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

[Mike]

Just now, Bigblue204 said:

What kind of better deal are they looking for?

You’re right, I guess they rejected it because they felt sorry for the league and wanted them to offer less.

[Bigblue204]

Just now, Mike said:

You’re right, I guess they rejected it because they felt sorry for the league and wanted them to offer less.

You're the one making claims. Calling people stupid. etc etc. You must know what they want

[Mike]

Just now, Bigblue204 said:

You're the one making claims. Calling people stupid. etc etc. You must know what they want

Yeah. I do know what they want. Too much.

They “held strong” long enough to get a proposal that ticked off the top six financial items on their wish list, put it to a vote and clearly did not explain the importance of actually bothering to vote to their membership.

They then turned around and went back to the league after a rejected proposal and said “make it better.”

You think it was the PA that leaked the poor voter numbers? It absolutely wasn’t, it was 100% the league and they did it because they know there’s absolutely no reason to improve an offer for an uninvested membership. The offer the PA ends up eventually pushing through (if it happens) isn’t going to be the best offer, it’s going to be the offer they accept because the paycheques are going to be missing and the players are going to want to play. 30% of the Americans clearly don’t care about the Canadian labour issues, but they’re going to care about an empty bank account. 
 

The PA completely blew this whole thing. They’re out of their league.

[Blueandgold]

12 minutes ago, Mike said:

Yeah. I do know what they want. Too much.

They “held strong” long enough to get a proposal that ticked off the top six financial items on their wish list, put it to a vote and clearly did not explain the importance of actually bothering to vote to their membership.

They then turned around and went back to the league after a rejected proposal and said “make it better.”

You think it was the PA that leaked the poor voter numbers? It absolutely wasn’t, it was 100% the league and they did it because they know there’s absolutely no reason to improve an offer for an uninvested membership. The offer the PA ends up eventually pushing through (if it happens) isn’t going to be the best offer, it’s going to be the offer they accept because the paycheques are going to be missing and the players are going to want to play. 30% of the Americans clearly don’t care about the Canadian labour issues, but they’re going to care about an empty bank account. 
 

The PA completely blew this whole thing. They’re out of their league.

20% of NFL players didn’t vote on the last CBA was which very controversial. What % of players do you expect to vote? 70-80% seems to be an average turnout. 

[Booch]

23 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

What kind of better deal are they looking for?

they didnt like the "percieved" reduction in ratio...whic it wasnt....was basically the chance of reduced snaps by naturalized Americans...no drop in their salary...still 7 national starters...which would require 7 viable backups due to injury...was a petty reason to say no if u ask me...now they staring down an actual loss of a canadian starting spot....******* fools

 

[Mike]

5 minutes ago, Blueandgold said:

20% of NFL players didn’t vote on the last CBA was which very controversial. What % of players do you expect to vote? 70-80% seems to be an average turnout. 

Then it’s a misread by the bargaining committee. It’s become fairly obvious by all the news being leaked that they needed the American voter turnout to get the deal passed and they didn’t do what they needed to do to get that turnout.

I’d also argue the NFL and CFL vote is like apples and oranges because the NFL doesn’t have the passport dynamics that we have up here.

[Booch]

4 minutes ago, Mike said:

Then it’s a misread by the bargaining committee. It’s become fairly obvious by all the news being leaked that they needed the American voter turnout to get the deal passed and they didn’t do what they needed to do to get that turnout.

I’d also argue the NFL and CFL vote is like apples and oranges because the NFL doesn’t have the passport dynamics that we have up here.

like apples and flesh....2 total different things

[Bigblue204]

17 minutes ago, Booch said:

they didnt like the "percieved" reduction in ratio...whic it wasnt....was basically the chance of reduced snaps by naturalized Americans...no drop in their salary...still 7 national starters...which would require 7 viable backups due to injury...was a petty reason to say no if u ask me...now they staring down an actual loss of a canadian starting spot....******* fools

 

The reduction in ratio couldn't have been the only issue though. American players have come out and said they also voted no. Unless I suppose they also wanted the ratio to be left as it was. But I have a hard time buying that.

37 minutes ago, Mike said:

Yeah. I do know what they want. Too much.

They “held strong” long enough to get a proposal that ticked off the top six financial items on their wish list, put it to a vote and clearly did not explain the importance of actually bothering to vote to their membership.

They then turned around and went back to the league after a rejected proposal and said “make it better.”

You think it was the PA that leaked the poor voter numbers? It absolutely wasn’t, it was 100% the league and they did it because they know there’s absolutely no reason to improve an offer for an uninvested membership. The offer the PA ends up eventually pushing through (if it happens) isn’t going to be the best offer, it’s going to be the offer they accept because the paycheques are going to be missing and the players are going to want to play. 30% of the Americans clearly don’t care about the Canadian labour issues, but they’re going to care about an empty bank account. 
 

The PA completely blew this whole thing. They’re out of their league.

Too much of what? I agree on the PA mishandling the voting aspect. But without the details none of us can actually say what the players want is dumb, because we don't actually know. And pretending like the league is some how being upfront with the fans on the negotiations is ridiculous. The league will always blame the players for no deal getting done.

[Noeller]

1 minute ago, Bigblue204 said:

The reduction in ratio couldn't have been the only issue though. American players have come out and said they also voted no. Unless I suppose they also wanted the ratio to be left as it was. But I have a hard time buying that.

well there was also the "ratification bonus" part of it, which I feel the US players were more concerned about than the ratio....

[Booch]

4 minutes ago, Noeller said:

well there was also the "ratification bonus" part of it, which I feel the US players were more concerned about than the ratio....

yeah..I think thats what the Americans wanted....and when u look at it..Ratio wasnt reduced...just an option to sub americans into the spot for limited snaps

 

[Noeller]

[Jesse]

Well, this is not sounding good.

[Mike]

16 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

Too much of what? I agree on the PA mishandling the voting aspect. But without the details none of us can actually say what the players want is dumb, because we don't actually know. And pretending like the league is some how being upfront with the fans on the negotiations is ridiculous. The league will always blame the players for no deal getting done.

Too much of an ask. I’m not commenting on fair or not fair, I’m just saying the PA has extended their demands too far to be taken seriously at this point.

Do I think it was a deal they should’ve voted in originally? Absolutely. But I don’t have a vote and that’s not up to me. I’m in a union myself and I do respect everyone’s right to choose based on what they prioritize. But to think they can go back to the bargaining table and ask for MORE when the CFL is just going to turn around and say why should we offer more when you can’t even get a proper voter turnout? It’s just poor bargaining work, which is why I say they’re very clearly out of their depths with this.

The NFL had poor turnout but the CBA got voted in (barely) and that’s a huge difference. There’s no swing in leverage there. Now that it’s been voted down, the first question the league is going to ask at the bargaining table is “why was the deal good enough then but not good enough now?” and they’ll point to the poor turnout and argue that with a better turnout it would’ve passed. The tough part is that as they do it, they’re also likely right. It’s a huge swing in leverage in favour of the league, especially paired with the fan optics trending in their direction all of a sudden as well.

 

 

[Bigblue204]

16 minutes ago, Mike said:

Too much of an ask. I’m not commenting on fair or not fair, I’m just saying the PA has extended their demands too far to be taken seriously at this point.

Do I think it was a deal they should’ve voted in originally? Absolutely. But I don’t have a vote and that’s not up to me. I’m in a union myself and I do respect everyone’s right to choose based on what they prioritize. But to think they can go back to the bargaining table and ask for MORE when the CFL is just going to turn around and say why should we offer more when you can’t even get a proper voter turnout? It’s just poor bargaining work, which is why I say they’re very clearly out of their depths with this.

The NFL had poor turnout but the CBA got voted in (barely) and that’s a huge difference. There’s no swing in leverage there. Now that it’s been voted down, the first question the league is going to ask at the bargaining table is “why was the deal good enough then but not good enough now?” and they’ll point to the poor turnout and argue that with a better turnout it would’ve passed. The tough part is that as they do it, they’re also likely right. It’s a huge swing in leverage in favour of the league, especially paired with the fan optics trending in their direction all of a sudden as well.

