Bonus money applied to SMS

[Blue In BC]

Should this policy be changed?

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Someone's FIRED up!

[Blue In BC]

Well if a $600K player with no bonus is injured in TC and lost for the season, his entire salary is exempt from the SMS.

If that same player in the same circumstance had a $300K signing bonus only the balance of $300K would be exempt under the current rule.

That makes zero sense IMO. The early money is done to create an advantage to the player via a tax savings. It isn't necessary to create a risk for the team if a long term injury occurs at some point during the season.

If one of us gets a large bonus at the end of the year, it's part of our annual income tax. Revenue Canada doesn't care what week you earned it aside from within that given tax year.

[TBURGESS]

1. You won't find a $600K player without a bonus & it's likely going to be a big one. 
2. Everyone knows that bonus money isn't exempt from the SMS if a player gets injured & teams still give out bonuses.
3. If the CFL were to exempt bonus money, it would only help the rich teams.

It's a bad idea.  

[Blue In BC]

1. You won't find a $600K player without a bonus & it's likely going to be a big one.
2. Everyone knows that bonus money isn't exempt from the SMS if a player gets injured & teams still give out bonuses.
3. If the CFL were to exempt bonus money, it would only help the rich teams.

It's a bad idea. 

How would it help rich teams if the bonus rule was not exempt from the SMS? I gave a specific example, can you provide an example to clarify?

That fact every team gives out bonus's isn't really an argument IMO. It's just part of the current situation as I suggested to give an advantage to the player to end up with more money in his pocket.

[TBURGESS]

How would it help rich teams if the bonus rule was not exempt from the SMS? I gave a specific example, can you provide an example to clarify?

You need to have the 'extra' $300K sitting around to be able to spend it.  

[Blue In BC]

You need to have the 'extra' $300K sitting around to be able to spend it. 

Players are injured every season on every team. Every team spends to the SMS every season. Two teams over spent in 2023 including the Bombers.

A rich team may be one with a billionaire owner or one that is run well. It varies over time as to which team is a rich team.

Several teams lose money trying to be competitive. That's true of privately owned and community owned teams.

Teams that are losing tend to lose gate revenue and possibly have less advertising revenue.

A wishful goal for the CFL is for teams to make a profit. I'd say things like the SMS is intended to make them as competitive as possible.

Now how a team comes up with $300K is somewhat irrelevant. Whether it comes from an organizations deep pockets or a weekend bottle drive.

The bigger question is where and when the issue comes up. Once the season starts and free agency has passed, options are limited.

Where do you find the replacement for a lost $600K player whether he had a bonus or didn't have a bonus.

Using a more specific example: Lawler: Even if his bonus was exempt, where would we find an equal replacement with the extra cash?

[TBURGESS]

You're arguing for an undetermined amount of money to be added to the SMS to replace hurt players who have bonuses. It's undetermined because you have no idea of which players are going to get hurt, so how do you plan for the expenditures? 

It does matter if the team is rich or poor. Poor teams will have trouble adding $300-500K to their SMS. Rich teams won't. 

[Blue In BC]

You're arguing for an undetermined amount of money to be added to the SMS to replace hurt players who have bonuses. It's undetermined because you have no idea of which players are going to get hurt, so how do you plan for the expenditures?

It does matter if the team is rich or poor. Poor teams will have trouble adding $300-500K to their SMS. Rich teams won't.

It's not an undetermined amount. It's the amount of any bonus that is paid if a player is injured.

Of course you can't determine which players are injured or when. Whether the bonus is pro rated or not, the cost of the injury list can be extensive. My point is that it's an operational cost and should be an SMS cost.

I already pointed out that a 6 game IR is exempt from SMS with the mention of both with a bonus and without.

Going back to the rich team or poor team argument. I pointed out that every team spends the SMS regardless of what the cost of their yearly injury list.

Anyone know how the NFL handles this?

That's not difficult to understand IMO.

EDIT: Here's something from the NFL rules.

If a player has a legitimate long-term injury, his cap hit is still counted; however, the team is permitted to replace him with one or more players whose combined salary is equal to (or less than) that of the injured player, even if the additional players would put the team over the salary cap.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

How many times do different people need to explain why it's a bad idea?

[TBURGESS]

It's not an undetermined amount. It's the amount of any bonus that is paid if a player is injured.

Of course you can't determine which players are injured or when. Whether the bonus is pro rated or not, the cost of the injury list can be extensive. My point is that it's an operational cost and should be an SMS cost.

I already pointed out that a 6 game IR is exempt from SMS with the mention of both with a bonus and without.

Going back to the rich team or poor team argument. I pointed out that every team spends the SMS regardless of what the cost of their yearly injury list.

Anyone know how the NFL handles this?

That's not difficult to understand IMO.

EDIT: Here's something from the NFL rules.

If a player has a legitimate long-term injury, his cap hit is still counted; however, the team is permitted to replace him with one or more players whose combined salary is equal to (or less than) that of the injured player, even if the additional players would put the team over the salary cap.

You know how many of the Bonused players will be injured? Of course not, so you can't know the amount. 

Lets try this another way. Say there are 10 players with $100K bonuses on the team. All of them get injured. You now have to come up an extra million dollars for your SMS. If only one gets injured, you have to come up with $100K. 

[Blue In BC]

How many times do different people need to explain why it's a bad idea?

More than have. The rules are changing all the time. Will this change? Can't tell but it doesn't appear on the horizon at this point. That doesn't mean something won't happen in time.

While a 4 tie doesn't mean anything written in stone one way or the other, it does mean not everybody disagrees.

[Blue In BC]

You know how many of the Bonused players will be injured? Of course not, so you can't know the amount.

Lets try this another way. Say there are 10 players with $100K bonuses on the team. All of them get injured. You now have to come up an extra million dollars for your SMS. If only one gets injured, you have to come up with $100K.

So 10 players sign those deals a week before free agency. The next day they are in a bus crash on the way to a hockey game and lost for the season.

You think it's fair that the team has to play with an SMS reduced by $1M? You think they won't go out in free agency and find the best player replacements as possible. Shouldn't they be allowed to do that or should they just default their season?

Obviously that's an extreme example but shows the flaw in the concept.

BTW. In your example, if those players are lost for the season or an extended amount, they know exactly how much SMS was used to pay bonus's. Whether a player is injured for 6 games or 18 games. At some point they know the number.

We've seen players lost for the season before TC or during TC. 

Regardless. Whether they know the amount or when they know the amount, it potentially limits a teams ability to compete.

Lets use Collaros as the example. I don't know his exact salary or early money. Let's say he got $300K and was lost for the season due to an injury last night. We'd gain back the other half on 6 game IR but would still lose that $300K

Shouldn't the team be allowed to " have " that money to try and trade for a quality back up to take over. The alternative, is that the SMS budget is spent and we just add in a rookie on an ELC.

Now we wouldn't find another $600K QB but money could be spent on other spots on the roster as well.

[TBURGESS]

So 10 players sign those deals a week before free agency. The next day they are in a bus crash on the way to a hockey game and lost for the season.

You think it's fair that the team has to play with an SMS reduced by $1M? You think they won't go out in free agency and find the best player replacements as possible. Shouldn't they be allowed to do that or should they just default their season?

Obviously that's an extreme example but shows the flaw in the concept.

BTW. In your example, if those players are lost for the season or an extended amount, they know exactly how much SMS was used to pay bonus's. Whether a player is injured for 6 games or 18 games. At some point they know the number.

We've seen players lost for the season before TC or during TC. 

Regardless. Whether they know the amount or when they know the amount, it potentially limits a teams ability to compete.

Lets use Collaros as the example. I don't know his exact salary or early money. Let's say he got $300K and was lost for the season due to an injury last night. We'd gain back the other half on 6 game IR but would still lose that $300K

Shouldn't the team be allowed to " have " that money to try and trade for a quality back up to take over. The alternative, is that the SMS budget is spent and we just add in a rookie on an ELC.

Now we wouldn't find another $600K QB but money could be spent on other spots on the roster as well.

Yes I think it's fair because everyone involved knows the risk of paying out bonuses & every team has to play under the same rules. It's not a flaw. It's the way it's designed to work. 

[Blue In BC]

It's not a matter of being fair just because it applies to each team. The SMS is designed to create a level playing field. This hampers it. Rules need to be cumulative to achieve that goal.

I've suggested that signing bonus's not be allowed. That keeps the playing field level. If they did that would it be " fair " because that's the way it was intended to work?

Teams are allowed to use unused SMS to carry over into the next season as year end bonus money. I'm not against that and it's where some of the saving from 6 game IR get used. OTOH, I could just as easily agree that SMS shouldn't carry over to the next season. Or conversely that bonus money paid to injured players be pro rated would be used.

I wonder when the SMS rule was extended to allow it to be spent at year end?