Advertisement

Why isn't CFL free agency more fully embraced?

B.C Lions RB Andrew Harris (33) runs the ball against the Calgary Stampeders during the first half of their CFL football game in Vancouver, British Columbia, November 7, 2015. REUTERS/Ben Nelms (REUTERS)

In many sports, the opening of free agency is one of the biggest days of the year. TSN and Sportsnet annually deliver full-day broadcasts on NHL free agency, and NBA and MLB free agency also draw huge attention and interest. NFL free agency hasn't grown as much, as few top players leave during it, but what's perhaps even more surprising is what's happened with CFL free agency. Free agency in this league draws very little attention (even relative to its sport's in-season popularity) and doesn't seem highly anticipated by many players, general managers, or fans. In fact, there was even a discussion this week on Twitter that this year's impressive crop of pending free agents is actually bad for the league. From this corner, that's not the best way to view it, but let's examine some of what people are saying on the subject:

The one point that's indisputably in favour of no one-year contracts (and thus, less free agents every year) is from a standpoint of marketing returning players, which it turns out is what Walters was talking about in the comments that started this. It's also understandable that there are some reasons why fans want their favourite players to stick around, especially if they've invested in a jersey with that player's name; none of this is to tell fans that they can't like particular players and want them to wear their team's colours forever. However, marketing individual players is only a small part of the CFL's overall business, and many of the other perceived downsides of expanded free agency come from a focus on the losses rather than the gains. That's how humans often think (as illustrated by the fascinating, and Nobel-prize-winning, research of Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, much of which is outlined in Kahneman's excellent book Thinking, Fast And Slow), but it's not necessarily the best way to analyze situations.

Any team having high numbers of pending free agents can be seen as a problem, or it can be seen as an opportunity. Some players will leave, but others will be brought in. The dismay over long-tenured players leaving is seen in other leagues, too, but those leagues also see plenty of excitement and hype over bringing in big-name free agents. In the CFL, that doesn't seem to happen as much: consider how much outcry there was about the Roughriders releasing Weston Dressler and John Chick compared to the smaller stories of them signing Shawn Lemon (a younger replacement for Chick), Winnipeg signing Dressler, and Hamilton signing Chick. None of those moves are actually about the free agency period (which doesn't open until Feb. 9; these players were released earlier), but they're similar; these players  became free agents and signed elsewhere. Their moves were all within the CFL, so the league didn't actually lose anything by them switching teams (apart from that marketing perspective, but keep in mind that these are now guys their new teams can market, and flashy new acquisitions can be quite important from the marketing side). Loss aversion research suggests that people care more about who their team's lost than who they've gained, but realizing how that framework works the first step to overcoming it; if you can look at your team's net transactions and conclude that they're better off on the whole, the losses don't sting as much.

Now, who particularly gains from expanded free agency? Players. The CFL's non-guaranteed contracts mean that multi-year deals only offer stability from one side, the team's; players under contract can still be cut (as Dressler and Chick were) or told to accept less money in a renegotiation or face being cut. Whenever a player approaches free agency, they have options; they can accept a new deal from their current team before hitting the market, they can test the NFL waters, or they can pick and choose from the CFL teams interested in them. That can be great for both players and teams; players can find where they fit best and can play the biggest role, rather than being stuck with a team that's not as excited to fully utilize them, and teams can pick from a wider selection of players than just who they drafted and/or initially signed. For players in particular, the flexibility to sign an extension, test the NFL or see what's out there on the market is vital, and it's much better than being locked into a multi-year deal that they're forced to honour, but one the team can end at any time.

In fact, the really surprising thing is that so many CFL players still sign longer deals and/or extensions before testing the free agency waters; last year saw nine league all-stars as potential free agents, but only one (offensive tackle Stanley Bryant) moved within the CFL, with two others (Brett Jones and Delvin Breaux) heading to the NFL and the remaining six signing new deals with their existing teams. That's not just all-stars; many other players about to hit free agency sign extensions instead, and at least some of them could make more on the open market. The high number of decisions to stay with their current team may be about familiarity, family, a sure deal and the convenience of not having to move outweighing potential gains; each case is different, though, and we can't get inside players' heads. What we do know is that CFL free agency as it stands isn't nearly as prevalent or disruptive as it could be if more players were willing to test the market.

What about those players who do leave the CFL in free agency, usually for the NFL? Well, the argument here has long been that they're doing the CFL a service; the more players from the CFL who make NFL rosters, the more the league is seen as a solid possible path to NFL glory and the more top players it can attract (only a few of whom will ever actually land in the NFL). This is particularly true in the case of players who land substantial NFL contracts, as Eric Rogers did this offseason. Morever, many who do go to the NFL wind up coming back before too long, as we saw this offseason with Duron Carter. Thus, even those losses aren't really losses, and the advantage of shorter contracts here is that we see less unhappy players who want to be in the NFL but are locked into CFL deals (see Chris Williams). Those situations don't benefit anyone. Shorter-term contracts may pose some challenges, but they certainly provide more NFL opportunities, and those opportunities are arguably a boon for the CFL as a whole.

Short contracts and expanded free agency can work out for CFL teams too, though. For one thing, it's not that they can only sign short-term deals; if they have players who they want for the long term and can convince those players a long-term deal is reasonable, they can still make that happen. For another, the big numbers of free agents hitting the CFL market allow teams to reshape their rosters to a greater extent and with much more frequency than if movement was more limited.

This is particularly true with Canadians who play traditionally-American positions. Just look at all the top Canadian talent potentially set to hit the market, including two top running backs (Andrew Harris and Jerome Messam), two defensive tackles (Ted Laurent and Cleyon Laing) and a top defensive end (Justin Capicciotti). Playing a Canadian at any of those positions can provide a team with much greater ratio flexibility, but it's extremely hard to get someone who can step in and start at one of those spots right away from the draft, as they usually need a few years of seasoning as a backup.

If all contracts were long-term, we wouldn't see Canadian players of this importance and calibre hit the market much. Only the few select teams that initially drafted these guys would have the option of starting Canadians at these spots (and again, usually doing so after letting them develop as a backup, and taking the risk that they would never turn into starters). With more open free agency, any team can dream of starting a Harris or a Capicciotti and picking up the accompanying ratio flexibility. They just have to pony up the money.

Beyond that, a greater free agency crop presents a substantial opportunity for the CFL on the media side. It's never going to be the NHL's free agent frenzy, but the more notable the free agency crop is (and in particular, the more significant players who actually move), the more media attention the league will generate as a result. Free agency is an excellent reason to talk about the CFL in the midst of its offseason, and the higher the numbers and impact of potential free agents, the more people will talk about it. On the marketing side, splashy free agent signings are a solid way for CFL teams to generate some hype and get people thinking about them (and thinking about buying tickets). There are big advantages to free agency, and it's not something the league should be looking to cut down on.

This isn't meant as an attempt to legislate fan reactions. Seeing your favourite player go to another team, especially a rival, is understandably annoying for many, especially if you've shelled out the money for a personalized jersey with their name on it. The CFL's also about more than just players' on-field impact; many of its players really embrace their communities and the communities embrace them back, so even if a signing like Lemon may seem like a replacement and perhaps an upgrade on a player like Chick from an age standpoint, fans' disappointment to see a beloved player go is understandable. Sports can be emotional as well as rational, and the emotional reactions and desire to keep players with your team for the long term aren't necessarily wrong. However, from a wider perspective, it's hard to say that short-term deals and expanded free agency hurt the CFL as a whole. In fact, there's a compelling case that they help it.