Global status in 2024 and other conversations

[Sir Blue and Gold]

I'm of the opinion that the league is best served with no ratios at all. However, since there are, I've always found it weird how some fans are so pro the Canadian ratio while being anti global ratio. It's the same logic applied for the same reasons.

[Jesse]

I'm of the opinion that the league is best served with no ratios at all. However, since there are, I've always found it weird how some fans are so pro the Canadian ratio while being anti global ratio. It's the same logic applied for the same reasons.

I am pro-ratio and pro-global.

But I believe that if you want to mandate globals on your team, it should be a well thought out, planned process. It has seemed mostly slapped together without forethought or long term direction.

[dd]

I m pro Canadian and all for increasing the ratio by 1 NAT position and remove the global position, would mean more canadian kids are playing the game in their home country, which I think the Cfl should be all about.

[Blue In BC]

I don't think many people care  about roster construction or globals or DAs vs DIs etc etc.

It's complicated and none of us know the rules but get into these heated arguments with others who also don't know the rules.

They know enough to evaluate players.

[Blue In BC]

I'm of the opinion that the league is best served with no ratios at all. However, since there are, I've always found it weird how some fans are so pro the Canadian ratio while being anti global ratio. It's the same logic applied for the same reasons.

If posters are pro Canadian ratio then being anti global is logical. Is that what you actually meant or did you miss type and mean pro global?

For the most part I haven't noticed that many posters that fit into that concept.

I'm not pro ratio but I am going to lean towards pro Canadian if we have to have one.

[Blueforlife]

I like having globals as I have enjoyed the players it has attracted.  I hate the complicated rules and will die on the CDN ratio sword.

[theaardvark]

My idea of a Global having the option of moving to American status as his only way to make more money just makes sense.  It allows protection and development until the player has completed their development.

Protection of Nat designated players is a different thing.  Yet people seem interested in the "Fake Nat" designation and how it can be used to make vet Americans into "Nationals".  Not true Nats, and only for limited snaps. 

I get the idea was to somehow get vets to stay with thier teams, and create more continuity.  Fake Nats = fail.  No team is using it at all...  but most teams are using GLB's

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

My idea of a Global having the option of moving to American status as his only way to make more money just makes sense.  It allows protection and development until the player has completed their development.

Protection of Nat designated players is a different thing.  Yet people seem interested in the "Fake Nat" designation and how it can be used to make vet Americans into "Nationals".  Not true Nats, and only for limited snaps. 

I get the idea was to somehow get vets to stay with thier teams, and create more continuity.  Fake Nats = fail.  No team is using it at all...  but most teams are using GLB's

Same goes for Globals, Les Mauro is an example of a "Fake Global", he was born in Japan but was raised from childhood and played all of his football in the US.

[theaardvark]

Same goes for Globals, Les Mauro is an example of a "Fake Global", he was born in Japan but was raised from childhood and played all of his football in the US.

No, I was talking about the "Nationalized American's" that can replace a Nat for x amount of snaps each game...

As to "Fake" Nats that are Americans with the right heritage/residency, many of the best Nats are American raised and educated, many not even knowing they were "Nats" until they were told...  Mauro is not unusual in the ratio world...

[TecnoGenius]

It's complicated and none of us know the rules but get into these heated arguments with others who also don't know the rules.

Hey, those are the best kind of arguments! 

[TecnoGenius]

I'm of the opinion that the league is best served with no ratios at all. However, since there are, I've always found it weird how some fans are so pro the Canadian ratio while being anti global ratio. It's the same logic applied for the same reasons.

When they rename the league to the GFL, get back to me.

[TecnoGenius]

Protection of Nat designated players is a different thing.  Yet people seem interested in the "Fake Nat" designation and how it can be used to make vet Americans into "Nationals".  Not true Nats, and only for limited snaps. 

There's only 1 person in this world interested in FAKENATs, and that's Ambrosie.  Well, and some nebulous amorophous lifeform that controls the CFLPA, I guess.

The rest of us all hate FAKENATs and DNA/DNSs and all that garbage from the last 2 seasons.

Just think, what horrendous nonsense will Ambrosie come up with before next season!!  Oh my!  I shudder to think that it can actually get worse.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

I am pro-ratio and pro-global.

But I believe that if you want to mandate globals on your team, it should be a well thought out, planned process. It has seemed mostly slapped together without forethought or long term direction.

Fair - at least you're consistent! I would argue that the global ratio rules are exactly as "planned out" as the Canadian ratio rules though. Fundamentally, it's the same concept trying to accomplish the same things. 

[blue_or_die]

Fair - at least you're consistent! I would argue that the global ratio rules are exactly as "planned out" as the Canadian ratio rules though. Fundamentally, it's the same concept trying to accomplish the same things. 

Not so sure on that last part. The Canadian ratio is trying to correct the supply-demand curve of the sheer number of American players that can come in and take over entirely, while the global initiative is trying to grow CFL interest elsewhere.

If the global program's intent is to "give global players a shot", then we have a problem lol. You could argue that we are in fact doing that in order to get the eyeballs, but that should be a tool in the toolbox for growing the game internationally. So far all we've seen is this sort of token roster spot + draft for this and not a well-thought out strategy with measurables, etc. I think that's what Jesse was getting at.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Not so sure on that last part. The Canadian ratio is trying to correct the supply-demand curve of the sheer number of American players that can come in and take over entirely, while the global initiative is trying to grow CFL interest elsewhere.

If the global program's intent is to "give global players a shot", then we have a problem lol. You could argue that we are in fact doing that in order to get the eyeballs, but that should be a tool in the toolbox for growing the game internationally. So far all we've seen is this sort of token roster spot + draft for this and not a well-thought out strategy with measurables, etc. I think that's what Jesse was getting at.

Both are mostly marketing tools. The Canadian ratio is trying to make sure Canadians can play in the league and get developed because some fans really like that connection. The league is really trying to get more fans globally and is taking the exact same approach with the global ratio. If the league was concerned only with on field product quality they would simply let the best players play.