iso_55 Posted December 7, 2013 Report Share Posted December 7, 2013 When we win a Grey Cup (hopefully in my lifetime) I'll remember that remark & I'll be living it up laughing. My take is if you can't win within the salary cap then you have a loser for a GM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted December 7, 2013 Report Share Posted December 7, 2013 When we win a Grey Cup (hopefully in my lifetime) I'll remember that remark & I'll be living it up laughing. My take is if you can't win within the salary cap then you have a loser for a GM. i'd agree with that... ...if the CFL had a salary cap. however, it does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweep the leg Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 When we win a Grey Cup (hopefully in my lifetime) I'll remember that remark & I'll be living it up laughing. My take is if you can't win within the salary cap then you have a loser for a GM. i'd agree with that... ...if the CFL had a salary cap. however, it does not. Exactly. I hate that they can spend more than us & it helps them win, but there's nothing wrong with going over the luxury tax threshold if you can afford it. I'd prefer the CFL to have a hard cap than the current system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuranBoldenRules Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 When we win a Grey Cup (hopefully in my lifetime) I'll remember that remark & I'll be living it up laughing. My take is if you can't win within the salary cap then you have a loser for a GM. i'd agree with that... ...if the CFL had a salary cap. however, it does not. Exactly. I hate that they can spend more than us & it helps them win, but there's nothing wrong with going over the luxury tax threshold if you can afford it. I'd prefer the CFL to have a hard cap than the current system. The only league with a hard cap is the NCAA. Unless the penalty is forfeiting games, it's not a "hard cap" IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweep the leg Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 When we win a Grey Cup (hopefully in my lifetime) I'll remember that remark & I'll be living it up laughing. My take is if you can't win within the salary cap then you have a loser for a GM. i'd agree with that... ...if the CFL had a salary cap. however, it does not. Exactly. I hate that they can spend more than us & it helps them win, but there's nothing wrong with going over the luxury tax threshold if you can afford it. I'd prefer the CFL to have a hard cap than the current system. The only league with a hard cap is the NCAA. Unless the penalty is forfeiting games, it's not a "hard cap" IMO. So what do the NHL & NFL have? As I understand it, they disallow any contract that would put a team over the cap, so there's no need for a penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweep the leg Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 When we win a Grey Cup (hopefully in my lifetime) I'll remember that remark & I'll be living it up laughing. My take is if you can't win within the salary cap then you have a loser for a GM. i'd agree with that... ...if the CFL had a salary cap. however, it does not. Exactly. I hate that they can spend more than us & it helps them win, but there's nothing wrong with going over the luxury tax threshold if you can afford it. I'd prefer the CFL to have a hard cap than the current system. The only league with a hard cap is the NCAA. Unless the penalty is forfeiting games, it's not a "hard cap" IMO. So what do the NHL & NFL have? As I understand it, the NHL disallows any contract that would put a team over the cap, so there's no need for a penalty. iso_55 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacquie Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 So what do the NHL & NFL have? As I understand it, they disallow any contract that would put a team over the cap, so there's no need for a penalty. I don't think so. I seem to recall the Devils being over the cap and they had to play a few games undermanned. Did it change with the new CBA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 If they played undermanned it's probably because they were at the cap and not allowed to bring up any players. I think the NHL has something for emergencies. Without looking it up is say the NHL is pretty hard. Even during the off season you're only allowed to be over the cap by a certain percentage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuranBoldenRules Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 The NFL cap is one of the most complicated and convoluted, even more than the NBA. It is based on a 4 year period, current one is 13-16, then 17-20 under this current CBA. Teams can be over in one season as long as they make it up by the end of the window. You can be under one year and over the same amount the next, no penalty, you can carryover cap space. Floor works the same way. Nobody would ever implement a truly hard cap in North American pro sports because the penalty would potentially taint a fanbase. Every league has basically the same penalties dealing with losing draft picks, fines. The toughest penalty probably is the NHL where they would go back and tear up the roster in order of player being acquired to make the team compliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 Who the F cares... I wouldn't give two craps if the club was fined a tonne of money and all draft picks were forfeited if it meant that we won a Grey Cup. bluto 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacquie Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 Who the F cares... I wouldn't give two craps if the club was fined a tonne of money and all draft picks were forfeited if it meant that we won a Grey Cup. Even if it means we suck for years after? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 There are somewhat reasonable reasons to be at or over the cap like a plethora of injuries. But for a team to decide they will spend well over the cap just to be better than everyone else is absolutely cheating. If that's what the riders did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 When we win a Grey Cup (hopefully in my lifetime) I'll remember that remark & I'll be living it up laughing. My take is if you can't win within the salary cap then you have a loser for a GM. i'd agree with that... ...if the CFL had a salary cap. however, it does not. Exactly. I hate that they can spend more than us & it helps them win, but there's nothing wrong with going over the luxury tax threshold if you can afford it. I'd prefer the CFL to have a hard cap than the current system. The only league with a hard cap is the NCAA. Unless the penalty is forfeiting games, it's not a "hard cap" IMO. So what do the NHL & NFL have? As I understand it, the NHL disallows any contract that would put a team over the cap, so there's no need for a penalty. That's what I want to see. if you're a buck over the cap & as a result can't sign that player you think will help you win the GC then it sucks to be you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 There are somewhat reasonable reasons to be at or over the cap like a plethora of injuries. But for a team to decide they will spend well over the cap just to be better than everyone else is absolutely cheating. If that's what the riders did. I have heard that they could be $40,000-$50,000 over. That's what some Rider fans are saying over at CFL Horsemen. They of course, are fine with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jpan85 Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 It's acceptable to be in the first level. Injuries can happen but anything over that no excuse for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR. CFL Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 And how does everyone feel about the cheating that goes on with putting healthy players on the 9 game injured to avoid the Cap? Is that acceptable cheating ? Even the innocent Bombers do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 You're still missing the point here. It was Rider fans who screamed louder than anyone about the Esks cheating when they were over the cap and winning even though the cap back then was even less enforced. Now though it's just the way business is done when it's the Riders doing it. We're laughing at their hypocritical nature here nothing more nothing less. pigseye, iso_55 and Blueandgold 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigseye Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 The Riders just made a mint off of the GC, 2015 or 2025 won't matter to them what the future costs are, especially once the new stadium is up and running and they are pulling down even more revenue, I can see this becoming their m.o. and driving the weaker sisters to their knees, everything they bitched and complained about happening to them in the past, hypocrites is apt. iso_55 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 The cap? Their heads are too big for the cap as they believe whatever they did is justified as they are the chosen. Sask. has had their day and now we'll be hearing about it for a long time. BC and even Tor. handled winning pretty well, but I bet Sask. puts the "in" back in "sufferable" iso_55 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 Who the F cares... I wouldn't give two craps if the club was fined a tonne of money and all draft picks were forfeited if it meant that we won a Grey Cup. Even if it means we suck for years after? what... like, 23 of them? there's winning the Grey Cup... and there's failing. nearly doesn't count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted December 8, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 I guess we could actually wait and see if taman is over the cap before passing judgement... Ha DR. CFL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPuDS Posted December 9, 2013 Report Share Posted December 9, 2013 And how does everyone feel about the cheating that goes on with putting healthy players on the 9 game injured to avoid the Cap? Is that acceptable cheating ? Even the innocent Bombers do that.sigh. cfl came out and said it wasn't considered cheating but a legal if uncool way around the rule..ya kno, for a dr... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR. CFL Posted December 9, 2013 Report Share Posted December 9, 2013 My point being as soon as you implement any rule or form of regulation in sport people automatically look for a way to surcumvent it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted December 9, 2013 Report Share Posted December 9, 2013 I believe the CFL should have a hard cap as CFL contracts aren't complicated because they aren't multi million dollar deals like the other leagues. Therefore a team should be able to move players around within that limit how they see fit. Just as long as they're not over. If they're over then the penalties should be a lot harsher then they are now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotoriousBIG Posted December 9, 2013 Report Share Posted December 9, 2013 The Cap is a joke as there are 101 ways around it. The CFL only audits what's on the books; perks in the form of cars, off season jobs, housing, even jobs for spouses are obviously not taken into account. Remember the infamous Bob Wettenhall Xmas bonuses he doled out at his annual Xmas party? Or Burris' wife's job in Calgary? However, a bigger problem that NO ONE talks about is that support staff and coaching salaries are not capped. So a franchise like SK -- which could put a green S on a 30-cent mug,charge 19.99 for it and sell out in 8 seconds -- has all this extra cash to pay for coaches. Why should one team be able to outbid for mercenary, one-year type coaches like Cortez, and still have tons of cash for extra QB coaches, WR coaches, etc. So the less successful teams that can't afford to have 5 GC winning coaches will have to make due with newbies and skeleton staffs? It looks like just a giant slush fund, something that a league as delicate as the CFL should monitor. Oh, and what about the per diems that SK coaches and players get? Its apparently double what the BB pay. Yet another slush fund. When half the teams fold and its a 4 team league maybe the CFL will wake the hell up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now