Should the CFL go Metric?

Why not. 110 yards is almost exactly 100 meters. The 50 meter line would be the center line. You would have to get almost an extra yard for the first down, but with the CFL rules, that wouldn't be that big of a deal.

Even if they keep the yards for historical purposes, why do they still list the players height/weight in feet/lbs? Does anyone know?

For long distances, I tend to think in kilometres rather than miles, mainly because vehicle odometers, road markers, and speed limits are all in kilometres. But I really would have no idea of my height and weight in metric.

And that extra yard to make 10 metres might force us to go to four downs, and that's just not going to happen. Best reason I can think of for staying with yards.

So Canada still uses the English Standard system for Height and Weight? I didn't know. For some reason I thought we (USA) were the only country that still used English Standard for anything. You learn something new everyday. I thought you were completely converted to metric. Well, I guess we got to the bottom of that. Thanks.

no, the national standards are all metric. the choice to keep imperial measurement by the league is just a matter of choice. I think that the fact that 10 yard = 9.1+ meters for example is a reason that the system has not and will not change. It messes with records. You would make a 1st down either 9 yards or 10, not 9.144.

Measurements Canada made the metric system standard something like 40 years ago. If work with lumber or steel, you will almost always see metric now, not imperial. If you work in almost any form of engineering, physics or chemistry based profession it is all metric. Federal measurements will ALWAYS be metric primary units, as I believe provincial will to (this is why if you import a car you may have to change the cluster...it MUST have km/h, unless it is grandfathered).

I think you will start to see more and more sports start to list players bios in metric within a few years. Europe has set this trend, and the world is likely to follow within a few years. I think that the big reason that there was not a push is that there are generations (45+) who really did not take metric in school. Imperial will be phased out.

The old farts think in imperial, anyone under age 40 should be all metric.

I used to think that too, then i heard recently that there were 3 countries still on the old standard of measurement: the USA, Liberia, and Myanmar.

Believe it or not, they actually played an exhibition game once using metres (and with the size you suggested). They also played one half with three downs and a second half with four downs to compare. Ultimately it showed that they could do it, and use three downs but they decided to not go forth with, partly because of tradition but mostly because the Mulroney government was elected in 1984 and halted the mandatory metricification of the country.

in early 80's, I ask this young girl for a pint of milk. She had no ideas what I was talking about, even though they served half litres. You would think they would at least teach Canadian kids they sytem that was.

What I could never figure is exactly why our pre metric system wasnt exactly the same as the USA.

Funny you should mention…

The newest math curriculum in Western Canada has a unit (in Gr. 10) for kids to do conversions between Metric and Imperial units.

As for why we didn’t go with the US…we stuck with the UK. We still spell “colour” with a “u” and we used their version of the imperial system, with a ton that is 2240lbs, instead of the US short-ton.

Except that it's us old farts who measure their heights and tell them how tall they are as they're growing up. :oops: I'm not sure about this, but something tells me that if you ask a kid how tall he is, he'll answer in imperial.

And I challenge you to find a cookbook that doesn't use imperial measure, although you might find one that also lists equivalent metric measures. I don't think my over has a metric temperature option (and it's only 15 years old).

But yes, all businesses now work in metric, and so all producs purchased are in metric sizes. Not always logical metric sizes, though (why are pop can 381 mls?).

Agreed CatsFAN ! Does it matter what unit of measurement you're using? Does 100kph feel faster than 62mph? Does using metric benefit us in any way? Sometimes it does, but in most everyday uses it doesn't. Changing to metric won't make football a better game, so why bother? Golf, horse racing and other examples are quite happy with their method of measurement. Do you realize there are 7 different ways to measure temperature? How does reading metric benefit us over reading Kelvin or Fahrenheit or Rankine? Change for change sake isn't always a good idea!

same reason a 2x4 is a 19x38 now...you are not going to change the dimensional size of something that will mess other stuff up. You change the size of a piece of lumber and you have to change all support brackets, plus plane down wood if doing a reno. You don't change a pop can because it would not work in pop machines and entire production lines....note that pop bottles came out after the metric system was common, so they are even metric numbers.

There are several forms of imperial measurement, varying from country to country. Many of the measurements are the same, but there are differences...why, because communication was difficult when they were developed, and nobody wanted to be the one to cave to another county's standard. I suppose it would kind of be like a position of power.

We used the British standard (imperial) because we were still a part of the British colony when imperial units were introduced/standardized a couple hundred years ago. The US was not, and elected to not follow this, likely to tout their independence.

Why teach dead math. It is touched on, but definitely not a focus. Metric is our standard, and has basically taken over. People under 40 really don't use imperial except for height and weight...and that is fading away. With imperial there are certain units (classes of measurement) that do not even exist, making some scientific calculations (more on the physics end) impossible w/o converting to metric and SI. SI units and calculations use no imperial units. imperial units are a pain to work with because there is not a standard denominator in general mat like metric (ie metric is in units of 10 for common math...basically until SI calculations are involved).

The imperial system is one based off of observation, the metric is one that was thought out and developed to be easier to work with.
A foot was the size of a kings foot at the time of development...standard made
an inch was the knuckle width of an emperor...12 of em in a foot...standard set
a yard was the length of his standard stride while walking through his court yard...standard made
a league was the arm spread of some sailor...standard set

this goes on and on, hence why conversions in imperial are a major pain. Yes, some logic was set later, but the base units were developed in a painstakingly way because there was simply no other readily available option at the time...at least the recognized the need for a standard.

Imperial has served its purpose...much like the horse and buggy, slate tablet, slide ruler, black and white tv, etc etc etc

now it is time to use a system that is easier to use. That is why it is not taught.

Totally agree. I actually prefer metric myself, having learned it in high school physics and chemistry classes before Canada officially switched. It made a lot more sense than the rather arbitrary imperial measurements (e.g. 2 1/2 cups in a pint? How many pecks in a bushel again? And what the heck is a gill?) But sometimes old habits (height and weight) are hard to break. At least I haven't seen many recipes lately that call for an egg of butter.

And I do understand that some of the bizarre product sizes (e.g. 355 ml pop cans :oops: ) have to do with legacy applications, such as the pop machines as you mentioned. But I do find that in some cases, manufacturers could make a better effort to standardize their sizes to make it easier for consumers to price compare between different sizes, especially when they are changing their product sizes anyway.

Are we far enough off topic yet?

Standard construction material is still produced in imperial sizes. New stand alone buildings still use 2x4 (38x89), 4'x8' sheets of plywood and drywall, etc. The sizes are then converted to appease the government (eg: 1/2" plywood is 12mm plywood). Even though a building is designed in metric, imperial sizes are always a consideration when designing room areas, floor to floor heights and so on. And it depends where you are in the country - the east tends to have more of an imperial influence, while the west is more metric - go figure. It seems to be gradually changing though, as T-bar ceilings now have both metric and imperial sizes, etc. We'll get there eventually, but no time soon.

Maybe we can do a similar soft conversion to the football field. We could use the same marker lines, and call them metres. Let's call them 'metric yards' :stuck_out_tongue: :stuck_out_tongue: The reason I say this is because changing yards to metres on a football field messes up historical standards and records. 1000 yards is a benchmark for running backs, and all the great running backs in history have their totals recorded in yards. Converting all this seems silly.

Otherwise I'm not really opposed to a metric field.

it's truly a retarded idea.

who thinks of these things to change a football field from Yards and Feet to Metres?

that is just insanity.

and I use feet and inches to measure myself..

inches to measure wood and length..

and Lbs to measure weight.

and I Litres to measure liquids.

I am taking Architectural Technologies in school and we were having a discussion like this a couple of weeks ago. Most Firms dimension in imperial ( for residential buildings ) but in metric ( for commercial buildings ). Our teacher was saying that there is really no reason for this except that it is " traditional, the way it has always been done ".

Most submit imperial drawings for the framers and other trades, but the city also requires metric drawings to be submited for the building permit approval.

It’s just one of the wierd things that we live with, no real explenation except that thats the way its been and probably will be for a long time.

I don't know about the rest of you guys but 3rd and centimetres doesn't have a good ring to it.

(singing) One of these things is not like the other.....

the Litre is a metric measure. Ounces and gallons are imperial.

Now lets enter.....TANGENTIAL USELESS TRIVIA!!!!!!........ :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Anyways, I like the CFL measurements just the way they are. It's tradition. It's stable. It's a lot less like homework. :smiley:

(singing) One of these things is not like the other.....

the Litre is a metric measure. Ounces and gallons are imperial.

actually I was just saying that I use Litres to measure liquids, didn't mean that I thought it was imperial

Sorry, CFL. I thought you meant you were using imperial measures for everything. My bad. :frowning: