CFL announces changes to the game - merged topics

[theaardvark]

Sideline signage probably becomes less an issue when eastern teams need to put teams on both side lines...

And yes, they are stupid and should be eliminated.  They are for TV mainly, and there is no reason they can't be virtual.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Minimal changes? Once the ball goes into the end-zone, returners will simply knock it out the back or side (using the hand or else it would be given to the other team). No single, just get the ball on the 35 or 40 or where the FG was tried from. Running the ball out of the end-zone will be a thing of the past.

Doubt it, for sure they will give up a single if they knock the ball out of bounds on a missed FG.

[Stats Junkie]

That's still a rouge.  Only if the ball goes out unassisted is it not a rouge.

On the subject of the rouge, let's start using the term properly. Rouge involves an action by the scoring team at the point of the score. A kick through the back of the end zone is just a deadline kick.

Other uses of 'rouge' in Canadian football:
Rouge (v) - to tackle an opponent in the end zone for a score.
Rouged (past tense) - tackled

Here is an example of rouge and rouged used in a scoring summary along with deadline kick.


Notice that 'rouged' on single points involves a tackle and it is also used on a safety touch where the QB was tackled. Rouge is also used to describe a scoring play that involved a blocked punt in the end zone (that same play became a safety touch in 1978).


Another Canadian term is 'convert' vs the distinctly American 'PAT'. Extra Point is somewhat acceptable.

'Convert' is derived from the early days of Canadian football before a points scoring system was introduced. Back then, the team with the most 'Goals' won the game. If tied, the team with the most 'Trys' won. If still tied, the team with the most minor points or singles won the game.

There were a couple of ways to score a goal. One was to kick a goal from the field by kicking the ball through the goal posts (which were located on the goal line). Today we call it a field goal. The other way required a team to score a try. The scoring team could then 'convert' the 'try' into a 'goal' by kicking the ball between the goal posts.

[Stats Junkie]

Found the graph"

That is the graphic from the Dave Naylor post. As Jeff Hamilton notes, there are a lot of missing details from this graphic. What time frame are we talking about - Jeff speculates that it is data from 2025 which is a small sample size.

Jeff was building on comments from Derek Taylor where he questioned how large each zone (left, middle, right) actually is.

Since then, DT has posted his own graphic with data dating back to 2015 although he admits that data since 2021 is incomplete. DT divides the field into 5 sections:
- sideline to numbers (left & right)
- numbers to hash marks (left & right)
- hash mark to hash mark (pre-2022 width).
DT also divides the end zone into 4 equal 5 yard depths.

His data shows a much more even distribution of passes to all areas of the end zone which is based on a much more statistically significant sample size.

https://x.com/DTonOB/status/1971664645078548841?t=ORJYbc67BDZKlm2YHqu5VA&s=19

[ichabod_crane]

Doubt it, for sure they will give up a single if they knock the ball out of bounds on a missed FG.

Ah no. If the receiving team handles the ball in any way in the endzone (be it kickoff/field goal or punt) in any way or bats it out of bounds that is still a single. It's untouched balls or missed field goals out of bounds which no longer will be singles as I understand it.

[Jesse]

That is the graphic from the Dave Naylor post. As Jeff Hamilton notes, there are a lot of missing details from this graphic. What time frame are we talking about - Jeff speculates that it is data from 2025 which is a small sample size.

Jeff was building on comments from Derek Taylor where he questioned how large each zone (left, middle, right) actually is.

Since then, DT has posted his own graphic with data dating back to 2015 although he admits that data since 2021 is incomplete. DT divides the field into 5 sections:
- sideline to numbers (left & right)
- numbers to hash marks (left & right)
- hash mark to hash mark (pre-2022 width).
DT also divides the end zone into 4 equal 5 yard depths.

His data shows a much more even distribution of passes to all areas of the end zone which is based on a much more statistically significant sample size.

https://x.com/DTonOB/status/1971664645078548841?t=ORJYbc67BDZKlm2YHqu5VA&s=19

Yup. DT tracked from 2015 and his data shows all the talking points are full of hot air.

More passes are already attempted to the middle of the field and scoring is up over the past few years.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Ah no. If the receiving team handles the ball in any way in the endzone (be it kickoff/field goal or punt) in any way or bats it out of bounds that is still a single. It's untouched balls or missed field goals out of bounds which no longer will be singles as I understand it.

That's what I said Ichabod Crane, that's exactly what I said.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Just think, if the posts were moved back we would have shut the Cats out yesterday. 

[markf]

Idea...

Put together a montage of the last two minutes of some of the last second, down to the final play games from this season.

Publish it, Show it to Mr. Commissioner Rule change and ask why he thinks the games aren't exciting enough.

Based on the actual games, His argument does not hold water.

[theaardvark]

Idea...

Put together a montage of the last two minutes of some of the last second, down to the final play games from this season.

Publish it, Show it to Mr. Commissioner Rule change and ask why he thinks the games aren't exciting enough.

Based on the actual games, His argument does not hold water.

The clock is not to create more excitement, but to increase pace.

We do have rules that change inside 3 minutes, I have no issue with changes that speed up 57 minutes of the game, but leave the final 3 alone...

[Sir Blue and Gold]

The clock is not to create more excitement, but to increase pace.

We do have rules that change inside 3 minutes, I have no issue with changes that speed up 57 minutes of the game, but leave the final 3 alone...

I think so too. Although I'll say that every football league I've ever watched generates thrilling endings to games and anyone who tries to tell you that the NFL or NCAA somehow doesn't is either lying or doesn't watch it.

I do enjoy the tactical changes that occur when the offense needs to drive the field and the clock doesn't stop for them for 30 seconds every 5 seconds play. They use the sidelines. They run different plays. They have to run to the line. All of that is also entertaining and fun even if it's a bit different than what we see in the CFL.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Idea...

Put together a montage of the last two minutes of some of the last second, down to the final play games from this season.

Publish it, Show it to Mr. Commissioner Rule change and ask why he thinks the games aren't exciting enough.

Based on the actual games, His argument does not hold water.

Teams will have to drive to the 35 to have a long shot at making a last minute FG.  Leiegghio soils himself on FG's over 50 yds.

[bomb squad]

Yup. DT tracked from 2015 and his data shows all the talking points are full of hot air.

More passes are already attempted to the middle of the field and scoring is up over the past few years.

What do you mean? How do you get that from that chart?

[Tecno]

I asked everyone around me @PAS about the changes.  Had some interesting takes.  On theory in particular stood out to me, as they guy was pretty sure he was right.

Dude thought the '27 changes aren't in stone and are negotiating tactics for when the USA TV deal is renewed between 26'-'27.  If USA guys pay up for TV rights then we do this Diet-NFL changes.  If USA doesn't pay up, we ditch the 110Y/GP changes.

Certainly as possible as some of my theories.  And gives us 110-is-sacrosanct people possible hope.  Though now we're hoping CFL only gets the normal pittance from the USA deal, LOL.

[Tecno]

Can't recall if I saw this here or not.  Just in case, here's a petition for the league to pause and think through these changes a bit.

Petition to pause rule changes

If you're even remotely on the "nay" side, sign it.  It's not saying you hate all the changes, or that you don't want any changes, it just means there should be more discussion and external input.