Salary limits/Positions

I was having this discussion the other day. Given the disparity of salaries in the CFL with so may at minimum we were discussing wage ceilings per positions. Not a guarantee but a maximum. I’m not sure how I feel about it. You? Not the amounts necessarily but the principle.

QB: $300,000
RB $140,000
WR: $185,000
OL: $175,000

DL: $175,000
LB: $200,000
CB: $150,000
DB: $100,000

Kicker: $90.,000
Punter: $75,000
Combined Kickers: $150,000

Returner specialist: $80,000

the concept has merit .

I know some will quickly disagree and point to the 90's and what almost destroyed the league financially, however in addition to these suggested max figures, I am definitely in favour of having a franchise rule designated for one player which would exclude the salary cap.
Likely such a player would be the QB position.

A friend and I had a great discussion about that, argoT;

If I remember correctly, the idea was that one player who wasn't a QB could have a salary of exactly $250,000 which is exempt from the cap but the contract has to be 3 years....and it's a guaranteed contract.

The thinking was/is, a QB is already the most recognizable player on the team, and they don't bounce from team to team nearly as often as the other players. Teams need marketable players who fans can identify with in this league with such turnover. This would give fans a QB plus one other who is identifiable.

Also, this would clear $250,000 of cap space to then be spread over the other players. Perhaps, raise the minimum salary or something. Helps everyone involved.

Teams would have to be very smart when handing out that one franchise contract, as the player can't be injury prone, or they will be paid for 3 years and that cap exemption spot wasted during the length of the deal.

I think you'd see young star players with 2 productive years in the league and have already tried their luck down south sign a 3-year guaranteed deal, thus, potentially playing for the same team 5 years. Much better than the current turnover rate.

If teams can afford to constantly pay for coaches and GMs that have been fired while also paying current coaches and GMS, surely they can afford a set up like this.

If the league mandated these ranges the starters would probably make about 3.3 M. Leaving about 2 M for back-up and special teams taking into account injury lists etc.
It would certainly raise the median salaries while reducing the very top end and increase the "middle class".

The question I guess is whether you could keep some impact receivers like Duron Carter, SJ Green etc for. $175-185,000 instead of $250,000 I would think so. And Free agency would take on a different look. I think it may stabilize rosters actually.

who and how is it decided what positions are worth the most?

The league already tried the "marquee" player concept...with essentially the starting QB's salary being exempt from the salary guidelines. Rather than having unlimited salaries for the QB and the remainder of the team restricted to a total of $4.5K, for example...it made sense just to increase the cap (i.e. $5.2K) and include QB's in the cap. Some teams don't pay their QB's top dollar, like Hamilton and Calgary (and B.C.) with their starter's being young. Should they be penalized for that? Should the be forced to spend to the maximum?

The league also tried a $150k maximum salary in the early 2000's. Team's got around that by signing QB's to a "personal services contract" with the owner, sometimes for double the player's base salary (like in D. Dickenson's case when he returned from the NFL, signing in B.C. for a $150K base (maximum) + $250K PSC.)

That was when the CFL had a $2.5M salary cap per team. The Cap back then was a guideline not a requirement. All team's admittedly exceeded the cap...which was then considered a "floor" not a "ceiling" cap.

Frankly the league is miles ahead with the current SMS. Any attempt to restrict QB salaries with that money redistributed to entry-level players is doomed to failure. There's a good reason why starting QB's are so highly paid. They're the difference between winning and losing in the CFL. Not so much with the rookie backup receivers.

Ummm...not sure how this relates to the topic posted. No one is suggesting a comparable to QB and entry level receiver.

But there is only so much money to go around. It’s pretty easy to say “let’s pay QBs 300k and if he gets injured then we free up more cap money” the problem is you can make the cap $4.6 million and if players go on the injured list you have to pay them too. The players payroll is not really the $4.6 million but it could be $6 million. There is only so much money to go around.
Someone mentioned the TFC making over $4 MILLION a year just to display the BMO logo on their jerseys. That’s one team and that would pay all of the salary cap for a CFL team!!!
This is a gate driven league. It’s not like other leagues where there are huge TV contracts and other streams of revenue like jersey sponsorship etc
If the cap is $4.6 million and 42 players that is an average of just over $100k, it’s up to the teams how they average that out.
As fans why should we give a damn whether someone is making $40k or $240k a year? as long as we are entertained and the teams aren’t losing money.

