 3rd or 4th (or 5th) best QB.

I think SSK and EDM understood this need in FA2023 but failed somewhat in their OL efforts.  Not easy to get a great OL in one season because it's so hard to get the required NATs, and for some reason stellar IMPs are also rare.

[Waffler]

It sounds so nice "can't have a coach bidding war" and "fragile league", and it's parroted often, even by our commissioner.  But is it real?

Show me the epidemic of HC/GM bidding wars before they instituted the cap.  I don't recall any, except maybe mercenary Jones.

Show me the death of the CFL in its bazillion years of existence without a coaches cap.

What we did have is a disparity in the number of coaches the rich teams had, that made a difference. I recall the Bombers had a tiny staff compared to Calgary in their winning years.

Yes, not that many head coaches moved for money but I can see it happening if there is no penalty. It would be the only competitive advantage you could still buy.

[Lincoln Locomotive]

That's what tummy-rubbing tongue-wagging HC in BC thought in M.Reilly's final season.  I would argue the first piece is a good OL.  A good OL and decent receivers will give you the Matt Nichols era where you can win a ton of games whilst only having the 3rd or 4th (or 5th) best QB.

I think SSK and EDM understood this need in FA2023 but failed somewhat in their OL efforts.  Not easy to get a great OL in one season because it's so hard to get the required NATs, and for some reason stellar IMPs are also rare.

Case in point are some of our Bomber teams who won with average QBs and super above average defences.....but a great QB is usually going to bring championships to any team.    There are exceptions but Bud Grant said it best when asked what were the keys to his success...."a good QB, a good wife and a good dog!  He won more championship for us than any other coach....