Jaxon
-
Posts
443 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by Jaxon
-
-
One of the reason's that the Argos traded up to get Coombs.
-
Some idiotic blogger from the US on Twitter is trying to tell me that Saskatchewan made a profit of nearly 150 million dollars .... during Grey Cup week.
... and that's why he is claiming the players are asking for more than a reasonable amount of money.
He probably means the Grey Cup resulted in a $150 million economic impact for Sask.
And I would challenge that number. The Regina Grey Cup last year mainly recycled Saskatchewan money. Most hotels were filled with people from within the province, as all the rooms were monopolized by one operator, who focused on Saskatchewan. Very little outside money came into the province.
-
I'm sorry to say that I voted for Katz last time. I wasn't enthused with him, but I still believe he was better than Judy. There will be better candidates this next time around, and he won't be getting my vote.
I believe that voting is a responsibility, not just a right. I also believe that spoiling a ballot sends a much bigger message than just not voting. Staying at home shows apathy, while spoiling your ballet shows that you care enough to get off your butt and get to the polling station, you just don't like the choices. Civic elections are triple ballot deals, not just mayor but city councellor and school board as well, so there isn't much excuse for staying home.
-
I think the they won't be locked out. If you think about it at some point they are going to have to pay those bonus. Good PR to let players show up get them. On the other side it would not look good for the players to show up get their money then bolt the next day.
That will depend on how likely the league believes that this is the PA's strategy: to get the bonus money and then bolt. This is quite unique to the sports world, which doesn't exist in other labour relations. Signing bonus are quite common in the collective bargaining process, but they kick in after the deal is ratified. Of course in most negotiations, they set the rates for what everyone is actually making; this contract contains minimums, maximums and framework, but not actual rates of pay.
The rumour is that the PA told the players to report in good faith, which could truely be good faith, or it could be a ploy to collect the bonus money, which would arm the PA with more resources to strike. If it is the second, and I hope it isn't, this could be a very very very long stoppage, as all good faith would be lost.
-
If this is infact the case, I would suspect that either a deal is done by Friday, or the teams will lockout the players prior to the bonus money being due. This would be a very significant deadline for the negotiations.
-
There will be a significant amount of pressure to get this done today, or into the wee hours overnight.
Players flying into town while in labour limbo just isn't good for them or for the teams. No one wants to spend time or money on uncertain projects.
I don't see it stretching into the weekend, but labour negotiations can be very tricky, so I'm not placing any bets.
I laugh, though, when hearing some people discribing the process, as they keep meeting, breaking, meeting, breaking. Some seem to feel that unless they are in the same room talking that it isn't moving. I've done labour negotiating for 30 years or so, and that's how this dance works. You make a proposal, and answer questions regarding the proposal....then the other side says "give us some time to consider it" so either you or they leave the room. They discuss the proposal, track the progression of the talks, and formulate a counter proposal. Then you meet again, and they present their counter proposal, and answer questions, and you say "give us some time to consider it"....and the process repeats itsself. You don't actually sit face to face for hours on end argueing. So long as they are in the same building, albeit in different rooms, the process continues.
-
#Bombers QB Drew Willy says if there is a CFL strike he'll make sure the players get together to work out somewhere in Wpg. #bn
— Ed Tait (@WFPEdTait)
May 28, 2014Nice leadership statement coming from our new QB. Wonder what facility they would be able to get to practice in. Are all the players still flying in? Who is paying for their flights if there is a strike?
Okay wet blanket here. Although admirable on Willy's part, would there not be some injury insurance and legal issues if an agreement is not in place to hold such a thing? I know, how to ruin a good news story. Carry on.
I'm not aware of any legal issues, that would prevent players from having some pickup football games just as you and I might, but the insurance question is legit. That being said, players workout all off season with injury risk, and many QB's and receivers get together for some pass drills throughout the winter.
-
The issue here isn't one of "subsidy" but rather one of "surcharge" The Bombers are willing to pay full regular price for transit on behalf on their customers. If you take the bus to the Library, it's $5.10 return. If you take the bus to work, it's $5.10 return. If you take the bus to the university, it's $5.10 return. If you take the bus to a Jet game, it's $5.10 return.
I don't think that taking a bus to a Bomber game should cost more than $5.10 return, regardless of who is paying the bill.
-
Does anyone have a list of each councillor, and how they voted on this issue?
-
This is an excellent opportunity for these 4 players to develop their skills.
Goodrich did spend one year with the Bisons, not sure if he ever played, but was definately with the Rifles from start to finish for the last few years. Having watched both Carter and Goodrich in their time with the Rifles, best comparison I could give was that Carter was a Joe Poplawski type of receiver...run great routes, and catch everything thrown to him. Goodrich was more of a Milt style, make the catch and go to the house....once he gets in open field, not likely to be caught at the CJFL level. I'll be watching to see how he performs against the pros. Goodrich works as hard or harder in the gym than most pro players....he would definately be on the radar for the Bombers. I believe he may be the best amateur receiver in the province, right there with Nick Demski....both can go out an win games for their teams.
Riche was dominant by mid-season for the Rifles last year, especially in the home game against Regina (Rifles won that one against the team that went on the win the national championship) He's a big kid from Brandon with long arms, and explosive start. He's a couple of years younger than Goodrich.
Watson is a strong OL with good feet and decent technique. The o-line coach for the Rifles is one of the top o-line coaches for developing young players, and he has brought Watson along very well.
Lachance previously played d-line and has just been converted to full back this offseason. Running back coach for the Rifles is former Bomber Brett McNeil, so you know the fullbacks will be taught how to block properly.
The Bomber-Rifle relationship has never been stronger as the new regime at the Bombers understand the system and are committed to developing Canadian players. The Rifles were very competitive last year under a rookie head coach. They play in by far the toughest division of the CJFL (Prairie Football Conference) The PFC has won 15 of the last 20 national championships, so getting out of the division is the biggest challenge. I expect that the Rifles will finally break through this year. Coach Karhut has a year under his belt, and the talent is there.
I suspect that all 4 will be returned to the Rifles, but may be invited to practice with the Bombers all season long to learn systems and develop their skills. This is how Andrew Harris was brought along in BC. I don't think Joe Mack was interested, but Kyle Walters, Wade Miller, and Mike O'Shea know how this system works. BC, Calgary, and Saskatchewan have made use of the special relationship between the CJFL and the CFL for years, and so it's great to see the Bombers recognizing the potential. Rifles new logo incorporates the "W" from the Bombers and the Bombers were involved in the press conference to release the new look.
-
Which leads me to wonder why they even bother having it. If you're paying 4 (now 2) guys the same as you would be if they were playing, why not just let them play?
I agree. With the number of injuries we see during games sometimes, the more guys on the sidelines suited up the better. It makes no sense to have two OL go down in a game and having a guy standing there in civvies on the sideline who could have gone in as a sub, instead of putting some poor DL out there doing his best impression of a turnstyle.
IIRC, it becomes a ratio issue. If these 2 additional guys are now designated imports, they can go in on special teams, and take the spot from a non-import player.
-
As a 46 year season ticket holder, I'm quite concerned regarding the current bargaining situation. I love the game and have been a big supporter of the league, and especially the Canadian Content rules.
After reading the letters from both sides, the comments on here, and the articles in the newspapers, I find that I'm more in support of the league's position rather than the players.
The CFLPA's position apprears to be 2 fold: we deserve more because we took hits in the past, and revenue sharing is the way it is done in sports. I tend to believe that these arguements are easily countered.
1. Yes the players have had to sacrifice in the past, but so have the owners. Many teams lost a significant amount of money, and those losses are different variety than the players sacrifices. As a player, if you took a pay-cut, you still got paid to play football. They didn't have to ante up money that they had saved from other ventures. The owners that lost money, were in negative positions. The players who sacrificed were still in positive positions (ie they didn't pay to play) Furthermore, they aren't all the same players. The players turn over every couple of years, so the ones that gave up, are not necessarily those who will gain back.
2. Revenue share is a fact in the NFL, NBA, NHL, all of which are a much greater scale than the CFL. It is not a fact in smaller scale sports: Arena football, Minor League baseball, AHL hockey. To believe that this is the model for all sports is incorrect, and there is a major flaw in the concept: COSTS. The players say that they want to be partners with the owners, but they don't mean it. They want to share in the revenue, but not in the costs. How much is the CFLPA willing to contribute to the new stadiums in Winnipeg, Regina, Hamilton, or Ottawa. They want a hefty percentage of the gate, but don't want to consider the capital costs needed to attain that money.
In a normal business, many decisions come down to the profitability of a project. For example, suppose you are considering building a new factory, and your annual financing cost is 4 million per year. You estimate that the increased net revenue will be 6 million per year, and you estimate that staffing cost and other costs remain consistent. Let's also assume that you have a share ownership plan with your staff. It's an easy decision, you build the project, everyone is happy, staff have a nice new facility, better than the old one, and the business grows and prospers and everyone gets a share increase on the 2 million per year profit enhancement. Now consider if you had what the PA wants, a royalty right of the top before expenses. They'd want 50% of the 6 million, meaning the net revenue would go up by 3 million, and the cost by 4 million, so the project would not happen. It isn't realistic for the PA to exclude costs from their position. Partners share in costs, not just revenue.
In the end the CFL already pays way more than most of the players would make if it didn't exist; mulitples more than the arena league, or the European loops. They pay more than most of the other professional sporting leagues (excluding the big 4) A 12% (on average) pay hike along with a 3,000 signing bonus appears to be very generous. Certainly in the greater society, most people would be thrilled with an offer like that.
I have the utmost respect for the players hard work and talent, but I'm also realistic about how much they should expect. The difficulty may be that they are used to working hard and sacrificing to "win" at whatever they are doing. I'm afraid that egos will get in the way fuelled by all of the union bravado. If they don't step back and look at the value of the league's offer, which I think more than fair, they risk losing the season. This would hurt the players and the fans more than the owners. Right or wrong, that's reality. My greatest concern is that if we lose a year, a new version of football comes in to replace it. American (boring) Rules, small fields, 4 downs, 11 players, none of whom are Canadian. I can't stand the thought of that.
-
They brought up a good point on TSN 1290 this morning. They don't believe the Canadian labor laws would allow them to bring Americans in to fill Canadian jobs. So to have replacement players they would all have to be Canadian. I'm not sure if this is true or not just repeating what they said this morning.
I don't believe that this is correct. The NBA operates in Canada with no Canadian content requirement, as does MLB, and the NHL.
-
Easy choice for me. My father started buying a season ticket for me in 1968, and we've been going to games ever since. He's getting older now, and we have to park up close to accomodate him. $200 for more precious time with Dad is an easy choice. Not sure how many seasons he has left.
-
The officiating in the CFL sucks, by far the worst of any sport I have ever watched.
Not sure putting these guys in front of the mic would make the fans feel more confident in the quality of refs we have. Having them bumble around the field is one thing, having them bumble around the mic after could turn into a complete clownshow.
Like the ref that was standing right there watching our QB (Brink?) take the crown of a helmet right to the chin. The replay shows the bozo looking right at it. What is he going to say? I didn't see it? I did not think it was that bad? My wrist was sore from flagging the Bombers all afternoon?
It is best to keep trying to ignore the whole situation imo.
Officiating isn't much better in most other sports. Cite: Rappers playoff game today. NFL SanFran vs Seattle this past January. Plenty of bad officiating to go around.
As for the proposal, I'd suggest that the main media isn't suitable, but an interview between the director of officiating or a well trained interviewer and the game crew designed to better explain the rules could have some merit.
-
I wonder if Anthony Coombs will skip the draft and sign with us...
Not an option. Once a player has played CIS, they have to go through the draft. If they are not drafted, then they can sign where they like. It is different for CJFL players who can be territorial protections.
-
That being said, taking draft picks, or moving down in the draft, is NOT an easy solution. Many teams trade (or swap) their draft picks, often a couple of years in advance. Is the receipient of a draft pick to pay the price? Can you imagine if the Bombers traded to get Sask's first round pick in 2015, but they were a small amount over the cap and that draft pick was now voided? We'd be screeming.
The draft pick would not be voided. The rules at CFL.ca say:
Non-Monetary Penalties:
Forfeiture of next available first round draft pick for Clubs that exceed SEC over $100,000
Forfeiture of next available first and second round draft picks for Clubs that exceed SEC over $300,000
Meaning if they traded their 2015 1st round pick then they would forfeit their 2016 1st round pick.
I realize that this is current rule, I'm just concerned that it could be abused. Certain GM's don't value picks highly, so they trade them off for established players. It could go on indefinately. I suppose that the rule could be amended to prevent offending teams from trading picks until they have "paid" the penalty, but I just don't see draft picks as being as a strong enough deterent in the event of a serious offence. Justice delayed is Justice denied.
-
I would like to see stiffer penalties for cap violations, but I recognize that this current Saskatchewan amount is really quite minor. I would propose that an escalation should occur for repeat offenders, with a re-instatement after 10 clean years.
That being said, taking draft picks, or moving down in the draft, is NOT an easy solution. Many teams trade (or swap) their draft picks, often a couple of years in advance. Is the receipient of a draft pick to pay the price? Can you imagine if the Bombers traded to get Sask's first round pick in 2015, but they were a small amount over the cap and that draft pick was now voided? We'd be screeming.
I think that draft picks would be a last resort. I'd rather subject a serious multiple offender (which they are not) to other sanctions, such a "dispersal draft" where they protect 20 players, and the other teams in draft order get to take one other player off of their roster. That would be much more effective than taking draft picks, and solves the 'previously traded' draft pick issue.
Did you really think this one through???? Since in this hypothetical situation the Bombers now own that draft pick, you're say that if Sask went over the cap, the Bombers get penalized.... Obviously the penalty would be to take away or downgrade the offending team's highest draft pick...
or maybe I'm reading it wrong and you're suggesting that the Bombers have committed the infraction and get penalized with the draft pick we acquired in a trade... which would make sense..
Perhaps I wasn't clear. My point is that it would be impractical to penalize the wrong team, so other arrangements would have to be made, which would be less than effective. If an offending team has traded their first and second picks, then their "highest" draft would be in the third round, which may not be all that valuable. This could be especially true in your scenario if a team knows they are over, then they would intentionally trade their picks to minimize the penalty. For a penalty to be effective, it has to mean something, and I don't think that Draft picks are neccesarily a meaningful penalty.
-
I would like to see stiffer penalties for cap violations, but I recognize that this current Saskatchewan amount is really quite minor. I would propose that an escalation should occur for repeat offenders, with a re-instatement after 10 clean years.
That being said, taking draft picks, or moving down in the draft, is NOT an easy solution. Many teams trade (or swap) their draft picks, often a couple of years in advance. Is the receipient of a draft pick to pay the price? Can you imagine if the Bombers traded to get Sask's first round pick in 2015, but they were a small amount over the cap and that draft pick was now voided? We'd be screeming.
I think that draft picks would be a last resort. I'd rather subject a serious multiple offender (which they are not) to other sanctions, such a "dispersal draft" where they protect 20 players, and the other teams in draft order get to take one other player off of their roster. That would be much more effective than taking draft picks, and solves the 'previously traded' draft pick issue.
-
- if the kicked ball hits the goalposts (since the 1970s; before then it was a live ball)
This isn't 100% accurate. It is true if the ball hits the uprights in the air. If it bounces first, then hits the goal post, it is a live ball.
