Ummmm.... We need preseason games guys

On another thread there are people arguing for fewer (or even NO) preseason games. Let's deal with some arguments in order from (what I see as) least to most important.

1. No entertainment value.
Well, it depends. It's a different kind of entertainment. I suppose that the fan who is really into roster moves and player strategies will like preseason better than some other fans. It's not as exciting but I do find it interesting. It's kind of like the Christmas stocking before one gets to the presents. Preseason games are an appetizer. They're a way for the fan to get back into the game and to get ready for all the crucial arguments to come.

2. Not Important
Whew... don't know how stron I can be about this one. When we went to fewer preseason games (to save money and up revenues by converting two preseason games to regular season ones) there were two results that - IMHO - hurt the game.

a. Veterans got an easier ride at the beginning of the season. There just isn't enough time to have youngsters push the vets and so I think that we've seen more coaches playing it safe at the beginning of the season and going with known quantities.

b. In a related manner, we see a lot more games playing with the Practice and Injury Reserve rosters as coaches try to figure out how to keep younger potential players around. Kids are kept, released, re-signed, put on I.R., etc. This hurts the game (and those players) because it's that much harder to come down with a clear decision on 'keepers' at the beginning of the season.

3. Quality of Play As Dust says in the "earlier Season" thread. Right now the first few weeks of the season are hard to watch as the calibre of play is often terrible. I almost think that coaches treat these games as if they WERE preseason tilts... but they affect the final standings.

Me... I'd go back to 4 full preseason games. Even if I yawned a bit at times I think it would be good for the teams and the calibre of play... if (sadly) not for revenue streams.

gee, I missed that. who said what where about no preseason games??

Two is too little while four pre season game is one too many.
I have been saying now for a while, we need one more week at least of camp and a third game to be a neutral site pre season game not only to test the expansion possibility but to expand the game for a particular team in its area.
Since only four of the teams would be involved in the third home game, this could be rotated each year.

I still think that we should stick to two preseason games but have a closed scrimage before the actual preseason game where yu play all of your up and comers and rookies.
Then in the second game...you let the fans in and play an actual game with your previous years starters.
Some players could play in both games on the same day...however there would be a time limit or a play limit on each player for the day

For me it's simple, 4 preason games, with 2 I'm paying for as a season ticket holder, I'm almost certain I cancel my seasons tickets immediately unless the ex games were basically just thrown in as almost freebies. You make some valid points Mark but at the end of the day, I basically want to watch games that count even if the play isn't as polished at the beginning of the year as the season goes on. I just don't like exhibition games that much.

You do make some points, but I have to disagree with more preseason games. In an 18 game schedule with 75% of the league making the playoffs the first couple of weeks of the season can be used to adjust rosters. Plus why should we have to pay for exhibition games. I think one is enough. High School and University can do with out preseason games so can the “Professionals”

The high school and university kids also don't get payed , so I guess the pro's can go without being payed as well ?
I think 3 exibition games would be a good comprimise between, TV,fans and management.

Well said. :thup: A neutral-game site wouldn't need a league-size stadium (yet) but a few successful expeditions might show the value of putting one into Quebec, Moncton, wherever.

I basically agree with this. I posed this scenario to Mr. Cohon in the Q&A segment and was told it would be brought up with the BOG. I can't beleive the CFL is not already doing this, it just makes sense. A 3'rd pre-season game at a neutral site is an incredible way to market the CFL and grow a larger fan base in cities without a team.

I really like this idea.

I like it as well but my fear is that if you bring exhibition games to a city more than say twice then that city may feel it's just being used especially if there has been no discussion in the city at all about getting a potential team or expanding/upgrading the current CIS stadium.

It's also like the NHL, although they have too many X games, playing a home game in the city of their AHL franchise or sometimes not even as including such outposts in various provinces and or States.
What a concept to market the league and bring the big league to smaller markets as well.
Cohon always talks about building the brand, well there is no better way for fans to see it live.

Financing...

they cannot extend the number of preseason games without cflpa approval. They would also have to pay the players more. The number of paying fans at a preseason game, specially at a smaller neutral site would not cover the costs. IN short, each team would lose money.

Financing.....what does this mean?
Each neutral site and just like Moncton this year, would guarantee or offset fees usually transportation and putting up both teams.
The sponsorship for each city would therefore be required and not to speak of selling tickets and rites to the game. In fact, no doubt TSN would be involved in showing this game which would be anovalty to viewers and be a big hit.
Seating wise, I would think a minimum 10,000+ seats would be needed?
A positive all around for the league.

No doubt... but it all costs money. Ottawa is not coming back into the league until 2013 now, due to the current tv contract. Although a third pre-season game at a neutral zone site anywhere in the country (the "third" game decided by lottery) would be great, it still costs money to get both teams there, market the game, engage the fans, and make sure there is a 15,000 (bare minimum) seating capacity stadium to play at.

The more pre games there are,thats means thats one less week of football that I dont have to watch for me.

Keep it 2,if they have 3 or 4 pre games thats way too much football,and you know they would never shorten the reg down from 18 games now.

The only thing I would change is allow the home team to dress as many players as they want to take a look at.

How about playing a pre-season game in Buffalo every year between Montreal and another strong team? That way, at least 1 entertaining game can be played in front of Bills fans every year (until the Bills move to LA anyway) :twisted:

they need 3 games... it will give every team a little more opportunity to see who they need to keep and let go.

plus more time to get their playbooks introduced. It truly is a no brainer.

I think they have a pretty good idea after a couple weeks of camp, heck even before camp starts really as to who they are going to keep or not, injuries aside.