What rule changes do you want to see?

I like points 1,2&3. I’d still rather see fewer interlocking games though. A point on kickoffs? Interesting and worthy of consideration.

Well I guess Sam ought to know. Although he may be a bit biased, being a gunslinger extrordinaire and all.

there are a few things I'd chage in the league if I could:
  1. Inseald of three points, make 50+ feild goals worth 4 points
  2. Have the extra point kicks after TD be to the side like in Rugby, this makes it look harder to kick a goal, but not impossible to do (though Esk has told me it’s hard the way it is now, I still wanted to say this)
  3. Bring back the OT lose point but chage the points system to: 3 for a win, 2 for a tie or OT win, one for an OT lose, none for a lose.
  4. Keep the cross over, this makes the CFL more based on the league than divisions, unlike the other pro leagues of North America
  5. Make the single count in kickoffs (though with the long field, it would be ultrarare to see it awarded in this sitiation)
  6. Somepeople measoned a CJFL rule that they like to see in the CFL, I somewhat liked it bu I have forgoten what it was, so I leave a space on my list for it.


The CJFL rule you were thinking of is if a returner returns a missed field goal or punt out of the end zone and gets stopped before the 20 (25?) yard line the ball automatically gets put at the 20 (25?). This encourages returns.

The 4 point field goal discourages forward progression of the football and some teams may go backwards to try for more points. Right now the scoring is set-up to reward teams who go further down the field. Sure a 3 point field goal is worth the same from 15 yards as it is from 52 yards but the odds are better to hit a field goal from 15 yards.

But I think this would lead to the death of the rouge: who would ever concede a single when they can get the ball to the one and scrimmage on the 20?

Right. And a team that consistently moves the ball to their opponents’ 20 but has to settle for 3-point field goals is at a disadvantage against a team that is unable to move the ball inside the 43 but has a kicker who can nail the 50-yarders for 4. The team with the better offence should have the advantage, not be punished for it.

Well I think the votes are in and I have to agree with the majority that if they're going to change anything, overtime needs changing. Regardless of the sport I've always been against the idea of not playing the game in order to have a winner. Two 5 minute halves is lots of time and very fair.

A couple of writers have brought up the single point. It's always been my understanding that, in the Canadian game at least, a team is rewarded for gaining yards by having the opportunity to score points. The single may be thought of as a reward for failure, but it's a reward that's hard to get if you don't gain yards.

Thanks to everyone for keeping the discussion civil for a change.

We agree :smiley: …I love the over time as well :wink:

It is oridinal…it give both teams an equal chance…and people can always miss field goals…that has happened before. :smiley:

The CJFL rule you were thinking of is if a returner returns a missed field goal or punt out of the end zone and gets stopped before the 20 (25?) yard line the ball automatically gets put at the 20 (25?). This encourages returns.

But I think this would lead to the death of the rouge: who would ever concede a single when they can get the ball to the one and scrimmage on the 20?

I agree BigDave this rule does have its advantages and disadvantages. With the disadvantage being the loss of the rouge and a returner being rewarded for bringing it to the one yard line. Right now it’s a hisk risk high reward situation which I personally like.

As far as the overtime shootout is concerned I like it. Basically whichever team is playing the best will win. The NFL overtime has to much weighing on a coin flip.

Though I've never really liked the "shootout", I have become accustomed to it, and have now accepted it as part of the sport. My preference is still for the old way, but I have found some enjoyment in the new format as well. If they ever return to the two five-minute halves, I'll be thrilled; but if not, I'll continue to enjoy it the way it is.

I don't mind teh shootout for regualr season games, but in playoff games I think they should go back to the old format. It puts the team the goes on offence at too much of an advantge, in my opinion

Each team gets the same number of possessions, so neither team really has an advantage. If anything, the team that goes on defence has the advantage, because they know what the other team scored, so they know what they need. (If the other team scores a touchdown, and you get the ball, you know you can't settle for a field goal.)

One rule I definitely want to see gone is scoring a point for missing a field goal. That's just awful. I remember going to a Stamps/Argos game a few years back in Calgary, where in the dying seconds, the score was 35-35. Toronto lined up for the winning field goal, and Prefontaine(I think that was their kicker back in 2001) purposely shanked it, but just hit it enough that it would go through the back of the endzone. But he must've missed the goalposts by a good 15 yards. And Toronto won, 36-35. That rule is totally out of date, and needs to be changed badly.

Four points for a 50+ yard field goal?? No offence, but I think that's awful. Why should a team be rewarded more for getting a drive only to the opposing team's 40, than a team who got one to the opposing team's 15? Plus, if a team is on 2nd and long, in a position where they are sitting at a potential 47 or 48 yard field goal, the QB may be inclined to lose two or three yards on the play. I dont like that rule idea at all.

I've heard a couple of people complain about the new OT rules. Why? I LOVE the new overtime!! It's so much more exciting! Why do you think the NFL is about to change their OT? Because their current format is boring. The CFL's overtime is much better. And sorry to disappoint buddy who said that it's an "original" idea, but NCAA football has been doing the new CFL format OT for years.

Guys Guys Guys.
Lets get this straight once and for all. You do not get a point for missing a field goal. You get the point if the ball is not run out of the end zone. I know this sounds like I am splitting hairs but there is a difference. Yes I know that if you miss a 10 yard field goal the ball will go out of the zone but lets get it right.

All that being said and done I say keep it it is truly part of the Canadian game.

You're right KK. The point is for keeping the other team from running the ball out, not for missing the field goal. As well, someone in the old huddle suggested that teams should scrimmage from the 45 instead of 35 yard line in overtime. I thought that was a great suggestion. 8)

That wouldn't be a bad idea, because they would pretty well have to move the ball at least a little in order to get a realistic shot at a field goal.

The only thing they need to change is don't give out a single point on missed field goals. Example let's say it's this years Grey Cup and the game is tied at 20 there's no time left on the clock and team A is kicking let's say a 25 yard field goal and they miss from that distance the return man his no chance of running the ball out because it will sail through the end zone. I think it makes the game look bad when you still get rewarded for missing your goal don't get me wrong I love the Rouge but to keep it exicting what they should do is instead of giving the team the ball at the 35 yard line when they take a knee they should start them at like the 10 or 15 yard line because that would make the returning team want to run the ball out even instead of rewarding a team for taking a knee and the Rouge would still be in tact but keep the single point in on punts but do the same thing if the team chooses not to run the ball out of the end zone.
I just thought of one other rule I want changed and that is when one team kicks a field goal the other team has a choice to return the kick or take the ball at the 35 yard line.
this rule should be like on a touchdown they should have to return the kick it maked it more exiting for the fans.
And about the 4 points for a field goal 50 yards or longer bad idea and NFL Europe already has that rule in place.

First paragraph ------Right on
Second paragraph----- way off
Do I think the entire team should suffer because the kicker missed a field goal
That is kinda like saying why shouldn’t the QB get credit for a reception jsut because the reciever didn’t catch the ball.
Back to the point at hand
I’ve said it many times before and I will keep on saying it untill people get it right. The point is not for missing a field goal. IF Landry or Stokes run back a missed field goal for a TD, does the kicking team get a point? Huh ?Huh?Do they? Do they? No, they dont so then I guess there is no point for a MISSED FIELD GOAL.
The point is awarded because the receiving team FAILLED to get the ball out of the endzone

Well why dont we give 6 points for a TD 5 point for getin ginside the 10, 4 points for inside the 20 etc etc
In baseball bases loaded no out and then score no runs too bad
In hockey bang one off the post, no points,
Close is only good in horseshoes and hand grenades
The same is true in football, you gotta get the ball into the endzone not almost there. If the kicker blows it, well its a team sport and the team will live together and die together.

I like the 4 point for a 50+ yarder probably bacause that was my idea :lol:

AND!!! might I add...close is also good on "First Dates" :wink: