Govenors have differing views?

Govenors have differing views?

by Argofan_1000 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 5:32 pm

Orridge said in the league release. “While the Board and I have differing views on the future of the league,"
Maybe this says everything.


So what are they? Differing views, I mean. What is the future as everyone sees it?

10 separate business units or 1 unified unit? Revenue sharing or not?
Open Mike Games? Fines to clubs? Media access? how to handle the pending litigation, Next CBA? CFLPA? Overall team Cap proposal? Next TV contract or games on twitter/facebook? Expansion? to where - Canada - US ? Video game?
Open neg lists? ESPN? NFL involvement? Ratio changes? US draft? There are probably a dozen more issues for the next guy. No easy task.

What was the one big issue keeping in mind Orridge's statement of "differing views"?

You can't say that Orridge did nothing! He shook the tree and he fell out. nothing wrong with that. Good luck to him
User avatar
Veteran
 
Posts: 593
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:38 am

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by KevinRiley2 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 5:34 pm

Argofan_1000 wrote:Orridge said in the league release. “While the Board and I have differing views on the future of the league,

Maybe this says everything.


So what are they? Differing views, I mean. What is the future as everyone sees it?

10 separate business units or 1 unified unit? Revenue sharing or not?
Open Mike Games? Fines to clubs? Media access? how to handle the pending litigation, Next CBA? CFLPA? Overall team Cap proposal? Next TV contract or games on twitter/facebook? Expansion? to where - Canada - US ? Video game?
Open neg lists? ESPN? NFL involvement? Ratio changes? US draft? There are probably a dozen more issues for the next guy. No easy task.

What was the one big issue keeping in mind Orridge's statement of "differing views"?

You can't say that Orridge did nothing! He shook the tree and he fell out. nothing wrong with that. Good luck to him

The owners want more $$$$. If Orridge brought in more money, he'd still be there - no matter his/their views.
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 6925
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 pm

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by Argofan_1000 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 5:51 pm

KevinRiley2 wrote:
Argofan_1000 wrote:Orridge said in the league release. “While the Board and I have differing views on the future of the league,

Maybe this says everything.


So what are they? Differing views, I mean. What is the future as everyone sees it?

10 separate business units or 1 unified unit? Revenue sharing or not?
Open Mike Games? Fines to clubs? Media access? how to handle the pending litigation, Next CBA? CFLPA? Overall team Cap proposal? Next TV contract or games on twitter/facebook? Expansion? to where - Canada - US ? Video game?
Open neg lists? ESPN? NFL involvement? Ratio changes? US draft? There are probably a dozen more issues for the next guy. No easy task.

What was the one big issue keeping in mind Orridge's statement of "differing views"?

You can't say that Orridge did nothing! He shook the tree and he fell out. nothing wrong with that. Good luck to him

The owners want more $$$$. If Orridge brought in more money, he'd still be there - no matter his/their views.


I think money is at the root of it but what path to get there
User avatar
Veteran
 
Posts: 593
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:38 am

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by KevinRiley2 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 5:54 pm

Argofan_1000 wrote:
KevinRiley2 wrote:
Argofan_1000 wrote:Orridge said in the league release. “While the Board and I have differing views on the future of the league,

Maybe this says everything.


So what are they? Differing views, I mean. What is the future as everyone sees it?

10 separate business units or 1 unified unit? Revenue sharing or not?
Open Mike Games? Fines to clubs? Media access? how to handle the pending litigation, Next CBA? CFLPA? Overall team Cap proposal? Next TV contract or games on twitter/facebook? Expansion? to where - Canada - US ? Video game?
Open neg lists? ESPN? NFL involvement? Ratio changes? US draft? There are probably a dozen more issues for the next guy. No easy task.

What was the one big issue keeping in mind Orridge's statement of "differing views"?

You can't say that Orridge did nothing! He shook the tree and he fell out. nothing wrong with that. Good luck to him

The owners want more $$$$. If Orridge brought in more money, he'd still be there - no matter his/their views.


