COVID-19 : How it could impact Lions/CFL

The Place for BC Lion Discussion. A forum for Lions fans to talk and chat about our team.
Discussion, News, Information and Speculation regarding the BC Lions and the CFL.
Prowl, Growl and Roar!

Moderator: Team Captains

User avatar
B.C.FAN
MVP
MVP
Posts: 11029
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

According to Dave Naylor and Farhan Lalji of TSN, the CFL and its players association have made progress in negotiating a return to play agreement and have submitted a joint request for federal assistance believed to be about a quarter of the maximum $150 million mentioned previously by commissioner Randy Ambrosie. That would put the request in the range of $30 to $40 million. The requested funds would go toward player salaries and operating costs for a shortened season, similar to federal aid given to other employers. They say Winnipeg is still considered the favourite location for a single hub to start the season, but other cities and models are still under consideration. Farhan said at least 75 to 80% of players are committed to playing this season, and others are waiting for a recommendation from the CFLPA. It sounds promising that we will see at least 6 regular season games this fall.

Video link:
https://www.tsn.ca/cfl/video/3-downs-wh ... le~1992126


"I think [Fred Fateri] was like a lot of people who watch football, hockey or any professional sport on television. They sit there and think they could coach better than the professional. Some people really think that." - Bob Ackles, The Water Boy
maxlion
Champion
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 12:49 am

I am wondering how this proposal deals with US player salaries. Is the idea that Canadian taxpayers would pay Mike Reilly a few hundred thousand to come to Canada to play football for 3 months? Because that would be hard to justify.

I'm not against using federal funds to pay foreign workers in certain circumstances. Maybe even subsidize football players? Not sure. But probably not more than $2000 per month.


User avatar
KnowItAll
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7302
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 6:32 pm
Location: Delta

maxlion wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 9:43 pm
I am wondering how this proposal deals with US player salaries. Is the idea that Canadian taxpayers would pay Mike Reilly a few hundred thousand to come to Canada to play football for 3 months? Because that would be hard to justify.

I'm not against using federal funds to pay foreign workers in certain circumstances. Maybe even subsidize football players? Not sure. But probably not more than $2000 per month.
be surprised if any stars came up here for 2000 a month. Maybe rookies and backups just looking for the chance to play and get better and be noticed.


Every day that passes is one you can't get back
User avatar
B.C.FAN
MVP
MVP
Posts: 11029
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

The CFL minimum salary of $65,000 works out to about $13,000 a month for 5 months, or about $22,000 for a 6-game season over a month and a half.


"I think [Fred Fateri] was like a lot of people who watch football, hockey or any professional sport on television. They sit there and think they could coach better than the professional. Some people really think that." - Bob Ackles, The Water Boy
maxlion
Champion
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 12:49 am

I wouldn't expect many if any US players to come up here for $2000/month. But should taxpayers pay many times that amount for them to come play for a few games?

Subsidising Canadian businesses employing Canadian workers is one thing, paying foreign workers for essential services is obviously needed, but US football players at $10k+ per month?

How much would Mike Reilly make in a shortened season? And how much would taxpayers be on the hook for? That is my question.


Murdoch
Starter
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:04 pm

Not sure if that $350 B deficit number disclosed recently was ytd or projected. It's a big number either way. Get ready for $10 and $20 coins. Quit with the nickels if they haven't already. Nothing I can do about it but still find it more concerning than football, hockey, or golf these days. Some might question the sustainability of such grand plans.

Point being, if it wasn't for USA being possibly worse off the dollar is going to take a hit. It's not like there is a stockpile of $2,000 / ton gold left to buoy the balance sheet. Heck of a call to sell at $850. Hopefully it doesn't come to a .50 dollar for the CFL. Will need to mandate wages paid in CFL dollars tied into any support to avoid the loopholes that will be invented.

May as well add to the rant and say TSN is doing a poor job of keeping the CFL in the news with the late night double headers. Replays starting after midnight in the east are hard to get excited about, never mind to stay awake for. Seems like zero effort and imagination to me.

Feel better now. Wishing all a good weekend.


User avatar
B.C.FAN
MVP
MVP
Posts: 11029
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

Paying players pro-rated salaries for a shortened season has many complications. A lot of veteran players have already received significant advances on their 2020 salaries in the form of offseason bonuses. Mike Reilly reportedly has a six-figure report-and-pass bonus for showing up to training camp and passing his physical. Other players have significant performance bonuses for milestones that can't be achieved in a shortened season, such as 1,000 receiving or rushing yards. The league and CFLPA will have to negotiate how to handle those situations in a way that will be as fair as possible to everyone.


"I think [Fred Fateri] was like a lot of people who watch football, hockey or any professional sport on television. They sit there and think they could coach better than the professional. Some people really think that." - Bob Ackles, The Water Boy
maxlion
Champion
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 12:49 am

Fair enough BC FAN.

I think this will be a hard sell. On the one hand, the CFL does support jobs and there is a cultural component. On the other, it is non-essential and relies on US players making way more than most of the jobs that are supported. It would be cheaper for the government just to pay the workers to stay home, rather than pay US players to come. And the CFL could return next year if it is truly culturally important.

On balance, the optics of paying US players relatively big bucks to play a few games using taxpayer funds make this proposal unlikely to succeed, in my opinion.


User avatar
B.C.FAN
MVP
MVP
Posts: 11029
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

Dan Ralph of The Canadian Press says the CFL's revised financial request, sent to federal Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault, is for roughly $42.5 million.

CFL submits revised financial request to federal government: source


"I think [Fred Fateri] was like a lot of people who watch football, hockey or any professional sport on television. They sit there and think they could coach better than the professional. Some people really think that." - Bob Ackles, The Water Boy
Huge Talent
Starter
Posts: 169
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2016 7:12 pm

That seems like a reasonable amount of money. And justifiable. The cfl has a moderate economic impact. It also helps maintain the fabric of Canadian society. We love our hockey, but the cfl is more "Canadian," and even the haters would miss it.


Murdoch
Starter
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:04 pm

Sounds like the NHL has a plan and is moving forward. The question that comes to my mind is " who are they doing it for ? ".

Are we in need of hockey to make it through the day ? Bottom line I come up with is they are doing it for themselves. They need it more than the fans in order to pay for the sports cars and mansions that every 25 year old journey man grunt seems to have in abundance. The super stars are flying multi million dollar jet planes.

Doesn't seem sustainable to me. Doing something for yourself and having others pay is a tough sell over the long run. Enjoy the day on your own dime Antonio Brown. Where does Willie Jefferson get a $300,000 job?

Conversely, doing it for the fans is an honorable objective and has a far better chance of being rewarded by others. When they understand that concept and get it right will be the day they get back headed in the right direction imo. I don't see that they are there yet.

The game I love. The business side is so so.


Murdoch
Starter
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:04 pm

I actually have no grudge with player salaries so was wrong to mention that. Cap management system is somewhat straight forward minus the loopholes. And the players are the game without doubt.

I have more issue with team presidents of community owned not for profit franchises making $500,000 or even Randy Ambrosie at $750,000. Those jobs used to be volunteer positions and could still well be if it wasn't such a great job for making the big easy.

Enjoy the week.


User avatar
BC 1988
Legend
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:58 pm
Location: BC (since 1988)

Murdoch wrote:
Mon Jul 13, 2020 8:35 am
Sounds like the NHL has a plan and is moving forward. The question that comes to my mind is " who are they doing it for ? ".

Are we in need of hockey to make it through the day ? Bottom line I come up with is they are doing it for themselves. They need it more than the fans in order to pay for the sports cars and mansions that every 25 year old journey man grunt seems to have in abundance. The super stars are flying multi million dollar jet planes.
The NHL motivation to do this August playoffs-Sept Cup final is entirely motivated by the TV revenue they are on the hook for in the event of non-completion of the season. On the players side, they understand that the future of the game is at stake, and that contributed to the least acrimonious negotiations in the modern NHL. Mathieu Schneider (special assistant to NHLPA executive director Fehr) was on TSN 1040 this morning, and he said that the agreement also covered the possibility of playing 2020-21 with no fans/stands.


User avatar
Hambone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6628
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:25 pm
Location: Living in PG and back working in Mackenzie for the next few months.

BC 1988 wrote:
Mon Jul 13, 2020 2:27 pm
Murdoch wrote:
Mon Jul 13, 2020 8:35 am
Sounds like the NHL has a plan and is moving forward. The question that comes to my mind is " who are they doing it for ? ".

Are we in need of hockey to make it through the day ? Bottom line I come up with is they are doing it for themselves. They need it more than the fans in order to pay for the sports cars and mansions that every 25 year old journey man grunt seems to have in abundance. The super stars are flying multi million dollar jet planes.
The NHL motivation to do this August playoffs-Sept Cup final is entirely motivated by the TV revenue they are on the hook for in the event of non-completion of the season. On the players side, they understand that the future of the game is at stake, and that contributed to the least acrimonious negotiations in the modern NHL. Mathieu Schneider (special assistant to NHLPA executive director Fehr) was on TSN 1040 this morning, and he said that the agreement also covered the possibility of playing 2020-21 with no fans/stands.
It also doesn't hurt that 85% of the regular season schedule was behind them and with that 85% of player salary expenditures had already been doled out. The NHL pays out all "salaries" for the playoffs in the form of playoff bonuses. Playoff TV revenue will still be huge and easily cover the players' playoff bonus pool with likely some left over for the member clubs. What hurts the most for NHL teams is not getting the lucrative game revenues for playoff dates where the arenas are packed and tickets priced much higher than for regular season games. That's the biggest loss factor for them and only for the 16 teams who would have actually made the playoffs under normal circumstances. For the other 15, like my Red Wings, well they only miss out on revenues from the final 5 or 6 home games. There wasn't going to be any playoff gravy for them regardless.


You're as old as you've ever been and as young as you're ever going to be.
Murdoch
Starter
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:04 pm

So is the plan is to fulfill their commitment for the past season with this latest playoff scheme and then roll right into the new season that would normally start in October, possibly with or without fans?

Maybe different tv rights for playoffs and regular season factored in to the plan. I wish them well.


Post Reply