Rourke Contract squabbles

[TBURGESS]

This is an argument between what is in the CBA and folks who think that the CBA doesn't apply to the third year. Facts vs conjecture.

Salary - Defined in the CBA for draft picks - What's outside the CBA for draft picks, doesn't matter.

Option - Defined in the CBA for draft picks - What's outside the CBA for draft picks, doesn't matter.

Zero proof for the idea that the 3rd year for draft picks doesn't matter & it's in the CBA that it does matter.

Zero proof that the league turned BC done because Rourke wasn't in his option year. Turned them down, yup, because it wasn't his option year, nope.

Zero examples of draft players in their 3rd year, since 2019 (That's the CBA we're looking at & I don't know if the clauses were in older CBA's), who got to ignore the 3rd year option in the CBA. One poser did say there were thousands of examples, but couldn't come up with any.

Disproving me? 🙄🤣

 

[GCn20]

4 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

This is an argument between what is in the CBA and folks who think that the CBA doesn't apply to the third year. Facts vs conjecture.

Salary - Defined in the CBA for draft picks - What's outside the CBA for draft picks, doesn't matter.

Option - Defined in the CBA for draft picks - What's outside the CBA for draft picks, doesn't matter.

Zero proof for the idea that the 3rd year for draft picks doesn't matter & it's in the CBA that it does matter.

Zero proof that the league turned BC done because Rourke wasn't in his option year. Turned them down, yup, because it wasn't his option year, nope.

Zero examples of draft players in their 3rd year, since 2019 (That's the CBA we're looking at & I don't know if the clauses were in older CBA's), who got to ignore the 3rd year option in the CBA. One poser did say there were thousands of examples, but couldn't come up with any.

Disproving me? 🙄🤣

 

There is zero proof of a single thing you have said. Not one iota....heard it on twitter...my god you are thick sometimes. If anyone is a poser around here it is you. Why don't you do everyone a favor and just shut the **** up. In case you haven't noticed everyone here has grown tired of your shtick. You went from a devil's advocate on here and have quickly ramped up to troll status in most people's eyes. You keep banging whatever damn drum you want about this, the rest of us will believe what we know to be true.

Edited November 18, 2022 by GCn20

[JuranBoldenRules]

2 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

This is an argument between what is in the CBA and folks who think that the CBA doesn't apply to the third year. Facts vs conjecture.

Salary - Defined in the CBA for draft picks - What's outside the CBA for draft picks, doesn't matter.

Option - Defined in the CBA for draft picks - What's outside the CBA for draft picks, doesn't matter.

Zero proof for the idea that the 3rd year for draft picks doesn't matter & it's in the CBA that it does matter.

Zero proof that the league turned BC done because Rourke wasn't in his option year. Turned them down, yup, because it wasn't his option year, nope.

Zero examples of draft players in their 3rd year, since 2019 (That's the CBA we're looking at & I don't know if the clauses were in older CBA's), who got to ignore the 3rd year option in the CBA. One poser did say there were thousands of examples, but couldn't come up with any.

Disproving me? 🙄🤣

 

You’re arguing about contract terms for weeks but lack a fundamental understanding of what an option is.  An option doesn’t obligate the team to do anything.  The contract terms only hold if the team chooses to pick up the option.  If they don’t the third year of the contract doesn’t exist.

So yeah, BC could be jerks to Rourke and pick up the option to force him to play for cheap next year if he doesn’t make the NFL.  But how do you think that would play out for them in the long-term?

[Wideleft]

You know what would be awesome?

If a mod stripped all the Rourke contract talk out of this thread, put it in it's own thread, triple-locked it and then made it invisible.

That would be awesome.

[GCn20]

3 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

You’re arguing about contract terms for weeks but lack a fundamental understanding of what an option is.  An option doesn’t obligate the team to do anything.  The contract terms only hold if the team chooses to pick up the option.  If they don’t the third year of the contract doesn’t exist.

So yeah, BC could be jerks to Rourke and pick up the option to force him to play for cheap next year if he doesn’t make the NFL.  But how do you think that would play out for them in the long-term?

