Are the Canadian rules hurting the product?

As far as downs go, I can appreciate that 4 downs can lead to a more pure, balanced game. Its more open to allowing different styles of play, whereas 3 downs encourages emphasis on the pass. Of course, 4 downs on a CFL field wouldn't work, nor would 3 downs on an NFL field. The extra width, not to mention the extra receiver, open up the passing game and make 3 down football possible.
I wouldn't change to 4 downs for anything in the world, but I can appreciate that neither is better, neither is right, neither is wrong.

When it comes to most of the rest of the rules though, the CFL is head and shoulders above, IMO. Every NFL game I watch some obscure, unnatural rule comes up which seems to have been put there cuz somebody had too much time on their hands. The rules seem almost robotic, if that makes any sense.
Ex, the kicking team cannot advance the ball after recovering an onside kick. Huh? Why?

And too many games are won and lost based on who has the most timeouts left. Timeouts should be a way for a team to take time to plan out an important play, not an inherent part of the game's strategy.

Of course, I could compare every difference but I'll stop here before I go on a full blown rant. :smiley:

LOL ! NOPE :stuck_out_tongue: :rockin:

I see 4 down football as amature lower level, the extra down is a learning down, a mulligan :roll:

Funny, I’ve heard basically this same description used, except it was:
football = game of possession
rugby = game of position

Just don’t be offside when the ball was supposed to go to you :smiley:

I see the 4th down as a mulligan as well Massdestruction, no way should the “best” players be playing with an allowed extra down IMHO even with the smaller field and one less receiver to toss to.

pw13 wrote: In some ways the NFL has eclipsed the CFL in terms of aggressive play-calling, fast pace and high-powered passing attacks
Yes, I suppose in many ways it could be said the NFL lately is a passing game just as the CFL has been characterized as. The receivers have taken over as the stars compared with the running backs, in both leagues for the most part.

It should be remembered why the other league uses four downs. They began with three downs (having learned the game from McGill). However their habit of running almost every down meant that first downs were difficult to achieve. Also injury rates were horrendous. Four downs was the natural and simplest solution. If we went to four downs our passing game would become a pedantic run game.
Besides, how can the rules of a game hurt the game. They in fact make the game. If you change the rules you get a different game. Like playing poker but throwing in a few rules from bowling.

Yes, used to be 3 downs to make 5 yards.

Hmmm, so howcum the NFL isn’t a “pedantic run game”? And let’s throw U.S. college ball into the question as well.

The narrower field reduces the chance of the runningback getting around the corner. And the defence not having to be a yard off the ball reduces the number of yards a runningback can get through the middle, if only by a yard. And the limited pre-snap motion also benefits the defence.

Are we talking about changing all that? Ugh.

I think the Canadian rules are better and allow for more strategy, eg when trying for a long field goal you have to consider if you miss the opponents can run the ball out and all the way back for a td.

I’ve already said I’m not talking about, or interested in, changing any CFL rules (other than some clock rules, which is a whole other topic). But I refute the baseless suggestions some CFL fans persistently make that the NFL is boring, run-dominated, dull, plodding, and now even pedantic. IMO anyone who makes such claims has not been watching the NFL for the past decade or so, or is wilfully ignoring the evidence.

Football purist know the n f l is an inferior product !

You are correct that the American game, at least the better teams, is much more exciting, more pass-oriented than in years past. But I still find the Canadian game more exciting, for the reasons given in my first post in this thread. I still watch the NFL, but only if I have nothing better to do. No idea why I’ve never gotten into NCAA - again, maybe because I have no attachment to any team, and there’s way too many to choose from.

One thing the NFL needs to do is widen the field. The receivers are so much faster than decades before and one thing I've noticed is that they can't run fast crossing routes any longer because the field is too narrow. They have to find a way to allow these great runners to move around more and that is by widening the field somewhat.

The best players are in the NFL where the money is and where it will never be in Canada. The only thing removing the import-rule will do is turn the CFL into a formal farm-league of the NFL with an ever-rotating squad of even lower-paid imports, zero fan recognition and loss of any connection with minor and CIS football.

The import CFL players know this and always support the continuation of the import rule as it keeps ALL the players salaries up.

I’m not referring to players in the NFL, I’m referring to the best players on CFL rosters. It makes no sense to leave more talented players standing on the sidelines while the roster rule forces teams to start less-talented players simply because they’re non-imports. To get the most entertaining on-field product, let the best players on the roster play… obvious.
It also makes no sense and is counter-productive to pay players far above their skill level simply because they’re non-imports IMO.

Absolutely NOT true. I’ve been to OHL / AHL hockey games that were FAR more entertaining than a lot of NHL games.

Depends on what your expectations are I guess. At the top level of professional football in this country, as a fan I want to watch the best available players perform. Allowing fans to experience the highest-quality on-field product will be in the best long-term interests of the league IMO. The highest quality on-field product will be achieved if the best available players are allowed to play. The players are the entertainers - they make the plays and create the excitement.

Me as well, much prefer OHL over NHL and AHL. For me the "best" players as that is crudely defined often is simply one factor, there are other factors which to me is all part of the entertainment aspect of the equation. Sometimes I find CIS games far more entertaining in football than a boring NFL or CFL game and as we know, CIS players generally are considered to be less in skill level than the NFL or CFL.

Look at women's hockey, I bet some midget boys teams could beat Team Canada but man was I riveted to the TV this week watching the women's team play and really enjoy the games and how they developed, wasn't even thinking about the "best" hockey players out there because as I say, some boys midget teams could probably beat them.