I think money is at the root of it but what path to get there

That's the key. Not sure if there are any unrecognized revenue streams but that will be the key to success for the new Commissioner.
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 6925
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 pm

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by brianjoxx » Wed Apr 12, 2017 5:56 pm

Argofan_1000 wrote:Orridge said in the league release. “While the Board and I have differing views on the future of the league,"
Maybe this says everything.


So what are they? Differing views, I mean. What is the future as everyone sees it?

10 separate business units or 1 unified unit? Revenue sharing or not?
Open Mike Games? Fines to clubs? Media access? how to handle the pending litigation, Next CBA? CFLPA? Overall team Cap proposal? Next TV contract or games on twitter/facebook? Expansion? to where - Canada - US ? Video game?
Open neg lists? ESPN? NFL involvement? Ratio changes? US draft? There are probably a dozen more issues for the next guy. No easy task.

What was the one big issue keeping in mind Orridge's statement of "differing views"?

You can't say that Orridge did nothing! He shook the tree and he fell out. nothing wrong with that. Good luck to
him




Nice read. Thanks. Add upcoming salary increase demands with new contract and length off it.
Starter
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 10:39 am
Location: vernon,bc

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by 300Magnum » Wed Apr 12, 2017 7:14 pm

Argofan_1000 wrote:
KevinRiley2 wrote:
Argofan_1000 wrote:Orridge said in the league release. “While the Board and I have differing views on the future of the league,

Maybe this says everything.


So what are they? Differing views, I mean. What is the future as everyone sees it?

10 separate business units or 1 unified unit? Revenue sharing or not?
Open Mike Games? Fines to clubs? Media access? how to handle the pending litigation, Next CBA? CFLPA? Overall team Cap proposal? Next TV contract or games on twitter/facebook? Expansion? to where - Canada - US ? Video game?
Open neg lists? ESPN? NFL involvement? Ratio changes? US draft? There are probably a dozen more issues for the next guy. No easy task.

What was the one big issue keeping in mind Orridge's statement of "differing views"?

You can't say that Orridge did nothing! He shook the tree and he fell out. nothing wrong with that. Good luck to him

The owners want more $$$$. If Orridge brought in more money, he'd still be there - no matter his/their views.


I think money is at the root of it but what path to get there


When you lay out a vision, you need full fill it.

The league needed a Commish and whatever path that Orridge had laid out to get hired he obviously did not delivery.
Starter
 
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 12:39 pm

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by PTBO Dave » Wed Apr 12, 2017 10:01 pm

KevinRiley2 wrote:
Argofan_1000 wrote:Orridge said in the league release. “While the Board and I have differing views on the future of the league,

Maybe this says everything.


So what are they? Differing views, I mean. What is the future as everyone sees it?

10 separate business units or 1 unified unit? Revenue sharing or not?
Open Mike Games? Fines to clubs? Media access? how to handle the pending litigation, Next CBA? CFLPA? Overall team Cap proposal? Next TV contract or games on twitter/facebook? Expansion? to where - Canada - US ? Video game?
Open neg lists? ESPN? NFL involvement? Ratio changes? US draft? There are probably a dozen more issues for the next guy. No easy task.

What was the one big issue keeping in mind Orridge's statement of "differing views"?

You can't say that Orridge did nothing! He shook the tree and he fell out. nothing wrong with that. Good luck to him

The owners want more $$$$. If Orridge brought in more money, he'd still be there - no matter his/their views.


This is true, but if a commish suggests a money-making course of action that is rejected by the BOG for whatever reason, then they're at least partly to blame.

I'm not saying that this is the case, because I don't know what went on in BOG meetings, but it's been known to happen in business that a person with great ideas takes the fall for those who refused to accept/understand the value of those ideas.
What all men speak well of, look critically into; what all men condemn, examine first before you decide.
-Confucius

When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt. -Robert M. Pirsig
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 1204
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 6:17 am

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by jamie » Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:44 am

I've been a CFL fan for a long time but can honestly say I haven't the foggiest clue what the commissioner's role is, what his duties are or where his powers lie.

For instance...what are his limits to on field product? Does he have any say in the rule changes? Or how they are enforced?

Is he given a mandate to get a 10th franchise?

Does he have free reign in league discipline?

Does he just follow owners majority decisions or is he expected to lead the BOG?

They had a cheerleader PR type in Cohon but that fizzled too.

I really have no idea.
Veteran
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:34 pm

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by Argofan_1000 » Fri Apr 14, 2017 10:46 am

Orridge said in the league release. “While the Board and I have differing views on the future of the league,

in this quotation I was thinking that there are really only a few things that could fall within the scope of this statement and cause someone to be released. differing views on;

- expansion outside of Canada or a 2 division league US/Canada
- ratio and content rules
- revenue sharing
- Television/streaming/over the air TV, as this would be his expertise
- pending litigation and how to handle this.

I don't know - just speculating. But these are all real issues that would take he league in a different direction. I can tell you if we don't fully support this league in Canada with the owners making money and the players having a larger piece of the pie then everything will be on the table. This type of discussion happens in every boardroom and if Canada doesn't support their own the owners will find a solution.

They could put a for sale sign on the entire league if they want to with 9 relocations. The sale price won't be 10 million per club, they could be talking about 50 - 75 million. Just how hard does the league and owners have to fight to convince Canadians to support something Canadian. John Tory said "if Canada was voted the best country in the world to live Canadians would ask for a recount" Heard that again on TSN 1150 Hamilton this week and he was referring to the CFL.

If you remember in the state of the League address Orridge did say that he wants to grow the league outside of its borders, don't know what that means, could this be the issue?
User avatar
Veteran
 
Posts: 593
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:38 am

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by Aerial » Fri Apr 14, 2017 11:25 am

I would guess, speculating, that "growing the league" in a significant way would be to look at the US once again and who knows, maybe Orridge really wanted to explore this but the BoG said no go. That would be a very big difference of opinion on the future of the league. Also ties in with Canadian content perhaps. But who knows really?
“I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.” - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 2325
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2015 12:22 pm
Location: Hamilton, ON

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by HfxTC » Fri Apr 14, 2017 12:11 pm

Argofan_1000 wrote:
KevinRiley2 wrote:
Argofan_1000 wrote:Orridge said in the league release. “While the Board and I have differing views on the future of the league,

Maybe this says everything.


So what are they? Differing views, I mean. What is the future as everyone sees it?

10 separate business units or 1 unified unit? Revenue sharing or not?
Open Mike Games? Fines to clubs? Media access? how to handle the pending litigation, Next CBA? CFLPA? Overall team Cap proposal? Next TV contract or games on twitter/facebook? Expansion? to where - Canada - US ? Video game?
Open neg lists? ESPN? NFL involvement? Ratio changes? US draft? There are probably a dozen more issues for the next guy. No easy task.

What was the one big issue keeping in mind Orridge's statement of "differing views"?

You can't say that Orridge did nothing! He shook the tree and he fell out. nothing wrong with that. Good luck to him

The owners want more $$$$. If Orridge brought in more money, he'd still be there - no matter his/their views.


