Durie Extended

[Mulder]

Thank you @TorontoArgos for extending me through the 2014-2016 seasons.Truly an honour to continue my career as an Argo #BleedBlue #HomeTeam

— Andre Durie (@AD3TWO) January 6, 2014

Great news!

[Tau Ceti]

Quality Canadian content!

[hugoagogo]

Good signing for the Argos indeed!

[matchuk]

awesome signing

[argotom]

A good signing for a great and versatile player.
At the reported $140k, this number should have been around $200k and especially with the increase in the salary cap likely to be over $500k this year and that is still way too short for the players.

[paulwoods13]

The cap amount won't be known for months, and there's no way of knowing how much it will grow. Even if it does grow by $500,000, $140,000 is a very fair number for an excellent player. Giving him $200k would mean $60k less to spend on other players we will also need.

[argotom]

The cap amount won't be known for months, and there's no way of knowing how much it will grow. Even if it does grow by $500,000, $140,000 is a very fair number for an excellent player. Giving him $200k would mean $60k less to spend on other players we will also need.

My point is the obvious need to bring up the salaries for everyone.
To include the minimum from the now what $40k to yours of $60k sounds fair to me.
Also, instead of the nonsensical 42 out of 46 man roster playing, how about all 46 playing.

[ArgoRavi]

My point is the obvious need to bring up the salaries for everyone.
To include the minimum from the now what $40k to yours of $60k sounds fair to me.
Also, instead of the nonsensical 42 out of 46 man roster playing, how about all 46 playing.

No, please don't expand rosters any further. If they were to go to 46, I fear that you would see less offence and less big special teams plays as a result as teams load up on defensive and coverage team specialists with those extra roster spots.

[doubleblue]

I could be wrong but 140,000 for a Canadian SB/RB starter would be a approximate 30-40,000 raise on average IMO. Durie is better than your average Canadian SB but I was always under the impression the going rate for his position was about 100,000. Maybe that gives us an idea what players can or should expect under the new SMS. Good Canadian starting O-Linemen will probably be looking at 200,000 per year because of their scarcity.

[OV Argo]

I could be wrong but 140,000 for a Canadian SB/RB starter would be a approximate 30-40,000 raise on average IMO. Durie is better than your average Canadian SB but I was always under the impression the going rate for his position was about 100,000. Maybe that gives us an idea what players can or should expect under the new SMS. Good Canadian starting O-Linemen will probably be looking at 200,000 per year because of their scarcity.

We don't know CFL salaries, so it is all speculation. Also, IMO, the notion that Canadian "starting" offensive linemen are so rare so they can extort huge CFL salaries is a CFL cliche/fallacy - show me the money please (confirmed salaries) and i might believe this (Rob Murphy was reportedly the highest paid O-Lineman in the league a few years back; I can name about 20 or more proven to top notch Canadian O-Linemen in the league, so tell me how they are so "scarce"? Proven starters get the most money obviously and QBs are the highest paid CFL players by far: QBs are always imports and a large majority of CFL starters are imports = American players eat up most of CFL salary dollars.

[argotom]

No, please don't expand rosters any further. If they were to go to 46, I fear that you would see less offence and less big special teams plays as a result as teams load up on defensive and coverage team specialists with those extra roster spots.

I hate to bring up the No Funners in this debate, but their bigger roster seems to have no effect on better and more wide open play the last few years aka the west coast offense.

[OV Argo]

No, please don't expand rosters any further. If they were to go to 46, I fear that you would see less offence and less big special teams plays as a result as teams load up on defensive and coverage team specialists with those extra roster spots.

I agree Ravi; the 46 thing is stupid and a waste of money as it is; 42 man roster is more than enough; the great CFL heydays of the 60s thru 80s featured smaller rosters and the play was IMO easily as good or better than today's CFL; there is still large PRs now that allow for guys learning the team/game and ready to step-in when injuries happen.

[Argo]

I think Durie could end up being a pretty good player for the Argos.

[jerrym]

Great news. I think Durie is the most underrated player in the league.

[AngeloV]

I agree Ravi; the 46 thing is stupid and a waste of money as it is; 42 man roster is more than enough; the great CFL heydays of the 60s thru 80s featured smaller rosters and the play was IMO easily as good or better than today's CFL; there is still large PRs now that allow for guys learning the team/game and ready to step-in when injuries happen.

The only good thing about the 46 man rosters are that it give a team up to an hour before game time to decide whether on not an injured or perhaps ill player will be able to suit up. If they have just a 42 man roster with no extras, a team may be forced to play a player short in such a scenario.

[OV Argo]

The only good thing about the 46 man rosters are that it give a team up to an hour before game time to decide whether on not an injured or perhaps ill player will be able to suit up. If they have just a 42 man roster with no extras, a team may be forced to play a player short in such a scenario.

It still means they are paying 46 guys' salaries, when IMO there is no need for that; they could easily be allowed to pull a player off the PR on game day to replace a suddenly injured or ill player. I'd make the rosters 40 players and everybody gets a raise, plus bump up the PR money a bit; instead of paying 4 guys on the 46 for nothing.

[argotom]

It still means they are paying 46 guys' salaries, when IMO there is no need for that; they could easily be allowed to pull a player off the PR on game day to replace a suddenly injured or ill player. I'd make the rosters 40 players and everybody gets a raise, plus bump up the PR money a bit; instead of paying 4 guys on the 46 for nothing.

There is no better example during a game when there is a e first starter injury, even worse when there are multi injuries and then what?
We have a 46 man roster so let everyone play, in fact I have gone on record to expand it to 50 and therefore reduce the PR to injury only.

[OV Argo]

There is no better example during a game when there is a e first starter injury, even worse when there are multi injuries and then what?
We have a 46 man roster so let everyone play, in fact I have gone on record to expand it to 50 and therefore reduce the PR to injury only.

Did you watch any CFL football in the 60s thru 80s? - when game rosters were under 40 players? Funny I don't recall all sorts of disastrous roster problems from back then.

[ArgoRavi]

Did you watch any CFL football in the 60s thru 80s? - when game rosters were under 40 players? Funny I don't recall all sorts of disastrous roster problems from back then.

I happen to agree with you, OV, but the one argument that can be made for expanded rosters is that they would result in less wear and tear on players and their bodies.

If you go back and look at player participation records from the 1970s, for example, there is one year where the Esks, who won the Grey Cup, only used something like 40 guys for the entire season. Of course, there is now suspicion that at least three members of that Edmonton team (York Hentschel, David Boone, and Bill Stevenson) suffered from CTE so there may have been quite a toll from playing so much with injuries such as concussions that we might not see as much today.

[AngeloV]

It still means they are paying 46 guys' salaries, when IMO there is no need for that; they could easily be allowed to pull a player off the PR on game day to replace a suddenly injured or ill player. I'd make the rosters 40 players and everybody gets a raise, plus bump up the PR money a bit; instead of paying 4 guys on the 46 for nothing.

I can't disagree with any of that, but as we know, the PA will never allow it...especially in better financial times league wise.