TBURGESS

The CFL averages 400K-500K tv viewers a week. You think it gets better as the year goes on? Nope. There are about half a million CFL fans willing to watch on TV and about 20,000 willing to go to the stadium to see the games. Tell me more about what the owners should do to fix it?

No, eliminating the ratio does not inevitably lead to changing the rules. Bottom line is the CFL is broken. Older fans are literally dying off & there aren't enough younger fans to take their place. The CFL needs to attract the younger crowd or die.

Everyone around here loves to watch Collaros throw to Schoen and all the other US players on the team. I doubt they'd stop watching the CFL if the ratio was lowered or even eliminated. Changing the CFL rules to NFL rules is another thing. That would stop a lot of us old guys from watching the CFL but, we're no longer the fans that the CFL needs to attract. They need the younger generation and those football fans are NFL watchers.

No ratio doesn't mean no Canadian stars. It means no older Canadian backups. The best Canadians play in the NFL, the second best start in the CFL, the third best play special teams, the rest are backups. The CFL isn't the ratio. It's the rules. It's the home town team. It's the stars and it doesn't matter if they are American, Globals, or Canadians.

Not high brow, just regular old humour.

This reminds me of when everyone found "Rusty Bedsprings" by IP Nightly funny in grade 6.

From: https://3downnation.com/2023/03/16/veteran-qb-dane-evans-takes-team-friendly-contract-to-join-b-c-lions/

Quite frankly, all I care about is that the cheques don't bounce when someone takes over in Montreal. If Quebec wants to separate, they should, as long as they take their portion of the debt, don't use Canadian money or any other services, and allow whatever parts of Quebec that want to stay in Canada stay. Canada is like an unhappy marriage. Quebec is the wife who wants to leave everything behind except the benefits. The rest of Canada is the husband, who keeps giving things to the wife to keep her happy, despite knowing that it's all a farce.

Leggs Reals (Is this a thing now?) : 7th best FG kicker by %, .1 yard better than 8th. 1 FG >= 50 yards, tied with 2 other kickers for 8th. Missed 5 Converts, worst in the league. Game Winning FG's 2, Ott/Skn Game Losing misses 2, Mtl/Tor in the freakin GC. Ya Buts: We didn't need him to win most games. He punted well. He's not the only reason we lost.

Feels - It might have gone through. Reals - It was blocked.

Nice to have Bailey back & I'd like to know how much he got. I swear some of you guys are so triggered by my posts that you go off without even reading them.

Sorry Mike for agreeing with you. I find it hilarious that the "usual suspects" go on the attack when anyone, even Mike, says anything that's not uber positive. It's nice to know that it's not just me. I think Walters has had a great off season signing our own, but receiver is the only upgrade we've got from last year's shoulda woulda coulda won the Grey Cup team. It may be the only one we need as long as the older guys have one more year in them. MOS' "We use our MLB differently than other teams" is the same lame excuse he's used before for much less talented people than Bighill. I love Bighill, but he didn't earn his salary last year, especially at the end of the season when he was a step slow and didn't wrap up. I can only hope that was due to injury, not age. Jeffcoat's another guy who I don't think earned his salary last year. I'd have looked for younger/cheaper and used the extra to upgrade @ DT. Bryant was still all star quality last year, but not a dominant as he has been. At 36, the wheels could fall off at any time. Agodusi is a one game wonder, but that doesn't really matter because he'll be the 4th or 5th option. We're still the top team in the league because Collaros is head and shoulders above any other starting QB in the CFL. Rourke was the closest QB last year, and he's in the NFL now, so it's not even close now. Bring on the 'Yah Buts'.

You can and do 'ya but' valid points and invalid points. Biased? From you?

It's fun watching Mike make valid points and the usual suspects replying with 'ya buts'.

Agreements in principal aren't binding. Teams aren't announcing signings.

It only applies to draft picks 1st contracts.

That's what the CBA says. We can choose to renegotiate with any American player at any time.

I came here for Bomber news and found "How BLM signing with the Ticats affects the Riders". SMH

Bombers QB's - Collaros $600K + 2 backups. Lions QB's - VAJ @$350K + 2 backups. Therefore the Bombers use $250K more SMS for the QB spot, unless we pay our backups more or less than BC does. The real math is that the Lions take the full SMS value of the players off the books, not the net(- 6 game) savings. Example: Collaros gets hurt this year and retires. We get $600K of SMS room, not $600K - the 6 game SMS relief.

Both sides don't have good points. I asked myself and told myself that I was doing the right thing shouldn't be allowed to trump public policy. Lockdowns and mask wearing are political decisions, not science decisions. The science says they both work & less people would be dead & will die in the future if we used them. The "I don't wanna's" have made things worse for everybody & are allowing the deaths to go up. My wife and I are on our 5th round of vaccinations and got Covid after the 4th. Without the vaccines, we'd both likely have been in the hospital fighting for our lives. With the vaccines, we we in bed for a week hacking up our lungs. We've got long Covid symptoms. Can't get through the day without a nap. This is the result of a non-mask wearing, non-shutdown society that's run by politicians who care more about the polls than people's lives.

I got Pipkins salary wrong, he only saves them $80K. Using last years SMS hits... Pipkin @ $80K, Adams @ $75K, Rourke @ $71K, Burnham @ $165K = $391K of SMS savings. Is that the math that you wanted me to do?

The Lions had room for VAJ half of last year, so they've already incorporated both VAJ's and Rouke's salary in the SMS. Pipkin is probably getting $250K+, drop him and they're golden. Add in Burnham's $165K and they're ahead of the game. As for chopping 2-3 high end players, Burnham and Rourke are those players, they don't need to chop 2-3 more.

Assuming he starts all the games & throws 20+ TD's, that's 350ishK. $250K more than VAJ. Based on QB salary, we're in a significantly worse spot SMS wise than the Lions. Burnham's $165K salary is already off the books, and the Lions say they won't go shopping for another top end receiver. My guess is they keep VAJ, they don't sign BLM or Faj-JJ & they are still in the top 3 in the west.

You want to start this up again? What a pigeon. You: Coo Coo, Ignore the CBA Me: Section 9.02 You: Angry Coo Coo, Ignore the CBA Me: Section 9.02 You: Angrier COO COO, You're wrong Me: Prove it Round and round for weeks. Naylor: Tweets that the Lions can make an offer because the CFLPA and the CFL signed off on it. You: Kicking the pieces off the board, shitting all over everything and strutting around like you won. This proves I'm right, you're wrong, you should slink off after apologizing. Me: New information explains how they can make an offer. Why didn't you come up with that? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- None of the ideas as to why the Lions could ignore the CBA that you and yours came up with were correct, yet you want to declare a victory lap and want me to apologize for being right about Section 9.02 all along. The whole argument could have been avoided if anyone has said, don't like the clause, get the parties of the contract of the change it. The key is and always has been, that the only way they can make that offer is if the CFL and the CFLPA have signed off on a clause change in the current CBA. I'm guessing that happened some time during last season & I said that in the last go around that you started. You were too busy kicking stuff and strutting to notice.

I don't. Turns out you don't need an account to do a search. If he re-signs with BC I'll be surprised, but it most likely means that the CFL and the CFLPA changed the 3rd year option rule for Rourke. You can't sign him to a new contract because of the rule, so change the rule never occurred to anyone around here until yesterday.