He doesn't understand that the option year only exists to put a gun to a player's head IF a team so chooses. He doesn't get that no team is obligated to pick up the option....that is why the option year exists, it allows flexibility for both team and player. Only the first two years of a draft pick contract are mandated under the CBA. The third is the option. Not sure how much clearer it could be. He keeps pointing to the CBA saying that the option year he can only be paid this much....totally true...but doesn't recognize that option years of contracts can be opted out of by the team...HENCE THE TERM OPTION YEAR.

Edited November 18, 2022 by GCn20

[ShyGuy]

option, noun, op·tion

an act of choosing
hard to make an option between such alternatives

the power or right to choose : freedom of choice
He has the option to cancel the deal.

a contract conveying a right to buy or sell designated securities, commodities, or property interest at a specified price during a stipulated period
also : the right conveyed by an option
The ad is for a condo to rent with an option to buy.

[Jesse]

13 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

This is an argument between what is in the CBA and folks who think that the CBA doesn't apply to the third year. Facts vs conjecture.

Salary - Defined in the CBA for draft picks - What's outside the CBA for draft picks, doesn't matter.

Option - Defined in the CBA for draft picks - What's outside the CBA for draft picks, doesn't matter.

Zero proof for the idea that the 3rd year for draft picks doesn't matter & it's in the CBA that it does matter.

Zero proof that the league turned BC done because Rourke wasn't in his option year. Turned them down, yup, because it wasn't his option year, nope.

Zero examples of draft players in their 3rd year, since 2019 (That's the CBA we're looking at & I don't know if the clauses were in older CBA's), who got to ignore the 3rd year option in the CBA. One poser did say there were thousands of examples, but couldn't come up with any.

Disproving me? 🙄🤣

 

Again, what is not explicitly said (or not said) is if the team can deny the option.

You do not know if the league will or will not allow that. None of us do. There is an element of ambiguity that you’re not admitting to, which is the only thing that annoys me.

[JuranBoldenRules]

2 minutes ago, Jesse said:

Again, what is not explicitly said (or not said) is if the team can deny the option.

You do not know if the league will or will not allow that. None of us do. There is an element of ambiguity that you’re not admitting to, which is the only thing that annoys me.

I’m sure the league will rule on the side of forcing the only functional Canadian QB in our lifetimes to go and make more money in the NFL, XFL or USFL.

[Bigblue204]

Was it on here that someone broke down Rourkes first 9 games and compared them to Zachs last nine? I swear I saw that some where...but I can't seem to find it now

[ShyGuy]

We need to go back to the 50s when players were treated like indentured servants

[Geebrr]

5 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

Was it on here that someone broke down Rourkes first 9 games and compared them to Zachs last nine? I swear I saw that some where...but I can't seem to find it now

Yup- and ZC’s second half was better 

It was someone on Twitter

[GCn20]

58 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

This is an argument between what is in the CBA and folks who think that the CBA doesn't apply to the third year. Facts vs conjecture.

Salary - Defined in the CBA for draft picks - What's outside the CBA for draft picks, doesn't matter.

Option - Defined in the CBA for draft picks - What's outside the CBA for draft picks, doesn't matter.

Zero proof for the idea that the 3rd year for draft picks doesn't matter & it's in the CBA that it does matter.

Zero proof that the league turned BC done because Rourke wasn't in his option year. Turned them down, yup, because it wasn't his option year, nope.

Zero examples of draft players in their 3rd year, since 2019 (That's the CBA we're looking at & I don't know if the clauses were in older CBA's), who got to ignore the 3rd year option in the CBA. One poser did say there were thousands of examples, but couldn't come up with any.

Disproving me? 🙄🤣

 

I really didn't want to continue this but over at Riderfans they are saying that Farhan was on the Sportscage this morning and he believes that Rourke will receive multiple offers and will almost definitely take one of them and go to the NFL. He stated the Lions are putting together a new contract offer for him but he thinks Rourke will go to the NFL no matter what kind of money he is offered by BC.,

....but,,,but,,,,but,,,,the Lions aren't allowed to offer him more money....CBA says....lmao

[JuranBoldenRules]

52 minutes ago, Noeller said:

GC still on Sunday...just other playoff games on Sat. Tried it in '08 and it was a disaster. Not well received. We'll see how 2.0 version goes.....

