CFL Game Changes FAQ

[Tecno]

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

When Unca 'Brosie said something, we generally believed him.  He had our trust.

Yes, there would be value in Johnston saying "we aren't using this as the launching pad to further Americanization".  Even if you didn't believe him you'd have his own words to hold his feet to the fire and drum up repercussions should he later backtrack.

And you'd think Johnston would be trying to earn our trust like 'Brosie did.

[Tecno]

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?

Another talking point I wish would disappear.  It is as lame, stupid, pointless and misdirecting as the "post player safety" one.

No one ever picked or abandoned their seat based on the goalpost structure ruining their view.  No one.  Ever.  No one ever said, "crap I couldn't see that TD in the corner because the 5" thick upright was obstructing my vision from 200' away!".  EVER.

Commish & co have planted these ridiculous ideas in your head and you parrot them like you actually had thought of that before, and like it's some critical issue now!

THERE. IS. NO. CHANGE. TO. SIGHTLINES. -- NO. ONE. EVER. CARED.  Anything else is gaslighting.

[Tecno]

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 2 cutoff EZs "bugged the crap out of" you?  Then you'll be able to link to your many previous posts where you proclaimed this your big #1 bugbear?  There should be many, right?  It was your pet peeve.  Oh wait, there are none?

Weird.  Half the people on this forum know my main CFL loves / hates.  Plenty of proof in previous posts.  You don't hold back either: we know your main loves/hates.  Pretty sure other than the odd "MTL corners are dumb" passing comment once every 2 years, you haven't complained about it any more than anyone else.

And yes, everyone has moaned about turf changes in certain stadiums as lame.  But no one made it one of their top 10 bugbears.

To argue that these issues now justify all these radical changes is disingenuous.  As is saying they were a big beef for you prior to this week.  The MTL/TOR issue would have been solved with the EZ changing to 17Y, and no change to the 110Y.  Saying it justifies anything more drastic is a blatant lie.  And nothing Johnston did will fix the turf-change/substrate problem.

Lastly, how many times do you remember the MTL or TOR EZ length/corners issue impacting the game?  I recall only 1 pass in 7 years to the MTL corner that would have been complete in any other stadium.  1 pass.  Sucks, sure, but worth blowing up the 110Y tradition?  Like Rourke said, both teams have to play around it, it's literally not a big deal.

Drop the parrot routine, and think up better arguments yourself.  You're more than capable.

[Tecno]

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.

This is a good, new, point as well.  Many articles and the Commish have used the word "consistency" to justify all the changes.  Well, there's one aspect where the game will be less consistent after the changes.

[Tecno]

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.

Yes, it certainly appears he's attacking his job from the TV/commercial(/NFL) perspective, whereas 'Brosie always seemed to come at it from a fan/player standpoint.

However, Commish/TSN shouldn't get too antsy about games going long... it's just taking a little chunk of time out of the following SportsCentre.  They play like 7 hours of SC on 2 to 4 of their stations every single night... we can live without that extra 15 mins.

[Tecno]

Just listened to the coaches show on OB... Osh wants the rouge in, and he's a as he says.. a CFL purist and doesn't want the rouge removed, the field changed or the goal post moved.  He'll see how it plays out, but did note about Vaval's play wouldn't have happened.

Osh is a great Canadian who loves our game.  So good.

Yup, I just listened now.  MOS, while subtle and careful, truly hates the changes.  I'm probably at 99% agreement with what he's really thinking, and vice versa.  And I think it pains him, both that these things are happening, and how it's causing pain to the long time fans.

Remember, he's not at liberty to just speak his mind more like Rourke did.  He doesn't want the grief that would come down from the Commish and his bullies.

I'm proud of MOS for saying even what he did.  I also note the strong contrast between MOS's take and WM's...

I wholeheartedly recommend everyone listen to the show:
https://globalnews.ca/pages/audio-vault-cjob/
sept 22, 7pm, move the red bar ahead to skip the ads

[gobombersgo]

I wholeheartedly recommend everyone listen to the show:
https://globalnews.ca/pages/audio-vault-cjob/
sept 22, 7pm, move the red bar ahead to skip the ads

Or you could listen to the podcast version where the commercials are taken out already.

Search Blue Bomber Podcast on your podcast app or access it through the CJOB website:

https://globalnews.ca/pages/podcastscjob/

[Jesse]

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.

All about how it looks on TV.

Random American #1, channel surfing: "Hey, there's a game on! Wait, *** is this? The field looks messed up" [changes channel]

This is 100% an attempt to get increased viewer numbers by creating a stronger buy in from Americans to keep the game on. They don't want anything that creates a strong, immediate aversion by the way the game looks. That will make it easier to add American teams and fit our field into American stadiums down the line.

[Tecno]

Random American #1, channel surfing: "Hey, there's a game on! Wait, *** is this? The field looks messed up" [changes channel]

I'm not sold on this.  Random American:

"There's a 55YL, that's weird, why is that?  That's new.  I'm going to watch a little to see if I can figure it out"

vs

"Hey NFL is on in June, this is great!  Why are the players so small, they aren't all 6'3!  Why aren't the making catches like usual?  Hey this is one of those AAF, XFL thingies, this is crap, click"

That will make it easier to add American teams and fit our field into American stadiums down the line.

If they do another "X Era" thing then I'm out.  It's one of the few things that I would quit over.  There cannot be a Canadian ratio for half the league but not the other.  Period.

[Jesse]

I'm not sold on this.  Random American:

"There's a 55YL, that's weird, why is that?  That's new. I'm going to watch a little to see if I can figure it out"

vs

"Hey NFL is on in June, this is great!  Why are the players so small, they aren't all 6'3!  Why aren't the making catches like usual?  Hey this is one of those AAF, XFL thingies, this is crap, click"

If they do another "X Era" thing then I'm out.  It's one of the few things that I would quit over.  There cannot be a Canadian ratio for half the league but not the other.  Period.

To be fair, we have a lot of decades worth of proof that Americans are not curious about the differences.

But, that said, I believe that to be proof that the CFL is unable to significantly break into that market, and dismantling our league to attempt what so many failed spring leagues have tried over and over to do (including the CFL in the 90s), is insanity.

[ichabod_crane]

The single point changes I actually can live with. Don't reward failure. Remember they only changed giving a single on a kickoff out of bounds in the end zone  not many years ago i believe.

Yeah I don't ever remember anyone complaining about the goal post location before outside that Sask playoff game where Fajardo doinked an pass off of it!

My main issue I have with all this is how is this supposedly going to attract
More fans/viewers? What "data" shows this will do Anything? Seems more like someone threw a  few darts at the wall just for the sake of change to be in the news. 

[Jesse]

The single point changes I actually can live with. Don't reward failure. Remember they only changed giving a single on a kickoff out of bounds in the end zone  not many years ago i believe.

Yeah I don't ever remember anyone complaining about the goal post location before outside that Sask playoff game where Fajardo doinked an pass off of it!

My main issue I have with all this is how is this supposedly going to attract
More fans/viewers? What "data" shows this will do Anything? Seems more like someone threw a  few darts at the wall just for the sake of change to be in the news. 

This is part of it too. Stew made a comment about wanting to be a bigger part of the "Attention Economy".

[blue_gold_84]

As BLM said, it modernizes the game.

How? Nobody's explained how.

Are you okay?

[blue_or_die]

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? 

1) I think only you and maybe 4 other people in the world only are annoyed by the goalposts obscuring sightlines or limiting offensive options in the red zone. I've literally never thought of this.

2) You concede that the endzone seat quality decreases (i.e. takes bad seats and makes things even worse, which I didn't think was possible) but that the endzone play is relatively small. Firstly, what happens near the endzone is OBVIOUSLY THE MOST EXCITING PART OF THE GAME OMFG. Second, if you're sitting in the endzone seats, your view of the ENTIRE game just got ****ier, since you're physically further removed from the entire field.

3) Regarding the endzones being cut off in some stadiums (I refuse to type stadia like you do), while it also drove me nuts, I never at any point blamed the field and instead wonder why TF these stadiums are so ghetto that they didn't build a stadium to accommodate a CFL field. Just as you say seeing the track is cringe, that's the stadium design, not the field.

4) You are way way way overstating the NFL preseason game thing. There might be one here or there over the next few decades and the field differences are probably the smallest factor in the NFL's decision making to play elsewhere.

5) The field LITERALLY defines the game in one of the biggest ways.

[theaardvark]

I'm not sold on this.  Random American:

"There's a 55YL, that's weird, why is that?  That's new.  I'm going to watch a little to see if I can figure it out"

vs

"Hey NFL is on in June, this is great!  Why are the players so small, they aren't all 6'3!  Why aren't the making catches like usual?  Hey this is one of those AAF, XFL thingies, this is crap, click"

If they do another "X Era" thing then I'm out.  It's one of the few things that I would quit over.  There cannot be a Canadian ratio for half the league but not the other.  Period.

Here's the issue with that...

Bringing an NFL preseason game to a CFL stadium is a little paint on the field.  Nothing else.

Bringing a CFL team into an NFL/NCAA size field means adding in 15 yards to the width.  The would NOT be an easy change, likely needing a new turf, and maybe removing seats.

It could be done, but its not as easy or as cheap as you would conjecture.

10 yards of length and 5 yds of EZ may modify the game slightly, but it far from changes it from a play calling perspective.  Changing where the FG becomes a factor, again, does not change the game, but may change the strategy slightly.

Yes, ST coaches are going to have to modify their playbooks, but there is still no fair catch, and we haven't seen where the balls will be placed for KO's or after FG's.  And the new rouge will change ST plays as well.  So I can see why ST coach Miller and ex ST coach MOS might have issue.

PLay clock is still an issue, we don't know how certain aspect will be addressed, and I can see fine tuning in preseason next year.

But the field, getting to a "normal" length and moving the FG posts makes a lot of sense taking the sentimental out of it.  Its still 3 down ball, but now it will be the same game in every stadium.

And, IF we can get a little NFL preseason money, it could save the league.