CFL Game Changes FAQ

[Tecno]

I wanna know how this affects those that sit in the end zones.  The field resize now makes it a bit further away.  Not the same expierence that we are currently paying for.

You're now 10 yards further away from any action on your side of the field.  Walk the field next PAS game and see just how long it is from the 10YL to the GL.  10Y is actually quite far.

Plus, YOU now get the "obstructed view" the goal post supposedly causes between you and any EZ play.  (Previously you would only get that effect on plays outside the EZ.)  Of course, the whole obstructed view argument is a red herring anyhow.  No one ever complained about this -- the bars are very small in diameter.  But if Commish tries to gaslight you that it's a real issue, remember that they just made it worse for you.

Riderfans pointed out that corner sections, especially uppers, will be ipmacted the most because they won't have a good sightline to anything now!  People who were aligned with the EZ are now well outside the EZ.  They rightly point out that it's WPG & SSK stadiums that are impacted the most.  STHs there may end up being the most upset come opening game of '27.  Prices may have to be reduced.

[theaardvark]

Generally speaking, most smart OC's call the deep corner route to the flag to avoid the goal posts altogether. Dumb dumbs call the deep pass over the middle and run the risk of a doink, and so be it. It's not like the goalposts magically appeared out of nowhere, call your plays accordingly.

Thanks for making their point.

Having to adjust playcalling based on the goal posts is dumb.

Removing the obstacle leaves the entire EZ, corner to corner, open for plays.  15 yards deep only, without obstruction it is more real estate to run routes in that 20yds with posts.

[blue_gold_84]

Having to adjust playcalling based on the goal posts is dumb.

It's only been that way forever, but sure... It's dumb now because you say so.

For a guy who's spent years ripping on the NFL on this forum, it's pretty wild to see how much of a cheerleader you are over these changes that make the game more resemble the NFL.

[Tecno]

Thanks for making their point.

Having to adjust playcalling based on the goal posts is dumb.

Except Rourke came out and explicitly said they've never considered the crossbar or uprights and it's literally not a thing in their scheme or planning.  He said the other day is the first time he's ever hit one in his life.

Many QBs say they can't hit the crossbar from the 20 even if they tried.  It's so thin, relative to all that empty air around it, that the odds of striking it are slim to none -- even when you pretend it doesn't exist.  And that is borne out by the super miniscule number of times a season QBs accidentally hit it.

I'd say the only real obstacle they avoid is the actual post (bottom part) because of its thick padding.  So right at the post, right behind, and mid-way behind farther at slightly enlarging angles, would/should be the only parts of the EZ you can't throw to.  You can throw to the very back behind the post because you can just put it over it all.

I'm sure I could run the math on the actual % of the EZ "lost" to the post.  And I bet anything that area is smaller than the area they are losing by reducing the EZ by 5x65...

All of the Commish arguments are weak and fragile and most do not stand up to scrutiny.  Or they use one argument for one change, and then make another change that counteracts that same argument!  Case in point: moving the posts increases EZ space for TDs vs we're reducing the EZ by 5Y meaning... uh... it decreases the EZ space for TDs.  Which is it, Commish?

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Great point!  Both leagues produce games that last around 2.75 to 3.25 hours.  3 is what they aim for in the CFL (others can speak to the NFL).  I'm not sure which have more commercial time, though.  CFL is 1.5 minute ads quite often (I know, I edit them out on the PVR), with longer ones at halftime.  They air less ads at the end if the game is running late, always trying to squeeze things into 3 hours.

In fact, maybe this change is to pander to TV and to get more ad time in without reducing the number of plays?  I could see it speeding up the pace of the game allowing them to pack more plays in a smaller space so they can cut to ads more often in terms of wall clock?

It also could keep the games from going over the 3 hours, and from even getting close to going over.  That would allow them to stop the "no more ads" situation they get into in the final 15 mins sometimes when the are running late.  I bet they really hate not being able to run the normal quantity of ads during that time!  That is their bread & butter.

And if these are arguments and considerations they are using, just come out and tell us.  Everyone would understand if they said "we need more ads but don't want to ruin the experience with less plays, so we can have more money to increase SMS".  Instead, so far, all we have to go on is "we want to increase the pace" and that Johnston personally hates the final 3 mins taking half an hour.

If Johnston worked for TSN he's surely aware of the tension it creates for them when a game runs long, the hatred of that situation and the headaches it causes, probably over-rides every other thought process.  At the game he attended he was probably cheering for the game to end more than the team he wanted to win.

[blue_or_die]

Re the goalpost move:

In addition to the points already made that they've literally never been talked about as an issue from both a safety and playcalling perspective, I oppose this based on the fact that a score in the CFL - aside from the rouge - is based on breaking the plane of the endzone. Now that is only for touchdowns. Takes away from the meaning of getting to that endzone line for scoring while solving a non-issue. More change for the sake of change with no objective explanation.

[theaardvark]

It's only been that way forever, but sure... It's dumb now because you say so.

For a guy who's spent years ripping on the NFL on this forum, it's pretty wild to see how much of a cheerleader you are over these changes that make the game more resemble the NFL.

As BLM said, it modernizes the game.  Its not NFL in the least.

3 downs, 65 yd wide field, still a rouge, 12 players, ratio, bad officiating.

Goal posts out of the way, clean sightlines for more of the fans (sure, some EZ seats are less desireable, but how often is the action in the EZ?  And now, regardless which hash mark they are on, your corner is still in play... with the goalpost blocking, its less likely your corner gets targeted. 