Biggest issue with it is amateur football right up to CIS has to work around it and lots of CFL facilities are shared.

What happens when the Bisons and Bombers have to host playoff games the same weekend?

Access to IGF is almost nil for amateur football below the Bisons now with the addition of the soccer team.

Edited November 18, 2022 by JuranBoldenRules

[TBURGESS]

2 hours ago, GCn20 said:

There is zero proof of a single thing you have said. Not one iota....heard it on twitter...my god you are thick sometimes. If anyone is a poser around here it is you. Why don't you do everyone a favor and just shut the **** up. In case you haven't noticed everyone here has grown tired of your shtick. You went from a devil's advocate on here and have quickly ramped up to troll status in most people's eyes. You keep banging whatever damn drum you want about this, the rest of us will believe what we know to be true.

I meant to type poster, not poser. However, if you see yourself as a poser, you are a poser.

It's in black and white in the CBA. What more proof do you want? You're the one saying that BC can ignore the CBA. Where's your proof?

This is just one of your problems. You think that something is true even after you're shown, in black and white, in a contract, that it's not. It's kinda sad that you go to personal attacks, cuz you ain't got nothing else, but it's your MO.

2 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

You’re arguing about contract terms for weeks but lack a fundamental understanding of what an option is.  An option doesn’t obligate the team to do anything.  The contract terms only hold if the team chooses to pick up the option.  If they don’t the third year of the contract doesn’t exist.

So yeah, BC could be jerks to Rourke and pick up the option to force him to play for cheap next year if he doesn’t make the NFL.  But how do you think that would play out for them in the long-term?

I know what an option is & it's specifically defined in the CBA for CFL draft picks. The definition of option that's in the section of the contract that pertains to remuneration for draft picks is the definition of option used for draft picks. If the option wasn't specifically defined in the draft picks remuneration section, then you'd be right, but in this case you're not.

It wouldn't be BC forcing Rourke to play for cheap. It would be the CBA and the CFL.

2 hours ago, Jesse said:

Again, what is not explicitly said (or not said) is if the team can deny the option.

You do not know if the league will or will not allow that. None of us do. There is an element of ambiguity that you’re not admitting to, which is the only thing that annoys me.

Do you have a source that teams can ignore the option terms written into the CBA? It's not ambiguous because it's written into the CBA in the draft pick remuneration section.

1 hour ago, GCn20 said:

I really didn't want to continue this but over at Riderfans they are saying that Farhan was on the Sportscage this morning and he believes that Rourke will receive multiple offers and will almost definitely take one of them and go to the NFL. He stated the Lions are putting together a new contract offer for him but he thinks Rourke will go to the NFL no matter what kind of money he is offered by BC.,

....but,,,but,,,,but,,,,the Lions aren't allowed to offer him more money....CBA says....lmao

RIDERFANS as source after taking shots about using twitter as a source? BTW: Twitter was a good enough source for you to agree that you had read that BC had asked the league for an exception for Rourke's contract.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Rourke will take his NFL shot. Why wouldn't he? He won't be back in the CFL next year. Why would he come back to a draft pick first contract situation?

Rourke will be a FA if he comes back after next year and will get multiple offers.

Would the CFL exempt Rourke from the CBA first draft contract? I'd hope so, but they didn't do that this year. Maybe because they don't want to open the door for all draft picks to ignore the option year of their contracts and ask for an exemption?

I think that they should add "Except For QB's" in the CBA so Canadian QB's could get paid the same as US QB's. I also think they should be designated as Canadian's no matter if they are backups or starters. The idea that they are sometimes Canadians is dumb IMO.

Edited November 18, 2022 by TBURGESS

[Jesse]

6 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

Do you have a source that teams can ignore the option terms written into the CBA? It's not ambiguous because it's written into the CBA in the draft pick remuneration section.

Does every team pick up the third year option for every draft pick (that has one built into their contract)?

Is there the option decline the +1?

[Wideleft]

 

[Booch]

8 minutes ago, Jesse said:

Does every team pick up the third year option for every draft pick (that has one built into their contract)?

Is there the option decline the +1?

nope...rarely actually....and I can tell you that from first hand experience with draft picks the last decade

Fact of the matter...BC has come out on multiple occasions lately saying with no doubt or ambiguity that 2023 they will not be paying their starting QB 80k next yr, whether it be VA..or Rourke and it will be in line with CFL starter money...plain and simple...cut and dried

I also still stand by my offer that if He is Back next yr for 80k +10% i will never post again....put my money where my mouth is....if a certain someone will stand by their "assumption" and disappear for good if he is playing for more...you so confident and sure of yourself...stand by it and agree

[Jesse]

3 minutes ago, Booch said:

nope...rarely actually....and I can tell you that from first hand experience with draft picks the last decade

Fact of the matter...BC has come out on multiple occasions lately saying with no doubt or ambiguity that 2023 they will not be paying their starting QB 80k next yr, whether it be VA..or Rourke and it will be in line with CFL starter money...plain and simple...cut and dried

I also still stand by my offer that if He is Back next yr for 80k +10% i will never post again....put my money where my mouth is....if a certain someone will stand by their "assumption" and disappear for good if he is playing for more...you so confident and sure of yourself...stand by it and agree

I don't believe we'll ever get the answer. He'll be in the NFL and he'll come back as a FA. 

 

[Booch]

Just now, Jesse said:

I don't believe we'll ever get the answer. He'll be in the NFL and he'll come back as a FA. 

 

i can assure...regardless of what someone says that that option isnt binding...u either pick it up....or re-do a new extension

That being said...Rourke will go along same lines as us with Kongbo....he came back as a true free-agent after 1 yr of his rookie entry deal...and could have signed with anyone for anything (and we had competition and made best offer btw) because we released him from that entry deal, and it became null and void....and thats what will happen...he will be released from the deal, essentially "not picking up the option"...again...key fricken word here...option...and he can sign anywhere...for anything....and btw...happens a lot...u just dont hear about it

[greenrider55]

1 minute ago, Booch said:

i can assure...regardless of what someone says that that option isnt binding...u either pick it up....or re-do a new extension

That being said...Rourke will go along same lines as us with Kongbo....he came back as a true free-agent after 1 yr of his rookie entry deal...and could have signed with anyone for anything (and we had competition and made best offer btw) because we released him from that entry deal, and it became null and void....and thats what will happen...he will be released from the deal, essentially "not picking up the option"...again...key fricken word here...option...and he can sign anywhere...for anything....and btw...happens a lot...u just dont hear about it

Realistically, would Rourke sign anywhere else if he came back, IE would Toronto stash away money for him, or do you think he’ll be loyal to BC?

[HardCoreBlue]

4 minutes ago, Jesse said:

I don't believe we'll ever get the answer. He'll be in the NFL and he'll come back as a FA. 

 

My prediction is he can't secure a practice roster spot in the NFL so he continues to work on his craft here in the CFL eventually tho it turning into a long and storied career in the CFL.

[Bigblue204]

2 minutes ago, greenrider55 said:

Realistically, would Rourke sign anywhere else if he came back, IE would Toronto stash away money for him, or do you think he’ll be loyal to BC?

He seems like the type to stay loyal.

[Firekid]

1 minute ago, Bigblue204 said:

He seems like the type to stay loyal.

That's what she said.

[Wideleft]

23 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

He seems like the type to stay loyal.

He seems like a good guy, but good doesn't always equal loyal.  He lost almost half a season in his first year as a starter.  You gotta get paid as much as you can as soon as you can because the football gods aren't always kind.

Edited November 18, 2022 by Wideleft

[Jesse]

11 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:

My prediction is he can't secure a practice roster spot in the NFL so he continues to work on his craft here in the CFL eventually tho it turning into a long and storied career in the CFL.

Money, OL, surrounding cast.

He may go to BC first, but they need to at least match other offers.