New rules / commissioner's statements

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Except MOS (and others) have repeatedly said (including MOS in EOY pressers) that CFL is entirely a game of "field position" (FP).  I think PPD counts for almost nothing in MOS's eyes when he can gain the FP.  If he's on the opponent's 35-50YL, he's going to Sheahan that sucker into the 5-10Y coffin in the air OOB and lock his opponents into the tough "QB in their EZ" situation and have specific D plays to try to 2 & out (or safety) them.

MOS won't just magically start going for it at the opponent 45 on 3rd & 5 just because he can't kick a FG!  He'll play the FP long game.  Most coaches not named Dickenson The Greater will likely do similarly.  Teams starting on their 5 half the game will mean scoring will go DOWN -- unless 5 safeties a game becomes a thing!

Fact: O'Shea doesn't publicly state anything of importance to game day strategy let alone how he's going to handle rule changes two years from now.

[TBURGESS]

If a shorter field means more scoring, then the NFL should be outscoring the CFL but... 

The Canadian Football League (CFL) consistently averages more points per game than the National Football League (NFL). Recent seasons have reported average scores exceeding 50 points per game in the CFL, which is roughly equivalent to one additional touchdown compared to the NFL's typical average of around 42 points per game.
 

[bomber beetle]

In the UFL, the ball is placed at the 25 if punted out of bounds between the goal line and the 25.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

If a shorter field means more scoring, then the NFL should be outscoring the CFL but...

The Canadian Football League (CFL) consistently averages more points per game than the National Football League (NFL). Recent seasons have reported average scores exceeding 50 points per game in the CFL, which is roughly equivalent to one additional touchdown compared to the NFL's typical average of around 42 points per game.
 

You can't compare different leagues/games using field size on it's own unless the other variables were the same, which they're not.

You can make a CFL vs CFL field size comparison (once we get the data) but you can't do it across games or sports. It stands to reason when you shrink a CFL field you'll get more touchdowns in CFL games compared to CFL games on a longer field.

But of course "field size" doesn't determine scoring on its own. Obviously. A premier league field is 115 yards long but average goals is around 3.5 a game.

Correlation and causation.

[TBURGESS]

You can't compare different leagues/games using field size on it's own unless the other variables were the same, which they're not.

You can make a CFL vs CFL field size comparison (once we get the data) but you can't do it across games or sports. It stands to reason when you shrink a CFL field you'll get more touchdowns in CFL games compared to CFL games on a longer field.

But of course "field size" doesn't determine scoring on its own. Obviously. A premier league field is 115 yards long but average goals is around 3.5 a game.

Correlation and causation.

Football is football. TD's are TD's. FG's are FG's. The NFL and CFL are way more alike than they are different. They are the best comparison that we have & they already have smaller fields with the uprights at the back end.

It doesn't stand to reason the smaller field = more TD's. Nor does it stand to reason that less FG's = more TD's or even more aggressive offence. 

Correlation isn't causation, but facts are facts. 

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Except there's going to be a lot more "short punts", and short punts where the teams are hemmed in on a small amount of field.

Teams will be punting from the opponent 40 all the time now (because it's a 62Y FG attempt!).  Good teams will have a P that can coffin corner in the air: NO return at all!  Teams with a bad P will likely be dropping most punts onto the field around the 5.  The cover team from the 40 will be all over any return, and the every returner will be penned at the rail (no one will kick to the middle -- too short and high chance of it rolling into EZ).  Again, NO returns.

Thus I think we'll actually get LESS "good" returns, more coffins, more overall punting vs FGs, and the "going for it more on 3rd & long/medium" will NOT materialize.  The whole thing could backfire spectacularly.

Agree completely with this perspective, one change I would like to see implemented is a penalty for punting the ball out of bounds in the air no matter where.  Forcing the punters to land the ball in play will create more return and turnover opportunities.

[bomber beetle]

If a shorter field means more scoring, then the NFL should be outscoring the CFL but...

The Canadian Football League (CFL) consistently averages more points per game than the National Football League (NFL). Recent seasons have reported average scores exceeding 50 points per game in the CFL, which is roughly equivalent to one additional touchdown compared to the NFL's typical average of around 42 points per game.
 

On paper, the higher scoring statistic is a good look for the CFL.

Does more scoring make the CFL more exciting though?
Both leagues score touchdowns at the same rate. The CFL sees more field goals.
So the difference in scoring would be more accurately stated as roughly three extra field goals rather than 'roughly equivalent to one additional touchdown'.
A field goal attempt is generally not the most exciting play in football, even though success generates points.
There have been enough CFL games that do become boring field goal fests.

If the CFL delivers on the extra 60 touchdowns per season, that should make it more exciting overall even if scoring does not increase or actually slightly decreases. We would then see more touchdowns per game than the NFL. Considering that the CFL has more passing touchdowns on average compared to the NFL, those extra touchdowns are generally going to be more entertaining than the touchdowns produced in the NFL. Potentially, that could make a great game even better.

[wpg#1]

I know I'm sounding like a broken record ... but I just don't understand how a smaller field is going to create more touchdowns. Once a team is inside the 50 yard line, even if there's a 55 yard line ... nothing changes. It's the same. So why bother.
The claim of more touchdowns is BS as far as I can tell.

[bomber beetle]

I know I'm sounding like a broken record ... but I just don't understand how a smaller field is going to create more touchdowns. Once a team is inside the 50 yard line, even if there's a 55 yard line ... nothing changes. It's the same. So why bother.
The claim of more touchdowns is BS as far as I can tell.

In most situations, to get inside the 50 a team will travel 10 yards less.
There could be a lot of other variables that will affect this, but if drives to the opposition's goal line become shorter there should be the odd extra touchdown.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Football is football. TD's are TD's. FG's are FG's. The NFL and CFL are way more alike than they are different. They are the best comparison that we have & they already have smaller fields with the uprights at the back end.

It doesn't stand to reason the smaller field = more TD's. Nor does it stand to reason that less FG's = more TD's or even more aggressive offence.

Correlation isn't causation, but facts are facts.

TDs are TDs, facts are facts and Abra cadbra I've said smart things.

[jets4life]

If a shorter field means more scoring, then the NFL should be outscoring the CFL but...

The Canadian Football League (CFL) consistently averages more points per game than the National Football League (NFL). Recent seasons have reported average scores exceeding 50 points per game in the CFL, which is roughly equivalent to one additional touchdown compared to the NFL's typical average of around 42 points per game.


 

Check mate!

[Tecno]

Fact: O'Shea doesn't publicly state anything of importance to game day strategy let alone how he's going to handle rule changes two years from now.

Well, he did actually state what I said he did in a recent presser.  If you're too lazy to watch them all, I guess I can dig it up for you and find the citation and exact quote.

And if you're watched every MOS presser over the years, you'll know that he does drop some nuggets of his overall philosophy once in a while.  And I don't believe they are misdirections.  Maybe saying something like "field position is everything" (paraphrasing) is so obvious to the entire league that he feels it gives away nothing by stating it.

You do have to watch like 4-8 pressers before you get some insight into his actual brain, but I do believe that you actually get it.  That's why I think I'm decent at predicting what MOS is going to do sometimes.