CFL announces changes to the game - merged topics

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Yes, it is. The three downs and rugby-influenced fields have been the fabric of the CFL since its inception.

You and Aardsy don't seem to have a clue.

I get you feel that way. And there's probably 150-250 (being generous) die-hard fans who post here who agree with you. The question I have for you is whether the hundreds of thousands of other fans who attend games across Canada (or watch on TV) also agree with you, or if they align closer with my way of thinking.

I've done lots of work around consumer sentimates, outrage, social listening, etc. in a business context and I think it's you who doesn't have the proper market orientation here. 

[blue_gold_84]

Osborne stadium.  Opened in 1932 with seating for 4,000.  Going on a hundred years ago and 3 years after the first forward pass was completed in 1929. Great example of how we should "modernize" with that 100 yard field.

[blue_gold_84]

I get you feel that way. And there's probably 150-250 (being generous) die-hard fans who post here who agree with you. The question I have for you is whether the hundreds of thousands of other fans who attend games across Canada (or watch on TV) also agree with you, or if they align closer with my way of thinking.

I've done lots of work around consumer sentimates, outrage, social listening, etc. in a business context and I think it's you who doesn't have the proper market orientation here. 

Fans were never consulted in any meaningful way. The commissioner basically admitted as much.

Get over yourself. Also: what's a sentimate?

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Fans were never consulted in any meaningful way. The commissioner basically admitted as much.

Get over yourself.

And if you had a chance to be "consulted" but they went off and did it anyway because they think it's the best course of action for the business how would you have felt?

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Fans were never consulted in any meaningful way. The commissioner basically admitted as much.

Get over yourself. Also: what's a sentimate?

sentiments My bad!

[blue_gold_84]

And if you had a chance to be "consulted" but they went off and did it anyway because they think it's the best course of action for the business how would you have felt?

Quite a pointless question, wouldn't you say? I mean, you can read through my comments over the last few days to see how I feel about this whole situation.

The CFL isn't in financial shambles because of its field dimensions, goalpost location, or the rouge - and the changes proposed don't make its business model more sustainable. Those in charge don't seem interested in having that tough conversation, though.

[wpg#1]

Oh, so it was just 1 field, not a CFL-wide thing.  You know, like the MTL EZ corners exception.

So it is true the CFL never had 100Y fields as the rule.  And if Aards hates/hated and lambasts the MTL corners problem, the he surely must hate/lambast the Osborne stadium problem.  And it surely can't then be used as a talking point to justify the current changes.

Oh ya, and you need to go back to 1956 to even bring up Osborne as an argument.

Thanks Tecno, exactly what I was thinking. It was not CFL wide.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Quite a pointless question, wouldn't you say? I mean, you can read through my comments over the last few days to see how I feel about this whole situation.

The CFL isn't in financial shambles because of its field dimensions, goalpost location, or the rouge - and the changes proposed don't make its business model more sustainable. Those in charge don't seem interested in having that tough conversation, though.

I can tell you what tends to happen if they did what would be a mostly disingenuous fan outreach effort seeing as they clearly decided that they were going to do:

You would get an email with a link to a survey. You'd fill out the survey.

Then they'd have done the announcement anyway and it would naturally cause even more anger because you took the time to share your feelings and they were ignored. The data isn't even really usable from their perspective because I don't think these moves are really aimed at the hardcore CFL fan (who are all on this board) and that's really the only person (or at least a largely disproportionate number) who would be motivated enough to do it anyway. they already knew how you'd feel, to be blunt.

And I don't think you actually want to shift the narrative to the financial health of the league, do you? There's a salary cap. An operations cap. And outside the praries there's attendance issues. in half the major markets.

[Waffler]

And they complain about grass in Argoland...

[blue_gold_84]

And I don't think you actually want to shift the narrative to the financial health of the league, do you? There's a salary cap. An operations cap. And outside the praries there's attendance issues. in half the major markets.

I'm saying the caretakers of this league don't seem to want to have the discussion, despite how pressing a matter it apparently is. Only two franchises turned a profit last year; alarm bells should be blaring.

Trotting out a bunch of arbitrary, mostly pointless changes - while leaving players and coaches out of the loop - fails to address why the CFL is not sustainable from a so-called business standpoint.

I don't see the benefits here, either in the short- or long-term.

[Tecno]

that is why i said that they should be assisting with the rollout and implementation.

Uh, what good does that do now?  Usports/highschools/junior had zero say, zero heads up, zero anything.  How are they going to assist in "rollout and implementation" if they don't even want to follow the changes?  And if they do want the changes, what does "assisting" buy them?  Is the CFL paying for all their new fields and posts?

This is a case of a dad telling the kids they have to help bag the leaves on the lawn and saying "I'll allow you to assist me with implementation".  Not a case of treating grown adults and old & storied institutions (as well as your future source of players) as valued peers and stakeholders.

If I was any of these leagues, I'd be livid.

[Waffler]

If I was any of these leagues, I'd be livid.

I wouldn't be surprised for it to take years if not decades before all fields are changed.  There is no legal requirement for them to do so. I don't even know know what their motivation would be. Only a tiny fraction end up in the pros, this is not why they exist.

[Tecno]

Changing a couple of rules doesn't suddenly make it the NFL. There is no chance that that can happen because it's not a possible outcome EVEN if you changed every rule to mirror. The CFL will never be the NFL.

Yes, it can never be the NFL.  What it can be is Diet NFL.  Or XFL/AAF.  A cheap copy of the NFL.  And that's even worse than if the NFL just came in and expanded to all 9 CFL cities.

For me the ultimate betrayal will be the loss of the ratio.  Even more so than 3 downs.  The day the ratio is banished, and most teams start 24 IMPs, and 90% of NATs lose their jobs, THAT will be the day we are no longer the CFL.  That is the day we're just another feeder / film league.

And not only is that possible, with the new Commish I might guess it's even probable.

I say this kindly, think about it some more. Step back from the ledge.

I really haven't seen many here being irrational.  For the most part it's a steady diet of good points and arguments, to make us think about all the angles.  Even from you.  Don't try to reduce it to emotion like the paid promoters are.

Even on the call in shows (both blue and green cities) it's only a small fraction that are saying their STs are being cancelled for '26.  Those are the only people I'd say are "on the ledge".  And even then, most are providing rational reasons.

[Tecno]

I get you feel that way. And there's probably 150-250 (being generous) die-hard fans who post here who agree with you. The question I have for you is whether the hundreds of thousands of other fans who attend games across Canada (or watch on TV) also agree with you, or if they align closer with my way of thinking.

Well, we all have a great opportunity to find out on Saturday.  I for one will be asking nearly everyone in ear shot around my seat what they think.  I'm in a 99% STH area.  These are the fans whose opinion matters most.  If even 10% of STHs cancel next year, that will be disaster for WFC and the league.

[Tecno]

Then they'd have done the announcement anyway and it would naturally cause even more anger because you took the time to share your feelings and they were ignored. The data isn't even really usable from their perspective because I don't think these moves are really aimed at the hardcore CFL fan

But at least they could have offered some numbers in the presser instead of just alluding to vague (probably non-existent) "data".  They could have just come out and said "our surveys show 50% of you will hate these changes but 50% will like them", or whatever.  At least they'd be more transparent and honest.

And maybe, just maybe, if they found out 75% of STH hated the changes, 20% liked them, and 5% would cancel their STHs over them, maybe they'd survey which change was the worst (110Y!) and take that one off the table.

The opaqueness of the process and final goal, and insulting extremely poor arguments proffered, is half of the problem people are having.  It could have been done sooo much better.  Unless... the final goal is so ugly, they have to keep it hidden or that STH cancel number goes up to 30%...