They throw to the side lines because 85% of the field is outside of the hash marks. Not only is the coverage more spread out you can also throw deeper passes. From the 5 the max is 25 yards over the middle. From either hash the max is 39 to 40. Found that in a 2500 year old Greek scroll. Think he was calculating the shortest route to dump his crap bucket!
We’ve literally had Bo Levi Mitchell come out and say from about the 40 yd line in the playcalling is impacted by the goalposts in the endzone, the closer you get the more it’s in play. It really shouldn’t be much of a debate that massive posts in the middle of the field would deter football players from using that part of the field.
5 Likes
As I said before, let’s put a metal spike in the ice in line with the goalie just inside the blue line. How would that be a good thing?
3 Likes
Reminds me of a old story I read in I believe it was Jim Young’s bio named ‘Dirty 30’ .
The story goes that the Lions had a rather smallish guy make the team as a free safety . The guy was only something like 5’7” and weighed around 160-170 lbs . Anyways the story goes that the team the Lions were playing had a big brute of a TE that was around 6’4” and weighed around 230-240 who was a rookie American new to the league. So on a goal line stance doesn’t the QB attempt to hit him on an inside slant and he runs full force right into the goalpost and gets knocked out cold . When he came to the little safety was standing over him telling him rather loudly ‘ Ya come into my territory again I’ll knock you out twice as hard next time” 
2 Likes
Alright, so now you are resorting to just making crap up so as to make your argument?
3 Likes
The stats are no different in 4dn.
What stats and what’s your source for them?
1 Like
The comparison was researched about a half a year ago. 3dn could definitely point you to the study. Most of their passes also went wide, simply because there is more room to throw there. Would removing the post here open it up a bit? Sure, but i suspect it will at best offset the shorter endzone for passes over the middle.
I implied that they could easily do it. So what part did i make up? The part where i said that they could easily paint a couple stirpes down each side to make it 4dn with? Or the part where i said if they did that then they’d also have to reduce the number of players on the field? Making the field 100 yards was the hard part. The rest is just paperwork even if they aren’t likely to do it.
1 Like
Yes so many things COULD happen of course, but a hypothetical point as you made does not make your point or provide evidence or insight.
Stick to the FACTS if you are trying to make a point, or it’s just your wandering opinion again.
1 Like
Here’s one of them that was openly discussed on the old forum and on Reddit for what it’s worth
5 Likes
No more refs. Less discernment please.
2 Likes
I don’t disagree but I’ll add that Fajardo made a comment about using the goalposts to scheme plays around (ironic that it came from him).
2 Likes
Isn’t this whole thread an opinion on the rules??
3 Likes
was just thinking and remembering. Watching the CFL since 66, I never felt that I would enjoy the games more if they would just change this rule or that. I went for a few decades without even pondering what could improve the game. I just took it as is, regardless of what changes were made along the way, and continued to enjoy the games. The game could still be exactly as it was way back then, as far as rules and officiating goes, and I would still be enjoying it.
5 Likes
Yes. But presenting opinion as fact, or just making things up as if fact, is another matter, and that’s my point with that example using multiple hypotheticals without citing as much.
1 Like
Thanks.
I don’t know it I’m reading the results correctly but, How does any of this show a need to shorten the field or move the goal posts?
1 Like
I don’t think a “need” is the proper test. You can argue there isn’t a “need” to change anything as some said when the forward pass was being considered.
Do the rule changes streamline the game and make it better and of greater appeal to casual fans? I think so.
4 Likes
Well there’s lots of that kind of talk going on here. Many people present there opinion as fact.
4 Likes
I’ve been following the CFL for almost 60 years…I’ve had seasons tickets for what will be 50 years next season. I can’t think of any time where I thought of rule changes that are “needed” to keep me as a fan. I acknowledge that some rules changes over that time have made the game better. I can understand how moving the goalposts will affect the game but we’ve had no issues scoring because of the goalposts. I understand moving player benches. Time clock…we’ll see. I don’t understand shortening the field (other than it needs to be if the goalposts “have” to be moved.)
IMHO….the rule changes on the horizon will not attract a new fan to the game. Won’t cause an existing fan to abandon the CFL.
7 Likes