CFL Rosters

Besides mentioning the Lions might be over the cap, this story mentions the possibility of going to 46 dressed players.
It never really made sense to me to pay 46 but only dress 42, particularly with the liberal CFL Injury List where you can hide players. It would have to be determined how to split the extra 4 players between imports and non-imports.

The Lions were prevented from offering contract extensions at the end of last year, believing they may have spent in excess of the $4.4 million salary cap, which has them facing a possible fine.

They figure to be further handicapped by the absence of a new collective bargaining agreement. Among the items to be discussed in talks between the league and the CFL Players Association is the possibility of an active 46-man roster in exchange for other concessions. Last year teams paid full salaries to 46 players but only dressed 42 on game day.

[url=http://www.theprovince.com/sports/football/bc-lions/year+starts+Lions/9387567/story.html]http://www.theprovince.com/sports/footb ... story.html[/url]

This is amazingly petty. Other concessions for dressing guys they already pay for. I’ll tell you the CFL is so azz backwards sometimes. The nine game exemption was a stupid move by the CFL because they can’t control what is an injury and what is hiding a player. Worked in our favour this year howeve. Als were able to pay for most or all of Smith Marsh and LBJ’s salary for 2014 :slight_smile:

What can I say? They are trying to provide professional football on the cheap - low salaries, low budgets...

The only other country that loves this type of football is the USA. Now, pro salaries in the US (and in other countries where soccer is played) are immoral and beyond all imagining. Good players should indeed get more, but recently a baseball player just signed a $125,000,000 contract for 7 years. This is the opposite end of the spectrum. Surely, there is a logical middle ground.

When teams have to make gut-wrenching decisions which players to dress for a game based on who is earning what flies in the face of good management and coaching of a football team.

Where the CFL is concerned, I would like to see more players be allowed to dress. Football is a contact sport where hard hits are commonplace. Games are often won and lost due to the loss of a key player or players.

So, a balance has to be struck. To attract better players, you have to be prepared to pay them well. To ensure that other good players are ready to go on a moment's notice, you have to expand the roster. Frankly, I would like to see the number of players available raised to 50.

So the CFL is "so azz backwards sometimes" for not dressing the 46 active/paid players on rosters. Why don't you look at other Leagues? The NFL rosters are set at 53 fully paid players,but not 53 do play; I could be wrong,but I do think that only 46 do dress for games. NHL rosters can be at 25,excluding players on injured reserve, but not 25 do dress.

I would be extremely surprised if 46 players do dress; yes, I would like if more players could dress, but I don't expect it to be more than 2 players. In many instances, and the BC Lions are the main culprit, the 4 players not dressing are injured players; the BC Lions are too cheap to transfer these players to injured lists and add uninjured players on active rosters. For the 8 games where Lulay was injured, the BC lions had 4 QBs on the active rosters.

If 46 players were dressing, rosters would have to be expanded. Myself,I do hope that the rosters will be expanded to 47 players and that 44 will dress,i.e. 1 more Non-import and 1 more Import than now.

The 9 game injured list has been in place for years and years and it is a bright decision; better is the fact that during the season, 2 players on this 9 game list can come off,before the end of 9 games. Great decision for Owners such as Mr.Wetenhall who are not cheap. Thanks to Mr.Wetenhall Jim Popp has been able to use this list to include players not game ready yet along with the ones injured badly.

Richard

Richard, they are paying for the 46 guys. All they are saving is travel costs and per diem for 9 games. It would likely even allow them to get more value. Teams would not need to go with a 200k all purpose kicker. They could afford to go with a punter and a place kicker for less money sometimes.

As I wrote, I do hope that the numbers of dressed players will increase,starting in 2014, but I doubt that it will increase by as many as 4 players; I am fully aware that the additional costs would be minimal since the 4 scratched players are fully paid; furthermore, in some instances these players travel to the out of town games.

Assuming that the 46 players were to dress, would these additional 4 players be 2 Non-Imports and 2 Imports? Would the designated Imports be increased from 3 to 5? Presently in some instances the 4 scratched players are not ready to play; in the Als semi-final game against Hamilton, Kyries Hebert was a scratch but he was not ready to play; had 46 players be allowed to dress, Kyries would have been on 1 game injured list.

If I could decide what the active rosters would be,starting in 2014, here are my choices:

Active players: Total of 47.

Dressed players: Increased by 2.From 42 to 44, i.e. 1 more Non-Import and 1 more Import. The 44 dressed players would consist of: 3 QBs,20 Imports,including 3 designated, and 21 Non-Imports.

Minimum Non-Import starters: Reduced by 1. From 7 to 6.

Richard

I have also been saying for a while, I do not understand the concept and no one from the league has ever explained sufficiently why there is a 46 man paid roster and only 42 play?
Now with the new agreement coming, I have suggested that with an increase there should also be an increase to 50 players and all playing, therefore getting rid of the practice squad.
It’s high time the league and especially the players who have been taking many salary haircuts to save the league are properly compensated.

You got to understand. Richard is a bean counter :lol:

Great discussion, and at least all agree that the minimum number of players dressing for games should be increased from only 42 and it's laughable in my view for the status quo when 46 players are paid anyway!

To answer Richard's question on the NFL, yes 46 players are on a game-day roster. 7 are inactive on game day are paid anyway. And then on top of that up to 8 are on the practice roster weekly and a few of those guys are paid more than the minimum for the practice roster too.

In all many NFL teams have 61 players per week, plus ALL other players on practice rosters of other teams and specialty free agents (i.e. usually journeyman QBs, kickers, punters, long snappers), amongst all players available from whom to select to dress for any given game.

Here's a good article on the breakdown:

[url=http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1640782-the-anatomy-of-a-53-man-roster-in-the-nfl]http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1640 ... in-the-nfl[/url]