Blue Bombers add three to roster - April 2, 2024

[theaardvark]

Nope, nope and nope. Even a player with guaranteed money can be traded to another team willing to accept that guarantee.

Want player retention? Eliminate NFL option and 1 year contracts for veterans. Both made player retention more difficult. We understand why players want that but it's also the reason we so many potential free agents each off season. Going into 2024 there were 300 more or less potential free agents.

Somebody can do a count ( if they want ) of how many of those were veterans on 1 year deals and / or how many changed teams.

These concepts work against each other. The benefits of either can be debated.

The problem with eliminating 1 year vet deals and the NFL window is you no longer have players, you have hostages.

The measures we support create a positive engagement with the players, and make them happier to commit to a team.

Creating a positive environment for re-signing is better than enforcing rules that require a player to play someplace he may not want to play.

As to trading a player with guaranteed money, of course you can.  But that money gets paid out by someone if the player retires or is long term injured.  And it is in the $SMS cap for that year.

[Blue In BC]

The problem with eliminating 1 year vet deals and the NFL window is you no longer have players, you have hostages.

The measures we support create a positive engagement with the players, and make them happier to commit to a team.

Creating a positive environment for re-signing is better than enforcing rules that require a player to play someplace he may not want to play.

As to trading a player with guaranteed money, of course you can.  But that money gets paid out by someone if the player retires or is long term injured.  And it is in the $SMS cap for that year.

 The CFL survived long before NFL option or 1 year deals. You know, back when player movement was less frequent.

I'm all for creating a positive environment but the tide has shifted too far towards the players to prevent roster turnover.

Long term injuries are covered by the 6 game IR rule about the SMS. There is an issue with the advance money when or if a player is injured at some point. There should be a pro rated calculation that includes the bonus being exempt for the games missed.

It's interesting that in other leagues, players sign much longer contracts.

[TecnoGenius]

You're examples:

Jeffcoat wasn't picked up by any other team. Injury history and age came into play as well as SMS.

Gray essentially retired

Bailey left for a chance of a bigger role as well as money. He wasn't going to be a # 1 to # 3 target in Winnipeg because of our starters.

Then you're missing the point.  The retention idea I propose isn't just keeping players from jumping teams, it's also about keeping aging vets or potential retirees in the CFL vs the couch.

Jeffcoat is the perfect example!  We only had ELC left, and KW basically stated any non-re-signed vet could probably get their job back if they'd take ELC.  Jeffcoat won't play for ELC (too proud, I don't blame him).  KW can't spend more than ELC.  Thus Jeffcoat walks and hits the couch.

Now, we add in the TecnoGenius vet team-retention plan and we now can offer Jeffcoat 90+45=$135 to stay, and KW only takes a $90 SMS hit (tweak the actual numbers as you see fit, the idea can work with arbitrary (but chosen by consensus) numbers for each aspect).  Does Jeffcoat stay 1 more year for $135?  Probably?  Remember, WFC doesn't care at all about the extra $45k, it's chump change, as long as it's outside the SMS.

Same for Gray.  In fact, I've often suggested a special extra-SMS thing for NAT hoggies... far too many retire way too young (Goosen, Gray, Spooner, etc).  In a league that has a horrible time filling out decent OLs, we really should do better at keeping the good/decent ones!!  Gray is certainly good enough to start somewhere, even if not here.  He may have chosen retirement to save his body when he saw he wasn't going to get the big Desjar payday.

Always keep in mind what the stated goals of the CFL & CFLPA are regarding vets, especially IMP vets; and player churn, which Ambrosie has directly spoken to in many TSN interviews.  My ideas directly address the stated goals.  Let's face it, what the league has done so far (DNA/DNS/NA) has been completely useless, if not totally counter-productive...

3. Add some sort of restricted free agency via draft choices or neg list based on years spent with a given team and nationality.

I'd love to hear more about your idea.  I could be onboard with something like that too.  Spell out how it would work.

[TecnoGenius]

The key to these propositions is not that they increase the $SMS, just increasing the $SMS would not change player retention at all, and it would just get spent and raise salaries across the board.

Aards 100% gets it.  100% right on all points.

