Season opener - BC @ Calgary

[tedbear]

Not sure if their were any coaches on the rules committee, but as in many business's it seems that the people who are making the rules are not as smart as the people that are on the front lines.

It only took the first game for this rule to be exploited. I guess one of the positives is that our coach figured it out.

Should be a good one tomorrow night. GO LIONS!

[TheLionKing]

Dave Naylor has posted an explanation of the new Designated Nationalized American and Designated National Starter positions. Rhymes and Baron appear to be listed as backups primarily to satisfy the new rule. They can replace a designated national starter for up to 23 plays per game, and can also replace any American. They just can't be on the field for the first play of the game. All clear?

Only the CFL can they come up with such convoluted rules.

[Hambone]

Not sure if their were any coaches on the rules committee, but as in many business's it seems that the people who are making the rules are not as smart as the people that are on the front lines.

It only took the first game for this rule to be exploited. I guess one of the positives is that our coach figured it out.

Should be a good one tomorrow night. GO LIONS!

There are 13 voting members on the Rules Committee; all 9 coaches plus 2 reps from the CFLPA Brian Ramsey & Adam Bighill plus 2 representing officials.

https://cfldb.ca/rulebook/rules-committee/

However I believe this concept came out of the most recent CBA negotiations, not from the Rules Committee.

[maxlion]

When I first heard about this new rule, I just shook my head. But I haven't heard coaches or players complain, so maybe it is not so bad after all. For my part, I am just going to ignore it. It is too convoluted for most fans to bother with.

[Toppy Vann]

I think this rule is a good thing as it will reward teams for retaining these players who have chosen to play in the CFL or become naturalized here.

That's been a huge complaint over the years. Long-term fans who don't study teams like BC Fan, Hambone, David and the like complained they didn't know the players anymore and along with attendance starting to fall across the CFL.

[Hambone]

When I first heard about this new rule, I just shook my head. But I haven't heard coaches or players complain, so maybe it is not so bad after all. For my part, I am just going to ignore it. It is too convoluted for most fans to bother with.

For us fans it comes across like Sheldon Cooper put it together. I think it offers flexibility and options for a coach that for the most part will be subtle in impact. Taking Rhymes for example I think it means they could play him as a NAT in place of Cottoy or McInnes and bring Williams in to backfill Rhymes American slot although with BC listing 8 pure NAT starters they could do that anyways.

One very important thing to keep in mind. What is perhaps the biggest complaint CFL fans have? Too much roster turnover. The main intent of this thing is to make it attractive for American players to stay put; in other words reduce roster turnover. A pending FA could find himself at a point where if he signs to stay it will put him over the threshold to earn that status which makes him more valuable to his current team than to a new one.

I'm not one of them but many fans would love to blow the ratio totally up. I'm against it because I think it would be a blow to grassroots football in Canada if it became league largely devoid of Canadians who generally don't contribute nearly as much to the roster turnover problem. The ratio detractors cite a desire to have "the best players" playing as a means to create a more exciting product. Call me crazy but all due respect to Daniel Petermann or previously Jacob Scarfone I kind of like the idea that if Cottoy gets hurt they now have an option to replace him with Terry Williams thanks to Rhymes.

[Hambone]

I think this rule is a good thing as it will reward teams for retaining these players who have chosen to play in the CFL or become naturalized here.

That's been a huge complaint over the years. Long-term fans who don't study teams like BC Fan, Hambone, David and the like complained they didn't know the players anymore and along with attendance starting to fall across the CFL.

We're on the same page Toppy. Just to give a few examples (and some may already be under contract for 2024) but I believe Banks, Broxton, Edwards-Cooper, Hatcher, Perkins and Woods would be eligible for this new status if they stay in BC for 2024. They won't be if they go elsewhere giving them more value if they are retained. If they go elsewhere it will take 2 more years to earn that status.

[maxlion]

For us fans it comes across like Sheldon Cooper put it together. I think it offers flexibility and options for a coach that for the most part will be subtle in impact. Taking Rhymes for example I think it means they could play him as a NAT in place of Cottoy or McInnes and bring Williams in to backfill Rhymes American slot although with BC listing 8 pure NAT starters they could do that anyways.

One very important thing to keep in mind. What is perhaps the biggest complaint CFL fans have? Too much roster turnover. The main intent of this thing is to make it attractive for American players to stay put; in other words reduce roster turnover. A pending FA could find himself at a point where if he signs to stay it will put him over the threshold to earn that status which makes him more valuable to his current team than to a new one.

I'm not one of them but many fans would love to blow the ratio totally up. I'm against it because I think it would be a blow to grassroots football in Canada if it became league largely devoid of Canadians who generally don't contribute nearly as much to the roster turnover problem. The ratio detractors cite a desire to have "the best players" playing as a means to create a more exciting product. Call me crazy but all due respect to Daniel Petermann or previously Jacob Scarfone I kind of like the idea that if Cottoy gets hurt they now have an option to replace him with Terry Williams thanks to Rhymes.

The intention is good. But I think they could have accomplished it in a more straightforward way. Football is already complicated. Adding a ratio adds another level of complexity. Now you have this too.

I thought before it was all about 49% of snaps, but now it is 23 snaps? Or did I get that wrong?

[Hambone]

The intention is good. But I think they could have accomplished it in a more straightforward way. Football is already complicated. Adding a ratio adds another level of complexity. Now you have this too.

I thought before it was all about 49% of snaps, but now it is 23 snaps? Or did I get that wrong?

Fair enough but I'd wager that at least 80% of the fans attending any game will be unaware this new set up exists or notice it being in effect. They are more likely to notice roster turnover than this change. I think it's the real die hards who follow every little roster move and rule change who have their shorts in a knot over this. The more casual fans not so much.

[B.C.FAN]

I thought before it was all about 49% of snaps, but now it is 23 snaps? Or did I get that wrong?

Yes, it was realized that 49% would be impossible to calculate because no one would know how many snaps a team would have until the game was over. This is a fixed number that will likely average out the same but league spotters can count the number of snaps and warn teams when players are getting close to the limit.

[Hambone]

I thought before it was all about 49% of snaps, but now it is 23 snaps? Or did I get that wrong?

Yes, it was realized that 49% would be impossible to calculate because no one would know how many snaps a team would have until the game was over. This is a fixed number that will likely average out the same but league spotters can count the number of snaps and warn teams when players are getting close to the limit.

I read something that effect the other day. The spotters and eye in the sky will be tracking that and will advise coaches when a player is approaching his limit. Long gone are the days when that job would be handed to a guy with a clipboard and binoculars. You have the eye in the sky cameras and referees, spotters and now Genius who is supposed to be tracking anything and everything in real time. Handling this demand shouldn't be an issue.

[Qman]

The intention is good. But I think they could have accomplished it in a more straightforward way. Football is already complicated. Adding a ratio adds another level of complexity. Now you have this too.

I thought before it was all about 49% of snaps, but now it is 23 snaps? Or did I get that wrong?

Fair enough but I'd wager that at least 80% of the fans attending any game will be unaware this new set up exists or notice it being in effect. They are more likely to notice roster turnover than this change. I think it's the real die hards who follow every little roster move and rule change who have their shorts in a knot over this. The more casual fans not so much.

100%

99% of the fans don’t realize there is a DI rule, you won’t notice this one. It’s built into the packages.

[Qman]

Several of us have commented on the Lions keeping 52 players on their active roster after CFL cutdown day, all under full contract and counting toward the salary cap unless they're placed on the 6-game injured list. According to the weekly CFL Game Notes, the Lions have the smallest active roster in the league. Hamilton and Montreal have 59 players on their active rosters as of June 6:

HAM 59
MON 59
OTT 58
CGY 56
TOR 56
EDM 55
SSK 54
WPG 53
BCL 52

Noticing a lot of teams have long “real” injury lists coming out of camp, we are by far the heathiest with just 2 injured guys.

[OV:54-40]

When I first heard about this new rule, I just shook my head. But I haven't heard coaches or players complain, so maybe it is not so bad after all. For my part, I am just going to ignore it. It is too convoluted for most fans to bother with.

For us fans it comes across like Sheldon Cooper put it together. I think it offers flexibility and options for a coach that for the most part will be subtle in impact. Taking Rhymes for example I think it means they could play him as a NAT in place of Cottoy or McInnes and bring Williams in to backfill Rhymes American slot although with BC listing 8 pure NAT starters they could do that anyways.

One very important thing to keep in mind. What is perhaps the biggest complaint CFL fans have? Too much roster turnover. The main intent of this thing is to make it attractive for American players to stay put; in other words reduce roster turnover. A pending FA could find himself at a point where if he signs to stay it will put him over the threshold to earn that status which makes him more valuable to his current team than to a new one.

I'm not one of them but many fans would love to blow the ratio totally up. I'm against it because I think it would be a blow to grassroots football in Canada if it became league largely devoid of Canadians who generally don't contribute nearly as much to the roster turnover problem. The ratio detractors cite a desire to have "the best players" playing as a means to create a more exciting product. Call me crazy but all due respect to Daniel Petermann or previously Jacob Scarfone I kind of like the idea that if Cottoy gets hurt they now have an option to replace him with Terry Williams thanks to Rhymes.

You like the luxury of replacing Cottoy with a kick returner who has proven basically zip as a receiver in the CFL ???

[Alputt]

Missed kick! Let’s go Lions!