What about coach’s salaries? how about cutting their salaries? or reducing the numbers? or having a coaching cap?
the CFL has ballooned in the coaching department. I think I read that there are 13 coaches on a CFL team, that’s more coaches than players on the field. There is no other sport anywhere with that amount of coaches.
It wouldn’t surprise me if the coaches payroll is higher than the players.
Then you have all of the other football positions like the scouts, the GM, the assistant GM, the VP, etc etc how many others in that front office?

I like this idea but I'd want to get even more specific. Defensive ends are more highly prized than tackles. Similarly, offensive tackles are worth more than guards, generally, because of the higher athletic demands of playing "on an island" at the edge of the line. I'd flip the salaries of DBs and CBs -- in this league, playing inside defensive halfback is a unique challenge that most American players have to adjust to (i.e. the slot "waggling" as he hits the line). On the wider CFL field, corners aren't going to see as much action and they have fewer responsibilities, generally. Lastly, I'd pay Sam linebacker (another unique CFL position) more than Will or Mike.

I believe it may have stemmed from a comment in a newspaper article. Justin Cappiccioti and Jovon Johnson both commented that the Redblacks had assigned a value to their position and were not willing to exceed it. The way the article was worded made it sound as though some other teams apply this method as well.

To be honest, it sounded like a token face-saving explanation, like for every guy that gets cut for salary cap purposes. Johnson was reportedly offered $65,000. That’s the value you assign to a starting corner? Then you’ll constantly be playing rookies there.

There may be such a method as a starting point to keep your finances in order, but surely if Johnson were younger and consistently productive the limits would have been stretched a bit.

That article started me thinking about this area in a broader way.

I doubt that such a system will be put in play. But in answer to FYB question I would imagine such a value designation would have to be driven by the union and agreed to by the league. Or perhaps vice versa.
But as I say I doubt it will come into play. However it is more common than not for organizations/businesses and their unions to place salary structures in place for positions.

They are paying "O" linemen far too much money and that is driven by the ratio. Teams have to meet the ratio and they want to stock the talent positions with Internationals, therefore too many teams going after too few National linemen, it's supply and demand. But on the other hand ...................when you have a CIS calibre "O" linemen facing an ex-NFL or NCAA "D" lineman that is a huge task, these CIS lineman have never had to face players that are that fast and strong before.

Wasn't sure where to place this tid bit but with California and New York State raising minimum wage to 18.75 Canadian which is almost 40,000 a year may cause some after thought to the poor starter wages to entice that US athlete to play for our minimum .

Football ops and coaching is where the league needs to get their house in order. The savings from the SMS have gone straight to that as teams look for a competitive edge.

Look at the 3 teams run by the "Barker crew" holding a camp together down south LOL!
Who does that ? Guys looking to get together and party on their employers dime.

Do you have any ideas on what or how to get football ops and coaching costs in order?

Tough one to audit...

But limit number of coach, scouts, office staff.
Register contracts with the league office with clause to audit tax returns.
Set salary structure and limits in place
Pension for 10 year or more of continued service.

Pension? there goes any savings you made by reducing coaches or management Do the owners want to be paying ex-coaches for life? that would be far too expensive and put teams and the league in a position of guaranteeing pensions
No encourage coaches to contribute to an RRSP plan or 401k if they are from the US, that way the teams are not responsible for paying them in the future.

No team is going to reduce the number coaches while their competitors are employing them. The owners/league should get together and decide things like "do we really need a QB coach? a receivers coach? an "O" line coach? a fitness coach? and a few others?"
While we are at it how about reducing the number of players on the field to 22 from 24? two less players on a CFL sized field would open up the game more and allow teams to reduce rosters. Just a wild thought!

I’m surprised you didn’t jump all over doing away with guaranteed contracts. How much has Montreal paid people to NOT work for them over the last couple of years?

That issue would disappear with a cap on football ops.