DPI + 10

[Tecno]

No one wants to see a DPI instead of a spectacular completion with chance of YAC/TD.  DBs who are beat or know they are in trouble will purposely commit DPI to stop an even worse fate than the DPI.  This ruins the "show".

If you want to increase O and TDs, and make the "show" better, without ruining the entire CFL like they are trying to do right now, how about DPI penalties get team A:

1. The spot-of-foul (as they do now) PLUS 10 YARDS (with no half-distance modifier)

and/or

2. When untouched, the spot where the ball hits the turf PLUS 10 YARDS.  This is important to keep DBs who know they are beat early from tugging/tackling the REC 40Y away from the final ball spot.

These rules would stop DPI dead in their tracks.  No "on purpose" DPI would ever be committed again.  Not-on-purpose ones would probably go down 80%.  This would generate a ton more catches, completions, YAC and TDs.  It would probably add a couple more highlight reel plays per game.  No DPI ever made the reel, unless it was a bad/pivotal one right at the end that determined the outcome.  (And if 10Y isn't enough, make it 15.)

There.  I solved at least half of the new commish's "problems" without having to do anything other than a rule tweak and some ref training.  Certainly a cheaper solution than re-turfing 3 stadiums for $4M total cost...

[Sir Blue and Gold]

You either haven't totally wrapped your head around the direction they're going yet or this is a strange way to cope, in which case I'm sorry you're so impacted.

I think the theme over the last 48 hours is to make the CFL less weird and therefore more approachable.

They are not going to inject more strangeness after spending a whole bunch of corporate capital aligning a whole bunch of harder things a day and a half ago.

If it's just another way to slam the changes there's like three threads already.

[dd]

DPI fouls are fine just the way they are.

[Ducky]

If anything, I would like to see them allow more hand battling and positioning.

Call holding and screening but otherwise let them play.

[Tecno]

You either haven't totally wrapped your head around the direction they're going yet or this is a strange way to cope, in which case I'm sorry you're so impacted.

No, I was trying to think of easier/cheaper/better alternatives to the (fake) stated goal of making the O more exciting, getting more TDs, getting less FGs.  Remember, they are NOT (yet) stating the goal is to make us match the NFL rules.  They are pretending it's all about scoring.

So I offered a great way to get more scoring.  Yes, the time for this would have been 6 months ago, not the day after the horrible NFL-Lite news.  No, the CFL won't care about any other idea now.  But it does illustrate how it's not really about the scoring... because if it was they could do a million things like this, and like they did when they moved the starting point to the 40, etc.

It's more a thought experiment than anything else.

[Tecno]

If anything, I would like to see them allow more hand battling and positioning.

Call holding and screening but otherwise let them play.

But that only makes us more like the NFL.  It is a valid debate though.  The CFL DPI rules are very complicated.

And if you want more O/TDS, then I think you actually have to go the other direction.  Allow virtually no contact, no hands-on-body until the ball arrives.  That would be easier to call, and for everyone to judge correctly.

Whether you go your way or mine, the DPI+10 idea would still help stop DPIs and result in way more completions and excitement.

[Tecno]

DPI fouls are fine just the way they are.

Are they?  What is the biggest source of fan anger and disillusionment in terms of flags?  DPI.  If they are iffy they always rile up the base.

So why not add rules that make DPI less attractive to DBs to commit?  Remember, the only mantra right now is "more scoring!".

[Blue In BC]

Are they?  What is the biggest source of fan anger and disillusionment in terms of flags?  DPI.  If they are iffy they always rile up the base.

So why not add rules that make DPI less attractive to DBs to commit?  Remember, the only mantra right now is "more scoring!".

Where do you come up with this stuff? lol

[Pete]

for the most part dpi  rules in place work, with the challenges its up to the coach when to use them

[DM83]

I played both Wr and Db in the CIS. We knew the rules. They were fine. If you committed too many Pass I you would be replaced. Basically any contact that causes one guy to lose or gain an advantage should be a penalty.

I then played touch football and that had a penalty for target interference if by the offence, was a turnover, unless the defence declined it. That was cool!

A few years ago, they tacked on roughing, which prior to this change was a dead ball fall. If on third down, who cares hammer the receiver. Dead ball could equaled " after the play" turnover. So that gave DBs a free shot to break up the play.

Again a few years ago, they added that a rough play foul on a receiver on 3rd down, would then be called a live ball fall, with a rough play added(15 yd penalty, ball,caught or not) and a first down.  All this was changed to make the offence get a more beneficial advantage.  Tackle in the CFL added this a couple years ago.

Let's face it, we all like to see TDs. Those Defenders hated it. But it made for better players.
Hand checking, as long as no advantage gained was and still is acceptable. The NFL has gone stupid this past year, and has a no touch policy it seems. In Tiuch, it was always, a hand on a body to find relative position of the other guy, as long as no advantage gained was legal. It did promote awesome skill as defenders could  find out where the. Receiver, and vice versa on a jump ball, and not receive a foul, but actually more skill.

Like I said I played both positions. Any unfair or un earned contact should produce a flag. Certainly, hand touching to find out relative positioning, shouldn't be a flag.  NFL flagging a guy for breaking together legally is not a foul. It's just good football.

Players at both levels never complained as when you are that good, it's two guys exhibiting skills, and they are both good.. now in the CFL, I am not sure if they have reduced touchy feely fouls. Less flags the better.

I do ref adult touch football and the players appreciate non calls, as they do, when penalties are deserved. I coach HS DBs and OC. I teach the same concepts. At that level those athletes play hard, and teaching avoiding penalties, had been always an emphasis, as I have seen with the other teams coaches.  Calling touch fouls that don't disadvantage anyone should be avoided.

[Tecno]

Where do you come up with this stuff? lol

That reply is not like you.  Which part of what I said is wrong?

Commish literally just ripped apart and revamped our whole game with the explicitly stated goal of "more TDs", "more going for it".  And before him "more O" was the mantra for years (i.e. the move from 35 to 40).

And I posit the most fan-annoying flags are DPI.  Think of the 5 penalties that angered you the most over the last 5 seasons.  How many are DPI?  For me it's 4 of 5.  (The 5th being the fake no-end rigged call.)

[Tecno]

for the most part dpi  rules in place work, with the challenges its up to the coach when to use them

Ya, I agree.  I'm not saying our DPI isn't working.  I'm brainstorming ways to get more O and TDs other than blowing things up like the Commish is doing.  I want to prove a point that there were other things that could be done rather than ditch the much-beloved 110Y field.

I believe making DPI punishment so severe DBs will never commit it would get you a ton more completions and TDs every week.  Think of every bomb that right now gets a panic DPI.  Now turn those all into completions.  That's like 150Y more a game and probably every 3rd one getting explosion YAC for TD.

[Blue In BC]

That reply is not like you.  Which part of what I said is wrong?

Commish literally just ripped apart and revamped our whole game with the explicitly stated goal of "more TDs", "more going for it".  And before him "more O" was the mantra for years (i.e. the move from 35 to 40).

And I posit the most fan-annoying flags are DPI.  Think of the 5 penalties that angered you the most over the last 5 seasons.  How many are DPI?  For me it's 4 of 5.  (The 5th being the fake no-end rigged call.)

DPI penalties can be anywhere downfield. In some cases we see them called at 30-50 yards. I don't think adding another 10 yards makes any sense.

Bonds took at least one like that this season.

The current DPI rules generally work but some of it is very subjective. Fans will frequently feel that a given penalty was incorrect.

I think maybe some close calls could get better reviewed by the EITS before a need for a challenge. The problem with that is that you can find a penalty on just about every play somewhere on field. Holding, blocking, offside and close time counts.

The refs aren't perfect but where do you draw the line of letting the players play and the refs doing the best they can.

Here's a thought. Add 1 more ref?

BTW I don't know that adding more offence to games is what fans want in general. Competitive games with both good offence and defence is better. USA college games often have teams scoring 50+ points.  I'm not interested in those kinds of games.

[Tecno]

DPI penalties can be anywhere downfield. In some cases we see them called at 30-50 yards. I don't think adding another 10 yards makes any sense.

But it does.  Game theory: a ball is coming into a REC/DB pair alone 50Y downfield, the DB is sure that REC will make the catch (say it's 2019 Brian Burnham).  Here's the DB's choices:

1) DPI the REC ASAP = spot of the foul maybe 45Y downfield, no YAC = 45Y gain
2) don't DPI the REC = catch 50Y downfield, REC has X% chance of YAC (call it 25%?) = 50Y to TD gain

Those are the only 2 choices.  So what does the DB take every time?  #1.  Because you're insane not to.  And that is what we see on many of the deep man on man shots to the all-stars like Kenny.

What is the result?  Kenny make less highlight grabs.  There is zero YAC.  Refs have to intervene.  Fans are denied a better show.  On average "less O / TDs" is generated.  QB/REC stats are denied the huge gain.

Now: add in my DPI+10 idea (or +15 or plus whatever it takes for DBs to choose #2 above instead of #1).  The math changes:
1) DPI = 55Y gain (60Y under my "where the ball fell" idea)
2) catch = 50Y to TD gain

The DPI is instantly worse for the DB to commit.  And higher +X would discourage them further.

The current DPI rules generally work but some of it is very subjective. Fans will frequently feel that a given penalty was incorrect.

I'm not talking about what's called or not called, or whether the refs are any good at it or not.  All things being equal and changing nothing else, such a rule would reduce DPIs across the board.  Because the calculus has changed.

Here's a thought. Add 1 more ref?

Again, that's not the point of my thread, but I'd be all for that.

BTW I don't know that adding more offence to games is what fans want in general. Competitive games with both good offence and defence is better. USA college games often have teams scoring 50+ points.  I'm not interested in those kinds of games.

I agree.  But that's 100% against the direction the league has been taking in the last 3 years.  And 200% against what the new Commish is doing.  Every big change he is doing has as part of its argument "more O, more TDs".  We are about to throw away the 55YL for the only stated purpose of MORE O.

So either we're the only 2 fans who like the amount of O currently, or Johnston is trying to fix something that ain't broken, and a biiiig mistake is about to be made.

(And I'm not totally against more O, though I do like D and balance, I just hate the big changes that are coming in its name.)

[Blue In BC]

But it does.  Game theory: a ball is coming into a REC/DB pair alone 50Y downfield, the DB is sure that REC will make the catch (say it's 2019 Brian Burnham).  Here's the DB's choices:

1) DPI the REC ASAP = spot of the foul maybe 45Y downfield, no YAC = 45Y gain
2) don't DPI the REC = catch 50Y downfield, REC has X% chance of YAC (call it 25%?) = 50Y to TD gain

Those are the only 2 choices.  So what does the DB take every time?  #1.  Because you're insane not to.  And that is what we see on many of the deep man on man shots to the all-stars like Kenny.

What is the result?  Kenny make less highlight grabs.  There is zero YAC.  Refs have to intervene.  Fans are denied a better show.  On average "less O / TDs" is generated.  QB/REC stats are denied the huge gain.

Now: add in my DPI+10 idea (or +15 or plus whatever it takes for DBs to choose #2 above instead of #1).  The math changes:
1) DPI = 55Y gain (60Y under my "where the ball fell" idea)
2) catch = 50Y to TD gain

The DPI is instantly worse for the DB to commit.  And higher +X would discourage them further.

I'm not talking about what's called or not called, or whether the refs are any good at it or not.  All things being equal and changing nothing else, such a rule would reduce DPIs across the board.  Because the calculus has changed.

Again, that's not the point of my thread, but I'd be all for that.

I agree.  But that's 100% against the direction the league has been taking in the last 3 years.  And 200% against what the new Commish is doing.  Every big change he is doing has as part of its argument "more O, more TDs".  We are about to throw away the 55YL for the only stated purpose of MORE O.

So either we're the only 2 fans who like the amount of O currently, or Johnston is trying to fix something that ain't broken, and a biiiig mistake is about to be made.

(And I'm not totally against more O, though I do like D and balance, I just hate the big changes that are coming in its name.)

I completely disagree with the 10+ yards idea.