https://www.tsn.ca/naylor-many-questions-but-few-answers-on-a-2021-cfl-season-1.1543725

The Canadian Football League has been outrageously quiet since it pulled the plug on its season more than two months ago, leaving behind a wake of speculation about where things are headed next.

With the reality setting in that COVID-19 is likely to still be around in some form next summer, there is real concern about what the 2021 season might look like or if it will occur at all.

There are teams that believe it is vitally important to play in 2021 and that without a season the CFL is in danger of being mothballed. Whether every team believes that is another question. And there is a lot to sort out before anyone can accurately predict what a season might look like and how much pain the teams are collectively willing to stomach to make it happen.

The league and its franchises are currently running through various scenarios for next season, trying to get a handle on true costs of each and working at ways to trim budgets and save money. That’s likely to continue until the league can truly choose a course of action, which feels like next April at the earliest.

Why? Well, there’s not much point in fully committing to a scenario that’s seven months away if that scenario might be totally unrealistic by the time you get there.

There has been no 2021 business plan presented yet, only regular updates to the presidents and governors about what the league is doing to prepare for the unknown.

It should be noted that teams will need to make decisions about retaining assistant coaches with expiring contracts by December, which will be the first real economic commitments to a 2021 season. Restrictions on signing players will need to be lifted well before the opening of February free agency, where players are likely to meet a cautious market – one in which signing bonuses will probably be absent.

There’s a collective bargaining agreement to amend, if not renegotiate, with the players, which will require some kind of pressure point because it always does. But the league can’t sit down with the players until it gets a true handle on revenues and it can’t do that until it chooses a course of action.

Will CFL teams be allowed to have full stadiums next summer? It doesn't seem likely. But just what percentage of capacity will be allowed – if any at all – is impossible to guess. It seems as if the league is counting on the restrictions that currently prevent fans from being in stadiums being lifted. But to what degree?

When will we see a schedule? Good question. Or could we see multiple schedules for different scenarios? Never say never.

Could it be a 21-week, 18-game season played in home stadiums? Unlikely, given the losses teams are expected to take with reduced numbers of fans in the stands. Could we see a return to the 10-week bubble? Maybe. A nine-game schedule played in home stadiums before fans? Perhaps.

The point is no one knows, so demanding answers to questions that can’t possibly be answered right now is a waste of time.

All we know is that there’s going to be a lot less revenue for teams to operate with under any scenario, not just because of crowd restrictions but also due to older fans choosing to stay home for their safety. The CFL’s fan demographics do it no favours in this regard.

Getting consensus on a best course of action won’t be easy for the CFL’s nine teams. Back in the summer, there were teams that were willing to play without government support and teams that weren’t. And just like then, the biggest challenge commissioner Randy Ambrosie faces now is finding a scenario they can all live with.

Adopting a revenue-sharing model so that each team absorbs the same amount of red ink would certainly make consensus-building easier, which many believe should be the direction for the future, COVID-19 or not.

The other elephant in the room is federal government, which many in the CFL believe left it high and dry last summer after months of back-and-forth talks where the league believed it was making progress.

Is the CFL prepared to go down that road again, knowing it doesn’t control the timeline and larger forces can change things in an instant? Perhaps, although it’s not as though the feds don’t have a long list of people coming at them with their hands out.

There will be voices demanding the owners suck up the losses of playing a season under any circumstance, as owners have done in other sports. But the business calculation in sports such as MLB, NFL, NHL and NBA is different because of the percentage of revenues those leagues derive from television.

Losses sustained by playing in those leagues can also be viewed as investments towards protecting massive franchise values. That’s not the case in the CFL, where teams can’t just float money on the backs of their franchise values, and where one third of the teams are publicly owned.

It would be beneficial for the league to soon announce its formal commitment to play some kind of season in 2021.

But beyond that, get ready for months more of waiting with lots of questions and speculation but very few answers.

