Lionbackers.com

ziggy wrote:Glad it's over, can't believe this went on as long as it has. I guess though at the end of the day the league imposed it's penalty, the player got his chance to appeal and the system stumbled through the process the way it was designed to.

The CFL needs to learn from the NHL from this one. The longer you drag things out, the less confident the fans are that you are capable of making the right decision. The good news is that based on the indignation expressed on some fan sites, we all know now that two games in a similar incident will not be acceptable to the majority of fans. This should help the league in future deliberations.

Blue In BC wrote:

ziggy wrote:Glad it's over, can't believe this went on as long as it has. I guess though at the end of the day the league imposed it's penalty, the player got his chance to appeal and the system stumbled through the process the way it was designed to.

The CFL needs to learn from the NHL from this one. The longer you drag things out, the less confident the fans are that you are capable of making the right decision. The good news is that based on the indignation expressed on some fan sites, we all know now that two games in a similar incident will not be acceptable to the majority of fans. This should help the league in future deliberations.

Are you suggesting that the " indignation " of fans felt that 2 games was too much or too little.

Blitz wrote:I'm not surprised that the two game suspension was held. It was not a football play dispite Khalif's assertion that it was. It was a play made in frustration due to the amount of holding that often takes place by Edmonton's offensive line. Khalif might have been wiser to to have expressed remorse as the arbitrator determined.

I certainly don't think it was wise to have the arbitrator be a retired judge from Alberta and an Edmonton Eskimos season ticket holder to booth. Does that mean that he got it wrong or was biased. Likely not but perception is important and its hard to believe that this was the choice of arbitrator.

I support Khalif Mitchell as a B.C.Lion. He made a mistake...an impulsive unplanned deciision and he has been punished for his offence. Look forward to getting himn back in the lineup two games from now.

Westerman has been coming on and will start at Mitchell's spot and Evans will rotate in. Taylor will be the guy mostly getting the double teams.

Blitz wrote:I'm not surprised that the two game suspension was held. It was not a football play dispite Khalif's assertion that it was. It was a play made in frustration due to the amount of holding that often takes place by Edmonton's offensive line. Khalif might have been wiser to to have expressed remorse as the arbitrator determined.

I certainly don't think it was wise to have the arbitrator be a retired judge from Alberta and an Edmonton Eskimos season ticket holder to booth. Does that mean that he got it wrong or was biased. Likely not but perception is important and its hard to believe that this was the choice of arbitrator.

I support Khalif Mitchell as a B.C.Lion. He made a mistake...an impulsive unplanned deciision and he has been punished for his offence. Look forward to getting himn back in the lineup two games from now.

Westerman has been coming on and will start at Mitchell's spot and Evans will rotate in. Taylor will be the guy mostly getting the double teams.

DanoT wrote:The appeal process definitely helped the Lions as it allowed Mitchel to be part of a D line that kept two of the better backs in the CFL from gaining squat in two away games. It also gave rookie Westerman two more game's experience before he steps in to replace Mitchell.

Admittedly from a public relations point of view the lengthy process did not do the Lions any good.

jcalhoun wrote:Hey all,

Well, I'm disappointed Mitchell's suspension wasn't reduced to a single game, but I appear to be in the minority here with that opinion. His losing twelve grand in salary is too steep a penalty in my eyes; I know it's not the same, but getting caught over the legal alcohol limit and getting one of those blowers in your car will wind up costing an individual about five grand. There's no way that what Mitchell did merits more than twice the monetary penalty than someone who is caught driving drunk. Several of the Vancouver rioters have received suspended sentences, community service, and fines of less than one thousand dollars. I understand the world of sport is not subject to the same rules as the larger society, but the comparison suggests to me the judgment against Mitchell was too harsh.

Several here have compared this suspension with other leagues: 'this is equivalent to x games in the NHL, or y games in the NBA, MLB etc'. Sorry, that's bullsh*t. The average player in the NBA makes 5.15 million a season, MLB is 3.31 million, NHL is 2.4 million, the NFL is 1.9 million per season on average (according to the first result google churned out). Taking away 100k-250k in salary via suspension from someone who makes several million is a lot less severe than taking away 12 grand from someone who makes 110k (or whatever Mitchell's salary is). For these reasons, I think it's foolhardy and shortsighted to compare this incident, the suspension, the appeal process and the final result to other sports leagues. Mitchell made a mistake at work, like I'm sure many of us have. He makes a salary not out of line with many of you I'll venture. His actions merit punishment, but 1/9 of his salary?

If I win the lotto max tomorrow I'm going to pay Khalif twenty-grand to mow my lawn.

Changing tack slightly to show what a glass-half-full kinda guy I am:

I'm glad he appealed, and it should benefit the team in the long run. Even if the Lions were certain the suspension would be upheld, delaying the process for two weeks means Mitchell will have three consecutive weeks off heading into Labour Day. Having a dominant interior lineman well-rested and injury-free (and no doubt raring to go) for the critical back-to-back games against Montreal, not to mention the back half of the season, will be a benefit to us. Furthermore, the games Mitchell was allowed to play in while under appeal were arguably tougher opponents (Calgary was .500 in week 5, just coming off a huge win over the Riders, Toronto was 3-2 and was tops in the East) than we're facing over the next two (Riders on a 3 game losing skid, Winnipeg). If anything, the appeal was smart for those two reasons.

Cheers,

James

Blue In BC wrote:Ziggy. As you can see there were and are still some fans that feel it was too much. I understand the financial implications for the player is significant. To that end, I see their point.

OTOH, Rottier has missed two games already. He does get paid on the IR, but what about the impact of losing him as a starter for 2 or more games to his team. What about the fact that he's on the IR another player likely gets added to the 46 man roster at an additional cost.

The Esks lose a starting player and on top of that have to pay for his replacement while possibly suffering at the performance level.

At the moment it's two games. What if it extends to 3 games, 4 games, 5 games.

There is more at play here than just the impact to Mitchell and the Lions.

ziggy wrote:

Blue In BC wrote:Ziggy. As you can see there were and are still some fans that feel it was too much. I understand the financial implications for the player is significant. To that end, I see their point.

OTOH, Rottier has missed two games already. He does get paid on the IR, but what about the impact of losing him as a starter for 2 or more games to his team. What about the fact that he's on the IR another player likely gets added to the 46 man roster at an additional cost.

The Esks lose a starting player and on top of that have to pay for his replacement while possibly suffering at the performance level.

At the moment it's two games. What if it extends to 3 games, 4 games, 5 games.

There is more at play here than just the impact to Mitchell and the Lions.

So if you were running the league, what would your solution be?