That is fine but then let's not talk about Canadian content in the light that the CFL mandates Canadian content to promote the development of Canadian players growing up in our country. And I believe that's exactly how the CFL describes the import rule and why it exists. Unless the league decides on a myriad of vision concepts. :?
Earl, I think it should be a separate discussion from the National part of the roster. But at the same time, IMO it would be fitting to celebrate those players that embrace the CFL and Canada. And there are ways to do that by without necessitate changes to the roster ratio. For instance, lets say the league decides to award special status to those Internationals that have played a minimum of 5 seasons with the same CFL team and, to make it an even more exclusive club, the player must live full time in a Canadian city. And let's say for these players, Naturalized Canadians, Canadianized Internationls, Maple Leaf status, or whatever name you give them, the league gives a 25% cap credit on that players salary which then gives the team a few extra bucks to sign or retain other players. You could then cap the number of players a team can apply for this status for or cap they amount of cap relief allowed under the status at say $50K or $100K. How many players would this apply to? Not many, but it would give the home team the edge to keep a veteran in FA rather than losing him over an extra $10-15K offered by another team. And such an allowance will bring the cap value of the player's salary closer to what a younger guy might make so a team will be less likely to make a move purely for financial reasons. Anyways, just a suggestion going off what others have said.
And speaking of keeping veteran players, some great news for the CFL:
CFL News ?@CFL_News 40m40 minutes ago
Big coup for #Calstampeders to extend @BoLeviMitchell. Many feel he's good enough to get serious NFL shot when his contract was up. #CFL
CFL News ?@CFL_News 41m41 minutes ago .@BoLeviMitchell signed an extension to stay with #CalStampeders through [b]2018 [/b]season, per sources. #CFL via @SUNMitchell</blockquote>
My only concern with this approach is that it only helps those (richer) teams who are at or near the cap. It does nothing for the (poorer) teams who are closer to the bottom of the salary cap range. In other words, the teams that are spending more now will be able to outspend the rest by even more under this proposal. That's why I suggested the four "veteran or national" spots to the roster, replacing one of the national and three of the international roster spots. No change to the number of national starters - still seven - just a change in the number of roster spots. The number of designated internationals on the roster would depend on the number of veteran internationals the team dressed - anywhere from one to five, using my earlier proposed numbers.