I was sitting with a bunch of senior rules officials in the stands at the Canada Cup in Saskatoon in 2009 when this happened. There was quite a discussion between the coaches and the game officials, as the coach was arguing that the ball was dead, but the game officials ruled it live and awarded a rouge when it was downed in the endzone. The senior rules officials that I was with verified that the game officials got it right.
-
my bad, I should have mentioned the Rouge.
As a note, however, you don't get a point for missing a field goal, you get a point if the other team fails to run a kick back out of the endzone.
Several times a season we will see a missed field goal result in a touchdown the other way, and on many other times a missed field goal results in no points being scored. This, of course, is a complex rule.
-
The thing about it its not the NFL. You need time to get acquainted with the CFL game usually two to three years. Have seen two many talent guys come up here and not be able to account for the 12th guy on the field and destroy there confidence with two or three starts.
12th man? Well damm....there you have it. Perhaps some orientation and observation is indeed in order.......I'm going to Google some differences between the CFL and NFL........."did he say 12th guy"?...what the heck
The CFL and NFL are pretty different. 12 men on each side being one. Another big difference being the the field size. The CFL fields are 110 yards rather than 100, and they are also about 12 yards wider as well. Not to mention the end-zones, which are 20 yards deep. It takes some getting used to. Once you look it up, you'll see the leagues contrast in many ways.
Uprights in the front of the endzone not the back and a we have bigger BALLS
The fans may have bigger balls, but the players don't (anymore) The CFL ball is the same dimensions now as the NFL one. The older J5V was larger, but that goes back a few years.
Some of the major differences:
Field
CFL field is 65 yds wide (27% wider than the one used in the USA)
CFL field is 150 yds long (110 goal line to goal line, plus endzones at 20 yds) this is 25% longer than USA fields
Total CFL field area is 9750 square yards, which is approx 59% larger in total area.
Also of note on the field is the much wider placement of the hash marks. The 65 yds of width are divided 24 yds to the near hash, 17 yds between the hash marks, and another 24 yds from the far hash mark to the far sideline. This make the field strength a much bigger issue. With the ball on a hash mark, there is 24 yds to the "weak" side (aka. "boundary") and 41 yds to the "strong" side (aka "field". This is a huge difference that many American coaches and players don't fully appreciate when they first arrive. It also greatly affects the kicking game, much more room to run on kick and punt returns, plus FG attempts often come at a greater angle from the side. NFL hash marks are the same width as the goal posts, so the ball is more centred, and FG attempts are straighter.
Finally regarding the field, our goal posts are at the goal line, which creates many exciting missed field goal returns.
Significant Rule Differences
12 players per side.
3 downs to get 10 yards
On offence 7 must be at the line of scrimmage for the snap, unlimited motion is allowed for the other 5.
Defence must line up a minium of 1 yard back from the line of scrimmage.
All kicks (punts, kickoffs, missed field goals) that remain in the field of play must be returned. There is no "fair catch", instead there is a 5 yard halo given to the returner. The kicker, and any player who is behind the kicker at the time the ball is kicked is "onside" and may recover the ball for his team. This applies on all kick-offs, punts, fieldgoals, and "quick kicks".
Timing rules are quite different as well, as we stop the clock in the last 3 minutes from the whistle until the officials have set the ball. If the previous play ends with time (1 second) on the clock, one more play is allowed.
I could go on for some time, but these are the biggest differences. I can (and have) talk at some length on the differences between the Canadian Amateur rules and the CFL game. I quite well versed in both. I'm less clear on the NFL rule nuances, as I have no formal training in the game played south of the border.
- TBURGESS, mikemicktb, johnzo and 1 other
-
4
-
Are you sure the Pinnacle Club isn't flooded?
Yes, It is dry. I verified this with some people that I'm going with.
-
Shameless bump on this.
Tickets are still available, but going fast. I've got mine and I'm really excited for the evening. Last year's roast of Reinebold was awesome.
Main Camp Day 2 (Reports and Discussion)
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Posted
73 - Kurt Goodrich
45 - Tariq LaChance
54 - Braiden Watson
76 - Spencer Riche