Riders send LLoyd an offer

WOW i'm not sure what jsut set you off Austin but damn.... :smiley:

I'll agree with you the riders haven't been better than they are for quite a long time. But wouldn't it make sense to keep the players that are winning you the games? and i'll also agree with you that he's made some outstanding moves....but not resigning impact players because you "think" you can replace them for cheaper is just plain stupid. You may eventually replace a Mo Lloyd or an Anton Mckenzie but to replace both in the same year and expect 0 drop off? that's never gonna happen. And thats why people are worried that ET's confidence in recruiting players may be a hinderance to the continued "short term" success of the team. Eventually he will find replacements, but what happens when their contracts are up. I for one don't like this cycle and agree with Arius...what are we spending our money on?

no, he is supposed to pay them fair market value. The Riders are a good team. they were before et arrived and still are. But if you are a good team, you stay that way by keeping the guys who actually are responsible for that. The LBs were the strength of this team the last couple of years. And they can and will be for the foreseeable future. I personally am debating this with fans on a forum not with ET. A fan says let Mo go, play someone cheaper and I say that is not a good plan. And somehow that is an attack on ET? Get real!! et is doing what he should. Not saying he will offer what ever it takes to keep those guys. And then when push comes to shove, I believe that is exactly what he needs to do. If you make a fair offer now, Mo will sign. If you wait until he is a free agent, say goodbye. Or it will actually cost you more. It really is that simple. But I am not criticising ET over something he has not done. I am telling some fans to get a grip....
which I might add is what I do 90% of the time, but you just don't get it....

In todays Star Phoenix, Mo Lloyd says he has heard nothing from the Riders, and that if his agent were to have received a six figure offer he would definately have heard about it, Holidays or no Holidays. He also goes on to say that Sask. has the first shot at signing him however, which I read to mean he wants to stay here, but no offer extended yet. Maybe E.T.'s E- Mail isn't working properly and he just thinks he is doing the things he says he is. Would explain the Durant mystery also.

ET says,then it's MO says, boy this story is turning intio a great off-season thriller , and i love it........I'm cheering for MO by the way....

It does seem to have shades of the Henry Burris - Roy Shivers negotiations.

For my two cents ..... ET better get moving quickly on this to try to sign up his FAs before 15 Feb..........with Richie Hall in Edmonton, you know he'll be chomping at the bit to get at some of those defensive FAs on the Riders' roster.....

Word on another site is that Tillman has five signed so far, and they'll be announced in the coming weeks...whether or not any of those are defensive players remains to be determined...

So you're saying that if a team signs a player to a 5 year $100,000 per year contract during mid season, they must use up 1/2 a mill of cap room in the signed year and zero for the remaining 4 years??? I would think Revenue Canada would have a hayday with this one. The SMS can't be in conflict with Canadian laws.

Where did i say it wouldn't count for the next years? My understanding is of the SMS is that if they sign Mo to that contract, they are responsible for 100k every year for the length of the contract but ALSO they count towards the CAP for the year they are signed in. Hence his new contract would have counted for 2008 and put us over the cap. Where as if he waits till Jan 1, its a new fiscal year and the SMS Cap is reset.

But that way still puts us in a messy situation. With all the free agents we have and all contracts signed in 2009 apply 100% to the 09 cap, then we are going to on the 09 cap hook for a lot of guys 2 or 3 years salary in 09. They will get hammered again by the cap in 09 if that's the case. Or else we get a bunch of 1 year only contracts and we are in the same mess in 2010, plus trieing to get guys to stay again. Nice continuety building by the league if that is the SMS case.

Welcome to the beauty of the SMS taleback. It does allow the smaller teams like the Riders to compete financially with the ESKS, but it also pretty well eleminates the days of keeping the same skilled player for a long time. The days of keeping a Bobby Jurisan or a Done Narcisse for 10 years are gone. Because the SMS has put is in the mindset of trying find a slightly worse player for alot lest money.

AustinPowers you are hilarious.
My answer to your question is not in my lifetime. I liked how you give a guy an hour and a half to answer your question, when I didn't read it till just now.
I gave Tillman credit, he has made the Riders better. My problem with him now, is that he pretty much flat out refuses to pay top guys top money. How do you keep someone who is at the top of their game, and also has quite a few years left in their career, if you don't pay them market value. Have you seen that Car add, I forget who its for, where the guy comments on how cheap the car is. And the guy retorts that "You cut your own Hair, That's Cheap, This is inexpensive." Well Tillman is being Cheap. My opinion.

as an aside, this could be all elementary and Tillman could be offering lots of money, but thats just not what I have been hearing.

Lots of confusion continues over ETs half a response on this question. At most, the only thing that would count against the SMS in 2008, for a 2009 contract, is a signing bonus. So a contract extension with no bonus would have zero SMS implication. But from what we discussed earlier, the actual problem had nothing to do with the SMS. That was a pure red herring. There are tax implications to any American player who, because he does not reside in Canada year round, from a signing bonus. With Clermont, the Canadian tax laws allowed us to sign him, but pay him a bonus down the road, ie., 2009. American tax law says a signing bonus must count at the time of the signing, not in the future, even if the bonus is only forthcoming. It has nothing to do with the SMS. It is a tax problem. No bonus, no problem. And further, it appears that the IRA is willing to accept more precise language that eliminates even that issue.
So a player like Mo could conceivably be asking for a signing bonus in the tens of thousands. THAT money would have counted in 2008.

Thanks for the clearification Arius....its appreciated, SMS not my strong point :smiley:

I think we are all confused somewhat, because the CFL as it is wont to do, has never spelled the rules out very clearly, and, as n penalizing Montreal last year, seems to make stuf up as they go along.
what I said isn't "fact" but the best interpretation that we were able to come up with after a discussion on the issue. What ET told us was "it was complicated" but he never bothered to give much detail.
Austin will be all over me for suggesting this, but I think ET likes everyone to think things are tougher than they are so he appears to be a miracle worker if he gets anything done.
Any Trekkers here? It is the "can you give me any more Scotty" syndrome.

I'd rather go for "Beam me up, Scotty...."

Spock you pointy-eared hobgoblin you.....................

I'm a doctor, not a bricklayer.....

What a bone headed move if its ture.If this is true Wally will have thrown his career away like a fool.If he did make the offer its like artimus said its tampering and would cost the Lions organization big time.Loss of things like shared monies from the league,loss of draft picks,fines and compension for the riders.You have to think that he BC Lions owners wouldn't be happy about losing all that and would fire Wally on the spot.

For the record I don't think this is true Wally would never be that stupid

He definitely has a huge ego. You can tell the way he speaks.