Jesse

Guarenteed Bob is sitting at home commenting the game as he watches anyway, just hook a Mic on him.

Unfortunately, no. When it's not televised, there's no feed to stream.

Are these USport athletes?

omg, thank you. Just signed up. Well, at the very least, it keeps him out of our city and likely out of professional sports. I wonder how Walters and co. feel about bringing this into the city.

I miss the Canada Day opening weekend. That was my favourite.

So, each team is in charge of their own votes. It's not cumulative of all players.

I think I like the deal. Still need more details about how the snap sharing is going to work,

And maybe that's something you can negotiate if another team enters the league, because it's creating more overall jobs so you need less per team. But that is still pie in the sky, imo.

100% because it just adds a layer of complication. Keeping track of the snap counts, is it game by game or cumulative or chunks of the season?

Like that they're talking - don't love the snap counts being back in play - was really hoping for a solution that didn't include that component.

Listen, I believe in the ratio and don't really want to see it changed. We can agree to disagree on that. There have been a few versions of the CBA so far, I don't think we can really debate specific clauses because I don't think we really know for sure what was voted on and why or why not it was voted down. The only one I remember seeing that 7+1 was one was the snap percentages - which is really 5.5 nationals, not 7. But again, I don't think it makes sense to debate it too much, it's all hearsay. Mike made the point that there's a faction of players who don't come here because it's not worth the attempt to come here and compete for one spot - I honestly don't believe that changes too much even if we completely abandon the ratio. We have 20 DBs here to compete for 1 or 2 spots - that doesn't change because of the ratio. We have a bunch of receivers here to compete for 1 or 2 spots. Do we have a ton more guys making the trip for 2 or 3 spots? The trip to Canada to play in a different league will always turn a large group of Americans away. The same way hockey players will move on rather than go to the KHL. We may see a few back end of roster spots improve because of more options - but I can't see a way it vastly improves the game, and it costs us an identity that - while you disagree with - IS important to many fans.

McKnight was our first man off the bench last season. As example of the American talent that we recruit that is supposedly "way better". Woli is an example of a Canadian who stand to lose his starting spot.

You know Booch, you've been taking all off-season how our team is as good or better than last season - hyping up Grey and Dobson, previously on the Eli train and saying we could bring him back, promising that we have cap room if Deslaurias sneaks loose. But now suddenly Canadian depth hurts the team and is going to get our QB killed if we have an injury to a Canadian. You can't have it both ways, the Canadians can play or they can't. The best players go to the US, The next tier that comes to Canada comes here and starts and has success if they have the ability. The guys we are talking about this affecting is on the back half of the roster and Woli vs. McKnight wouldn't move anyone's needle.

Derek Taylor describing how all non-US based sports work (Thread):

It was a bit of a knob comment, but in response to a knob comment as well. Obviously there is a talent gap - the US has 10x as many people and treat football religiously. However, the talent gap is not n = 1. We've tried for how many years to improve our receiving group. Three American spots, but it's been a revolving door and a bunch of vet retreads that never worked out. Why hasn't the infinite talent of the US shown itself yet? The fact is many guys aren't going to play in Canada. Some move on to other opportunities, some can't survive financially on the salary. Some have had legal trouble, etc, etc, etc. At a certain point, we're bringing in athletes that need to develop. The talent gap from Canadians and the players who actually come to Canada is not as big as it's made out to be, there's just more of them. Who is at the bottom of our Canadian starters? Thomas? Woli? The winner of Gray/Dobson? These are the guys that don't belong on the field in your opinion?

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....

Well, this is not sounding good.

Absolutely, we've just heard a few conflicting things so it's hard to know if this is a single issue or if there' a few things stalling the deal. I do not think the ratio should be reduced, but I also like the idea of rewarding/benefits for a "naturalized" American. I'm having trouble reconciling it, so I can see why it's so hard to negotiate.

I guess it depends on why they're digging in their heels.

I imagine if this went through, those part time Canadians would be paid less and back-up imports (who meet the nationalized criteria) would earn more. I don't think guys like Woli and Thomas have the same earning power if they're benched half the time.

Before it was essentially 5.5 (4 starters and 3 guys playing 51%). Now it would be 6.

100% And again, half the roster and the vast majority of starter spots are American. So I think the CFL has shown that it matters very much. And reward those guys who do it with opportunities. Whether that be coaching positions for former players like Hufnagel and Dickenson or alternate opportunities for current players like Bighill. Not sure what you're arguing about. We do all that. But as a National league, it's also important that with all of these Canadian dollars being spent, we place of focus on people here AS WELL (not instead of, like you keep pretending I'm saying). When Andrew Harris came to a school I was teaching at and pointed at the field outside the window and told students he would cut across that field every day...It hits different. Canadian born and bred players tend to live in Canada and spend their pay cheques in Canada. Americans go home spend their money there. Yes, the long term guys might move here eventually, but that's a pretty small percentage of the amount of guys that come through the league each year.

I said it was not a "major league". It is obviously a professional league. But includes a mandate that helps drive national interests.

Is that a CFL ball? Or some local team called the "mustangs" or something?

Yes. And the CFL gives them a platform in which to do that, but we also need a platform to promote all of the Canadian benefits I listed earlier. Half the roster is American. 17 starter positions. Plenty of room for the "best players" to come in and make their mark. And here's a key point on which we disagree, I guess. But the CFL isn't a major league. It's a nationalized league much closer to the CHL, KHL than it is to any of the "big 4". It exists for a purpose, and that purpose isn't the same as those other leagues - not entirely anyway. Harris is the ultimate example of a guy who most likely doesn't get a shot if not for the ratio. And we would have missed out on his career - a guy who has been in countless schools as the local kid with a rough upbringing who turned it around. This is the ultimate argument for the ratio. The literal poster boy.