 

 

We will have to agree to disagree. I don't think the players asking for more is a problem. You can say the leverage is in favour of the league, but there are 2 leagues down south that could very much benefit form an influx of CFL players. The owners just as much as the players, can not afford a strike. The players have somewhere else to go. The owners dont.

Naylor reporting the league wants to reduce the ratio because they believe it will increase the level of play. Which is just an absolutely ridiculous thing to say. 

[Mike]

5 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

We will have to agree to disagree. I don't think the players asking for more is a problem. You can say the leverage is in favour of the league, but there are 2 leagues down south that could very much benefit form an influx of CFL players. The owners just as much as the players, can not afford a strike. The players have somewhere else to go. The owners dont.

Naylor reporting the league wants to reduce the ratio because they believe it will increase the level of play. Which is just an absolutely ridiculous thing to say. 

How many owners do you think would be happy to walk away from ownership tomorrow 

[Booch]

7 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

We will have to agree to disagree. I don't think the players asking for more is a problem. You can say the leverage is in favour of the league, but there are 2 leagues down south that could very much benefit form an influx of CFL players. The owners just as much as the players, can not afford a strike. The players have somewhere else to go. The owners dont.

Naylor reporting the league wants to reduce the ratio because they believe it will increase the level of play. Which is just an absolutely ridiculous thing to say. 

it would....how you say it wouldnt is ridiculous

[Bigblue204]

1 minute ago, Mike said:

How many owners do you think would be happy to walk away from ownership tomorrow 

If that was really the case, they would have already. Investors don't hold on to investments just cause. Again, you're using what you've read in the media and assuming it's the truth. Real life is very much different. The owners want a profit. All of them.

2 minutes ago, Booch said:

it would....how you say it wouldnt is ridiculous

The league is going to ask for 1 player reduction Booch. 1 player isn't going to bring in more fans. 1 player isn't going to make any QB's play better or any WR's make better catches etc etc etc. If the league wants better players. They need better pay. The league thinks the casual fans want better overall play. But what the casual fans actually want is NFL level of play and that's just never going to happen. The issue with the league is not the ratio or the rules. It's the image and revenue. The ratio BS doesn't solve either of those things.

[Booch]

10 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

If that was really the case, they would have already. Investors don't hold on to investments just cause. Again, you're using what you've read in the media and assuming it's the truth. Real life is very much different. The owners want a profit. All of them.

The league is going to ask for 1 player reduction Booch. 1 player isn't going to bring in more fans. 1 player isn't going to make any QB's play better or any WR's make better catches etc etc etc. If the league wants better players. They need better pay. The league thinks the casual fans want better overall play. But what the casual fans actually want is NFL level of play and that's just never going to happen. The issue with the league is not the ratio or the rules. It's the image and revenue. The ratio BS doesn't solve either of those things.

i thought u were implying to pooching the ratio....u said reducing ratio was implied would raise the level of play...and I agree with what Naylor said....U never said anything about 1 player...or fans in the seats....But if you replace a 2nd string Canadian reciever who backs up your star, with a bonafide NCAA standout, or an American who has experience in the CFL and was successful, or was doing time in the NFL...then yeah....the WR play would be better, and prob give the QB another option than the Back-up who would basically be ignored

[Jesse]

8 minutes ago, Booch said:

i thought u were implying to pooching the ratio....u said reducing ratio was implied would raise the level of play...and I agree with what Naylor said....U never said anything about 1 player...or fans in the seats....But if you replace a 2nd string Canadian reciever who backs up your star, with a bonafide NCAA standout, or an American who has experience in the CFL and was successful, or was doing time in the NFL...then yeah....the WR play would be better, and prob give the QB another option than the Back-up who would basically be ignored

It's amazing how much easier recruiting gets when you get rid of a couple Canadians. I wonder why we don't bring these guys in now....

[Noeller]

I'm wildly in favour of clinging to the ratio...I'm here for the Canadian content, period. I'm just really hoping they can find a way to make the owners happy while maintaining the Canadian content. I have much less interest in a league that slowly whittles away their CanCon.....

