He played in both. He played in the AFL first, then NFL-E, then the Rams. The rest, as they say, is history.
I’m glad to hear you agree with my third point.
I agree with you on the first point that the player needs to take responsibility for doing up all 4 snaps. I even suggested to the CFL (in their off-season request for suggested rule changes) that it be called a penalty if a player lines up without all 4 done up. Unfortunately they didn’t implement my suggestion. The fact remains though that hardly a game goes by without someone losing their helmet during a play. Something (anything) needs to be done to stop this “out of control train wreck” that statistically at least, is bound to happen. I hope it doesn’t take a tragedy for the league to act.
I even agree with what you say about my second point. There must be some risk/reward aspect to kicking a field goal. I think that the risk aspect currently is too highly weighted however. Statistically the longer the field goal the less likely the chances for success. Perhaps another idea might be to limit the number of defensive rushers allowed so that the kicking team can limit the number of “jumbo” players they need to block, thereby having more DB, LB types available to catch fleet of foot returners such as Thiggy. Somehow balance between risk and reward needs to be addressed, otherwise you’ll see a lot more coffin corner punt attempts from the 45. While exciting in its own right such a play pales in comparison to a 52 yard field goal attempt.
Agree with you 100% that something has to be done. I believe that in the NFL they introduced a rule that said if there is a strap, it must be buckled. Donovan McNabb was the worst offender. He had four straps and only buckled two. I think they CFL should implement the exact rule you mentioned. Maybe there just needs to be more people who ask for it. When the CFL asks for rule changes again this off-season (which is likely) I will write this one in, as I’m sure you will do. The more people who get on board, the more likely it is that the league will do something.
I can agree with this as well. One of the most exciting moments I ever witnessed live was Ozzie’s 57-yard FG in the 1998 East Final. Man, that was awesome.
The odd thing is that while every other position seems to be getting better, kickers don’t seem to be improving at the same rate. They talk now like a 47-yard attempt needs to be thought about. I remember when that was a no brainer.
But you’re right, the risk-reward is tipped to highly towards risk right now, and something to address that would be nice.
I personally think that the reason kickers aren’t improving with long range kicks is that they don’t get to try them as much any more as the coach worries about a bad result (return for a TD) if unsuccessful. It could be as simple as if they try more long range kicks the success rate will increase. Practice does make perfect after all. I wonder if anyone has any statistics which bear out my gut feeling about the CFL’s downward curve in attempting long range field goals? (Please and thank you if anyone does.)
I’m sure once Russ sees this, he’ll be on it. The guy is a stat like I’ve never seen. 
Even if the numbers don’t support it, it does feel like they don’t attempt as many.
And you could be entirely right. It could very well be that coaches are afraid to try it. I know that with guys like Owens, Thigpen and David, I’d be scared too. But there used to be Pinball and Gizmo. Those guys would have scared me as well. Now I kind of hope someone does do the research to see if you’re right.
All hail the stats guru from la belle Province. :thup: (maybe i will PM him with a link to this, just to make sure he doesn’t miss it somehow.) :oops:
Agreed. I would alllow the coach to challenge any ruling on the field. So long as it costs the team 1 time out per challenge, coaches would not abuse the challenge flag.
It was 1st name that pop into my head
Better than North Battelford I guess. (I don’t mean to put down what is, I am sure, a very lovely place. 
Over Saskatoon and Victoria? Hm, well, I guess you can’t help what pops into your head first, but you have to admit, Moose Jaw is a weird one.
Wonder if it has anything to do with a change in the ball - manufacturer, composition, etc. Last change I know of was in 1996, when they switched from Spalding to Wilson. Has Wilson made any ball changes lately?
I wouldn’t know. But I think it was FootbalYouBet in the CFL Talk forum who was complaining that the new balls were not as “sticky” as they used to be, but I’m not sure how far back he’s going. Would less sticky balls have an effect on kicking decisions?
I’m about to show that I am about as mature as a 7-year old, but I had to laugh at “less sticky balls.” I’m so sorry, I really need to grow up.
The only thing I know about the balls is that after that “Our Balls are Bigger” campaign, they changed the size to match the NFL.
The Wilson CFL ball is larger and fatter than their NFL ball. It's not merely the same ball with stripes and a CFL logo. Pretty sure the NCAA ball is also different from the NFL ball.
I do miss the Spalding J5V.
Probably not. But a different texture might (think dimples on a golf ball).
It also could be the turf used in the stadiums. Maybe the “give” it has to protect players is not giving the kickers the same footing.
Or maybe the steroids aren’t as good as they used to be. [Kidding]
Well, I think I’m about the same age as you and maybe even a bit older, and it was hard to type that with a straight face.
The only thing I know about the balls is that after that "Our Balls are Bigger" campaign, they changed the size to match the NFL.Last time I was at SportChek, I picked up an NFL ball and a CFL ball. The texture difference between the two was fairly noticeable. The NFL one was definitely stickier.
Among the rule differences between the CFL and the NFL, the tolerances on ball sizes is one I don’t quite understand (aside from slogans about bigger balls). It seems to be a pretty narrow range in both cases. Would the difference be that appreciable if you had, say, the largest CFL ball and the smallest NFL ball within the respective tolerances? (Sorry if that sounds like a dumb question. I watch football, not play it, and I’m still in the Football 101 phase).
-
Make expansion a priority
-
Create incentives for teams to develop Canadian QBs
-
Commission a gaming company to develop a CFL vid game
-
Allow each team to have one "marquee" player exempt from the salary cap
-
Raise the salary cap to $5m
-
Allow import players who have played 50 CFL games to play as non-imports
An Argo-Cat fan
Done right (Canada only and with the right market/ownership group, I agree).
What incentives?
I agree, but it could be expensive if there is a limited market for it. It would have to be completely researched first from a marketing perspective.
This is an idea from the 90’s which led to a marquee player (Doug Flutie) to effectively being stiffed by the Stampeders. Anything which adds to the cost of doing business without demonstrable benefits is dangerous. The league has always been on the edge financially and I would want to make sure this wouldn’t bankrupt some of the teams first before implementing it.
See point 4 above. I’m not sure this will help the league. It might wind up only helping the players we currently have be paid more. With the NFL practice roster salary being much higher than the average CFL player salary, I don’t think you will attract too many new players. I assume this was the intent of your suggestion.
This is similar(?) to what was done in the sixties iirc. Players such as Mosca played as non-imports once they obtained citizenship. This does nothing to promote the development of Canadian players at a grass roots level. This I think was the reason why the league changed this. It took the “Canadian” out of the "C"FL.
Cheers!
A lot of interesting reading. When time permits I'm going to read all of the ideas in PiCat's link to the CFL Forum, where in a quick glance I saw what may be my favourite of all the suggestions I've read here this morning -- the Grey Cup declared a nation-wide 3-day weekend. With the game now on Sunday night, or at least well into the evening on the west coast, when it's over, it's over too quickly because of "Monday mornin' comin' down." Attending Grey Cups across the country was, IMHO, a better experience when the parade was Saturday morning and the game that afternoon. Sunday was recovery and travel day, except in '62, of course. Even Sunday afternoon games were much better than the Sunday nights for both attendees and fans at the watch-from-home game and dinner parties in the east and the brunch and game gatherings on the coast. I do realize I'm dreaming as the TV audience and dollars are #1 in deciding what happens when in today's sports world.
I'm surprised at the general popularity of watching FG's. I wouldn't care if they were eliminated. Or, how about getting rid of them and, for those who find them exciting, make the line of scrimmage for converts the 40 yd-line. Still dreaming, I guess?
I do not like the return of he marquee player idea. It would be just another advantage for those teams that somehow seem to have unlimited budgets -- MTL, TOR, EDM.
"Blogskee Wee Wee"
Durring the off-season I keep Touch with alot of players on Facebook
Barker like to talk about moose Jaw Alot
so that made think of moose jaw