I know no very few believe it when I say it, but I think this will do what they are intending, to make the game better.  I'm not 100% happy with the clock, and we will have to see how the ball placement is handled with the new dimensions.  But I've always questioned the goal posts and the EZ 's in TOR and MTL bug the crap out of me.  Even in some of the other fields watching the players exit the field of play and hit track or other substrate change is cringe.

The fact that it makes NFL pre-season games an option is a huge bonus.  I'd never buy a ticket to them, but I know a lot of people that would, and those people don't watch CFL.  Getting them into CFL stadiums can't hurt.

The field does not define the game.  The game defines the game.  And the CFL game is still the same.  Minor tweaks.  The NFL changes of late have been a lot bigger game changers.  There are some that might even have a CFL flavour to them.  Anyone saying that the NFL is Canadianizing? 

[Waffler]

I don't like the term "modernizing". To me that means you use technology, like a chip in the football. Or baseball allowing computer decided strike zones. These are just rule changes. What is modern about it? It's just a word they use to shame us poor backward Banjo Bowlers into going along with what they want in the boardrooms of TSN offices. The suits that reside in the big smoke know what's best. They sell out so often there, they must. Ha!

[Pete]

If the commish would come out and say clearly that these rules are not put in place with any intention of going to the american game it would help. The question of can you guarantee that the cfl game will ever turn into the american version is unfair as noone can foresee all the circumstances.
But he needs to put to rest as much as possible that this isn't just the first step in a diabolical plan. (and yes I'd consider it diabolical if it was)

[theaardvark]

If the commish would come out and say clearly that these rules are not put in place with any intention of going to the american game it would help. The question of can you guarantee that the cfl game will ever turn into the american version is unfair as noone can foresee all the circumstances.
But he needs to put to rest as much as possible that this isn't just the first step in a diabolical plan. (and yes I'd consider it diabolical if it was)

You'd take his word as gospel, and not worry about 4 downs coming north, if he uttered that sentence?

A: its not his call, the BOG and owners call those shots.

B: he's not the commish for life, what happens after he leaves isn't covered by that plattitude.

If he HAD said "We'll never have 4 downs", the same people crowing about him not saying it would say that its not binding and can still happen anyways.

The fact that they could have made more changes, but stopped at the purely cosmetic and didn't touch the sacred cows tells you the intent.

The modified rouge was a long time coming.  The clock, still not sold on. 

We still have 3 downs, 65yd width, deeper EZ, 1 yd off the ball, no fair catch, 12 players, ratio, the things that make the GAME the GAME. 

If the big concern is that the cheap seats are 10 yards further away from the end line, you have to also take the other end, the fact that play in the far end is 10 yards closer... well, that's not a big deal.  And the goal line seats actually improve sightlines.

[Pete]

Just saying that most of the complaints are more about what will happen next, and that's partially my point in that he couldn't promise 4 downs will never come north. But in talking about the benefits of the rules he emphasizes the entertainment value of more tds vs fgs etc.
I just think he could be more clear on the intent. And while I don't know him well enough to say it would be the complete truth there would be less negativity is he made it clear that these rules aren't meant to clear a path to greater americanization

[Jesse]

Just saying that most of the complaints are more about what will happen next, and that's partially my point in that he couldn't promise 4 downs will never come north. But in talking about the benefits of the rules he emphasizes the entertainment value of more tds vs fgs etc.
I just think he could be more clear on the intent. And while I don't know him well enough to say it would be the complete truth there would be less negativity is he made it clear that these rules aren't meant to clear a path to greater americanization

I am angry about these changes. I am afraid of more changes in the future.

I do not believe for a second the reason behind making these changes had anything to do with improving the game or even making more offence.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Just saying that most of the complaints are more about what will happen next, and that's partially my point in that he couldn't promise 4 downs will never come north. But in talking about the benefits of the rules he emphasizes the entertainment value of more tds vs fgs etc.
I just think he could be more clear on the intent. And while I don't know him well enough to say it would be the complete truth there would be less negativity is he made it clear that these rules aren't meant to clear a path to greater americanization

A psychopath can say anything at anytime, but a smart one will never answer that question.

[gobombersgo]

Just saying that most of the complaints are more about what will happen next, and that's partially my point in that he couldn't promise 4 downs will never come north. But in talking about the benefits of the rules he emphasizes the entertainment value of more tds vs fgs etc.
I just think he could be more clear on the intent. And while I don't know him well enough to say it would be the complete truth there would be less negativity is he made it clear that these rules aren't meant to clear a path to greater americanization

Yes I am concerned about what comes next but what also bothers me is this is the first major announcement by the commish.

Sure they need to get more fans to the games and increase viewership but is this the solution?

What marketing initiatives have the league implemented? Is the league growing it's relationship with youth (flag) football? Why does the NFL have a larger flag football presence in Canada than the CFL.

If the league and money losing teams have exhausted all other ideas to increase revenue then I would be ok with the changes.

[Tecno]

Sure they need to get more fans to the games and increase viewership but is this the solution?

19y.o. Tanner (female): "Hey, the 'gram just told me CFL changed to a 100 yard field"

20y.o. Skyler (male): "Ya, let's hop in the uber and go to the game tonight!  Wasn't it 110 yards before?  That was so lame, but now CFL is soooo k00l!"

Said no one, ever.