Metric CFL, plus replacing chains with something better.

Me = Dumb math-practical American

Kinda going with the rugby thread, what if CFL went Metric? 100m long, either 60m or 70m wide (already 60m, 70m would justify a more wide-open, exciting game, and 3 downs would still be easier with the 11 yard distance).

After playing rugby for a couple years, I’ve grown awfully unaccustomed to the NFL’s tiny field, and look to the CFL for more normal-sized pitch action.

Another idea for simplicity sake: 5 downs to cross every 20m. The VISIBLE line would act as a goal line (but for the first down instead). This can be six downs to fit into the number-of-downs-to-goal number (but shouldn’t, you want to keep the pass attack game). Yes, I know it sounds like NFL Street, but honestly, wouldn’t that be more fun to have a plain to see, obvious line to gain than the damn chains?

Interesting ideas, it would be interesting to try these out, but I think the chains are here to stay.

I also find the CFL field more “normal”, if you will, despite that in Canada we have so much American football, NFL and college, on TV. I personally would like to see the Americans adopt 3 downs and having one foot in bounds on sideline passes. I think this would really open up the game there, although last year I found the NFL game better as the refs were calling the no chuck past 5 yards much more consistently, and the qb’s were lighting it up more often. But the NFL is only sport I can think of where both feet have to be in bounds to touch the ball, or the puck. In hockey, at the blue line, you only need one foot onside, same in baseball, basketball, American college football. Weird.

4 downs is religion here…there’s no doubt in my mind. I still have a hard time understanding how you can make 10 yards in three and not have a problem with the game like that…

The two feet issue for in-bounds I believe was instituted to make it more difficult than NCAA. Of course, if there were fences all along the sidelines and deadlines, we wouldn’t have this problem :stuck_out_tongue:

I agree Steve, 4 downs in religion in the States, and that is fine. But just think for a moment. Warren Moon who played in both the CFL and NFL, has mentioned that 3 downs puts a lot more pressure on the qb, he can’t just hand off as much, sometimes he has to take things in his own hand more often and try to get a first down. With 3 downs, I think you would see a lot more truly athletic qb’s, not as tall but better runners. I think it would be more exciting, there are so many talented qb’s in American college who don’t stand a chance of making it to the NFL because they are too short by NFL standards, but are absolutely fantastic qb’s. It is too bad there isn’t some sort of 3 down pro game in the States to allow these guys a chance to make some money after college ball. A few come here to play but with only 9 teams, that still doesn’t provide a lot of jobs.

The game runs much faster with 3 downs. You might think that all that running off and on the field chews up play time but the up side is that very rarely do you see an offense on the field for more than a couple of minutes. In the NFL you can have a single drive eat up like 10 minutes of the clock, not so here where a few minutes is all it takes to drive the field.

And I was reading at http://www.4malamute.com/plaque.html that in American college football back in the early 1900’s, it was 3 downs to make 5 yards for a first down! So if the NFL and American college ball goes to 3 downs, it won’t be the first time in States that this was the case!

Yeah…I actually knew about that.
I read a book called “Pigskin: The Early Days of Pro Football”

Is this a good book Steve for history buffs? Is it still in print? Who is the publisher?

Yeah, it’s pretty neat. I found it in my school library (I know that it’s still there), but your best bet is to check your municipal library system and/or www.google.com

With the visible lines every 20 yds, you just can’t do it. If I get you correctly you’re saying after a team has passed the visible line the next set of 5 downs should start. What if a team is stopped on the 39 yard line, they get 5 downs to make 1 yd, but if they are stopped on the 40 yard line they have to make the full 20 yds in 5 downs. That’s the thing with 3 down 10 yd football, is it’s easy. You get a first down then you have 3 more downs to get 10 more yds. This would change the game to much and confuse some casual fans.

The metric idea isn’t that bad, I personally like yds but I wouldn’t be offended if they went to metres. I’m sure though since all the players know yds they’d want to keep it that way. A player knows exactly how far 10 yds is (especially a receiver going for a first down) but 10 metres would be different.