Some interesting quotes here: 

 

[Bigblue204]

Just now, Booch said:

i thought u were implying to pooching the ratio....u said reducing ratio was implied would raise the level of play...and I agree with what Naylor said....U never said anything about 1 player...or fans in the seats....But if you replace a 2nd string Canadian reciever who backs up your star, with a bonafide NCAA standout, or an American who has experience in the CFL and was successful, or was doing time in the NFL...then yeah....the WR play would be better, and prob give the QB another option than the Back-up who would basically be ignored

I'm not convinced that would bring in a significant amount of fans like the league is suggesting it would though, even a total elimination of the ratio. Like I said, fans who want a better on field product want an NFL level product. And ratio or not, that won't happen without NFL money. As it stands now, it sounds like the league is offering the 6-1 deal as a take it or leave it. Naylor was asked why the league wants that reduction in ratio, and his answer was they believe it will increase the level of play. Like I said 1 player isn't going to move the dial at all. And it's again more proof that the league doesn't understand it's own market and seems to only want to become NFL light.

[JCon]

Why on Earth would I care more about a random back up WR from the US over a Canadian? I would rather that Canadian get the backup spot then someone who played for William & Mary and ripped up the Colonial Athletic Association. 

[Booch]

10 minutes ago, Jesse said:

It's amazing how much easier recruiting gets when you get rid of a couple Canadians. I wonder why we don't bring these guys in now....

are u just being kind of a knob?...every american cut lets just say...since this management took over..reciever wise was probably better....or at par with the Canadian starters, and the back-ups that were kept in their place...cause of BC...NOT EVEN CLOSE....get a grip man.,.I get it...u loooove the Canadian content and for you saving it as is makes u all warm and fuzzy....but the talent gap is huge....doubt it if u will, but I've seen highschool teams in Texas and in Cali that would prob whoop 8 outa 10 USport programs up here...theres tons of talent in the US that would make the CFL level of play exponentially better....but you cant bring em all in..facts are facts

 

8 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

I'm not convinced that would bring in a significant amount of fans like the league is suggesting it would though, even a total elimination of the ratio. Like I said, fans who want a better on field product want an NFL level product. And ratio or not, that won't happen without NFL money. As it stands now, it sounds like the league is offering the 6-1 deal as a take it or leave it. Naylor was asked why the league wants that reduction in ratio, and his answer was they believe it will increase the level of play. Like I said 1 player isn't going to move the dial at all. And it's again more proof that the league doesn't understand it's own market and seems to only want to become NFL light.

i never said...nor implied it would bring in tons and tons of fans, and thats not even the thinkjing behind it with team management...tho it would be a plus if it did...it's a matter of quality, and the ease of getting guys on the field and able to compete...why do you think it takes many many many Canadian players...who have been playing Canadian ball all their lives to become a star...or even just a moderate contributor...it's because they are so much further behind in the development aspect, and the learning curve....and no slight to them, and fault of their own....product of their environment, and maybe teams are tired of investing time and money into guys...for basically something that never relly pans out...then rinx=se and repeat and try again....many optics to it

[Noeller]

again, this has never been about "watching the best football possible" because that's what the NFL is for. This league, to me, is about showcasing Canada and Canadians. As far as I'm concerned, the Americans are just here to fill out the rosters because there aren't enough Canadians...

[Booch]

7 minutes ago, JCon said:

Why on Earth would I care more about a random back up WR from the US over a Canadian? I would rather that Canadian get the backup spot then someone who played for William & Mary and ripped up the Colonial Athletic Association. 

its about quality of player....not BC....let the best players make a team based on talent...some people are so narrow minded thinking it's cause they came from a glitzy U.S program...as a paying fan...u should want to be getting what u pay for...Canadian..American...******* russian...times change...things eveolve...no body is holding a gun to your head to support a team and go watch....if u choose not too cause its not "canadian" enough...see ya later...your choice

 

1 minute ago, Noeller said:

again, this has never been about "watching the best football possible" because that's what the NFL is for. This league, to me, is about showcasing Canada and Canadians. As far as I'm concerned, the Americans are just here to fill out the rosters because there aren't enough Canadians...

go support your local university then, and not worry about the CFL....Canada is still showcased...how is it not?....and there will still be Canadians....how old are u...did u knash your teeth and whine about it when the ratio was reduced several times in our lifetime?..I see u still a fan...so whats the difference now....