CPL General

[Keegan]

1 hour ago, RS said:

MLS owners are "actual" MLS, though. They write the cheques, so ultimately they make the rules (within FIFA guidelines, which is where the USSF gets to impose its own desires).

CFL positions may be more specialist in nature when compared to soccer, but CFL substitutions aren't restricted to just three per team per game.

Sure, they write the cheques to MLS, which is a single entity.. who in turn write the actual cheques that matter.  If you know corporate law you would know that MLS owners are NOT MLS.  Owners are investors who invested in the league because they believe in the business.. not because they want to make a franchise into PSG North America https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Soccer_owners.  MLS has been operating for 22 years fine and dandy.. they're not going to let a few cowboys come along and ruin it for everyone.  It's brilliant - maybe there are some owners who would love to run wild (thinking Atlanta, TFC) but the majority of the league (Columbus, RSL, DC, Philly, SJ, Dallas, Houston, NE etc.) just wants to survive by paying average salaries and not being left in the wake of the big dogs.  

https://deadspin.com/is-mls-a-ponzi-scheme-1797509617

Business first, football second.  This is how you attract billionaire owners who otherwise wouldn't touch soccer in North America with a 100 ft poll after the NASL debacle.  

This is why it's hard to get excited about the league.  Even when you think they're on the cusp of greatness you sort of get an idea of reality - this isn't real.  These aren't "clubs" - these are corporate chains who care about keeping spending in check, they don't prioritise keeping top talent, they don't care about rewarding good performances and they don't care about the wishes of their players.  It's depressing to watch TFC v Club America and know "wow, we could legitimately be as big a club as this team" but then you realise reality is that we can never have the same structure - if injuries hit we are doomed.  We can never truly develop talent in an efficient way, we can never develop to sell, we can never compete consistently continentally... it's all smoke and mirrors.  

MLS was created for the interests of American soccer and it has been a resounding success.  MLS/USSF make it happen together - you don't need to look far to see that they are one in the same just look at the US pyramid changes over the past few years.  

Edited July 17, 2018 by Keegan

[An Observer]

12 hours ago, jonovision said:

If the CFL can manage within a Canadian quota, in a sport where positions and substitution patterns are far more specific and complicated, the CPL should be able to do so as well.

The CFL does it differently.  It requires a certain amount of Canadians on the game day roster which effectively means all the foreigners (ie Americans) start and the Canadians fill in the rest of the slots.  The rest of the Canadians are the subs.  For soccer in would mean efffectively saying you can only have 6 foreigners on the match day line up which effectively would mean they all would likely start

[Unnamed Trialist]

13 hours ago, RS said:

MLS (and to a lesser extent CPL) will have similar interests to their governing body, but I find it hard to believe that random billionaires from around the business world care at all about domestic player minimums. If anything, the league's owners would abolish the quotas altogether (if they could get away with it).

You are aware that the US is currently being run in the name of billionaire oligarchs, including from other countries, who are putting up quotas like never before? 

[LAK]

1 hour ago, An Observer said:

The CFL does it differently.  It requires a certain amount of Canadians on the game day roster which effectively means all the foreigners (ie Americans) start and the Canadians fill in the rest of the slots.  The rest of the Canadians are the subs.  For soccer in would mean efffectively saying you can only have 6 foreigners on the match day line up which effectively would mean they all would likely start

There are a required number of Canadian starters in the CFL and a minimum amount that have to be on the field  at any given time.

[Keegan]

6 minutes ago, LAK said:

There are a required number of Canadian starters in the CFL and a minimum amount that have to be on the field  at any given time.

What is the rationale behind that? Is there a Canadian football equivalent of the voyageurs out there?  

[RS]

52 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

You are aware that the US is currently being run in the name of billionaire oligarchs, including from other countries, who are putting up quotas like never before? 

Yes, and that awareness plus $15 will get you a nice red MAGA hat.

MLS billionaire owners don't give a shit about protectionist policies. That's what the USSF is for.

[Ansem]

On 7/16/2018 at 12:09 PM, Cheeta said:

^ Absolutely, perfectly put.  Start 6 Canadians.  Finish with 3, finish with 9, whatever.

I have no problem with that. They didn't say 6 Canadians at all time. You still create that inner competitions (Can vs. Can - Can vs. Foreigners).

Let's look at the positives.  The wording of CPL (if true) is incredibly clever. They are allowing more internationals on rosters than MLS but putting the emphasis on starting 6 Canadians and half the roster being Canadians overshadows that teams will be allowed to sign up to 11-12 internationals. Good CONCACAF internationals can be found in the Caribbean and Central America at a reasonable price as that region tends not to be the focus of top leagues.

All and all, I'm liking what we're seeing so far.

As I said earlier, my family are from Central America and if anyone thinks that a great young prospect would say no to Canada and a 85k+ salary, you guys have no clue about the reality of theses parts. Most of them will absolutely jump at the opportunity.

Edited July 17, 2018 by Ansem

[LAK]

3 hours ago, Keegan said:

What is the rationale behind that? Is there a Canadian football equivalent of the voyageurs out there?  

I believe it's so that the Canadians on the team aren't just relegated to holding clipboards and doing special teams. They are valuable members of each team. If you look at the East and West All-star teams each year, there are a significant amount of canadians represented on that. The Canadians are a huge part of the draw in the CFL. The CFL has effectively found a great balance between quality of play and Canadian representation. They only need to do something about the quarterback position as it's the one position that is left off the ratio.

[jonovision]

4 hours ago, Keegan said:

What is the rationale behind that? Is there a Canadian football equivalent of the voyageurs out there?  

The rationale is that a Canadian football (pointy-ball) league would almost certainly not exist without a Canadian quota, and the sport at lower levels would be critically weakened.

[Ansem]

 

[BuzzAndSting]

55 minutes ago, Ansem said:

 

Purple?!

[Ansem]

8 minutes ago, BuzzAndSting said:

Purple?!

My favorite color ?

[Ansem]

4 hours ago, Ansem said:

I have no problem with that. They didn't say 6 Canadians at all time. You still create that inner competitions (Can vs. Can - Can vs. Foreigners).

Let's look at the positives.  The wording of CPL (if true) is incredibly clever. They are allowing more internationals on rosters than MLS but putting the emphasis on starting 6 Canadians and half the roster being Canadians overshadows that teams will be allowed to sign up to 11-12 internationals. Good CONCACAF internationals can be found in the Caribbean and Central America at a reasonable price as that region tends not to be the focus of top leagues.

All and all, I'm liking what we're seeing so far.

As I said earlier, my family are from Central America and if anyone thinks that a great young prospect would say no to Canada and a 85k+ salary, you guys have no clue about the reality of theses parts. Most of them will absolutely jump at the opportunity.

To add to this, the 6 mandatory Canadians starting is to avoid this

 

[Bison44]

The Pacific rain??  

Edited July 17, 2018 by Bison44

[ted]

20 minutes ago, Bison44 said:

The Pacific rain??  

I see some tifo possibilities! LOL

[baulderdash77]

I didn’t see the source but from what I’m reading here it’s at least 50% Canadian players with 6 Canadian starters.

I think that strikes a good balance between level of play and performance on the field.

This also gives us a chance to be legitimately better than USL next year as I think we will be able to be drawing a better overall foreign content quality than the USL brings and the Canadian starting level content will be USL or higher as well.  I’m still thinking Ottawa level or higher for next year as a baseline.

That’s going to give us a very good level to watch on the field.  

48+ Canadian starters next year really fills in the depth for the men’s national team as well.  Combined with what will be the remain quality Europe players and MLS players we will have solid pool of players playing regularly going forward and it will only get better from here.

[baulderdash77]

One other thing for player pool that’s just as important.  The next man up.

On paper if every single player for us has been available I think we had the 3rd best Concacaf team in 2014 and 2018.  The problem is we haven’t had the depth behind our starters that any missing player was catastrophic for us.

For example in 2014 had Josh Simpson and DeRosario not been hurt and Occean not gotten a red card we would have qualified.  We probably could have sustained 1 of those but 2 and our chances were on life support and all 3 we got completely rolled.

I think at any time the 100+ or so Canadian CPL players will give us maybe 5-8 players in a game for the CMNT.  Literally the top 5% of the CPL rosters will make the national team.

But if there is an injury the drop off won’t be as severe because there will be another 10-15 players playing and in form right behind them ready and waiting for the call.  We haven’t had those mid level player depth before which is why there’s always been several Unattached FC players on our roster.  That ends starting next year and our results will show it.

There’s never been a time where we have been able to call on that level of depth since the old NASL died.

Thats going to be the next thing for us that will move us up the ranks to a top 50 team consistently and propel us to the 3-5th best CONCACAF team permanently. 

Edited July 17, 2018 by baulderdash77

[RS]

2 hours ago, Ansem said:

To add to this, the 6 mandatory Canadians starting is to avoid this

 

As I've said elsewhere, MLS doesn't care about domestic player quotas on either side of the border.

EDIT: It wasn't elsewhere. It was the last page of this thread. ?

Edited July 17, 2018 by RS

[Complete Homer]

https://mobile.twitter.com/GregMcIsaac/status/1019382020449894401

Interesting tweet from McIsaac, nothing directly related to CPL but it's interesting that he's been talking with DAZN

Not 100% he's still with the league though. I think he's a consultant so it might have been a temporary gig

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

10 hours ago, Bison44 said:

The Pacific rain?? 

 

...at Lake Minnetonka Stadium.

[An Observer]

17 hours ago, LAK said:

There are a required number of Canadian starters in the CFL and a minimum amount that have to be on the field  at any given time.

Don’t think you are correct:

CFL roster sizes are 46 players (rather than 53 as in the NFL, though only 45 will dress for a game). A CFL team may dress up to 44 players comprising 21 non-imports (essentially, Canadians), 20 imports (almost exclusively Americans), and 3 quarterbacks

 

 

[Shortdutchcanuck]

 

From CFL roster rules:

Of the 24 starters on a team, a minimum of seven starters will be nationals players. When applied to a starting roster of a team it breaks down as follows (when using the minimum number of national players):

• 1 QB
• 16 international players
• 7 starting national players

 

[LAK]

6 hours ago, An Observer said:

Don’t think you are correct:

CFL roster sizes are 46 players (rather than 53 as in the NFL, though only 45 will dress for a game). A CFL team may dress up to 44 players comprising 21 non-imports (essentially, Canadians), 20 imports (almost exclusively Americans), and 3 quarterbacks

 

 

all above is true. Also...7 starters must be Canadian. That number can be a combination of 4 on defense and 3 on offense or whatever...BUT...often times the roster must be juggled if there are injuries etc. to maintain that number.

 

edit: Sorry I didn't see that it was addressed above.

Edited July 18, 2018 by LAK

[Cblake]

4 hours ago, Shortdutchcanuck said:

The biggest difference with the CFL is you can rotate players in and out as much as you want based on formations etc, so having 7 Canadian starters is not quite the same as it would be in the CPL where you have 3 subs. The overall quota is more comparable. 

From CFL roster rules:

Of the 24 starters on a team, a minimum of seven starters will be nationals players. When applied to a starting roster of a team it breaks down as follows (when using the minimum number of national players):

• 1 QB
• 16 international players
• 7 starting national players

 

 

[Cblake]

4 hours ago, Shortdutchcanuck said:

 

From CFL roster rules:

Of the 24 starters on a team, a minimum of seven starters will be nationals players. When applied to a starting roster of a team it breaks down as follows (when using the minimum number of national players):

• 1 QB
• 16 international players
• 7 starting national players

 

The biggest difference with the CFL is you can rotate players in and out as much as you want based on formations etc, so having 7 Canadian starters is not quite the same as it would be in the CPL where you have 3 subs. The overall quota is more comparable.