I think money is at the root of it but what path to get there



Always been the same... How can we squeeze more without reaching in our pockets.
Everything I write is just an opinion formed from various sources. Some more reliable than others, it is expressed as a composite of facts, innuendos, emotions, personal experiences and complete fabulation into a gumbo for entertainment purposes alone.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 34379
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 10:09 pm
Location: Halifax

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by Argofan_1000 » Fri Apr 14, 2017 12:14 pm

Aerial wrote:I would guess, speculating, that "growing the league" in a significant way would be to look at the US once again and who knows, maybe Orridge really wanted to explore this but the BoG said no go. That would be a very big difference of opinion on the future of the league. Also ties in with Canadian content perhaps. But who knows really?



this is a quote from the State of the League address last year when discussing expansion

"Our goal ultimately is to be part of that global conversation of sport, along with the NHL and the NBA and Major League Baseball. We need to be part of that conversation. And the steps that we're taking are getting us there, closer and closer. So I'm glad you raised that because that is a particular goal of ours right now, because we live in a global marketplace. We can no longer be insular or provincial in our thinking or in our action. Right? And this game is clearly exportable. I use this – you know, when I got here last year – and I can say this now because I'm an American by birth but a Canadian by choice – that it is so amazing to me that you can find maple syrup just about anywhere, right? You can get great maple syrup in Vermont, but there's only one Canadian maple syrup. Right? There's only one Canadian Football League. Right? It is unique. We've got a unique value proposition, we've got a unique selling proposition, we've got an incredibly exciting game. All the elements of sport that you would ever want are right here in this game: unpredictability, excitement, parity in the League. What's better than that? So it will happen, there's no question. "
User avatar
Veteran
 
Posts: 593
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:38 am

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by KevinRiley2 » Fri Apr 14, 2017 12:20 pm

Argofan_1000 wrote:Orridge said in the league release. “While the Board and I have differing views on the future of the league,

in this quotation I was thinking that there are really only a few things that could fall within the scope of this statement and cause someone to be released. differing views on;

- expansion outside of Canada or a 2 division league US/Canada
- ratio and content rules
- revenue sharing
- Television/streaming/over the air TV, as this would be his expertise
- pending litigation and how to handle this.

I don't know - just speculating. But these are all real issues that would take he league in a different direction. I can tell you if we don't fully support this league in Canada with the owners making money and the players having a larger piece of the pie then everything will be on the table. This type of discussion happens in every boardroom and if Canada doesn't support their own the owners will find a solution.

They could put a for sale sign on the entire league if they want to with 9 relocations. The sale price won't be 10 million per club, they could be talking about 50 - 75 million. Just how hard does the league and owners have to fight to convince Canadians to support something Canadian. John Tory said "if Canada was voted the best country in the world to live Canadians would ask for a recount" Heard that again on TSN 1150 Hamilton this week and he was referring to the CFL.

If you remember in the state of the League address Orridge did say that he wants to grow the league outside of its borders, don't know what that means, could this be the issue?

Interesting post.

I just think the CFL has maxed out it's NON TV revenue and Orridge took the hit - because they brought him in hoping/expecting NEW revenue streams and he did NOT deliver.
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 6925
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 pm

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by project.legacy » Fri Apr 14, 2017 3:15 pm

The old guard of the Governors is changing - Wtenhall, Young and Braley are no longer the powers they once were, but having Lastman, Hunt, King, and Morsky as the new guard, maybe presenting it's own set of problems. The League next to get the next Commissioner right, and actually allow that individual to do their jobs and grow the CFL. Orridge didn't seem to understnad the League or it's fanbase, so bringing in someone who does, add in being a good public speaker, and being a leader are absolute musts IMO.
User avatar
Starter
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Govenors have differing views?

by Argofan_1000 » Fri Apr 14, 2017 4:13 pm

project.legacy wrote:The old guard of the Governors is changing - Wtenhall, Young and Braley are no longer the powers they once were, but having Lastman, Hunt, King, and Morsky as the new guard, maybe presenting it's own set of problems. The League next to get the next Commissioner right, and actually allow that individual to do their jobs and grow the CFL. Orridge didn't seem to understnad the League or it's fanbase, so bringing in someone who does, add in being a good public speaker, and being a leader are absolute musts IMO.


don't forget this lady
http://www.bluebombers.com/2017/02/23/n ... governors/
User avatar
Veteran
 
Posts: 593
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:38 am

Next

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests