"Eyebrow-raising rule changes"???

Come on FYB, some rule changes happen in most sports. Look at figure skating when they got rid of the compulsory figures. And baseball lowering the mound and the American League with the DH, hockey with the red line and allowing the longer passes etc.! :o

A 32-yard single seems odd, 20 or 25 works and make the 2 point go from the 5, not 3…too close with the D a yard off the ball .

the league is looking at instituting a 30-second play clock that will begin as soon as the ball is spotted on the line of scrimmage instead of when the referee signals for it to start. That would likely make the CFL game a little more speedy than it already is. Good news for offences. Bad news for defences.[/b]
[/quote] No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no.

They want to artificially drive up scoring, but changing the play clock like this fundamentally alters the flow of the game, most importantly in the final three minutes of either half. If this happens you will see more American style, ball control kneel downs and clock eating endings, instead of the magnificent last mad dash to take the game that is so wonderfully canadian.

Start the clock sooner, sure, but for the love of chip burnside don’t add time.

I'm OK with having the punting team stay onside before the ball is kicked. That should all but eliminate the no yards calls though it may be offset with more offside calls for the punting team. Time will tell.

The 1 and 2 PATs seem over reactive to me. I think putting the 1 point at 15 years is sufficient. Keep the 2 yard play at the 5. Don't want to see that become a gimmy either.

Does the CFL really have an issue with scoring? Canadian football has more scoring than American football.

They want to artificially drive up scoring, but changing the play clock like this fundamentally alters the flow of the game, most importantly in the final three minutes of either half. If this happens you will see more American style, ball control kneel downs and clock eating endings, instead of the magnificent last mad dash to take the game that is so wonderfully canadian Start the clock sooner, sure, but for the love of chip burnside don't add time.
Not sure I follow you LB74, with just 3 downs and you're losing, you can't really be doing kneel downs and ball control if you have a long way to go for a td or fg to win a game. Actually even if you are winning I don't think it would lead to any more kneel downs and ball control as is now the case, staying with 3 downs of course. :?

The problem earl, is that with a 30 second play clock a team can eat a minute and a half without gaining a first down. Or, if they do gain first down after two plays, can use up TWO AND A HALF of the final three minutes of the game.

Three downs or four, the play clock changes how games end.

I bet we could both agree one of the best parts of Canadian ball, is that it's not over till it's over. Unlike the US, where it's not over, until ... Well, there's three or four minutes left and someone one team has the lead.

personally I'd love to see the play clock and game clock coincide whereas the 20 second PC is just that..20 seconds from the end of the play.

Broadcast advertisers may not be fond of this model but the game would certainly be thrilling to say the least with increased athleticism at the forefront.

I wonder how that would work game clock versus play clock if they go to the 30 second play clock. Right now in the last three minutes the clock stops when the play ends. On in bounds plays the game and play clock start simultaneously when the ref blows play in.

With the 30 second clock starting the second the ball is placed at the line of scrimmage - is there still a point after that at which the ref would still be blowing play in - meaning the team can't snap the ball until after that whistle? I would assume that is the case to allow time for player personnel changes to be made before a snap of the ball. That whistle would be unrelated to the play clock - but would start the game clock.

In that case the game clock would not tick off a full 30 seconds.

Am I making sense there? Otherwise I think you will see some keystone cop mad scramble routines of players trying to substitute players without a quick snap catching them with too many men on the field.

Ideally, that would be the way we played the game. And you’re absolutely right, broadcasters would hate it. Personally I’ve noticed the pace of games slowed down (most noticeably when watching live at the stadium) since tsn has secured sole rights to air the cfl.

I hear what you’re saying pat, but I don’t think there’s a way to execute it. The play clock is unavoidably connected to the game clock.

What you’re talking about is part of why the Americans have a forty five second clock, because time is whistled in the second the ball is placed… And clock rules are one of the les visible but significant reasons why our game is so different and superior to theirs.

Make that was so different and superior. In the 1980s and before, the 20-second play clock started as soon as the ball and sticks were placed, and most snaps occurred less than 30 seconds (of actual game time) after the previous whistle. But for years now the refs have not started the 20-second clock until substitutions have occurred – and in the meantime the game clock keeps ticking down. I have watched the clock in stadium and seen many examples when 40-45 seconds ticked off the clock between a whistle and the next snap. This proposed change should in fact speed up the game and increase the number of offensive plays per game, taking us back to what things used to be like in the past, when the CFL game was more exciting and faster-paced than it has been in recent years.

If memory serves, they added a rule just last year where the play would not be whistled in until the defense had been given time to make a substitution.

I still think adding time to the play clock is completely a move in the wrong direction.

Whistle the play in right away, and put onus on the refs to move those chains!

TSN can have their commercial breaks between quarters and halves. Hopefully, our BOG has the stones to see this.

Totally agree that the play clock needs to be started earlier than it is now. It does seem to take too long between the end of one play to the next one being whistled in.

But I’m pretty sure commercials aren’t what’s slowing the game down between plays. From what I remember, TSN currently shows commercials only after turnovers, during injury timeouts, at the three minute warning, and between quarters, not between plays.

It does seem to take too long between the end of one play to the next one being whistled in.
Yes CatsFanInOttawa, many times I at least have that impression of exactly that come to think of it. I think some lessons can be learned from basketball to speed the game up where you score a basket and bang, ball back in play in a jiffy.

Out of curiosity, I decided to watch a bit of the '67 Grey Cup for comparison. It turns out that in that game, it was usually 20 and sometimes up to 30 seconds after the ball being blown dead and the next play being whistled in. A lot depended on what type of play it was - long bombs took longer than short running plays - and whether there were any substitutions. Pretty much the same as now, from what I can see.

I did see a few differences that made the game move more quickly. There didn’t seem to be as many substitutions as there are now. Also, the players ran to the line after leaving the huddle, and often the ball was snapped almost immediately - I’m thinking they would be called for procedure now doing that.

From the way you wrote your response I am not sure if you don’t like the idea or not.
Referencing the XFL always seems to be a derogatory thing but if they had this in place good for them. Never followed the league so don’t know. You can steal good idea’s from anywhere. Didn’t even the NBA put funny names on their jerseys this year?
If you don’t like the idea please explain why. From your other posts you seem to think things through . Would like to hear your argument.
I believe the point of the game is two fold …offence to maintain possession long enough to score, defence to turn possession back to their offence without being scored on. Why should that basic principle be stopped with time left and the score in doubt. Yes in a blow out injuries and other factors come into play but as long as it is less than a converted touchdown difference the defence should have the opportunity to force a turnover. It only takes one second to turn an interception or fumble into a touchdown because the clock can not stop during a play I believe.
This would also give our game yet another point of difference from the NFL while adding to the "never over till it’s over " feel.
Look forward to your thoughts

Thanks Red.

I don't exactly have any thoughts on it either way actually. I just remember the XLF did have a rule where the team in possession of the ball MUST attempt to make forward progress on all plays.

Then you have debacles like this : [url]http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000425503/article/jets-nick-mangold-flips-mike-mitchell-on-dirty-play[/url]

its a legal play, and if you watch Vick, he reaches backwards and drops the ball - a textbook fumble - but the play is whistled dead. But maybe this kind of victory formation culture only exists in the US. I don't think any team in Canada would assume with more than a minute left and a seven point lead that they deserved to win the game like the Jets appear to in this video.

Then again, forward progress or no, with a longer play clock then you'll see teams taking this approach more often to try and keep a close score in their favour, instead of being forced to get first downs (wich in turn generates opportunities for turn overs)

Am I reading you think Vick fumbled on purpose or that teams will start to do that ? Not sure how that helps their cause with a 5 point lead, 2nd and 4 and 34 seconds left. Pretty risky even with next to no time left little own 30 or 40 seconds and that XFL wording of forward progress might stop guys taking a hand off and running around to try and kill the clock.
With so many teams using the shotgun in the CFL your QB is out of the way so wouldn’t get pummelled. It would add pressure to a have a clean snap and a secure hand off or completion more than anything.

Actually I think that the only problem in the play you embedded was again the built in perception / assumption by the offence the game was over. The defence did nothing wrong by coming on and the the offensive line stopped the player by flipping him out of the way. Works for me. In this particular instance there would have been no fumble because Vick actually took a knee before the ball came loose.
I don’t think he should have been able to but that is only my perspective. Maybe that is why this is described as a dirty play because by seeing the formation the defence is expected to not come hard.

Does anyone know what the actual rules are on taking a knee? Is there any ( besides the fact it kills the play and you cannot hit the QB) or is it just something that has become normal at the end of a half and end of game without any real rule?

There’s nothing official in the CFL rule book other than the play is to be whistled dead as soon as the QB intentionally kneels.

BTW, assuming the rule is the same in the NFL, Vick dropping the ball wouldn’t have been a fumble as the play would have already been whistled dead when his knee touched down. Not sure it is, though.

Here is Drew Edwards take on the possible rule changes. (Ti-Cats beat writer for The Spec).

I chuckled at Collaros’s tweet - “So it’d be football, not a UFC fight the first 10-15 yards of receivers’ routes? I’m all for that!? he wrote via @Zcollaros7.

Gee sounds like a quarterback talking. lol

[b]CFL considers rule changes to boost scoring [/b] Better gets some new bulbs for the scoreboard and more headache medication for defensive coordinators.

The CFL rules committee is meeting in Toronto this week to consider a number of tweaks designed to improve offensive and special teams production. It comes after a season that saw points per game decline 13 per cent and offensive scoring drop by a whopping 23 per cent, from 48.7 points per game in 2014 to just 37.7 last season.

The most significant change likely to be recommended by the committee, which is made up of coaches and general managers from across the league, would be a rule that would explicitly limit contact on an offensive player beyond five yards from the line of scrimmage. That’s standard operating procedure in the NFL but would be a new wrinkle for CFL defenders to deal with.

At the moment, defensive backs and linebackers are given plenty of leeway when it comes to manhandling would-be pass catchers. Running backs and receivers are routinely bumped off their crossing routes by linebackers – a favourite trick of Montreal’s Chip Cox and Saskatchewan’s Shea Emry – while jersey-grabbing and out-and-out holding of receivers is also common-place.

And remember Ticat defensive back Delvin Breaux driving offensive players off the field of play last season? Though he was occasionally flagged for overzealousness – throwing them over the sideline scoreboard, for example – Breaux’s consistently locked down opposing receivers by physically controlling their movements for extended periods.This change would help clarify what’s allowed and what isn’t.

The change would obviously be a boon for offences and Ticat quarterback Zach Collaros voiced his approval for the potential change via Twitter.

“So it’d be football, not a UFC fight the first 10-15 yards of receivers’ routes? I’m all for that!? he wrote via @Zcollaros7.

Another potential change designed to help the offence would an alteration on how the play clock is run. At the moment, the clock starts when the ball is placed and the official has blown in the play, usually after both the offence and defence have had the opportunity to make substitutions. The new rule would have the play clock start as soon as the ball is spotted.

So even though the play clock would likely be longer – changed from 20 seconds to 30 or 35 – the offence would have the opportunity to snap the ball almost immediately after it’s spotted, without giving the defence a chance to rest or change personnel. Even in regular offensive situations with no hurry up there could potentially be less time between plays, speeding up the game.

Special team return teams could get a boost as well. On the table is a change that would limit the number of players who could cross the line of scrimmage until the punt is kicked– again, much like the NFL. The result could be more time and space for return men like the Ticats’ Brandon Banks, as well as less of the devastating high speed collisions that often take place on punt returns.

There are other proposals under discussion, including one that could see the possibility of three-point conversion and therefore a nine-point play but initial reports indicate it isn’t expected to be adopted for this season.

It’s worth noting that none of these of initiatives has been officially recommended by the rules committee and any changes would have to be approved by the CFL’s board of governors. But it’s clear the league’s leadership is determined to improve scoring opportunities in an attempt to increase scoring and make the game more exciting.