Both the CFL and CFLPA are in favour of reducing the number of national starters from seven to five after the issue was raised during recent labour negotiations in Toronto, per sources.While a final decision has yet to be made, there appears to be a consensus on this issue after the first round of negotiations.
Agreed, but it appears that is not the case,
I doubt the reason is to get more Globals rather than U.S. players as starters
I totally agree with a reduction of Canadian/National starters without reducing the total number of Canadian/National players. Such a move will improve the game.
Richard
I doubt it as well, I’m just making a generalization about the Global player thing. Not a fan of players being handed spots, no matter their passport.
Why should 5 Canadians be given starting positions when they could easily be replaced with Americans who are superior athletes, better trained and will probably sign for less?
Let the best players play. If a Canadian or Armenian is good enough, he should earn their roster spot on ability, not Nationality.
Sure, this might decimate Canadian university football with top athletes perhaps choosing other sports which gives them a better chance to earn a living. There also may be pressure to standardize the quirky Canadian rules since the vast majority of players, coaches & GM’s are Americans who grew up playing American football…not a dying sport Canadians used to play.
I was afraid of this. Big blow to Canadian kids with visions of CFL and using it as motivation. The overall gap has been closing over the years…this will likely widen it again down the road…not in favor of this at all.
So the ratio went from 10 Canadian starters to 7 now going to 5. Only time will tell. Pro and cons on both sides of the issue.
My personal preference is to leave it as is.
I’m not a big fan of this reduction. If it were a temporary measure to make the transition to ten teams from nine, then I wouldn’t mind so much.
But if they reduce the number of starters, I think they should simultaneously increase the number of national roster spots to get more nationals with pro-level training.
So GM’s have been crying that it will be tougher to sign Americans because of the new leagues, but then want to increase the number of American starters…
Typical CFL genius…
It would not shock me if the reduction in the ratio is mostly because the players want long term health care for injuries sustained on the field, and this is the way to pay for it because of some sort net cost savings. What I would be curious to see is any numbers to back this up.
Reducing the starter ratio is the CFL taking the easy route instead of committing fully to the very real issues football faces in this country.
Canadians are covered by our public healthcare. Americans are not unless they are residents. So adding more Americans would increase the cost of any insurance benefits I think.
Even Canadians have to pay for drugs and many rehabilitative services, which for long-term injuries can prove quite expensive ... especially if the injury is severe.
I am in favour of a slight reduction due to the additon of a 10th team. If there are 70 top-notch National starters in this scenario, then I am fine with the status quo. But my concern is that the number of quality starting Canadian pros isn’t quite that high, especially when some starting O-linemen around the league go down to the inevitable injury.
The Sinopolis, Harrises, Muambas etc. will always have a place in the CFL. These guys are off-the-charts athletic and can start on any team at any time. My issue is more with the 6th and 7th best National starter on most teams. That’s where things start to get a little murky. And if it isn’t the 7th starter, then it’s the depth chart after injuries play a role.
Reduce mandatory National starters, raise minimum salary, add a National or two to the roster, add a “Global player” roster spot and let everyone on the roster dress for games… more dues for the CFLPA … the 4-5 additional players dressed for each game allows fewer starters to take additional hits on special teams …
I don’t mind the ratio dropping of the starters as long as they are still mandated to have the same amount of canadians on the roster.
The nature of canadian universities is so that athletics takes a backseat to academics and rightly so. This is likely never going to change, and if sports programs arent funded to their máximum then athletes wont develop to their Max. So it’s not unreasonable to expect ratio adjustments to be made on a regular basis. In my opinion
Declan cross is an absolute beauty and makes some clutch plays. No disrespect to him, but in contrast to other players, he really seems to lumber around, and thats why he is better suited for full back and not wide receiver from his collegiate years.
It’s to his strength that he could adapt to a different position, but the nature of canadian players is as such because they arent developed enough at their preferred positions.
Say goodbye to Canadian receivers, with very, very few exceptions.
If I were a GM having to play five national starters, I’d be going with three on the o-line, one at safety, and one at DT or perhaps LB. My backups would then all be at those positions.
I am definitely against reducing the number of Canadian starters. Is this the Canadian Football League or the CanAm Football League?
Reducing the starters will turn the majority of Canadians into grunt special teamers. Not much incentive for young Canadian athletes to pursue a football career.
Brian Ramsay the president of the players association just tweeted that the report is false.