CFL Slagged in Today's National Post!

Try as I might, I'm always bored to tears with the Argos. The problem is that the Argos play in the CFL, an inferior product devoid of excitement, strategy, talent and great play.

I just don't have the time today... only have a 5 minute window now. Would somebody write an intelligent letter to the editor immediately answering this clown? He clearly doesn't understand the game... nor does he want to.

I thought I recognized the smarmy attitude of this writer.

"Michael Taube is a former speechwriter for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Angry CFL and Buffalo Bills fans can reach him at"

Do you honestly take a speech writer for Harper as somebody to listen to?

Well said sigpig.The writer is delusional and the Post is circling the bowl. I guess this article is meant to appeal to the paper's right wing base that believes that everything American is better. :smiley:
Pat Lynch(the old guy in section 7 just left of the 55 yard line)

I love how this moron makes sweeping statements as if they are truths. Example....the NFL with all of it's strategic coaching moves or how the CFL has limited offensive schemes when it's only 3 downs. Sorry...but any game I've watched of the NFL calibre has bored me to tears because of the reliance on running the ball. To me it seemed like, 1st down, maybe pass...4th down..punt.

And as for the rouge? I love it. I love how teams woould place their kicker ini the endzone to kick the ball back out to prevent that single (generally when the game is literally on the line).

I guess this clowns problems are due to at least two's had to watch the Argos (hahaha) and two....he's a PC.

Its one guest columnist's opinion not an NP editorial. All tired arguments we've heard before.
Nothing new to see here.
Move along.

Michael Taube is nothing more than a neo-liberal,free market,money grubbing con with "p eni s envy" for our neighbours to the South.Occasionally,I have the great misfortune of reading his "column" in that other spectacular Con birdcage liner,The Toronto Sun.He wants to privatize everything because he's a Freidmanite,who thinks the "free market" will solve all problems.

He's a right wing kook to be laughed at and mocked...Just like all right wing kooks!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

The guy is just a plain idiot.

I took the liberty of writing Mr. Mike. Yes I have too much time on my hands:

[b]Hi Mike,

You're probably getting a lot of this today but allow me to add to the pile:

I found your article today to be an utter misrepresentation of Canadian football. Your breakdown of Canadian football as being pass-pass-kick, run-pass-kick, run-run-kick demonstrates a shallow depth of knowledge of football of any sort. Are you claiming that American football is better because there are more permutations of plays in a 4 down, 3-and-out as opposed to the Canadian 2-and-out?

No one with in-depth knowledge of the gridiron varieties of football would speak with such malice about one particular brand. They are different. Subjectively you may prefer one over the other but by no objective means can you assert that one is more strategic and involves more great play.

For example, I could turn around your argument and say by virtue of 3 downs, Canadian football is on edge without the 'experimental' or pace setting down. You have to make big plays to succeed. Some will prefer the 6 minute, 35 yard drive resulting in a punt. I for one, am just as content that said drive be finished in 2 minutes as is more often the case in Canadian football. Special teams in American football is an intermediary as opposed to an intricate part of the game. Yes with 16 games per week in the NFL you can amass a comparable special teams highlight reel against the 4 game CFL week. However, rules like the fair catch, and a punting team's ability to 'down' the ball abbreviate the need for kicking, coverage and returning in American football. The focus is squarely on the scrimmage. Again if you like that, great. If you want to see a game where kicking carries more weight, watch the CFL. The rouge is a part of this. One who prefers the NFL is content with a missed field goal being the end of the play. The CFL fan enjoys the added 'strategy' of conceding the rouge for field position verses attempting a return and the subsequent coverage and continued play. Its a matter of preference and subjectivity.

The notion that Canadian football is somehow the quirky or abnormal variety stems from poor marketing and local TV blackouts in the 70s, 80s and 90s. This left a generation of young and new Canadians blind to a sport with the same vintage as American football. Which is the 'normal' or 'standard' of gridiron football is completely arbitrary. When the CFL came around business-wise and TSN picked up the ball with promotion, the hate-on began from those who wrongly saw the CFL as no less a gimmick sport than the AFL.

Toronto probably has its own market for an NFL team. Sure. You can argue for the merits of this. It doesn't take the expense of the CFL to do so. Your article will only influence those who have a very casual and passing interest in football period. Those in the know will thoroughly rebut your article. The fans of the CFL that watched the Grey Cup (6.1 million) and contribute to regularly out-drawing the NFL in Canadian TV ratings probably take offense. If this was your aim, congratulations.

Now for the conspiracy theories:

Are you on Phil Lind's payroll? Having been Stephen Harper's speech writer, is this a far fetched extention of the propaganda needed to eventually constitute the NAU?

Best Regards,

I read the article with mild interest in his opinions right up to where he said this...:

Meanwhile, Canada's tourist industry would thrive.
Then I just laughed and clicked off the page.

Is he seriously trying to say Canada's entire tourist industry would thrive because of 10 home dates of football in Toronto out of 365 days a year ? Yes, I can see the hoteliers and restauranteurs in Charlottetown PEI, Cochrane Ontario and Red Deer Alberta licking their chops now.

According to this guy, no need to hire a defensive coordinator in the CFL, it's just offence, offence, offence that outshines the defence. I always like the expression that smash mouth football doesn't exist in the CFL. Of course some people are only visual learners and some of the added TV angles from field level of the NFL compared with the CFL could give the impression that we don't have a defensive lineman and linebacker stick it to a running back and knock him dead cold in his tracks. And for slow learners who rely on strictly what they see on the tube, well, I can see how someone might think the CFL doesn't have any smash mouth plays. :wink:

So if this commentary came from the looney left it would be taken seriously? If more government is the answer then why not nationalize the CFL?

As Zontar points out, we’ve heard these arguments before, nothing new, move on.

email this idiot and give him a piece of your mind;

I won't read it because I already know what it says. Like everybody else here, I've heard it all before. But just one point. Isn't the National Post of the brink of going belly up. Maybe this is their way of going out with a bang.

This is a surprise to me, I always thought left wingers were kooks. Well I should say I don't think, I know. :lol:

I do know one thing for sure though, the Prime Minister wouldn't agree with that speech. Probably one of the reasons he is a "former" speech writer.

Great letter man,way better than mine,I just called him a d**K.

Great letter for sure and yes, mine was short and succinct as well.

He's got nothing to say, forget about him.

I only read the first couple of paragraphs and it became obvious to me that the writer knows nothing about football.

And yet BF.. .both your letters get right to the point!!

:D :lol: :lol:

Great letter Joe.
Let us know if he replies to it. That's if he understands the great points you made.