HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #441  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2020, 12:41 PM
jonny24 jonny24 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Hamilton, formerly Norfolk County
Posts: 1,124
Wow, this has sparked some very interesting discussion., I'm glad!

My ideas are based on the fact that Canadian Football has always existed on a continuum that run between 19th century rugby (the unchnaged point) and American Football (the most-changed point). Most (not all) innovations originated from the Americans i.e. Walter Camp in the 1880's. Canadians have adopted most, but not all of those changes, and retained more from the original version.

The exact reason why we don't just play rugby is that Canada was so connected to England and the commonwealth that the game was here, being played, watched, and evolved, before "rugby" was really codified. The first evidence of games here is in the 1860s. The Rugby Football Union in England, where 21 clubs met to agree to a common set of rules, wasn't formed until 1871. So the cat was already out of the bag, essentially.

So I'm not saying I hate the Canadian game, or just want to be non-American, or just want rugby. We already have rugby, I'm a Toronto Arrows season ticket holder just as I am a Hamilton Tiger-Cats season ticket holder. I don't want fewer sports.

But even though I, and many many others, love the game as it is doesn't mean it can't be improved. The league itself changes a couple rules every year trying to do exactly that. Sometimes rule changes are minor. Sometimes they are drastic as allowing a forward pass, where previously that was against the fundamental nature of the game. So change, and radical change, can and has happened. The league specifically cites "speeding up the game and "reducing stoppages" as incentives for many of their rule changes. It's a common complaint, not amongst the haterz, but a long long-time, die-hard fans, that the game has become bogged down with stoppages, TV timeouts, reviews and flags etc.

None of my proposed changes have anything to do with the rules of gameplay between the snap and a tackle. They primarily revolved around how the game is carried on between the tackle and snap, and separate suggestions that are more cost/roster related that would have effects through fitness, body type, and use of skills.

And even though millions of people love the game as it is, we are seeing evidence that this is not enough. As a whole the league loses money each year. Attendances and viewership have declined. Sure this could be somewhat cyclical, but that doesn't mean efforts shouldn't be made.

Changes already needed to come because of the looming concussion issue. Eventually it will become unacceptable to carry on the way we have, now that the risks of long term head injuries become more clear. But, since that is a cost and a risk to the league, they aren't motivated to be forward thinking on that, they are trying to get away with the least changes they can. But the Covid crisis is forcing their hand. So it is opportunity to lean into it, make changes that allow for survival, remain unique as we always have been, and in the future of restricted international travel, a focus on our domestic talent and football ecosystem.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #442  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2020, 1:13 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,664
This has actually been an interesting discussion for me.

I have always been conscious of, and fond of, the residual rugby-esque aspects of Canadian football.

Obviously, these subtleties are lost on the vast majority of Canadian gridiron football fans.

Making Canadian football more distinct vis-à-vis American football is certainly an appealling idea. Perhaps the level of difference could be along the lines of rugby league vs. rugby union?

Though I wonder how feasible all of this would be as you have kids', high school, college and university football that you'd ideally have to bring into line in order to make it work optimally.
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #443  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2020, 2:12 PM
jonny24 jonny24 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Hamilton, formerly Norfolk County
Posts: 1,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
This has actually been an interesting discussion for me.

I have always been conscious of, and fond of, the residual rugby-esque aspects of Canadian football.

Obviously, these subtleties are lost on the vast majority of Canadian gridiron football fans.

Making Canadian football more distinct vis-à-vis American football is certainly an appealling idea. Perhaps the level of difference could be along the lines of rugby league vs. rugby union?

Though I wonder how feasible all of this would be as you have kids', high school, college and university football that you'd ideally have to bring into line in order to make it work optimally.
That would be a key part to the long term success. It would be rather difficult to get everyone to agree, especially as we don't have a unified or very authoritative power structure like the RFU or World Rugby. Once that was accomplished, however, then it would by default mean that Canadian players who came up through that system would be the best suited to play the new style of game at the pro level.

With enough buy-in and organization, you could use each university conference to try out slightly different rule variations. It could help build a more direct link between the CFL and Usports, which could serve to increase attention and TV coverage of U sports.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #444  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2020, 2:34 PM
savevp savevp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 781
I'd think as a first step, paring down roster sizes and using (mostly) the same players offensively and defensively would be a first step that would be embraced by the lower levels of football; CFL-down change. It would be beneficial financially for any club at any level, especially in high school or community leagues where the player pool is shrinking.

