Jump to content

yogi

Members
  • Posts

    423
  • Joined

Posts posted by yogi

  1.  

    Half of this video was people cheering or highfiving.

     

    He seems a little slow as far as his speed.  That being said, he's looks like a good "smash through walls" type of back, and he slips away from the D pretty good too.  He looks like he either finds the holes, or makes his own.  I'd take him for his smashing ability regardless of him not being that fast.

     

    That video doesn't even have shitty rap music accompanying it, so he can't be that good

  2.  

    I won't be there, someone please ask if they are thinking of bringing in Westwood to camp?

    Or if they're going to be serving nacho's.  I'm not going all the way to training camp if they're not serving nacho's.

     

    Also could someone complain that the bus gets me home too late after the game. Tell them to fix it.

  3.  

     

     

    Only has happened six times and four of them have been the Riders. One for Montreal and one for Winnipeg. This was also the first time it has happened since 2010.

     

    Since one team is clearly the trending violator, perhaps the league should look in to doubling fines for the second violation and then removing draft picks for the third and subsequent violations. Of course you would have to start with a fresh slate for all teams and count this as the Riders first violation.

     

    Until or if penalties ever change, teams should look to spend whatever they want as long as they aren't forfeiting picks.

     

    The only issue I have with this exact idea would be the previous regimes that cost their successors (in Winnipeg's case a rookie) their first and/or second "warnings". 

     

     

    Fair. Forgiveness clause could allow a team's history to be cleared after a certain number of years.

     

    Other ideas for penalties (A hard cap may have to be introduced on some):

     

    - Instead of a team fine, the team loses that amount (or a set amount) towards the next season's cap. This may be a bit more harsh for a league that had a cap of $4.4 million for the previous season however.

     

    - Penalty escalators are reduced to reflect player salaries. I think it can be argued that if a team is in excess of a standard contract, spending in excess then may become an advantage. As it stands now, a team doesn't lose a pick until you spend about a starter's worth of salary. $1 to $50,000 (dollar-for-dollar), $50,001 to $100,000 ($2 per dollar + first round pick), $100,001+ ($3 per dollar + first and second picks)

     

    - If a team spends in excess, they get dropped to the end of each round in the draft + fines.

     

    At the end of the day, this is the first conversation we have had about a team spending over the limit in three years, and it was fairly minimal, so I don't think anything may even have to be done unless it becomes a more prominent issue.

     

     

    I like the idea of movement down in the draft order. Maybe you make it a minimum of 4 or 5 spots in the first round. or 1 spot/$10k over.

     

     

    That would unfairly benefit other teams. Move down 1 spot, 1 team moves up a spot, every other team stays the same.

×
×
  • Create New...