Jump to content

Featured Replies

comment_281958

its a fair play yes.. but its also frowned upon by almost all GM's across the board.  I imagine if you discuss it with the coach/gm first and then work from there, its all good but just to put a claim for a player on the PR??

 

that gentleman's agreement that creates animosity between GMs when you abuse it.. thats probably the only real "cost" of it.

  • Replies 117
  • Views 10.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • Just to clear up any speculation in the thread, Spooner was indeed offered a spot on another team, and he declined it.  Flat out. 

  • WBBFanWest
    WBBFanWest

    This post drips with irony, but at least you didn't start a thread to say it!

  • I will only post things like that from facts I know as being accurate..rarely speculate, and what Credentials are you requiring...and define credentials. I a while back stated some street cred in a di

comment_282025
2 hours ago, MC said:

I don't understand the problem.  Teams have been claiming players from other team's practice rosters for years.  That is why teams use the 1-game IR.  It is allowed and there is no gentleman's agreement about not doing it.

If teams are really concerned about this problem they can negotiate it out of the next CBA.

Players will probably say no problem, all you have to do is pay PR players a full salary, cause that's what a player gets when they are moved from the PR to the AR.

And that's when teams will once again say they are fine with keeping things as they are.

 

We are witness to the birth of status quo.

comment_282037

Not sure it ever happened.

Spooner was added to the 1 game injured list Aug 3 (https://www.cfl.ca/transactions/) and wasn't on the 46 man roster (https://d3ham790trbkqy.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2016/06/Depth-at-Ottawa-August-4.pdf) for the Aug 4th game.

Rules (https://cfldb.ca/faq/rosters/) state: 

Quote

Practice roster contracts allow a player to be signed by another club to a regular player contract, meaning the player must take an active (46-man) roster spot (sign a standard player contract). The club that currently holds the practice roster contract has the same option to sign the player to a standard player contract (and place the player on a 46-man roster spot) to avoid losing the player. Players under practice roster contracts are not allowed to sign a practice roster agreement with another team until they are released from the contract or the contract expires.

 

comment_282064
10 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Sure Neufeld for Brian Burnham, Solomon Elimimian  & BC's first rounder in next year's CFL Draft. Wally would jump out of his chair chowing down on his right cheek with that request. ;) 

He'd squint so hard his eyes would disappear....Wouldn't a guy like Solo just fit in nicely here though...I'm afraid Neuf won't do it and neither will Wally

comment_282085
16 hours ago, Eternal optimist said:

Doing this is totally allowed by the rules, and yet there is a consensus its a dirty move... yet there is no opportunity cost for the team doing it. Why not? I mean it makes the other team have to shuffle their roster if they think the player is legitimate - and if not, you get a swing at a potential gem on another teams' PR.

Can't begrudge practice roster players a shot at a starting position. We only pay em, what, $500 a week?  That's not enough to get a monopoly on their services.

Create an account or sign in to comment