The Canadian Football League Players Association (CFLPA) has released the results of its second annual report card, allowing players to anonymously rate all nine CFL teams.
Four franchises received their overall rating improve compared to last year: Hamilton Tiger-Cats, Calgary Stampeders, BC Lionsand the Edmonton Elks. After appointment of a new president, general ManagerAnd head coachEdmonton moved up four spots to fifth place overall.
Green and gold were last in 2024 with an average letter grade of D+. They were the only franchise to receive an F grade in any category, both in nutrition and training camp. Those grades improved to C- and C+, respectively, and their D- grade in team travel turned into the first A+ ever recorded by the CFLPA. The result was an overall grade of B-.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, two teams saw their grades decline last season: the Montreal Alouettes and Ottawa Redblacks. After finishing third in 2024 with a grade of B-, Ottawa fell furthest to seventh place with a new grade of C.
The Redblacks earned an “A” for their football operations on the first CFLPA report card, but that dropped to a C in 2025. The team also recorded a C in the newly designated coaching staff category. Since then the team has made radical changes in this area, hire Ryan Dinwiddie from the Argonauts to be their head coach and general manager, although it should be noted that Toronto received the lowest coaching staff grade of any team at D+ in Dinwiddie's final year in office.
With scores across the 10 categories averaged to create a composite score, the nine CFL teams are ranked as follows.
- Hamilton Tiger-Cats – B+ (Last Year: B)
2. Saskatchewan Roughriders – B (Last Year: B)
3. Winnipeg Blue Bombers – B- (Last Year: B-)
4. Toronto Argonauts – B- (Last Year: B-)
5. Edmonton Elks – B- (Last Year: D+)
6. Calgary Stampeders – C+ (Last year: C-)
7. Ottawa Redblacks – C (Last Year: B-)
8. Montreal Alouettes – C (Last Year: C+)
9. BC Lions – C (Last Year: C-)
The Lions and Alouettes finished with the lowest overall grades and were the only teams to earn an F grade in any category in 2025.
British Columbia has received an unfavorable award for nutrition and diet. In his comments to the survey, one player wrote: “The overall nutrition of our team is very much lower than normal than it should be for a professional football team. This requires significant improvement.” Another said: “The food here is 99 percent up to the players.”
Montreal failed for its poor treatment of families. According to one respondent, “Family support and treatment on game days are lacking and, in my opinion, need the most improvement of all categories.”
Teams were judged in 10 different categories, which is two more than last season. The coaching staff was separated from the football operations category, and strength and conditioning was also separated from the therapeutic and medical staff. Two other categories were changed: management/administration became property and business operations, and facilities were added to the equipment section.
Full details of what each category entails can be read at the end of this article. The full breakdown by class was as follows:
Report card grades were derived from responses to a 78-question survey sent to all CFL players that included multiple-choice, ranking and open-ended questions. Responses were collected anonymously, and scores for each category were then averaged and normalized to convert the data into standardized letter grades. The CFLPA collaborated with Dr. Desmond McEwen, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Sport Psychology at the University of British Columbia, to refine the survey analysis and ensure a comprehensive and unbiased systematic review of all data collected.
A total of 381 players took part in the survey this year, compared to 495 in 2024. Players were also given the opportunity to leave general comments as part of the survey, which generated both positive and negative feedback.
Finishing with the top score for the second year in a row, the Hamilton Tiger-Cats received rave reviews. One player called the team “the class of the CFL” and said they were “going beyond the call of duty” by choosing to make improvements despite their already high ranking. In particular, he mentioned the Thanksgiving dinner the club hosted for all the players and their families.
Other teams were also noted making positive changes. Stampeders, previously criticized for its nutrition programthis time received a B grade, with one person saying “it all worked out well.” The Blue Bombers, who were selected for their legacy command aircraft in 2024, were noted to have improved their travel capabilities. Players from British Columbia and Saskatchewan reported improved strength and conditioning, while the Gray Cup champions were also praised for making “significant improvements” in nutrition, training and family activities.
The league has often complained about the availability of player performances and the way they are compensated. In Saskatchewan they were “not offered at the expected price” and were “very slow.” One Lions player said they were paid “grossly below market rate” and were not compensated for travel to events. One Redblacks player said they weren't given a chance to earn that money, while another said things were particularly scarce during the offseason.
Winnipeg and Ottawa have come under fire for their behavior at training camp. As for the Bombers, Mike O'Shea apparently kept the team in shape “almost every single day” with “zero days off.” The Redblacks faced logistical challenges. while at Queen's University in Kingstonwhich “added a lot of stress… it was completely unnecessary” and made the location “impractical.”
Montreal has faced particularly harsh criticism for its training room, which one player said requires “a lot more work to keep it professional.” One player said there was “not enough attention to detail” with machines not working and bathtubs “keep breaking”. A Toronto player filed another complaint, saying the quality of training equipment issued by the team was “not up to professional soccer standards” and the shortage had led to players spending their own money.
Despite the team's overall improvement, the Elks were the subject of one of the biggest allegations in the poll. One respondent highlighted the “terrible rehabilitation planning,” noting that it was “wildly inconsistent” and “lacked useful feedback to address the injury.” According to the player, both injured and uninjured players did not receive proper treatment.
Edmonton was also the most talked about issue among respondents, but not from their own players. Guest teams complained about the quality of accommodations, with one person calling a hotel in Alberta's capital “unacceptable.”
The CFLPA believes that team report cards provide valuable information to help players make informed decisions regarding free agency. and improve the level of conditions in the league. The project was inspired by the NFLPA, which has been publishing its own report card since 2023.
The NFL recently filed a grievance against its union after repeated demands to stop publishing ratings. In his 2025 address to the league, CFL commissioner Stuart Johnston was vague when asked whether he would use similar tactics, but said he was supportive of conversations between the league and the Players Association regarding the controversy.
Below are detailed descriptions of each of the 10 categories defined by the CFLPA.
Coaching staff: Players were asked about their relationships with the head coach, coaching staff, and video staff; planning their team activities; and their team's compliance with the CBA regulations, including those related to padded training and practice times.
Football Operations: Players were asked about their relationships with team management, contract negotiations, and access to the necessary tools/resources needed to succeed.
Property/Business Operations: Players were asked about their relationships with team presidents and team owners, as well as their access to resources related to off-field issues such as housing, work permits, on-field appearance opportunities, etc.
Services and equipment: Players were asked about general conditions at the stadium and whether they had to pay for any required football equipment, including gloves, mouth guards and boots; if they were given a suitable choice of helmet; about the condition of the equipment issued to them; and the general knowledge and helpfulness/availability of their equipment personnel.
Therapeutic and medical personnel: Players were asked whether their club had adequate levels of medical staff; if therapy was carried out at an appropriate time both in season and out of season; about their perceived quality of care; and the availability of massage and chiropractic care.
Strength and Conditioning: Players were asked about the quality of their clubs' training programs; and the availability and experience of a strength and conditioning coach.
Nutrition and diet: Players were asked what food their club provided and the quality of that food; if they were charged for this food; the presence of a club nutritionist; and the quality, quantity and adequacy of nutritional supplements provided.
Team trip: Players were asked about the quality of their club's travel arrangements; if the flight time allowed for sufficient rest and recovery after the game; and reimbursement of any travel expenses.
Training camp: During training camps, players were asked about the quality of their housing; about the quality of food during training camps; whether rest and recovery were a priority; and if their club adheres to CBA training times and meets additional training requirements during training camps.
Treatment of families: Players were asked whether their club offered services and support to partners and children, including assistance with housing, childcare, and medical and mental health services; and whether opportunities for family play were provided.