Edit

Edited January 26, 20215 yr by SpeedFlex27

So, after paying Milanovich to sit around & do nothing for a year he leaves. He got paid & didn't earn a penny. Especially during this pandemic when other coaches lost their jobs instead. I'd like to see the CFL take a stand with coaches that have itchy feet by taking them to court to get the team's money back that they paid out to anyone who does something like this. Milanovich & the Colts may have thought twice about doing this if they knew they might be held financially liable. 

9 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

So, after paying Milanovich to sit around & do nothing for a year he leaves. He got paid & didn't earn a penny. Especially during this pandemic when other coaches lost their jobs instead. I'd like to see the CFL take a stand with coaches that have itchy feet by taking them to court to get the team's money back that they paid out to anyone who does something like this. Milanovich & the Colts may have thought twice about doing this if they knew they might be held financially liable. 

They probably have clauses in their contracts that allow this.

10 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

So, after paying Milanovich to sit around & do nothing for a year he leaves. He got paid & didn't earn a penny. Especially during this pandemic when other coaches lost their jobs instead. I'd like to see the CFL take a stand with coaches that have itchy feet by taking them to court to get the team's money back that they paid out to anyone who does something like this. Milanovich & the Colts may have thought twice about doing this if they knew they might be held financially liable. 

Big hole for EE to fill. Wonder if they will go after a CO from another team, dig up a skeleton from CFL days gone by, or if they will try to start with a fresh hc. 

Could be a good fit for June Jones, for in league guys I think bobby dyce deserves a shot at HCing again. Maybe tommy condell? 

the two names I read yesterday were Jim Barker and Jamie Elizondo....neither of those would excite me, if I was an Esks fan.

1 minute ago, Noeller said:

the two names I read yesterday were Jim Barker and Jamie Elizondo....neither of those would excite me, if I was an Esks fan.

Jim Barker would be a horrendous choice. Doesn't get any more CFL than a hire like that.

They should be pursuing Trestman. Harris could have a great year under him.

Edited January 26, 20215 yr by Dr Zaius

1 hour ago, wbbfan said:

Big hole for EE to fill. Wonder if they will go after a CO from another team, dig up a skeleton from CFL days gone by, or if they will try to start with a fresh hc. 

Could be a good fit for June Jones, for in league guys I think bobby dyce deserves a shot at HCing again. Maybe tommy condell? 

I'm assuming most teams have their COs under contract, so unless a team is willing to let them go I don't see it happening. And I'd be very surprised if any team would do that at this time of year.

I personally would think this bridge got burned to the ground when he left after the last GC......but you never really know.

 

 

I feel when Jones left Edmonton it was like this

2 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

I feel when Jones left Edmonton it was like this

CFL in general. No Jones in the CFL again, please. Keep that trash down south. 

Just now, Bigblue204 said:

I'm assuming most teams have their COs under contract, so unless a team is willing to let them go I don't see it happening. And I'd be very surprised if any team would do that at this time of year.

its the default that if a CO is offered a HC job or a promotion that you let them take the interview/job. but it is getting late for that. 

28 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I personally would think this bridge got burned to the ground when he left after the last GC......but you never really know.

 

 

I cant think of a coach who has been worse for the league, or is more the opposite of a winner. 

the Esks beat guy for CHED radio was saying today: "The problem with Jones is that he's ALWAYS looking for the next opportunity. Hard to build a program when the HC won't commit to the program".....and that's about right. Sounds like he's got NFL/NCAA opportunities down south anyhow, so that's good...stay there.

3 hours ago, wbbfan said:

its the default that if a CO is offered a HC job or a promotion that you let them take the interview/job. but it is getting late for that. 

Yeah in December...I could see it happening. But late Jan...doubt it.

*If* they were to go with Jones then they would be getting rid of Thorpe also.  

27 minutes ago, Brandon said:

*If* they were to go with Jones then they would be getting rid of Thorpe also.  

Well, if Jones is to come back to CFL, I think he might want Sunderland's job too. 

