BigBlue

We have had good commissioners from time to time including a marketing type or two. I am not so sure what we have right now. One of the best things we can do right now is try and duplicate what sportsnet has done with the CBC. It would take some marketing genius and the ability to run some pro forma numbers to generate the interest. A little greed generation is a big part of marketing. More critical than anything is a good on-field product. Too often we haven't had that because we just let our franchise quarterbacks get beat up and teams lose an entire year of competitive entertainment. We react like it's nothing, just part of the game! I find the CFL the most exciting football anywhere. We have to promote, highlight and leverage that excitement. That marketing needs to be more than on TV; it must also include a community involved stands filling promotion of the live product for families seeking to stretch their entertainment budget. We shouldn't be selling major-league refreshment prices; need to get the teenagers out. Need to make hotdogs and pop affordable. We don't need major market advertising firms trying to do the stuff like they do in the majors. We need someone with marketing niche genius at the grassroots level.

"Where would you expand? Halifax? ... Quebec City or London, Ontario? Remains to be seen. poersonally, I doubt it." I agree Halifax is a dead-end pursuit and a logistical nightmare in terms of travel. Very expensive too. London would be cutting into the fan base, MAYBE, for the Tigercats and Argos. Of course, you never know what that community might be hungry for. I see no appeal. So no. Québec city intrigues me though. It would instantly set up a rivalry with the Alouettes. The fan base there has proven themselves; there is a natural complement between football and hockey – – they have opposite seasons with very little overlap. I also think it would add some legitimacy to the league, filling in a void where the major French population looks a little underserved, at least to me. I also heard Ambroise speak of Québec City in positive terms in terms of marketing the CFL. So it looks like the CFL brass are thinking about it seriously. I hope it happens – – it would make everything better in terms of scheduling, league balance, and keeping travel costs down. Expanding to Québec city makes a lot of sense to me.

never used it oh Brilliant one

So Canadians projected to go highly in the current NFL draft include: Penn State tight end Theo Johnson, a native of Windsor, Ont., could be the first Canadian selected in the 2024 NFL draft. Isaiah Adams, offensive line, Illinois ... likely to end up as a guard in the pros due to his strength and compact build. Tanner McLachlan, tight end, Arizona ... not the best blocker, but his receiving talent alone could get his name called early Anim Dankwah, offensive tackle, Howard... measuring 6-foot-8 and 353 pounds... much assembly will be required with his footwork and lateral efficiency at the pro level Massive University of British Columbia offensive lineman Giovanni Manu could also be a late-round pick https://www.cbc.ca/sports/the-buzzer-newsletter-2024-nfl-draft-preview-canadians-1.7185282

I totally agree with you. Those incremental increases were prearranged. The next major negotiation is still a couple of years away. What the financial situation of the league is a big unknown right now. If we are still in these tight finances (and I am guessing that the missing the covid season has a lot to do with that) then it is just stay in financial survival mode. However, if we are continuing to see TV fan ratings going up there could be a substantially larger amount of money available for the salary cap. It might even be a quantum leap. When such discoveries are made financial decisions in a compacted time frame are not always made with the greatest wisdom. Preplanning what to do with newfound money is not senseless. It often makes a great deal of difference; in order to negotiate well; you have to know what is truly important and what makes a big difference. Otherwise, the money just goes to the top end of the player pool, as the all-stars demand and the general managers compete. That is the opposite of planning. So at the next player negotiations, if there is not a source of new money from increased viewership or attendance, then I agree that the best thing to focus on is player safety and procedural methods to ensure that safety. One item I have harked on in the past is quarterback protection. There are many other issues. There is also methodology to increase player security and comfort. Why bring preplanning up now? Because we are in a lull of big events to discuss. How many posters are considering the state of the league 3 to 5 years down the line? Now that we've had the NFL draft last night, we can start to get into the nitty-gritty of our Canadian draft and getting players to camp. It's getting exciting!

When the players vote, they ratify. Negotiations occur before the fact; there are trade-offs for both sides in the negotiations. If the governors want an expanded roster, $240,000 is not a lot of money. And some of the players will see player expansion is a good thing. So in our discussion the key thing is getting the concepts across, not minor money matters

" I do NOT see the CFL adding more salaried positions" I agree if the salary cap is not going up but if history is any guide it will go up at least some. What I am advocating here is to take $250,000 of that increase and expand the Canadian roster size. It will ultimately lower the cost of Canadians over all. It will lower it because there will be more Canadian talent because of the larger veteran experienced talent pool (30 to 60 more veterans at least). The teams can then apply the rest of the salary cap increase as they see fit. Until we see game day rosters the same size as the NFL, we will always have game day injury problems. A little common sense can prevail here. We just have to regulate it slightly for a very good purpose.

isn't a very sound path to development and eventual playing time. It is not sound? What are you thinking in that regard? They will be at every practice. They will have instruction from the positional coaches. They will have mentorship from the starters in their position. And during the practices they will be playing their heart out. And they will be working out on their own before and after practice. They will also learn a new and better way of weight training. They will be living in a different world than their amateur experiences. They will learn grit from rubbing shoulders with seasoned veterans. They will be dressed and in the lineup for nine games, and may be more if there added to the full-time roster temporarily because of injury. In those nine games that will likely have some special teams work. Or they might be put into the game in short yardage situations. They will be doing guided film work. They will be totally immersed with the whole team through thick and thin. What kind of learning is that? You don't think the six will develop so much more than anything they've seen in junior or college? And on top of that, they will have a chance to play instead of sitting in an office someplace with no football future path. Not every one of the six will stay in the league but one or two or three of them will eventually get to a starting role. Don't you think? Anyway, if you don't like six half timers, just add three more Canadian players to the roster size. They can develop that way. Further, the CFL PA should be happy because they have expanded permanently the number of jobs for the players. Negotiating for that the fantastic!

"You have a university degree and you know your life is drawing you elsewhere." This would be true for some, especially those who have taken specific degrees in say engineering, accounting or nursing. Many others true aspiration is to play football and worry about career later. These same individuals know that just having a degree is no guarantee of a good job. More and more have to go on to acquire Masters degrees to pursue their chosen vocation. And even that is no guarantee of a job in their targeted career path. There are also career paths such as in real estate or financial sales or 100 other situations, where the athlete can work around the football season in developing a clientele. Not having to travel for nine games would help the newbie graduate pay a little more attention to such a job during the season. That's a career choice. Further, remember at one time all CFL players had to have an alternate job because Canadian football salaries were just inadequate. In some ways that's no different today. You have the joy of football while you develop a proposed football income source. More to the point, there are many very athletic individuals, who just for one reason or another, whatever that might be, just have not had the opportunity to fully develop their skills. In addition to university students, this is also true of junior league football players around the country. They love football and just want to play it. So whether it's more economical to have six players on half salary, or three players on a full roster spot, what I'm advocating is that the CFL PA should lobby for an expansion of the roster size. We need to have a larger talent pool. My personal thought is that it's better to have six extra on the roster than just three. Like the draft, management just doesn't know who was going to emerge in a big way. So much is depending on willpower and underlying athletic skills not yet developed. And yes, eligibility for the six person half season would include junior football players and would include Canadians attending US universities. Those young men would also have the ability to be in school, online. That is becoming more and more popular as well as relatively lower cost to achieve advanced degrees in their targeted field. None of these football aspirants are denigrated or damaged by just playing nine games instead of 18. Let the young men design their own future. Who are we to judge how they will decide to run their life. Add three full-time or six part-time for about the same cost ($240,000 plus travel cost) and develop that talent pool. Our league loves Canadians and it is the Canadian talent that has given our game longevity.

For a kid straight out of college who really wants to play professional football, $40,000 for half a year is not peanuts. It's a career starter that might get them on the team full-time next year. Meanwhile they get to immediately don a professional uniform and just get used to the game. Learning how to play in the enemy's territory can be learned later. Meanwhile they will have the benefit of professional coaching and mentoring from the senior players in their position. This is way better than sitting on the taxi squad hoping someday to get in to uniform. This is not a denigrating position for a raw rookie. Ask any aspiring Canadian who gets cut whether they would rather be one of the partly paid Canadian trainees. Ask any of the coaches if they would like the depth that these players would give when the injury bug hits. Even if "their development is being accelerated at half the pace of their teammates" (and I don't believe it would be), then there is progress being made towards the following season. Many would buy into that. This might not be the perfect way to get more Canadians into our game, but it is a way. We would end up with more Canadian talent and more useful players than ever before. Develop the lower end of the roster.

"The Canadian Football League Players’ Association (CFLPA) has been accepted as an affiliate member by the Canadian Labour Congress, following a ratifying vote by the organization on Thursday. “The CFLPA has a proud and successful 59-year history of advocating for fair and safe working conditions…"" What do you feel the CFL PA should next go after to improve the game for both the players and the fans? Personally, when there is an expansion of money available for the players, I would like to see it go for more Canadian positions on each and every CFL roster. I don't believe just adding a little more money for the top end of the roster will improve our game that much. I would rather see the money go to the low end of the roster. And I don't think sending money to the top-end will bring in more players from the xfl and the other peripheral leagues . One idea is to add three Canadian minimum salary positions (for $240,000 or so per year per team). Having more trained Canadians may actually lower the cost of Canadians on the roster. Yes – no? More is less? There is also another way to do this although we would have to be a little more innovative in our thinking. This would take eligible first and second year Canadian players and have them dress and play only home games. That would cut out the cost of travel. It would give them nine actual games in which they could dress. Often Canadian players are behind because they just haven't had a high enough level of training. This will give them that opportunity. And it would strengthen not only the team but all the league's player pool. So for example, each team could dress six extra Canadians (or four) for each home game. It would only cost the league minimum salary for each of those nine home games. And if they did get on the regular-season roster it would still be for the same league minimum per game. Yes it would give the home team a little advantage; that would be good for attendance, to have the home team win a little more often. And of course the visiting team would gain the advantage at their next game. Does this sound like a crazy thing to negotiate for, for six extra positions with limited playing time? Three extra salaries would cost what, $240,000 (6 X $80,00 X half a season) or so per year? Would adding an extra 56-60 players to the talent pool make the league stronger? What should the CFL PA due to change their thinking to benefit all of the players and their association, not just their stars? What idea have you been thinking about to improve our game?

Robert, given very good odds, how much of your own money would you spend on this prediction/bet? At least a looney?

Take a look at the stadium photograph above. Maybe just tear down half the stands, get rid of the track, and build the opposite side with new stands filled with private boxes. In a government town like Edmonton they would find ways of filling those boxes without violating some sense of propriety. The old stands that remain could be discounted relative to the new stands on the opposite side, which would help bring in families at prices they could afford. Yes, renew the refreshment stands and washrooms in the old sections. Meanwhile the new stands would be able to handle more premium food and drink sales. There is a lot of money in Edmonton that would want premium seating, higher end refreshments and all that kind of stuff. The private boxes could add in luxury amenities. This is not hard to figure out; it's just hard to get past the little fiefdoms that exist in the political arena; they bow to the big money in that city. Some leading figure/s would somehow have to sponsor such. Leadership would have to go beyond the old boys club that tends to dominate the Board of Directors in cities like Edmonton and Winnipeg. Wade Miller did it here. Such a leader needs good background in both marketing and applicable business skills. That's how community-based teams can continue. In Regina they got Mosaic Stadium done but they've gone backwards in football operations. In Calgary, the CFL does not have the sex appeal that the status minded have for the Flames. That's more politics and a lack of civic leadership in Canada's leading business city. Calgary's mayor's office has a disproportionate amount of power while the business people are too focused on making lots of money. Again football needs a civic champion in that community.

After going to one of the links on 3 Down Nation I was swarmed by ads so much so that I couldn't read the article. I've not had to endure that in a very long time. I do get their email updates and it's a nice summary but after today I'm just not so sure I'm interested in anything they do anymore. This seems to be a real drop-off in their substance and allowing their subscribers to be pestered by unsolicited advertising reeks of STUPID. They were okay and sometimes good but now… Oh wow!

Of all the quarterbacks outlined in the list above, the one I had particular fondness for was our current offensive coordinator, Buck Pierce. Yes he was on the downside of his career but I still thought he played okay if he wasn't too banged up. He could huck the ball and make plays with his legs. He was filled with heart and intensity. I just enjoyed watching him play. But yeah, he is turning out to be a way better coordinator than he was a QB, even at its prime. Always was and still is a favourite of mine.

Pass - Run: who cares November games hurt attendance and weaken the whole league ... many fans stay home when they would attend in May MOVE THE GC TO THE 1ST SUNDAY IN NOVEMBER

i cut my teeth on leo lewis and kenny ploen: inside the 10 yard line, lateral to lewis, lateral back to ploen, then a pass often to lewis, or ploen just walks into the endzone over and over, game after game now thats football

3pm cst?

does the show start at 2 pm cst?

Brady is not worth any way thing near Nic Demski ($175k+)... I expect BO will be offered around 140 with incentives = $150k take it or leave it

I have lost track of Demski's contract status ... very quiet like most of the Blue /// any updates?

protecting our QBs is an awful thing ... worst ever thought?

Vital to our league in the long term and short term progress.

Why Jeopardize Our Most Important Assets ? When a team loses its starting quarterback, home team walk-up traffic and television ratings are crushed; the weaknesses of the league are exposed. TSN loses a bit of money and a lot of interest; fans call us a bush league and public interest wanes. The most money spent by any team ALWAYS is on its most valuable asset, so what is the league’s brain trust thinking? Are they trying to please the players Association? Are they hoping to hit highlight reels of an athlete being destroyed? Are we trying to claim that our 100+ year history and heritage mandates we need to show grit? Our referees need to be instructed to protect our quarterbacks at all costs! EXPLICITY and in detail. Just a feather of too much force brings out the flag. Forget about referee’s discretion. Make it costly for them to miss a roughing call. Put the whole league on a mission to keep our starting quarterbacks upright. Go overboard making “roughing the passer” punitive. “When in doubt about a roughness call or potentially dangerous tactic against the quarterback, the Referee should always call roughing the passer.” (NFL Policy) Our game will change, if we want it to. It’s a simple matter of will. There is no doubt what the but the NFL has done. We need to more than a match their actions. We have more at stake. THE CFL HAS TO ABSOLUTELY WITHOUT EXCEPTION ENFORCE THE QB PROTECTION RULES. REFEREES NEED TO BE FORCED TO COMPLY. What is the “hug rule”? “A rushing defender is prohibited from committing such intimidating and punishing acts as “stuffing” a passer into the ground or unnecessarily wrestling or driving him down after the passer has thrown the ball, even if the rusher makes his initial contact with the passer within the one-step limitation… When tackling a passer who is in a defenseless posture (e.g., during or just after throwing a pass), a defensive player must not unnecessarily or violently throw him down or land on top of him with all or most of the defender’s weight. Instead, the defensive player must strive to wrap up the passer with the defensive player’s arms and not land on the passer with all or most of his body weight.” One more thing: “A player who initiates contact against a passer is responsible for avoiding an illegal act… pass rushers are responsible for being aware of the position of the ball in passing situations”. In other words, the onus must be on the defensive player to have the awareness required to avoid fouling the quarterback. So if the defensive pass rusher pulls up and “hugs the quarterback” instead of throwing him into the ground, there is no penalty; but following through yields a 25 yard penalty, a game misconduct and an automatic one-game suspension. Multiple infractions will carry even more harsh retribution. Real change will happen rapidly. For everyone’s information, here is a fairly comprehensive set of the NFL’s roughing the passer rules: https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/roughing-the-passer/ ROUGHING THE PASSER Because the act of passing often puts the quarterback (or any other player attempting a pass) in a position where he is particularly vulnerable to injury, special rules against roughing the passer apply. The Referee has principal responsibility for enforcing these rules. Any physical acts against a player who is in a passing posture (i.e. before, during, or after a pass) which, in the Referee’s judgment, are unwarranted by the circumstances of the play will be called as fouls. The Referee will be guided by the following principles: Roughing will be called if, in the Referee’s judgment, a pass rusher clearly should have known that the ball had already left the passer’s hand before contact was made; pass rushers are responsible for being aware of the position of the ball in passing situations; the Referee will use the release of the ball from the passer’s hand