By: Isabella Urbani, Staff Writer
On May 11, the BC Supreme Court denied an injunction made by five SFU football players to reinstate the school’s varsity program. SFU announced the termination of its 57-year football program on April 4. This came as a result of the school failing to find a new conference after its previous one elected to not renew their agreement.
The injunction would’ve allowed players to temporarily stop SFU from cancelling of the program, at least until the case’s verdict. The grounds of the injunction argued SFU hadn’t provided its players with enough notice about the closure of the team’s program, thus, causing a breach of contract.
Prior to the injunction’s filing, SFU announced they were hiring a special advisor to look into alternative ways football could operate at the school on a “varsity or non-varsity level.” A month later, immediately following the court’s ruling, SFU hired Bob Copeland of McLaren Global Sports Solutions to make a recommendation for the program’s future. Copeland’s report is set to be released this September.
TSN sports broadcaster and SFU alum Farhan Lalji explained to The Peak that without the lawsuit, SFU might not have ever “legitimized” how they would go about determining the feasibility of the program.
“When [SFU] first released the idea of a special advisor, I think we all understood that it was there to deflect attention from the university and the administration to delay things until December, when there was, essentially, nothing left to save,” said Lalji.
Since Copeland’s hiring, SFU president Joy Johnson, has referred to the school as having “no place to play in NCAA football.” Previously, when she announced the end of the football program in April, she noted they have no place to play at all. Lalji said this shift in language, although small, is indicative that the program may have started considering non-NCAA options, which was originally thought to be too much of a challenge.
“In the beginning, it was, ‘There’s no solution. There’s nothing left for us to do,’” said Lalji. “Whereas now, [SFU has] pivoted and said the NCAA history of the program is over.”
This change in language appeared in SFU’s latest video statement, released the same day the injunction verdict was announced. In the video, Johnson explained SFU had remained silent throughout the injunction because it would have been “inappropriate” for the school to make a comment while the trial was being held.
“It was a choice to choose not to speak publically at all,” said Lalji. He is less interested in what SFU decides to say, and more interested in whether or not the school “engage[s] meaningfully” with players and SFU alumni, like himself, going forward.
“The unfortunate part of it all is, the delay that got us to this point has created a lot of uncertainty for the athletes. A lot of them are gonna have to make decisions to leave, and they don’t want to do that.”
In spite of the injunction being denied, SFU football players were able to regain access to their locker room during the trial, which had been previously inaccessible.
“I think the players needed something concrete,” said Lalji, who believes the reopening of the dressing room will act as an “olive branch” from the school to the players.
This gives [players] a little bit of short-term hope. There are some other targets we’ll put out in front of the administration, and hopefully, as the adviser gets deeper into this process, the university will move forward on some other action items also.”
As for the program’s reinstatement, Lalji is hoping the door to exhibition games, or low-stakes practice games, is still open. “I don’t believe [players] would get a full schedule of games. I think the university is very reluctant to fully reinstate the program until they’ve gone through their process, and a full schedule of games would indicate reinstatement.”
By at least playing exhibition games during 2023, while the special advisor sees if the program can run competitively the following season, the football team will be able to “capitalize on momentum,” said Lalji. President of the SFU Football Alumni Society, Mark Bailey, has said an independent exhibition schedule has been crafted by alumni and is currently awaiting approval.
While the cancellation of the program most readily affects football students, Lalji wouldn’t be surprised if the impact extends to both the remainder of the athletic department and the students themselves. He explained it wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing.
“I think right now you should be considering, even if you’re not a student-athlete, if you want to go to this university, given everything I’ve heard and what their process looks like.
“In the end, I think the athletic department and the school itself will be better off for it, because it might change processes going forward altogether.”
