I dont know how owners think they can hide this kind of stuff. It is going to be obviouse when the books are opened to the auditors and a star player in this league is being paid half of what his peers are.....cmon.
Good point, Piggy.
a number of issues will need to be continuously monitered to effectively maintain the cap.
Any descrepancies, like a player appearing to be underpaid, or a player working for the team, or the owner in any capacity should get red flagged, and then you turn the forensic accountants loose and not much will escape their scrutiny.
If players have a job at fair market value, that won’t necessarily be a problem.
But if it is working for the owner of the team in any capacity, there needs to be conflict of interest guidelines in place. It should be possible to have guidelines that are effective, yet flexible enough to judge each such case on its own merits.
We want the players to get jobs, be part of the community, and be good year round citizens.
As long as there is transparency, any non-football job is fine.
It is if owners and teams start trying to hide these things, and don’t work at keeping the system open and fair that we will have problems.
If everyone knows what a players second job is, and who is paying the bills, it can be easily determined if there is a problem.
But in my opinion it should be
That example is one where conflict of interest issues come into play.
Working at a law firm is one thing.
But working for the owner of the teams law firm is another.
It certainly would be preferable for Climie to get a job with another firm in that instance.
It isn’t a question of whether the salary is “cappable” or not, but a question of whether the “Climies” of the world are entitled to even have that job.
We make our politicians jump through similar types of hoops and it works reasonably well.
There are many examples of business and government using conflict of interest guidelines.
Teams should have to file applications regarding such employment and then the commish investigates and makes a ruling.
And that shouldn’t be as time consuming as it sounds…
And pure “personal sevice” contracts would never pass the “smell” test.
This is why I think that salary figures in the CFL should be disclosed publicly, as they are in the NHL. If the public and media can see for certain the salaries of a team's players, then teams will be held more accountable for their salaries. Hypothetical situation... If salaries are made public we won't see someone like Dickeonson being signed for lets say $50,000 under the cap and hundreds of thousands outside of the cap. Salaries that are made public will prove that the player's salary is legitamate and reasonable. That's not to say this will completely prevent players being paid for "personal service" contracts, but it would definitely limit the amount that a team can hide away from the cap.
esks123 - you write "Salaries that are made public will prove that the player's salary is legitimate and reasonable." How will making the salaries public accomplish this? In the NHL, where salaries are made public, does the public have any authority to do anything if salaries look suspicious? The answer is, "of course not!!" Making salaries public (in this way) is simply a public relations move, nothing more. It would not help or hinder the effectiveness of a cap.
I personally do not agree with disclosing player salaries to the public. It is completely possibly to monitor player salaries in a controlled fashion without the information being available to the general public. I find it to be morally wrong. Of course, this is all a matter of opinion and perspective on freedoms. But a person/player has the right to keep his/her financial matters private.
StatiK76
GO BOMBERS!!!
Why should he not be entitled to have such a job?
There is no conflict of interest here. Climie would be payed for his services as a football player and also as a lawyer! It might be said that if he worked for the owner of another team as a lawyer that there is a conflict but not for the same owner.
I agree with you ro1313. I think “conflict of interest” was used in the wrong context.
A conflict of interest arises, because if a player is working as the employee of a team owner in another capacity besides that of a football player, it is uncertain as to whether the wages are fair and justified regardless of the optics that they appear fair.
In the Climie case, maybe he is a lousy lawyer. Maybe his football career keeps his billing hours low.
Maybe he receives what appears to be a fair wage for an associate of the law firm but in fact, he doesn't actually do much at the office besides buy a few clients lunch and glad hand a little.
If he works in such a situation, it becomes pretty easy for the "firm" to pay him 200,000 a year, when perhaps he really only deserves 100,000.
And the problem, and why it is a conflict, is because it is difficult to tell in such a situation just how reasonable the salary is.
However, if you notice, I never said Climie could not work in said law office.
I said that it may be preferable that he did not, but that each case as it arises can be judged on its own merit.
Rules regarding such conflicts of interest must be in place, but need to be flexible as well.
The cap will be a waste of everyones time if no such rules exist.
Also, ro, I am a little confused.
You think that Climie's salary as a lawyer should be "cappable", but you see no conflict of interest.
That seems to be a conflict in and of itself.
If he has a job, any job, that is completely unconnected to the football team, why would that be cappable? But I agree with you that if he works for the team/owner in some capacity, it should have cap ramifications.
And as I pointed out, what those ramifications might be is his inability to work for the owner at all.
There are other possibilities, but that is one solution.
Anyway, I thought I was largely supporting your statement on "cappability".
Maybe not.....
So then should the Prime Minister of this country be allowed to keep his public and personal wealth a secret then? CFL players,like politicians and other athletes, are public figures and what they make and where they make it are fair game.
As to what D'Angelis makes, if the Flames are part owners of the Stamps and he is working for them, then it should fall under the cap. Endorsements are a different story however, if a player is able to land an endorsement deal , then it should not fall under the cap, as it a seperate business that is paying him, not the team.
5 per cent ownership does not mean they own the team (Flames). So since you Rider fans are owners does that mean you guys should give us your finance details.
Really this is not like the Flutie salary where he was paid to sit and spin. The guy is in North Dakota working for a hockey team, not football.
Its an offseason job. He is getting fair compensation for his work. The same as ‘goldie’ gets fair compensation for his work in the Esks sales dept in the off-season.
Doesnt matter if it is .05 %, they still own part of team. If the Rider players get off season jobs from businessmen that have shares in the team , then it should fall under the cap. If this league is going to get it financial house in order and go forward, EVERYTHING has to be above board , no questions asked.
Arius
I am saying that if Climie was to work as a lawyer for the owner then it should be capable.
If he works for Crane Poole & Schmidt in other words a firm not connected to the team, then it should not be capable.
Af for conflict of interest, there is no conflict if He were to work as a lawyer and player(Never mind the cap here) However if, as a lawyer with another firm, he were to sure the owner of the team that he plays for. That would be a conflict of interest
And ro, I am 100% in agreement with you about your first paragraph.
But the optics in that case would be best if he simply did not work as a lawyer for the team owner at all. But the reason it is cappable in one instance, but not the other is because of percieved conflict of interests–the league cap vs. the player/team. The problem is, why is one okay, but not the other. You must give a rationale. If not conflict of interest, then what? I guess I don’t really care what you call it, but call it something. The point being, there must be guidelines that allow for consistant interpretation of the rules.
As for the second paragraph, yes, that would appear to be a conflict of interest as well, but not different from any other lawyers possible conflicts.
A firm isn’t likely to have a lawyer sue a blood relative, or the family business regardless of any football ties. A lawyer would normally step aside himself in such cases.
...so let me get this straight.....some of you guys think that a salary paid to a guy working for an NHL team should be counted towards the guy's CFL salary because the NHL team owns a small percentage of the guy's CFL team in order to ensure that the NHL team doesn't help out the CFL team by hiding lots and lots of dollars in that NHL salary, thereby helping the guy's CFL team....it's the NHL were talking about here you know....not like they don't have any checks and balances there huh?....yeah, I guess the NHLPA wouldn't have a problem with an Owner hiring bogus staff and paying them wads of cash so it reduces the players margin of profit sharing...
The very fact that we are debating wether or not D'Angelis salary with the Flames minor leauge team should be cappable means that the SMS is on its way to failure. A lot of guys are going to work at jobs that are in a huge grey area as to wether it falls underneath the cap, which means that the SMS will utlimately fail. Time for the CFL to go back to the drawing board and find an new system to work under.
Hold on there sambo42 - you guys are debating it. Who’s to say the CFL is? Don’t you think they have considered this and established rules for what wages are capped and which are not?
True enough rapid, but how long before it becomes an issue for the CFL? If they use D'Angelis' job as an example and deem it uncappable, then it will open the floodgates for a way around the SMS.