Started by ModAdmin, April 27, 2022, 05:53:53 PM
Quote from: TBURGESS on April 27, 2022, 07:25:12 PMA bunch of changes to promote offense & give the command center more power. I'm not really for or against any of the changes.
Quote from: theaardvark on April 27, 2022, 06:06:25 PMLove all these changes... One interesting one, the 2 QB's rule, means there will be 2 players with headsets on the field... is there an additional advantage there?
Quote from: Pete on April 27, 2022, 07:36:04 PMNot sure about giving the command center more power, might just backfire and disrupt the flow of the game I prefer the way it is now with coaches having limited challenges. Many times calling games tighter just results in slow moving pace.
Quote from: ModAdmin on April 27, 2022, 05:53:53 PMChange:[/b] To also keep a game moving, a penalty that occurs at the end of the first or third quarter will be assigned at the start of the next quarter, rather than triggering an extension of the quarter. The non-offending team could still insist the penalty be imposed within the quarter if there is a clear advantage, such as wanting to keep the wind behind it for a crucial kick.
Quote from: ModAdmin on April 27, 2022, 05:53:53 PMChange: Introduction of a new objectionable conduct penalty for quarterbacks who "fake" giving themselves up by pretending to initiate a slide while carrying the football. The ball would also be spotted where the fake occurred. The safety of all quarterbacks is jeopardized when measures to protect them are instead used to gain an advantage.
Quote from: ModAdmin on April 27, 2022, 05:53:53 PMChange: Automatic ejection of any player guilty of two unnecessary roughness penalties or two objectionable conduct penalties (or a combination of two UR and OC penalties)
Quote from: theaardvark on April 27, 2022, 08:28:08 PMWatching the USFL games, getting the command centre more involved doesn't seem too bad...
Quote from: Blue In BC on April 27, 2022, 09:26:14 PMDesignate their starting RB as a QB and O'Conner ( # 2 actual QB ) as a receiver. By rule any player can play QB whether he's designated a QB or not. That would allow a team with a Canadian back up at QB to add another import RB for example and still maintain the starting ratio and the overall roster ratio. Note that QB's are not included in the overall roster ratio which is something some posters wanted.
Quote from: Blue In BC on April 27, 2022, 09:26:14 PMJust figured out the loophole that a couple of teams could use to gain an extra DI as a result of the QB rule Not another DI by classification but subterfuge. There are 3 teams that might have a Canadian QB on their roster.EXAMPLE: The Lions will start an import at RB and they probably roster 2 Canadian QB's.Designate their starting RB as a QB and O'Conner ( # 2 actual QB ) as a receiver. By rule any player can play QB whether he's designated a QB or not. That would allow a team with a Canadian back up at QB to add another import RB for example and still maintain the starting ratio and the overall roster ratio. Note that QB's are not included in the overall roster ratio which is something some posters wanted.Nothing suggests a team can't have a 2nd QB on every offensive play. Implementing what I suggested doesn't break that rule change. It might be not what was intended. It might be unethical but go ahead and explain how it doesn't comply with the new rule?
Quote from: TBURGESS on April 27, 2022, 09:51:54 PMWhich rule states that any player can play QB? Current rules state that one QB or Kicker must be on the field for every offensive play & 2 players are designated as QB's. QB1 goes down. QB2 or a kicker must come in. QB2 goes down and a player designated as the 3rd QB comes in. (I've never been able to find a rule that allows this, but I've seen it done.)In your example: QB1 goes down. QB2/Rec takes the QB spot, and RB must stay on the field. It doesn't matter tho. If QB1 and QB2 are both Canadian, they take an NI spot. There is no 'extra' import in either situation so no advantage to calling QB2 a receiver.
Quote from: Letsgobomberspodcast on April 28, 2022, 01:00:55 AMHashmark rules on paper will make offences better. But a team insider told me receivers are cautious to say that as the hashes are the main reference point for route running Eg when you hit the hash you slant etc. also, I guarantee Richie and his staff are already finding ways to counter it and or plan for it.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on April 27, 2022, 09:56:50 PMI like all the rules except starting at the 40 yard line after a field goal. The 35 already seemed generous enough. It might even be significant enough that teams go for six at 10-15 and inside. It might be better off to safeguard that field position than to score 3 and let them go right out to the 40. It really, really punishes kickers for missing too. Miss a field goal and you get 1 point and it's already out near mid-field. Yikes.
