CFL no longer offensive game. Now all about defense

No question about it the glory days are gone. If someone ever comes up and tells you '' Oh the CFL is all fast, high scoring, exciting, all about offense kinda football right?''

you now say '' no. it's a 2 and out low scoring, smashing defensive style, interceptions, fumble recovery, offense stalling, low scoring kinda football now''

It's the leagues fault for allowing this to happen. they haven't adjusted to the defensive progression over the years. the NFL produces way more exciting football now and of course the NCAA blows the CFL away now. The games are so boring. These players are not good enough anymore on offense. There are zero stars on offense.

It's time to maybe add 4 downs.

It worries me but I think we are just going thru a cycle. If it continues past this year, we will need to do something.

With the expansion to 9 teams, the CFL should have lowered the number of required Canadians - for a couple years.

TurdraFootball wrote: It's time to maybe add 4 downs.
So you want 7 downs then? :wink:

Well it would be fun if they tried 4 down for some exhibition games perhaps, I think that's often how potential new rules are looked at. I would be for that not that I need this but for a try.

Too funny though, I remember when "NFL only counts" guys used to tell me the CFL is too high scoring, too much like basketball and no defense while the NFL was better because of the defense and tougher to score. :stuck_out_tongue:

It’s one year. Calm down.

Years ago, the criticism of the CFL was that it was pitch and catch, too easy to score, not enough gritty defence like the almighty NFL. Now that the NFL has become more high-scoring, our game isn’t good enough because it’s too low-scoring. :roll:

Edit: Earl just made my point.

It is just a cycle the league is going through. It happens with all sports with offense and defense doing new things and the other catches up and the cycle turns.
For the CFL elimination the use of FB play created a 5 wide open offense. The defenses were still using old system of really 3 true what we would consider LBs.
Now the SAMLB spot has been completely been redefined to something brand new now. A hybrid position has evolved where it is now played by a DB.
Another factor is the curve of more and better Canadian Receivers is way out in front of Canadian cover DBs. Now not only does every club have much more depth of Canadian receivers. Almost every team has at least one Canadian receiver who is at least the number two if not the number one receiver. Fantuz, Getz, Durie, etc are all 1,000 yard receivers and goto guys. Back end of the receivering corp are much deeper and even more rec like Watson, Gore, etc are solid 3rd receivers. Now there is a new wave coming on even stronger that are taller 6'4" vs still largely smaller quicker cover DBs.
With that still almost all the cover DBs are imports and the SAMLB position as it stands in the CFL does not exist in the NCAA or in the CIS.
Now not only are the import DBs adjusted fully to the Hybrid DB/LB but more Canadian DBs have come on this season alone to be at least solid Field side CBs but also flexible enough to be able to cover receivers as Safeties in interchangable defensive parts schemes. Then there is Pruneau in Ottawa as a rookie getting as good as any SAMLB in the league.
Now that the defenses have caught up. The offensive schemes are changing. With more use of TE/H-Back type receivers and more emphaisis on running the ball with multiple style RBs of power and scat backs also in 2 back systems. With Big athletic Olineman getting into the second level and blocking a smaller SAM LB.
The chess game coninues as the the pieces on the board are changing.

Enjoyed the read cflsteve :thup:

Moi aussi.

Winnipeg BeachBum, mattsdad, ect, ect, ect..........

Troll thread

I do like the monikor though - TundraFootball have to admit. :wink:

Much better than mattsdad or WinnipegBeach_BlueBombers.

I never thought I would ever say this, but the way the defenses are taking over the game I would say lets try four downs in the exhibition games next year. Still all CFL rules other wise.

For pride and puritanical reasons it is my hope this not come to pass although do understand the reasoning behind it due to the game evolution of late.

I'd prefer to drop the number of field players by one (to 11) on both sides of the ball rather than increase the number of downs which would essentially increase the number of rushing/screen plays while further distancing the CFL from it's once unique and enthralling stature as a big play passing league.

that being said, there is no reason to hit the panic button as of yet as the next season or two will be revealing soon enough.

Why imitate the NFL ? 4 downs ? Why not just make it 5 downs with the stipulation that instead of 10 yds to make a 1rst down you have to go 5 yds for a first down.They could also double the score for a TD from 6 to 12 pts and make fg's worth 5 pts increase the "rouge' to a "trey" a 2 pt convert to a 4 pt convert and just to make things interesting make the convert worth a point and a half and a safety worth two and a half points :roll: Now if that doesn't increase scoring,nothing will :? :stuck_out_tongue:

CFLsteve made some excellent points about the SAM position, which is absolutely unique to Canadian football and without equivalent in CIS, US college, or NFL.

To his post, I'd just add that CFL defenses have evolved schematically to take away the West Coast offense that Trestman and Hufnagel popularized from 2008 onwards. DCs have figured out that pressure and combo coverages behind the defensive front have a statistically better chance of success. Take away the short game, pressure the QB, and dare him to beat you with low-percentage deep balls down the field.

LaPolice has an excellent column on this very issue:

The four main reasons LaPo lists are Canadian ratio-changers, addition of a fourth DI, personnel changes/injury, and evolution of defensive coverage. On the latter topic, he notes:

Defences have had to evolve to handle the offences of today and they have done a great job of it. When I was a coordinator in 2002 and 2003, the coverages you would see were much simpler; a lot of man coverage and forms of Three Deep coverage. Now a days, there are a lot of combination coverages and what is called pattern reading where DBs and LBs run underneath and right to cover the routes that they recognize compared to dropping into designated zones on the field. The defensive coaches in the league are very good and know what they are doing. They deserve a lot of credit for the job they do.

The point about combo coverages is important. Instead of just playing straight man or iterations of 3 deep, defenses are employing a mix of man and zone coverage on a given play, made possible because of the football intelligence of DBs who can pattern-read on the fly. The latter type of player is much harder to beat than a DB who just drops into a particular zone or plays straight man. You have to actively scheme to take him out of the play, and if you do, you expose yourself elsewhere.

My overall point is that everything is cyclical. Defenses have responded to offensive changes over the past seven or eight years. Now the onus is on offenses to catch up. We've already seen versions of the new CFL offense with what SSK is doing with a three-pronged ground attack. The Als were actually forced to adopt a similar playbook in 2012 due to injury and this year, they are slowly incorporating just such an attack with Whitaker, Sutton, and Rogers as the end-around threat comboed with the odd QB draw.

OCs will eventually realize that jumbo sets and a multi-dimensional ground attack are the keys to attacking a pressure defense. Once teams adopt that strategy, defenses will be forced to evolve in their turn.

Metres anyone?
I think 4 downs is too many and 3 downs too few. Why not balance it out a bit by changing from yards to metres?
1 metre = 1.09 yards. The field would be 100 metres long which pretty much equals 110 yards, so the field size would stay the same, just add a 4th down.
Same rules of course ( though tweaking a few might be a good idea IMO), it would allow the offence more time/options by having a 4th down and should create more scoring plays.
I've been a cfl fan for a very long time and have to say this is one of the most - if not the most- unexciting, low scoring season that I've seen.
One could argue that it would be more American by adding a 4th down, but by going to metres makes it more Canadian.
Kind of balances everything out.

lol - touche - you beat me to it by a few minutes.
How about this then. Since we are in Canada and use the metric system. Switch to meters and 4 downs.

The field will be 100 meters instead of 110 yards long. And because 10 meters is longer than 10 yards simultaneously switch to 4 downs. 10 meters = 10.94 (almost 11) yards.

You may laugh - but the first time I took one of my nieces to a CFL game she asked me ‘What does 10 yards mean? Is that 10 meters?’

4 downs on a CFL width field equates to no more passing way around it, it would be a 80%+ running league, and teams that didn't do it would be stupid. After a few years of the LBs getting oversized (NFL sized) the passing game would open up a bit, but it would never be the same.