CFL 2021

[monkeypower]

11 hours ago, gosioux76 said:

And, to someone else's suggestion, what could the Canadian government really do to stand in the way of a private business making a decision in an attempt to ensure its survival? I don't see how a protectionist measure would help unless it involved some sort of financial incentives. 

 

Quote

The Canadian Football Act (1974), also known in its long title as An Act respecting Canadian Professional Football, was a proposed Act by the Parliament of Canada in April 1974 designed to give a government-protected monopoly over professional football in Canada to the Canadian Football League (CFL). Although it was never signed into law, the move by the government eventually compelled the World Football League's Toronto Northmen to move to the United States as the Memphis Southmen. The spectre of the Act was again raised when John F. Bassett, the owner of the Northmen/Southmen franchise, proposed a United States Football League franchise for Hamilton, Ontario, in 1983.

 

[BengalErnst]

It was a proposed act that never got put into law. It really doesn’t have a chance to hold up in court. 

[Brian in Boston]

There's little question that the Canadian Football League's leadership has to figure out what needs to be done in order to ensure the circuit's sustained existence.

League-wide average attendance has decreased for seven consecutive seasons, with said average hitting just 22,917 fans through the turnstiles in 2019. Particularly vexing is the league's growing irrelevance in Canada's three most populous metro areas, with the CFL teams representing said markets - the Toronto Argonauts, Montréal Alouettes, and BC Lions - generating the three lowest average team attendance totals amongst the league's nine franchises in each of the last five seasons. In fact, over the past ten seasons the Lions have escaped the CFL's bottom three in average attendance just three times, with the Alouettes having managed the feat just once. The Argonauts' "greatest" attendance achievement during said decade? Twice finishing second-to-last in average attendance.       

[Sec19Row53]

Saskatchewan and BC were supposed to be on ESPNNews last night, but weren't when I checked. ESPN doesn't have squat in their app for the CFL. That surprised me given they carry the league. 

[Skycast]

On 8/7/2021 at 5:51 PM, Sec19Row53 said:

Saskatchewan and BC were supposed to be on ESPNNews last night, but weren't when I checked. ESPN doesn't have squat in their app for the CFL. That surprised me given they carry the league. 

 

They do have a section for the CFL with all the upcoming games listed and links to the streams.

[MJWalker45]

On 8/7/2021 at 6:51 PM, Sec19Row53 said:

Saskatchewan and BC were supposed to be on ESPNNews last night, but weren't when I checked. ESPN doesn't have squat in their app for the CFL. That surprised me given they carry the league. 

I had to scroll to the bottom of ESPN+ to find the Toronto vs Calgary game. 

[bosrs1]

2 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

I had to scroll to the bottom of ESPN+ to find the Toronto vs Calgary game. 

 

Yeah they've relegated the CFL pretty far down. But then ESPN does that to most things not the NFL. I hate this time of year when the NFL preseason starts and the NBA summer league is going. Meaningless bull crap attached to those leagues takes precedence in the ESPN world over MLB, CFL or anything else actively playing. 

[MJWalker45]

Just now, bosrs1 said:

 

Yeah they've relegated the CFL pretty far down. But then ESPN does that to most things not the NFL. I hate this time of year when the NFL preseason starts and the NBA summer league is going. Meaningless bull crap attached to those leagues takes precedence in the ESPN world over MLB, CFL or anything else actively playing. 

I had the same issue with EFL games too. 

[gosioux76]

54 minutes ago, bosrs1 said:

 

Yeah they've relegated the CFL pretty far down. But then ESPN does that to most things not the NFL. I hate this time of year when the NFL preseason starts and the NBA summer league is going. Meaningless bull crap attached to those leagues takes precedence in the ESPN world over MLB, CFL or anything else actively playing. 

 

Maybe it's just because I'm a Hulu Live subscriber, and its algorithm is just hitting on my interests, but the CFL games this weekend were pretty easy to find on my interface. Sure, it offered up the NFL Hall of Fame Game first, but I didn't have to work too hard to find the CFL. 

[Discrim]

Congrats to the Blue Bombers

[DEAD!]

Seeing Hamilton lose on their home turf made my day... 

[Magnus]

13 hours ago, DEAD! said:

Seeing Hamilton lose on their home turf made my day... 

https://imgur.com/PEHpv6D

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

14 hours ago, DEAD! said:

Seeing Hamilton lose on their home turf made my day... 

 

Even though my favourite CFL team is the Argos, I don't hate Hamilton.  Indeed, from years of being able to listen to CHML in New York, I have kind of an affinity for that team.  So I was hoping that they would win it at home.

Anyway, I didn't really go for the decision to take a knee and concede a single on the kickoff following the field goal that had put Winnipeg up by 2, especially as the Hamilton returner had an unobstructed path out of the end zone.  I understand the idea that Hamilton were going into the wind, and so the field position was valuable.  But, so late in the game, the points are more valuable; and, even in the worst-case scenario of a two-and-out, one just has to put one's confidence in the punter and then in the defence.

 

(As an aside, one thing I really enjoy about the CFL game is the role of punting.  In the NFL mentality, punting is equated unequivocally with failure.  Whereas, in the CFL mindset, punting is a tool that is used in order to manage field position.  So an offensive series resulting in a punt that leaves the opposition deep in its own half can be considered a successful one, given the effect that this field position can have on the flow of the contest.)

Anyway, this Grey Cup was a highly enjoyable game.

Still, I guess I will nit-pick about the overtime format.  While the idea of starting from a yardline in the opponent's half is unappealing from a competitive standpoint, as it takes away the chance of a team winning on field goal, a safety, or a single, I can understand the rationale for that for the sake of reducing the total number of snaps that would be necessary if normal play were to continue.  But what I really don't like is the requirement that a team go for the two-point conversion after a touchdown.

First, this requirement takes a crucial decision out of a coach's hands:  whether to go for a gimme one-point convert or try for the risky two-pointer.  Second, in a playoff game that cannot end in a draw, this makes overtime potentially longer by giving only two possible values for a touchdown (either 6 or 8 points), as opposed to three possible values (6, 7, or 8 points). And, if we assume that the team having the ball first will usually go for the two-point conversion if it scores a touchdown on its first possession, the requirement to go for two removes the possibility for the second team to possess the ball to win the game on a standard PAT if the first team has failed in its two-pointer. 

[MJWalker45]

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Still, I guess I will nit-pick about the overtime format.  While the idea of starting from a yardline in the opponent's half is unappealing from a competitive standpoint, as it takes away the chance of a team winning on field goal, a safety, or a single, I can understand the rationale for that for the sake of reducing the total number of snaps that would be necessary if normal play were to continue.  But what I really don't like is the requirement that a team go for the two-point conversion after a touchdown.

First, this requirement takes a crucial decision out of a coach's hands:  whether to go for a gimme one-point convert or try for the risky two-pointer.  Second, in a playoff game that cannot end in a draw, this makes overtime potentially longer by giving only two possible values for a touchdown (either 6 or 8 points), as opposed to three possible values (6, 7, or 8 points). And, if we assume that the team having the ball first will usually go for the two-point conversion if it scores a touchdown on its first possession, the requirement to go for two removes the possibility for the second team to possess the ball to win the game on a standard PAT if the first team has failed in its two-pointer. 

Seeing how college football has botched their format, I prefer this one.  However, with the caveat that they go for 2 after the second overtime, not from the beginning. Moving the ball back to the 35 should help take easy FG's out of the equation to start with.