Proposed rule changes

[WestCoastJoe]

Love the rouge and the name just the way it is, if the CFL begins to tamper with rules regarding the rouge, it will become one step closer to looking like the NFL. The field position gained is reward for the rouge regardless of whether it sails through the endzone, don't want that scored against you, keep the opposition out of range with a stout defense.

I like the analogy of football to war in this aspect, as the football becomes the grenade and the FG the target. Hit the target and you get a full hit, miss and there is still collateral damage from the fallout and a rouge is the reward.

In the time of Jim Van Pelt, Gerry James, and Bud Grant of the Bombers, field goal kickers were not so automatic as they are today. A missed field goal seemed as likely as a made one. Lots of rouge/single points. In those older days, it did give a significant reward for the field position battle. And even now, it definitely affects the strategy and play calling during the game. It has certainly thrown Wally for a loop at times. IMO it adds a random element to the scoring, as does the possible 2 point conversion.

The Keystone Kops (Chinese Fire Drill) runaround in the end zone is certainly entertaining. It is one possible play within the context of a CFL game. It might be amongst the most fun to watch, but IMO it is not the greatest display of coordinated, practiced, professional, athletic excellence. To me, it is more like the randomness of "The Play," of U Cal fame, when coach Joe Kapp's team lateralled many times on the last play of the game, keeping the ball alive, making it all the way to the end zone, even running through the music band. It's all good ...

I expect the rouge is here to stay. And, as a fan, I can live with it. Vive la rouge.

[Tighthead]

I don't mind the rouge, but any time Rammer types that it is a reward for field position, I always say that field position is its own reward.

So far he has not come around to my way of thinking and the forecast is bleak in that regard.

[Honour Dewalt]

I think the reward for field position argument is bunk anyway. That is what the successful fieldgoal should be. Or like the previous post, the field position itself is the reward because it influences the game outcome on it's own. The game i sso different from the NFL that this little change would not come anywhere close to making it like that league. I love the CFL, so it is not like I am trying to make it like the NFL at all.

On another topic, why does the kicker who concedes the safety (another play i hate) run around for a while killing time in the endzone before ultimately kneeling down or running out of bounds for the safety? Why not just kneel right away? Lots of the time, it is done when the game result is still in doubt, so you don't know if you are killing time YOU will need, or the opponent. That's something I really don't get. I see McCallum doing it a lot. Running around like a game of keep away or tag, for no reason.

[Tighthead]

The best part of the punter dancing around killing clock in the second quarter is the faint hope that he will not see a defender and get blindsided into next week while giving up a touchdown. Someday this has to happen.

[Anglophone]

The best part of the punter dancing around killing clock in the second quarter is the faint hope that he will not see a defender and get blindsided into next week while giving up a touchdown. Someday this has to happen.

It's going to be Saskatchewan, too. Victory will be sweet!

[Rammer]

I don't mind the rouge, but any time Rammer types that it is a reward for field position, I always say that field position is its own reward.

So far he has not come around to my way of thinking and the forecast is bleak in that regard.

Field position does have its own strategy, if the distance is right, a HC has to decide upon the punt for field position, kick a FG with the potential of a return, or even go for the rouge if the game situation dictates that. The rouge is an extra element that the armchair QB can always debate afterwards and that only adds to the enjoyment of the game itself. Remember when Wally got PMc to punt for the long rouge instead of going for the W against the Riders a few seasons back? It doesn't always work, and another recent scenario was the Paul McCallum missed FG in OT for the Riders in the WDF against the Lions. That rouge could have won the game when the Lions went all or nothing with Duncan from the 38 yardline (IIRC), miss and the Riders likely win that game when all seemed lost after the 18 yard miss by Paul. Lots of fun, and it also amps up the amount of 2 pt converts IMO, another exciting play that the you see in the CFL way more than in the NFL.

[WestCoast]

Yes. We do have the best T O there is.

Toss out the clock. Don't need it or want it.
Then, you put out your BEST offence' and I'll put out my BEST defence and we"ll go at it.
CFL rules " 3 and out"
Then I'll do it. If where still tied we'll do it again.
And Again

How great is that?

[WestCoast]

Oops, still need the 20 sec clock

[WestCoast]

sorry, I don't know how to edit on this site, but the O T above should obviously have been O T.

[Toppy Vann]

The next thing I was going to say was that the ball must go through the endzone in the air. If it bounces on the ground first, it will still count as a point, because the receiver would have the chance to catch it.

Too complicated and how often does it happen that way?
Do you change the rule if it is a punt out of the end zone vs MFG?

The more they complicate the game and the rules, the more fans turn off. You don't want people in the stands going - hey what happened to our point and if it bounces on the line do we stop for instant replay to see if it is in or out. 1 point.

I like OT but dislike how they tinkered and of course I did like two 5 min. halves with kickoffs which would not work I guess with back to back game on Friday night.

Remember when the Lions decided to try and have PM boot the kick in OT through the end zone in Sask rather than attack with offensive plays? We know how that turned out. Trying to kick it through the end zone and overpowering a kick can produce bad results - that is evident.

[Anglophone]

Yes. We do have the best T O there is.

Toss out the clock. Don't need it or want it.
Then, you put out your BEST offence' and I'll put out my BEST defence and we"ll go at it.
CFL rules " 3 and out"
Then I'll do it. If where still tied we'll do it again.
And Again

How great is that?

No matter how good your defense is, the offense will still be withing field goal range. Therein lies the flaw (along with the unfair advantage given to the second team)

[Rammer]

Yes. We do have the best T O there is.

Toss out the clock. Don't need it or want it.
Then, you put out your BEST offence' and I'll put out my BEST defence and we"ll go at it.
CFL rules " 3 and out"
Then I'll do it. If where still tied we'll do it again.
And Again

How great is that?

No matter how good your defense is, the offense will still be withing field goal range. Therein lies the flaw (along with the unfair advantage given to the second team)

That is why each team should be forced to KO from the GL and allow ST to become part of OT. Kicking from the GL should give an average start from the 45 or so, not within automatic FG range as the 35 is, and also with a reward for having a good ST to gain even better field position.

[CatsEyes]

sorry, I don't know how to edit on this site, but the O T above should obviously have been O T.

[Lions4ever]

I'm all for keeping the single point but it must be scored from punt formation or free kick (as in those crazy kick back n forth scenarios) but not for a missed FG. Miss the FG, no point for you!

[Hambone]

I'm all for keeping the single point but it must be scored from punt formation or free kick (as in those crazy kick back n forth scenarios) but not for a missed FG. Miss the FG, no point for you!

So you want to remove the return of the missed FG for a TD too? Remove the threat of the single if the defending team doesn't try to get the ball out of the endzone after the missed FG and there is no reason to try returning it at all. The only thing a return man would be needed for is to secure the ball before the kicker is onside recovers it. We had 6 missed FGs returned for TDs last year generating more points by the defending teams than by the kicking team when a FG was missed.