Every route would be the same, and honestly, when I walk I walk about 5/8m, not 5/8yard (marching band for six years failed me). Hence, 16 paces = 10 meters. It wouldn’t be much different to say 11 yards, and honestly most regular routes for recievers go around 15 yards from the line.

With the lines: I don’t think that you understood completely :S

There would be lines every 10m. If you were down at your own 15m, you would have to advance TWO LINES from the spot of the first down. This means that you need to gain 15m in 5 downs.

The five downs would be no more than 20m, no less than 10m. With smart play a player would submit to a tackle a meter before the next line in order to get an 11m set of downs, and personally I believe that this should be rewarded with an easy play phase.

If lines were every 5m, then you can have it be three lines ahead, between 10m and 15m, and have it be 4 downs or 3 downs. That would probably fly a lot better with fans.

There would still technically be a chain gang, but they would just carry the down markers and hold them on the ends of the line-to-reach-1st-down, and there would be no actual chains.

i do not see how these lines would be an improvement to the game. to concede a tackle for an easier next set of downs as opposed to fighting for every inch each play does not sound nearly as exciting. and what is your issue with the chains. they work perfectly fine.

“Welcome to a cold, cold day in Winnipeg - we’re experiencing temperatures of -14c with winds gusting up to 20k/hr from the north; Making it feel like -19c. Terry Glenn is lining up. Its 2nd and 8.7meters … He completes a fastball to Milt Stegall who is brought down by strong man Signor Mobley. Mobley came into camp this year 8 kilo’s heavier than his normal 93.2 - really filling out his 188.82cm frame. Its now 3rd down and milimetre’s for the Bombers on the Edmonton 16.4 meter mark - We’ll probably see Troy Westwood come out and attempt a 3 pointer. Westwood’s longest this season is 42.5 meters … His hair is a disgustingly stragley 44cm’s.” …

Heh - Just doesn’t have the same ring to it …

StatiK76

…good call there static76, as we wait for Westwood to set up I’ll let the viewers at home know that Troy’s hair has exceeded the exposure limit of 40cm placed on CFLPA by the league and the Bomber front office has been fined 1,500 Euros…

:roll: Some folks seem to be over complicating the metric use. We have km highways, C temperatures, and many other metric units in use now. Track and field use metric measures. In football, the yard would be replaced by the metre, and yard lines would be metre lines instead. The field would be a bit longer and wider, and to gain 10 metres a player would have to travel about 2.5 feet further. Everything else would be the same, including thrre downs. This should not be too tough on the players, especfially Canadians, as they all have a few years of college under their belt!

Go CFL!!! :lol:

:roll: Some folks seem to be over complicating the metric use. We have km highways, C temperatures, and many other metric units in use now. Track and field use metric measures. In football, the yard would be replaced by the metre, and yard lines would be metre lines instead. The field would be a bit longer and wider, and to gain 10 metres a player would have to travel about 2.5 feet further. Everything else would be the same, including thrre downs. This should not be too tough on the players, especfially Canadians, as they all have a few years of college under their belt!

Go CFL!!! :lol:

:roll: Some folks seem to be over complicating the metric use. We have km highways, C temperatures, and many other metric units in use now. Track and field use metric measures. In football, the yard would be replaced by the metre, and yard lines would be metre lines instead. The field would be a bit longer and wider, and to gain 10 metres a player would have to travel about 2.5 feet further. Everything else would be the same, including thrre downs. This should not be too tough on the players, especfially Canadians, as they all have a few years of college under their belt!

Go CFL!!! :lol:

…some folks seem to be unclear on the one-post-is-good-enough concept of the Forum…

Leave him alone…he posted in metric! Isn’t metric twice the amount?

Sorry, I got a message that indicated the post had not been submitted, so I hit the submit box again. By the way, metric uses tens, hundreds,etc., not two’s. :lol: