Hours to FA

[OV - 54:40]

But Hambone, in Murphy's case I don't think he was signed with an option year. One year only. That would make him a free agent. Otherwise, yes this would all be a moot point in a few days.

Murphy had a 1 + 1 as all CFL contracts have to be, remember all the debate surrounding Ricky Williams signing. What he won't do is come back to the contract that he signed, knowing that he is the elite OL in the league, and will get top $ for his services now. He is financially stable enough to sit out the season if he isn't rewarded a compensation package to his satisfaction.

I wonder if Gene Makowsky for the Riders makes say around 160K plus - he won back to back CFL lineman of the year and has been a proven force in the league for years now; or do players get to re-negotiate every season and say hey i won this or that award or was on the all-star team? Some GMs might say - you had a very good season for your first year pal, but still a ways to go before you prove you are even close to rating the top paid O-lineman in the league.

[Lionheart]

I wonder if Gene Makowsky for the Riders makes say around 160K plus - he won back to back CFL lineman of the year and has been a proven force in the league for years now; or do players get to re-negotiate every season and say hey i won this or that award or was on the all-star team?

No, players do not get to do that. It must be agreeable by both parties.

[Rammer]

But Hambone, in Murphy's case I don't think he was signed with an option year. One year only. That would make him a free agent. Otherwise, yes this would all be a moot point in a few days.

Murphy had a 1 + 1 as all CFL contracts have to be, remember all the debate surrounding Ricky Williams signing. What he won't do is come back to the contract that he signed, knowing that he is the elite OL in the league, and will get top $ for his services now. He is financially stable enough to sit out the season if he isn't rewarded a compensation package to his satisfaction.

I wonder if Gene Makowsky for the Riders makes say around 160K plus - he won back to back CFL lineman of the year and has been a proven force in the league for years now; or do players get to re-negotiate every season and say hey i won this or that award or was on the all-star team? Some GMs might say - you had a very good season for your first year pal, but still a ways to go before you prove you are even close to rating the top paid O-lineman in the league.

If the Lions paid Murphy a league minimum salary or slightly above that given he started, he deserves more, and his hammer isnot needing the Lions as much as they would need him back at a better contract. I think given Murphy's season, if he does make it back a raise is in for signing on for a few more seasons, and his win of the OL of the year. But will it be enough in his mind to persuade him from hanging up the cleats for a year, or a season in the AFL closer to home.

[Shi Zi Mi]

Actually, I hope Murphy does not sign in the NFL, if just to give more clarity to the "mandatory 1+1" discussion. If he only signed a 1 year deal, he should be available to all CFL teams after Feb 15th.

Leading credence to his having signed a 1+1 deal is the fact that he is not included on the list of potential FA's for Feb 15th.

Then again, it still wouldn't prove that 1+1 is mandatory......just what Murphy has signed........oh, well.

I still stand by the Calgary player deal that allowed him out during the season......IMHO, it proves conclusively that you can include whatever you want in a contract, as long as both parties agree.

[Murph56]

I assure you OV-54:40, this past year for me was no fluke.

[Shi Zi Mi]

I assure you OV-54:40, this past year for me was no fluke.

Hey Rob,

You finally made it over here.

I was talking to you about this website at the Walby's Warrior's gig in Winnipeg in November (old, fat guy wearing the bright orange #14 jersey).

Maybe you could clear up this confusion on your contract.......are you contractually bound to the Lions for 2007?

How's things going down south? There's quite a few Lions' fans watching the newswires and calendar(Feb15th) with bated breath.

Best of luck, no matter which way things play out for you.

[Rammer]

Actually, I hope Murphy does not sign in the NFL, if just to give more clarity to the "mandatory 1+1" discussion. If he only signed a 1 year deal, he should be available to all CFL teams after Feb 15th.

Leading credence to his having signed a 1+1 deal is the fact that he is not included on the list of potential FA's for Feb 15th.

Then again, it still wouldn't prove that 1+1 is mandatory......just what Murphy has signed........oh, well.

I still stand by the Calgary player deal that allowed him out during the season......IMHO, it proves conclusively that you can include whatever you want in a contract, as long as both parties agree.

Remember the Calgary player was either a PR player other than his one game of CFL play. Maybe he slipped through the CFL by making it through waivers.....just kind of like the AFL players were jumping through to our amazement.

[Shi Zi Mi]

Actually, I hope Murphy does not sign in the NFL, if just to give more clarity to the "mandatory 1+1" discussion. If he only signed a 1 year deal, he should be available to all CFL teams after Feb 15th.

Leading credence to his having signed a 1+1 deal is the fact that he is not included on the list of potential FA's for Feb 15th.

