How Could the Coronavirus affect the Argos and the CFL

[jerrym]

The ratification of the NHL and NHLPA's agreement has led to the formal announcement of Toronto and Edmonton as hub cities. With the playoff's going on it Toronto, the Argos are likely to get even less media coverage than usual, further adding to the team's problems.

[jerrym]

While watching TV the other day, I saw a veteran NBA player say he doesn't see players following all the rules restricting their behaviour because of Covid-19. In his words, "some of them didn't follow the few rules that were there before Covid, so I don't see it happening now". With all the enticements for young men to go out and party etc., I think their will be a fair amount of rule-breaking in all leagues that operate this year, thereby increasing the risk to themselves, other players and the public.

[jerrym]

The NFL has announced a new type of face shield for helmets to reduce the risk of Covid-19 infection. I still think there will be substantial but reduced game risk of infection with this helmet. As one health expert said, one could hardly design a sport to increase the risk of infection as much as football with all its close and intense contact. The url below contains pictures of the new helmet with face shield. Perhaps the CFL could adopt it.

With NFL training camps set to start at the end of the month, the league believes it is closer to one answer when it comes to player safety amid the coronavirus pandemic: face shields for the players' helmets.

The NFL and the players' union agreed to several protocols in a 42-page document last week, including team travel, media and treatment response. They have also updated the facilities protocol, specifically addressing training camp, using recommendations from a joint committee of doctors, trainers and strength coaches. ...

“We’ve had a real robust discussion around it that stretches back a number of months,” said Dr. Allen Sills, the league’s chief medical officer. “From the start, the NFL Players Association, their medical advisers, their engineers have been engaged with us. We’ve also had dialogue with players along the way trying to look at early prototypes and developments.”

The face shield was designed by Oakley, which already provides visors for the players. ...

"We have well over 700 players that used the visors last year,” said Renie Anderson, chief revenue officer and executive vice president of NFL Partnerships.

The face shield has received a better response than the mask suggestion. “The player feedback was integral in coming up with this design," said Dr. Jeff Crandall, chairman of the NFL’s Engineering Committee. "They (Oakley) would start with this design and say: ‘Do you like this one better or this one? How’s your field of view on this one?’

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/h...5-673874d4b162

[Rich]

CFL submits revised financial request.

https://www.tsn.ca/cfl-submits-finan...ment-1.1494145

Funds if approved to cover player and operation costs. Owners will cover other expenses including losses. Ask will be about 42.5 million.

This request is also endorsed by the PA as instructed to earlier by the finance committee.

The Feds will spend many times more than $42.5M — in each province — in efforts to kickstart the economy. This is a relatively small and low-risk ask. I am becoming more and more confident we’ll be watching the Argonauts play this year.

The key is the hub city concept. A hub city is like a mini-stimulus package for an entire region. Jason Kenney said the NHL West hub in Edmonton would generate “tens of millions” for the Alberta economy, and the CFL hub would be bigger with more personnel than the NHL West hub.

Feeding well over 1,000 extra people every day for 3.5 months would be a huge boost to any region’s food supply and distribution system, not to mention all the extra cleaning, hospitality and security jobs that would be created. And how much could the Feds get back in GST from all this extra business?

They’re going to spend this money anyway on some kind of stimulus. Why not on one that saves a national sports institution at the same time? I can’t see it not happening.

[Bosco]

The Feds will spend many times more than $42.5M — in each province — in efforts to kickstart the economy. This is a relatively small and low-risk ask. I am becoming more and more confident we’ll be watching the Argonauts play this year.

The key is the hub city concept. A hub city is like a mini-stimulus package for an entire region. Jason Kenney said the NHL West hub in Edmonton would generate “tens of millions” for the Alberta economy, and the CFL hub would be bigger with more personnel than the NHL West hub.

Feeding well over 1,000 extra people every day for 3.5 months would be a huge boost to any region’s food supply and distribution system, not to mention all the extra cleaning, hospitality and security jobs that would be created. And how much could the Feds get back in GST from all this extra business?

They’re going to spend this money anyway on some kind of stimulus. Why not on one that saves a national sports institution at the same time? I can’t see it not happening.

Yea, no...

https://globalnews.ca/news/7165865/c...onton-toronto/

[Rich]

Yea, no...

https://globalnews.ca/news/7165865/c...onton-toronto/

No, yeah, nobody said a boost worth tens of millions of dollars to a provincial economy would be a panacea. But it will help.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/nhl-c...-242c6909b7ce/

[doubleblue]

No, yeah, nobody said a boost worth tens of millions of dollars to a provincial economy would be a panacea. But it will help.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/nhl-c...-242c6909b7ce/

Don't see how with the present conditions that would boost tourism. Too many restrictions. Isn't there still border restrictions from province to province still in effect? Let alone the Canadian/US border.

[Rich]

Don't see how with the present conditions that would boost tourism. Too many restrictions. Isn't there still border restrictions from province to province still in effect? Let alone the Canadian/US border.

It’s not about tourism, it’s about the ancillary benefits that come from feeding and housing a 1500-person bubble for four months.

[paulwoods13]

There's no doubt playing host to a "bubble," like 12 NHL teams or nine CFL teams, for weeks would result in spending that otherwise wouldn't take place in that particular community. But the overall impact on the Cdn economy would be minimal, and even locally it would not have a huge benefit other than for a few hundred hotel and food-service workers who might otherwise be unemployed. Regardless, I still believe the chances of a CFL season in 2020 are just about nil.

[Rich]

and even locally it would not have a huge benefit other than for a few hundred hotel and food-service workers who might otherwise be unemployed.

Regional produce growers, meat producers, bakeries and the like surely would also benefit.

Yes, tens of millions of dollars is, overall, a minimal boost to a provincial economy. But it is not nothing and it transforms the CFL’s request from being a handout into being a part of a bigger economic recovery package.

[AngeloV]

Apparently, the CBA is nowhere close to being agreed upon, and to me there is something that just doesn't add up here.

League is asking for 42.5M for the government which is apparently 100% for players salaries only. Now the league wants to play a 6 game schedule and pay the players 33% of their full salaries. Makes sense. 1/3 of the games, 1/3 of the salaries. But, it the league does get the 42.5MM ask, that is roughly 89% of the overall league salary cap (5.3M x 9 = 47.7MM). Not sure what the league is trying to pull, but to me it seems they are not being genuine here.

If they get the 42.5MM ask, they need to divide that evenly amongst the 9 teams, and play as many games as possible, and pay the players 80% of their full salaries. That would go a long way towards future labour peace.

My point, don't ask for 42.5, say it is to cover player salaries, then give less than half of that to the players.

[Mightygoose]

Apparently, the CBA is nowhere close to being agreed upon, and to me there is something that just doesn't add up here.

League is asking for 42.5M for the government which is apparently 100% for players salaries only. Now the league wants to play a 6 game schedule and pay the players 33% of their full salaries. Makes sense. 1/3 of the games, 1/3 of the salaries. But, it the league does get the 42.5MM ask, that is roughly 89% of the overall league salary cap (5.3M x 9 = 47.7MM). Not sure what the league is trying to pull, but to me it seems they are not being genuine here.

If they get the 42.5MM ask, they need to divide that evenly amongst the 9 teams, and play as many games as possible, and pay the players 80% of their full salaries. That would go a long way towards future labour peace.

My point, don't ask for 42.5M say it is to cover player salaries, then give less than half of that to the players.

The ask of 42.5 Millon is also to cover operational costs

https://www.tsn.ca/cfl-submits-finan...ment-1.1494145

Not sure if that's limited to football ops but it's to be used for more than player costs.

[AngeloV]

The ask of 42.5 Millon is also to cover operational costs

https://www.tsn.ca/cfl-submits-finan...ment-1.1494145

Not sure if that's limited to football ops but it's to be used for more than player costs.

OK, every article I had read said it was strictly for player salaries.

[Stevoman]

It's not looking like there will be a shortened season. But why is the CBA being tied into the agreement between the league and players to play this year? They really should look at this year only and then use the off-season to create a new plan for the league including the CBA.

[paulwoods13]

Regional produce growers, meat producers, bakeries and the like surely would also benefit.

Sure, to a minor extent. And growers, producers, etc., in the places where the players came from before entering the bubble would lose a tiny bit of business, too. Granted some of that is U.S. biz, but the net overall impact is minimal.

[paulwoods13]

It's not looking like there will be a shortened season. But why is the CBA being tied into the agreement between the league and players to play this year? They really should look at this year only and then use the off-season to create a new plan for the league including the CBA.

For one simple reason -- ownership hopes to leverage the current crisis to come up with a new CBA that significantly reduces costs in the future, in order to give the league at least a shot at fixing a business model that's clearly broken. Maybe this will be the time (the first time) that the players and PA don't get hosed in bargaining. Guess we may know within six days.

[Mightygoose]

It's not looking like there will be a shortened season. But why is the CBA being tied into the agreement between the league and players to play this year? They really should look at this year only and then use the off-season to create a new plan for the league including the CBA.

The current CBA is based on an 18 game regular season plus 2 pre season games. A change to the number of games alone means a new CBA has to be negotiated for this season.

Though I can see why the owners would want a new one for 2021 and onwards, if the PA is adamant on talking this year only the league should just focus on this year only and the have the 2 parties agree when to start talks for the following season(s)

[ArgoGabe22]

I was optimistic something would happen this year but I think they should scrap any plans and prepare for 2021. It just sucks players lose an entire years salary unless something is salvaged. But then again, other people have lost jobs too. So who do you side? Do players deserve more sympathy over your neighbour? It’s tough because we all love the league and it’s players and want the best.

[paulwoods13]

Though I can see why the owners would want a new one for 2021 and onwards, if the PA is adamant on talking this year only the league should just focus on this year only and the have the 2 parties agree when to start talks for the following season(s)

I see little chance of that happening. Owners want (need) costs reduced going forward, and they perceive that they have leverage right now, with everything shuttered. If they defer on discussing a new CBA, they lose that perceived leverage. IMO owners are far more concerned about achieving a business model that works for the long haul than they are with making sure a few games are played in 2020. I don't blame them for that -- the conditions for all teams to consistently make a profit don't exist under the current revenue model, and there's little reason to think revenues are going to rise significantly. Hence costs have to be addressed. At the same time, I wouldn't blame the players and the PA for holding fast and refusing to bargain a 20% pay cut at the point of a gun. I expect we will hear in the next week or so that 2020 is toast.

[jerrym]

I see little chance of that happening. Owners want (need) costs reduced going forward, and they perceive that they have leverage right now, with everything shuttered. If they defer on discussing a new CBA, they lose that perceived leverage. IMO owners are far more concerned about achieving a business model that works for the long haul than they are with making sure a few games are played in 2020. I don't blame them for that -- the conditions for all teams to consistently make a profit don't exist under the current revenue model, and there's little reason to think revenues are going to rise significantly. Hence costs have to be addressed. At the same time, I wouldn't blame the players and the PA for holding fast and refusing to bargain a 20% pay cut at the point of a gun. I expect we will hear in the next week or so that 2020 is toast.

I think this is the more than likely outcome.