Goal posts

The Place for BC Lion Discussion. A forum for Lions fans to talk and chat about our team.
Discussion, News, Information and Speculation regarding the BC Lions and the CFL.
Prowl, Growl and Roar!

Moderator: Team Captains

Murdoch
Rookie
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:04 pm

Was thinking about the NFL exhibition game in Winnipeg and how they shortened the field because of the goal posts being positioned as they are in the CFL.

Now I am thinking maybe the NFL is right and they should be at the back of the endzone.

I would say all teams have red zone routes that use the post to get separation from the D which is kind of a weasel move to some. Weston Dressler made a career out of it. Hard to argue about the safety factor.

Anyway... just a thought. Could have been a whole different story if Cody Fajardo hadn't drilled the crossbar.


User avatar
KnowItAll
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7283
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 6:32 pm
Location: Delta

I have suggested that many times over the years. Two things give me pause tho. It is easier for the NFL to do it because of only having 10 yard endzones. It also would likely significantly decrease the number of missed FG returns. Thus I am undecided.


Every day that passes is one you can't get back
User avatar
Hambone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6581
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:25 pm
Location: Living in PG and back working in Mackenzie for the next few months.

Murdoch wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:44 pm
Was thinking about the NFL exhibition game in Winnipeg and how they shortened the field because of the goal posts being positioned as they are in the CFL.

Now I am thinking maybe the NFL is right and they should be at the back of the endzone.

I would say all teams have red zone routes that use the post to get separation from the D which is kind of a weasel move to some. Weston Dressler made a career out of it. Hard to argue about the safety factor.

Anyway... just a thought. Could have been a whole different story if Cody Fajardo hadn't drilled the crossbar.
Most of us are quite happy that story ended the way it did. :wink:

I'd have to look back at that play again. I wasn't convinced it would have been a slam dunk TD if not for the post. A Bomber DB had broke hard towards the intended receiver as Fajardo released the ball. I thought he may have been able to break the play up.


You're as old as you've ever been and as young as you're ever going to be.
User avatar
cromartie
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4836
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 2:31 pm
Location: Cleveland, usually

Football evolved from rugby. Rugby goal posts remain at the front of the end zone.

The NFL is the exception to this rule. and they didn't do it until the mid 1970s to compete with the WFL's Action Point.

Removing strategy from the game because "the NFL does it" is rubbish, whether it's the post pattern, rouge, or missed field goal returns.


User avatar
B.C.FAN
MVP
MVP
Posts: 10983
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

I'm willing to predict that kickers will be 100% opposed to this idea. A field goal from the 12-yard line would be a 32-yarder, the same as the current convert distance. Kicking percentages would plummet.

I can't recall ever seeing a major injury as a result of a collision with the goalpost but many potential touchdown passes have been foiled by a post or crossbar. My instinct is to dismiss the suggestion but it could open the door for some new strategic thinking. Consider:

- Field goals would likely still be attempted from inside the 25 yard line (52- or 53-yard kicks) but teams would be more likely to attempt longer kicks, knowing that they're less likely to be burned by long returns fielded deep in the end zone.

- Returners would get more touches on missed field goals and would have to make a decision on conceding a single or trying to run the ball out of the end zone.

- Teams would be more likely to gamble on third and short from the 20 yard line, for example, rather than try a 47- or 48-yard field goal.

- Teams would be more likely to gamble on third down from the 30 or 40 yard line rather than punt for field position or a single.

We might see less scoring as a result of making field goals more difficult but most of those scenarios could make the game more exciting as long as coaches don't get overly conservative and punt the ball from places on the field where they would now attempt long field goals.


"I think [Fred Fateri] was like a lot of people who watch football, hockey or any professional sport on television. They sit there and think they could coach better than the professional. Some people really think that." - Bob Ackles, The Water Boy
User avatar
Hambone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6581
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:25 pm
Location: Living in PG and back working in Mackenzie for the next few months.

KnowItAll wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:57 pm
I have suggested that many times over the years. Two things give me pause tho. It is easier for the NFL to do it because of only having 10 yard endzones. It also would likely significantly decrease the number of missed FG returns. Thus I am undecided.
There's also the aspect that moving them to the back of the end zone means teams would have to get down to the 28 to make for a 55 yard FG attempt. That's the end, if not outside, of some kicker's range. That would dramatically change the way the game is played in a fashion I can't even begin to contemplate. No sense trying for FGs on you get inside the 40. If a kicker misses a 50 yarder from his 30 obviously there can be no return. What happens? Does the opponent still get the ball at the 35? Effectively a turnover with the opponent gaining 12 yards as the ball would have been scrimmaged from the 23 to make it a 30 yarder.

To put the posts at the back of the end zone in BC Place they'd have to be mounted into the ground somewhere back in the tunnels. That would reduce options for half time shows as it would cut the tunnel in half for moving anything onto the field. Nothing 10' or higher would be able to pass under them. The uprights are 18'6" wide inside to inside thus around 19' outside to outside. With the back line somewhere directly below the first rows of end zone seating the uprights would be right between those seats. Ya just gotta know that given such close proximity they will be far too appealing for some drunk to make the leap.

On the bright side BCF do you have a fish net you can mount on a golf ball retriever? You could be our last line of defense for an opposition FG! :tease:


You're as old as you've ever been and as young as you're ever going to be.
User avatar
David
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8765
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 10:23 am
Location: Vancouver (Kitsilano)

B.C.FAN wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:16 pm
I can't recall ever seeing a major injury as a result of a collision with the goalpost but many potential touchdown passes have been foiled by a post or crossbar.
I guess it depends on how you define "major" injury, but I recall Korey Banks suffered a severe case of whiplash (I don't recall him missing games though) in our Grey Cup-winning year of 2011 when he had a major collision with goalposts in Regina (you're right though, injuries are quite rare).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pd8l6ItUPRA

Playing it back now it's hard to hear all the cheers in the background. I know the Riders were getting thumped by our Leos at the time, but that's super tacky. :roll:


DH :cool:


Please sell the team, Mr. Braley.
User avatar
Hambone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6581
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:25 pm
Location: Living in PG and back working in Mackenzie for the next few months.

cromartie wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:11 pm
Football evolved from rugby. Rugby goal posts remain at the front of the end zone.

The NFL is the exception to this rule. and they didn't do it until the mid 1970s to compete with the WFL's Action Point.

Removing strategy from the game because "the NFL does it" is rubbish, whether it's the post pattern, rouge, or missed field goal returns.
And they still have the old style posts; 2 posts mounted into the ground right on the goal line. Not the single post a couple yards behind the goal line.


You're as old as you've ever been and as young as you're ever going to be.
TheLionKing
Hall of Famer
Posts: 24010
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:13 pm
Location: Vancouver

Former Lion defensive back Craig Murray almost suffered a life altering injury when he ran into the old, unpadded post at Empire Stadium.


Murdoch
Rookie
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:04 pm

Excellent discussion with many good points. Thank you for setting me straight.

Forgot about missed field goals in the heat of my post and the opportunity to change the game with a single play. Can anyone say Chris Rainey?

Interesting though how one move could have so many ripple effects. Desperation Hail Mary's form the 35 late in games and a logistical nightmare as well as Hambone mentioned.

Net effect would be lower scoring most likely and not the direction the game needs to go.

Q and A with Ambrosie today. Must be online somewhere. Enjoy your day.


User avatar
BC 1988
Legend
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:58 pm
Location: BC (since 1988)

This is a first-rate thread topic (just what we need in the face of a possible no/delayed/truncated CFL season). Needless to say, as a die hard traditionalist, I am very opposed to any change to our game (particularly one that could make it more boring, lower scoring).

All the same, it was great getting such an array of outlooks. Keep them coming. :thup:


User avatar
KnowItAll
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7283
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 6:32 pm
Location: Delta

the thing that bothers me the most about posts on the goal line is mid field successful tries. I think a team should have to advance the ball inside the 35 to have a reasonable shot at a FG.

I really don't like when in CFL stupid OT that teams start off already in good FG range.


Every day that passes is one you can't get back
User avatar
Sir Purrcival
Hall of Famer
Posts: 3926
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Comox Valley

I'm not in favour of changes for changes sake. For 100 years, the goal posts have been where they have been. They don't obviously lead to an inferior game thus I don't see any real benefit to adopting the American approach. It is a different game, with different rules, strategies and playing conditions. If you are going to change the posts, what's next? Change the field dimensions, the number of players, adopt a fair catch rule?
As for the injury dimension, better to take tackling out of the game because far more injuries occur there than from hitting the support post. No one would support that argument. From a perspective of doing a "what if....." it is worth thinking about but there is nothing that I have heard so far to suggest that we up-heave a century of tradition.


Tell me how long must a fan be strong? Ans. Always.
User avatar
Hambone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6581
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:25 pm
Location: Living in PG and back working in Mackenzie for the next few months.

KnowItAll wrote:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 5:19 pm
the thing that bothers me the most about posts on the goal line is mid field successful tries. I think a team should have to advance the ball inside the 35 to have a reasonable shot at a FG.

I really don't like when in CFL stupid OT that teams start off already in good FG range.
Last year there was 40 FG attempts in 81 games from beyond 49 yards; 1 attempt every second game. Those 40 attempts represent 9.5% of the 421 total attempts. Overall there were 248 kicks from inside the 40 (91.5% successful), 133 from 40-49 (77.4% successful) and 40 from 50 and beyond (65% successful).

The 66 missed FGs resulted in 21 rouges. There were 42 recorded returns of missed FGs. Blocks or hitting uprights likely account for the rest. Stats last year show 1 in 3 misses resulted in a rouge and 2 in 3 resulted in returns. There were 3 MFGs returned for a TD. Add on converts and as many points were scored running back MFGs as were scored via the rouge. Edmonton's Cristion Jones and Winnipeg's Janarion Grant had MFG returns of 100 and 61 yards respectively without scoring but you can bet the fans were jumping out of their seats anticipating them going all the way. Thanks but I'll take the tradeoff of the excitement of the MFG return, not to mention possibility of kicking the ball out, at the risk of a rouge. Much better than the NFL's back of the end zone posts, Down there for all intents the FG play is over as soon as the ball clears the line of scrimmage.

As for the OT rule damned if you do, damned if you don't. Personally I like the old 5 minute halves that incorporated all aspects. But if they're going to have the shootout OT then the 35 makes sense. Move the starting point back 10 yards and you make the TD more difficult which in turn increases the odds of a FG attempt being the result. Move it in 10 and the FG becomes a chip shot if the team can't score the TD.


You're as old as you've ever been and as young as you're ever going to be.
Murdoch
Rookie
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:04 pm

Love it when you jump in with the numbers Hambone. Can't argue with facts.

For the record, the original idea was never intended as an adoption of NFL rules but more of looking at the logic behind their decision. I assume that had to do with the obstacle in the field of play.

The NFL game in Winnipeg couldn't have gone worse. To shorten the field at the last minute added to the disaster. Seemed pretty extreme when it was something that was there all along if they would have looked. Field dimensions and the like must have been discussed. Anyways... that's what prompted the thought.

While I agree with the obstacle in the field of play argument the effect of moving the scoring target definitely takes away from the game. Virtual uprights at the goal line?

Good point also about starting OT now already in field goal range. Can't remember what it was about a tie that made them move on from that.

I assume US college posts are at the back as well. Maybe that's just the way they do it.


Post Reply