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.