Hey Aards, did you sell the pet mart?  I was in there today and sounds like it's some other dude now?  They raised the prices on my reptile lights!!   

[TecnoGenius]

I think Walters really intended to re-sign Grant, but this has gone on far too long to feel comfortable with, they need to get this done pronto.

In my rewatch of 2023 I'm noticing Grant seemed to be tailing off a bit, especially after he returned from injury.  He didn't do much in the post-season, and teams seemed to be respecting him less (gunning more vs containing).  (But he did have the best return ever vs SSK in that one game.)

Returners can fall off the cliff fast.  Alford is mostly useless now.  Lucky isn't even put back there anymore.  Those were the top 3 guys since 2019.  Now it's being taken over by the newest kids like Leake.

Grant is being hit with Jeffcoat syndrome... ego demands more money yet IR and possible performance issues hamstring KW offers.

Maybe we're waiting for camp to see if we have the next Grant?  If not, then up the $ a bit to get Grant.  Clearly no other team is biting.  If we have to go over SMS a bit, why not?  Just make sure it's 1-year and heavily performance-based.  Give him $5k every K/P R-TD.  Pull an Adarius Bowman if he produces nothing in week 1-6.

... it could also be Miller asserting his desires into the mix.  Maybe he's not sold on Grant as the answer...

[TecnoGenius]

The CFL survived long before NFL option or 1 year deals. You know, back when player movement was less frequent.

I'm all for creating a positive environment but the tide has shifted too far towards the players to prevent roster turnover.

I think the NFL opportunities make the GM job (and our fan speculation) so much more interesting, and challenging.  It especially impacts the NAT draft.  It's such a funny situation: we want to draft the best players, but not too good.

Similarly with scouting: find the overlooked gems, but make sure they have some flaw that precludes them from the NFL.  That usually means height (for most positions).  That's almost certainly why we still have Holm, and maybe even Schoen.

When you watch a ton of player interviews, like on bb.com, you fast realize every single one has the NFL dream, and most are playing in the CFL only to get to the NFL.  It's only once they are here a couple/few years they grow to love the CFL and want to stay when the NFL dream is dead.  If you take away the NFL dream, or even restrict it, from the new/young guys, a majority probably wouldn't even bother ever coming to Canada.

[Blue In BC]

Then you're missing the point.  The retention idea I propose isn't just keeping players from jumping teams, it's also about keeping aging vets or potential retirees in the CFL vs the couch.

Jeffcoat is the perfect example!  We only had ELC left, and KW basically stated any non-re-signed vet could probably get their job back if they'd take ELC.  Jeffcoat won't play for ELC (too proud, I don't blame him).  KW can't spend more than ELC.  Thus Jeffcoat walks and hits the couch.

Now, we add in the TecnoGenius vet team-retention plan and we now can offer Jeffcoat 90+45=$135 to stay, and KW only takes a $90 SMS hit (tweak the actual numbers as you see fit, the idea can work with arbitrary (but chosen by consensus) numbers for each aspect).  Does Jeffcoat stay 1 more year for $135?  Probably?  Remember, WFC doesn't care at all about the extra $45k, it's chump change, as long as it's outside the SMS.

Same for Gray.  In fact, I've often suggested a special extra-SMS thing for NAT hoggies... far too many retire way too young (Goosen, Gray, Spooner, etc).  In a league that has a horrible time filling out decent OLs, we really should do better at keeping the good/decent ones!!  Gray is certainly good enough to start somewhere, even if not here.  He may have chosen retirement to save his body when he saw he wasn't going to get the big Desjar payday.

Always keep in mind what the stated goals of the CFL & CFLPA are regarding vets, especially IMP vets; and player churn, which Ambrosie has directly spoken to in many TSN interviews.  My ideas directly address the stated goals.  Let's face it, what the league has done so far (DNA/DNS/NA) has been completely useless, if not totally counter-productive...

I'd love to hear more about your idea.  I could be onboard with something like that too.  Spell out how it would work.

I'm not missing anything. At some point every veteran is going to be replaced. SMS is only part of the reason. By my count we said goodbye to 23 players that were on the AR or PR. Some we wanted to keep and some we didn't.  Of that group only 8 are with another team.

