Lionbackers.com

Still money well spent. How often do two of your biggest impact players return mid-season from the NFL and both happen to be nationals to boot? Take away those signings ($250,000+$150,000) and they are comfortably under.
And the CFL Draft is far too hit and miss anyways. To me, the additional fine ($643,667) is a much bigger deal.

I agree it was money well spent but losing the third and ninth overall picks still hurts. The Lions retain their 11th overall pick.

I have to admire Doman. He must have been made well aware a significant fine was coming to sign both Rourke and Betts yet he agreed to it without insisting any players (VA) get cut to make salary cap room for them. How many other CFL teams would have done the same?

It amounts to trading a 1st, 2nd AND $643,667 for Rourke and Betts, not to mention their salaries for 2024.

Hambone wrote: Fri Mar 28, 2025 9:52 am It amounts to trading a 1st, 2nd AND $643,667 for Rourke and Betts, not to mention their salaries for 2024.

I'm still trying wrap my head around the size of that fine for the CFL. Is it the largest in league history? It must be pretty damn close. I guess that made getting Betts re-signed this off-season an even a greater priority.

SammyGreene wrote: Fri Mar 28, 2025 9:35 am I have to admire Doman. He must have been made well aware a significant fine was coming to sign both Rourke and Betts yet he agreed to it without insisting any players (VA) get cut to make salary cap room for them. How many other CFL teams would have done the same?

As things unfolded by the time they signed Rourke it was too late to cut VA or any vet with 6 years of service including 2024. He was injured in BC's 8th game vs Winnipeg. If he was still on the roster for their 9th game his salary would be guaranteed. BC's 9th game, vs EDM, fell on August 11th. Ironically that was the same day Atlanta released Rourke. The time to cut vets of 6 or more years to free cap space for Rourke and Betts was BEFORE the Elks game. Players in that group with contracts that would make a difference were Adams, Chungh, Couture, Evans, Lee, Lokombo, Mackie, Peters, Stanback and Whyte.

Only way to make cap room for them once Rourke was signed was to cut players with 5 years of service of less. 5 year vets with somewhat sizeable deals including Cottoy, Knevel, McInnis, and Schleuger would have to be cut literally the day Rourke signed to avoid their contracts being guaranteed. They could have waited until after Rourke's first game to make decisions on vets of 4 years of less. Notables there included Banks, Broxton, Debaillie, Flintoft, Hladik, Hollins, Perkins & Robertson who went on the injured list after the Winnipeg game.

Realistically to make the cap dent necessary to clear space to add Rourke and Betts after the season when the season was already past the halfway post would have required gutting the team. They would have to either trade some of those 6+ year vets or cut vets of 5 years or less service either before Rourke's 1st game or immediately after it. It takes removing a lot of players to clear up space when each on represents incremental gains in little chunks of $10K to maybe $40K.

Savings aren't necessarily as large as they might seem. Many players have healthy parts of their salaries paid up front in signing/roster bonuses. And of course when you cut a guy another player's salary gets added. It becomes a net savings calculation as it becomes say Player A's salary for remainder of season (8/18 of base) less Player B's salary for remaineder of season (8/18 of base). Player B will make mimimum of $70K = $31.1K for 8 games. Hollins was apparently on a base of $153.8K ($223.8K max less $70K signing) = $68.4K for 8 games. Net savings is only $37.1K. That might have been the most extreme example. As for some other players base salaries reported by 3D inluded Adams $155K, Dolegala (who did get cut) $82K, Lokombo $91.5K, Hladik $86.2K, Peters $76.2K. The rest of their compensation comes in signing/roster bonuses, housing & travel allowances etc.

Overall I think the logic was to accomplish 3 things; 1 short term, 1 longer term and the other a combination:
1) to do whatever it took to push to get to the Grey Cup. There were signs of wobbly wheels on the wagon before VA went down and if they have to ride things out with Dolegala until he returned a playoff spot could be in jeopardy.
2) secure Rourke to be their QB for the rest of the season and beyond.
3) secure Betts to help with 1) above and to put them in the best position to retain him longer term.

They could have passed on going after Betts but that wouldn't have saved them from losing that 1st rounder. Adding Rourke was going to push them probably into the $250K+ overage range. At that point do they cut their losses or say screw it let's go for it for the cost of a 2nd and a bit more cash, As a buddy of mine liked to say "if you're gonna be a bear, might as well be a grizzly".

SammyGreene wrote: Fri Mar 28, 2025 11:11 am

Hambone wrote: Fri Mar 28, 2025 9:52 am It amounts to trading a 1st, 2nd AND $643,667 for Rourke and Betts, not to mention their salaries for 2024.

I'm still trying wrap my head around the size of that fine for the CFL. Is it the largest in league history? It must be pretty damn close. I guess that made getting Betts re-signed this off-season an even a greater priority.

I don't recall an instance of such a fine for any transgression. Biggest SMS fine was after the first year of the SMS when Montreal paid approx $116K and a 1st for going over by something like $108K. IMO getting Rourke back in the fold was mission critical to the Lions for more than just football. That cost the 1st. Betts was a "nice to have" who put them over the top to cost the 2nd.

Great breakdown Hambone. Thank you.
I see the club is under full attack from JC Abbott and others but they must know damn well what the long term implications would potentially be to the franchise letting Rourke sign elsewhere to save a 1st round draft pick that could be the next Daniel Joseph.

The price for under-performing and destroying team chemistry is a $643,667 fine and your two top draft picks — all of which will go directly towards helping your rivals.

Maybe he doesn’t return to his 2022 form and it looks like a huge cost but I would put money on him thriving again and obviously Doman already has with the hefty fine he is paying.

If Rourke returns to form and the Lions start winning with entertaining football, then increased numbers of fans in the stands will cover the fine rather quickly.

SammyGreene wrote: Fri Mar 28, 2025 1:51 pmI see the club is under full attack from JC Abbott and others but they must know damn well what the long term implications would potentially be to the franchise letting Rourke sign elsewhere to save a 1st round draft pick that could be the next Daniel Joseph.

Well said, SammyGreeene.


DH

The Lions have had a terrible record in the draft for years. The only first-round picks still on the roster are Nathan Cherry (2022), Francis Bemiy (2023) and George (Anu) Una (2024), who combined to dress for 3 games last year, with no starts.

Hambone wrote: Fri Mar 28, 2025 9:52 am It amounts to trading a 1st, 2nd AND $643,667 for Rourke and Betts, not to mention their salaries for 2024.

If it were a "trade" and the above was all it cost for 2 Canadians who have previously been the best player in the entire league at their positions, then I would declare Lions have won the trade.

David wrote: Sat Mar 29, 2025 11:44 am

SammyGreene wrote: Fri Mar 28, 2025 1:51 pmI see the club is under full attack from JC Abbott and others but they must know damn well what the long term implications would potentially be to the franchise letting Rourke sign elsewhere to save a 1st round draft pick that could be the next Daniel Joseph.

Well said, SammyGreeene.


DH

I don't it's fair at all to say that JC Abbott and others at 3 Down Nation have the Lions under "full attack" or any attack on the BC Lions at all on this single issue. As a fan I think these guys do a fantastic service for the CFL and no one's paying them the big bucks. They have to earn every penny daily I suspect. Fans are lucky to have such an astute observer of the BC Lions right here in the lower mainland in JC Abbott.

Abbott like the other 3 down writers know full well what was behind the decision to not worry about the cap with Betts and Rourke.

If there were to ANY criticism of the Lions (and there's really none with the decision to sign these two when they were let go), it's how Neil McEvoy used the 70% failure rate of draft picks when he didn't need to do that. Signing Rourke and Betts back was a no brainer although it'd be fair to quibble with for how much for those who might feel the cost was too high.

Even my mentioning this might be a bit of nit pick here. However, if a draft pick comes to a Lions TC, they might like to think BC holds them in higher regard than a 70% chance of failing. I'm sure that is not how McEvoy really feels though. He'd take a player who shows he can play regardless of draft status as would any of the BC staff..

However for fans who didn't like how VA got benched after his recovery Nathan Rourke and the Lions still have a hill to climb here especially with how highly his team mates and fans regarded VA's play and felt he got the shaft when healthy to play.

Toppy Vann wrote: Sun Mar 30, 2025 3:32 pm However for fans who didn't like how VA got benched after his recovery Nathan Rourke and the Lions still have a hill to climb here especially with how highly his team mates and fans regarded VA's play and felt he got the shaft when healthy to play.

And the big question that has never been answered about that is when was VA truly healthy enough for BC to insert him over Rourke? There's a big difference between healthy in the player's mind and the mind of the medical staff and coaching staff who has to take a lot more into account.

Was he 100% when BC had the bad loss to Toronto at BC Place? Maybe for the embarrassing Hamilton OT loss which absolutely gets hung on RP's Swiss cheese defence that BLM rode roughshod over in the 2nd half. BC should've been on a 3-1 roll going into the win in Calgary and 4-1 going into Regina where they suffered an embarrassing loss. No doubt had they not brought Rourke back and were forced to try to stay in the playoff hunt with Dolegala and Brice we would have seen VA sooner. We might have been scrambling just to stay in a playoff spot.

Two picks and a $350k fine to lose in the first round of the playoffs. Awesome. Worth every penny. Glad we're bad at drafting anyway.