Suggested Rule Changes for 2011

As a referee you of all folks up there ought to know that you can change it back for starters for the preposterous grounds on which the change to it was based at largely the whims of the media.

Spare us this "sorry you guys" BS and the like when you don't know some basic facts.

It is a little-known fact that the format is based on overtime rules that began in American high school football in the state of Kansas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtime_(sports)
In college and high school football, [b]as well as the Canadian Football League[/b], an overtime procedure is used to determine the winner. This method is sometimes referred to as a "Kansas Playoff," or "Kansas Plan" because of its origins for high school football in that state. A brief summary of the rules:
Sure it's a heated issue on here, but the fact is that you are having professionals decide an otherwise great contentions game with nothing but a glorified high school scrimmage format. LAME! :thdn: :thdn: :thdn:

They can change anything they want, including the OT format.

As for the "simple sake of the return game" -- if you honestly do not think kicks and kick returns are a huge part of Canadian football then I am not liking your chances of achieving your stated goal of becoming a CFL coach or executive some day.

X2 :thup:

how is it lame?

it's no different than regular play, except they eliminated the kickoff.

they just want to give each team equal opportunity. I really believe that there's nothing that needs to be changed.

I don't see what's wrong with the current OT format. It's provided some of the most entertaining games of the year. Is anyone going to deny that? Look at the SJ Green catch. That magnificent catch, and that entire Montreal/Saskatchewan was made even more exhilirating than it already was thanks to the overtime format we currently have in place.

I've only been watching the CFL regularly since 2008, so I might not be in a position to comment on how exciting the past three seasons have been compared to past ones, but some of the things I've seen have been no less than sensational, in my humble opinion. And I attribute part of that to the overtime format that we currently have. In the mini-games that begin at the 35, the feeling that every single play counts takes over, I find. It makes for some of the best entertainment I've ever seen.

And so what if this rule started in high school? A good idea is a good idea, regardless who comes up with it.

cflisthebest:
All of the choices that a team would have regarding the present coin toss would still exist under my proposed rule. It would just be that the home team would automatically win the toss. They can defer their choice to the second half if they want. The factors such as weather (for outdooor stadiums) or anything else affecting the game would still be taken in consdieration by the home team in deciding whether to ecercise their option in the first or second half.

Massdestruction:
Please see my reply to the CIS rule in that thread.

As for the kicking out of bounds, I could quite happily accept no penalties at all for punting out of bounds. My beef with the present rule is why does it change with field position?

Billy Soup:

I remember when the OT format included 4 mini games and have watched a few games that went the length. I believe that 4 is definitely too many but am not sure about 3.

I am okay with the present 2 mini-games in their present form but IF it has to be changed I would like to see 2 5-minute halves but with the final 3 minutes timed as the final 3 minutes of the halves during regular time (with a coin toss at the start of the OT).

Nythril:
I could not agree with you more about letting plays conclude and them straightening out problems later. This is true for clock issues, fumbles, down by contact, etc. If the play is started legitimately , let it conclude. Cases where there is a penalty before the ball is snnapped, such as a procedure or blatant offside, the play would be stopped immediately for the safety of the players.

I think that what the NFL has changed for the playoffs regarding OT is the perfect way. Hope we get to see it in action.

OH YEAH! FYB this makes up at least for your views on those (wilderness) beavers! :rockin:

hey, if it were not for beavers, we wouldnt know how to make damns or chop down trees :wink:

Right without beaver life would be awful no doubt, plus sometimes we would not be able to just not give a damn too. :stuck_out_tongue:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhyCL-ELRxg

But I think we would have figured out how to chop down trees without them c'mon!

IMO a field goal shoot out would be fun.From the 55 till someone misses.

Aw hell, let's just ask QBs to throw the ball through the goalposts from mid-field -- about as close to real football as a FG kicking contest.

Why did they change the O.T. format? was it not because it was putting fatigued players at risk?

If you want to throwing contest, they should have to hit the crossbar from 75 yards!!!

I have never heard that suggested as a reason. I think it was combination of TV wanting the games to be played within a defined time frame and the (mistaken, IMO) belief that the new format would be more exciting than two short halves of regular football.

"Players risking injury" was the propaganda put out (by hack mainstream sports media of course!) to cover-up the real reason -- for the benefit of TV media.

Let's not be naive here, as the owner$ call these shots and other considerations come before the players if they come into consideration at all. :roll:

I see a few fans like the new format and fine that's their opinion, but don't give me any crap about it being special or even as I heard one dope Kool-Aid drinker suggest long ago something along the lines of "excitingly Canadian!" Uh, what about all that great special teams play these same folks will rave about correctly otherwise in the CFL? It's gone for overtime but it's still so exciting woo-hoo! :roll:

It is just an idea the mainstream TV media borrowed from American high school football played in Kansas, which to our detriment down here in large part was borrowed by NCAA football effective 1996. :frowning:

And this overtime scrimmage still sucks major butt to watch even more at the professional level, after a great competitive game, all the same. :thdn: :thdn: :thdn:

...I see you are using the Queen's proper words, insomuch as it's the language we have agreed to use and share, but could you put them in an order that makes some semblance, if it's not too much of a trouble...

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Soooo funny…too true
Tooo true …so funny

Although, to be fair, maybe its an affiction. Dyslexia? Confusion? Second Language? Third? Pompousiosity? Who knows?

Paolo, we agree the OT format should be changed, but I would sure like to see a source for your contention above. I watch news coverage of the CFL very closely and I do not recall ever seeing such a suggestion anywhere.

As for what you have called "hack mainstream sports media," can you suggest any alternative information sources that are more reliable and worthy of our attention than mainstream news organizations employing actual journalists?

"Players risking injury" was the propaganda put out (by hack mainstream sports media of course!) to cover-up the real reason -- for the benefit of TV media
.

Sometimes when all the mainstream media sources (or other collective entities) avoid or browbeat the same differing or dissenting opinion, such behaviour is indicative of collusion or a hackjob. Also indicative is when they use the very same trendy or catchphrases, as in with that propaganda to promote OT under the guise that "reducing risk of player injury" was even a genuine secondary consideration. When in doubt also follow the money trail.

I'll be clearer another time with more actual examples including actual footage found via YouTube perhaps, but I find most of the time one cannot give some folks enough evidence after they have already decided to take what the media report as if it is the theory to be disproven instead of beginning from scratch to figure out the reality. I find most will do just that as if their TV has any more credibility in and of itself to present alleged facts than any other medium. :roll:
<<

As for what you have called "hack mainstream sports media," can you suggest any alternative information sources that are more reliable and worthy of our attention than mainstream news organizations employing actual journalists?
[/quote] >> When you know the true ownership of any given media outlet, as is usually some massive conglomerate, you'll have a better idea of what they will and will not report. Then you can deduce or induce from that point with greater certainty more often.

Otherwise you have to sort through a whole lot of garbage online to find the true gems as most are unwilling to put the extra time into doing.

Again, I'll provide more examples another time, but I find far more alternative information sources on American topics so far than I do on Canadian ones. The reverse is true however for sake of certain off-topic industries I follow like petroleum and mining.
<<