Bye week discussion

[Blue In BC]

A lot of possibilities, the trick is figuring out who will accept PR roles. I think they must have worked this out with the existing players on cut down day, it wouldn't be fair to spring it on them a week later.  Can't see Ayers or Vanterpool going to the PR, but you never know, there is room on the 1 game to play with..

Yes and no. As I mentioned I'm not a fan of using the 1 game IR to hide players. It just seems unethical from my point of view. I know teams do that. Riders already have 8 players on their 1 game IR. Whether any or all are actually injured I don't know but it's at least partially suspicious.

OTOH there isn't room on the PR to add 3 or 4 more players and by my count our AR is 5 or 6 over the limit so a lot will have to change.

So these are all just possibilities except Collaros to 1 game suspension as a certainty. 

Interesting comment about Ayers and Vanterpool moving to the PR. On one had I agree with your thoughts but on the other hand, why are teams allowed to have more than 45 players on the AR after the official cut down and time?

[Jesse]

Yes and no. As I mentioned I'm not a fan of using the 1 game IR to hide players. It just seems unethical from my point of view. I know teams do that. Riders already have 8 players on their 1 game IR. Whether any or all are actually injured I don't know but it's at least partially suspicious.

OTOH there isn't room on the PR to add 3 or 4 more players and by my count our AR is 5 or 6 over the limit so a lot will have to change.

So these are all just possibilities except Collaros to 1 game suspension as a certainty. 

Interesting comment about Ayers and Vanterpool moving to the PR. On one had I agree with your thoughts but on the other hand, why are teams allowed to have more than 45 players on the AR after the official cut down and time?

I wonder if it's just a loophole for the team on bye that we haven't had to submit a roster and depth chart yet.
Or these moves have been made, we've just not been informed of them.

[Blue In BC]

I wonder if it's just a loophole for the team on bye that we haven't had to submit a roster and depth chart yet.
Or these moves have been made, we've just not been informed of them.

Teams playing this week had a bunch of players moved to IR or added from PR etc. Whether that was actually done yesterday or just announced yesterday is a valid question.

Some players were added to both 1 game and 6 game IR prior to cut down day. Logan for example. Other players were moved to suspended list but that hasn't happened formally for Collaros. I take that was to allow him to practice this week even though he can't play. That seems like another loophole even though that's in our favour.

So either there is a lack of transparency or there are loopholes.

[theaardvark]

The PR can be 13 allowing for 2 global players. Currently we have 11 on the PR but only 1 global player. Yes we might have to 1 game IR a couple of players but I really hate having to dick around hiding players and using SMS money as a result.

Noting that an ELC player on the 1 game IR is about a $4k game check compared to $1K on the PR. So it adds up

There is noting to indicate that PR players only ever receive the minimum, and those funds are $SMS allocated.  Moving someone to the PR exposes them to scooping, and does send a message, especially if they are not first year rookies.

Vanterpool to the PR would not be at min wage.  Ayers either.  So whether they get moved to IR or PR, I don't think the $SMS is going to change much for those players, so getting them to take an IR stint protects them and their egos.

A few $K is not going to be an issue for our $SMS, especially if the players are good enough to get scooped.  Ayers and Vanterpool would be, IMHO.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Yes and no. As I mentioned I'm not a fan of using the 1 game IR to hide players. It just seems unethical from my point of view. I know teams do that. Riders already have 8 players on their 1 game IR. Whether any or all are actually injured I don't know but it's at least partially suspicious.

OTOH there isn't room on the PR to add 3 or 4 more players and by my count our AR is 5 or 6 over the limit so a lot will have to change.

So these are all just possibilities except Collaros to 1 game suspension as a certainty. 

Interesting comment about Ayers and Vanterpool moving to the PR. On one had I agree with your thoughts but on the other hand, why are teams allowed to have more than 45 players on the AR after the official cut down and time?

I wonder if it's just a loophole for the team on bye that we haven't had to submit a roster and depth chart yet.
Or these moves have been made, we've just not been informed of them.

I think this is the case, today's player transaction list is dominated by the Argos and Als juggling their lineups in preparation for their game tonight.  Plenty of teams stashing good players on the one game, Bombers can't afford to be the "ethical" exception.

In many cases the roster rules don't fit the game, early season injuries are a huge concern and load management is a thing in a 20 game season, players like Stanley should not be expected to play all 20 games. Expand the roster and allow teams a reasonable amount of flexibility to manage their personnel properly without resorting to cheating.

[Jesse]

Teams playing this week had a bunch of players moved to IR or added from PR etc. Whether that was actually done yesterday or just announced yesterday is a valid question.

Some players were added to both 1 game and 6 game IR prior to cut down day. Logan for example. Other players were moved to suspended list but that hasn't happened formally for Collaros. I take that was to allow him to practice this week even though he can't play. That seems like another loophole even though that's in our favour.

So either there is a lack of transparency or there are loopholes.

Lack of transparency or loophole is a weekly game we could play in the CFL.

That said, Zach is suspended for one week, which will occur in week 2 because of our bye, so he was always allowed to practice this week. He truly isn't suspended yet.

[Blue In BC]

There is noting to indicate that PR players only ever receive the minimum, and those funds are $SMS allocated.  Moving someone to the PR exposes them to scooping, and does send a message, especially if they are not first year rookies.

Vanterpool to the PR would not be at min wage.  Ayers either.  So whether they get moved to IR or PR, I don't think the $SMS is going to change much for those players, so getting them to take an IR stint protects them and their egos.

A few $K is not going to be an issue for our $SMS, especially if the players are good enough to get scooped.  Ayers and Vanterpool would be, IMHO.

Those 2 players are still on ELC deals. So there is nothing indicating they would get more than the minimum PR salary.

Yes, the PR doesn't have to be at the min, but there is equally nothing to suggest a CFL rookie or even 2nd year guy gets more. There might be an argument on a player like White of Cobb that were signed as free agent after their original ELC. Vanterpool only played 2 games in 2024.

Players almost never get " scooped " from PR's. To suggest there might be very little difference in any of these players getting nearly a normal pay check while on PR is foolish IMO.

Even though I don't like the idea of hiding players on the 1 game IR, it would make more sense to do that in order to " have / save " PR roster spots which are limited.

[theaardvark]

I think this is the case, today's player transaction list is dominated by the Argos and Als juggling their lineups in preparation for their game tonight.  Plenty of teams stashing good players on the one game, Bombers can't afford to be the "ethical" exception.

In many cases the roster rules don't fit the game, early season injuries are a huge concern and load management is a thing in a 20 game season, players like Stanley should not be expected to play all 20 games. Expand the roster and allow teams a reasonable amount of flexibility to manage their personnel properly without resorting to cheating.

Expanding the roster means either reducing the minimum wage, or increasing the cap.  Whether they can add in players and leave the cap/payscale the same is not something that can be done midseason, and would be counterproductive to the concept of wanting players to sign multi-year deals.

I'd love to see a 50 man AR.  Would improve the league talent level and help teams sustain through injury, and avoid injury by allowing more flexibility to adjust work load.

Maybe even make it a new section of the AR, basically a "Dressed PR" idea.  Cap the salaries for those players so designated (like Globals), and use it for first or second year players that you'd like to be able to give game time to. They could be DI's or Nats, and would be subject to all the same substitution restrictions.

I'd much rather pay Ayers and Vanterpool a game cheque and have them available on the sidelines in pads than in sweats.

If they added $320k to the cap, that would be easy to do.

[Blue In BC]

Lack of transparency or loophole is a weekly game we could play in the CFL.

That said, Zach is suspended for one week, which will occur in week 2 because of our bye, so he was always allowed to practice this week. He truly isn't suspended yet.

Suspensions during the season if not disputed are immediate. This is a bit of an unusual situation that I don't remember happening before. Although Lawler was suspended for 6 games before 2023 and he was unable to participate in TC or pre-season IIRC.

It's all very odd including the reason for Collaros suspension.

[Blue In BC]

Expanding the roster means either reducing the minimum wage, or increasing the cap.  Whether they can add in players and leave the cap/payscale the same is not something that can be done midseason, and would be counterproductive to the concept of wanting players to sign multi-year deals.

I'd love to see a 50 man AR.  Would improve the league talent level and help teams sustain through injury, and avoid injury by allowing more flexibility to adjust work load.

Maybe even make it a new section of the AR, basically a "Dressed PR" idea.  Cap the salaries for those players so designated (like Globals), and use it for first or second year players that you'd like to be able to give game time to. They could be DI's or Nats, and would be subject to all the same substitution restrictions.

I'd much rather pay Ayers and Vanterpool a game cheque and have them available on the sidelines in pads than in sweats.

If they added $320k to the cap, that would be easy to do.