as his guideline that the passer is now fully protected; once a pass has been released by a passer, a rushing defender may make direct contact with the passer only up through the rusher’s first step after such release (prior to second step hitting the ground); thereafter the rusher must be making an attempt to avoid contact and must not continue to “drive through” or otherwise forcibly contact the passer; incidental or inadvertent contact by a player who is easing up or being blocked into the passer will not be considered significant. A rushing defender is prohibited from committing such intimidating and punishing acts as “stuffing” a passer into the ground or unnecessarily wrestling or driving him down after the passer has thrown the ball, even if the rusher makes his initial contact with the passer within the one-step limitation provided for in (a) above. When tackling a passer who is in a defenseless posture (e.g., during or just after throwing a pass), a defensive player must not unnecessarily or violently throw him down or land on top of him with all or most of the defender’s weight. Instead, the defensive player must strive to wrap up the passer with the defensive player’s arms and not land on the passer with all or most of his body weight. In covering the passer position, Referees will be particularly alert to fouls in which defenders impermissibly use the helmet and/or facemask to hit the passer, or use hands, arms, or other parts of the body to hit the passer forcibly in the head or neck area (see also the other unnecessary roughness rules covering these subjects). A defensive player must not use his helmet against a passer who is in a defenseless posture—for example, (1) forcibly hitting the passer’s head or neck area with the helmet or facemask, even if the initial contact of the defender’s helmet or facemask is lower than the passer’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the passer by encircling or grasping him; or (2) lowering the head and making forcible contact with any part of the helmet against any part of the passer’s body. This rule does not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or non-crown parts of the helmet in the course of a conventional tackle on a passer. A rushing defender is prohibited from forcibly hitting in the knee area or below a passer who has one or both feet on the ground, even if the initial contact is above the knee. It is not a foul if the defender is blocked (or fouled) into the passer and has no opportunity to avoid him. Notes A defender cannot initiate a roll or lunge and forcibly hit the passer in the knee area or below, even if he is being contacted by another player. It is not a foul if the defender swipes or grabs a passer in the knee area or below in an attempt to tackle him, provided he does not make forcible contact with the helmet, shoulder, chest, or forearm. A passer who is standing still or fading backward after the ball has left his hand is obviously out of the play and must not be unnecessarily contacted by an opponent through the end of the down or until the passer becomes a blocker, or a runner, or, in the event of a change of possession during the down, until he assumes a distinctly defensive position. However, at any time after the change of possession, it is a foul if: an opponent forcibly hits the quarterback’s head or neck area with his helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder if an opponent lowers his head and makes forcible contact with any part of his helmet against any part of the passer’s body. This provision does not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or the helmet in the course of a conventional block. When the passer goes outside the pocket area and either continues moving with the ball (without attempting to advance the ball as a runner) or throws while on the run, he loses the protection of the one-step rule provided for in (a) above, and the protection against a low hit provided for in (e) above, but he remains covered by all the other special protections afforded to a passer in the pocket (b, c, d, and f), as well as the regular unnecessary roughness rules applicable to all player positions. If the passer stops behind the line and clearly establishes a passing posture, he will then be covered by all of the special protections for passers. The Referee must blow the play dead as soon as the passer is clearly in the grasp and control of any tackler behind the line, and the passer’s safety is in jeopardy. Note: A player who initiates contact against a passer is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a passer, irrespective of any acts by the passer, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact. Penalty: For Roughing the Passer: Loss of 15 yards and an automatic first down; disqualification if flagrant. Notes When in doubt about a roughness call or potentially dangerous tactic against the quarterback, the Referee should always call roughing the passer. See 8-6-1-c–d for personal fouls prior to completion or interception.

"Dru will likely look for the biggest possible deal " how can you read his mind? know his intentions? Brown has said in public he loves being mentored by zc ... that is very big