Second Round Final Cuts

[Fatty Liver]

4 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

I don't know why we don't. This so called "Gentleman's Agreement" not to take players from other teams off the PR is frustrating. If it's frowned upon so much as dirty pool if it happens then why doesn't the CFL change the rules to say PR players are protected? Some of the rules in the CFL are head scratchers & make little sense.

I agree 100%, if they respect some of these "gentleman's agreements" they should implement them as rules.  Perhaps it's the P.A. that prevents them from doing so, as they're not in the best interest of the players.

Edited June 18, 2017 by Throw Long Bannatyne

[SpeedFlex27]

4 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

I agree 100%, if they respect some of these "gentleman's agreements" they should implement them as rules.  Perhaps it's the P.A. that prevents them from doing so, as they're not in the best interest of the players.

If anything you'd think the CFLPA would want teams to be able to grab these guys. As a fan, I find it frustrating knowing there are players on other teams PR's that could help us yet they're untouchable when actually they aren't. .

[JuranBoldenRules]

48 minutes ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

I'd do it. He was likely expendable due to them picking up Woods

Or because he's not quite good enough?

[Taynted_Fayth]

16 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

I don't know why we don't. This so called "Gentleman's Agreement" not to take players from other teams off the PR is frustrating. If it's frowned upon so much as dirty pool if it happens then why doesn't the CFL change the rules to say PR players are protected? Some of the rules in the CFL are head scratchers & make little sense.

I'm curious if a team has to go to the PR players GM first and ask to speak with that player, or if they can just directly talk to the PR player first? PR players are under contract and being paid, so it should still be seen as tampering if another team approaches them without consent

[Jpan85]

You have to put him on your 46 man roster than. So you would have to release someone. Pretty deep at special teams Canadian LB would be no point.

[Taynted_Fayth]

6 minutes ago, Jpan85 said:

You have to put him on your 46 man roster than. So you would have to release someone. Pretty deep at special teams Canadian LB would be no point.

but can another team speak with the PR player without the players team knowing before hand?  I keep thinking back to the Bennett situation last year, and while he's since been cut,  the proximity of him signing in sask. after the GC al;most immediately makes me wonder if there had been some discussions ahead of time for Bennett to make such a quick decision.  

We put some of our potential future on the PR yesterday (most notably Spooner) and I would hate to have another team be in his ear the whole time he's there setting up a quick jump at the first chance he can

Edited June 18, 2017 by Taynted_Fayth

[Jpan85]

If someone claims Spooner they can move him to 46 blocking claim or he can choose to stay. It's not as easy as some make it to get players off PR.

[wbbfan]

Id like to see rookies un claimable off the PR. Both imp and ni. Better for the league and the game if players who need that time to develop get it. After the rookie year there should be a compensatory draft pick for snatching off some one elses pr. Or neg lister. Also, itd be nice if rookie NIs didnt count against the PR. The league needs more then any thing, to develop NI talent. Being able to keep guys like butcher around for a year and season them a bit would only help. 

[Jpan85]

The PA would never go for that. If you are taken off PR you are on 46 man roster and receiving a game check. These things can't be unilaterally implemented by the league.

 

[ALuCsRED]

To sign off the 46 man roster you have to talk to the player, get the player to agree to move, have the player sign, then the original team can still roster that player to protect them (and drop someone else off their 46 man roster to the PR).

From https://cfldb.ca/faq/rosters/:

"Practice roster contracts allow a player to be signed by another club to a regular player contract, meaning the player must take an active (46-man) roster spot (sign a standard player contract). The club that currently holds the practice roster contract has the same option to sign the player to a standard player contract (and place the player on a 46-man roster spot) to avoid losing the player. Players under practice roster contracts are not allowed to sign a practice roster agreement with another team until they are released from the contract or the contract expires.

There are no league restrictions to how long (how many seasons) a player may stay on a practice roster. It is purely a player's decision to accept a practice roster spot when offered by a team."

[wbbfan]

1 hour ago, Jpan85 said:

The PA would never go for that. If you are taken off PR you are on 46 man roster and receiving a game check. These things can't be unilaterally implemented by the league.

 

yeah I know the league couldnt. I tend to think the PA takes what the league offers. But they would certainly deserve some thing for that concession. 

 

[Eternal optimist]

6 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

I don't know why we don't. This so called "Gentleman's Agreement" not to take players from other teams off the PR is frustrating. If it's frowned upon so much as dirty pool if it happens then why doesn't the CFL change the rules to say PR players are protected? Some of the rules in the CFL are head scratchers & make little sense.

The biggest problem with going against the "Gentleman's Agreement" is essentially the other teams would just set up an embargo against your team. Although trades are uncommon in the CFL, if you were blacklisted for breaking the Gentleman's Agreement, you'd miss out on potential win-win trades with other teams, and trades that often occur shortly before the CFL draft.

In economics, a similar scenario is commonly referred to as the "Prisoner's Dilemma" provides an interesting example of common group decision-making problems and could shed some light on this issue.

That said, I agree and it is stupid that they don't just sign off each other's practice rosters.

[ALuCsRED]

So, the former Bombers cut were:

MTL - Jovon Johnson, Don Unamba

TOR - QB Drew Willy

OTT - WR Tori Gurley, DL Adrian Hubbard

SSK - QB Bryan Bennett, DL Ivan Brown, WR Thomas Mayo, DL Jordan Reaves,

 

And put in the practice roster were:

EDM - PR'd WR Kenny Stafford

 

[Atomic]

I think the so-called gentleman's agreement doesn't even exist.  We've seen teams try to poach players from practice rosters, it just almost always gets blocked by the owning team.  Why would they let someone steal their player?

[wbbfan]

4 minutes ago, Atomic said:

I think the so-called gentleman's agreement doesn't even exist.  We've seen teams try to poach players from practice rosters, it just almost always gets blocked by the owning team.  Why would they let someone steal their player?

Yeah if there was a time when it existed i wasnt alive. I remember guys in the 90s being poached, even remember dave ritchie poached guys late in the season from rivals we expected to face in the play offs. He did it a couple times. Was some claims it was for play book spying, i remember us doing it to some one, maybe buono and him doing it right back right away. The league is too small to black ball GMs / trading partners. 

[Eternal optimist]

15 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

Yeah if there was a time when it existed i wasnt alive. I remember guys in the 90s being poached, even remember dave ritchie poached guys late in the season from rivals we expected to face in the play offs. He did it a couple times. Was some claims it was for play book spying, i remember us doing it to some one, maybe buono and him doing it right back right away. The league is too small to black ball GMs / trading partners. 

The most recent case I can remember of stuff like this happening was in the 2011 playoffs when the Ti-Cats signed Terence Jeffers-Harris 2 days before the Eastern Semi-final...but even that was only after the Bombers had released him.

[Atomic]

Just now, Eternal optimist said:

The most recent case I can remember of stuff like this happening was in the 2011 playoffs when the Ti-Cats signed Terence Jeffers-Harris 2 days before the Eastern Semi-final...but even that was only after the Bombers had released him.

In 2014 we tried to take Canadian linebacker Jonathan Beaulieu-Richard from the Ticats but they just activated him so we couldn't do it.  There have been other examples but I wouldn't be surprised if it happened and went unreported as well.

It's really easy for teams to block it from happening so it rarely happens.

[SPuDS]

On 2017-06-17 at 0:14 PM, Jpan85 said:

 

we got jesus in the secondary!? omg we will be unstoppable!
 

[SPuDS]

On 2017-06-17 at 0:59 PM, Noeller said:

Isn't that quite the statement around these parts... After so many years wandering the desert.... 

such a glorious change of events.  never thought I'd see the day again that we cut semi-promising talent because we have a plethora of it for once.

[SPuDS]

On 2017-06-17 at 3:46 PM, rebusrankin said:

Flanders on the roster = good.

A little surprised Neufeld survived.

Happy L. Washington is on the roster.

Wish we'd put Daniel Williams on the PR.

Worried Jones tries to nab Spooner.

I almost wonder if Neufeld is not trade bait at this point..

[Tracker]

3 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

we got jesus in the secondary!? omg we will be unstoppable!
 

Perhaps Jesus will be looking after the (punt) returning?

[SPuDS]

On 2017-06-17 at 4:04 PM, AKAChip said:

Yikes @ #67 for Poop. Awful, awful number for a D-Lineman.

dont think you can use #2 as a d-lineman tho.

[Tracker]

3 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

dont think you can use #2 as a d-lineman tho.

Why can he not use #2? He IS"Poop" after all.

[SPuDS]

On 2017-06-17 at 8:45 PM, Eternal optimist said:

 

It was not too long ago that the Bombers proudly displayed one of the best middle linebackers in the league while having a "meh" defense elsewhere...

 

Henoc Muamba and 2013, methinks? That turned out swell didn't it?

even before that, the Barrin Simpson years.. He was a stud and had insane stats but kinda seemed like we suffered elsewhere across the board..

 

I think too much is being made about Hurl as our "starter" especially considering its really only going to be in name only.. he will rotate alot im sure.

[WBBFanWest]

41 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

we got jesus in the secondary!? omg we will be unstoppable!
 

Jesus is good, no question, but if we're talking defence, I'd rather sign Peter.  He's better.  In fact, one night, he denied Jesus three times.  That's pretty amazing!