Of course, laying off certain players would be unpopular and would likely involve wrangling with the PA, and would also probably take a couple years as contracts expire. This would be the kind of innovation that could start at the lower non-pro levels and work its way into CFL in three or four years. As the rosters shrink, you will probably see less heavy linemen and more emphasis on agility and versatility. The less effective D line, as an example, might lead to changes in how the QB starts play - maybe the snap process becomes less restricted? I think one of the great turnoffs for potential new fans, especially immigrants who've not grown up with football, is the procedural complexity of what should be a straightforward action. Rugby has a similar problem, especially union. I'd love to see that process less prescribed.

Say someone is tackled at the 30yd line. Maybe a new procedure would become popular involve a snap back and some kind of lateral or running handoff to get the ball to the QB in a different part of the field, away from the crowd of players? Maybe at the same time, the rules change to allow the ball to be snapped from anywhere along the 30y line, rather than at a prescribed spot? That would help speed up play. Maybe backfield motion extends to anyone on the field? Maybe the ball no longer has to be snapped back and play can restart in any fashion from where the ball was down?

Just some simple innovations that maybe could occur in the future and I don't think they'd fundamentally change the game. Something to think about...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #445  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2020, 2:41 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,664
I have been a CFL fan all my life but I've also always longed for Canadian football to be a more distinct "code" like Irish and Australian football are.

Never really dared to think about it much more than that because I've always thought that having the CFL with crowds of 25-30,000 (with occasional peaks to 50-60,000) was still more exciting from a fan perspective than the risk of having 2500-5000 people in the stands or even less, to watch a more Canadian-specific brand of football.

And that's kinda the "rub" for this plan. As much as the spotlight on the NFL hurts the CFL as discussed on here ad nauseam, it actually does drum up interest in gridiron football in general - that benefits the CFL.

This may not exist evenly across the country, I can tell you that lots of guys I know who are NFL junkies also occasionally attend CFL games. I was thinking about this yesterday when the profile of an old acquaintance popped up on Facebook. I stalked him via his photos and while his profile pic has him and his kids in NFL team jerseys and he has photos of his NFL pilgrimages to the U.S. all over his site, he also has pics of himself here and there in Ottawa Redblacks jerseys and at games at Lansdowne.

I don't know if guys like this would buy CFL tickets if the game was even more markedly different from the NFL's rules.

So I suspect that the new CFL might have to build much of its fan base from square one, from the ground up.
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #446  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2020, 3:58 PM
savevp savevp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
I have been a CFL fan all my life but I've also always longed for Canadian football to be a more distinct "code" like Irish and Australian football are.
This!

I think Canadians like to believe Canadian football is a lot more Canadian than it really is. In fact, the Burnside rules were a deliberate attempt to make it an Americanised game. Maybe it made sense at the time but it shouldn't be a surprise so many CFLers are American.

What is really Canadian is the tradition. The Grey Cup is one of the great national traditions, the culture surrounding the league is very Canadian. But on the field? Canadian football has been a deliberate offshoot of American football since the early 1900s and continues to be influenced heavily by it. Just look at how the CFL changed the balls in 2018 to be more similar to NFL.

I'm sure those of us (I'm the worst) who constantly fret about the CFL-NFL similarities are tedious. This is a particularly self-concious manifestation of the English Canada national self-doubt in regards to American culture, but I think it is beneficial to call a spade a spade and acknowledge the deliberate American origins of Canadian football as it is today, rather than indulge the fantasy that our code is really that distinct anymore.

Quote:
So I suspect that the new CFL might have to build much of its fan base from square one, from the ground up.
At this point, in the big three markets, CFL has to regain relevance basically from the ground up if the league is to attract the next generation of fans. No team is
imminently dying, and the Argonauts have about the most stable ownership situation anywhere, but you'd be kidding yourself if you think more than a handful of young people consider CFL relevant in Toronto, Montreal, or BC. Much of this is on the individual matchday experience for each team, but today's sport fan doesn't really want to sit through four hours with most of that as play stoppage. Now is the time to reassert some individuality and distinctiveness as the Canadian game, double down on the 'weird' aspect of Canadian football (more rouges, more kicking, more trick plays!), and stop looking to the States to change our uniforms, balls, rules, etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #447  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2020, 4:23 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,664
A decent case can actually been made that North American gridiron football originated in Canada.

If you look at the history, it's either visiting Canadians who showed the game to Americans, or Americans visiting Canada who took the game home with them.

In any event, over the years the Americans made it their own and the rest is history.

As such, I actually don't think there is a dearth of Canadian sports innovation. But there is a dearth in the development of these sports within Canada - at least at a professional level.

I mean, we invented ice hockey - though we know what happened with that at the pro level. We also invented lacrosse and we also as I said have a pretty good claim to North American gridiron football.
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #448  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2020, 4:43 PM
savevp savevp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 781
^ I think we have a claim to baseball as well. And sort of basketball through James Naismith.

I think the origins of gridiron aren't the question so much as the origins of the modern game on either side of the border. Canadian football before the Burnside rules was nothing at all like the game after they were adopted. Canadian football before 1903 was basically rugby with a more robust system of defensive blocking. The Burnside rules were an attempt to bring Canadian football in line with the American game, with some exceptions, and were quite controversial at the time. I suppose it made sense at the time, when Canada was almost a client state of America in terms of population and cultural influence, but it kind of tied Canadian football to the sinking ship of concussions in gridiron.

Long story short though, what Canadian football is today is largely an offshoot of American football, even if we were started earlier. We treasure the subtle differences in code but after 1903 the biggest ones were chucked out the window.

https://enacademic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/3849473

I found this a good quick refresher. I doubt most CFL devotees are familiar with the history from that long ago.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #449  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2020, 1:51 PM
thurmas's Avatar
thurmas thurmas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 7,595
CFL presented to the fed's alongside the CFLPA a revised support request of now only 42.5$ million to run a shortened 2020 CFL season.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #450  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2020, 2:42 PM
Andy6's Avatar
Andy6 Andy6 is offline
Starring as himself
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto Yorkville
Posts: 9,739
Quote:
Originally Posted by savevp View Post
This!

I think Canadians like to believe Canadian football is a lot more Canadian than it really is. In fact, the Burnside rules were a deliberate attempt to make it an Americanised game. Maybe it made sense at the time but it shouldn't be a surprise so many CFLers are American.

What is really Canadian is the tradition. The Grey Cup is one of the great national traditions, the culture surrounding the league is very Canadian. But on the field? Canadian football has been a deliberate offshoot of American football since the early 1900s and continues to be influenced heavily by it. Just look at how the CFL changed the balls in 2018 to be more similar to NFL.

I'm sure those of us (I'm the worst) who constantly fret about the CFL-NFL similarities are tedious. This is a particularly self-concious manifestation of the English Canada national self-doubt in regards to American culture, but I think it is beneficial to call a spade a spade and acknowledge the deliberate American origins of Canadian football as it is today, rather than indulge the fantasy that our code is really that distinct anymore.
It could be that the CFL, if it survives, will gain from the bursting of the American bubble ... the U.S. is becoming an object of pity and ridicule rather than of aspiration. The NFL itself is caught up in politics. The CFL's problem was always that it wasn't the big time, as defined by U.S. media. Possibly people will be more willing to look at a homegrown product in the future.

I'm not sure how "our code" is any less distinct than it ever was. In many respects, it is going the other direction. When my dad went to Bomber games at Osborne Stadium in the 40s, the field was basically U.S. size, since that's all they could fit in. The punt return game that characterizes the CFL is a product of rule changes in the 1970s. I believe they even had fair catches in Canadian football back in the 40s.
__________________
crispy crunchy light and snappy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #451  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2020, 1:47 AM
Coldrsx's Avatar
Coldrsx Coldrsx is offline
Community Guy
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canmore, AB
Posts: 66,638
Boston Pizza

@bostonpizza

As part of a larger shift in our overall marketing strategy, Boston Pizza recently ended its sponsorship of Edmonton’s CFL team.
__________________
"The destructive effects of automobiles are much less a cause than a symptom of our incompetence at city building" - Jane Jacobs 1961ish

Wake me up when I can see skyscrapers
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #452  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2020, 3:37 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 21,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
A decent case can actually been made that North American gridiron football originated in Canada.

If you look at the history, it's either visiting Canadians who showed the game to Americans, or Americans visiting Canada who took the game home with them.

In any event, over the years the Americans made it their own and the rest is history.

As such, I actually don't think there is a dearth of Canadian sports innovation. But there is a dearth in the development of these sports within Canada - at least at a professional level.

I mean, we invented ice hockey - though we know what happened with that at the pro level. We also invented lacrosse and we also as I said have a pretty good claim to North American gridiron football.
It was less invention and more tweaking established sports out of necessity. I'm sure all of us did that in elementary school during recess with factors like weather, available equipment and, play area. The power of professional leagues makes it impossible for new innovation to reach any sort of scale. It's still attempted every year and, occasionally, there is a breakthrough . Unfortunately, any breakthroughs have a low chance of long term survival.

Our major cities are international and Football is simply not an international sport. As mentioned, the flow of the game is a big part of the game not gaining traction. Next is the cost to play over other sports. It's not Ice Hockey. The only saving grace for hockey is that it has become our national sports. It is stagnating . Who knows in a generation or two. It's too easy for CFL fans to blame the NFL and football fans attracted to a larger, big budget on field product. It does exist. It's definitely not nearly as big as it's made out to be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #453  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2020, 5:08 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,762
2020 Canadian Football Hall of Fame inductees:













https://www.cfl.ca/2020/07/16/canadi...duction-class/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #454  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2020, 5:14 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,483
A very impressive crop of big names, except one (for me, at least)… I have never even heard of Clyde Brock?!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #455  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2020, 5:24 PM
HomeInMyShoes's Avatar
HomeInMyShoes HomeInMyShoes is offline
arf
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: File 13
Posts: 13,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
A very impressive crop of big names, except one (for me, at least)… I have never even heard of Clyde Brock?!
The curse of the offensive tackle.

Played a lot, four-time all star. I saw him play a couple of times in the early 70s, but I was a kid.
__________________

-- “We heal each other with kindness, gentleness and respect.” -- Richard Wagamese
-- “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #456  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2020, 5:30 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,762
I'm not a huge football fan, so the only player I know is Burris. Is it fair to say that the Canadian Football Hall of Fame does a better job of selecting new inductees than the Hockey Hall of Fame, even with a much smaller pool of players/builders?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #457  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2020, 5:48 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
I'm not a huge football fan, so the only player I know is Burris. Is it fair to say that the Canadian Football Hall of Fame does a better job of selecting new inductees than the Hockey Hall of Fame, even with a much smaller pool of players/builders?
I wouldn't necessarily say better... they both have their complexities. Both HOFs have to balance recognizing players from the pro leagues they are most closely associated with (CFHOF - CFL, HHOF - NHL) with people whose accomplishments are in other leagues or facets of the game. For example, two of this year's inductees, Uteck and Vavra, are best known for their accomplishments in university football. The HHOF has to take into account international players, female players, etc. It can be a complicated decision.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #458  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2020, 6:16 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,762
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
I wouldn't necessarily say better... they both have their complexities. Both HOFs have to balance recognizing players from the pro leagues they are most closely associated with (CFHOF - CFL, HHOF - NHL) with people whose accomplishments are in other leagues or facets of the game. For example, two of this year's inductees, Uteck and Vavra, are best known for their accomplishments in university football. The HHOF has to take into account international players, female players, etc. It can be a complicated decision.
I can certainly appreciate the complexity players and careers the HOF has to select from, but the HOF committee does not seem to have that same appreciation. Their main criteria seems to be the number of Stanley Cup rings one wears on his figures, no matter how small an individual player's role might have been in actually earning that Cup (for example, Kevin Lowe who had the privilege of playing on the same team as Gretzky).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #459  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2020, 9:03 PM
thurmas's Avatar
thurmas thurmas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 7,595
Eskimos make internal decision to change team name: report

https://3downnation.com/2020/07/16/e...m-name-report/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #460  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2020, 11:01 PM
osmo osmo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by thurmas View Post
Eskimos make internal decision to change team name: report

https://3downnation.com/2020/07/16/e...m-name-report/
They did a consultation with indigenous groups recently and got the green light. Due to them being provocative in having dialogue and the groups being okay with the name, I find the new development puzzling.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:54 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.