Parity

It seems to me that it's taking a lot longer to sift out the good and bad in the CFL this year ... yeah, BC is undefeated, but they don't look invincible by any means. Hamilton hasn't won, but they came close against BC, and seem due to break out ... I think I'd still pick them over Winnipeg.

Still, the East is more logjammed than it's been in who-knows-how-many-years, and the west looks like a shootout.

This is awesome ... all the teams are muddled together, and it's looking like anyone can beat anyone on any day.

Maybe it's just because for once, Montreal is not dominating ... but the League seems very well balanced this year, so far.

we do still need a salary cap. please, if you do anything mr. wright, make a salary cap

Ah, yes, we are a ways from economic parity (deadmonton? Ottawa?) but in terms of competition, it's shaping up to be a great year.

Parity is in the eye of the beholder. In just a few weeks, teams do seem to be close in points and some underdog upsets have occurred. But thus far, favorites have won 17 of 21 games which suggest lack of parity? For parity, there should be more underdog victories closer to 50% of all games. I think there might be more parity in MLB or NHL.

Please do not start this BS that the CFL needs a salary cap. The CFL is probably the last league that needs a salary cap. Ottawa is probably one of the better teams in the league right now. And Edmonton has not been playing to the potential that they should be (especially with some of there players) In the CFL its always any team can beat any other team. Honestly I think a salary cap would ruin our almost perfect game :wink:

Plus its not like CFL players get paid that much anyways (minus Ricky Ray) Like wuts the average salary of a CFL player thats been in the league for a while and proved himself to be a good player? Like maybe $50,000 I cant think of it being much more then that so a salary cap would be what? Maybe Ricky Rays Salary? I have to say that I am strongly against a salary cap. I didnt agree with the one in hockey and I dont agree with the one now.

Speakin of the Hockey salary cap. That was probably the dumbest thing. Hockey was the same way it was fine (mind you the players get paid a whole lot more) But no team was way over the top of any other team. Tha Rangers and the Leafs from what i know of there last year of play had two of the highest salarys in the league. The rangers did horrible (sorry to all u ranger fans out there)

Now the one league that I must say needs a salary cap is baseball. Like seriously. You can pretty much pick 6 teams at the begginning of every year and 90% of the time one of those teams will win the world series. Baseball desperatly needs a salary cap. Hockey didnt but I can live with it. Now as for the CFL we do not need a salary cap I think that would ruin our game.

I love the idea of a salary cap for most sports, for many reasons. One of them is this: I have been an avid follower of several sports my entire life. I've seen the NHL and MLB players go from loving the game to appearing not to so much. Perhaps it wouldn't make a difference in quality of play to the men actually getting paid, but myself (as a fan) would view those men as less than the greedy bastards some appear to have become with the increasingly ludicrous salaries they are demanding. In those two sports, particularly, it does not appear to me that the love of the game is what is driving them forward - it's the almighty buck.

PARITY IN MLB? Come on, that must be a joke. Is that a joke? I'd like to see a listing of each World series winners and how much their rank of highest payroll for the past 15 years. I will bet that not 1 World series winner has been in the bottom 50% of payroll. I won't even watch MLB becuase of lack of parity. What is the use of cheering for an underdog who has no chance in hell of winning. Parity is not in the eye of the beholder. That is beauty. Parity can be somewhat measured.

I agree with the original post. Any team can win these days. Makes it exciting. Anyone can win the Grey Cup this year. Ask Rider fans about how they won in 89 and how they went to the Grey Cup final in the 90's (97?) when they beat out Eskies and heavily favoured Stamps. Ask them about Parity.

When The Florida Marlins beat the Yankees a couple of years back for the World Series they had something like a 40 million dollar payroll vs NY's 200+ Million.

The thing is, baseball "teams" aren't teams as much as just a bunch of individuals. What I'm saying is it's probably the sport that requires the least team chemistry. Thus, it's easiest to buy a championship in baseball. So what if two egos don't get along? It's not going to stop jerk A from throwing to jerk B to get the out. However, in hockey or football for example, if you don't have team chemistry you don't have a chance. Hence why the Rangers have had the highest payroll, by far, for however-many-years running, and haven't even made the playoffs since 1997. You can buy talent (and the ego that comes with it), but you can't buy chemistry. Remember in '97 when Gretz, Mess, and half of the Oilers from the 80's (it seemed) played on the Rangers? They made it to the 3rd round of the playoffs that year. Those guys were old then (let alone now!). It's all about chemistry.

CanucKev I agree.....the horses are still pretty much neck in neck up to this point. It's great that everyone is still in it even the teams that opened 0 and 4. It will probably be the halfway mark in the season before we really get an idea of the true power rankings.

In the meantime......Go LEOS!!!!! 8)