10 players revealed from each CFL team's negotiation list

TORONTO – For the second time this year, the nine CFL teams have unveiled 10 players from each of their negotiation lists. Clubs are required to do so on two occasions throughout the year following a measure approved at the 2018 CFL winter meetings.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://www.cfl.ca/2021/12/21/10-players-revealed-cfl-teams-negotiation-list/

For what it's worth... if anyone needs a good QB prospect just see 'Hufnagel's New and Used Quarterback Prospect Emporium' (located conveniently beside Bob's Discount Toupee Shop). Calgary knows how to find 'em.

The CFL should do away with the negotiation list and have a live US colligate draft. No more secrecy and it creates buzz on whom their CFL teams have taken

1 Like

Yes I agree Huff certainly does know how to pick em! Look at Hamilton they have 7 QBs on their list. With Evans & Masoli they seem to be doing alright ! The Teams that need a good QB either are not listing them or have not been scouting them. Guess they would rather steal Calgary's castoffs! LOL

1 Like

That's OUR plan. Wait in the weeds for Calgary to put one of these gun slingers on their practice roster then swoop in like the stinky scavenger we are. :laughing:

1 Like

I disagree. They should abolish the draft altogether and go all free agency. The draft - any draft - is nothing but anti-trust/collusion.

Furthermore, any league with a salary cap system that puts all teams on the same financial footing each year can't even argue the reverse-standings-order for parity argument. A salary cap IS perfect parity. Anything else in addition just messes up the parity.

Dunno who "our" is but unless it's the Cats (assuming Reilly isn't going anywhere) you ALL need QBs.

Evans will be a starter, soon. When he threw that pick to....I forget, and rushed back to knock it out and recover it..... The kid's got game. Cats should hang on to him. Unfortunately for the rest of the league, we have nothing to offer, now.

I disagree. If there was no draft the most desirable players in any league would sign with the most desirable teams most of the time. This would work against parity, even with a salary cap in place. What top prospect would sign with the Coyotes, for example, if they didn’t have to? Whatever CFL team is considered weak in any given year would be at a severe disadvantage.

Under the free for all model, the unproven rookies would also likely be paid much more, without ever having proven themselves or played one game. This would lower veteran salaries. The NHL, for example, limits entry level contracts for this reason. Even in business, a rookie just out of college, no matter how promising, does not get to be paid equal to a proven veteran. I don’t think the players association would be onside with this.

1 Like

Not with a proper salary cap. It would be impossible for the best few teams to sign ALL of the best FAs at market value. Full stop.

Again, wrong. All unproven American rookies in the CFL are FAs with absolutely no restrictions. When is the last time that an American rookie signed in the CFL for big time money? You can't name one. It doesn't happen. So the issue that you bring up is a much smaller problem than you claim it to be. Only with Canadian rookies would there be much of a bidding war for services, and if a team ends up overpaying for a Canadian rookie then it will use up their salary cap and prevent them from filling their roster and cost them wins on the field.

This whole notion of 'unproven rookies' not deserving money comes from armchair QBs who think that if they themselves lived the dream of playing pro they'd be humble and just accept what they're given and so they expect the rookies in real life to do the same. It's really born of jealousy. A player is worth what a player is worth. If there are teams demanding his services, his worth goes up, regardless of his experience. Conor McDavid was instantly a top 5 player in the NHL in his rookie season. You cannot tell me that he was only worth 900k that the CBA allowed him when the league average salary was somewhere around 2Million. If he was on the open market he would have gotten the 5 million that he deserved or more. But because the draft denied him his right to the open market, the NHL and the NHLPA (who agreed to the draft and the rookie caps in the CBA) colluded to deny him his value. This is exactly why drafts in any sport were introduced, to keep players not already in the league from getting their true free market value. It's collusion and anti-trust, pure and simple. The parity argument is just their propaganda cassus belli.

I still disagree. Not with all of your points, but the premise. And McDavid was nowhere near top 5 in the league during his first year. Many first or second overall busts- Daigle, Stefan, Yakupov, Ryan Leaf. I prefer they do something to prove themself at the pro level before being handed the bigger bucks.

The draft also clearly helps parity. Can you imagine where the Oilers would be today without McDavid? 2-20 I would guess. How is parity served by having McDavid go to the Leafs or the Rangers or Lightning? And I’m not saying the draft system is perfect, just that it helps with parity. Personally I think the Oilers should have been prohibited from picking first for 10 years as a penalty for incompetent drafting or winning too many lotteries, but even they couldn’t screw up picking McDavid.

He was an elite player from game 1. Where do you rank him? In what percentile? He was paid in the 75th-80th percentile. That is nowhere near fair market value. Do you really think that that's fair?

And those teams lost. All of them, usually embarrassingly badly. Let them overpay and lose. :+1:

No it does not. You just prove this point by saying how many times the Oilers have drafted high and have still been perennial losers.

If you have a proper salary cap, then all teams are on equal footing. Winning and losing is purely based on competency of each club to put a team on the field/ice/court. Period. Each team has the same budget to sign players and coaches from the same talent pool. It doesn't get any more balanced than that. Any other tweaks just messes with that balance. The clubs all sink or swim on their own in that same pool. Some teams will sink year after year (Cleveland Browns) and some will swim (Patriots) and that's all down to bad or good management/ownership - just the way that it should be.

Where would the Oilers be without McDavid? That depends on who else they got in his place, and where McDavid ended up. And where all the other great players ended up, but they would all find their place in the market and teams that lose would lose fair and square, and more importantly, the players would all be paid fairly.