CFL, CFLPA Cancel Off Season Mini Camps

[Rich]

Quote

The league and players’ association have agreed to put an end to team mini-camps.

The CFL and CFLPA added mini-camps to the collective bargaining agreement in 2010, which allowed teams to hold them for three days, but they were voluntary and no contact was permitted. After eight years of holding off-season mini-camps, they will be no more, per sources.

Mini-camps provided teams the opportunity to see players in their own setting on a Canadian field while working with coaches and team-specific schemes. It gave a chance for franchises to evaluate newcomers and make decisions based on performances at mini-camp. Based on the assessment afterwards, players could put themselves in a favourable spot heading into training camp, especially rookies new to the three-down game, or hopefuls could be released.

...

 

[Fatty Liver]

Why? The mini camps seemed to be an excellent venue for initiating rookies to the CFL game.

[JCon]

Seems like a bizarre move, removing opportunities to see new players and get them acclimatized to the CFL game. 

I thought it was win-win. 

[Bubba Zanetti]

This just seems dumb.

[Fatty Liver]

The vast majority of mini-camp players are cut in main camp anyway so it's not like a lot of them ever become P.A. members. 

I wonder if the P.A. looks at these camps as an unfair advantage rookies have over their members to steal their jobs, if so bizzare logic.

[Sard]

I see it as an opportunity to weed out the weaker players early, which would in theory raise the level of players in Training Camp.  Very odd decision, so there must be more to it than they are reporting.

[Fatty Liver]

Perhaps these camps were not cost effective in terms of the number of qualified players they produced.  Which could be a discovery of Ambrosie's forensic accounting initiative.

[Taynted_Fayth]

I kinda half assedly followed the riders mini camp reports cuz I'm not sure if the bombers held any this year (seemed like there was only rookie camp and tc camp both held at IGF). Other then Luc Mullinder slobbering over everyones jock those camps 2 years in a row provided them sweet FA so don't see why it's really much of an issue. If anything the extra time to shake some off season rust on your QB should be a welcomed thing by the league

[Brandon]

Listening to Streveler on 1290 this afternoon he made mention of the mini camp being a great introduction for a guy like him who had zero knowledge of the CFL to help him prepare for camp.   

[Rod Black]

3 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

The vast majority of mini-camp players are cut in main camp anyway so it's not like a lot of them ever become P.A. members. 

I wonder if the P.A. looks at these camps as an unfair advantage rookies have over their members to steal their jobs, if so bizzare logic.

 

3 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Perhaps these camps were not cost effective in terms of the number of qualified players they produced.  Which could be a discovery of Ambrosie's forensic accounting initiative.

You are on to something. The PA gets squat (dues), in theory, from allowing non members to participate. Management is dissatisfied with the results vs monetary cost and time. Very slick on Ambrosie to get a win win agreement. 

 

[Jacquie]

The last paragraph of the article:

Quote

Player safety has been paramount has been top of mind since Randy Ambrosie has taken office as the commissioner. An extra bye week was added to the 2018 schedule and padded practices were eliminated after training camp is over last September. Eliminating mini-camps continues that initiative.

Although that's really badly written, it's saying it's a player safety thing.

Edited June 26, 2018 by Jacquie

[wbbfan]

4 minutes ago, Jacquie said:

The last paragraph of the article:

Although that's really badly written, it's saying it's a player safety thing.

because no contact once a day for 3 days is a player safety thing...

In this case I think the league should add 1 week back to pre season and move the cut down day up. 3 games is optimal for pre season any way imo. Wont happen though. I feel like this is an early bit of good will from the league to the PA to try n get a new cba done. 

[Eternal optimist]

20 minutes ago, Jacquie said:

The last paragraph of the article:

Although that's really badly written, it's saying it's a player safety thing.

How much longer before they just make an entire quarter non-contact?

[SpeedFlex27]

5 hours ago, JCon said:

Seems like a bizarre move, removing opportunities to see new players and get them acclimatized to the CFL game. 

I thought it was win-win. 

That's why. The CFLPA is all about protecting it's own. Less evaluation time means keeping job for veterans. Do you think entitled overpaid Canadian OL who control the players association care about rookies at other positions especially Americans? No chance. 

[JCon]

1 hour ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

That's why. The CFLPA is all about protecting it's own. Less evaluation time means keeping job for veterans. Do you think entitled overpaid Canadian OL who control the players association care about rookies at other positions especially Americans? No chance. 

I know but it was a mutual decision done outside the normal terms of the CBA. If anything, I would have expected this to be used as a bargaining piece.

Maybe it was a goodwill gesture, which do occur within a collective agreement. 

Edited June 26, 2018 by JCon

[SpeedFlex27]

1 minute ago, JCon said:

I know but it was a mutual decision done outside the normal terms of the CBA. If anything, I would have expected this to be used as a bargaining piece.

Maybe it was a goodwill gesture, which do occur within a collective agreement. 

It probably was. 

[17to85]

Alternate theory: this is the cfl keeping costs down for the poor teams, like with the cap on coaches coming in. Can't have Toronto or Montreal having to pay money they don't have. ******* eastern Canada, get your **** together.

[JCon]

12 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Alternate theory: this is the cfl keeping costs down for the poor teams, like with the cap on coaches coming in. Can't have Toronto or Montreal having to pay money they don't have. ******* eastern Canada, get your **** together.

Funny, because I'm guessing Toronto has the most expensive GM/Coach combo. 

 

[17to85]

10 hours ago, JCon said:

Funny, because I'm guessing Toronto has the most expensive GM/Coach combo. 

 

I think it's pretty universally accepted that Saskatchewan has the most expensive staff, if only cause there's more coaches than players there. 

[WBBFanWest]

1 minute ago, 17to85 said:

I think it's pretty universally accepted that Saskatchewan has the most expensive staff, if only cause there's more coaches than players there. 

They have over 100 coaches?  Wow, how many "safe houses" do those guys have???

[Fan Boy]

2 hours ago, WBBFanWest said:

They have over 100 coaches?  Wow, how many "safe houses" do those guys have???

You need coaches in the "safe houses" to run the drllls in the back yard to keep everyone ready. 

[Fatty Liver]

3 hours ago, WBBFanWest said:

They have over 100 coaches?  Wow, how many "safe houses" do those guys have???

Unofficial count of the Riders "houses".

6 Safe houses

2 crack houses 

8 cat houses

2 little pink houses (for you and me)

3 half-way houses

0 Rick Houses

 

 

 

[MC]

Most likely cutting a cost, a potential liability and making the CFLPA happy in the process.  They cost a fair amount of money in travel costs for the players and coaches.  There might be some liability involved.  I know in the NFL they have players sign waivers to attend because the rookies are not signed yet.  They may have been served with the odd Statement of Claim because a player was hurt and, as a result, has lost income.  And the established players (i.e. dues paying members) of the CFLPA have everything to lose with these mini-camps.  If it was up to them, they would likely want to stop the rookie camp too.  But that won't happen.

[Fatty Liver]

8 minutes ago, MC said:

Most likely cutting a cost, a potential liability and making the CFLPA happy in the process.  They cost a fair amount of money in travel costs for the players and coaches.  There might be some liability involved.  I know in the NFL they have players sign waivers to attend because the rookies are not signed yet.  They may have been served with the odd Statement of Claim because a player was hurt and, as a result, has lost income.  And the established players (i.e. dues paying members) of the CFLPA have everything to lose with these mini-camps.  If it was up to them, they would likely want to stop the rookie camp too.  But that won't happen.

I believe mini-camp=rookie camp, they are one and the same.

[Jacquie]

22 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

I believe mini-camp=rookie camp, they are one and the same.

No they aren't. Mini-camp is in April while rookie camp is just before main TC.

Edited June 26, 2018 by Jacquie