Then again, it still wouldn't prove that 1+1 is mandatory......just what Murphy has signed........oh, well.

I still stand by the Calgary player deal that allowed him out during the season......IMHO, it proves conclusively that you can include whatever you want in a contract, as long as both parties agree.

Remember the Calgary player was either a PR player other than his one game of CFL play. Maybe he slipped through the CFL by making it through waivers.....just kind of like the AFL players were jumping through to our amazement.

I don't think these players are slipping/jumping through anything..........when a player is placed on waivers, any team claiming said player has to honour the terms of his existing contract.

If that contract includes an "out" then the claiming team must still allow the player "out".......so claiming the player off waivers is moot.

IMHO, the league wants to keep this as hush hush as possible........why? so that it doesn't become part of every contract .

[OrangeShoes99]

I assure you OV-54:40, this past year for me was no fluke.

I can assure you that a lot of fans on this board realize that and want you back!

I saw you at training camp and thought you looked like the real deal. Then you tweeked you're back or soemthing and I feared they would release you.

I love the nastiness you brought to our line this year.

You were a huge part of the team's success last season, and I have no doubt you could duplicate it again this year. I hope it's in orange and black.

How's the knee?

[Rammer]

Actually, I hope Murphy does not sign in the NFL, if just to give more clarity to the "mandatory 1+1" discussion. If he only signed a 1 year deal, he should be available to all CFL teams after Feb 15th.

Leading credence to his having signed a 1+1 deal is the fact that he is not included on the list of potential FA's for Feb 15th.

Then again, it still wouldn't prove that 1+1 is mandatory......just what Murphy has signed........oh, well.

I still stand by the Calgary player deal that allowed him out during the season......IMHO, it proves conclusively that you can include whatever you want in a contract, as long as both parties agree.

Upon further research on the Calgary player, his name is David Allen (Tks GSG). The Calgary fans seem to think that he was released as part of his contract and that it was put in because he was a few games away from his NFL pension (which he is now one game short of). He returned last season and got cut. He looked pretty good running the ball in his Stamps game as IR, making a significant impact on the outcome, but he may have been waived through the league still.

[B.C.FAN]

I assure you OV-54:40, this past year for me was no fluke.

Best of luck no matter what the future brings. We would love you to stay and play here for another 5 or 10 years. As a bonus, you can collect some more hardware and jewelry at the end of the season. You're a valuable and much respected member of the organization.

[Rammer]

I assure you OV-54:40, this past year for me was no fluke.

As you will see, most on here are in complete agreement on that front. BTW, lived the pancakeing of Montford, you ended up costing him his return to the CFL with those two games against him. 8)

[Rammer]

Actually, I hope Murphy does not sign in the NFL, if just to give more clarity to the "mandatory 1+1" discussion. If he only signed a 1 year deal, he should be available to all CFL teams after Feb 15th.

Leading credence to his having signed a 1+1 deal is the fact that he is not included on the list of potential FA's for Feb 15th.

Then again, it still wouldn't prove that 1+1 is mandatory......just what Murphy has signed........oh, well.

I still stand by the Calgary player deal that allowed him out during the season......IMHO, it proves conclusively that you can include whatever you want in a contract, as long as both parties agree.

Here is the article on David Allen clearly outlining that it was a verbal agreement with Barker and that he was cut in order for the Stamps to hold up their end of the deal.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Columnists/Si ... 9-sun.html

[TheLionKing]

Interesting arrangement.

[Shi Zi Mi]

Actually, I hope Murphy does not sign in the NFL, if just to give more clarity to the "mandatory 1+1" discussion. If he only signed a 1 year deal, he should be available to all CFL teams after Feb 15th.

Leading credence to his having signed a 1+1 deal is the fact that he is not included on the list of potential FA's for Feb 15th.

Then again, it still wouldn't prove that 1+1 is mandatory......just what Murphy has signed........oh, well.

I still stand by the Calgary player deal that allowed him out during the season......IMHO, it proves conclusively that you can include whatever you want in a contract, as long as both parties agree.

Here is the article on David Allen clearly outlining that it was a verbal agreement with Barker and that he was cut in order for the Stamps to hold up their end of the deal.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Columnists/Si ... 9-sun.html

Wow.......I wonder if his agent is aware of the risk he took........was his agent ignorant of the waiver rules in the CFL........especially with a 1 week window to sign in the NFL. All it would have taken is a Taman in Winnipeg (hello Kyries Hebert) claiming Allen on waivers and keeping him in limbo until that 1 week window closed.

It's really too bad that we're stuck with untrustworthy media to supply us with "facts". There's no way to know if this is accurate unless we get some "horse's mouth" verification.