Quote from: Blue In BC on April 27, 2022, 11:33:57 PMWildcat formation describes a formation for the offense in football in which the ball is snapped not to the quarterback but directly to a player of another position lined up at the quarterback position. (In most systems, this is a running back, but some playbooks have the wide receiver, fullback, or tight end taking the snap.) The Wildcat features an unbalanced offensive line and looks to the defense like a sweep behind zone blocking. A player moves across the formation prior to the snap. However, once this player crosses the position of the running back who will receive the snap, the play develops unlike the sweep.In my example, you could classify a player expected to be a RB as a QB. The new rule allows 2 QB's on the field at the same time. Further if the # 1 QB goes down the # 2 QB enters to play QB, however the rule doesn't state you HAVE to have 2 QB's on the field at one time. It only states you can have 2 QB's on the field at one time. A RB designated as a QB would still be on the field. He could also take a direct snap and / or throw a pass.Canadian QB's do NOT TAKE a NI spot. As a starter they count against the 7 starters. Imports are restricted up to and including DI's. QB's are still a separate classification.A team with 2 Canadian QB's would have 16 starting imports and 4 DI's = 20. A team with 2 import QB's would have 17 starting imports, 1 back up QB and 4 DI's = 22 Now if the # 2 Canadian QB is actually designated as a receiver, he could / would in fact just be counted in the total count of NI's. That said you can roster more than the minimum requirement.That's the loophole. The exclusion of QB's in the total context of the roster but counted in the ratio if they are starters. I spelt it out as clearly as I could.
QuoteOf the 46 players named to the roster, each team may dress an active roster of 45 players, broken down as follows: Maximum of 2 QBs (no designation) Maximum of 20 American players (4 of which must be identified as designated Americans) Minimum of 21 National players Minimum of 2 Global players...Of the 24 starters on a team, a minimum of seven starters will be nationals players. When applied to a starting roster of a team it breaks down as follows (when using the minimum number of national players): 1 QB 16 American players 7 starting national players
QuoteArticle 5 ? Designated QuarterbackPrior to the game, a team is required to designate two players who shall be permitted to alternate for each other during the game at the Quarterback position exclusively. Not more than one such player may be in the game at any time and neither of them can enter the game as a member of Team B. PENALTY: L25 PLS DR or L25 PBD or option.NOTE: For the purposes of this Article 5, the duties of the Quarterback position may include punting, place kicking and kicking off.NOTE: A team is required to have one designated quarterback or kicker on the field for each of its offensive plays.
Quote from: TecnoGenius on April 27, 2022, 09:35:37 PMUh, I watch every CFL game, always, and I have never seen a QB do this. Is this a thing?? They sure fake-throw a lot, but I've never seen a fake slide or dive. Is this open to interpretation? Potential quagmire.
Quote from: TBURGESS on April 28, 2022, 02:30:49 PM If the starting QB is a NI, then he is one of the 7 starting NI's, which would mean a 17th American starter. To me, that's taking up 1 NI spot.If both QB's are Canadian, one would be a starter the other just a QB because they are still outside of the ratio rules.Calling QB2 a RB and a RB QB2 doesn't change the number of starting NI's (7), but I now understand how it creates an extra DI. If teams do that, then they might as well put QB's in the same ratio as everyone else, like I've been saying all off season. Lastly, can we bring Streveler back as RB/QB2. He's worth even more since the rule change.
Quote from: Blue In BC on April 28, 2022, 03:46:29 PMAn import QB is one of the 17 import starters. So having a Canadian QB doesn't change the number of import starters. It only changes where they line up. So no, it doesn't take up a NI spot. The balance is still the same. Technically I think the " extra " import wouldn't be an extra DI. He'd be a non starting import that could rotate in at any time for another import.Putting the QB's in the same ratio has been discussed a lot in other strings and I have stood against that idea. At least unless there is further clarification.My point was that you need to accommodate how that is implemented in the total ratio. Most teams will have 2 import QB's. Does that mean we add 2 imports to the total allowed on the roster?For a team like the Lions with 2 potential Canadian QB's they'd be allowed to add 2 more imports which would be non starting. However that would be a little like giving them 2 additional DI's.If you do that, it directly reduces the roster by 2 Canadians since the current ratio has a separate classification for QB's inside the ratio.Obviously only a few teams are going to have a Canadian QB let alone 2.
Quote from: TBURGESS on April 28, 2022, 04:01:38 PMDidn't they change the rule a year or two ago to allow a Canadian QB to be designated as a NI? That would make him one of the 7 NI starters. A DI is an Import who can come in for any starting Import but can't start. That's what you'd be 'creating'.BC could have two additional DI's. They pay for them with their 2 NI QB's. Calling a Canuck a Canuck doesn't reduce the number of Canadian's on the roster. It makes all Canadian's the same ratio wise.
Quote from: Blue In BC on April 28, 2022, 04:09:31 PMNope and nope. The change made was to allow a starting Canadian QB to be included in the starting 7 but not part of the 21 on the roster. Even your quote shows 2 QB's no designation + 21 Canadians.The minimum number of Canadians is 21. Canadian QB's are not currently part of that count whether he is a starter or not. In the case of the Lions, they will end up with 23 Canadians instead of 21. I think you're getting lost in the specific interpretation of the QB designation. Technically you're correct that the number of imports would be a constant in your example. It does reduce the number of Canadians in total under the current QB designation which I feel is the current ratio intent.
Quote from: TBURGESS on April 28, 2022, 06:10:43 PMAs I understand it:There are a maximum of 20 American players + 2 QB's. If 2 IMP QB's, then 22 IMP. (Maximized # of IMP)If 1 NI & 1 IMP QB, then 21 IMP.If 2 NI QB, then 20 IMP.If QB1 = NI, then he is one of the mandatory starting 7 NI's. (Note: This doesn't increase the number of starting IMP's)Therefore each NI QB increases the number of Canadian's on the team.Designating an IMP QB as any other IMP spot & visa versa doesn't change anything ratio wise.Designating a backup NI QB as any other IMP spot & visa versa maximizes the number of IMP's on the roster (22 or 21 depending on if the starting QB is a IMP or NI). It doesn't change the number of starting IMP's, so the spot would be a backup IMP that isn't a DI cuz rules say 4 DI's, but he'd still have to come on for an IMP cuz rules say min 7 starting NI's.
Quote from: Blue In BC on April 28, 2022, 06:32:07 PMSounds right. And yes each NI QB increases the number of Canadians on the roster.If the maximum changes per your description I'd accept QB's being counted into the overall roster ratio. However we don't know that would be the case. As I said QB's are normally imports. A decision could be made to increase the maximum number of imports to 22 and go from there whether the extra 2 were QB's or otherwise.Your description still disseminates QB's as either Imports or Canadians.Can't have it both ways. Either Imports are imports whether they are QB's or other. Or we have this variable variable maximum that still considers whether they are QB's or not. That's what we have now. Bombers will have 22 imports when you consider they have 2 import QB's. Lions will end up with only 20 because they have 2 Canadian QB's.That's the issue and it's a circular argument.You didn't mention the 2 global player minimum I asked about? I wonder what would happen with a Global QB. In theory he can only replace an import. If he's on a team with a starting Canadian QB that becomes an issue.
Quote from: Blue In BC on April 28, 2022, 01:16:31 PMI think the intent on a punt single would be the same as a missed FG. Ball will come out to the 40 yard line.
Quote from: The Fresh Prince Of Belair, MB on April 28, 2022, 02:33:44 PMThis guy ruined it for everyone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Bb0n4pNwBw
Quote from: The Fresh Prince Of Belair, MB on April 28, 2022, 02:33:44 PMThis guy ruined it for everyone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Bb0n4pNwBwBanned in the NCAA too.
Quote from: ModAdmin on May 01, 2022, 07:31:47 PMMore on the players views on the rule changes...https://www.bluebombers.com/2022/04/30/first-and-goal-rule-changes/
Quote from: Pete on June 19, 2022, 07:27:31 PMJust looking at the rule changes after 2 weeks:1. Moving hash marks has opened up the field (and exposed our weakness more at safety/2. Having teams start at the 40 after kicks to the endstone hasn't been good...several of new rules were aimed to make returns more exciting, but this rule eager to give up single. Even if you get a good return like Grant had , he didn't make the 40.3. 2 QBs on field so far a non factorRules they should have done:1 Make delay of games a 10 yd penalty..it's painful to watch coaches like Dickenson do the fake gamble thing and slows down the game2 Have command center more leeway to overturn bad and missed calls such as the obvious hit to the head on Schoen in game 1.
Quote from: Pete on June 19, 2022, 07:27:31 PMJust looking at the rule changes after 2 weeks:1. Moving hash marks has opened up the field (and exposed our weakness more at safety/
Quote from: Pete on June 19, 2022, 07:27:31 PM2. Having teams start at the 40 after kicks to the endzone hasn't been good...several of new rules were aimed to make returns more exciting, but this rule eager to give up single. Even if you get a good return like Grant had , he didn't make the 40.
Quote from: TecnoGenius on June 20, 2022, 04:29:03 AMAnd has it helped the kickers? I think there are as many/more misses so far this season as (awful) 2021? What has happened to the kick game in the CFL?!?!Noticed how more teams are going for it on 3rd down when they reach midfield? CGY doing that a ton. I'm screaming at them like "what are you thinking?". Who does that? I guess the new coffin rules entice them to just go for it? It's like we're the NFL all of a sudden. I just don't get it.I'm glad MOS doesn't do that.However... I think we seriously need to consider always going for 2 PAT. If Leggs is going to miss half the PAT, the odds say we'll come out way ahead. Yes, we'd have to tool and practice for 2 PAT as we basically never bother (and it showed last game).
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on June 20, 2022, 05:09:20 AMI think it makes the game more interesting, much more so than when converts were automatic. Pushing it back to 32 yds. allows for wind and weather to influence the kick, as it probably did in Ottawa and almost always does in windy stadiums like Hamilton.
Quote from: Stats Junkie on June 20, 2022, 04:14:10 PMThe CFL goal in moving the convert scrimmage to the 25 yard line was 85%2018 - 93.02019 - 93.42021 - 91.82022 - 88.9