Here we go again....TOM WRIGHT and the owners.

This could be under the " don't believe everything that you read " catagory.

BUT , according to the GLOBE........who knows very little , about sports.

The owners of ........B.C. , MONTREAL , ect.......... :roll:

have offered a contact to WRIGHT with no money raise and NO clear definition of his role , in fact it is the same as the last contract he signed before..................... He said he wanted a definition of his role in writting , as any one would.........but they have said to him .........take it or leave it.

So WRIGHT , may reject the contract , himself.......and the owners think that they would look better getting RID of him that way , if he does it himself........... :roll:

He would remain to the end of the season as a figure head commish , if he rejects this contract.

What excuse are they using this time........[besides their big egos and the fact that they don't won't any TRUE salary cap] is the owners of........B.C. and MONTREAL , who could wreck everything.

read the article at ..........

These people should own NHL teams........... :roll:

  1. The press will go nuts with this :roll:

  2. This will not make the sponsors of the CFL , very happy.

Business can only grow with stabilty.

  1. If I were WRIGHT.........I would say S..... YOU.......go ahead , do it yourselves and pi.. off your fans and sponsors.......cancell my deal with OTTAWA , and have 8 CFL teams.In the middle of the season.

  2. That will go over real well with the fans and the press...........

They would distroy all of the CFL 'S recently earned good will .......with 1 really stupid move that would set them back..........years. :roll:

I think that covers it, hello there.

I heard the same thing this morning on the radio.

Montreal - BC....WHAT ARE YOU THINKING?????

I know Montreal owner was ticked because of the starting time in last years Eastern Final. When you look at the big picture (Unless I'm totally wrong) hasn't Wright landed all the big corporate deals? Improved the TV revenue? He has always been available to our local radio interviews quite frequently.

Can anyone tell me why the owners want to get rid of the best comish that we have had in decades?

Boo..urns to the owners of BC and MTL

And TORONTO actually WANTS a CAP!

So, they are not the bad guys here after all.

Well wanting and following are two different things.
Anyteam (any I mean any here so dont jump all over me) could say they want a cap and when they are accused of breaking it they would say
"Oh no not us we wanted it, remember?"

The ARGOS voted NOT to fire Wright.

why dont we wait for a story from a more relialable newspaper like the national inquirer
Here is the story
Tom Wright's future as the commissioner of the Canadian Football League should become clearer this week.

The CFL's governors, who offered Wright a one-year extension some weeks ago, are demanding that he accept or reject the offer tomorrow or Wednesday, according to sources.

It's uncertain whether Wright is interested in remaining in the job under what are said to be identical terms and conditions as those in his current three-year contract, which will expire at the end of this CFL season.

Wright has been in limbo since May, when governors held a telephone conference call to discuss his employment status while he was vacationing in France. Though there were strong suggestions from board of governors sources at the time that Wright might not receive the seven of nine votes necessary for a contract extension, the governors indicated they would negotiate with Wright

How many of them truly want him back remains in doubt.

Board sources indicate some clubs are not so much fond of Wright as they are leery of the potential public-relations damage if they push out a leader who is generally liked by fans. But by refusing to respond to Wright's request for a longer extension, the governors may have found a less damaging way to show him the door.

In May, Wright expressed dismay that news of the board's review of him had become public and suggested he may want some of his roles clarified in a new deal. Sources indicate, however, that the board has been unwilling to budge off anything in Wright's current contract.

It is believed Wright has two or three steadfast opponents on the board, while most other governors have mixed opinions on the job he has done. The Montreal Alouettes and B.C. Lions are believed to be most opposed to Wright's leadership.

Criticisms of Wright revolve around what some clubs consider his lack of clear vision for the CFL and a management style they perceive as ineffective for the commissioner's job. There have been suggestions from some board members that the CFL hire a chief operating officer to accompany Wright in the league's head office. Others, however, are adamantly opposed.

Wright has also run into trouble at the board over the issue of the $2.6-million salary cap for each club, which has never been enforced during his tenure. Some clubs are angry over Wright's refusal to penalize those that blatantly exceed the cap. Others, however, are furious over his using the an exhibition game in Halifax in June to declare that a salary management system will be in place for the start of the 2006 season.

Those clubs, believed to be B.C., Montreal, the Edmonton Eskimos and possibly the Hamilton Tiger-Cats, believe that attempting to enforce the cap will merely drive more of players' compensation into an underground economy.

Wright also has a mess in his hands over the recently transferred ownership situation in Ottawa. Though the commissioner oversaw Bernie Glieberman's taking over 51 per cent of the Ottawa Renegades at the end of May, he also promised a $1-million payout to some of the club's original owners as part of that deal. The payout was in response to threats from members of the original Ottawa ownership group that it was prepared to sue the league for failing to live up to a promise to enforce the salary cap.

Though a vote to make the $1-million payout was passed, the finality of the measure is unclear. Two clubs, Montreal and B.C., abstained from the vote, and one other, the Calgary Stampeders, was not on the conference call. The Hamilton, Toronto and Calgary owners believe they should not have to contribute to the payout because they were not part of the league when the Ottawa group was admitted in 2001.

Some governors wanted Wright to ignore the lawsuit threat and revoke the Ottawa franchise from its original owners, delivering it to Glieberman in exchange for promised investment. Instead, the commissioner agreed to the $1-million payout and allowed some of the original owners to retain a 49-per-cent share.

Several board sources said they are unsure how Wright will solve the disagreements among the board over the payout and that a final resolution of the matter remains far off.

I dont see where it says that BC and Montreal have offered no more money or an unclear definition of his job.

It does say that Mt, BC, Edmonton and Ham are against the cap because it would drive compensation underground. They do have a good point there.
It has been mentioned before that teams pay big buck to be corperate hand shakers.

And the ARGOS voted to keep WRIGHT not fire him..........before.....this...............PELLEY was one of the owners who change some owners minds.

Could be!!
I really dont know who voted for what.

They all voted to keep him in the end…but a little birdie told me that PELLEY…was the difference.

What I don’t agree with the ARGOS ON , is that they and other CFL…teams had to pay 1 million dollars…for the OTTAWA DEAL…

Both Hamilton and the ARGOS were helped out at one point…so they should pay their part of the deal the OTTAWA deal so CFL will not get sued…by the former OTTAWA , owners…who are mad about the CAP…

The BAD guys in this one are B.C. and Montreal…

Based on the article I dont see that

Yea, but untill there is an actual cap then you can’t really blame any team for going over it cause thems the Rules.

I personally want a solid cap, and I’m sure every team in the league will profit from it, but realistically till it happens… thems the rules.

Hopefully no more riders follow Burris to cowtown in the off season, thats the only real fear I have of no cap.

I want a cap as well.
The point I was trying to make was that just because a team publicly stated that they want a cap does not mean they will abide by it. It makes them look good and can take the heat off of them if required

I SEE OUT OF ALL THIS ........privately owned teams with all the bucks(who don't want a salary cap) VS. smaller community owned franchises (who would like to see a fair and equitable salary cap)... winners; the guys with all the bucks = Wright firing = big time trouble in the league= and in the end nobody wins.....maybe a simplified overview.....but I hope the intelligent people in the league keep their heads and work toward an acceptable solutiuon.....or they could endanger all the advancement this league has reached in the recent past and future. :!:

When will you guys lose yor obsession with the cap…??? Piss off…if you can’t compete then stop friggin’ cyin’ about it! This shit gets old, man…

At least you are talking about the rules , in another thread…I got in trouble for talking about the call,s , as well as the rules… :lol: :lol: [just joking]

We should start a petition to keep Wright as Comish. I don't know if it would mean much in the long run but maybe to just show some support from fans would be helpful. I know I'd be the first to sign on it. Anyone else think this is a good idea or just a waste of time?

is Tom Wright all that good....i mean all i've noticed in the last few years is new penalties and reffing that is, well, disagreeable.....salary cap, or lack there of, problems....on the positive we've gotten good sponsorship, but i think it might be time to switch it up.

Are you friggin’ serious? Pay attention, kid…

maybe it;s not his falt, just what i've noticed, maybe it's been going on longer, i'm too young to know