CFL 2026 Season

[cjones2451]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Changing the field is about looking more like NFL. That's it. Full stop.

That may your opinion, I don't see it that way, so I ask you why? it would kill the CFL if it was a NFL lite or feeder league. There is no way Wade Miller or Craig Reynolds would support this, yet they voted for the changes, so there has to be a plan in place that benefits the league long term. They are community owned teams, so there is no owner looking to "get rich quick" based on this.

They probably did not expect this much push back, but to recant on those changes now would be an even worse look for the league

[trueviking]

The CFL is a Canadian institution that has been around for more than a century. Making it a minor feeder to an American league would be an embarrassment to the country.

I don’t have blind faith in wade miller or Craig Reynolds. The game is far bigger than them.

Nobody has ever said the changes are a get rich quick scheme. They clearly believe looking more like the NFL on tv will increase interest. They believe that is the solution. I whole heartedly disagree with that belief. In my opinion they should be looking for ways to make the game even more distinct and more Canadian. Not less.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by trueviking

They want it to look like the NFL but couldn't go all the way for fear of complete backlash.....they think that will make the game more popular....its misguided but that's the reason

Aside from my conspiracy theory of American expansion, I can see no other reason but this.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by cjones2451

so there has to be a plan in place that benefits the league long term.

They probably did not expect this much push back, but to recant on those changes now would be an even worse look for the league

So what is the plan, why aren't they shouting it from the rooftops if it's so great and why was all this hidden from the coaches, players and public when they rammed it through?

I don't think reconsideration of this would look any worse for the league than considering getting together with the XFL.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by trueviking

In my opinion they should be looking for ways to make the game even more distinct and more Canadian. Not less.

Totally agree, the US isn't as powerful (in all senses of the word) as they were when I was a kid. For example it was almost unheard of for Canadian college players to get NFL camp invites, I could probably name them on one hand but it's fairly commonplace now.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by cjones2451

Previously, if there was talk of expansion, there always needed to be a commitment for a 23-25,000 seat stadium. Now it seems the bar has been lowered to talk of temporary stadiums or even smaller capacity with room for expanding down the road. That and the CPL in existence does give me some guarded hope it may happen. Would be nice to see a stadium in Halifax that is for the Wanderers, CFL, University and community use (concerts, etc) but we shall see.

I'd personally love to see a CFL team in Atlantic Canada, but the league has been trying to put a franchise there for the past 50 years without success. The closest the CFL ever came to placing a team there was 1984, when they conditionally awarded a team to Halifax, under the condition the city built an acceptable stadium to play in. Sadly, that never occurred.

Perhaps it will be different in future, but I think that's probably a decade away from happening.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Perhaps it will be different in future, but I think that's probably a decade away from happening.

All you need is an owner and leader and things can move fast, but that's the hard part.

[cjones2451]

Originally Posted by elly63

So what is the plan, why aren't they shouting it from the rooftops if it's so great and why was all this hidden from the coaches, players and public when they rammed it through?

I don't think reconsideration of this would look any worse for the league than considering getting together with the XFL.

My guess and totally hypothetical. Farhan Lalji reported that in 2024 the Rules Committee tried to change the Rouge for Playoff games only, where a game could not be won on a missed field goal single through the end zone and it was voted down. I think the more people involved this would have taken forever to get anything done and ultimately it would have gone nowhere. The urgency is in that the TV contract is up at the end of the 2026 season.

There is no considering the XFL /UFL or whatever iteration there is of it. Their 2026 season kicks off in 3 months and they just fired all the GMs and 5 teams don't have a Head Coach, 3 teams moved to new cities and little to no marketing in those cities. I cannot for the life of me see why they would want to do that.

Would they try to get a bigger American TV contract, absolutely! They do not have to have a team or teams there to do it. The last deal they did with CBS was $1M US per season reportedly (which was 5x larger than the older ESPN deal) so if they can grow that, get a new Canadian TV deal that pays them what what they should be worth based on the TV ratings ($100-120M CAD based on regional TV deals for NHL teams), and the CFL is in a WAY better position. I believe this is why Stewart Johnston was hired, he knows exactly how TSN operates and I believe has the knowledge to get this done. Again, I am speculating, but to me it seem more logical, and more attainable than trying to get some Hail Mary US deal.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by cjones2451

Would they try to get a bigger American TV contract, absolutely! They do not have to have a team or teams there to do it. The last deal they did with CBS was $1M US per season reportedly (which was 5x larger than the older ESPN deal) so if they can grow that, get a new Canadian TV deal that pays them what what they should be worth based on the TV ratings ($100-120M CAD based on regional TV deals for NHL teams), and the CFL is in a WAY better position. I believe this is why Stewart Johnston was hired, he knows exactly how TSN operates and I believe has the knowledge to get this done. Again, I am speculating, but to me it seem more logical, and more attainable than trying to get some Hail Mary US deal.

When I mentioned XFL, I meant in the past not recently.

As for TSN, unless there is some bidding competition, what incentive do they have to offer more money? God forbid Sportsnet gets involved unless it is a single Game of the Week.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by cjones2451

I believe this is why Stewart Johnston was hired, he knows exactly how TSN operates and I believe has the knowledge to get this done. Again, I am speculating, but to me it seem more logical, and more attainable than trying to get some Hail Mary US deal.

I checked out Stewart Johnson's Linkedin page. I know that he is not fully responsible, but TSN ratings and attendance for CFL games dropped off dramatically from 2010-21, coincidentally when he was President of TSN, during this time frame. He was also lacking any kind of football experience, either as a player, coach, GM, etc.

Perhaps the league should have hired someone from the Winnipeg Blue Bomber front office, if they wanted to go with a winner.

[elly63]

I posted this in the very beginning but forgot about it when I became resigned to the fate that the rule changes would happen.

We are supposed to be moving away from things American, Elbows Up, and all that.

This is the exact opposite, with terrible optics and timing.

I always thought Elbows Up was BS because I knew once the present relations with the US "normalized" all the US and NFL wannabees would be back. They just laid low and kept quiet for a while. Perhaps they realized what they were doing was wrong (supporting another country's culture over their own)

This post was aimed at those who have trolled this thread over the years and others who have used this country as a place of convenience.

[jonny24]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

The entire grid iron game of Canadian football is almost like the NFL, not exactly the same, but very similar…

In my opinion there is nothing wrong with the rule changes that become more similar to the NFL, though still very different, aside from the upright position behind the end zone, and 100 yard field… the NFL is the largest most powerhouse professional league in the world, they are doing something right. The Canadian game rules that make the Canadian game distinct are all very much intact, namely, 3 down ball, 12 men, and bigger field, the waggle, 1 yrd off the line, all that encourages more passing.

Well is it very similar, or very different? It can't be both.

They are not all intact. Like I said before, ask someone six months ago to name the important differences, and the endzone, field length, and old rouge would have been on that list. It is only post-announcement that suddenly people write that defining list without them.

The deeper endzone encourages passing touchdowns, with more room to pass into.

The 110 yard field is important, not for the professional game but for the community game. It lets every high school and park in the country have a regulation 100m/100yd soccer / football / rugby field on one field with one set of goalposts.

It's also tradition, which is one of the most important assets the CFL actually has. Throwing it out willy-nilly for something that has no negative impact (other than being different from the NFL) is incredibly shortsighted.

Originally Posted by cjones2451

That and the CPL in existence does give me some guarded hope it may happen. Would be nice to see a stadium in Halifax that is for the Wanderers, CFL, University and community use (concerts, etc) but we shall see.

Originally Posted by cjones2451

You just amplified my point, they aren't building retractable seats for the CPL, so the Wanderers are trying to get a permanent stadium in Halifax, it makes it easier to justify if it is a share stadium. if the seating can be the same and it is just painting different lines. The Wanderers already get 7,200 for their current temp stadium, its not inconceivable to picture a shared stadium with some financial help from government. Long shot sure, but not impossible.

CPL and CFL teams already share stadiums. There's no need to change the size for entire sport on the off-chance that a relatively new, very small league will want to share. They can share anyway like they do in Hamilton, Ottawa, and until this year Winnipeg.

Originally Posted by trueviking

In my opinion they should be looking for ways to make the game even more distinct and more Canadian. Not less.

Amen. I've been saying the same thing for years.

Originally Posted by cjones2451

I think the more people involved this would have taken forever to get anything done and ultimately it would have gone nowhere. The urgency is in that the TV contract is up at the end of the 2026 season.

...

Would they try to get a bigger American TV contract, absolutely! They do not have to have a team or teams there to do it. The last deal they did with CBS was $1M US per season reportedly (which was 5x larger than the older ESPN deal) so if they can grow that, get a new Canadian TV deal that pays them what what they should be worth based on the TV ratings ($100-120M CAD based on regional TV deals for NHL teams), and the CFL is in a WAY better position. I believe this is why Stewart Johnston was hired, he knows exactly how TSN operates and I believe has the knowledge to get this done. Again, I am speculating, but to me it seem more logical, and more attainable than trying to get some Hail Mary US deal.

You might be right, but this exemplifies why this is ass-backwards.

1. As you said, the change process might be slow. It's a 100 year old league, they can take time to make changes. Rushing (railroading) things to chase a single TV deal should never happen. Once again - short sighted.

2. Why would TSN suddenly double what they are paying because a few rules are changed?

I've said it a million times. The people who refuse to watch the CFL, it's not because of ~5 specific rules, it's because they see it as second-tier. Appeasing those people will never work.

Where's the logic?

Untenable #1. Making it the exact same as the NFL would make it a true feeder league, that's a bad idea.

Untenable #2. The current status quo also doesn't bring in enough people (somehow, even though attendances have been increasing for years and ownership is the strongest it's been in decades?) so we "need" to change things?

..... and somehow the answer is to split the difference between Untenable #1, and Untenable #2? People don't like it when it's 80% the same as the NFL, so 90% the same ought to do it?


If there are 1 million people in this country who, the reason they don't follow the CFL is because they are very particular about some of the rules of gridiron football... I'd suggest there are 5 million people who don't follow the CFL because they think gridiron football as a whole isn't that entertaining to watch.

[cjones2451]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

I checked out Stewart Johnson's Linkedin page. I know that he is not fully responsible, but TSN ratings and attendance for CFL games dropped off dramatically from 2010-21, coincidentally when he was President of TSN, during this time frame. He was also lacking any kind of football experience, either as a player, coach, GM, etc.

Perhaps the league should have hired someone from the Winnipeg Blue Bomber front office, if they wanted to go with a winner.

Roger Goodell and Gary Bettman never did either, it is not a requirement to be a Commish. Randy Ambrosie was a player and I don't think that made a difference

[elly63]

Originally Posted by jonny24

Like I said before, ask someone six months ago to name the important differences, and the endzone, field length, and old rouge would have been on that list. It is only post-announcement that suddenly people write that defining list without them.

They're moving the goalposts (pardon the expression)

Originally Posted by jonny24

I've said it a million times. The people who refuse to watch the CFL, it's not because of ~5 specific rules, it's because they see it as second-tier. Appeasing those people will never work.

Bingo

jonny, you really get the gist of this and not just because I agree with you. I've accepted my fate but still resent being lied to.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by jonny24

Well is it very similar, or very different? It can't be both.

They are not all intact. Like I said before, ask someone six months ago to name the important differences, and the endzone, field length, and old rouge would have been on that list. It is only post-announcement that suddenly people write that defining list without them.

The deeper endzone encourages passing touchdowns, with more room to pass into.

The 110 yard field is important, not for the professional game but for the community game. It lets every high school and park in the country have a regulation 100m/100yd soccer / football / rugby field on one field with one set of goalposts.

It's also tradition, which is one of the most important assets the CFL actually has. Throwing it out willy-nilly for something that has no negative impact (other than being different from the NFL) is incredibly shortsighted.

It’s incredibly different. The fact there is an extra man, with 3 downs compared to 4, is incredibly more important than the same length of field, or uprights at the back, not to mention different sized end zones, a rouge, backfield movement, yard off the line, 23% wider field. The games are vastly different.


The deeper end zones are not even deep for all stadiums currently, or even all end zones for that matter. Toronto has two different dimensions in each of their end zones. One of them being only 2 yards longer than the proposed 15 yards. Montreal corners are cutoff. To me standardization is critical… comparing the differences in dimensions of the field to that of a baseball outfield wall is a bad argument. In my opinion, a better/closer argument would be comparing the differences of end zones to a baseball infield with shorter baselines in some stadiums, or a first baseline different to that of a third base line in a single stadium, which would be ridiculous.

I agree that shortening the field by 10 yards is a big change, but that in my opinion is due to accommodate moving the uprights to the back. And moving the uprights to the back is to accommodate player safety, encourage more passing plays up the middle, and outright just removing an obstacle that interfere with the play of game.

You highlight the rouge as if it is eliminated. I’m a huge fan of the rouge, for the fact that it is there to penalize the defence for not advancing the ball, rather than rewarding the offence for missing a field goal… the change has made it so much better, as it removes the rewarding aspect of a missed field goal. Though I would like to see it somewhat modified again to penalize the defense for not playing a kick that lands in the end zone and subsequently bounces out. They should be penalized for not playing the kick it when it can be played, but that may be subjective and they want to eliminate any human interpretation of what is/isn’t playable.

Time clock improves the pace of play.

Teams now had to move to each side of the field to accommodate the play clock, cause you can’t expect a defence to run 70 yards down field to be able to beat the clock.

[cjones2451]

Love him or Hate him this will be interesting

Luke Willson interviews the Commish on his series Film Never Lies. Will be posted at 4:30pm Eastern today

https://t.co/FyJXbxqC8M

[jonny24]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

It’s incredibly different.

....

I note that you couldn't refute my characterization as Americanization, nor did you retract calling that concept "stupid".

I'm not going further with nitpicking each individual rule.

The BOG has taken a very broad, American-in-direction change, that I feel both steps on tradition and will fail to bring in the money they are after.

I may be proven wrong on the second point. That remains to be seen.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by cjones2451

Love him or Hate him this will be interesting

Luke Willson interviews the Commish on his series Film Never Lies. Will be posted at 4:30pm Eastern today

Why do I think watching this will piss me off. Can't stand Willson and wonder why he seems to be influential. Can it be that some weak Canadians just love it when someone gets success in the US and comes home, automatically making him better in their eyes. Didn't like the way he (and most of the TSN band of wimps) excluding Suits, jumped Nathan Rourke.

I can separate the message from the messenger so we'll see what they have to say but I really find him annoying AF and couldn't finish his last "interview" with Phonsie.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by cjones2451

Roger Goodell and Gary Bettman never did either, it is not a requirement to be a Commish. Randy Ambrosie was a player and I don't think that made a difference

Gary Bettman had a proven track record, joining the NBA when the league was struggling at the beginning of the 80s, and put in charge of marketing and legal departments, which helped the league grow exponential, until the NHL poached him in 1993, when the NBA was at it's highest popularity level ever.

Stewart has actually overseen reduced viewership and attendance for CFL.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by jonny24

I note that you couldn't refute my characterization as Americanization, nor did you retract calling that concept "stupid".

I'm not going further with nitpicking each individual rule.

The BOG has taken a very broad, American-in-direction change, that I feel both steps on tradition and will fail to bring in the money they are after.

I may be proven wrong on the second point. That remains to be seen.

Huh? I wasn’t refuting you, I was responding to jonny24 who asked if the leagues, with the CFL changes, are very similar, or very different, and in my opinion, I clearly explained how the two games are still radically different.

However, If you read that same post, you can note how it clearly does refute any characterization that the CFL game is not Americanization.

If they moved from 3-down to 4-down, and/or 12 men to 11 men, and/or outright eliminate the rouge, and/or modify the field width to 53 yards, then yes, I’d agree it is Americanized. The change in length and change in upright position does not Americanize the game. To each their own…

In my opinion, the BOG made have taken a very broad, CFL -Canadian modification to the Canadian game, which, I will successfully bring in my money they are after.