For some teams, the CFL Offseason is here. Rather than lose all the coaching movement discussions to the Regular season thread, I thought we could start putting it here.

Those teams currently lost in the wilderness:

Ottawa

Toronto

BC

Montreal

Calgary

Edmonton

Saskatchewan

Hamilton

The champs are here.. the champs are here... Winnipeg*

 

*Grey Cup Champions

17 hours ago, Tiny759 said:

Obviously you hope for 7 but when you go to kick a field goal, the drive technically isn’t over. But why should missing a kick give a point? I find it silly. 

Canadian football is all about the bigger field and because of that I think the American game evolved differently. To score a rouge in the NFL game would be too easy. I can see why they wouldn't use it. The nuances and diversity of our game played on a big field makes it a very different game requiring a different skill set from the players and especially the kickers. You just don't see kickers with a skill set like Justin Medlock's in the NFL. A skilled kicker like that can completely change the outcome of a game in the CFL. Not so much in the NFL.

1 hour ago, Noeller said:

Rouge: French for "Red", also a single point in Canadian Football

Rogue: To go against the rules. See: "Going rogue"....

Also:Rogue: noun, see "Nissan automobiles"

1 hour ago, J5V said:

Canadian football is all about the bigger field and because of that I think the American game evolved differently. To score a rouge in the NFL game would be too easy. I can see why they wouldn't use it. The nuances and diversity of our game played on a big field makes it a very different game requiring a different skill set from the players and especially the kickers. You just don't see kickers with a skill set like Justin Medlock's in the NFL. A skilled kicker like that can completely change the outcome of a game in the CFL. Not so much in the NFL.

I don’t disagree with you at all, but this really is more that I just find the single point silly on missed field goals and nothing about nfl vs cfl

2 minutes ago, Tiny759 said:

I don’t disagree with you at all, but this really is more that I just find the single point silly on missed field goals and nothing about nfl vs cfl

But don't you find that single point adds a lot to the game? I'm not sure what's silly about it. To get that single point you have to drive the ball fairly deep into opposing territory. You also have to do a good job of containing the returner. I find it very exciting and it adds a new element to the FG when you realize it isn't an all-or-nothing proposition. If the game is tied and the field goal is missed but stays in play you have to get it out of the end zone or risk giving up that point. That point can cost you the game, or win it. 

27 minutes ago, Tiny759 said:

 I just find the single point silly on missed field goals and nothing about nfl vs cfl

Would you feel better if it was called a Red?

2 hours ago, J5V said:

But don't you find that single point adds a lot to the game? I'm not sure what's silly about it. To get that single point you have to drive the ball fairly deep into opposing territory. You also have to do a good job of containing the returner. I find it very exciting and it adds a new element to the FG when you realize it isn't an all-or-nothing proposition. If the game is tied and the field goal is missed but stays in play you have to get it out of the end zone or risk giving up that point. That point can cost you the game, or win it. 

So I don’t mind it if it’s caught in the end zone and returnable then it gives the option of return or give up the point. But a straight miss that goes through I find silly. That’s a direct miss, doesn’t give an option for a return.  

4 hours ago, Mr Dee said:

"My time in Winnipeg was the most memorable experience I had playing in the CFL.”
https://www.bluebombers.com/2020/03/03/time-winnipeg-memorable-johnson-retires-bomber/
#ForTheW

I'll never forgive Sleepy Joe for slowly dismantling Swaggerville...

17 minutes ago, Tiny759 said:

So I don’t mind it if it’s caught in the end zone and returnable then it gives the option of return or give up the point. But a straight miss that goes through I find silly. That’s a direct miss, doesn’t give an option for a return.  

Exactly!

I see people's points and they make sense, but I've always enjoyed the NFL better without the single point. I think it rewards skill to have it just 3 for a FG and 6 for a TD. Either your kicker makes it and you get 3 or he misses and the other team takes over at the spot of the FG try.  Either way though I'll always love the CFL better then the NFL overall. It's just the one thing I don't like about the game. The NFL has its own issues...

7 minutes ago, Floyd said:

I'll never forgive Sleepy Joe for slowly dismantling Swaggerville...

Yup, that was a fun time. Wish they could have gotten it done for that group...

1 hour ago, Blue and Gold87 said:

Exactly!

I see people's points and they make sense, but I've always enjoyed the NFL better without the single point. I think it rewards skill to have it just 3 for a FG and 6 for a TD. Either your kicker makes it and you get 3 or he misses and the other team takes over at the spot of the FG try.  Either way though I'll always love the CFL better then the NFL overall. It's just the one thing I don't like about the game. The NFL has its own issues...

It’s obviously not a huge issue, but it does look a bit silly when a kick misses, goes through the end zone and you get a point. But ya the cfl game is way better.

16 minutes ago, Tiny759 said:

It’s obviously not a huge issue, but it does look a bit silly when a kick misses, goes through the end zone and you get a point. But ya the cfl game is way better.

You keep saying the single point is silly. Over & over. Go watch the NFL then & don't patronize us by saying the Canadian game is better.  Lots of knowledgeable posters here who can see right through you. 

 

1 hour ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

You keep saying the single point is silly. Over & over. Go watch the NFL then & don't patronize us by saying the Canadian game is better.  Lots of knowledgeable posters here who can see right through you. 

