Salary Cap Abuse

[url=http://www.cfl.ca/index.php?module=newser&func=display&nid=13908]http://www.cfl.ca/index.php?module=news ... &nid=13908[/url]

"Pierce's deal includes a renegotiation clause that allows him to significantly boost his $200,000-a-year salary if he replaces Dave Dickenson as the team's No. 1 quarterback in 2008."

[url=http://www.cfl.ca/index.php?module=newser&func=display&nid=13913]http://www.cfl.ca/index.php?module=news ... &nid=13913[/url]

"But Dickenson will also be 34 next season, he'll be commanding around $400,000 a year and the Lions can't keep Pierce waiting forever."

I think it's pretty stupid how the CFL sets an "initiation date" for the salary cap so that teams could sign all of their players with front-loaded contracts. Why didn't they just implement a cap and teams had to deal with the salaries they already had in place?

Teams that have re-negotiatied salaries are obviously not cheating in any way. Just like how the Eskimos did not break any rules in the Maas to Hamilton trade(although many people ignorantly think they did).

First of all that does not say he sighed does it?

The thing is that that was reported by the media. Not the league, not the team, not the player.
The media will print anything they want regardless of the truth.
You will never hear the team announce the salary!

I know teams never announce salaries, but this is the closest you can get to actually knowing a players salary. The league should follow the NHL in announcing all players' salaries publicly.

I agree they should be announced but what a sports writer writes.....Is meaningless. They don't know any better than we do....

The Eskimos largest signing bonus was reportedly $20,000 to Robert Brown. BC's largest reported signing bonus was to Buck Peirce for $100,000. Montreal didn't report any of their signing bonuses, but with 22 players getting bonuses at the Grey Cup deadline, I'm sure the overall total is quite large.

Bottom line us, just like Edmonton's Maas trade last year, NO rules are being broken with these signing bonuses. I remember reading that the final terms of the salary cap have not yet been approved, and BC's, Montreal's and Toronto's disagreement with the salary cap is why they forced Tom Wright out. Who, and when, the CFL hires as a Commissioner will play a huge role as to whether or not the cap is actually enforced next year. Personally, I am not holding my breath to see violators of the cap being punished with large financial penalties, and loss of draft picks. I wouldn't be at all surprised if next year's cap is the same as this years cap. And the year before that, and the year before that, and the year before that, and the... In other words, a cap on paper alone, with no enforcement behind it. There are very powerful, very wealthy, private owners of teams that do not want to be limited this way. It would be a shame, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Actuall RW the Staples incident happened in Montreal on Artificial turf and it was Montreal not Edmonton wearing the staples.

If you read my comments, I said that Edmonton was not going to be hurt by this, Regina and Winnipeg on the other hand will. The Eskimos did sign their players to up front deals, as did everyone else. My complaint is if you are going to say there is a cap, make it real and enforceable and don't create double standards. IMO this deal does create a double standard.

At least this year's signing bonus loophole is a one time thing. In future years, signing bonuses WILL count against a team's salary cap. But, as I've said, this is all meaningless if the next Commissioner doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to force the powerful, wealthy private owners of teams that violate the salary cap, to pay large fines, and to take away their draft picks.

Yes you are correct! But still you can not deny that the Esks managment does not allow teams to practise on their field the day before a game where as all other teams do allow this. Again any way to cheat the Esks will find it! Smart I guess so! But now the Huey is gone, Duey or Luey will have to do!

I would respond to your point, but I’m not sure you have one. Yes, Duey or Luey will have to do for now, I guess. Very intelligent observation.

As for the Commonwealth grass, the Eskimos don’t even practice on that surface the day before games. They practice on the grass at the old Clarke Stadium. As for why “all other teams” allow practices to occur on their field the day before games… do you think this has anything to do with the wear and tear a practice will put on grass, as compared to turf? That thought really didn’t cross your mind? Wow. So, again, not too sure what your point is there. Funny that you aren’t bringing up Doug Flutie’s $1,000,000 per year “personal services” contract that he was paid his entire time with the stamps, out of the pocket of their wealthy private owner, when you list the dubious actions of teams to skirt the rules. Selective memory, perhaps?

All the points that have been listed are pretty much the same reasons that the so called evil owners voted against the cap

Who exactly are your "evil owners"

I know that Montreal and BC voted against the cap.
I think there was 1 other team that did as well but I dont remember who it was.

When I called them the evil owners I was refering to all the flack they had recieved from many posters who complained about them being against the cap.

I agree that delaying the effective date of SMS implementation will give the rich private owners an advantage for this year. I can accept that, so long as in future years the SMS will be rigidly enforced.

Ok, just wondering. No surprize that these 2 teams voted against the cap as IMO they have the most to lose.

I personally favour a cap but only if it is enforced and does not favour some teams. I wouldn't even mind if they included a provision for a marquis player outside of the cap, as long as they eliminate the loopholes(like the personal services contracts).

I dont think a SMS is enforceable without disclosure of salaries. Its difficult to hide what a player makes if he has signed a "personal services" contract, or what kind of signing bonus a player has been given, if they have to make salaries public knowledge. Disclosure also let the fans know which team ranks where in terms of how much they have spent on salaries. If the SMS is going to be enforced, a lot of players are going to be taking pay cuts, and some may be as high a 25%. Im going to use Joseph as an example. He is not worth the $400,000 the Gleibs signed him for, but hey may to take a huge cut, say $100 000 to play next year. It is also possible the the Riders could release him , then sign him back for a lot less. It a higher risk move for the team , but it could be a possibility. If that happens the pay cut might even be higher. An enforced SMS means a huge market correction because teams must come under the $4.05 million cap that the league has set. If you have 46 players on your roster, that means an average of $10 000 per player. Some might be taking bigger cuts, and some might even get raises. Im not sure the $4.05 million cap is workable, it should have been set higher, like $5 million, IMO. Yes that means some teams might struggle, but to keep good players and the league competitive, some adjustments have to be made so the SMS is workable.

$4 Mil is plenty. The difference between 4 and 5 million for average salaries is from 87K to 108K - about a $20k difference. There will be no change in competitiveness, only in ticket prices. Where else is an average CFL player going to earn $87K for 6 months work? NFL? No, otherwise he would already be there. Walmart? Fort McMurray?

Here's an issue that may affect some teams: having to spend UP to the new cap. I'm not sure why they raised the cap to over $4 million. A $3.8 million cap would have really levelled the playing field and forced the big spenders to make tough decisions about whom to keep.

You would have to think there is some economic rationale behind the level of the cap, likely the average league salary, which is the way most caps work and as smilinlarry pointed out, this is the last time any team will be able to front load a contract without it counting towards the cap, assuming we have a cap in the future.

Someone suggested that pride will play a part in keeping teams honest, the reverse of that is do you want to be the one to go down in history as the first cheater under the new system, a dubious honour indeed.

If they’re relying on pride to police the cap system, they’re retarded. Seriously. If teams and owners had any pride, we wouldn’t need the cap in the first place.

Why would BC and MTL have the most to lose? Are you saying the spend the most?

Again no one knows who spends what and saying that any team is over the cap because they win is wrong.(I know you are not saying it but it has been said)

Mtl came out and said that they are against the cap because there will always be teams that find their way around it. They will pay players to be hand shakers and what not.

Are they wrong? Look at the accusations that have already started...."This team did that and that team did this!!!!!!"