almost everyone makes the playoffs...
may long regular season starts - direct competition with nhl playoffs
i like the new playoff format
TORONTO — The Canadian Football League (CFL) has finalized updates to the season schedule and reached an agreement with the CFL Players' Association (CFLPA) on a refreshed playoff format beginning in 2027.
The season will shift to begin Victoria Day Weekend, anchoring the start of each new CFL campaign with an iconic Canadian holiday and the unofficial start of summer. From May to Thanksgiving, long weekends will serve as defining moments in the regular season, creating new tentpole CFL traditions in addition to the league's legendary Labour Day Weekend games. The new start to the season also means the postseason will conclude earlier in the fall, taking full advantage of warmer weather for fans in attendance and providing prime playing conditions for CFL stars to showcase their skills.
"All summer long, the CFL will be front and centre – exactly where it belongs. We're establishing CFL Long Weekends, from Victoria Day to Thanksgiving, to create can't-miss events for fans in the stadium and those watching at home," said Commissioner Stewart Johnston.
The roar of the season reaches a crescendo with a major update to the postseason. Four additional playoff games amp up late-season intrigue as teams battle for all-important playoff positioning. Finishing Top-2 in the divisions guarantees at least two playoff games. Postseason re-seeding – regardless of division – and two victories being required to advance to the championship introduces the possibility of postseason rematches, and new playoff and Grey Cup clashes.
"More games. More drama. More entertainment. That was the mission and that's exactly what this format will deliver," added the Commissioner. "We're raising the stakes so every game carries real consequences – more teams in the hunt, right to the end."
The league worked closely with the CFLPA to integrate the new structure into the existing Collective Bargaining Agreement.
"This proposal sparked important and productive discussions, with a clear focus on ensuring our members benefit from any changes," said CFLPA Executive Director David Mackie. "It represents a meaningful step forward that supports both player compensation and the continued growth and excitement of the league, while reinforcing a framework where players share in that growth."
2027 KEY DATES
CFL Invitational Combine | February 26
CFL Combine presented by Anytime Fitness | Week of March 15
CFL Canadian Draft | April 13
CFL Global Draft | April 14
Rookie Camp Opens | April 21
Training Camp Opens | April 24
Week 1 | Victoria Day Weekend
Week 6 | Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day/Fête nationale du Québec (Que.)
Week 7 | Canada Day Weekend
Week 11 | August Long Weekend (Civic Holiday)
Week 16 | Labour Day Weekend
Week 21 | Thanksgiving Weekend
Playoffs
Round One – Division Showdowns and Play-In Games | October 15-16
Round Two – Elimination Games | October 23
Round Three – Grey Cup Semi-Finals | October 30
114th Grey Cup – November 7
NEW PLAYOFF FORMAT
ROUND ONE – TWO DIVISION SHOWDOWNS AND TWO PLAY-IN GAMES
Division Showdown: The first- and second-place teams in each division face off. Winners earn a bye to Round Three (Grey Cup Semi-Finals) with home-field advantage; losers move on to Round Two (Elimination Games).
Play-In Games: Teams finishing outside the Top-2 in each division are seeded Nos. 5-8, with No. 9 eliminated from playoff contention. The Play-In Games will see No. 5 host No. 8, and No. 6 host No. 7. Winnersadvance to Round Two, while losers are eliminated.
ROUND TWO – ELIMINATION GAMES
Division Showdown losers host Play-In Game winners with matchups based on regular-season records. Winners advance to Round Three (Grey Cup Semi-Finals) and losers are eliminated.
ROUND THREE – GREY CUP SEMI-FINALS
Division Showdown winners host Elimination Game winners with matchups based on regular-season record. Victors advance to the Grey Cup.
wow.
wow.
Some initial thoughts (not exhaustive since this will take some time to digest):
- While it's a little comical that 8/9 teams make the playoffs, it was already viewed as that way anyway so nbd.
- The new format has some elements that make a lot of sense. But wow is it ever gimmicky. Some will view that as a feature, others as a bug
- Strikes a compromise of maintaining divisional rivalries but also seeding fairly so a weak east doesn't get any help
- I'm ok with May Long being the season kick-off but it'll take some getting used to.
- At the same time, the main reason moving the season up was popular was the get the season done before November. We add a playoff week so we're still finishing after Halloween every year.
- Playing the GC in November is great with me as that's a core tradition to me, but the CFL season is now 25 weeks. I wish they could eliminate 1-2 byes (I've always found it insane that we have 3 byes - understanding the issue of having an odd # of teams)
I guess that's all for now but I'm going to think about this more.
Not sure I like the changes. I'd rather have the semi and finals be 2 game series. Oh well, we'll see how it goes.
My initial reactions are mostly positive. I can accept the compromise between keeping the divisional structure and trying to make the play-off matches more fair. The new format means you have to win more than one game to reach the Grey Cup, which was always a little lame - but with only 6 teams, it was all you could do. The trade off to making the path more challenging was to add more teams.
That said, the East vs West Grey Cup is not necessarily in the cards anymore. The regular season becomes almost meaningless for half the league. Another massive change before even seeing the first wave of massive changes (or even seeing the exact language of new rules announced months ago) is setting themselves up for more criticism. The move up in schedule will be well received by many, but creates some challenges (the draft coming prior to the NFL's for one).
They might want to slow their roll on some things. Such massive changes are probably going to require trouble-shooting as new issues arise and they're not going to have the capacity to handle so many different things at once.
some really bad teams will be making the playoffs. some will say that is happening now though.
Can't say they aren't trying new things to generate interest ...and while not everything will be a home run they are swinging that is for sure.
can always tweak things if they become a disaster
Might be hard for teams to sell playoff tickets if they only know a week in advance if they're hosting or on the road.
Wait and see how this plays out, I don't think East vs. West format is necessary any longer, I'd rather see the 2 best teams compete for the Grey Cup.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on April 28, 2026, 07:19:07 PMMight be hard for teams to sell playoff tickets if they only know a week in advance if they're hosting or on the road.
Wait and see how this plays out, I don't think East vs. West format is necessary any longer, I'd rather see the 2 best teams compete for the Grey Cup.
So will the Bombers include 2 playoff games as part of their season ticket package?
I do like the possibility of going to 2 home playoff games.
What's the point of even playing 18 games in the regular season, if playoffs are pretty much guaranteed?
Moving the schedule up to May Long, and ruining the November playoff/Grey Cup tradition is yet another bad move.
What's the incentive to play well during the season? Last year all the western teams would have made the grade, Ottawa would have been the odd team out.
Definitely hear ya on the regular season result's importance being severely diminished. And it's not like the NHL where you can have y/z v WC2 and have 7 games to sort out who's best statistically - in football it's any given Sunday and to give the worse teams a chance to knock out much better teams in a single game on a regular basis is problematic.
Real mixed bag here.
Quote from: Blue In BC on April 28, 2026, 07:33:41 PMWhat's the incentive to play well during the season? Last year all the western teams would have made the grade, Ottawa would have been the odd team out.
Well, you certainly want to be in the top 2 in your division. Generally, that will keep things competitive for most of the season until the possibility is mathematically eliminated. After that, it's a scramble to not be last for the bottom teams, which is a nice incentive not to tank.
(https://y.yarn.co/ada2b678-9a24-41b1-9a5c-4f68828eb05a_text.gif)
That's basically my reaction.
May Long Weekend kicking off the 2027 season will be interesting considering how finnicky the weather can be that time of year.
The new playoff format seems to make the season redundant, but I'll reserve judgement until we see how it actually plays out.
It could make for a very different looking CFL come next year.
And here's the official link for anyone interested: Coming in '27 (https://www.cfl.ca/2026/04/28/coming-in-27-a-cfl-season-built-for-summer-long-weekends-cfl-and-cflpa-champion-a-new-era-of-playoff-football/)
I like the changes generally but this IS way to much to fast.
But mistakes will be made and it will be interesting to see which teams pay the biggest prices?
I fear the league will basically alienate near everyone except the real die hards while the normies will care less.
Quote from: Jesse on April 28, 2026, 08:28:09 PMWell, you certainly want to be in the top 2 in your division. Generally, that will keep things competitive for most of the season until the possibility is mathematically eliminated. After that, it's a scramble to not be last for the bottom teams, which is a nice incentive not to tank.
this make sense. I like this angle.
Quote from: blue_gold_84 on April 28, 2026, 08:29:27 PM(https://y.yarn.co/ada2b678-9a24-41b1-9a5c-4f68828eb05a_text.gif)
That's basically my reaction.
May Long Weekend kicking off the 2027 season will be interesting considering how finnicky the weather can be that time of year.
The new playoff format seems to make the season redundant, but I'll reserve judgement until we see how it actually plays out.
It could make for a very different looking CFL come next year.
And here's the official link for anyone interested: Coming in '27 (https://www.cfl.ca/2026/04/28/coming-in-27-a-cfl-season-built-for-summer-long-weekends-cfl-and-cflpa-champion-a-new-era-of-playoff-football/)
May long weather in recent years is a disaster in Southern Manitoba. We pity our neighbours who start camping that weekend each year. :D
Wow is right. Wow as in incredibly dumb. Still, never underestimate the stupidity of the BOG who saw dollar signs when this suggestion was floated out there. What's obviously a play to gain more gate revenue and a larger tv contract with 4 more games during the season may not result in significantly more revenue as some might believe as the regular season will soon be irrelevant.
Teams hosting 2 home playoff games will face an increasing likelihood of one or both of those games selling rather poorly and this may result in minimal or zero profits for that specific game. Remember there are costs with operating the stadium on game days and additional costs for the players for those additional games.
Overall, league attendance may increase slightly for the league thanks to the additional 4 playoff games, but overall league profits (or rather losses since most teams lose a few million to several million per year) will likely see minimal, if any improvements, since per game average attendance will likely remain the same or even decline...you know...because the regular season games will be mostly meaningless.
To my knowledge, never in the history of pro sports has a league had 90% of its respective teams qualify for the playoffs. I think this is bush league and just shows how desperate the BOG is at this point. Throwing stuff at the wall and see what sticks - see also the rule changes.
I'm surprised there isn't more push back on the playoff format. It's really that 8 of the 9 teams makes the playoffs. If there were 12 teams in the league, I'd be okay with it.
Season starting earlier is great.
Next step one division. Let's go. Keep them coming.
Quote from: peg_city on April 28, 2026, 09:08:17 PMI'm surprised there isn't more push back on the playoff format.
Season starting earlier is great.
At this point, they should just change the name of the CFL, to the TFL (Toronto Football League), since all the decisions involving the CFL are made with executives in a boardroom in Toronto, all the rabid fans in CFL strongholds like Winnipeg and Regina be damned.
9 team league and only 8 teams make the playoffs.
Quote from: Pigskin on April 28, 2026, 09:19:01 PM9 team league and only 8 teams make the playoffs.
Never go full Ottawa.
I would be okay with one division.
Not that I want to stir the pot, okay kinda, but can someone point the differences between this format and the NFLs for me...
... ;D
I think they borrowed the play in idea from the NBA, the idea being that more teams are playing relevant games late in the season and are not eliminated from the playoffs. The problem is that with 8 teams makings it, if you have one terrible team (which we usually do), the other 8 teams will be guaranteed a playoff spot pretty early in the season. Games are still meaningful in a way though, since you are trying for a top 2 spot and also for home field advantage. A lot to digest... I think the word to describe how I feel is discombobulated.
Is it April 1st again? Making it ok to not win... Just lose baby. until November, then turn it on.
Edit: make that Oct 15. Duane Ford will still be finishing the turkey.
The CFL will be unrecognizable by next year.
Quote from: Pigskin on April 28, 2026, 09:19:01 PM9 team league and only 8 teams make the playoffs.
I think they dropped the ball on messaging here. With the "play/in" round, I think the idea was that 4 teams make the playoffs and that 4 additional teams have an opportunity to earn their way in.
But the 8 out of 9 teams making it in has taken on a life if its own on socials.
Quote from: Jesse on April 28, 2026, 10:34:23 PMI think they dropped the ball on messaging here. With the "play/in" round, I think the idea was that 4 teams make the playoffs and that 4 additional teams have an opportunity to earn their way in.
But the 8 out of 9 teams making it in has taken on a life if its own on socials.
It seems to be a bit different than I understood it listening to tsn now.
I'll reserve my judgment once I see it played out. Moving up the season is good for me as I travel in Nov often. May will be a crap shoot, weather can be all four seasons that time of year lol.
Initial thoughts:
Have training camp in Texas. Below zero too many mornings in April here.
Don't start Collaros until Oct. That is when the meaningful games start. Silly to risk injury in the exhibition portion of the season.
Chris Jones would excel in the new format. Always took him months to pick his team and then they would actually be good by late fall.
Quote from: jets4life on April 28, 2026, 09:16:55 PMAt this point, they should just change the name of the CFL, to the TFL (Toronto Football League), since all the decisions involving the CFL are made with executives in a boardroom in Toronto, all the rabid fans in CFL strongholds like Winnipeg and Regina be damned.
Good point, I wonder if they ran any of these changes past the GM's? At least it mentions they consulted with the CFLPA.
I don't see how letting another bottom feeding team into the playoffs makes the games more exciting, meaningful or competitive. Teams are going to be doing more injury prevention management than anything down the stretch once they can't get #1 or #2 spots in the division, then rest player until the playoffs. Good luck trying to get fans to the last games of the season when games are meaningless.
I really don't like anything i've heard since Stu came in as Commissioner.
Pretty much hate it. We've had so many "let's revamp the playoffs" discussions here over the last decade. Yet not one person ever suggested anything as nutso as these '27 ideas. Not sure this helps anything or solves anything that was actually deemed a "problem".
Seems like more of Johnston's "change for change's sake". If I didn't know better, I'd suspect he's a manchurian candidate installed to destroy the league.
I'll analyze more after I'm done watching the draft show (just started!), or at least the 1st 2 rounds.
Oh ya, why announce this on draft day? Why split the spotlight? He kinda did this with the clock/post/110 changes last year... announce controversial stuff when everyone is busy with other stuff. Pretty sure this isn't by accident. Might help deflect the blowback.
Quote from: Tecno on April 29, 2026, 01:22:34 AMOh ya, why announce this on draft day? Why split the spotlight? He kinda did this with the clock/post/110 changes last year... announce controversial stuff when everyone is busy with other stuff. Pretty sure this isn't by accident. Might help deflect the blowback.
Definitely not an accident.
Best case: get eyes back on the league on the day of the draft.
Conspiracy case: hiding the news to be quickly buried under the optimism of drat day.
Quote from: Tecno on April 29, 2026, 01:20:53 AMPretty much hate it. We've had so many "let's revamp the playoffs" discussions here over the last decade. Yet not one person ever suggested anything as nutso as these '27 ideas. Not sure this helps anything or solves anything that was actually deemed a "problem".
Seems like more of Johnston's "change for change's sake". If I didn't know better, I'd suspect he's a manchurian candidate installed to destroy the league.
I'll analyze more after I'm done watching the draft show (just started!), or at least the 1st 2 rounds.
Well if nothing else it keeps every team in the playoff race which could help attendance for bottom dwellers. Thinking about the Elks who started so poorly last season and were out of the playoffs early, not much reason for fans to attend games.
more playoff money for players..pro for them
more wear and tear on bodies
sell more winter wear with games in May
if the raptors or leafs make noise in their playoffs - good luck selling tickets in toronto.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on April 29, 2026, 01:37:48 AMWell if nothing else it keeps every team in the playoff race which could help attendance for bottom dwellers. Thinking about the Elks who started so poorly last season and were out of the playoffs early, not much reason for fans to attend games.
And not just at the bottom, teams in the middle will be chasing the top 2 spots all season long. I think every team is going to have something to play for for the entire season in most cases.
The good:
Moving the season up.
The bad & the ugly:
Everything else.
Quote from: Jesse on April 29, 2026, 01:43:18 AMAnd not just at the bottom, teams in the middle will be chasing the top 2 spots all season long.
Doubt it. Usually 1 or 2 teams pull way ahead in divisional rankings by Sept. Once it's clear you're not 1 or 2, I think teams will totally put the brakes on and just try to not be #9. I'm talking resting starters, easing wear & tear on everyone, reps for rookies/backups, getting as fresh as possible for the "play-ins".
This will be doubly so if there's a clear crap team, like OTT last year or EDM the year before. If the 9th can be identified early it takes all the pressure off the middle 4 teams.
I see this making teams try LESS, and having more "garbage season" games -- maybe an entire month (or 2!) of them! The only way it would work is if almost every team was pretty equal, which basically never happens.
Quote from: The Zipp on April 28, 2026, 06:55:54 PMsome really bad teams will be making the playoffs. some will say that is happening now though.
Ya, so to put it in perspective that would mean that in '25 EDM and TOR would have made the playoffs. You could literally suck as bad as TOR did all season and get a shot at the cup. Maybe TOR finally gets Kelly back for the 1st play-in game -- then what...
Quote from: The Zipp on April 28, 2026, 06:55:54 PMcan always tweak things if they become a disaster
That would be admitting mistakes and failure, and I see no indication Johnston is even capable of that. Pretty sure the only way we'll ever get any of the New Insanity backtracked is if they fire Johnston.
Quote from: Jesse on April 28, 2026, 06:46:35 PMMy initial reactions are mostly positive. I can accept the compromise between keeping the divisional structure
How are we "keeping the divisional structure". Now it's only team 1 & 2 in each division that get in and 3rd place teams (who used to stay in-division -- mostly) go to any random division? That's how I read it.
Quote from: Jesse on April 28, 2026, 06:46:35 PMThey might want to slow their roll on some things. Such massive changes are probably going to require trouble-shooting as new issues arise and they're not going to have the capacity to handle so many different things at once.
Totally agree. That's the worst aspect. They are steamrolling everyone all the time, and it's questionable the way they time & group "CFL happenings" to split our attention spans.
So how is the venue chosen with all of these new rules? Higher seed always gets the home game?
Could this not result in the East losing a playoff game venue? Even with the crossover, the old system always balanced the venues between E and W.
Might this result in teams trying to finagle their final 2-4 games to maybe get lower in the overall standings? Let's say you're a weak but "best of the rest" #2 in the W... might you throw your last couple of games to become "5th seed"? You get a home playoff game (Prez will like that) PLUS to don't have to play the #1 in your div who whooped your butt all season -- until maybe the GC!
Quote from: blue_or_die on April 28, 2026, 06:42:52 PM- While it's a little comical that 8/9 teams make the playoffs, it was already viewed as that way anyway so nbd.
"They laughed at us already because 6/9 made the playoffs."
"So they won't laugh at us
much more because 8/9 make the the playoffs!"
Winning!
Sweet Jeezus, I'm going to agree with Tecno. Another reason to dislike Stewjo.....
This is such a stupid GTA centric idea. Of the options available, this was the worst choice. 5-13 record will get into the playoffs. Embarrassing. One division, top 6 teams make it, 1 and 2 get buys. Way better.
Quote from: Tecno on April 29, 2026, 03:16:19 AMHow are we "keeping the divisional structure". Now it's only team 1 & 2 in each division that get in and 3rd place teams (who used to stay in-division -- mostly) go to any random division? That's how I read it.
Totally agree. That's the worst aspect. They are steamrolling everyone all the time, and it's questionable the way they time & group "CFL happenings" to split our attention spans.
If they maintain the divisional rivalries it's not quite fair, for example the Bombers could play the Riders 3 times and the Ti-Cats could face the RedBlacks 4 times and come out ahead in the end ranking.
