safety, kick-off from the 20?

Watching the game last night one of the TSN commentator's, I believe Suitor, mentioned he believes that if a team gives up a safety they should have to kick-off from their own 20 yard line, as opposed to the current rule of kicking off from the 35 or the team choosing to take the ball from their own 35.

Personally I think this would be a great idea (coupled with the option of taking the ball at your own 50 yard line). Right now the safety is used as strategy, to change field position. Unfortunately it is being used to often, and it has become to easy of a decision to just give up the safety.

Change the kick-off position and make the coaches think more when giving up a safety. Also putting emphasis on a great defensive stop deep in their opponents territory.


Make em punt it as well, not the traditional kick off with the tee.

You want to take the stratify out of the game....
its fine the way it is.

I don't like it much but it's not used that often (though twice in the GC irked). The defending team should not be penalized for hemming the other side in near their own goal line. That's why they should have to kick from their own 20. It makes some sense to me that the other team should get the ball back in better field position.

How do you figure being awarded 2 points is being penalized?

Actually I think it would add more strategy to the game.

Right now as it stands if you are within your fifteen yard line you take the safety (except for some fourth quarter situations).

I think this rule would make coaches think more about taking the safety at any point in the game.

Because they have to involuntarily give up field position to get the two points. It's not their choice. They should get the two points and the other team should have to kick off from the twenty. That would award the defenders for hemming in the offence.

Well who volunteers to give up field position?
Who chooses to take points......

Why are people talking the greatest game there is and constantly trying to change it?
Besides being pinned deep is not always the result of great defence....

If my defence gets a turn over on my 2 yards line......why should your team be rewarded if I dont get more than 2 first downs?

Why should the team that is hemmed be able to take the easy way out with the safety?

I am against most rule changes but this one actually makes sense. Take away the easy coaching decision and make it a tougher decision. To many teams give up the safety because it only costs them 2 points and they can start from scratch again. Make it tougher on them.

well I disagree
I think the game is fine the way it is

I think it can be evolved in this matter, taking the safety, as it stands now, isn't strategy it's the easy decision to make.

has it ALWAYS been to the 35 on a safety? I thought it had been the 25 some time ago.

I believe it was always the 35 but I dont know for sure

This is game has evolved over time and it is still evolving. Every year there are rule changes. We're not asking to add a down or move the goal posts back — things that would fundamentally change the game. We're asking one aspect of a rarely used play be changed. Lets keep things in perspective here please.

Having your tubby punter run into his endzone and juke around to run time off the clock for some reason, then cowardly stepping out of bounds just before he gets hit, is somehow good strategy? If so, they should change the rules to make it bad strategy, because I don't need to ever watch that again in the CFL, pleeeeze.

If deliberately conceding safeties is such good strategy, should we cheer when our QB gets sacked in his endzone? So perhaps a Great Canadian Compromise instead?

Concede a safety, and you give up 2 pts and kickoff from the 25 yd line...or just punt the ball and take your chances.

or we could leave it as it is

Hear, hear!

Giving up a safety is not automatic. There is a risk involved, in that you give the opposing team two points AND the football.

Points are given up in exchange for field position all the time. Anyone ever heard of a single point? Wanna get rid of the rouge next?

Leave it the way it is. Start dickering with it and you may end up wrecking it.

How many safeties were used last season? Does anybody know?

I'll wager there wasn't more than a dozen, including the GC. I'll also wager there were FAR more rouges than safeties. So please, lets not get feisty over a relatively minor rule change to a rarely used play and start comparing it to a common single point after a kick. Nobody is (at least in this thread) is suggesting the elimination of the rouge so why even bring that up? It just obfuscates the debate.

Unfortunately giving up a safety when you are pinned inside your own ten yard line is becoming a bit too automatic.

I'm not saying take it away altogether. I'm saying make it a more difficult decision. You are still giving up two points for field position. But not as good of field position.

I also think your example of a rouge is an entirely different situation. The rouge isn't the effort of a great defensive effort or a great punt, it is typically a bad punt or a missed field goal, allowing the other team to take the ball farther out.

Well if it is so rarely used, why bother? If it was something that happend 4-5 times a game I might agree with you. As you said, "a dozen times in a season" is not worth changing.