If teams aren't being ethical then we see the Lions go over the SMS by $300K. It's allowed with a fine and loss of draft choices. Where do we draw the line whwn some teams have deeper pockets than others. That why we have an SMS.

I'd like an expanded roster as well. Not every team is profitable so it's not just a matter of increasing the SMS.

The idea of a " dressed PR player " player has some merit but then again it's both an SMS issue and ratio issue. The rule for an import would have to be different than for a Canadian.

In theory that player could play if another player is permanently removed from that game.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Good luck getting current players to vote to split the pie more ways. You'd have to increase the cap to match but the union would want to up it in a manner that exceeds the current ratio to consider it -- which is a hard spot. The Canadians would never allow the ratio percentage to shrink so you'd mostly be adding Canadians, which, given the relative scarcity would not really improve play that much. Could be done but it would be expensive due to the dominos that would fall to allow a couple more Americans, which I agree, would help.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

If teams aren't being ethical then we see the Lions go over the SMS by $300K. It's allowed with a fine and loss of draft choices. Where do we draw the line whwn some teams have deeper pockets than others. That why we have an SMS.

I'd like an expanded roster as well. Not every team is profitable so it's not just a matter of increasing the SMS.

The idea of a " dressed PR player " player has some merit but then again it's both an SMS issue and ratio issue. The rule for an import would have to be different than for a Canadian.

In theory that player could play if another player is permanently removed from that game.

I honestly don't know what to believe anymore, league revenue goes up without any explanation when most of the stadiums remain half empty for most games. Based on revenue generated SMS is increased $412,365 for 2025, but most teams are reluctant to spend it because the CFLPA can't make up their minds how it should be divied up.  Lot's of work for the commissioner to resolve.

[Blue In BC]

Good luck getting current players to vote to split the pie more ways. You'd have to increase the cap to match but the union would want to up it in a manner that exceeds the current ratio to consider it -- which is a hard spot. The Canadians would never allow the ratio percentage to shrink so you'd mostly be adding Canadians, which, given the relative scarcity would not really improve play that much. Could be done but it would be expensive due to the dominos that would fall to allow a couple more Americans, which I agree, would help.

Yes lots of issues but the roster size has increased significantly over the decades.

I've previously suggested adding 2 more imports ( as DI's ) and 2 more Canadians to the roster. Restricting the play of the extra DI's would be counter productive. If they dress they should be able to rotate in under the current rules.

Yes, the SMS would have to go up. I suppose the size of the PR could be reduced y 4 players at the same time. Assuming each earns $1K on the PR, the next increase is about $55K per player added to the AR.

As you mentioned, the supply of 2 extra Canadians is limited and the benefit of adding 2 more is debatable.

I also mentioned I would eliminate the global designation and convert those 2 roster spots to normal DI's. That allows globals to make the AR but makes them compete with imports to win those spots.In that sense it's not a significant change to the ratio. I just see global players as non Canadians. No need to draw a line or force the issue between an Australian and an American. 

In that sense we'd have Canadians and non Canadians ( imports and globals ) in the same category.

Speaking of splitting the pie, what the heck is going on with the increased SMS for 2025?

[Blue In BC]

I honestly don't know what to believe anymore, league revenue goes up without any explanation when most of the stadiums remain half empty for most games. Based on revenue generated SMS is increased $412,365 for 2025, but most teams are reluctant to spend it because the CFLPA can't make up their minds how it should be divied up.  Lot's of work for the commissioner to resolve.

It is a contradiction. Watching the rider game last night and there were many empty seats. I don't understand how teams negotiated revenue sharing but have no idea how to implement the extra revenue.

Also someone suggested one idea was to increase salaries for PR players? That seems like the worst idea. Pay the players that are on the AR not those that may never see the field. Maybe a slight increase but paying PR players more doesn't add benefit IMO.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

It is a contradiction. Watching the rider game last night and there were many empty seats. I don't understand how teams negotiated revenue sharing but have no idea how to implement the extra revenue.

Also someone suggested one idea was to increase salaries for PR players? That seems like the worst idea. Pay the players that are on the AR not those that may never see the field. Maybe a slight increase but paying PR players more doesn't add benefit IMO.

Don't have any idea how this would work, but with special players on the bubble like Ayers and Vanterpool that might spend half the season on the PR but also could dress for games, agree to pay them around $80k in total, no matter their status.  Rewards the player for putting in time waiting for their opportunity and allows the Bombers to retain them until they're needed, which they both will be eventually.