Argos Over Cap But Won't Be Fined

Other teams are kind of peeved. I think all teams should be treated the same.

The fine was not levied due to Covid-19. No mention of how much they went over by but it's not business as usual now.

It's not like it helped them anyways :joy:

Violated is a pretty strong word Justin, maybe exceeded the cap would be better. :slightly_smiling_face: But do we know for sure it was the player cap or the coach/management cap. I wouldn't be surprised it was the latter. That cap was imposed by Ambrosie and not the player salary cap which is part of PA agreement. I don't believe ever hearing what the penalty would be for going over the management cap. Looks like it might be public shaming.

non player salary cap penalty -

For the first $100,000 over the cap, the fine is the equivalent of the amount by which the limit has been exceeded. For any amount over $100,000, penalties range from a minimum of a $25,000 fine and the loss of one second-round draft pick to a maximum of a $250,000 fine and the loss of three draft picks.

But in 2019, as the teams adjust to the cap, teams that voluntarily report their violations to the league will only be subject to team fines, not personal fines or the loss of draft picks.

Regardless, it’s pretty sad considering the Argos are owned by a multi million dollar corporation. Yet if anyone else goes over, the league is standing there with their hand out.

1 Like

The second sentence of the 3down article says: "The Boatmen went over the $5.25 million allotment for player salaries."

Player cap in 2019 was $5.2M. Non-player cap was 2.738M.

But nobody else did go over so there was there was no one else for the league to waive the penalty for due to Covid.

Obviously MLSE can afford the penalty since they can afford to go over in the first place. However, issuing fines publically is not a good look when seeking government assistance.

I think they're better off with a hard cap for all teams if they want to avoid this in the future.

I would think issuing the fine would look good to the government, as if the league were trying to legitimately manage its financial model. Allowing teams to flout the cap that is in place to control costs would not look good to me if I were part of the government committee deciding whether or not to provide financial assistance.

Nothing new here.............................

1 Like

If the government is wanting the league to have a better financial model and I would like to think the league does as well, the structure of the cap needs to change.

A soft cap like they have now, allows teams with deeper pockets to spend above the cap and then pay the penalty. MLSE simply saying 'meh' and paying the fine doesn't help level the playing field though in the Argos case it didn't make a difference this

Long term, I think going to a hard cap will be better for team's bottom line, if a contract puts them over, the league would simply refuse it. But I think that will mean a change in the next CBA which won't be an easy one.

why do you think they did not divulge how much they were over.?

Some shoddy journalism here overall.

Let’s see if I have this rationale down pat: “Yes Your Honour, I was driving over the speed limit but, the speed limit is a soft cap. Yes, this is a difficult time for all of us, due to Covid-19. So, in the circumstances, there is no fine, and by the way, I was the last to arrive at the party. Thank you, Your Honour.”

1 Like