Poll: Thoughts on Canadian player requirements

The other side of the issue. The previous poll asked whether people would stop watching if the Canadian content rules were eliminated. This poll is a bit more fuzzy, looking for people’s feelings on the issue. It’s quite valid for a person to answer that they’d keep following the league without Canadians playing, but still express a desire to see the league require a certain number of Canadian players.

Better question. Provides more data and gives more entry points without too much complexity.

I know it's not realistic to want more Canadians in the league but if there was a way to get more youths playing the game then yes it could happen . I voted yes even though right now we are stagnant in development our side of the border .

I always felt the non University route the Canadian JR's is a way of capturing the 18 to 29 year olds to have a way of backing up the talent pool and creating a CFL JR to smaller cities like JR A hockey is in Canada but with a longer age limit to take advantage of players finished with University but still want to play . Plus you have a greater football interest in cities not served by the CFL .

Moved by request to the main CFL Talk forum.

Fifteen people voted that they would like to see MORE Canadian players. Do the rules now prevent teams from starting more than 12 Canadian players? If a team determined that they had 20 Canadians that were better than Americans, would they be able to start them or do they have to go with the current rules.

Interesting comments here from a Canadian running back - Brendan Gillanders - he states. "The speed and pace of the US players just blows you away"

“There are a lot of Canadian college players that have great CFL careers. But the Americans that come up, they’re big, they’re fast and they drive the pace of play. You just get there and it kind of blows you away. You go from being one of the fastest guys on your university team to being average. It’s a difficult transition.
[url=http://www.ottawasun.com/2016/03/26/ottawa-redblacks-brendan-gillanders-excited-about-coming-home-after-overcoming-all-sorts-of-adversity]http://www.ottawasun.com/2016/03/26/ott ... -adversity[/url]

Do we really want to see more Canadian calibre players that are not as big and fast as the NCAA players? Like he says, you may the fastest guy on your university team but compared to a US player you are average.

The question has been asked and answered many times. I guess some people don’t like the answer. “So, how about those TiCats?”

Yes you are right, probably the mot discussed topic on these boards.
The Canadian content rule is probably the only rule in place that does not make the game any more exciting or improve the play on the field or add to scoring or reduce penalties or add any thing positive to the play on the field. It does not add to the entertainment value one bit.

I like there being Canadians that have to start. CIS has really stepped up in developing players the past 5-6 years or so. I remember 10 years ago, the top 5 players picked wouldn't even be starters as rookies. Now almost the whole first round in the CFL is guaranteed starters or at least have a prominent role (not just development), especially Top 3.

However, I believe each team has to start 7 Canadians in 1st string roles, correct? (I'm 99.99% positive). I wouldn't mind seeing that number down to 6, MAYBE 5. From there, just let the best man win, whether they are National or Import. It would improve the game in my opinion.

Figure out how many good Canadians each team has and if it average 8 then have 8 as the number. What kills the league is having Canadians that should not be playing.

CIS football programs are finally evolving their talent in recent years, and any drop in the ratio or starting 7 nationals will kill any momentum they have right now.

If they got rid of the Canadian content rules altogether, then we may as well have a funeral for Canadian grass roots football on the same day.

If someone is really that bothered by the Canadian content rules, then maybe the CFL, and also Canada, are not for you. You could always immigrate to the US and engulf yourself in Americana, and leave Canada, and our football game, to those with some national pride.

I think most people are talking about a "reduction" in the Canadian ratio, it was talked about when Ottawa came into the league. The problem with the 9 the team was that the number of Canadians actually "increased" the number of Canadian in the league which resulted in more teams trying to find quality Canadian players.

Of course as soon as you start discussing this topic people will start throwing out the patriotism thing and the usual "if you don't like it move to the US" :oops: :oops: "we are just US wannabes..............." that does get a little boring.
If we want to attract more fans to our league in the future then some things are going to have to change, if you look at the TV numbers you will see more and more viewers watching the NFL, MLB, the trend for the CFL is downwards.

We should be able to discuss ways to improve the league and attract more fans with without people getting emotional and throwing insults and bringing out the argument ending "US wannabe" thing.
I can't see why that allowing more players to compete one on one and bringing in more quality players would be the end of the league.

You seem to have language comprehension issues.

I never said the CFL would fail if it was 100% American, I said that if the Canadian requirement was dropped that grass roots football in Canada would all but die.

If you really want to watch Americans play, then watch the NFL. It's at least 98% American players.

I watch the CFL to see Canadians, and out of pure lack of interest pay little attention to international players.

Also, many of you are discussing this like we fans have any power to change it. We don't, so this "discussion" is about as productive as banging your head against the wall.

I understand that many Canadians have all but sold their soul to American culture, but not all of us have.

Canadian athletes will NEVER progress when their fellow Canadians prefer to watch Americans play, especially in the CFL. Imagine how much bigger the CFL and CIS would be if all the Canadian NFL and NCAA fans followed it.

So all them Garth Brooks fans that sold out FIVE shows in Hamilton last week and 60,000 tickets sold this week in Ottawa have all but sold their soul to American culture???..........................lol

[url=http://ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/celebrity/five-reasons-to-love-garth-brooks]http://ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/ ... rth-brooks[/url]

Those damn Americans we have to stop watching them, send Garth back, send Zack back, send Burris back.
Put a stop to that sold out Jays game at the Big "Owe" in Montreal and stop the MLB coming back to Montreal.
1 Million Quebecers watched the Super Bowl on RDS and around 100k watched the Grey Cup - oh them wannabe Americans in Quebec!!
It is all about Canadians wanting to see the best and they want the Major Leagues, they want to see MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL, MLS.

A CFL with no mandated Canadian content would be a disaster. But I do think we can and should reduce the number of national starters per team. Cut down to 6, and if we add a 10th team in the future, cut to 5. This isn't a knock on Canada, but we absolutely don't have the population base, the resources, or the money to fill out every team with 7 quality national starters. I don't want to see guys like Eric Deslauriers "starting" just to fill a ratio spot, I don't want mediocre Canadian guards finding cushy jobs on O-lines because of ratio. The best Canadians should have a fair chance to win jobs, and that's why the ratio exists -- many American coaches are prejudiced, don't kid yourselves, and will automatically go with Americans unless their hand is forced. But we just don't have enough quality Canadian starters for all the positions. So let's go with the middle ground.

personally i think there is plenty of Canadian talent available for the CFL. However, given football seems to be a copycat league, coaches have mined the Canadian O-line talent coming out to near extinction over the years. Coaches/GMs seem to preordain certain positions as Canadian.

That point would be stronger if every team was strong at positions held predominantly by Americans too. I'm not sure that's the case. Just because a team has poorer Canadian content doesn't necessarily mean that there isn't Canadian talent to be had. It could be a matter of lousy scouting and/or development by the team.

I would rather the league and its teams work to improve the talent pool than just give up on it by limiting opportunity.

But that's where scouting comes in. There are scads and scads of American players to be had, flat-out volume greater than Canadians. So it's easier to scout Canadians and also harder to attribute poor CanCon to bad scouting. With Americans, it's easier to point to bad scouting because there are so damn many American football players. You can always find good American linebackers, corners, running backs, and receivers; if you're having trouble, that's on you. :wink:

I would rather the league and its teams work to improve the talent pool than just give up on it by limiting opportunity.
Fair point, but why not do both? Improve the talent pool, sure, but cut back on the number of starters until the talent pool justifies the number. Look at the paucity of top Canadian receivers. Do you see Canadians playing defensive halfback? Corner, even, very often? How many Canadians start at difficult positions like defensive end, QB, slotback, DHB, or SAM linebacker? Can you honestly look me in the eye and tell me that there are tons of great Canadian receivers just waiting for their chance to have a 1000-yard season in the CFL? Guys like Fantuz aside, the vast majority of Canadian receivers are bit players, 4th receivers playing the wide side of the field and chipping in with the occasional big catch. If they had more to give, don't you think they'd receive the ball more?

I do believe there is a staunch anti-Canadian bias that many American coaches hold that the Canadian cannot compete well with an American at the so called skilled positions.
I do believe that if given equal footing many Canadian receivers could be bona fide 1000 yard receivers if targeted at the rate of a number one or two or even third receiver. And same holds true at defensive positions imo.

I remember Steve Nash was giving a talk to Can High School BB players and just forewarning them that they will have be very demonstrably better than their American counterparts to ever see the court if they go south to play. And that was certainly borne out by personal experience. Different sport I know..

Because I don't find that limiting the number of guys that can be on a club helps improve the talent pool. You don't improve someone by taking away opportunity.

Justin Cappiccioti has had two pretty good years playing DE after a couple of "formative" seasons. I don't mean to use the exception to prove the rule, but it's an example of a guy who worked hard, was coached well, and ended up on par, if not better than, many Americans.

I tend to question more if Canadian are not playing those positions because they're automatically assumed to be inferior or because they actually ARE inferior. Antoine Pruneau was given a shot at SAM LB and excelled at it after playing the token Canadian position of safety. All he needed was an opportunity.

Tons? I don't know about tons. Enough? Yes, I think so. If you know where to find them and how to develop them. And you won't develop them by telling them they can't play beyond CIS.

I think it goes beyond just American coaches. It feels like it's become the general thinking. We're so used to Canadians being fullbacks, safeties and offensive linemen that it's hard to even imagine them at other positions.

DnP is right about there being no notable Canadian defensive halfbacks in the CFL (unless I'm missing one) but if there were a ridiculously good one playing for Western and some team drafted him, would they even play him there, or would they move him to safety because that's what everyone is comfortable with now?