2026 CFL Winter Meetings

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Stamps and Elks GM interviews.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

BC Lions

[Stats Junkie]

CFL to retain 20 second for last 3 minutes of each half. This seemed like an inevitable decision.

I was expecting a 20 second clock after a stoppage in play, similar to the 25 second clock in the NFL.

Overtime rule change - no more tie games. If tied after 2 mini games, there will be alternating converts from the 3 yard line.

I don't recall this one being on the agenda. Personally, I have no issue with a tie (very infrequent).

https://3downnation.com/2026/01/14/cfl-rules-committee-recommends-leaving-late-half-clock-unchanged-eliminating-ties-in-overtime/

[Jesse]

I hate rules where it's a certain way for the entire game and then changes after a certain point. It makes the league more confusing and harder to understand for new fans. Feels counterintuitive to what they say they're trying to do.

The tie thing is whatever, I guess. Ties are so infrequent it seems like it's fixing another non-existent problem.

[Tecno]

CFL to retain 20 second for last 3 minutes of each half. This seemed like an inevitable decision.

Haha, instead of coming up with novel ways to meld the new 35s clock with the existing clock-stoppage system they just took the easy way out.  However, I do think it's the correct decision.  We would all be devastated if the final minutes of halves started looking like the crap in the NFL.  (I'm watching the playoffs and their rules are the same joke they've always been.)

Johnston gonna be hella mad, though.  Dude is on record saying he hates the final 3 mins taking 20 minutes to play.  Which is funny, because that's what most of us LIKE!  Proving once again, he's not a CFL fan, and he has no clue.

[Tecno]

Overtime rule change - no more tie games. If tied after 2 mini games, there will be alternating converts from the 3 yard line.

This is probably for gambling.  A tie is a push for some bets, and a push is the worst thing for the bookies -- no money made on either side's bet.

And with less/no rouges, we'll probably get more overtimes than usual.  That single point keeps things pretty wild.

Most seasons there are 0 to 2 ties total.  I think '25 had 0 ties.  So it won't do much, practically.  As such, even though I wouldn't have bothered, I can't say I hate the change.

The unforeseen problem: 2 bad teams who go into 3rd OT and the 2-pt shootout... they could both get 0 successes for 2, 3, 4, 5 rounds!  This could result in crazy long OTs/games.  The first time this happens it'll rub people the wrong way.

To speed things up I would mandate the side they play on NOT change after each round.  I would not cut to commercial.  I would just have them swap O's and D's immediately and snap the ball for each attempt.  If they change sides and/or cut to ads it'll take forever.

[Tecno]

I hate rules where it's a certain way for the entire game and then changes after a certain point. It makes the league more confusing and harder to understand for new fans. Feels counterintuitive to what they say they're trying to do.

Well, it was a bit like that already, no?  However, this new system the change will be more noticeable.  So HC's can drag their feet in the final 3 just like they're used to?  Hehe, MOS had a say in this on the rules committee, eh?  Hehehe.

[gobombersgo]

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

When Stewie mentions "data", he really means something less trustworthy.

[blue_gold_84]

When Stewie mentions "data", he really means something less trustworthy.

Data driven by sports betting?

[Sir Blue and Gold]

I think eventually you'll see the clock rules change in the final three minutes also because to me it doesn't make sense to have two sets of clock rules.

We just might need to actually play a bit with what we've changed before the buy in comes.

[TBURGESS]

I agree that it makes no sense to have 2 different sets of clock rules. My solution is to go back to the one set of clock rules that have always worked.

[Jesse]

I agree that it makes no sense to have 2 different sets of clock rules. My solution is to go back to the one set of clock rules that have always worked.

Agreed, though in the spirit of not being an old stick in the mud and hating change just because it's new and different, I will say that the clock adjustments are the rule change that I have the least issue with. It's not a terrible idea to standardize the time in-between plays. Though I feel sometimes it's more on the refs than anything, which aren't going to improve with a more involved process.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Agreed, though in the spirit of not being an old stick in the mud and hating change just because it's new and different, I will say that the clock adjustments are the rule change that I have the least issue with. It's not a terrible idea to standardize the time in-between plays. Though I feel sometimes it's more on the refs than anything, which aren't going to improve with a more involved process.

I think adding pressure to the refs. to come to quicker resolutions is going to produce less accurate results, the officials generally do well when they congregate and discuss who saw what. This change seems to be driven by TSN in an attempt to make the game better fit their broadcast objectives and hurry it along.

[Jesse]

I think adding pressure to the refs. to come to quicker resolutions is going to produce less accurate results, the officials generally do well when they congregate and discuss who saw what. This change seems to be driven by TSN in an attempt to make the game better fit their broadcast objectives and hurry it along.

100% TSN is dictating what happens through their puppet master.