 

Well it all started the other day when this was brought into the thread and I stated my opinion. Scary I know. When people question, I’ll defend it and so on and so on. You dont have to like it or agree with it, but don’t go projecting your view on something because someone said something you disagree with. It’s a thread made for discussion, just gotta deal with it sometimes.

4 hours ago, Tiny759 said:

So I don’t mind it if it’s caught in the end zone and returnable then it gives the option of return or give up the point. But a straight miss that goes through I find silly. That’s a direct miss, doesn’t give an option for a return.  

That's why it's only worth a single point. You still had to get close enough to the end of the field to be able to boot it through. It's a small reward for getting close enough. Besides, a kick is never a for-sure thing. Lots to go wrong. The snapper can muff the snap, the holder can bobble the ball or not get the laces turned, it can get blocked, the kicker can shank it, it can hit an upright or crossbar, the wind could blow it back in your face, etc. 

20 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

I'd change the rule to no point if the ball goes through the end zone without being touched. That keeps the run backs and the 1 point while eliminating the point for shorter missed FG's.

This is literally the suggested change that started this whole conversation...

The Rugby roots...

Once the anti-rouge-ists are allowed one concession they will keep coming until the rouge is eradicated from the Canadian landscape. As for the idea that the rouge “rewards failure” I would like to turn to Toronto Argonauts broadcaster Mike Hogan and his rebuttal via his Twitter account to such fallacy: “Going back to the game’s rugby roots, the rouge rewards the team for the 5-10 plays to get into a position to have the ball cross the goal line. It’s a reward for gaining field position, not for failure.”

https://www.cfl.ca/2020/03/03/cauz-defence-rouge/

 

Edited March 4, 20205 yr by Mr Dee

1 hour ago, bearpants said:

This is literally the suggested change that started this whole conversation...

Aaand it's a good idea.

57 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

The Rugby roots...

Once the anti-rouge-ists are allowed one concession they will keep coming until the rouge is eradicated from the Canadian landscape. As for the idea that the rouge “rewards failure” I would like to turn to Toronto Argonauts broadcaster Mike Hogan and his rebuttal via his Twitter account to such fallacy: “Going back to the game’s rugby roots, the rouge rewards the team for the 5-10 plays to get into a position to have the ball cross the goal line. It’s a reward for gaining field position, not for failure.”

Single point has been around forever, calling it a "rouge" has not, as far as I know.  Can anyone recall when this term started being used?  I don't recall it being used  at all in the 60's or 70's when I began following football.

7 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Single point has been around forever, calling it a "rouge" has not, as far as I know.  Can anyone recall when this term started being used?  I don't recall it being used  at all in the 60's or 70's when I began following football.

When nap time is over, we're going to be inundated with stories of yesteryear and the first time they heard of the rouge. 

 

Edited March 4, 20205 yr by JCon

2 hours ago, JCon said:

When nap time is over, we're going to be inundated with stories of yesteryear and the first time they heard of the rouge. 

 

I grew up in the Rouge. 

11 hours ago, Tiny759 said:

Well it all started the other day when this was brought into the thread and I stated my opinion. Scary I know. When people question, I’ll defend it and so on and so on. You dont have to like it or agree with it, but don’t go projecting your view on something because someone said something you disagree with. It’s a thread made for discussion, just gotta deal with it sometimes.

Well, that silly rule has been around for 110 years & it has worked out pretty well.  You don't like it, fine. I just get tired of hearing it's silly (as you keep saying) because it isn't. It's the Canadian game grounded in history. You change or take away any part of the Canadian kicking game & the result will be closer to the 4 down version of football in the States.  I like both games. They have their own set of individualized rules that make them unique. The single point is here to stay. It won't be tweaked or changed. 

7 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Well, that silly rule has been around for 110 years & it has worked out pretty well.  You don't like it, fine. I just get tired of hearing it's silly (as you keep saying) because it isn't. It's the Canadian game grounded in history. You change or take away any part of the Canadian kicking game & the result will be closer to the 4 down version of football in the States.  I like both games. They have their own set of individualized rules that make them unique. The single point is here to stay. It won't be tweaked or changed. 

 

Okay, so what is the rationale on missed field goal not resulting in a point when it touches an upright or crossbar?

14 hours ago, Tiny759 said:

It’s obviously not a huge issue, but it does look a bit silly when a kick misses, goes through the end zone and you get a point. But ya the cfl game is way better.

Nah.... watching 22 players stand and stare at a ball dribbling down the field is way more exciting.

1 hour ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Well, that silly rule has been around for 110 years & it has worked out pretty well.  You don't like it, fine. I just get tired of hearing it's silly (as you keep saying) because it isn't. 

Your opinion vs my opinion. Agree to disagree.

Many here saying it rewards a good drive and not a failure is understandable but with athletes getting better and better, what's considered 'close enough' to kick for the rouge will keep being further and further back. Others say , ' it doesn't happen that often so who cares' which is true but there are many things that might not happen in a game that are still dealt with in the rulebook. To simple ignore it and let it be, means you are opening yourself up to future issues. 

What I don't like is being called less of a fan of the CFL if I'm in support of a somewhat minor rule change. I understand the roots of the game and appreciate them, but that doesn't mean they can't ever be changed or one day be outgrown. We don't have to totally get rid of the Rouge, but its also okay to look at it and have the discussion.