Let's take Jefferson again. I'm not certain we would have kept him on the AR even if he accepted an ELC type deal. It was time to move on. Every dollar we give to one player is a dollar we can't give to another. SMS and profitability are linked issues.

The question is at what point does the team draw a line on a player and their succession plan. Any player you keep even on the PR takes away a spot for another player that might evolve into a starter.

It's part of the curve of a football career. You may start on the PR or get cut before you become a starter and then at some point another player beats you out of your spot. SMS is only one factor.

[theaardvark]

The CFL survived long before NFL option or 1 year deals. You know, back when player movement was less frequent.

I'm all for creating a positive environment but the tide has shifted too far towards the players to prevent roster turnover.

Long term injuries are covered by the 6 game IR rule about the SMS. There is an issue with the advance money when or if a player is injured at some point. There should be a pro rated calculation that includes the bonus being exempt for the games missed.

It's interesting that in other leagues, players sign much longer contracts.

Other leagues all have *GUARANTEED CONTRACTS".  So it is in the players best interest to dign as long a deal as they can get.  CFL is a league where you can sign a $300k contract, and be dumped after TC, never collecting dollar one.  And players are going to bet on themselves getting a raise whenever they sign a new deal.  Teams will lock them in on as long a term contract as possible at the best deal possible (for the team), knowing they can cut them loose at any moment.

Presently, guaranteed money is not covered by 6 game.  Neither are signing bonuses.  Every time a team gives a player either, they are rolling the dice, hoping they stay healthy and talented.  Making both 6 game eligible prorated would change a lot of the way contracts are written, for sure.  You can bet on a player staying talented, but healthy is something you can't always bet on.



. 

[theaardvark]

Aards 100% gets it.  100% right on all points.

Hey Aards, did you sell the pet mart?  I was in there today and sounds like it's some other dude now?  They raised the prices on my reptile lights!!   

Thrive Pet Food Market still has the same dude running it, and that's me... as to prices, that's from the manufacturer, I wish I could control that.  All in all, or prices have been a lot more stable than most retail businesses.

Thanks for agreeing with my vison for $SMS.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

I'm not missing anything. At some point every veteran is going to be replaced. SMS is only part of the reason. By my count we said goodbye to 23 players that were on the AR or PR. Some we wanted to keep and some we didn't.  Of that group only 8 are with another team.

Let's take Jefferson again. I'm not certain we would have kept him on the AR even if he accepted an ELC type deal. It was time to move on. Every dollar we give to one player is a dollar we can't give to another. SMS and profitability are linked issues.

The question is at what point does the team draw a line on a player and their succession plan. Any player you keep even on the PR takes away a spot for another player that might evolve into a starter.

It's part of the curve of a football career. You may start on the PR or get cut before you become a starter and then at some point another player beats you out of your spot. SMS is only one factor.

I'm going to disagree wholeheartedly with your stance, the loss of players such as Jeffcoat, Bailey, Ricky Walker and Gray is due more to salary mismanagement and poor communication practices, rather than a carefully calculated succession plan.  Unless you count "blank slates", as legitimate replacements for allstar level veteran players that served the team well for multiple seasons who did everything asked of them. Does not sound like a logical succession plan to me, sounds more like a hope and a prayer plan based on previous luck.

The salary mismanagement stems from Walters getting in over his head in the receiver dept. by initially re-signing Lawler at an extensive price after Jones blew away the salary cap for receivers, only Walters followed him into the unscripted territory of fiscal mismanagement. The situation was compounded when he had to pay Schoen a similar salary to what he offered Lawler, exceeding the budget for receivers to the point they couldn't afford to bring back a journeyman like Bailey even at a fair salary.  Robbing Peter to pay Paul is never good accounting practice.

As Harris pointed out in his podcast interview, the Bombers have had a "fail to communicate properly" problem reaching back multiple years now which needs to be rectified as it will eventually tarnish their legacy.

Love Walters to pieces and credit him equally along with O'Shea for 4 great years but that doesn't excuse making basic errors in budget and player management whether that falls on him or others within the organization. 

[ModAdmin]

I'm going to disagree wholeheartedly with your stance, the loss of players such as Jeffcoat, Bailey, Ricky Walker and Gray is due more to salary mismanagement and poor communication practices, rather than a carefully calculated succession plan.  Unless you count "blank slates", as legitimate replacements for allstar level veteran players that served the team well for multiple seasons who did everything asked of them. Does not sound like a logical succession plan to me, sounds more like a hope and a prayer plan based on previous luck.

The salary mismanagement stems from Walters getting in over his head in the receiver dept. by initially re-signing Lawler at an extensive price after Jones blew away the salary cap for receivers, only Walters followed him into the unscripted territory of fiscal mismanagement. The situation was compounded when he had to pay Schoen a similar salary to what he offered Lawler, exceeding the budget for receivers to the point they couldn't afford to bring back a journeyman like Bailey even at a fair salary.  Robbing Peter to pay Paul is never good accounting practice.

As Harris pointed out in his podcast interview, the Bombers have had a "fail to communicate properly" problem reaching back multiple years now which needs to be rectified as it will eventually tarnish their legacy.

Love Walters to pieces and credit him equally along with O'Shea for 4 great years but that doesn't excuse making basic errors in budget and player management whether that falls on him or others within the organization. 

I would take the bolded statement above with a grain of salt until I hear the other side of the story.  Long term players who have been released while feeling they still have something in the tank are bound to feel a bit disrespected and undervalued.  It's hard to imagine the team would not clearly communicate what they can afford to players in this category.

[Blue In BC]

I'm going to disagree wholeheartedly with your stance, the loss of players such as Jeffcoat, Bailey, Ricky Walker and Gray is due more to salary mismanagement and poor communication practices, rather than a carefully calculated succession plan.  Unless you count "blank slates", as legitimate replacements for allstar level veteran players that served the team well for multiple seasons who did everything asked of them. Does not sound like a logical succession plan to me, sounds more like a hope and a prayer plan based on previous luck.

The salary mismanagement stems from Walters getting in over his head in the receiver dept. by initially re-signing Lawler at an extensive price after Jones blew away the salary cap for receivers, only Walters followed him into the unscripted territory of fiscal mismanagement. The situation was compounded when he had to pay Schoen a similar salary to what he offered Lawler, exceeding the budget for receivers to the point they couldn't afford to bring back a journeyman like Bailey even at a fair salary.  Robbing Peter to pay Paul is never good accounting practice.

As Harris pointed out in his podcast interview, the Bombers have had a "fail to communicate properly" problem reaching back multiple years now which needs to be rectified as it will eventually tarnish their legacy.

Love Walters to pieces and credit him equally along with O'Shea for 4 great years but that doesn't excuse making basic errors in budget and player management whether that falls on him or others within the organization. 

Three of the players you list are not currently expected to play in 2024.

Bombers have 2 up and coming Canadian OL to replace Gray. Both may be better than Gray who had many posters thinking that even in 2023.

Jeffcoat replacements include a long list of potential candidates to be proven but as I said, Jeffcoat is not expected to play in 2024.

The Bailey situation as been covered already. He wanted an opportunity to play more and to earn more. We have a dozen potential candidates to replace him.

Arguing any of these losses is due to salary mismanagement would be a hard one to make.

Would you have been willing to not re-sign Schoen or Oliveria in order to have kept those on your list? Wouldn't the argument then revert to the same for not being able to retain those players.

Can't have it both ways. Veteran players want more to re-sign. Both those players signed for less than offered elsewhere. Free agency creates a bidding war across the league for top players.  Decisions are made every season. Was it a good decision to allow Harris to leave 2 years ago and not make Oliveria the starter, allowing SMS to be spent elsewhere? Noting that not every decision works out the way hoped.

You call that mismanagement? You better take another look at the players we were able to re-sign to new deals. You might also take into account the Bombers have been to 4 consecutive Grey Cups winning 2.

Winning is the defining criteria.

[Pete]

I have to agree, winning is the main criteria as to whether a team is mismanaged (see Edm for example)
We may not agree with some of the decisions, I for one feel we are overinvested in the receiver position at the expense of our defense. But having the best offence in the league may win games for us despite that.
Like Ive mentioned earlier the only management actions I'd like to see is more proactively signing/extending  key players which would also help in succession planning.
On the failure to communicate, when a player doesn't like what he hearing it's not necessarily poor communication.

[theaardvark]

Salary mismanagement?

Signing the top WR in the league for a lower salary than the season before, and for 2 years is "mismanagement"?

I think Walters salary management is exemplary. He's had to make some tough decisions, like Harris, and Jeffcoat, and Gray, but those decisions had to be made, and the team has dealt with any of them and still got to the GC.

Every team has a few high paid players, and a lot of ELC's that have to pay above their pay grades.  That's just the way the league runs. 

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Three of the players you list are not currently expected to play in 2024.

Bombers have 2 up and coming Canadian OL to replace Gray. Both may be better than Gray who had many posters thinking that even in 2023.

Jeffcoat replacements include a long list of potential candidates to be proven but as I said, Jeffcoat is not expected to play in 2024.

The Bailey situation as been covered already. He wanted an opportunity to play more and to earn more. We have a dozen potential candidates to replace him.

Arguing any of these losses is due to salary mismanagement would be a hard one to make.

Would you have been willing to not re-sign Schoen or Oliveria in order to have kept those on your list? Wouldn't the argument then revert to the same for not being able to retain those players.

Can't have it both ways. Veteran players want more to re-sign. Both those players signed for less than offered elsewhere. Free agency creates a bidding war across the league for top players.  Decisions are made every season. Was it a good decision to allow Harris to leave 2 years ago and not make Oliveria the starter, allowing SMS to be spent elsewhere? Noting that not every decision works out the way hoped.

You call that mismanagement? You better take another look at the players we were able to re-sign to new deals. You might also take into account the Bombers have been to 4 consecutive Grey Cups winning 2.

Winning is the defining criteria.

From my perspective, the current lineup is not looking as good as it did last season, with numerous question marks and big holes that need to be filled immediately to keep them at or near the top of the league.

Competitively, they are worse on both sides of the line, the O-line lost Hardrick and Gray, two well established veterans, whether Eli or Dobson can measure up in pass protection remains to be seen. Hardrick's replacement remains a huge unknown critically protecting the teams #1 asset. 

The D-line lost Jeffcoat and Walker, I'd be amazed if they came up with 2 new players who could match their contributions.  Jeffcoat was an irreplaceable HOF level player who suffered injury problems and Walker was an experienced vet and the best DT they had on the roster, neither should be expected to play for less $$. As we've seen before, if the D-line fails to administer adequate pressure or stop the run, the secondary folds like a deck of cards.

Amazingly despite the expenditure, the receiver position is potentially worse off with the loss of Bailey, whoever fills his spot will not see that many balls and will have a hard time filling Bailey's shoes in the multiple roles he performed.  It's a crying shame they never made any effort to retain an established veteran like him. 

The secondary is a wash, they still have plenty of good D-backs to fill in for the loss of Rose and Houston, getting Holm and Nichols back was critical.

Clements was the logical successor to Bighill or Wilson at LB and was groomed to do so, this is the kind of succession that has proven successful in the past that is now being neglected in many positions. Cole can fill in as a role player but doesn't have the same level of experience or the proven football IQ to take over that spot yet. If Bighill or Wilson go down early in the season, it may cause a problem.

Of all the players that left, going from their remarks even paying them the salary they received last season would have been enough to retain them, excluding Hardrick who received a huge bump from Sask. and Houston who received a bump from the Stamps. Bailey, Gray, Jeffcoat, Walker, Clements and maybe Grant as well, were all key players to the team's success, none of which were moved on because their performance was inadequate or they had proven replacements ready to step in, they are being replaced mostly with cheaper question marks.

What it came down to was Walters having nothing left in the kitty to make them reasonable offers, so he didn't bother to offer them anything. I can understand one or two replacements per year when other teams make much better offers or a player ages out, but this was not the case in any of these situations.   

Walters saving grace may be his re-signing of Streveler, he has the ability to make up for deficiencies in other areas that could allow them to pull off wins even with less dominating performances.