ShyGuy
-
Posts
74 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by ShyGuy
-
-
17 minutes ago, Booch said:
nope...rarely actually....and I can tell you that from first hand experience with draft picks the last decade
Fact of the matter...BC has come out on multiple occasions lately saying with no doubt or ambiguity that 2023 they will not be paying their starting QB 80k next yr, whether it be VA..or Rourke and it will be in line with CFL starter money...plain and simple...cut and dried
I also still stand by my offer that if He is Back next yr for 80k +10% i will never post again....put my money where my mouth is....if a certain someone will stand by their "assumption" and disappear for good if he is playing for more...you so confident and sure of yourself...stand by it and agree
For the record,...
Olivera and Hallett both were drafted in 2019 and received extensions going into this season.
Kerfalla Exume was drafted in the 7th round, played for the bombers in 2019 and was a free agent going into 2021. -
-
Probably my favourite Bomber to be honest. Dude just exudes energy, he is exhausting to watch sometimes. All-world ball spinning skills as well.
1 hour ago, GCn20 said:NFL teams love their draft picks over UDFA's at any position. That's the way they roll. That being said, if a guy is good enough he will play. Also, Heinecke is starting this week, you can't blame them for taking a shot at Wentz but it seems that experiment has ended.
If you specifically bring in a guy to take over that starts the clock. As a coach or GM, if you draft a QB in the first round that puts 3 years on your clock because the impression is that you need to give the team time to grow.
-
-
option, noun, op·tion
an act of choosing
hard to make an option between such alternatives
the power or right to choose : freedom of choice
He has the option to cancel the deal.
a contract conveying a right to buy or sell designated securities, commodities, or property interest at a specified price during a stipulated period
also : the right conveyed by an option
The ad is for a condo to rent with an option to buy. -
-
9 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:
Do you think that the option year paragraph you quote over-rides the Option paragraph in the CBA that is specific to Canadian draft picks on their first contract? I don't. If it did, then there would be no reason to put the option paragraph in the CBA for Draft Picks as it would have no meaning to anyone. It's there to give teams a salary certainty for draft picks for the first 3 years.
It would go a long way if you can cite what you are seeing that gives you the impression that you are correct instead of screaming into the void.
Again, hard to find 2022 CBA things but from here
https://tdnprod.wpengine.com/2020/01/07/the-comprehensive-cfl-collective-bargaining-agreement/
QuoteAll Nationals will be required to sign a minimum 2 + 1 first contract and follow the salary grid at outlined below (this term does not apply to Nationals who signed registered contracts in 2019):
Their commentary provided here
QuoteThe usage of the term option year follows that of standard player contracts which would imply to me that this is a team option year. That would mean that players might not be able to sign two-year deals like recent draft picks seem to have negotiated for. Tunde Adeleke appears to have had a two-year deal, having left Calgary for Hamilton last year after playing only two years with his draft team.
Yes, you are correct in that the 3rd year TEAM option is included in the CBA and the Standard Player agreement in order to control costs for new draft picks. You may be correct in that the CBA language in that the salary structure of the contract may not be able to change as stated in the Standard Player Contract (teams may be bound to offering based on the structure laid out, not a minimum of 100% of the previous year + bonus).
What you can't seem to grok is that the Lions can literally let his contract run out by not exercising the option. Rourke would become a de-facto free agent and would not be bound to the third year option of his original contract as he would need to sign a whole new one.
Really the Lions have 2 options
1. Let Rourke test out his NFL option, lose him for a number of years based on how long he holds a clipboard and bounces around the practice squad... He may be released from his contract at this point... but his rights remain with BC? Like I've mentioned previously... hard to find exact language in the CBA around this. Presumably when he is done flirting with the NFL he could sign for whatever or have his rights traded2. Reach an agreement with Rourke, allow the option to expire, sign him to a new deal (and hope no one swoops in with a ridiculous offer he accepts).
-
-
45 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:
Honest question. What's stopping BC and Rourke from having a gentleman's agreement in place. BC cuts Rourke making him a FA. Only to turn around and re-sign him for a regular contract?
-
I am having a hard time finding a newer source but I can't imagine this has changed too much since or the CFLPA Would pitch a fit
https://cflpa.com/download/appendix-aa-standard-player-contract-option-year/ --> APPENDIX AA – STANDARD PLAYER CONTRACT – OPTION YEAR --> Originally posted 2014, updated 2020
Quote15. On or before the date of expiration of this Contract the Club may upon notice in writing to the Player addressed to his permanent home address as indicated hereunder, renew this Contract for a further term until 12:00 Noon Eastern Standard Time the 2nd Tuesday in February following the said expiration, on the same terms as are provided in this Contract except that (1) the Club may fix the rate of compensation to be paid by the Club to the Player during the said period of renewal and the rate of compensation shall not be less than one hundred (100%) percent of the amount set forth in Paragraph 3 hereof and one hundred (100%) percent of any bonus payment or payments payable except signing bonus, and (2) after such renewal this Contract shall not include a further option to renew the Contract. The renewal of this Contract shall be understood to include all bonus clauses regardless as to the year described therein and bonus payment or payments of any nature whatsoever except that signing bonuses will not be included.
Under these terms, the Lions have until February 14th, 2023 to inform him that he will be signed for another year under the same terms... Actually reading this it almost seems like they can tell him he gets another year but technically they could pay him whatever he wants in that extra year as long as it is at least 100% of the previous salary. ANYWAYS, if he signs again I presume they decline the option and sign a 3 year deal at least similar to Collaros. -
-
1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:
Option year doesn't mean 'Can ignore the CBA' or 'Allowed to offer a new contract that's more money then the salary grid'. It doesn't even mean 'can offer a new contract' because teams can offer a new contract to every player except a Canadian Draft Pick on their first contract at any time, no matter if it's an option year or not. They can even offer a new contract during the season. Option simply means that the team can tell the player to play out the option year at the agreed upon contract & the players option is to play or sit for the year.
We can end this disagreement right now. Just show me in the CBA where they say that teams can offer Canadian Draft Picks on their first contract a new contract in the 3rd year that exceeds the CBA.
The Lions have the OPTION to sign Rourke for another season at the 2+1 standard rate. What do you think happens if the Lions do not choose to use that option???
-
Just now, JuranBoldenRules said:
If a player has their option declined they are a free agent in February.
Yeah I know I was just taking the piss.
If the BC Lions decline his options there will be some sort of gentlemen's agreement between them and Rourke though. Won't prevent Jeremy O'day from taking notes about the Carlos Boozer incident in Cleveland though I'm sure 🤣 -
34 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:
It's like trying to correct anti-vaxers. Show them the information in black and white and they say 'I don't believe it' & 'What If' & 'You don't know for sure' & 'You're beating a dead horse'. You can't use facts to convince people who 'don't agree' with the facts. FTR: the CBA says what the options are for 3rd year draft picks & a NEW contract that supersedes the CBA rules for 3rd year draft picks ain't one of them.
Folks who hoped that Rourke got hurt again so they could TOLDYASO me are now hoping that Rourke comes back to the CFL next year and gets a new big contract so they can TOLDYASO me. 🙄
I doubt that Rourke comes back to the CFL next year, but if he does & he gets more than the $80k-ish that the CBA states, it will be because the CFL gives BC an out from the CBA. I think that would be fair for everyone involved & I think the next CBA should be modified to allow for draft picks to make what they are worth to the teams who draft them.
What are the options for the 3rd year on rookie contracts again? The team declines it or the team exercises the option and gets the player for an additional year at $80k? It would be too bad if the Lions refuse to exercise their option for a 3rd year and Rourke can't sign a new contract to play in the CFL next year, he's a pretty exciting player.
-
-
1 minute ago, JuranBoldenRules said:
I honestly can't believe Rourke's agent would let him play in a competitive game 10 weeks after an injury with a 6 month timeline given his obvious shot at the NFL this off-season when he's at full health. That right there is negligent.
The only thing I've been thinking is that they've been in contact with people in the NFL and they want to see something specific on tape.
-
-
7 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:
Looks like we shouldn't make the playoffs this year as the Bombers lost $170k on the playoffs last year, if you look at the revenue and operating expense line items. What's that all about? I know that it's all buried in accounting but you'd have thought that having a home WF game would have been pretty lucrative no? What am I missing here?
I wonder if it has to do with buying the playoff game and all the expenses related to it but the revenues ending up in another bucket?
QuotePurchasing the game from the league has a cost of $100,000 plus assuming all expenses for the game, specifically both team's playoff shares and the visiting team's travel expenses (flights and hotel) as well as marketing costs. The host team's profit/loss is determined after all their expenses are paid against their ticket, concession and other ancillary revenue received from the game.
- Noeller and kelownabomberfan
-
1
-
1
-
23 minutes ago, Fatty Liver said:
Picture this.... your boss comes up to you and says, "we're not exactly firing you, but we're cutting your salary by 3/4, could you please vacate your office and move all your **** over to that broken chair beside the photocopy machine? You're still a valuable part of our team!"
Picture this. You are managing your team and evaluating your upcoming vendor contract renewals. This particular vendor is using old technology and is prone to breaking down with extended downtime and costs multiple times that of other vendors. However, due to the relationship you've built, rather than cutting them loose you offer them lesser responsibility and a contract closer in value to what it would cost to replace them.
Rourke Contract squabbles
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Posted
We keep arguing about Rourke, but the player who will likely answer this question without disappearing out into the NFL is Kian Schaffer-Baker
2nd year player, theoretically has his option coming up, almost 1000 yards and 5 TDs and the right passport. If you had the option would you have him play out his +1 year at $80k or hope he continues to improve and sign him to a multi year deal?