Quote from: dd on April 29, 2026, 12:11:11 AMI don't see how letting another bottom feeding team into the playoffs makes the games more exciting, meaningful or competitive. Teams are going to be doing more injury prevention management than anything down the stretch once they can't get #1 or #2 spots in the division, then rest player until the playoffs. Good luck trying to get fans to the last games of the season when games are meaningless.
I really don't like anything i've heard since Stu came in as Commissioner.
Just wait until we hear the next "improvement" Johnston makes to the game.
The Grey Cup may be renamed the "Stewart Johnston Trophy for Athletic Excellence."
Quote from: The Zipp on April 29, 2026, 01:42:16 AMif the raptors or leafs make noise in their playoffs - good luck selling tickets in toronto.
I have a feeling that it would not make any difference, whether the Leafs or Raptors make a post season run. Toronto has over 7 million people in their metro area. Its at the point where it should not matter how other teams do. I don't think the Raptors run in 2019 hindered the Blue Jays at all.
People in Toronto just don't care about the CFL. If that idiot Johnston thinks the new changes are going to win over fans in Southern Ontario, he may want to get in touch with reality.
Quote from: Tecno on April 29, 2026, 03:06:40 AMDoubt it. Usually 1 or 2 teams pull way ahead in divisional rankings by Sept. Once it's clear you're not 1 or 2, I think teams will totally put the brakes on and just try to not be #9. I'm talking resting starters, easing wear & tear on everyone, reps for rookies/backups, getting as fresh as possible for the "play-ins".
This will be doubly so if there's a clear crap team, like OTT last year or EDM the year before. If the 9th can be identified early it takes all the pressure off the middle 4 teams.
I see this making teams try LESS, and having more "garbage season" games -- maybe an entire month (or 2!) of them! The only way it would work is if almost every team was pretty equal, which basically never happens.
Looking back at the final standings over the last few years, that's just not true. This will keep more teams in the mix because you're not just fighting for the top spot, you're fighting for the top 2 spots. And there's usually 2-3 teams near the bottom that can't give up because they won't want to be the odd team out.
Quote from: Waffler on April 28, 2026, 11:22:36 PMHave training camp in Texas. Below zero too many mornings in April here.
This morning's weather: 7am, -1°, Feels -4
warming up by 9am, the traditional starting time for practice: 2°,Feels -2
We are supposed to pick a team under these conditions?
Current temps in western Canada:
Regina, -4, Calgary -3, Edm -2
Quote from: Waffler on April 29, 2026, 11:08:49 AMThis morning's weather: 7am, -1°, Feels -4
warming up by 9am, the traditional starting time for practice: 2°,Feels -2
We are supposed to pick a team under these conditions?
Current temps in western Canada:
Regina, -4, Calgary -3, Edm -2
I will never stop ranting about having the year start on Canada Day weekend. It was perfect.
But I accept that I'm mostly in the minority on that one. Almost everyone agrees that moving up the season is a good idea as the single digit temps (whether they are above are below zero) feel much warmer now than they do in October.
The League makes a good point in making long weekends "events" and throwing more branding at them. It's a good idea.
As to the temps, the guys will obviously have use of the soccer complex as well as the field, so the prospects will have to deal with the conditions. It's part of being up here.
Quote from: Tecno on April 29, 2026, 03:21:18 AMSo how is the venue chosen with all of these new rules? Higher seed always gets the home game?
Could this not result in the East losing a playoff game venue? Even with the crossover, the old system always balanced the venues between E and W.
Might this result in teams trying to finagle their final 2-4 games to maybe get lower in the overall standings? Let's say you're a weak but "best of the rest" #2 in the W... might you throw your last couple of games to become "5th seed"? You get a home playoff game (Prez will like that) PLUS to don't have to play the #1 in your div who whooped your butt all season -- until maybe the GC!
It's already highlighted as to who hosts which games.
Round 1: 1st in each division will host 2nd in each division. 5th will host 8th, and 6th will host 7th seeds.
Round 2: Loser of the 1st vs 2nd games will host the winners of the other games.
Round 3: Winners of round 1 will host the winners of round 2.
If you finish 1 or 2 on the regular season you are guaranteed to host at least 1 playoff game. So I don't see your throwing games to host a playoff game theory playing out.
Quote from: bluengold204 on April 29, 2026, 12:43:43 PMIt's already highlighted as to who hosts which games.
Round 1: 1st in each division will host 2nd in each division. 5th will host 8th, and 6th will host 7th seeds.
Round 2: Loser of the 1st vs 2nd games will host the winners of the other games.
Round 3: Winners of round 1 will host the winners of round 2.
If you finish 1 or 2 on the regular season you are guaranteed to host at least 1 playoff game. So I don't see your throwing games to host a playoff game theory playing out.
Another point is that these are not segmented into divisions anymore. Teams will be reseeded after each round.
So you're not just competing to be the top two in your own division, you're also trying to have better records than the top 2 in the other division to ensure the best match-ups.
Quote from: bluengold204 on April 29, 2026, 12:43:43 PMIt's already highlighted as to who hosts which games.
Round 1: 1st in each division will host 2nd in each division. 5th will host 8th, and 6th will host 7th seeds.
Round 2: Loser of the 1st vs 2nd games will host the winners of the other games.
Round 3: Winners of round 1 will host the winners of round 2.
If you finish 1 or 2 on the regular season you are guaranteed to host at least 1 playoff game. So I don't see your throwing games to host a playoff game theory playing out.
What is going to happen a lot is the first place team will have to beat the 2nd place team twice (1st round and 3rd round). Hard to win back to backs. Advantages are that the 2nd place team will be on their 3rd playoff game by then and 1st place team is coming off a bye week.
Well I agree it's kinda of lame that every team except one will have a shot at winning it all I actually don't mind the format and don't feel there will too much tanking or resting of players as seeding matters more now.
Quote from: jets4life on April 29, 2026, 06:54:12 AMJust wait until we hear the next "improvement" Johnston makes to the game.
The Grey Cup may be renamed the "Stewart Johnston Trophy for Athletic Excellence in 'Canadian' Football."
FTFY
Quote from: Waffler on April 29, 2026, 01:04:19 PMWhat is going to happen a lot is the first place team will have to beat the 2nd place team twice (1st round and 3rd round). Hard to win back to backs. Advantages are that the 2nd place team will be on their 3rd playoff game by then and 1st place team is coming off a bye week.
Unless the records switch them up and suddenly you're playing the 2nd team out of the East.
This format is going to create new matchups. You're all assuming teams are staying in the East and west. Except the first round for the top 2 teams, that's is not the case.
Quote from: Waffler on April 29, 2026, 01:04:19 PMWhat is going to happen a lot is the first place team will have to beat the 2nd place team twice (1st round and 3rd round). Hard to win back to backs. Advantages are that the 2nd place team will be on their 3rd playoff game by then and 1st place team is coming off a bye week.
There's potential for that scenario to play out, but reseeding teams after each round can and most likely will counter act having to play the same team twice.
Quote from: Jesse on April 29, 2026, 01:15:59 PMUnless the records switch them up and suddenly you're playing the 2nd team out of the East.
This format is going to create new matchups. You're all assuming teams are staying in the East and west. Except the first round for the top 2 teams, that's is not the case.
Jesse gets it
Quote from: Tecno on April 29, 2026, 03:25:56 AM"They laughed at us already because 6/9 made the playoffs."
"So they won't laugh at us much more because 8/9 make the the playoffs!"
Winning!
Play ins... many leagues have them.
And what league has a 4 team playoff? To few games. These are money makers for the team/league.
Quote from: Jesse on April 29, 2026, 11:13:20 AMI will never stop ranting about having the year start on Canada Day weekend. It was perfect.
But I accept that I'm mostly in the minority on that one. Almost everyone agrees that moving up the season is a good idea as the single digit temps (whether they are above are below zero) feel much warmer now than they do in October.
You are not in the minority. Most people I know enjoyed the CFL when it started around the beginning of summer, and ended in the 3rd week of November. Starting on May Long is stupid, and breaks a century old tradition of playing the final game in November, by moving it up one month.
Quote from: theaardvark on April 29, 2026, 03:56:33 PMPlay ins... many leagues have them.
And what league has a 4 team playoff? To few games. These are money makers for the team/league.
They will not be "money makers," if attendance is dismal, which is pretty inevitable in most Canadian markets. Why would fans bother to see two teams with losing records (I.e 6th place host the 7th place team), with a very slim chance of winning two road games to get to the Grey Cup.
Hypothetically, how many people are going to pay to see an Edmonton (6-12) vs Hamilton opening round (7-11) game in Southern Ontario? It's not going to draw as many as the regular season, that is certain.
People who think there will be a spike in attendance for these games are in for a rude awakening.
Quote from: jets4life on April 29, 2026, 04:57:40 PMThey will not be "money makers," if attendance is dismal, which is pretty inevitable in most Canadian markets. Why would fans bother to see two teams with losing records (I.e 6th place host the 7th place team), with a very slim chance of winning two road games to get to the Grey Cup.
Hypothetically, how many people are going to pay to see an Edmonton (6-12) vs Hamilton opening round (7-11) game in Southern Ontario? It's not going to draw as many as the regular season, that is certain.
People who think there will be a spike in attendance for these games are in for a rude awakening.
I don't think anyone suggested a spike in attendance for the extra games, but there is now 4 additional play-offs within a whole extra week. That does represent more dollars and more ad revenue - at a time when the league is negotiating the new TV deal.
When all the previous changes occurred, people rightfully asked, how does this represent more fans or new revenue? These changes will have a direct impact on team and league revenue. Now and in the furture.
Quote from: Jesse on April 29, 2026, 01:02:53 PMAnother point is that these are not segmented into divisions anymore. Teams will be reseeded after each round.
So you're not just competing to be the top two in your own division, you're also trying to have better records than the top 2 in the other division to ensure the best match-ups.
The problem with "best matchups" is that there is less chance of playing a team that will traditionally draw well, if Winnipeg hosts one of these games. A game against Saskatchewan, Calgary, or Edmonton will be far more enticing to Bomber fans than playing Montreal or Ottawa in round 1.
Quote from: Jesse on April 29, 2026, 05:11:04 PMI don't think anyone suggested a spike in attendance for the extra games, but there is now 4 additional play-offs within a whole extra week. That does represent more dollars and more ad revenue - at a time when the league is negotiating the new TV deal.
When all the previous changes occurred, people rightfully asked, how does this represent more fans or new revenue? These changes will have a direct impact on team and league revenue. Now and in the furture.
You are assuming that the games will draw a considerable amount of fans. That's possible if the play-in is Winnipeg vs Edmonton or Saskatchewan. I can't see an Ottawa-Winnipeg game in Ottawa drawing over 10,000 fans. Nobody will want to bother with two team that at best, finished in 3rd place in their respective divisions, playing a mediocre team, with no real rivalry.
Quote from: jets4life on April 29, 2026, 05:11:51 PMThe problem with "best matchups" is that there is less chance of playing a team that will traditionally draw well, if Winnipeg hosts one of these games. A game against Saskatchewan, Calgary, or Edmonton will be far more enticing to Bomber fans than playing Montreal or Ottawa in round 1.
Yes and no.
There are rivalry games- like us and Saskatchewan, but there are also years where we play them in the preseaosn, 3 or 4 times in the regular season, and then again in the play-offs. A certain amount of fatigue sets in when you play the same team 5-6 times a season.
New match-ups are exciting too. They're less predictable and probably more entertaining for casual fans. Not to mention that, in this era, the tv draw is important as well. It's not solely about the gate anymore.
Quote from: jets4life on April 29, 2026, 05:15:00 PMYou are assuming that the games will draw a considerable amount of fans. That's possible if the play-in is Winnipeg vs Edmonton or Saskatchewan. I can't see an Ottawa-Winnipeg game in Ottawa drawing over 10,000 fans. Nobody will want to bother with two team that at best, finished in 3rd place in their respective divisions, playing a mediocre team, with no real rivalry.
In the playoffs fans will be cheering for a win over a competitive entertaining game, TV audience should be strong because most people are sitting at home late fall with nothing to do, nowhere to go.
Quote from: jets4life on April 29, 2026, 04:57:40 PMThey will not be "money makers," if attendance is dismal, which is pretty inevitable in most Canadian markets. Why would fans bother to see two teams with losing records (I.e 6th place host the 7th place team), with a very slim chance of winning two road games to get to the Grey Cup.
Hypothetically, how many people are going to pay to see an Edmonton (6-12) vs Hamilton opening round (7-11) game in Southern Ontario? It's not going to draw as many as the regular season, that is certain.
People who think there will be a spike in attendance for these games are in for a rude awakening.
They are "extra" games, and playoffs should draw good. The home teams will be the better team, and more likely to win, so there's that attraction, everyone likes a win.
I wonder what the paychecks are for these games...
Quote from: Jesse on April 29, 2026, 05:11:04 PMWhen all the previous changes occurred, people rightfully asked, how does this represent more fans or new revenue? These changes will have a direct impact on team and league revenue. Now and in the furture.
I remember back in 1993, the exact same thing was said about American expansion. "The CFL desperately needs the expansion fees. Not only that, it's more games for the league, which will generate more revenue, and it will increase TV revenue, and perhaps land the CFL on a major US networks now that there will be 5 American teams."
The end result was whatever money the league received in expansion fees, was offset by enormous losses from the new American franchises (sans Baltimore). When all is said and done, the CFL nearly folded,if it was not for the NFL coming to the rescue and bailing out the CFL.
So forgive me,if I am skeptical. I've already heard this song and dance 30 years ago. Only this time, with the new and "improved" changes to the field, it will backfire, and could lead to the demise of the league.
"Those who fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it."
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on April 29, 2026, 05:24:38 PMIn the playoffs fans will be cheering for a win over a competitive entertaining game, TV audience should be strong because most people are sitting at home late fall with nothing to do, nowhere to go.
....and turning into the NFL,since nobody will want to watch a 7-11 team play a 5-13 team, especially if it's an Eastern club vs a Western club. As an added "bonus" it will negatively affect regular season ratings and attendance, since there will be far less meaningful games.
Just take the NHL as an example. As a child, I watched the Jets in the old Smythe Division. 4 of 5 teams made the playoffs. There was little incentive for a mediocre team to really push in late season, and the drama was not usually there. Take for example 1987-88. The Jets were all alone in 3rd place with a 31-27-9 record, about 13 points below the Oilers and 13 points above the Kings. The Jets went on a 10 game winless streak in March, and ended up with a 33-36-11 record.
There was absolutely no push to urgency to turn things around. Fans even joked that the Jets were intentionally tanking, considering it was the first year that the Flames would win the division, and the punchline was that the Jets were deliberately losing to finish 4th and play Calgary, Once the NHL expanded to 30 teams, the race for the playoffs became far more exciting, and ratings went up, knowing that hated rivals were battling each other for that final playoff spots.
https://ottawacitizen.com/sports/football/montreal-alouettes/zurkowsky-cfl-steps-out-of-bounds-with-ludicrous-playoff-overhaul?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-ca
Respected columnist Herb Zurkowsky considers the format a farce. But even more surprising farther down in the same article is this nugget...
While we believe the revamped playoff system is carved in stone, we've already heard rumblings that some of Johnston's other 2027 bold moves — shortening the field to 100 from 110 yards, 15-yard end zones and goalposts being moved back — could be scrapped after severe public criticism.
All we wanted was a 10th team.....
what concerns me with this proposed extra round of playoff games is injuries happening in the 'nothing' first round game, where a team that has earned the right to be in the playoffs, loses its Qb or other valuable player and that will really compromise their ability to win games when it truly counts and a season's worth of effort is lost. And yes, injuries are part of football, but so is earning the right to be in the playoffs. This isn't curling, this is football, players are going to get hurt,
This idea stinks to high heavens and I can't wait until we get a new commissioner!!
Quote from: Waffler on April 29, 2026, 10:03:59 PMhttps://ottawacitizen.com/sports/football/montreal-alouettes/zurkowsky-cfl-steps-out-of-bounds-with-ludicrous-playoff-overhaul?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-ca
Respected columnist Herb Zurkowsky considers the format a farce. But even more surprising farther down in the same article is this nugget...
While we believe the revamped playoff system is carved in stone, we've already heard rumblings that some of Johnston's other 2027 bold moves — shortening the field to 100 from 110 yards, 15-yard end zones and goalposts being moved back — could be scrapped after severe public criticism.
Claims bombers played to empty seats when we sold out every game last year.
Interesting tidbit about the possibility of the Americanization changes not going through. Keeping my fingers crossed.
My son and his friends don't live and die with the bombers like I do, but go to games to socialize/rum hut. I think that's the way to get the next generation interested, they should get advice from Wade.
Quote from: jets4life on April 29, 2026, 05:15:00 PMYou are assuming that the games will draw a considerable amount of fans. That's possible if the play-in is Winnipeg vs Edmonton or Saskatchewan. I can't see an Ottawa-Winnipeg game in Ottawa drawing over 10,000 fans. Nobody will want to bother with two team that at best, finished in 3rd place in their respective divisions, playing a mediocre team, with no real rivalry.
Disagree all
Facts are presented in the graphic below, Ottawa will draw close or above these figures going forward, 10k was way off
Quote from: Waffler on April 29, 2026, 10:03:59 PMhttps://ottawacitizen.com/sports/football/montreal-alouettes/zurkowsky-cfl-steps-out-of-bounds-with-ludicrous-playoff-overhaul?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-ca
Respected columnist Herb Zurkowsky considers the format a farce. But even more surprising farther down in the same article is this nugget...
While we believe the revamped playoff system is carved in stone, we've already heard rumblings that some of Johnston's other 2027 bold moves — shortening the field to 100 from 110 yards, 15-yard end zones and goalposts being moved back — could be scrapped after severe public criticism.
herb has been getting more and more annoying/negative about everything. eats lemons for breakfast, lunch and dinner
this would be a great/fun playoff format for a 12 team league
Quote from: Waffler on April 29, 2026, 10:03:59 PMhttps://ottawacitizen.com/sports/football/montreal-alouettes/zurkowsky-cfl-steps-out-of-bounds-with-ludicrous-playoff-overhaul?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-ca
Respected columnist Herb Zurkowsky considers the format a farce. But even more surprising farther down in the same article is this nugget...
While we believe the revamped playoff system is carved in stone, we've already heard rumblings that some of Johnston's other 2027 bold moves — shortening the field to 100 from 110 yards, 15-yard end zones and goalposts being moved back — could be scrapped after severe public criticism.
Fans need to do anything humanly possible to save the league, from the dreaded Americanization of our beloved game. We should make petitions, boycott games, or even picked CFL offices. We have to do it now, before these changes ruin the league.
Literally no one is going to do any of that.
Quote from: jets4life on April 29, 2026, 11:06:35 PMFans need to do anything humanly possible to save the league, from the dreaded Americanization of our beloved game. We should make petitions, boycott games, or even picked CFL offices. We have to do it now, before these changes ruin the league.
Terrible idea, won't happen. While the changes are not perfect the league needs support more than ever. It will get sorted out.
[quote au
Quote from: Blueforlife on April 29, 2026, 11:42:04 PMTerrible idea, won't happen. While the changes are not perfect the league needs support more than ever. It will get sorted out.
I don't think you or others who either support (or accept) the new American-style field or rules, understand the loyalty most of the Canadian fan base has towards the CFL and our version of the game.
Just a suggestion. We should pin this thread, just to revisit it at the end of the 2027 season. I wish I was wrong but I can already sense that fans will be alienated, and some will stop coming to games. I predict a drop of 15% in attendance within 2 seasons of the dreaded new changes coming into effect.
We need to get rid of Stewart Johnston, and the rest of the band of fools responsible for destroying the Canadian game. We need to take back our league.
The best way to go about improving the bottom line of CFL clubs, is to market the product much better.
Quote from: Blueforlife on April 29, 2026, 11:42:04 PMTerrible idea, won't happen. While the changes are not perfect the league needs support more than ever. It will get sorted out.
If fans disagree they should absolutely be vocal about it. The league is not infallible and doesn't need blind support.
Quote from: The Zipp on April 29, 2026, 10:43:51 PMherb has been getting more and more annoying/negative about everything. eats lemons for breakfast, lunch and dinner
Herb should be the poster boy for mandatory retirement, I remember him being super negative and grouchy on the pre-game show with Bob Irving and that was 10 years ago!
Quote from: jets4life on April 30, 2026, 12:16:08 AMI don't think you or others who either support (or accept) the new American-style field or rules, understand the loyalty most of the Canadian fan base has towards the CFL and our version of the game.
Just a suggestion. We should pin this thread, just to revisit it at the end of the 2027 season. I wish I was wrong but I can already sense that fans will be alienated, and some will stop coming to games. I predict a drop of 15% in attendance within 2 seasons of the dreaded new changes coming into effect.
We need to get rid of Stewart Johnston, and the rest of the band of fools responsible for destroying the Canadian game. We need to take back our league.
The best way to go about improving the bottom line of CFL clubs, is to market the product much better.
I'll take that bet, paying 2 for 1 odds that attendance doesn't drop 15% in two years.
Quote from: Jesse on April 30, 2026, 12:16:33 AMIf fans disagree they should absolutely be vocal about it. The league is not infallible and doesn't need blind support.
It was suggested that we do the following:
We should make petitions, boycott games, or even picked CFL offices.
Petitions, sure. Other 2, hard pass.
You moved the needle on the narrative a wee bit there. Vocal sure.
Quote from: Blueforlife on April 30, 2026, 02:26:01 AMI'll take that bet, paying 2 for 1 odds that attendance doesn't drop 15% in two years.
You are on.
Quote from: Blueforlife on April 29, 2026, 11:42:04 PMTerrible idea, won't happen. While the changes are not perfect the league needs support more than ever. It will get sorted out.
This, X100.
The changes are part of an all or nothing play by the league.
There is no turning back. Support it and the league has a chance to survive.
Quote from: bomber beetle on April 30, 2026, 04:52:50 AMThis, X100.
The changes are part of an all or nothing play by the league.
There is no turning back. Support it and the league has a chance to survive.
That's ridiculous. Why should fans put down $4,000 (assuming two tickets, parking, concessions, etc) every year, for a watered-down version of the NFL? The CFL is a business. If they want to give the middle finger to loyal supporters, then let the league fold.
They should be marketing the existing product better.They are getting rid of the 55 yard line, moving the goal posts, changing the play clock, moving the season forward by 5 weeks, and making a convoluted playoff format that renders the regular season irrelevant.
No thanks. It's not the "CFL" any longer. May as well change the name of the league at this point. Although I am certain they probably will by 2029, and try again with American expansion. Why else would they make the field more inline with the American game. I will never spend a dime on the Bombers after 2026, unless Johnston is gone, and the new changes are dropped.
Quote from: bomber beetle on April 30, 2026, 04:52:50 AMThis, X100.
The changes are part of an all or nothing play by the league.
There is no turning back. Support it and the league has a chance to survive.
Of course there is. You could fire Johnston tomorrow, have the BoG or next commish say "we made a mistake", and undo the GP/110YL/playoff changes. Just blame it all on Johnston and say he went rogue.
Problem solved. Heck, even Johnston could come out and say he got it all wrong, but of course that's impossible for that self-toot-sniffer.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on April 29, 2026, 11:23:57 PMLiterally no one is going to do any of that.
They already did. Johnston got unceasing many-minute boos the entire time he was talking at the GC presentation @PAS/'26. No one stopped booing until he handed the cup to SSK.
If that was any sort of good measure of public opinion, more than 50% of the fans around me were booing. Way more than the 10-25% number they claim don't like the changes (in a rigged poll due to question wording, BTW).
It was brutal. And he deserved it.
Quote from: Jesse on April 29, 2026, 05:18:08 PMThere are rivalry games- like us and Saskatchewan, but there are also years where we play them in the preseaosn, 3 or 4 times in the regular season, and then again in the play-offs. A certain amount of fatigue sets in when you play the same team 5-6 times a season.
The fatigue is entirely dependent on whether you are winning or losing those games! Last season, when SSK kicked our butt almost every time, I did start to get green fatigue. But normally when we're kicking their butts I could have a season of just WPG vs SSK!
What will be guaranteed to be annoying though is if #1/#2 are always SSK/WPG and we
have to face them in the playoffs TWICE. That will totally SUCK ROCKS. If SSK is basically on par with us that makes getting to the cup extremely hard. And it could mean a "round 3 SF" is a brutal slobberknocker that leaves the winner wounded. And not many other-team fans will want to see a WPG/SSK matchup in both round 1 & 3!
If the E reverts to being clearly worse, which it basically did in '25, this will mean the GC is really the West round 3 SF. The actual GC then goes back to being a joke, where the E has to win via luck (like '22, '23 and possibly '24).
Quote from: jets4life on April 29, 2026, 04:57:40 PMThey will not be "money makers," if attendance is dismal, which is pretty inevitable in most Canadian markets.
The question isn't whether attendance will be dismal, the question will be can they put more butts in the seats than they did for their (maybe meaningless and slightly cold) Oct games. In most markets the answer is probably "yes".
If they beat their average, they win ($$).
Quote from: bluengold204 on April 29, 2026, 12:43:43 PMIt's already highlighted as to who hosts which games.
So it's guaranteed 6 of the 8 games are played in their respective division? Only the R1 "play-ins" can be in the "wrong" division. Right? I guess that's ok.
And the way the play-in seeding works it's basically random what side of the country hosts those games... unless the E is mega-weaker than the W and the last 3 place teams are always E. If that were to happen too many years in a row the E might make a stink the W always gets both play-in games.
Might teams purposely try to be #3 in-division (assuming the stronger division) instead of #2? Both #2 (if they lose) and #3 have 3 games to win, but #3 only has to beat the crap #8 team (easy peasy -- that was TOR in '25?!). Then you get to face the loser (worst?) of #1/#2. Only in the last game do you have to face the "best" in that division. That sure seems like the easier path than being #2 and getting mollywopped on twice by #1!!
The more I'm looking at the format, the more I'm wondering why there's any round 1 division "showdown" at all. That seems to be the worst aspect, making these play-them-twice scenarios as well as putting massive wear on players for basically no reason. The reg season would have WAY more meaning if you just ditched that game and gave #1/#2 the round 1 bye. Then #1 gets a R2 bye as well.
Quote from: jets4life on April 29, 2026, 06:54:12 AMThe Grey Cup may be renamed the "Stewart Johnston Trophy for Athletic Excellence."
Trophy will have a pull-string at the bottom. Yank it and let go and the cup lets out some random wormy sentence in that smarmy weaselly voice.
Pull... "next we're going to make the fields thinner!"
Pull... "watch me go to 11 men!"
Pull... "I'm improving your line of sight by 0.0012%!"
Quote from: bomber beetle on April 30, 2026, 04:52:50 AMThis, X100.
The changes are part of an all or nothing play by the league.
There is no turning back. Support it and the league has a chance to survive.
Love the attitude man
Quote from: jets4life on April 30, 2026, 05:17:10 AMThat's ridiculous. Why should fans put down $5,000 (assuming two tickets, parking, concessions, etc) every year, for a watered-down version of the NFL? The CFL is a business. If they want to give the middle finger to loyal supporters, then let the league fold.
They should be marketing the existing product better.They are getting rid of the 55 yard line, moving the goal posts, changing the play clock, moving the season forward by 5 weeks, and making a convoluted playoff format that renders the regular season irrelevant.
No thanks. It's not the "CFL" any longer. May as well change the name of the league at this point. Although I am certain they probably will by 2029, and try again with American expansion. Why else would they make the field more inline with the American game. I will never spend a dime on the Bombers after 2026, unless Johnston is gone, and the new changes are dropped.
We are not expanding to the US. Paying 3x odds on that.
The CFL is not a watered down version of the NFL.
I will support this great league forever. My buddy and I joke about getting wheel chair seats. Don't let the door hit you on your way out next year. Pick up some Jets seats, now there is a great team lol.
Quote from: Tecno on April 30, 2026, 08:17:58 AMSo it's guaranteed 6 of the 8 games are played in their respective division? Only the R1 "play-ins" can be in the "wrong" division. Right? I guess that's ok.
And the way the play-in seeding works it's basically random what side of the country hosts those games... unless the E is mega-weaker than the W and the last 3 place teams are always E. If that were to happen too many years in a row the E might make a stink the W always gets both play-in games.
Might teams purposely try to be #3 in-division (assuming the stronger division) instead of #2? Both #2 (if they lose) and #3 have 3 games to win, but #3 only has to beat the crap #8 team (easy peasy -- that was TOR in '25?!). Then you get to face the loser (worst?) of #1/#2. Only in the last game do you have to face the "best" in that division. That sure seems like the easier path than being #2 and getting mollywopped on twice by #1!!
The more I'm looking at the format, the more I'm wondering why there's any round 1 division "showdown" at all. That seems to be the worst aspect, making these play-them-twice scenarios as well as putting massive wear on players for basically no reason. The reg season would have WAY more meaning if you just ditched that game and gave #1/#2 the round 1 bye. Then #1 gets a R2 bye as well.
I don't think you really understand the format at all...
I think you are in the mindset that these are mostly division matchups when they are not. The only guaranteed divisional matchups are what they call the 'Division Showdown' games, where the 1st place team plays the 2nd place team in their respected divisions. All other matchups (the "Play Ins", Round 2, and Round 3) are based off of league standings not divisional standings.
It is not random how the playin seeding works and who hosts, you take the left over teams (from both divisions) that did not finish 1 and 2 in their divisions and seed them according to their season records they will be placed as seeds 5-8. The team with the best record will be Seed 5 and the team with the worst record will be 8 and thus play each other. The team with the second best record will become Seed 6 and the team with the second worst record will become Seed 7 and play each other. The teams with the higher seed will host.
Round 2 you will take the team that lost the Divisional Showdown games and play the winners of the Playin games. These teams will also be reseeded as well. For example in this round say the loser of the West Divisional Showdown now has the better record than the loser of the east Divisional Showdown and Seed 8 team won and advanced. They would then play each other, even if that Seed 8 team is from the east. This round is not division dependent anymore.
Round 3 similar the winners of the Divisional Showdown will play the winners from round 2. Again lets say the West Divisional Showdown winner has the better record than the East Divisional Showdown and by some miracle that Seed 8 team from the Playin is running the table and won their round 2 matchup. The West divisional showdown winner would play them, even if it is an eastern division team. Again this round is not division dependent.
If you stop and think about it, the format is actually pretty good. I honestly like it better than our current format as winning 1 game to advance to the final is kind of lame and could create some cross divisional matchups that we typically wouldn't see.
Quote from: Tecno on April 30, 2026, 07:57:39 AMThey already did. Johnston got unceasing many-minute boos the entire time he was talking at the GC presentation @PAS/'26. No one stopped booing until he handed the cup to SSK.
If that was any sort of good measure of public opinion, more than 50% of the fans around me were booing. Way more than the 10-25% number they claim don't like the changes (in a rigged poll due to question wording, BTW).
It was brutal. And he deserved it.
The number is closer to 75% from the polls I have seen.
Quote from: Tecno on April 30, 2026, 07:55:06 AMOf course there is. You could fire Johnston tomorrow, have the BoG or next commish say "we made a mistake", and undo the GP/110YL/playoff changes. Just blame it all on Johnston and say he went rogue.
Problem solved. Heck, even Johnston could come out and say he got it all wrong, but of course that's impossible for that self-toot-sniffer.
There must be team owners who believe they need these changes to have any chance of making a profit.
Reversing the decisions would involve more casualties than just Johnston. The league would not survive these casualties.
I'm 69, and I've been watching the CFL since I was 10, and this is the first time since I started that I'm actually wondering if there is any point in continuing. I feel like I'm watching the death of the CFL play out in slow motion.
The new rules suck. The new field sizes suck. The new playoff format SUCKS. The only point of the 18 game season is to remove 1 team? ***? We already have the same 9 teams playing each other up to 4 times a year. Now it could be up to 6 times, including playoffs, & the only time it will really matter is the Grey Cup.
5-8 and 6-7 playing games could both be hosted by the same division, but the winners of those go on the road the rest of the way.
Quote from: bluengold204 on April 30, 2026, 01:06:00 PMI don't think you really understand the format at all...
I think you are in the mindset that these are mostly division matchups when they are not. The only guaranteed divisional matchups are what they call the 'Division Showdown' games, where the 1st place team plays the 2nd place team in their respected divisions. All other matchups (the "Play Ins", Round 2, and Round 3) are based off of league standings not divisional standings.
It is not random how the playin seeding works and who hosts, you take the left over teams (from both divisions) that did not finish 1 and 2 in their divisions and seed them according to their season records they will be placed as seeds 5-8. The team with the best record will be Seed 5 and the team with the worst record will be 8 and thus play each other. The team with the second best record will become Seed 6 and the team with the second worst record will become Seed 7 and play each other. The teams with the higher seed will host.
Round 2 you will take the team that lost the Divisional Showdown games and play the winners of the Playin games. These teams will also be reseeded as well. For example in this round say the loser of the West Divisional Showdown now has the better record than the loser of the east Divisional Showdown and Seed 8 team won and advanced. They would then play each other, even if that Seed 8 team is from the east. This round is not division dependent anymore.
Round 3 similar the winners of the Divisional Showdown will play the winners from round 2. Again lets say the West Divisional Showdown winner has the better record than the East Divisional Showdown and by some miracle that Seed 8 team from the Playin is running the table and won their round 2 matchup. The West divisional showdown winner would play them, even if it is an eastern division team. Again this round is not division dependent.
If you stop and think about it, the format is actually pretty good. I honestly like it better than our current format as winning 1 game to advance to the final is kind of lame and could create some cross divisional matchups that we typically wouldn't see.
Thank you for this. I did not know that.
The graphics the league provided do not clearly indicate this but the wording does.
I agree, this is better than the current playoff format. It will guarantee that the best two teams always have a chance to advance to the Grey Cup game.
And it should eliminate most of the late season games where one or both teams are playing a nothing game.
Quote from: bomber beetle on April 30, 2026, 01:39:48 PMThere must be team owners who believe they need these changes to have any chance of making a profit.
Reversing the decisions would involve more casualties than just Johnston. The league would not survive these casualties.
The CFL's survivability hinges more on its financial stability in the short- and long-term than arbitrary wholesale changes to the game itself.
Whether said changes benefit the CFL or not remains to be seen. We're all just waiting to see how it unfolds, irrespective of our position on the changes.
Johnston isn't infallible and he'll likely become the fall guy should this not work out as he envisions.
Quote from: TBURGESS on April 30, 2026, 02:50:10 PMI'm 69, and I've been watching the CFL since I was 10, and this is the first time since I started that I'm actually wondering if there is any point in continuing. I feel like I'm watching the death of the CFL play out in slow motion.
The new rules suck. The new field sizes suck. The new playoff format SUCKS. The only point of the 18 game season is to remove 1 team? ***? We already have the same 9 teams playing each other up to 4 times a year. Now it could be up to 6 times, including playoffs, & the only time it will really matter is the Grey Cup.
I feel the exact same way. When I was a small child, my Grandparents bought me a third ticket at the 50 years line (West Side). They had tickets going back to Osborne Stadium, and were there in 53' when the new stadium opened. Before leaving to Alberta for over a decade I had season tickets for 20 years. I remember everything.
- Brockbusters
-84 Grey Cup
-Sean Salisbury
-Mike Riley leading us to 2 Grey Cups
-Tom Clements, Matt Dunigan, and Khari Jones
-Troy Westwood and the origins of the banjo bowl
-surviving the Rheinbold years
-Milt Stegal and the "catch"
-the record 18 game home winning streak 83-85
I love the Bombers, but the CFL executive directors are destroying our game. They need to be stopped NOW.
-
Do you actually remember "everything"?
The CFL in the 1950s:
Touchdowns were worth five points
Helmets were brand new inventions becoming mandatory only at the start of the decade
It wasn't even called the Canadian football league.
There's a ton more, shall I go on?
The truth? You can dislike the rules all you want but don't give me this BS argument that everything has stayed the same until now. The 50s and 60s were hugely transformational for football. Changes have been consistent and constant over time. Such is life.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on April 30, 2026, 10:19:38 PMThe truth? You can dislike the rules all you want but don't give me this BS argument that everything has stayed the same until now. The 50s and 60s were hugely transformational for football. Changes have been consistent and constant over time. Such is life.
How far are you going to go back in time. Why not tell us how Grey Cup games were played during World War 1 while You are at it. The CFL has made no major changes since the early 70s.
I've heard this spiel from you for several months. You just do not get it. The Bombers do not have a monopoly on entertainment in the city. The fact that only a small minority are in favor of the news changes should tell you something about the way the public feels about this.
You seem to have the attitude that "hey the CFL can do what they want. We are going to accept it unconditionally. Deal with it."
That is an incredibly unwise strategy. You do realize that there is a good chance that people will hate the new changes so much that they will be of the opinion "why should we shell out hundreds of dollars per game to see this product that is vastly inferior to what the CFL was for the past 50 years?'
People will begin to vote with their wallets. There are plenty of other entertainment options in the city. The Goldeyes. The Sea Bears. The Moose. Concerts. The Concert Hall. The RWB. Etc.
Even the Jets are finding out that there is a limit as to how loyal people are, when it comes to buying tickets to see the team. True North has been notoriously bad dealing with season tickets holders. I can tell you first hand that other cities are doing a much better job selling the product to their respective cities.
The CFL can do whatever they please, but come 2027, I guarantee some fans will be put off with the CFL giving the middle finger to hardcore fans, and will being to lose them for good. Judging by fan reaction, this will not end well.
Quote from: jets4life on May 01, 2026, 01:18:40 AMHow far are you going to go back in time. Why not tell us how Grey Cup games were played during World War 1 while You are at it. The CFL has made no major changes since the early 70s.
I've heard this spiel from you for several months. You just do not get it. The Bombers do not have a monopoly on entertainment in the city. The fact that only a small minority are in favor of the news changes should tell you something about the way the public feels about this.
You seem to have the attitude that "hey the CFL can do what they want. We are going to accept it unconditionally. Deal with it."
That is an incredibly unwise strategy. You do realize that there is a good chance that people will hate the new changes so much that they will be of the opinion "why should we shell out hundreds of dollars per game to see this product that is vastly inferior to what the CFL was for the past 50 years?'
People will begin to vote with their wallets. There are plenty of other entertainment options in the city. The Goldeyes. The Sea Bears. The Moose. Concerts. The Concert Hall. The RWB. Etc.
Even the Jets are finding out that there is a limit as to how loyal people are, when it comes to buying tickets to see the team. True North has been notoriously bad dealing with season tickets holders. I can tell you first hand that other cities are doing a much better job selling the product to their respective cities.
The CFL can do whatever they please, but come 2027, I guarantee some fans will be put off with the CFL giving the middle finger to hardcore fans, and will being to lose them for good. Judging by fan reaction, this will not end well.
Or none of that will happen and the league will continue on like it has for over a hundred years.
The door is that way.
Quote from: bomber beetle on April 30, 2026, 01:39:48 PMThere must be team owners who believe they need these changes to have any chance of making a profit.
Reversing the decisions would involve more casualties than just Johnston. The league would not survive these casualties.
Hogwash. The way it's being presented to the public at this moment is this is 99% Johnston. Whether it's true or not is irrelevant. Should 25% of STH cancel in '27 (ya, won't happen, but just imagine) then they'll oust Johston so fast it'll spin the GPs right back to the 0YL.
He's readymade for it as even if you love the changes you probably suspect he is like a used car salesman. He's eminently unlikable. A far cry from everyone's affable Uncle, Unca 'Brosie.
Quote from: bomber beetle on April 30, 2026, 01:39:48 PMThere must be team owners who believe they need these changes to have any chance of making a profit.
Reversing the decisions would involve more casualties than just Johnston. The league would not survive these casualties.
The enigma is that league revenues and the salary cap have gone up the past 2 seasons, but nobody will explain how that happened or what it means. Is this CFL gloom just a case of team owners always hoping for higher returns, cause I don't see them increasing spending if their revenue is truly in the red.
Quote from: bluengold204 on April 30, 2026, 01:06:00 PMI don't think you really understand the format at all...
I do. Give my post a 2nd read.
Quote from: bluengold204 on April 30, 2026, 01:06:00 PMI think you are in the mindset that these are mostly division matchups when they are not. The only guaranteed divisional matchups are what they call the 'Division Showdown' games, where the 1st place team plays the 2nd place team in their respected divisions. All other matchups (the "Play Ins", Round 2, and Round 3) are based off of league standings not divisional standings.
I wasn't talking who plays, I was talking where games are
played. Venues. As I said, 6 of 8 games are hosted in their respective division, regardless of any seeds or play-in results or anything else. Only 2 games
might be played outside their division (the 2 play-in games). If the E is decent it'll work out to 50/50 most years. If the E stinks (as is the norm) both playins could be in the W.
As such,
the venue for games is still at least 75% "divisional" (up to 100%, and average probably 88%).
Quote from: bluengold204 on April 30, 2026, 01:06:00 PMIt is not random how the playin seeding works and who hosts, you take the left over teams (from both divisions) that did not finish 1 and 2 in their divisions and seed them according to their season records they will be placed as seeds 5-8.
Again, I was referencing the 2 "venue up for grabs" play-in games. If E/W is pretty even, it will indeed
appear very "random" as to who is hosting those games. There may be 0 or 1 wins difference between #5/#6, #6/#7, #7/#8. Trying to figure out the seed in these middling teams will be impossible until probably the final week games are done.
Quote from: bluengold204 on April 30, 2026, 01:06:00 PMIf you stop and think about it, the format is actually pretty good. I honestly like it better than our current format as winning 1 game to advance to the final is kind of lame and could create some cross divisional matchups that we typically wouldn't see.
I like the win-1 to make GC. It's your reward for being the most consistent winner all year. It puts mega-emphasis on trying to win up until the end if the standings are close (like WPG/SSK in '24).
If most new playoff sequences end up being #1 & #2 facing each other twice, then it starts to smell like hockey or any other "best X of Y" format. I hate that. I love the sudden-death lose & go home aspect to football. I don't want to watch 7-game series like I'm a MLB fan, and players don't want to (and can't) play that many by that time of year -- it remains to be seen if they can even pull off the extra playoff game per team. Some teams will be on their 4th game in the Grey Cup vs 2 in the current format!
It also makes for a lot more upsets. The norm in the CFL is most years the #1 in division go to the cup, as seems rational and fair. Sometimes the #2 (usually due to injury or an injury-return). Rarely the #3. Now the #4 in each division has about as much chance as the #3 used to.
As for cross-divisional matchups -- those are almost always horrible draws for butts in seats. WPGers want to pay to see vs SSK or vs BC or vs CGY. Only the uber fans want to see us vs OTT or MTL. Even in the no-attendance E they like their rivalries. They want to beat up the "bad guys" from the S.Ontario/W-Quebec area. MTL fans didn't turn out in droves to see them beat us in the xover last season...
But I respect your opinion that you like it as to each his own. Doesn't mean it'll help the league or make the fans happier. And it may create hidden incentives to finagle and/or throw things to get a better setup (like my #3 being preferred to #2 concept). Or what about purposely throwing the round-1, just make sure you injure the other QB before you're done... beat a 5-8 team next week and then return to clean up the no-QB team.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 01, 2026, 06:24:26 AMThe enigma is that league revenues and the salary cap have gone up the past 2 seasons, but nobody will explain how that happened or what it means. Is this CFL gloom just a case of team owners always hoping for higher returns, cause I don't see them increasing spending if their revenue is truly in the red.
Add in the fact that when you own a business you can pay whoever you want whatever you want. I run my own business. If I want to reduce business "profit" (for tax reasons or whatever) I can simply pay myself more at the end of that year. All private CFL owners can do that too. They could have $2M profit that year and pay themselves $3M and say "oops, my team is losing money again!". It's all meaningless.
Or they can pay any staff member / position any extra they want in the same manner, as long as that position isn't part of any cap (coach cap, player cap). Is the Prez on the coach cap?? No? Pay your Prez $1M instead of $300k. Boom, you're now a "we lost money waaaah!" team.
Revenue is a better indicator of team financial health. Peg that against an average of expenses for the last 5 years or whatever. That will tell you more.
In this sense, the community owned teams are "better" because they are more transparent having to open the books to the public and answer to their BoG. I'm not against private ownership, but I'm totally against them screaming "poor"! You bought a CFL team, what did you expect, suck it up or sell it. None of these guys are stupid.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 01, 2026, 06:24:26 AMThe enigma is that league revenues and the salary cap have gone up the past 2 seasons, but nobody will explain how that happened or what it means. Is this CFL gloom just a case of team owners always hoping for higher returns, cause I don't see them increasing spending if their revenue is truly in the red.
Revenue growth is a lagging indicator which means that the groundwork was done in previous seasons. I.e. revenue growth is from the Ambrosie era. My guess would be gambling revenue.
Profits are harder to evaluate because only 2 teams open their books (WPG & SSK). The media keeps citing old information that the other 7 teams are losing money.
This offseason we have heard that Montreal is now in a break even position.
In Calgary, if not for a rain game they would have moved from the red to the black. So they are close to even.
I would not be surprised if Hamilton is in the black as well.
Quote from: jets4life on May 01, 2026, 01:18:40 AMHow far are you going to go back in time. Why not tell us how Grey Cup games were played during World War 1 while You are at it. The CFL has made no major changes since the early 70s.
I've heard this spiel from you for several months. You just do not get it. The Bombers do not have a monopoly on entertainment in the city. The fact that only a small minority are in favor of the news changes should tell you something about the way the public feels about this.
You seem to have the attitude that "hey the CFL can do what they want. We are going to accept it unconditionally. Deal with it."
That is an incredibly unwise strategy. You do realize that there is a good chance that people will hate the new changes so much that they will be of the opinion "why should we shell out hundreds of dollars per game to see this product that is vastly inferior to what the CFL was for the past 50 years?'
People will begin to vote with their wallets. There are plenty of other entertainment options in the city. The Goldeyes. The Sea Bears. The Moose. Concerts. The Concert Hall. The RWB. Etc.
Even the Jets are finding out that there is a limit as to how loyal people are, when it comes to buying tickets to see the team. True North has been notoriously bad dealing with season tickets holders. I can tell you first hand that other cities are doing a much better job selling the product to their respective cities.
The CFL can do whatever they please, but come 2027, I guarantee some fans will be put off with the CFL giving the middle finger to hardcore fans, and will being to lose them for good. Judging by fan reaction, this will not end well.
People in WPG who go to the bomber games aren't going to stop so they can go to the RWB or art gallery, even Sea bear games. This isn't a one or the other situation like the Jets, where the cost is so high most people can't bring their families. Hundreds of dollars on a Bomber game is a bit of stretch. Maybe if they are there to party, and again..if they are there for that. There are no other options in the city that provide the value and atmosphere of a Bomber game.
And while I'm not a huge fan of the changes to the game, your argument that the league hasn't made any major changes since the 70's kind of works against you. The league isn't in a good spot right now. We've heard time and time again that changes are needed if the league is going to survive. And while I think it's ridiculous that people would rather see it fold, the $$ invested across the country from all levels of government make that highly unlikely to happen. The changes are coming. And I can't fathom so called "hardcore CFL Fans" giving up on the league because of them. That doesn't make sense to me. And with all due respect, a lot of that is coming from people who aren't exactly the leagues target audience right now. There are a lot of grey hairs complaining and being loud. But if you get off SM and the "polls" (which lets be honest are about as useful as wet toilet paper) there are plenty of people who like the changes coming. I know, because I'm constantly telling them that moving the goal posts sucks.
I've said that I don't like this or that rule change along the way, but I've never said that it would stop me from watching every game on TV, something I've done for almost 60 years.
This round of changes are different. They move the CFL away from what it's always been... A quirky, truly Canadian version of the game towards a more US-palatable version of the game. The timing is staggeringly horrible. The US has declared economic war on us and Canadian nationalism is at an all-time high.
The stupid playoff structure is kinda the last straw that broke the camel's back. 18 games to eliminate 1 team. 4 'playoff' games in the first round to eliminate the 2 who shouldn't be in the playoffs in the first place. The top 4 teams move on, win or lose. Playing the same team 1 extra time.
For those who say that I'm just complaining and not offering any solutions, here are the rule changes that I'd like to have seen... None. They don't make the game better. Here is the playoff structure I'd like to have seen. No divisions; top 6 teams make the playoffs etc.
Quote from: TBURGESS on May 01, 2026, 03:05:02 PMI've said that I don't like this or that rule change along the way, but I've never said that it would stop me from watching every game on TV, something I've done for almost 60 years.
This round of changes are different. They move the CFL away from what it's always been... A quirky, truly Canadian version of the game towards a more US-palatable version of the game. The timing is staggeringly horrible. The US has declared economic war on us and Canadian nationalism is at an all-time high.
The stupid playoff structure is kinda the last straw that broke the camel's back. 18 games to eliminate 1 team. 4 'playoff' games in the first round to eliminate the 2 who shouldn't be in the playoffs in the first place. The top 4 teams move on, win or lose. Playing the same team 1 extra time.
For those who say that I'm just complaining and not offering any solutions, here are the rule changes that I'd like to have seen... None. They don't make the game better. Here is the playoff structure I'd like to have seen. No divisions; top 6 teams make the playoffs etc.
You don't have to like it, but you're not the target audience these changes are meant to appeal to.
And I'm not going to lie, this made me laugh - For those who say that I'm just complaining and not offering any solutions, here are the rule changes that I'd like to have seen... None.
Quote from: BIGBLUE204 on May 01, 2026, 03:15:59 PMYou don't have to like it, but you're not the target audience these changes are meant to appeal to.
And I'm not going to lie, this made me laugh - For those who say that I'm just complaining and not offering any solutions, here are the rule changes that I'd like to have seen... None.
Who is the target audience if not the fans of the CFL & how do the rule changes bring in non-fans?
What's funny, to me, is thinking that any rule changes are going to magically help the situation. If you think that these rule changes help, please expand on how.
There are a few rules I'd like to change, knowing that they won't help put fans in the stands.
1. Only 2 types of players: Canadians and imports, and it doesn't matter what position you play. All these different designations are dumb.
2. X number of Canadians get a guaranteed starting spot, with X being less than today. Better players make better games. If the CFL ever expands to the US again, the ratio won't apply for the US teams anyway.
3. Go to a single division. We don't need the antiquated East Vs West format.
Quote from: TBURGESS on May 01, 2026, 04:16:20 PMWho is the target audience if not the fans of the CFL & how do the rule changes bring in non-fans?
What's funny, to me, is thinking that any rule changes are going to magically help the situation. If you think that these rule changes help, please expand on how.
There are a few rules I'd like to change, knowing that they won't help put fans in the stands.
1. Only 2 types of players: Canadians and imports, and it doesn't matter what position you play. All these different designations are dumb.
2. X number of Canadians get a guaranteed starting spot, with X being less than today. Better players make better games. If the CFL ever expands to the US again, the ratio won't apply for the US teams anyway.
3. Go to a single division. We don't need the antiquated East Vs West format.
Obviously many, but not all, rule changes are intended to improve the on field product.
You simultaneously say you don't believe that they can do so, and then you go on to suggest rule changes anyway.
It makes no sense. It never makes any sense.
All companies, generally speaking, review and upgrade their products and services on a regular cadence. Yes, sports leagues too. Some of them have very recently changed the exact thing the CFL just did: playoff format.
You folks move the goalposts more aggressively than the CFL ever could.
Well, if making people talk is one of the goals, its working to a tee.
Playoff structure is better, top teams can get 2 home playoff games, and if you think the regular season doesn't matter, right there is your payoff.
The fact that the 2nd and 3r worst teams in the league could actually meet in the GC is kinda screwy, but that's not going to happen.
Win your division, and you get the best road to the cup, and a second chance if you have a bad first game.
2nd in the division, you still get at least one home game.
8 out of 9 players are going to get some playoff money.
It's kinda weird, but no doubt they put a lot of thought into it, and I think its going to be fun. Kinda like they looked at curling and took some pointers.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 01, 2026, 06:24:26 AMThe enigma is that league revenues and the salary cap have gone up the past 2 seasons, but nobody will explain how that happened or what it means. Is this CFL gloom just a case of team owners always hoping for higher returns, cause I don't see them increasing spending if their revenue is truly in the red.
I believe there is an agreement with the players' association whereby when revenues reach certain levels the players get a cut. Something like that.
The problem is that expenses are going up at the same rate if not higher.
Quote from: Stats Junkie on May 01, 2026, 06:50:59 AMRevenue growth is a lagging indicator which means that the groundwork was done in previous seasons. I.e. revenue growth is from the Ambrosie era. My guess would be gambling revenue.
Profits are harder to evaluate because only 2 teams open their books (WPG & SSK). The media keeps citing old information that the other 7 teams are losing money.
This offseason we have heard that Montreal is now in a break even position.
In Calgary, if not for a rain game they would have moved from the red to the black. So they are close to even.
I would not be surprised if Hamilton is in the black as well.
Teams have good years and almost break even.
For most teams, that is the ceiling.
A few bad years and millions are lost.
The league needs to find a way to have at least seven of nine teams making a decent profit consistently.
Quote from: bomber beetle on May 01, 2026, 05:11:06 PMI believe there is an agreement with the players' association whereby when revenues reach certain levels the players get a cut. Something like that.
The problem is that expenses are going up at the same rate if not higher.
According to the CFLPA they had to fight tooth and nail to get that late payment from the CFL last season, so I guess the breakdown is it's not a healthy relationship if one side is trying to screw the other.
Quote from: bomber beetle on May 01, 2026, 05:18:30 PMTeams have good years and almost break even.
For most teams, that is the ceiling.
A few bad years and millions are lost.
The league needs to find a way to have at least seven of nine teams making money consistently.
OK, lets make it so that 8 of 9 teams make the playoffs. So that even the final game of the year might have playoff consequences. No more "meaniningless" home games in September, having already been eliminated.
Ticket sales are important, and STH will fill a large number of seats, but actually getting them out to the game to sell concessions to, and selling tickets and putting butts in the seats that would stay home if the team had been eliminated is a little gravy on the season.
Quote from: TBURGESS on May 01, 2026, 04:16:20 PMWho is the target audience if not the fans of the CFL & how do the rule changes bring in non-fans?
What's funny, to me, is thinking that any rule changes are going to magically help the situation. If you think that these rule changes help, please expand on how.
There are a few rules I'd like to change, knowing that they won't help put fans in the stands.
1. Only 2 types of players: Canadians and imports, and it doesn't matter what position you play. All these different designations are dumb.
2. X number of Canadians get a guaranteed starting spot, with X being less than today. Better players make better games. If the CFL ever expands to the US again, the ratio won't apply for the US teams anyway.
3. Go to a single division. We don't need the antiquated East Vs West format.
The target audience is people who don't have the grey hair me and you do.
I don't know if anyone thinks the rule changes are a magical solution. I've not heard anyone, especially from the league suggest that. And if they have it's purely speculation. Rule changes for the most part don't bring in fans. I don't even like most of the rule changes coming. I do like the new playoff format, mostly because it's more football and I'll never say no to more football, especially more CFL football.
I 100% believe the changes to the on field game, and the playoff format are long plays to increase revenue and attract investors while making it easier to get an expansion team, if not multiple, within a decade. If it means I am going to be forced to watch more football, that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make. Will all this stuff work? I have no idea, I don't know what the head office knows, I don't know what their targets are financially. I know CFL stands are empty across the league and trying nothing is a great way to make sure that continues.
I don't think anyone disagrees that change needs to come.
I think the debate is and always will be, how much and how fast.
Tweaks aren't going to change the bottom line, but changes will. And the league is betting on these changes to improve the bottom line.
We still have 3 downs, 12 men, a 65 yard wide field, waggle, and ratio. This is a visibly different product from US football, and uniquely Canadian in the makeup of players.
We tried the US expansion, where we lost ratio, lost the draft, and had just an ever changing list of players no one bonded with. CFL-US was just another minor league, that was quirky to boot.
These changes are designed to make the game more modern, faster, more offense. The league maintains its qwirkiness that makes it easier for it to have die hard fans, like me, who watch CFL but not NFL. I am a tiny minority, but us weird fans can be the difference between red and black ink.
The earlier start date could be a big deal too.
I know many people (most of whom are getting older) that dropped their season tickets because they do not want to go in late October and November.
In 2027 the regular season will end on October 9th.
Long term it should be easier to maintain season ticket holders and also to attract casual fans to the late season games.
Add one more team to the league and I think we will see the Grey Cup moved to mid October. (Perfect!)
The golden age of the CFL, when BC and Toronto got 50K fans in the stands, is long gone, and it's not coming back & no rule changes are going to change that.
Change for change's sake doesn't do anything except piss off the grey-haired fans like me.
Calling any game that isn't lose and go home a playoff game is just wrong.
Changing from division-based ranking to non-division-based after the first week of playoff games is absurd.
If the rule changes aren't to put more fans in the stands, then what good are they?
Two teams get a playoff game that they didn't get before. That means paying the players and the travel for an extra week in seasons where you have little to no chance of making the grey cup. How does that help the financial success of those teams?
I'd argue that the CFL needs to make changes other than to look for more teams, which would bring more fans in & expand the CFL's reach and 'fix' part of the playing the same teams too many times problem. I'd also argue that that the changes the CFL has made are more likely to bring the death of the CFL sooner rather than 'saving it'.
Quote from: TBURGESS on May 01, 2026, 07:39:34 PMThe golden age of the CFL, when BC and Toronto got 50K fans in the stands, is long gone, and it's not coming back & no rule changes are going to change that.
Change for change's sake doesn't do anything except piss off the grey-haired fans like me.
Calling any game that isn't lose and go home a playoff game is just wrong.
Changing from division-based ranking to non-division-based after the first week of playoff games is absurd.
If the rule changes aren't to put more fans in the stands, then what good are they?
Two teams get a playoff game that they didn't get before. That means paying the players and the travel for an extra week in seasons where you have little to no chance of making the grey cup. How does that help the financial success of those teams?
I'd argue that the CFL needs to make changes other than to look for more teams, which would bring more fans in & expand the CFL's reach and 'fix' part of the playing the same teams too many times problem. I'd also argue that that the changes the CFL has made are more likely to bring the death of the CFL sooner rather than 'saving it'.
Unfortunately the golden age of the CFL also included limited access to the NFL product. Back in the day it didn't make much sense to be a fan of an NFL club as you'd only got to see them once or twice a year on TV. Some crazy Canadians now buy season tickets so they can fly into every home game, over time we've accepted a distorted reality that is out of wack, but it looks like we are in for a correction.
Quote from: theaardvark on May 01, 2026, 06:15:04 PMI don't think anyone disagrees that change needs to come.
I do. A lot will depend on your political and life philosophy.
I hate change for change's sake, or just for shock value, or just to say "see I'm doing something"!
Johnston can ruin the entire CFL, make it go broke in 2 more years, and walk away with a nice golden parachute & pension, and his next sleazy MBA job. He doesn't care. No skin off his nose.
Quote from: BIGBLUE204 on May 01, 2026, 05:57:23 PMThe target audience is people who don't have the grey hair me and you do.
Except the 45+ crowd just happens to be the huge majority of the loyal STHs. Until they are all dead you can't just ignore them and tick them off with unwanted changes.
Quote from: TBURGESS on May 01, 2026, 03:05:02 PMFor those who say that I'm just complaining and not offering any solutions, here are the rule changes that I'd like to have seen... None.
I agree... except for one: tandem blocking (eliminate or enforce, but not neither!) ;D ;D
In other words, I want rule tweaks to actual in-game rules, not wild fundamental changes.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 02, 2026, 02:10:17 AMUnfortunately the golden age of the CFL also included limited access to the NFL product. Back in the day it didn't make much sense to be a fan of an NFL club as you'd only got to see them once or twice a year on TV. Some crazy Canadians now buy season tickets so they can fly into every home game, over time we've accepted a distorted reality that is out of wack, but it looks like we are in for a correction.
When was this...just curious. Around 1984, I could see at least half of the 49ers and Vikings games on the American channels, which happened to be my 2 favorite teams of the 80s. Was it different in the 70s?
I just Googled the American TV deal in place at the time. The NFL negotiated with the big 3 networks (ABC, NBC, and CBS) in 1982, and struck a 5 year TV deal. The Golden age of CFL would have been 1977-83,I assume?
NBC (Channel 4) would televise AFC games
CBS (Channel 6) would televise NFC games
ABC (Channel 8 until 1986) would televise Monday Night Football
I know that Channel 12 (CKND TV) would be the Canadian network mainly responsible for televising the NFL for the entire duration of the 80s. The games would usually go from noon to evening. I think CTV (Channel 5) also showed NFL games, IIRC. I'm pretty sure MTN Channel 8 (debuted in Winnipeg in 86) also showed NFL games.
In 1989, TSN became affordable to both sides of the river (Videon and Greater Winnipeg Cable), and with it I believe they showed a Sunday Night Game. Then of course, with the cable TV boom, and FOX outbidding CBS in 1994 for rights to the NFC games, people could pretty much watch the majority of games for any team.
Quote from: jets4life on May 02, 2026, 04:55:26 AMWhen was this...just curious. Around 1984, I could see at least half of the 49ers and Vikings games on the American channels, which happened to be my 2 favorite teams of the 80s. Was it different in the 70s?
I just Googled the American TV deal in place at the time. The NFL negotiated with the big 3 networks (ABC, NBC, and CBS) in 1982, and struck a 5 year TV deal. The Golden age of CFL would have been 1977-83,I assume?
NBC (Channel 4) would televise AFC games
CBS (Channel 6) would televise NFC games
ABC (Channel 8 until 1986) would televise Monday Night Football
I know that Channel 12 (CKND TV) would be the Canadian network mainly responsible for televising the NFL for the entire duration of the 80s. The games would usually go from noon to evening. I think CTV (Channel 5) also showed NFL games, IIRC. I'm pretty sure MTN Channel 8 (debuted in Winnipeg in 86) also showed NFL games.
In 1989, TSN became affordable to both sides of the river (Videon and Greater Winnipeg Cable), and with it I believe they showed a Sunday Night Game. Then of course, with the cable TV boom, and FOX outbidding CBS in 1994 for rights to the NFC games, people could pretty much watch the majority of games for any team.
Need to go back to a time before cable when we only had 3 channels on TV, early to mid 70's would have seen peak attendance for Argos, Als and the Esks. Free trade kicked down the door to American culture.
Quote from: jets4life on May 02, 2026, 04:55:26 AMNBC (Channel 4) would televise AFC games
CBS (Channel 6) would televise NFC games
ABC (Channel 8 until 1986) would televise Monday Night Football
This is true. at the time they played only Sunday afternoon and Monday night. Literally there would be three games on per week. The highlight package Cosell did Monday was the only way you would see some teams at all.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 02, 2026, 04:29:51 PMNeed to go back to a time before cable when we only had 3 channels on TV, early to mid 70's would have seen peak attendance for Argos, Als and the Esks. Free trade kicked down the door to American culture.
Peak attendance for the Alouettes and Argos peaked in the late 70s. Eskimo attendance peaked in 1983.
We have to keep in mind that Montreal did not play in Olympic Stadium until 1977 (first full year), and Edmonton did not play in Commonwealth stadium until 1978, and even then, the stadium was not full expanded, which would occur in the early 80s, at 60,000. Toronto peaked in the late 70s.
In the first half of the 70s, Edmonton and Montreal did not have the capacity to draw huge crowds.
Montreal peaked in 1977 (59,525/game)
Toronto peaked in 1976 (47,356/game)
Edmonton peaked in 1982 (57,901/game)
BC peaked in 1986 (46,638/game)
Winnipeg peaked in 2025 (32,343/game)
Saskatchewan peaked in 2013 (37,503/game)
Calgary peaked in 2009 (36,502/game)
Ottawa peaked in 1975 (28,104/game)
Hamilton peaked in 2005 (28.002/game)
West
(https://3downnation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Att-West.jpg)
East
(https://3downnation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/ATT-East-768x468.jpg)
League avg attendance:
(https://3downnation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Att-CFL-768x468.jpg)
I would say the CFL was in it's heyday period prior to 1980.
In the 50's and 60's, almost every football fan in Canada was a CFL fan.
That started shifting to the NFL, maybe in the late 70's?
Now there are more NFL fans than CFL fans in this country and the gap continues to grow.
That is the big problem that needs to be solved...not saying it is by converting NFL fans but by having football fans follow both leagues.
Quote from: Tecno on May 02, 2026, 03:38:14 AMExcept the 45+ crowd just happens to be the huge majority of the loyal STHs. Until they are all dead you can't just ignore them and tick them off with unwanted changes.
There is a constant stream of people turning 50, many of them football fans, with age lifestyles and hobbies change. Why cheer for a team in a far flung location with no real connection, when you can cheer for a team playing in your own city and experience a true connection with other fans?
Quote from: jets4life on May 02, 2026, 06:39:04 PMToronto peaked in 1976 (47,356/game)
Saskatchewan peaked in 2013 (37,503/game)
TOR didn't top that in the John Candy/Gretzky years in the Sky Dome??
SSK had 37k capacity in that old tiny Mosaic??
Quote from: Tecno on May 03, 2026, 04:31:56 AMTOR didn't top that in the John Candy/Gretzky years in the Sky Dome??
SSK had 37k capacity in that old tiny Mosaic??
Toronto's peak year for the Candy/McNall/Gretzky owed Argos was 1991, when they managed to sign college football star Rocket Ismail. They never came close to beating their attendance in the late 70s, as they averaged 36,304 that season.
With the Riders, they may have left temporary seating for the 2013 season. I checked out the Wikipedia page for the 2013 Riders, and the drew huge crowds all season, peaking with the Labour Day classic at 44,910.
PS....Taylor Field was never tiny. I think the capacity was nearly identical to the old Winnipeg Stadium.
source: https://kenn.com/blog/sports-attendance/all-time-cfl-attendance/ (https://kenn.com/blog/sports-attendance/all-time-cfl-attendance/)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Saskatchewan_Roughriders_season (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Saskatchewan_Roughriders_season)
Quote from: bomber beetle on May 02, 2026, 09:49:10 PMI would say the CFL was in it's heyday period prior to 1980.
In the 50's and 60's, almost every football fan in Canada was a CFL fan.
That started shifting to the NFL, maybe in the late 70's?
Now there are more NFL fans than CFL fans in this country and the gap continues to grow.
That is the big problem that needs to be solved...not saying it is by converting NFL fans but by having football fans follow both leagues.
Agreed, in the 60's and 70's the CFL was a bigger part of Canadian culture and results were always front and center in the headlines, Grey Cup parties were huge and it was aptly nicknamed "The Great Canadian Drunk". By the late 80's many teams were struggling with attendance, in 1987 the Riders held a telethon to keep the team afloat.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 03, 2026, 04:02:40 PMAgreed, in the 60's and 70's the CFL was a bigger part of Canadian culture and results were always front and center in the headlines, Grey Cup parties were huge and it was aptly nicknamed "The Great Canadian Drunk". By the late 80's many teams were struggling with attendance, in 1987 the Riders held a telethon to keep the team afloat.
How old are you and bomber beetle? I am middle aged, and this was way before my time.
Born in 1961.
I went to my first game in 1972.
In stadium attendance is a cherry picked stat which has some relevance but mostly pats a few folks on the back in an attempt to sell a stupid "golden years" narrative.
The entertainment landscape in 1980 was incredibly different from today. The economies are different. Buying power is different. What people are willing to pay for is different.
It's like owning a Yo-Yo brand, pointing to the 1980s sales charts, and then saying they should copy the original colours of the 1980s because it was a good time for Yo-Yos.
Don't go into business folks. Nice try.
Quote from: Blueforlife on April 29, 2026, 11:42:04 PMTerrible idea, won't happen. While the changes are not perfect the league needs support more than ever. It will get sorted out.
No thanks. I cancelled my seasons after a long long time. I do not support this crap. I will go to the odd game but they will not get $2000 off of me this year. Wade voted for this to get money. He likes money. That's his only thing. As a Canadian I expected better from him. But he's about the party and the money, no longer the tradition of the game.
I loved the CFL and the 110 yard field and the 3 downs and the long end zones you could make amazing plays in. We have 3 downs for now, but who knows for how long.
That playoff format is a farce. I thought Ambrosie was bad...well he looks good now. Wow. Many cannot afford multiple playoff tickets. Some can, but how many? I guess it's ok for some, but I'm not sure all cities will sell.
Want the next gen of fans to come? Get halftime shows. We have a crappy band playing. BC gets it. We do not.
I'll buy a jersey but that's it for this year, maybe the home opener to see how awful it is. I want to support my team, and I will a bit, but Wade doesn't get my full money this year.
There is no CFL if changes don't get made.
Saying "Wade voted for it because he likes money" is not the flex you think it is. Yes, EVERY team "likes money". They especially like having money over not having money.
There are going to be angel owners that can subsidize thier vanity project / hobby. But there aren't going to be 9 of them that are willing to sink millions in every year.
Wade is interested in the longevity of the league far more than his own job. Or the money for a community owned team that cannot accumulate money.
So his vote for the changes has no personal monetary motivation, he knows that if the league as a whole is not viable, his beloved team is gone, regardless how much is in the bank.
I applaud your gumption, but not your logic. I, too, let my seasons go this year, but for completely different reasons, mostly personal. But I will be watching every CFL game that is broadcast.
In the next few years, we will either see an improvement in the watchability of the league, and with that, new eyes on screens, and butts in seats, or the start of the demise of the league.
If the league had done nothing, though, new eyes/butts were not going to happen. And as each lifelong fan shuffles off this mortal coil, the league slowly dies.
I like the fact there is a chance that the changes make the league viable into the future.
Quote from: TBURGESS on May 04, 2026, 02:55:33 PMAttendance is THE stat the CFL needs to increase.
Viewership, ad revenue, and gambling.
Physical attendance is getting increasingly less important.
Quote from: theaardvark on May 04, 2026, 03:20:36 PMThere is no CFL if changes don't get made.
There is no CFL if changes do get made.
Both statements are equally meaningless at this moment in time.
Quote from: Jesse on May 04, 2026, 04:07:01 PMViewership, ad revenue, and gambling.
Physical attendance is getting increasingly less important.
I'd think a league like the CFL would have to rely on all of those revenue streams to remain solvent, much less profitable. Advertising and gambling revenues can only go so far for a league with just nine franchises.
The two franchises in the black also happen to have the best attendance figures in 2025.
Quote from: blue_gold_84 on May 04, 2026, 05:05:09 PMI'd think a league like the CFL would have to rely on all of those revenue streams to remain solvent, much less profitable. Advertising and gambling revenues can only go so far for a league with just nine franchises.
The two franchises in the black also happen to have the best attendance figures in 2025.
Sure, it's just no longer 100% of the pie.
I also don't believe league propaganda that only 2 franchises are profitable.
Quote from: Jesse on May 04, 2026, 05:20:53 PMSure, it's just no longer 100% of the pie.
I also don't believe league propaganda that only 2 franchises are profitable.
Therein lies a problem with how the CFL operates, IMO. It leaves us to wonder, speculate, or question how healthy it actually is.
Quote from: Jesse on May 04, 2026, 04:05:36 PMWhy?
To assume the status quo has any kind of longevity is pie in the sky. The league has rebounded slightly from its lows where most teams were red ink, but there is still too much red ink to sustain the at least 9 team league, and if we drop below 8 teams, its not a league.
So, we need new life, new blood, we need to attract new eyeballs and butts.
Saying "This IS your grandfather's CFL" isn't gonna cut it.
Saying "We have new and exciting things for you to come see" at least gives the opportunity for growth.
The CFL will lose more fans to aging out than to "I can't take the change".
Without a new generation of fans to replace the ones Father Time collects, the league is done.
The "controversy" about the rule changes is getting a lot of mention in the news, and as they say, "Any coverage is good coverage, as long as they spell your name right". Fans that may have looked at the CFL as archaic are now being given a chance to look at it again.
The league is literally moving the goalposts to make it better. Cosmetically, that change alone make the league look a lot more professional, and as much as we all love the 55 yard line as being quirky, removing it cleans up the field even more. But it is still 65 yards wide, and the EZ is 50% deeper than the NFL, so it will remain a much more open game. Even the modernization of the rouge is great. It's still there, but no longer a reward for failure. You are going to have to TRY to get a rouge now.
Best of both worlds. I think the BOG Goldilock's it. Not too much, not too little, but just right.
Quote from: blue_gold_84 on May 04, 2026, 04:12:19 PMThere is no CFL if changes do get made.
Both statements are equally meaningless at this moment in time.
So, are you saying that a few cosmetic changes will mean this isn't the CFL anymore, or are you saying that the changes will hurt attendance/viewership?
It is still the 12 man, 3 down, 65 yard wide CFL game. So the first contention is wrong.
As for the second, sure, there will be a few diehards that will protest. For the first 3 games. They will come back. As to part time or non fans, all the discussion that has gone on will no doubt get some extra eyeballs on the game, if only for curiosities sake. And we all know, once you watch the excitement of a CFL game, its easy to get hooked.
Quote from: theaardvark on May 04, 2026, 05:36:02 PMSo, are you saying that a few cosmetic changes will mean this isn't the CFL anymore, or are you saying that the changes will hurt attendance/viewership?
I was pointing out how neither statement has any value at the present time. And I think you knew as much.
Quote from: TBURGESS on May 04, 2026, 02:55:33 PMAttendance is THE stat the CFL needs to increase, not a cherry-picked stat.
The yo-yo comparison is likely the worst comparison you've ever made, and you've made some doozies.
You realize that you're directly comparing attendance (sales) figures from an era where most CFL games weren't even televised, and those that were, were often blacked out locally, to 2026 where significant revenue comes from tv, advertising and sponsorship deals, yes?
Do you know how silly that sounds? Every time you guys start talking about this it's patently clear that none of you are the least bit qualified to even speak on the subject, let alone put forth proper arguments.
Quote from: Jesse on May 04, 2026, 05:20:53 PMSure, it's just no longer 100% of the pie.
I also don't believe league propaganda that only 2 franchises are profitable.
Exactly, the league would not agree to expanding the roster and increasing the SMS with the CFLPA if the majority of teams were losing millions. Neither adjustment improves their bottom line and the majority of teams agreed to these terms.
Quote from: Jesse on May 04, 2026, 05:20:53 PMSure, it's just no longer 100% of the pie.
I also don't believe league propaganda that only 2 franchises are profitable.
While we don't know the bottom line of 7 teams, interpolating the numbers from the Bomber's financial report can give some insights. Subtract the revenue from 10,000 tickets each game. Along with that, a proportional amount of the concessions along with merchandise. The profit is probably gone. Furthermore, how many teams get the same sponsorship numbers and run their own stadium? How many charge less, on average, per ticket? It gets real easy to see that the league is probably losing between 10 and 20 million dollars every year. I recall that Edmonton lost around four million in the final year of public ownership and I think they were averaging decent crowds of 23,000 or so.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 04, 2026, 05:43:12 PMExactly, the league would not agree to expanding the roster and increasing the SMS with the CFLPA if the majority of teams were losing millions. Neither adjustment improves their bottom line and the majority of teams agreed to these terms.
I believe those increases are tied to revenue, not profit.
We all know that the costs for everything are up significantly. Expenses, very likely, are easily keeping pace with revenue.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 03, 2026, 09:29:59 PMIn stadium attendance is a cherry picked stat which has some relevance but mostly pats a few folks on the back in an attempt to sell a stupid "golden years" narrative.
The entertainment landscape in 1980 was incredibly different from today. The economies are different. Buying power is different. What people are willing to pay for is different.
It's like owning a Yo-Yo brand, pointing to the 1980s sales charts, and then saying they should copy the original colours of the 1980s because it was a good time for Yo-Yos.
Don't go into business folks. Nice try.
No offence, but this post in unintentionally hilarious.
Quote from: jets4life on May 04, 2026, 06:29:05 PMNo offence, but this post in unintentionally hilarious.
None taken. Can't fault folks for being truly ignorant.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 04, 2026, 05:42:35 PMYou realize that you're directly comparing attendance (sales) figures from an era where most CFL games weren't even televised, and those that were, were often blacked out locally, to 2026 where significant revenue comes from tv, advertising and sponsorship deals, yes?
That's exactly why I said it's never coming back in the first place.
You realize that the changes being made won't significantly increase revenue... right?
Can you explain to me h
Quote from: TBURGESS on May 04, 2026, 10:36:32 PMThat's exactly why I said it's never coming back in the first place.
You realize that the changes being made won't significantly increase revenue... right?
How about you explain to me how adding playoff games that never existed before wouldn't earn significant revenue?
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 04, 2026, 06:30:26 PMNone taken. Can't fault folks for being truly ignorant.
Look we don't need comments that clearly posted to insult people. Agree or disagree but keep personal disparaging comments out of discussions.
Quote from: ModAdmin on May 04, 2026, 10:46:31 PMLook we don't need comments that clearly posted to insult people. Agree or disagree but keep personal disparaging comments out of discussions.
What about posts that start with "no offense" but are clearly meant to offend?
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 04, 2026, 10:53:20 PMWhat about posts that start with "no offense" but are clearly meant to offend?
We have the report to moderator option if you feel any post is a personal attack.
Quote from: tlf on May 04, 2026, 02:49:42 PMNo thanks. I cancelled my seasons after a long long time. I do not support this crap. I will go to the odd game but they will not get $2000 off of me this year. Wade voted for this to get money. He likes money. That's his only thing. As a Canadian I expected better from him. But he's about the party and the money, no longer the tradition of the game.
I loved the CFL and the 110 yard field and the 3 downs and the long end zones you could make amazing plays in. We have 3 downs for now, but who knows for how long.
That playoff format is a farce. I thought Ambrosie was bad...well he looks good now. Wow. Many cannot afford multiple playoff tickets. Some can, but how many? I guess it's ok for some, but I'm not sure all cities will sell.
Want the next gen of fans to come? Get halftime shows. We have a crappy band playing. BC gets it. We do not.
I'll buy a jersey but that's it for this year, maybe the home opener to see how awful it is. I want to support my team, and I will a bit, but Wade doesn't get my full money this year.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Bomberforlife
I am happy the mods are trying to keep the peace, good job.
Surveys have shown that ~5% of CFL fans will cancel their ST's or not go to games if the 2027 changes (100Y,GPs) go through.
Not a single survey of any sort has shown 5% new people will start buying ST or go to games because of the changes.
That's a major problem, and unless it just magically materializes, Johnston is harming the league, not helping it. That's the reality of the here and now.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 04, 2026, 10:39:13 PMCan you explain to me h
How about you explain to me how adding playoff games that never existed before wouldn't earn significant revenue?
Well, it all depends on if each game shows a profit or a loss! The "poor" teams, are they losing money for every home game they host (incl reg season)? Is the "poorest" team (TOR? EDM?) running every single game at a loss?
Clearly each stadium will have a break-even crossover point in terms of butts in seats. It shouldn't be hard to run the math.
If so, then every extra playoff game they might host would just cost the team money, assuming they don't get a better-than-normal turnout (which is probably a safe assumption -- why would they, it's like a reg season game if they are 6th place facing the 7th!).
Quote from: Tecno on May 05, 2026, 02:21:50 AMWell, it all depends on if each game shows a profit or a loss! The "poor" teams, are they losing money for every home game they host (incl reg season)? Is the "poorest" team (TOR? EDM?) running every single game at a loss?
Clearly each stadium will have a break-even crossover point in terms of butts in seats. It shouldn't be hard to run the math.
If so, then every extra playoff game they might host would just cost the team money, assuming they don't get a better-than-normal turnout (which is probably a safe assumption -- why would they, it's like a reg season game if they are 6th place facing the 7th!).
...Pretend your job is negotiating media rights and try again.
Quote from: tlf on May 04, 2026, 02:49:42 PMWade voted for this to get money. He likes money. That's his only thing. As a Canadian I expected better from him. But he's about the party and the money, no longer the tradition of the game.
I wouldn't be too hard on Wade, nor impugn motives. We simply don't know the inside of his mind, nor do we get many interviews to try to get hints.
I think it's just as likely some cabal on the BoG pressured or outright forced some Prez's to go along with the crazy ideas. It wouldn't help WM, WFC, or probably the CFL for WM and 2 other Prez's to stick their heads up, go against the flow, and say the changes suck. Besides personal "punishments", the league could be like Darth Vader and "adjust" the "equalization payments" to steal another $1M+ from WFC next season... "Pray I don't adjust it any further!"
No one knows. We also don't know how much power WM has on the BoG. As a very "small town" (compared to the others) Prez he might count for nothing.
I agree that many of us miss Unca'Brosie. At least his changes didn't touch 60+ year traditions, and his Global Experiment can be shut down on a moment's notice at zero cost.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 05, 2026, 02:26:01 AM...Pretend your job is negotiating media rights and try again.
You're assuming TSN wants MORE games... It seems like every season they reduce the # of PS games they show on TV. And what are their channels showing the rest of those weekends? 5 channels of South Sudan Open golf repeats all night? Our PS is basically free content and they're like "nah brah, South Sudan Open is cool".
Doubt anyone except us is tuning into the exciting new Play-In of 8th place TOR vs 7th place EDM come late Oct, especially when NFL and NHL is back on, right?
Great, everyone's favourite dickhead will be front and center on Friday Night Football broadcasts, he alone could drive more fans away from the CFL than the proposed rule changes!
https://3downnation.com/2026/05/04/luke-willson-announces-colour-commentator-role-for-cfl-on-tsn/ (https://3downnation.com/2026/05/04/luke-willson-announces-colour-commentator-role-for-cfl-on-tsn/)
Quote from: Tecno on May 05, 2026, 02:33:38 AMYou're assuming TSN wants MORE games... It seems like every season they reduce the # of PS games they show on TV. And what are their channels showing the rest of those weekends? 5 channels of South Sudan Open golf repeats all night? Our PS is basically free content and they're like "nah brah, South Sudan Open is cool".
Doubt anyone except us is tuning into the exciting new Play-In of 8th place TOR vs 7th place EDM come late Oct, especially when NFL and NHL is back on, right?
By "us" do you mean Bombers fans? Because, ummm...yes, that's exactly who the the CFL will monetize if the Bombers are in the 7-8 playoff game. Bombers fans. Woah, what a shocking conclusion.
You guys are so set on fighting change you're willing to argue more playoff games will lose money. I can't even begin to comprehend the mental gymnastics required to convince myself of that but prey I never get there.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 05, 2026, 02:41:37 AMBy "us" do you mean Bombers fans? Because, ummm...yes, that's exactly who the the CFL will monetize if the Bombers are in the 7-8 playoff game. Bombers fans. Woah, what a shocking conclusion.
Clearly WFC & fans aren't who I was talking about. It's the bottom-half of teams that may lose money with the extra playoffs. I'm not saying it's so, I'm saying it's possible. Clearly TSN ran the math and figured the PS games aren't worth the tiny investment of flying a crew out. If a #6 v #7 play-in has the same interest as a WPG/SSK PS game (a distinct possibility!) then they won't be worth it either -- noting that each recent year TSN shows 1 or 0 WPG/SSK PS games.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 05, 2026, 02:41:37 AMYou guys are so set on fighting change you're willing to argue more playoff games will lose money.
That's why I asked where the breakeven for butts is. If EDM has to put 20k in the stands to break even on a game, and they don't, then the extra game only hurts them.
I don't know the numbers on either TV or butts, but we can try to guess. Surely, because of the constant cry of "poor!", we can assume they are close to break even in both aspects!!
I'll keep this very simple for you: more playoff games equals more money for the teams, players, league and media partners.
I have no idea why you're bringing up pre-season games and trying to equate them to playoff games whether they be new or old. Only someone clever enough to stick a "never go full Johnson" on their profile would need this explained. The guy operates in business circles you don't even know exist and he'll probably bring in more corporate revenue in a year than you will in your entire life. But whatever. You're the expert. Happy?
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 05, 2026, 02:35:44 AMhe alone could drive more fans away from the CFL than the proposed rule changes!
I'm still convinced Wilson was a plant to soften us all for a year before Johnston released the whirlwind. It's all being directed, working on longer-term plans than we've been privy too.
Look back to Wilson's famous "I hate all these CFLisms" rant with the above in mind and it'll all make sense. He was dissing precisely what Johnston was going to hose a few months later "out of the blue".
That said, he may be mildly amusing in color. We shall see. We may have to hold our noses and try to put aside our distaste. In any event, he'll probably be eased in and host the lowest number of games of all the crew. Kind of like Matty did. They'll ramp him up next year if fans managed to suppress their gag reflex. I hate BLM, but have no problems with him taking a panel spot -- this could be a lot like that.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 05, 2026, 03:03:38 AMThe guy operates in business circles you don't even know exist and he'll probably bring in more corporate revenue in a year than you will in your entire life.
Appeal to authority fallacy. I judge the man by his actions, not the actions by the man.
You don't even attempt to argue the points. Just wave your hand.
It is very much possible a EDM/TOR play-in gets less TSN viewers AND butts in seats than a WPG/SSK PS game!! In fact, I might put money on it! The butts-in-seats is a virtual shoe-in. 28k tickets sold for @PAS SSK PS game in 2025. No way a @EDM or @TOR play-in game of bottom-feeding teams sells 28k. TV numbers will be harder to come by, but I do know that any PS game SSK is in has half of that province watching.
But whatever, you do you.
Edit: let's just have a 1 week regular season then and all the other 17 weeks + playoff weeks are "playoff games" with new stupid "play-in", "play-under", "play-out", "play-above" names, and all 9 teams get in. Because they have the magic "playoff" word they'll be profitable, right?? Pffft.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 05, 2026, 02:35:44 AMGreat, everyone's favourite dickhead will be front and center on Friday Night Football broadcasts, he alone could drive more fans away from the CFL than the proposed rule changes!
https://3downnation.com/2026/05/04/luke-willson-announces-colour-commentator-role-for-cfl-on-tsn/ (https://3downnation.com/2026/05/04/luke-willson-announces-colour-commentator-role-for-cfl-on-tsn/)
Never thought anything would make me long for Rod Black on a telecast, but suddenly I do...
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 05, 2026, 02:35:44 AMGreat, everyone's favourite dickhead will be front and center on Friday Night Football broadcasts, he alone could drive more fans away from the CFL than the proposed rule changes!
https://3downnation.com/2026/05/04/luke-willson-announces-colour-commentator-role-for-cfl-on-tsn/ (https://3downnation.com/2026/05/04/luke-willson-announces-colour-commentator-role-for-cfl-on-tsn/)
yeah this guy reminds me a lot of high profile social media types... anything to draw attention to himself, regardless of what he knows or doesn't
Quote from: Blueforlife on May 05, 2026, 02:07:53 AMDon't let the door hit you on the way out.
I swore I heard Stewart Johnston say this to CFL long time fans, if they do not care for his "improvements" to the game.
Having said that, the CFL enjoyed a decade of increased attendance and viewership from 1997-2007. By the late 2000s, the CFL was in great shape. This was after the infamous "American expansion" nearly killed off the league. As an added bonus, the CFL thrived in spite of the NFL becoming the preferred football league for Canadian fans.
Maybe we should go back 20 years, and study what the league did right, instead of changing the game that has existed for over a century.
There's also the aspect of covid ruining many people making them scared to go anywhere ever again. Add into that the generational shift and the rise of everyone-has-autism-itis. It may be that filling stands (or putting butts in seats anywhere) will never happen again until/unless the health of society turns around.
And even many "healthy/normal" people (especially middle/upper-middle class ones) all decked out their pads with massive TVs and hifi, and are happy saying "nah, I'll watch at home, it's better".
The way of the future may be less crowds but a larger TV audience. We may have to tailor the league more in that direction. Just look at movie theatres now vs 25 years ago. Used to have 250 seats and you'd go to shows with all filled. Now the theatres have 50 seats tops, and usually most are empty.
I am very involved with a club in town and post-covid we're still in "recovery mode" in terms of membership. A ton of people are just plain anti-social or scared, and I'm in a club that is traditionally full of introverts to begin with. But we're slowly recovering, and the CFL should be able to, too.
Quote from: Tecno on May 05, 2026, 06:38:14 AMThe way of the future may be less crowds but a larger TV audience. We may have to tailor the league more in that direction. Just look at movie theatres now vs 25 years ago. Used to have 250 seats and you'd go to shows with all filled. Now the theatres have 50 seats tops, and usually most are empty.
Not disagreeing with you, especially if your team isn't within a 1 hour drive of your house. I haven't been to a Stamps game in years even though I've watched nearly every one. Ignoring ticket cost, the drive + parking add nearly 3 hours to the day for me. And if gas sits at 2 bucks a litre this summer, stadiums attendance will suffer a lot because disposable income will shrink and out of towners won't make the trip.
The problem with the theory is that COVID proved this is a gate driven league, and the televised experience feeds off the live crowd. Remember how exciting crowdless NHL games were. CFL would be worse. And if Stewjos goal is no one in the stands, spending piles of money on field mods make no sense.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 05, 2026, 03:03:38 AMI'll keep this very simple for you: more playoff games equals more money for the teams, players, league and media partners.
I have no idea why you're bringing up pre-season games and trying to equate them to playoff games whether they be new or old. Only someone clever enough to stick a "never go full Johnson" on their profile would need this explained. The guy operates in business circles you don't even know exist and he'll probably bring in more corporate revenue in a year than you will in your entire life. But whatever. You're the expert. Happy?
More playoff games also equals more expenses. More money paid to the players and the staff. Calling them playoff games means more money in playoff bonuses for the players. For half the teams it means more money paid for travel and hotels and per diems. Home teams will make more money. Away teams might even lose some.
In business, you look at the net, not the gross.
Quote from: TBURGESS on May 05, 2026, 03:02:22 PMMore playoff games also equals more expenses. More money paid to the players and the staff. Calling them playoff games means more money in playoff bonuses for the players. For half the teams it means more money paid for travel and hotels and per diems. Home teams will make more money. Away teams might even lose some.
In business, you look at the net, not the gross.
You can have the profit of more playoff games or you can have the profit of no more playoff games.
Would you like a line graph? Asked another way, do you think the leadership group is so bad they would be proposing something that would result in a net loss?
Quote from: Tecno on May 05, 2026, 02:18:37 AMSurveys have shown that ~5% of CFL fans will cancel their ST's or not go to games if the 2027 changes (100Y,GPs) go through.
Not a single survey of any sort has shown 5% new people will start buying ST or go to games because of the changes.
That's a major problem, and unless it just magically materializes, Johnston is harming the league, not helping it. That's the reality of the here and now.
It is easy to be outraged and say you will cancel your ST if changes go through.
But, when push comes to shove, I'd say less than 1% will, if that.
As to adding STH, no idea if it will. But the status quo isn't cutting it in most markets. 5 years of GC appearances is bolstering WPG ticket sales, that can turn on a dime.
All we've had about the changes has been negative, from the fans and from the press. The focus has been on the loud. The fans that are loudest are the ones that "will give up their ST's" and hence, they are the ones the press is covering.
I don't think I've seen a single press report that represents the opinion that I believe. And I think that there far more that think the way I do than will "give up their seats".
But that's the way media works, you cover the chicken littles, because that gets clicks.
You want retro football, with leather helmets and wooden "H" goalposts on the goal line, start a new league.
The CFL needs some better spin people for sure. "This is not your Granpa's CFL, but he'd sure like it". The game is faster, the field is more modern but retains the big EZ and width, and the players are better.
We need more interviews with players that have spent time in the NFL who say that the level of play in the CFL is far better than they expected.
Letting naysayers dominate the media will not save the league.
Giving potential new fans a reason to watch will. Challenging the naysayers to give it a look will.
Do we need to convert every Canadian NFL fan to being CFL junkies? Not at all. But we do need to find a way to get some of those eyes to give the CFL a look.
It is unfortunate that south asian countries do not have American Football (using that term to differentiate from Soccer) leagues, or games that have skills that translate to American Football. That is the biggest untapped market for the CFL. With all the New Canadians available to win over, getting a Global Player from Dehli might be a great marketing tool. Remember the "Million Dollar Arm" movie?
The NHL have made some inroads in addressing this large base. I'm not suggesting that we could broadcast every game in Punjabi, or that the contributions of Chungh, Khan, Shanks, Bassi, Dhillon haven't been valuable among their communities, just that finding players talented enough to be taken in the Global draft would be a marketing coup.
Quote from: Tecno on May 05, 2026, 02:28:23 AMI wouldn't be too hard on Wade, nor impugn motives. We simply don't know the inside of his mind, nor do we get many interviews to try to get hints.
I think it's just as likely some cabal on the BoG pressured or outright forced some Prez's to go along with the crazy ideas. It wouldn't help WM, WFC, or probably the CFL for WM and 2 other Prez's to stick their heads up, go against the flow, and say the changes suck. Besides personal "punishments", the league could be like Darth Vader and "adjust" the "equalization payments" to steal another $1M+ from WFC next season... "Pray I don't adjust it any further!"
No one knows. We also don't know how much power WM has on the BoG. As a very "small town" (compared to the others) Prez he might count for nothing.
I agree that many of us miss Unca'Brosie. At least his changes didn't touch 60+ year traditions, and his Global Experiment can be shut down on a moment's notice at zero cost.
that's fair. I negotiate with unions at work and some can be ruthless and Boards can pressure people.
Perhaps I was too hard on Wade, it's just hard to accept such big changes to a game I love. SO many at once, is a lot to accept. Little ones I could deal with, but this is a lot to accept at once from Stewy. Can Mark Cohon come back?
Quote from: tlf on May 05, 2026, 05:04:52 PMthat's fair. I negotiate with unions at work and some can be ruthless and Boards can pressure people.
Perhaps I was too hard on Wade, it's just hard to accept such big changes to a game I love. SO many at once, is a lot to accept. Little ones I could deal with, but this is a lot to accept at once from Stewy. Can Mark Cohon come back?
Again, I'm not sure how these are that big a change. Losing the 55 and trimmimg 5 yards off the EZ while moving the GP off the field to make more of the EZ accessible seems like a simple fix to make the MTL and TOR fields the same size as the rest, and making the game a little (very little) more O friendly.
Game clock speeds the game up. Leaving it the old way in the final 3 minutes preserves the CFL uniqueness.
Moving the benches to the opposite side of the field in the east, how this was not a thing in the past, I'll never figure out.
Oh, and the earned rather than free rouge.
I get how the entire BOG were behind these changes, and I get the die hard fans negative response to ANY change.
Did the NFL lose their fans when the implemented the stupid KO rules? Other than Donald Trump?
The NFL actually has an entire page dedicated to the evolution of the game. They know how to spin change. The CFL should not be talking rule changes, but evolution of the rules.
"Imagine the NFL if the rules of play had never changed:
A quarterback can't throw a pass unless he's at least 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage. The offense begins some plays just a yard from the sideline and is penalized for throwing more than one pass during a series of downs. Player substitutions are prohibited. No communication from the sideline is allowed. Players from both teams grab their opponents' facemasks at will."
https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/evolution-of-the-nfl-rules/
Quote from: theaardvark on May 05, 2026, 04:02:51 PMIt is unfortunate that south asian countries do not have American Football (using that term to differentiate from Soccer) leagues, or games that have skills that translate to American Football. That is the biggest untapped market for the CFL.
That is some leap.
Quote from: theaardvark on May 05, 2026, 05:21:01 PMDid the NFL lose their fans when the implemented the stupid KO rules? Other than Donald Trump?
This is a wonderful example, because it's a change that no one liked but was entirely data driven and come to through meaningful discussions with all parties.
An alarmingly higher percentage of injuries were coming on ST. The union and league made changes to prevent injury.
Even the new play-off changes in the CFL. The league and the union met. They discussed changed. Negotiated and Union members voted in favour of making the moves.
None of this has anything to do with CFL making changes to the field in a sweeping change without informing any if the involved parties with no data whatsoever because "reasons".
Quote from: jets4life on May 05, 2026, 05:51:28 AMI swore I heard Stewart Johnston say this to CFL long time fans, if they do not care for his "improvements" to the game.
Having said that, the CFL enjoyed a decade of increased attendance and viewership from 1997-2007. By the late 2000s, the CFL was in great shape. This was after the infamous "American expansion" nearly killed off the league. As an added bonus, the CFL thrived in spite of the NFL becoming the preferred football league for Canadian fans.
Maybe we should go back 20 years, and study what the league did right, instead of changing the game that has existed for over a century.
- The marketing push around 1997 (our balls are bigger, interviewing americans).
- MLS started expanding into Canada around 2007
- Boomers were still doing to games. CFL was probably at its biggest when boomers were young
Our Bomber border is in the city for the start of TC. Does like the early start for next season.
- It will effect his off season job. Normally starts December and ends the last day of April.
- Cooler weather which could lead to more TC injuries.
- Doesn't like the playoff format. Said it's like pee wee football.
- Doesn't like the 1-2 playoff game.
Quote from: theaardvark on May 05, 2026, 04:02:51 PMIt is easy to be outraged and say you will cancel your ST if changes go through.
But, when push comes to shove, I'd say less than 1% will, if that.
As to adding STH, no idea if it will. But the status quo isn't cutting it in most markets. 5 years of GC appearances is bolstering WPG ticket sales, that can turn on a dime.
All we've had about the changes has been negative, from the fans and from the press. The focus has been on the loud. The fans that are loudest are the ones that "will give up their ST's" and hence, they are the ones the press is covering.
I don't think I've seen a single press report that represents the opinion that I believe. And I think that there far more that think the way I do than will "give up their seats".
But that's the way media works, you cover the chicken littles, because that gets clicks.
You want retro football, with leather helmets and wooden "H" goalposts on the goal line, start a new league.
The CFL needs some better spin people for sure. "This is not your Granpa's CFL, but he'd sure like it". The game is faster, the field is more modern but retains the big EZ and width, and the players are better.
We need more interviews with players that have spent time in the NFL who say that the level of play in the CFL is far better than they expected.
Letting naysayers dominate the media will not save the league.
Giving potential new fans a reason to watch will. Challenging the naysayers to give it a look will.
Do we need to convert every Canadian NFL fan to being CFL junkies? Not at all. But we do need to find a way to get some of those eyes to give the CFL a look.
I've seen more polls about the new changes. I think 75% of CFL fans that attend games are against the changes. You can't just state "the silent majority support the new changes to the league," when there is solid evidence that this is not the case.
Some people on the forum are just parroting CFL league propaganda, and ignoring the reality of the situation.
Quote from: peg_city on May 05, 2026, 05:33:08 PM- The marketing push around 1997 (our balls are bigger, interviewing americans).
- MLS started expanding into Canada around 2007
- Boomers were still doing to games. CFL was probably at its biggest when boomers were young
This still does not explain how the league managed to increase attendance from 21,300 to 29,200 over the decade (1997-2007), especially in regards to your theory about Boomers (it does not explain the increase of 8,000 fans/game). With the MLS theory, it's difficult to say, but I don't think it was a significant issues, considering they are two different sports, and only Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver obtained franchises (each team has a metro areas of 3 million+).
It seemed as though CFL attendance for Toronto, BC, and Montreal all declined from 2015 onward, bottomed out in 2021, and have rebounded somewhat since.
Quote from: jets4life on May 05, 2026, 06:55:22 PMI've seen more polls about the new changes. I think 75% of CFL fans that attend games are against the changes. You can't just state "the silent majority support the new changes to the league," when there is solid evidence that this is not the case.
Some people on the forum are just parroting CFL league propaganda, and ignoring the reality of the situation.
My purely anectodal observation:
It seems around 99.5% of fans either do not like or do not understand the changes.
And, about 99.5% of those fans just shrug their shoulders and still plan to be fans.
Quote from: Pete on May 05, 2026, 04:17:52 AMyeah this guy reminds me a lot of high profile social media types... anything to draw attention to himself, regardless of what he knows or doesn't
Very true and agree and I don't like the guy but he generates interest, social media thrives on any type of buzz, they get just as much popularity through negative press and positive. Just a hype machine.
Quote from: Jesse on May 05, 2026, 05:32:48 PMThis is a wonderful example, because it's a change that no one liked but was entirely data driven and come to through meaningful discussions with all parties.
An alarmingly higher percentage of injuries were coming on ST. The union and league made changes to prevent injury.
Even the new play-off changes in the CFL. The league and the union met. They discussed changed. Negotiated and Union members voted in favour of making the moves.
None of this has anything to do with CFL making changes to the field in a sweeping change without informing any if the involved parties with no data whatsoever because "reasons".
However, to Aardvark's credit, the answer to his question is "no". Full stop.
Quote from: bomber beetle on May 05, 2026, 09:41:53 PMMy purely anectodal observation:
It seems around 99.5% of fans either do not like or do not understand the changes.
And, about 99.5% of those fans just shrug their shoulders and still plan to be fans.
I'm not sure why the "Hurray for the changes!" posters keep insulting the intelligence of the majority of CFL fans who know exactly what the changes will mean to the league. It's fine that you love the changes, but why scrape to the bottom of the barrel and imply us hardcore fans are imbeciles.
PS...we both know that 99.5% of fans are
not shrugging your shoulders. Hell, last season I was at a game, and overheard people discussing the changes. Nearly everyone there stated that they were unhappy with the loss of the 55 yard line, the reduction of the end zone, etc.
There is also an inverse relationship between the more passionate the CFL fan, the more unlikely they are to be in favor of these new "improvements" to the game. The people least likely to go to games are the ones that are most open minded. The people who buy tickets, merchandise, streaming, etc are the ones that are going to be more opposed to them.
This fact leads me to believe that the changes will be detrimental to the league in the long run, and ultimately will hurt revenue and attendance.
Quote from: Jesse on May 05, 2026, 05:32:48 PMEven the new play-off changes in the CFL. The league and the union met. They discussed changed. Negotiated and Union members voted in favour of making the moves.
None of this has anything to do with CFL making changes to the field in a sweeping change without informing any if the involved parties with no data whatsoever because "reasons".
Too bad the CFL did not bother to inform U Sports, high school leagues, or any other amateur organizations in Canada. It's going to be very costly for those organizations to change their fields to accommodate the "new" CFL field.
Quote from: jets4life on May 05, 2026, 07:09:57 PMIt seemed as though CFL attendance for Toronto, BC, and Montreal all declined from 2015 onward, bottomed out in 2021, and have rebounded somewhat since.
I'll comment on the BC situation.
In his later years of team ownership, David Braley did very little to promote the BC Lions.
In 2015 he made the decision to close the upper deck. He foolishly thought that fans who had tickets between the 40s in the upper deck would relocate to the lower bowl.
Many weren't willing to pay extra to stay between the 40s. Similar price points put the fans near the goal line and those seats aren't that desirable. A lot of season tickets were lost.
Amar Doman not only markets the team much better than Braley ever did, he understands that opening the upper bowl will bring in more fans.
Quote from: jets4life on May 05, 2026, 06:55:22 PMI've seen more polls about the new changes. I think 75% of CFL fans that attend games are against the changes. You can't just state "the silent majority support the new changes to the league," when there is solid evidence that this is not the case.
Some people on the forum are just parroting CFL league propaganda, and ignoring the reality of the situation.
I didn't say that people didn't dislike the changes, just that they are not "I'm giving up my seasons" mad about them.
And yes, polling of fans that respond to polls about something are going to be biased.
As to "parroting CFL propaganda", well, that goes both ways. Bandwagons are easy to build and fill.
Quote from: Stats Junkie on May 06, 2026, 05:10:07 AMAmar Doman not only markets the team much better than Braley ever did, he understands that opening the upper bowl will bring in more fans.
Ya, this should be obvious to any non-casual CFL fan. I understand the need to save on costs of concessions/etc for the upper deck. But if I was the Prez I'd first close the corners and EZs before the between-the-30's upper deck seats!! If the corners and EZs were closed you could save just as much money by having the concessions behind them closed.
(Of course accounting for the TV aspect of having at least the 1st 10 rows of the EZs populated with fans.)
Quote from: tlf on May 05, 2026, 05:04:52 PMPerhaps I was too hard on Wade, it's just hard to accept such big changes to a game I love. SO many at once, is a lot to accept. Little ones I could deal with, but this is a lot to accept at once from Stewy. Can Mark Cohon come back?
I've been thinking a lot about this lately. Look at Aards with his CFL-approved talking points. Now imagine Johnston announced all the changes EXCEPT the 55YL change, which he would keep in his pocket to announce after 2027 started. What would Aards and the parrots (sounds like a band name!) be saying right now?
"We're still the CFL, we're still unique, we still have 3 downs, 12 men, 65Y width,
and 55 yard lines!"
I guarantee this is exactly what they would have said if Johnston had piecemealed it. Then a year later they announce no 55YL. Suddenly you have everyone's quotes
on record telling you that "what makes the CFL unique"
includes the thing they then removed. That would be hard for Aards to argue away -- we'd have their own words in writing, and they'd look like fools or liars.
This is why Johnston had to cram all the radical changes into one swoop. If you took any of the most radical changes (55, GP, 20YEZ, rouge) and held it back a year you'd have enough copy and chatter that you could NOT make another incremental change the following year. No, it had to be thrown at us all at once.
And every single one of the major changes HAD IT NOT BEEN ANNOUNCED would have been listed by Aards in their defense of our Canadianism.
Conversely, you could have, this off-season, substituted any of the "still-sacrosanct" untouched aspects for any of the Johnston-changes and Johnston, Aards & SB&G would be saying exactly the same thing they are now but with "moved GP's" replaced with "only 11 men on the field". Or "no 55YL" replaced with "50Y width". In other words, the specific aspect being changed is irrelevant to them -- they'd be applauding the changes, any changes, because they think it's being done for the good of the league, or like a stirred pot, or they are radical progressives, or they're just paid by Johnston. Only if Johnston just came out and said "everything is now the same as the NFL" would they bat an eye. Maybe.
Another way of looking at it is the proponents of the changes never once gave a rat's butt or second thought about the GP at the 0YL. It simply wasn't a thing to be against. But now that Johnston is selling it, they're like "ya change that GP, sucked all this time, hate it, move it now!". Now replace "GP at the 0YL" with any other CFLism. Everything would be playing out exactly the same.
The one benefit to this theory is that it hints that there will NOT be a change to the remaining Canadianisms. At least not for several years, after which everyone can wave off their current statements as being in the distant past. I figure we're safe until at least 2029.
Quote from: BlueInCgy on May 05, 2026, 09:01:25 AMThe problem with the theory is that COVID proved this is a gate driven league, and the televised experience feeds off the live crowd. Remember how exciting crowdless NHL games were. CFL would be worse.
I'm not saying no fans, or nearly no fans. I'm saying that if every young person is sperg'ing* out and the oldsters are scared of covid and comfy in their EZ-boy with their 80" OLED and boxed wine, then we may have to expect smaller crowds, and eventually smaller stadiums.
The rabid fun-to-watch face-painted fans would still go, and still make for good TV. There just might be a lot less of them.
I hope that's not the case, but if it is, it doesn't mean the CFL can't continue. The key then will be getting more people to watch on TV and monetizing it.
* I was at the MB Museum (of Man and Nature!) the other day and they've added a "safe space" "quiet room" just before the 1920's Winnipeg exhibit. That gives you a glimpse of the future with what they've done to the kids. Could you even do such a thing at the stadium?? And why would someone who can't handle the noise
of a museum even imagine they could handle a Bomber game? Yikes. Luckily my kids have both been going to IGF/PAS since they were 2. I'm doing my part!
It all seems pretty premature to me. No one has observed the planned changes yet so comments about the changes are all based on emotion/feelings. Fact is, some will like the changes, some will not. But it is going to play out and we know status quo is not working to get fans into the seats (with a couple of exceptions).
Quote from: ModAdmin on May 06, 2026, 07:01:26 AMIt all seems pretty premature to me. No one has observed the planned changes yet so comments about the changes are all based on emotion/feelings.
All well and good with the rouge & 35s clock rule. Not so great with the 55YL and GP changes, which combined will cost millions of dollars (with zero exaggeration) and
cannot easily be reversed once done.
If even 1 of the 2 new turfs being put in for this opt for sewn-in lines again, then it's literally a million bucks to change it back to 110 yards. And the instant a new stadium is built around the 100Y field, then there will never be a 110Y field again even if they make me the commissioner, because no one will be willing to put a team out of business.
That means these 2 changes specifically (the most contentious ones, coincidentally) need to be done with
extreme care and thought and data and foresight. Johnston and his changes give me the impression of the exact opposite of that. There's a lot of "trust me brah" going on here.
Quote from: Stats Junkie on May 06, 2026, 05:10:07 AM* I was at the MB Museum (of Man and Nature!) the other day and they've added a "safe space" "quiet room" just before the 1920's Winnipeg exhibit. That gives you a glimpse of the future with what they've done to the kids. Could you even do such a thing at the stadium?? And why would someone who can't handle the noise of a museum even imagine they could handle a Bomber game? Yikes. Luckily my kids have both been going to IGF/PAS since they were 2. I'm doing my part!
Back in the 80s/90s when we had season tickets at the old Stadium, there were times we had to sit through rain. The game was only postponed when it started to rain cats and dogs...literally.
Last season, I was at a game where they delayed a game, not because it was raining, but due to potential rain clouds, and a thunderstorm watch (not warning). Aside from that, the new stadium offers far more protection to the fans than the old stadium ever did.
People have become too soft.
Quote from: theaardvark on May 06, 2026, 05:26:37 AMAs to "parroting CFL propaganda", well, that goes both ways.
No, it doesn't.
Quote from: jets4life on May 06, 2026, 09:03:24 AMPeople have become too soft.
People have always been soft.
Quote from: jets4life on May 06, 2026, 12:51:34 AMI'm not sure why the "Hurray for the changes!" posters keep insulting the intelligence of the majority of CFL fans who know exactly what the changes will mean to the league. It's fine that you love the changes, but why scrape to the bottom of the barrel and imply us hardcore fans are imbeciles.
PS...we both know that 99.5% of fans are not shrugging your shoulders. Hell, last season I was at a game, and overheard people discussing the changes. Nearly everyone there stated that they were unhappy with the loss of the 55 yard line, the reduction of the end zone, etc.
There is also an inverse relationship between the more passionate the CFL fan, the more unlikely they are to be in favor of these new "improvements" to the game. The people least likely to go to games are the ones that are most open minded. The people who buy tickets, merchandise, streaming, etc are the ones that are going to be more opposed to them.
This fact leads me to believe that the changes will be detrimental to the league in the long run, and ultimately will hurt revenue and attendance.
I apologize that you were offended by my post.
I am a hardcore fan. I do not 'love' all the changes. I do
not know why the field is changing so I suppose that makes me an imbecile as well. I do know that something needs to change so I have presented my thoughts on why it is happening and how it may help the league to be sustainable....but I am just guessing.
I am involved with multiple sports organizations, which puts me in touch with hundreds of Bomber season ticket holders. I stand by my claim that no one likes the changes and most don't understand the need for them. However, none have expressed a desire to drop their tickets...in other words they are shrugging it off. I have only come across one person who was 'angry'...and he is not going to drop his tickets either.
Quote from: ModAdmin on May 06, 2026, 07:01:26 AMIt all seems pretty premature to me. No one has observed the planned changes yet so comments about the changes are all based on emotion/feelings. Fact is, some will like the changes, some will not. But it is going to play out and we know status quo is not working to get fans into the seats (with a couple of exceptions).
This is a fair comment about emotion.
I think it is also fair for fans to state their opinions about the changes before we see the results. In today's society it seems like we are asked for receipts after the fact.
I also don't buy the status quo narrative. When was the last time the CFL didn't make any rule changes during an offseason.
Older posters would remember Bud Ulrich, long time CFL official and a good one. Following is his letter to the editor in the Free Press.
A former ref's perspective
I'll preface my remarks by stating my involvement in the Canadian Football League as a head referee from 1974 to 1986, assigned to three Grey Cups (Montreal – 1979, Toronto – 1982, and Edmonton – 1984). I have played the game at the high school level and officiated in the amateur ranks for 13 years prior to being invited to the CFL.
I am a strong supporter of the CFL, attending games on a regular basis. The new rules the league is implementing bother me greatly. I can understand the new commissioner wants to improve the game, but I believe in the saying, "If it's not broken, don't fix it!"
Aligning the changes, i.e. smaller field, goal posts placed on the dead-ball line, no points for a missed field goal (play is whistled dead) takes away from some of the most exciting plays we witnessed for many years. I'm sure the commissioner is aware of this. Placing the goal post on the dead-ball line will reduce the number of field goals as the distance is increased with the new rule. Incidentally, the CFL scored more points per game last year than the NFL.
I checked with another official/supervisor of the CFL and in his 47 years in the league, the only time the goal posts created a problem was during a game between Oakland and Green Bay Packers who played an exhibition game in Winnipeg. During my short time of 12 years in the CFL, never once did the goal post cause a problem.
These changes can only be viewed as aligning our game with the National Football League. In today's climate of Canada needing to be self-reliant and not dependant on the United States for the development of our game, I am both surprised and disappointed with the rule changes.
I live in Winnipeg and I'm very proud of our team and the support of our fans. Saskatchewan boasts this position as well. Edmonton has a real problem with their fan base, and Toronto leads the way with the largest population, and the least fans. Surely this is the No. 1 problem! I fail to see how any rule changes will bring about more fans to the cities that need them the most.
The new playoff structure is flawed. Having over 90 per cent of the teams involved in playoffs, and the possibility of an all-east or all-west Grey Cup will decrease fan attendance both at the game and viewership on TV. The notion that more games will draw more fans is highly suspect. The east-versus-west is and always will be a competitive event. This rivalry will be eliminated. To do otherwise will provide disastrous results.
Bud Ulrich
Winnipeg
If they change and give the fans the 55 back, I'd be happy.
I don't WANT it removed, but I understand the concept, and agree that it has value.
But the league will not appreciably change with or without the 55yd line, and if that's something they held in their pocket to give back and dull the ire of the diehards, kudos to them for the plan.
As to being a "parrot for the CFL talking points", sorry if I have an ability to allow reason into my thought process. The BOG hired someone, and asked him to make changes to improve the marketability of the league. He did as asked.
Could they have been implemented more incrementally to soften the response? Sure. But this "rip the bandaid off" approach makes more sense to me. We were going to get here eventually. And I do think that the changes will make more sense applied together.
I like the 35 second clock for all but the final 3 min of each half, I like the GP move. I like having the teams on opposite sides, with the size of each cadre, it makes sense. They can get away with it in hockey having smaller groups. But having a long change / short change quarter in half the stadia is silly. Alternately, they could have made all fields have both teams on one side. Make it the same.
I like the changes to the rouge, it takes it from a common event that can be the game winning point to being a quirky anomaly.
I'm OK with the 15yd EZ and losing the 55, if for no other reason than making MTL and TOR have standardized fields (its not baseball). I think 15yd EZ would solve the problem, that they could maintain the 55 and still achieve uniform field sizes. So that could be a give back.
The heart and soul of the game, 3 downs, 12 men, 65yd wide field, proper kickoffs/punts/overtime, and the waggle all remain. No one can be flipping past a CFL game and confuse it with any other sport.
The league does need to start promoting the "new look", start bragging about the product's superiority to other offerings, both historically and with the revisions.
Maybe a 30 second Tik Tok on the new rouge (not even mentioning the old rouge).
And if they are going to give back the 55, that would be a great media blast as well. I'm sure it wont assuage the fury of the ultra die hards, but as a meaningful concession to the fans who love the uniqueness, I think it would be a great PR move.
Also, short vids on why our game is better would be awesome.
Tiktok type videos about the waggle, about the OT, about why we have 12 men, and a 65yards wide field. About why we don't need the "tush push" even with 3 downs, our SY specialists can get involved multiple times a drive, not just the rare occasion the NFL uses them.
About how we only have 3 downs, but the game is so wide open we can still have a running game. But that the extra DB and WR make the passing game so much more exciting.
There is so much to market in the CFL, and we've done a crap job at it since "Our balls are bigger". With the new "elbows up" environment, we need to promote OUR game.
Goal post move takes away the "doink", but doesn't change the FG much, and with the rouge mods, makes it even less of an issue. We need more TD's and less FG's. The GP move does this, the unobstructed 15yd EZ becomes a clearer, "Doink" free target.
Going for it at midfield becomes a different choice, which it should be. The modified rouge brings in precision punters, who knows, we might see 3 specialists now, or K that P short yards, and P that only P when a booming leg is needed.
Until the changes are implemented, and we see how they effect the game, opinions are only opinion. I can't see the GP change ever being reversed, and if the 55 is given back, it will be before new turf is installed, so investment in the new fields/turfs are safe.
Tweaks on the clock I expect to happen and on the rouge, possibly.
"If it ain't broke" keeps getting rolled out. But it is broke, like the majority of the teams. Having half the league with different sidelines than the other half, and 20% of the fields having a different shape and/or dangerous transitions is broke.
The game is evolving, to be better, more exciting, higher scoring and faster. That's is a positive change in my honest opinion.
Quote from: theaardvark on May 06, 2026, 05:18:36 PMAs to being a "parrot for the CFL talking points", sorry if I have an ability to allow reason into my thought process.
(https://media.tenor.com/KuFtDMEF3o4AAAAM/come-on-saturday-night-live.gif)
Quote from: theaardvark on May 06, 2026, 05:29:38 PMGoal post move takes away the "doink", but doesn't change the FG much, and with the rouge mods, makes it even less of an issue. We need more TD's and less FG's. The GP move does this, the unobstructed 15yd EZ becomes a clearer, "Doink" free target.
Going for it at midfield becomes a different choice, which it should be. The modified rouge brings in precision punters, who knows, we might see 3 specialists now, or K that P short yards, and P that only P when a booming leg is needed.
Until the changes are implemented, and we see how they effect the game, opinions are only opinion. I can't see the GP change ever being reversed, and if the 55 is given back, it will be before new turf is installed, so investment in the new fields/turfs are safe.
Tweaks on the clock I expect to happen and on the rouge, possibly.
"If it ain't broke" keeps getting rolled out. But it is broke, like the majority of the teams. Having half the league with different sidelines than the other half, and 20% of the fields having a different shape and/or dangerous transitions is broke.
The game is evolving, to be better, more exciting, higher scoring and faster. That's is a positive change in my honest opinion.
If teams can't kick a FG from the 40 they're not going to magically transform those stalled drives into more TD's, they're going to punt the ball away because they failed to make a first down. Watch the stats, punt numbers are going to go up significantly, final scores will be lower.
Many times Medlock kicked 5-6 FG's to keep the Bombers competitive in games, I don't recall ever being bored with that strategy, I was happy they still had a chance to win.
Quote from: bomber beetle on May 06, 2026, 03:39:04 PMI apologize that you were offended by my post.
I am a hardcore fan. I do not 'love' all the changes. I do not know why the field is changing so I suppose that makes me an imbecile as well. I do know that something needs to change so I have presented my thoughts on why it is happening and how it may help the league to be sustainable....but I am just guessing.
I am involved with multiple sports organizations, which puts me in touch with hundreds of Bomber season ticket holders. I stand by my claim that no one likes the changes and most don't understand the need for them. However, none have expressed a desire to drop their tickets...in other words they are shrugging it off. I have only come across one person who was 'angry'...and he is not going to drop his tickets either.
Are you implying then that you don't believe (or don't put much value on) the reasons provided by the league? I appreciate your input and opinions on this subject. Just want to clarify.
Quote from: blue_gold_84 on May 06, 2026, 05:39:17 PM(https://media.tenor.com/KuFtDMEF3o4AAAAM/come-on-saturday-night-live.gif)
What a useless post that only serves to demean if we're going to single out posts of no value intermittently, eh ModAdmin?
Quote from: bomb squad on May 06, 2026, 10:03:02 PMAre you implying then that you don't believe (or don't put much value on) the reasons provided by the league? I appreciate your input and opinions on this subject. Just want to clarify.
I believe the reasons provided are only an offshoot of the main reason.
It arises from a vision to be compatible with soccer stadiums, present and future. Both in Canada and possibly outside of the country.
I'm upset that people say I'm just parroting the leagues talkng points. Then parrots the leagues talking points.
(https://memecentral.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/lol-hahaha-meme.jpg)
In this case, "parroting the league's talking points" refer to being aligned generally with the recommendations of a business executive and the league's nine team owners and management, as opposed to the contrarian view of internet experts who, generally speaking, have no known business expertise, proficiency or success.
As long as we are all clear.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 07, 2026, 12:11:50 AMIn this case, "parroting the league's talking points" refer to being aligned generally with the recommendations of a business executive and the league's nine team owners and management, as opposed to the contrarian view of internet experts who, generally speaking, have no known business expertise, proficiency or success.
As long as we are all clear.
It's odd to see someone completely align with every new change and not have any conflicting opinions.
Quote from: Jesse on May 07, 2026, 01:55:06 AMIt's odd to see someone completely align with every new change and not have any conflicting opinions.
It's odd that anyone could have such visceral reactions to changes that they haven't seen for themselves.
Maybe I'll hate them? I don't completely know I won't. But I'm willing to look for reason, be optimistic, and generally speaking, trust that the people in charge (collectively) know what they're doing. I'm also safe in my truth that I love football in general: be that CFL, NFL, or NCAA.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 07, 2026, 02:04:48 AMIt's odd that anyone could have such visceral reactions to changes that they haven't seen for themselves.
You didn't read my "no going back" post on the last page? Going to 100Y field is akin to me picking up my family, selling the house, and moving to Guam for no apparent reason. When my wife goes mental at first mention, I can just tell her not to "have such visceral reactions to changes that they haven't seen for themselves". (Ironically, undoing a move to Guam would be easier than undoing the change to 100Y...)
My wife would definitely cancel her
seasons tickets to our marriage!
As such it requires way more thought and consideration and study than 99% of people (including Johnston IMHO) are putting into it.
Quote from: bomber beetle on May 06, 2026, 11:10:55 PMIt arises from a vision to be compatible with soccer stadiums, present and future. Both in Canada and possibly outside of the country.
And that's half my beef... sort of. It's not that I would be against soccer stadiums (or even US expansion if the ratio was forced!), it's that Johnston isn't telling us what the real reasons are beyond the talking point misdirections (mostly "more scoring").
The league talking heads are now totally opaque and phony. This doesn't make people confident. They farm out to the marketers for the talking points and just repeat them ad nauseam. Works on the low IQ crowd, but inquiring people want to know more!
I never once got the impression Unca'Brosie was holding back on details or explanations. He'd seem to spend infinite time explaining everything. And he was believable. I always hated the GLOB idea, but 'Brosie never lied about what it was going to be. It allowed us to have honest, and far less contentious, discussions.
TLDR; if it's "because muh soccer" (or whatever) then just come out and say it!! We'd all be a lot happier.
Quote from: Tecno on May 07, 2026, 02:29:25 AMYou didn't read my "no going back" post on the last page? Going to 100Y field is akin to me picking up my family, selling the house, and moving to Guam for no apparent reason. When my wife goes mental at first mention, I can just tell her not to "have such visceral reactions to changes that they haven't seen for themselves". (Ironically, undoing a move to Guam would be easier than undoing the change to 100Y...)
My wife would definitely cancel her seasons tickets to our marriage!
As such it requires way more thought and consideration and study than 99% of people (including Johnston IMHO) are putting into it.
I didn't read the post and if no one has told you yet, it's not normal to compare a rule change in a football league to you moving your family to Guam. Whatever you think, I can promise you it's not "akin" to that.
Quote from: theaardvark on May 06, 2026, 05:18:36 PMBut the league will not appreciably change with or without the 55yd line, and if that's something they held in their pocket to give back and dull the ire of the diehards, kudos to them for the plan.
And if they are going to give back the 55, that would be a great media blast as well. I'm sure it wont assuage the fury of the ultra die hards, but as a meaningful concession to the fans who love the uniqueness, I think it would be a great PR move.
Has the word gone out to float the idea of "giving us back the 55YL"? First I've heard of it. Frankly, I don't think Johnston is savvy enough to pull an "Art of the Deal": starting with an insane position so when you finally meet in the middle the other side feels like they've "won". If it turns out that's exactly what he did, then kudos to him for the 4D chess.
And Aards, we've moved past talking about each individual change. Stop mentioning the same-side-benches and all-fields-the-same (etc.) because absolutely no one cares about those changes. They aren't a point of contention, and anyone who brings them up now is straw-manning.
In fact, I'm not sure anyone's arguing
any of the individual changes anymore. We've moved on to the meta-changes: the reasons behind the changes, the effect of the gestalt, the way things are being handled, the transparency of the process.
But if Johnston magically backtracks on the 55YL, in perpetuity, then I, for one would be happy; and be fine with testing out all the other changes. It's my top #1 Canadianism (other than 3 downs). (GP move being a close 2nd, but easier to undo later.)
That said, not gonna happen. Johnston will ride
all these changes until he's fired.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 07, 2026, 02:04:48 AMMaybe I'll hate them? I don't completely know I won't. But I'm willing to look for reason, be optimistic, and generally speaking, trust that the people in charge (collectively) know what they're doing.
That's your choice and your prerogative.
Others see things differently, however, expressing their skepticism with all the changes, and questioning the rationale and motivation for them as they relate to not only the current state of the league, but its future in a changing sports ecosystem.
And that's their choice and their prerogative.
(https://jpellegrino.com/images/reflogic/appealtoauthority.jpg)
Quote from: Tecno on May 07, 2026, 02:46:20 AMHas the word gone out to float the idea of "giving us back the 55YL"? First I've heard of it. Frankly, I don't think Johnston is savvy enough to pull an "Art of the Deal": starting with an insane position so when you finally meet in the middle the other side feels like they've "won". If it turns out that's exactly what he did, then kudos to him for the 4D chess.
And Aards, we've moved past talking about each individual change. Stop mentioning the same-side-benches and all-fields-the-same (etc.) because absolutely no one cares about those changes. They aren't a point of contention, and anyone who brings them up now is straw-manning.
In fact, I'm not sure anyone's arguing any of the individual changes anymore. We've moved on to the meta-changes: the reasons behind the changes, the effect of the gestalt, the way things are being handled, the transparency of the process.
But if Johnston magically backtracks on the 55YL, in perpetuity, then I, for one would be happy; and be fine with testing out all the other changes. It's my top #1 Canadianism (other than 3 downs). (GP move being a close 2nd, but easier to undo later.)
That said, not gonna happen. Johnston will ride all these changes until he's fired.
Would you be good with a 110 yard field along with 10 yard endzones?
I doubt there will be a deviation from the proposed overall length of 130 yards.
Quote from: bomber beetle on May 07, 2026, 10:23:01 PMWould you be good with a 110 yard field along with 10 yard endzones?
I doubt there will be a deviation from the proposed overall length of 130 yards.
Nope. We have to have deeper EZ. Too many players to have an NFL postage stamp EZ.
Going from 150 to 140 should fit the fields into all the stadia, and even make the soccer crossover easier, talking the goalpost further out of the way.
Quote from: theaardvark on May 07, 2026, 10:32:35 PMNope. We have to have deeper EZ. Too many players to have an NFL postage stamp EZ.
Going from 150 to 140 should fit the fields into all the stadia, and even make the soccer crossover easier, talking the goalpost further out of the way.
The League stated that they want to harmonize the fields across the league. 130 is the maximum within current stadiums.
Quote from: Tecno on May 07, 2026, 02:46:20 AMHas the word gone out to float the idea of "giving us back the 55YL"? First I've heard of it. Frankly, I don't think Johnston is savvy enough to pull an "Art of the Deal": starting with an insane position so when you finally meet in the middle the other side feels like they've "won". If it turns out that's exactly what he did, then kudos to him for the 4D chess.
Just this:
https://montrealgazette.com/sports/football/montreal-alouettes/zurkowsky-cfl-steps-out-of-bounds-with-ludicrous-playoff-overhaul/
While we believe the revamped playoff system is carved in stone,
we've already heard rumblings that some of Johnston's other 2027 bold moves — shortening the field to 100 from 110 yards, 15-yard end zones and goalposts being moved back — could be scrapped after severe public criticism.
Quote from: gobombersgo on May 08, 2026, 12:16:52 AMJust this:
https://montrealgazette.com/sports/football/montreal-alouettes/zurkowsky-cfl-steps-out-of-bounds-with-ludicrous-playoff-overhaul/
While we believe the revamped playoff system is carved in stone, we've already heard rumblings that some of Johnston's other 2027 bold moves — shortening the field to 100 from 110 yards, 15-yard end zones and goalposts being moved back — could be scrapped after severe public criticism.
Well that is a start. The new playoff format may hurt season ticket sales, considering only one team makes the playoffs, and it devalues the regular season.
Quote from: bomber beetle on May 07, 2026, 10:23:01 PMWould you be good with a 110 yard field along with 10 yard endzones?
I doubt there will be a deviation from the proposed overall length of 130 yards.
In short. Yes. 110Y with 10YEZs, if that's the only compromise available, would be preferable to 100+15YEZs. Why? Because on my prior-to-Johnston list of "what's iconic about CFL football?" my list would have started like this (as would everyone else's if they were being truly honest with themselves):
1. 3 down
2. 55YL
When we had cheesehead family visiting us back when that NFL pre-season game was here, those are the first things I pointed out as the epitome of CFL. Who doesn't like the look on USA fans' faces when you show them a 55YL?!
20YEZs would have been like #6 on my list. Not because I don't like the big EZs, but because no one really gave EZ as much thought before it was threatened -- not like they did to the 55 anyways.
So ya, I'd sacrifice the EZs for the 55 if I had to.
Quote from: bomber beetle on May 07, 2026, 10:43:59 PMThe League stated that they want to harmonize the fields across the league. 130 is the maximum within current stadiums.
It's not. I was just at Molson for the ESF and spying things out & taking pics. Molson is the hardest "fit" in the league. TOR is easier to solve. Here's my previous post on it:
2025-12-11 13:58:09
If "must fit Molson" is the biggest reason for shortening the field, and having "no cut corners" is non-negotiable, then they could set the EZ to 14Y. That would 100% fit Molson. Problem solved, with no need to lose the 55YL. And there's zero argument one could make for 15Y EZs being fine but not 14. Talk about an imperceptible difference.
=============
So we could fit every stadium with 110+14+14 = 138Y fields (vs 150Y now). Keep the 110. Fix the corner issue in Molson and the "10Y less" TOR problem.
Yes, weird non-"multiple of 5" numbers would seem odd, perhaps, but since there aren't really many lines in the EZ, I doubt anyone would care or notice -- not like they care about the 55Y. Heck, most people never noticed TOR has one EZ shaved off!
So keep the 110 and shave the EZ to the most-maximal size to make
everything standardized, even in TOR/MTL.
Quote from: gobombersgo on May 08, 2026, 12:16:52 AMWhile we believe the revamped playoff system is carved in stone, we've already heard rumblings that some of Johnston's other 2027 bold moves — shortening the field to 100 from 110 yards, 15-yard end zones and goalposts being moved back — could be scrapped after severe public criticism.
Awesome! Thanks. Shows that all the forum comments, and call-in show griping, and letter-writing does move the needle. Of course, the pundit could be just making all this up, or his sources are just fans or other pundits, with no insight into the BoG or league employees... But it does give us hope.
Do not be silenced by the "you're just being emotional/visceral" shills!
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on May 07, 2026, 02:40:46 AMI didn't read the post and if no one has told you yet, it's not normal to compare a rule change in a football league to you moving your family to Guam. Whatever you think, I can promise you it's not "akin" to that.
That explains a lot. Then you're not debating in good faith and I wash my hands of you on this topic. Interjecting 2 sentences here and there regarding complicated topics and arguments that you aren't even reading doesn't help anyone.
Quote from: Tecno on May 08, 2026, 05:15:18 AM110Y with 10YEZs, if that's the only compromise available, would be preferable to 100+15YEZs.
Feels like you could play around a lot with this - why not a 52.5 center line for a 105-yard field, and 12.5 yard endzones? :D
Or just have a couple of stadiums be odd-balls, we already had a few baseball stadiums - for decades - be different than the others (e.g., Fenway Park in Boston with their huge wall).
Quote from: Cool Spot on May 09, 2026, 02:22:24 AMFeels like you could play around a lot with this - why not a 52.5 center line for a 105-yard field, and 12.5 yard endzones? :D
You jest, but I put that out as a possibility last year. The EZ length is pretty irrelevant whether 20 or 17.5 or even 15 (if they must). Whether it's a big "55" printed in the middle or "53" isn't the end of the world either, assuming they desperately wanted to fit all the freak fields. "53" might end up being an even bigger Canadianism than 55! But of course I think many/most would prefer 55 to 53 simply for historical reasons, and instead just shave off the EZs. And it would save the cost of returfing 2 fields, which is my big bugbear.
Hehe, but ya, don't go decimal points. 52.5... yikes. At that point make it an irrational number (decimals go on forever), and have it written across the entire line, rail to rail, to 44 decimal places. Halftime contest could be whoever can memorize the most places! Free Walby burger if you get all 44.
3DN raised a few interesting points in the podcast below, by moving the season up 2 weeks the CFL will now hold their draft before the NFL draft, which likely will result in more wasted picks on Canadian players that get drafted by the NFL.
Moving the season up 2 weeks also interferes with the university cycle which typically ends in early May, meaning some students will still be writing exams and may not be able to report to TC on time, plus dorm rooms will not be available as cheap accommodation, which is a budget item all CFL teams rely on.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 09, 2026, 07:04:32 PM3DN raised a few interesting points in the podcast below, by moving the season up 2 weeks the CFL will now hold their draft before the NFL draft, which likely will result in more wasted picks on Canadian players that get drafted by the NFL.
Moving the season up 2 weeks also interferes with the university cycle which typically ends in early May, meaning some students will still be writing exams and may not be able to report to TC on time, plus dorm rooms will not be available as cheap accommodation, which is a budget item all CFL teams rely on.
These are the little things that are going to pop up as you make changes. The league and teams and players are going to have to troubleshoot as things come up. It's why you don't make so many changes at once because you're not going to be able to put out one fire before the next one starts.
Quote from: Jesse on May 09, 2026, 07:37:47 PMThese are the little things that are going to pop up as you make changes. The league and teams and players are going to have to troubleshoot as things come up. It's why you don't make so many changes at once because you're not going to be able to put out one fire before the next one starts.
A real issue is the CFL under Johnston moves ahead with these decisions without fully consulting all effected parties, thus unintended consequences. Apparently Walters beaked off about these 2 issues although I don't know on which medium he did so, he has to be careful or he'll end up being fined for insubordination.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 09, 2026, 07:52:16 PMA real issue is the CFL under Johnston moves ahead with these decisions without fully consulting all effected parties, thus unintended consequences. Apparently Walters beaked off about these 2 issues although I don't know on which medium he did so, he has to be careful or he'll end up being fined for insubordination.
I heard him say the draft would be much more challenging. It obviously will be.
Ya KW commented on the draft-day swap. However, this just shifts the work to the GM -- it'll now be imperative a GM (and staff) can predict which prospects will go to NFL and stick, which will go to the NFL and fail (they already predict this for later round picks), and who won't go to the NFL at all.
If a GM/staff guesses wrong they could find themselves wasting a high 1RDP on someone who will never see Canada again.
Zach also said he doesn't like it because it's one week less a year with his family.
So some players will like it because it's guaranteed (for 89% of AR players) playoff money -- which isn't anything to scoff at if you're an ELC. But other players (the highest paid) would probably rather have the family time.
But ya, having our draft before the NFL is a bit of a headscratcher. Besides Johnston, who would think this is a good thing? Is there any chance to move the season up but keep our draft after the NFL? What about having it just hours after the NFL draft, or the next day? Wouldn't that still leave enough time before rookie camp starts?