CFL announces changes to the game - merged topics

[Waffler]

Once the field is shortened in 2027, there will be no going back. There will be stands put in and then be  another massive expense to undo it.

I thought about it and I have decided that the 100 yard field is my red line. If that goes in I won't spend another dime on season tickets or CFL merchandise. I will watch on TV for free. I am not against rule changes but if we don't have the CFL field then we don't have CFL football.

I'd like to see a poll on how many are willing to give up season tickets over this. A couple callers on the coaches show said they would.

[blue_gold_84]

Most of the media are toeing the line. They're giving airspace to the former American players who like the changes.

You have to follow the former Canadian players to get their opinions.

Peter Dyakowski:

For now. They gutted everything they could outside of bargaining. Anything that didn't require player approval for health & safety/CBA reasons. They will come for the rest when the CBA expires. These are the first (and major) steps towards full convergence with NFL rules.

This right here Dyakowski's bang on.

What the league did yesterday was nothing short of reprehensible.

[Tecno]

The fact that players and coaches were not included in any of the decisions, much less any discussion, is honestly sickening.

Big orgs will put together "focus groups" of current and potential future customers before making drastic changes.

Did the CFL put these changes to the "focus group" of current STHs?  After all, it's that group that pays nearly all the bills in the CFL.  Lose half the STHs and you no longer have a CFL.

And did the "potential customers" focus group say these changes would turn them into paying customers?

I bet the CFL did none of the above.

[Tecno]

The 400k may be a blip

Are you thinking the increase might be a one-off and the SMS gets reduced by a commensurate $400k in '26??  I'm not sure SMS has ever gone down before?

And if it's permanent, then you once again have the counter-argument to any "league is poor and doomed right now" talk.

[blue_gold_84]

Currently when teams use a no huddle sequence to either confuse the other team or prevent changes it doesnt seem to be an issue so likely 35 seconds is fine.
Its like most changes players/officials adapt, and if 35 seconds is too short or long adjustments can easily be made.
  Too many here look at change like the sky is falling.
As long as it remains 3 downs, with wider field, and 12 men the rest isnt a big deal . The effectiveness of the new changes will determine where they go or dont go from here To the cfls credit they aren't just status quo  Like the man said if you arent going forward your left behind

Considering the response from players and coaches since this announcement, I'm not sure you're paying enough attention here.

The league made arbitrary changes without consulting those most affected by them, which leads me to believe Johnston and co. don't care about them at all. This is a fine example of a slippery slope.

[blue_gold_84]

Big orgs will put together "focus groups" of current and potential future customers before making drastic changes.

Did the CFL put these changes to the "focus group" of current STHs?  After all, it's that group that pays nearly all the bills in the CFL.  Lose half the STHs and you no longer have a CFL.

And did the "potential customers" focus group say these changes would turn them into paying customers?

I bet the CFL did none of the above.

Of course the league didn't. The bush league nonsense never ends.

Stewart Johnston is a stain on this league.

[bunker]

Big orgs will put together "focus groups" of current and potential future customers before making drastic changes.

Did the CFL put these changes to the "focus group" of current STHs?  After all, it's that group that pays nearly all the bills in the CFL.  Lose half the STHs and you no longer have a CFL.

And did the "potential customers" focus group say these changes would turn them into paying customers?

I bet the CFL did none of the above.

I don't know what they did recently, but they cited an "extensive fan survey" in 2022 when they made minor changes to hash and kickoff locations. But the responses to these type of surveys can be influenced by the questions ("If the CFL was at risk of closing down, would you support minor changes to the rules?"), and the actual results were of course never revealed to the public. These surveys are more a public relations exercise to ensure people feel "heard" than any real attempt to gauge fan opinion. They don't care. They think they know best.

[Pete]

Are you thinking the increase might be a one-off and the SMS gets reduced by a commensurate $400k in '26??  I'm not sure SMS has ever gone down before?

And if it's permanent, then you once again have the counter-argument to any "league is poor and doomed right now" talk.

If it isnt a blip then its due to tv revenue, who likely heavily influenced these changes. Does the cfl have a deal already in place for the foreseeable future? ( Btw whats Johnsons background again?)

[VictorRomano]

Got an interesting text from my best friend.  He works for a big company that has a corporate box at PAS and gives away tickets to employees and clients.  The company GM sent out an email to all staff a half-hour after the league annoucement saying they would not be renewing their corporate box for 2026.  Curious timing, that.  I guess Johnston and his "we-know-better-than-you" crew will pick up the economic slack.  Right?  RIGHT?

[Tecno]

Once the field is shortened in 2027, there will be no going back.
There will be stands put in and then be a another massive expense to undo it.

You may be right.  The agents of change love to rapidly insert changes that cannot easily (if ever) be undone.

Certainly the instant they design & build a new stadium (whether Atlantic, or McMahon) it will then be set in stone forever.  You can play in "too big" stadiums, but (other than angled corners) you can't play in a "too small" one.

I thought about it and I have decided that the 100 yard field is my red line. If that goes in I won't spend another dime on season tickets or CFL merchandise.

It's a fair and growing take.  Not me -- I'll boil with the other frogs for a while longer.

I'd like to see a poll on how many are willing to give up season tickets over this. A couple callers on the coaches show said they would.

Make one!  "New Poll" at the top of the main forum screen.  Just word it carefully and give good options.  I'd make sure to have enough "sub" options, like "hate the 100 yard idea, but keeping my STs", "hate the 100 yard idea, bye bye STs".  You definitely don't want to make it just "keeping ST" vs "cancelling ST".  The vast majority (I've been reading a lot of forums all night) are not cancelling their ST with 100 fields... yet... even though probably more than 50% don't like the idea.

[Waffler]

Doug Brown highlighted that this probably is the first step to full NFL rules. This is all they could do without going through the players' union. The next collective agreement will be NFL rules.

My guess is then merger with the UFL, which will result in us being a feeder league to the NFL.

Then they will want the ratio gone. That's just minor league american football which holds about as much interest as the Goldeyes do now.

[Tecno]

I just listened to Rourke's actual comments recording for the first time.  What an amazing, astute, adult, reasoned, rational and appealing take on the changes.  He voices exactly what I think & feel.

Make sure you listen to him actually say the words.  They are quite moving, and he's very convincing.

Call me a Rourke fan for life now.  I don't care if he destroys us in some '25 playoff game.

[Blue In BC]

Then they will want the ratio gone. That's just minor league american football which holds about as much interest as the Goldeyes do now.

I'm not sure the USFL will survive after this season. Each season so far declining attendance etc.

[Tecno]

If the CFL wanted buzz amongst the lay-people (non-fans), they got it.

I've had 3 friends who NEVER talk to me about football and don't watch CFL (or NFL) text me asking about the changes.  And I had 2 people who loosely follow it (just the Bombers) do the same (which is also out of the ordinary).

"Any publicity is good publicity"

Maybe it's all just a cruel and cynical ploy just to generate interest and get more viewers in a short-term kind of way?  Maybe Johnston will come out right after the cup and say "kidding, all those changes are off!".  One can dream...

How many people contacted you?

[Blue In BC]

Shorter field and shorter end zone:

1. K/O's may go through the end zone at times.
2. At the very least many will be fielded somewhere in the end zone, so returns may not make it as far down field. Now it's normal to see a return to 35 yard line. That could be pushed back 10 yards due to shorter field.
3. On a good kicking or windy day, a K/O might go through the end zone.

The same kinds of issues will exist on punts.

IMO this takes a lot of the great returns we see now.

Standardizing the depth of the end zone I can understand. Eliminating the risk of injury with the goal posts at the goal line I can understand but how often does that happen? I've actually run into a goal post in my youth. That said the current placement is used from a strategic point of view by receivers.

Having the odd pass hit an upright is part of the game as well.