2021/22 - CFL Offseason - Non-Back-to-Back Grey Cup Champion Thread

[JCon]

Just now, Booch said:

can I ask why?...its basically just more flexible rotation...not a reduction in a starting required Canadians roster spot

For me, it's the complexity of the proposal and no in-game repercussions for breaking the rule. 

There are coaches in this league that will abuse this. Jones for one.  

[Booch]

Just now, JCon said:

For me, it's the complexity of the proposal and no in-game repercussions for breaking the rule. 

There are coaches in this league that will abuse this. Jones for one.  

yeah...I agree on that....how and who keeps track of the snaps....but I like the idea of the naturalized player, maybe just say 20 snaps a game max...be easier to count and manage....who cant count? lol

[bb1]

Maybe this is not spelled out simply for people. We have currently 7 required cdns to start right? Now does every team have 7 cdn backups who can seamlessly come in?  So the talent level and play drop off whenever any team loses a starting cdn. Add to that a diminished supply of top cdn who bolt off to the NFL. Add to that the money and time teams play to develop a cdn player only to have him leave and play somewhere else. It's supply and demand and teams need a little more balance with costs and supply. That's were the cost and drop off in talent hurt's the CFL. 

[Noeller]

One thing I've been thinking about is the lack (??) of Canadians who play football at a high enough level in this country, overall, and what happens if we add a team in the Maritimes? Then all of a sudden you need ____ number of Canadians to fill out that roster, as well. I know that's a "tomorrow problem" but still something to think about. Do we have enough Canadians of high enough quality to fill out 10 rosters in this country? 

Don't get me wrong, I'm always going to advocate for Canadians in the CFL...that's my priority, personally........but it's something I think about. 

[Jesse]

36 minutes ago, Booch said:

can I ask why?...its basically just more flexible rotation...not a reduction in a starting required Canadians roster spot

100% because it just adds a layer of complication. Keeping track of the snap counts, is it game by game or cumulative or chunks of the season?

[Jesse]

13 minutes ago, Noeller said:

One thing I've been thinking about is the lack (??) of Canadians who play football at a high enough level in this country, overall, and what happens if we add a team in the Maritimes? Then all of a sudden you need ____ number of Canadians to fill out that roster, as well. I know that's a "tomorrow problem" but still something to think about. Do we have enough Canadians of high enough quality to fill out 10 rosters in this country? 

Don't get me wrong, I'm always going to advocate for Canadians in the CFL...that's my priority, personally........but it's something I think about. 

And maybe that's something you can negotiate if another team enters the league, because it's creating more overall jobs so you need less per team. 

But that is still pie in the sky, imo.

[TrueBlue4ever]

55 minutes ago, Booch said:

yeah...I agree on that....how and who keeps track of the snaps....but I like the idea of the naturalized player, maybe just say 20 snaps a game max...be easier to count and manage....who cant count? lol

Ummmmm…….

 

[Noeller]

HOLY **** THEY DID IT!

 

[Bubba Zanetti]

2 minutes ago, Noeller said:

HOLY **** THEY DID IT!

 

Still needs to be voted on??

[Mr. Perfect]

I'll celebrate when the vote passes....

[TrueBlue4ever]

1 hour ago, JCon said:

For me, it's the complexity of the proposal and no in-game repercussions for breaking the rule. 

There are coaches in this league that will abuse this. Jones for one.  

I suspect the reason the 49% rule came into play is that there was already abuse of the rule in the last CBA by Steinauer and the Tiger-Cats, because it wasn’t clear how the “naturalized American” could be used. The Cats would start a Canadian and then pull him due to “injury” and put in the qualified American and play the rest of the game with them, effectively giving them up to 20 Americans getting the starting reps. The league is already trending to pare down the number of Canadians in key roles, so it’s silly to say that the players are being selfish when they vote against something that will eventually lose them their jobs, whether or not you think the product will be better with all Americans. Is it being unselfish or you vote against your self-interest or just stupid?

[JCon]

Just now, Bubba Zanetti said:

Still needs to be voted on??

Yes, but hopefully the PA read their membership and have a deal that they will accept. 

[Bubba Zanetti]

Just now, JCon said:

Yes, but hopefully the PA read their membership and have a deal that they will accept. 

If not they can have my f'ing season tickets back

[TrueBlue4ever]

Will be curious to see how the salary cap increases are pared back to accommodate the increased ratification payout. 

[Booch]

I'm sure they been told....to vote yes....I am also sure they will...as its lose lose for all if they dont

[JCon]

 

 

[Booch]

Nothing like going down to the wire...only in the CFL

Was also told by an insider part of the deal is that Ambrossie never wear a scarf....ever

[Stickem]

4 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

I think you vastly overestimate the profitability of the CFL. 

Someone must have heard me...Deal gets done today...LOL....okay maybe not Golden ....silvery white with a black and yellow beak...that better...Doesn't matter how you shake it down.....everyone would be losing coin should a strike occur.....I just hope both sides can live with a new deal....shut the fruck up and play ball

[Noeller]

details: 

 

[Mr. Perfect]

5 minutes ago, Noeller said:

details: 

 

That top tweet....quirky AF. 

[BBlink]

Just now, Mr. Perfect said:

That top tweet....quirky AF. 

Yeah. They somehow made it more dumb. But if it makes everyone happy let's play ball

[Noeller]

I agree with Jamie Nye in that I like the incentivizing playing Canadians (getting an extra 2nd rounder for team with most "Canadian snaps") but again with "who's going to keep track of all this??" 

[Mike]

8 minutes ago, Mr. Perfect said:

That top tweet....quirky AF. 

It’s so stupid lol why do we have to complicate it so much 

[Booch]

6 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I agree with Jamie Nye in that I like the incentivizing playing Canadians (getting an extra 2nd rounder for team with most "Canadian snaps") but again with "who's going to keep track of all this??" 

well....job creation perhaps....winner winner ahaha

[Mike]

2 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Absolutely.  But the changes they are proposing hurt American rookies and their opportunity to make it on the roster in the regular season.  They favour teams keeping veteran Americans who then can be utilized in protected roster spots.  

The leagues stated goal is to improve consistency on rosters they lost by going down to one year contracts and grow revenue by developing the relationship between teams and their fanbases.

Hence why I don’t really think they’re going about it the right way. At all. Agree completely with what you said.