10 hours ago, Jpan85 said:

They probably have clauses in their contracts that allow this.

Then these clauses need to be removed. No other league gets shitted on like our does by the NFL & our Commissioner & BOG's let it happen. Brock Sunderland's cum by ya comment that Milanovich is still his friend must sound so good to Eskimo season ticket holders. Coaches can come & go as they please while under contract but players can't. Huff wouldn't release Holley the Stamps all star line backer or their corner as they were under contract. Finally after months they relented yet anyone in management can just **** off if they want to go to the NFL. 

So nobody should ever leave a job for a better paying job with better possibilities for future employment? How loyal should a coach be to a fan base few loses in a row or a rough season they are calling for your head. Would you say the same thing to a Head coach in AHL or Juniors? Or if it’s a college coach moving to the pros?

40 minutes ago, Jpan85 said:

So nobody should ever leave a job for a better paying job with better possibilities for future employment? How loyal should a coach be to a fan base few loses in a row or a rough season they are calling for your head. Would you say the same thing to a Head coach in AHL or Juniors? Or if it’s a college coach moving to the pros?

So, a coach can leave when he wants but a player can't. He got paid to do zip with Edmonton. The Colts should be paying Edmonton compensation. 

Edited January 27, 20215 yr by SpeedFlex27

I think there's a middle ground somewhere here...... absolutely players and coaches should have the opportunity to make the big NFL $$$$$ when they've got the chance, but there have to be some protections in place for CFL clubs. Maybe that's a hard date? No opting out after a certain date? Whatever it is, I'm certain there's a way to meet in the middle. 

12 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Then these clauses need to be removed. No other league gets shitted on like our does by the NFL & our Commissioner & BOG's let it happen. Brock Sunderland's cum by ya comment that Milanovich is still his friend must sound so good to Eskimo season ticket holders. Coaches can come & go as they please while under contract but players can't. Huff wouldn't release Holley the Stamps all star line backer or their corner as they were under contract. Finally after months they relented yet anyone in management can just **** off if they want to go to the NFL. 

Thing is though, the Stamps would've paid for that indirectly. One of the big draws of the CFL for American players is the exposure and ability to continue to play and develop. Holley's case is the exception, not the rule. Players are under contract, yes, but from a long-term perspective, it benefits the club to allow them to go to greener pastures.

You'd be hard pressed to find many - if any, American players that'd prefer playing in the CFL over the NFL. Releasing Muamba to pursue the NFL arguably bit the Bombers - when he returned North, he signed with a different club. However, long-term, it built the goodwill to future American players, showing that if given an NFL opportunity, the Bombers would oblige. I'd argue the Bombers to attract more premium talent in the later years, and some of those players (Marcus Sayles, Winston Rose) have gone on to play in the NFL. Teams that have had disputes - notably the Argos - have struggled bringing in American talent, and the on-field product has shown that.

Is it ideal? Certainly not. It is however the reality the CFL faces, dollar for dollar there's no way the CFL could ever compete with NFL contracts. Although contractually players don't have the same rights as coaches, it is somewhat an unwritten rule that, if given an opportunity to play, they expect release from the CFL contract. For most of these players, their longer term goal is to play at the NFL level.

1 hour ago, Noeller said:

I think there's a middle ground somewhere here...... absolutely players and coaches should have the opportunity to make the big NFL $$$$$ when they've got the chance, but there have to be some protections in place for CFL clubs. Maybe that's a hard date? No opting out after a certain date? Whatever it is, I'm certain there's a way to meet in the middle. 

I always thought that a solution to this was a a system like they have in soccer where you have to pay the club for them to be released from their contract. Or the Japanese Baseball approach where you post your players ability and MLB team have to pay you to negotiate with that player. Would be a revenue stream for teams across the league.

 

So you're telling me the super team is still a go...

2 hours ago, Noeller said:

 

So the core of the CFL top tier have not changed......hmmmmm,,,he forgot to add resulting in the same ending....Cup to Bombers....heh heh..