Blue Bombers - 2025 Regular Season - Discussion Thread

[Noeller]

The biggest issue is that this is clearly just the first step... They'll get people used to this and then move in to the spicier meatballs like the 4th down...

[Goalie]

7 minutes ago, Noeller said:

The biggest issue is that this is clearly just the first step... They'll get people used to this and then move in to the spicier meatballs like the 4th down...

In its current form the cfl is only sustainable in Winnipeg and maybe Regina (lots of ppl dressed as green seats since Covid) and nowhere else. That appears to be the reality. I’m not sure how old you are, gonna assume late 30s early 40s… I’m in that range, we need to accept that the cfl can’t survive on us and dad really. You need the young ppl and that appears to be a problem league wide. Even here eventho it appears there are younger ppl there is lots of older ones like you and I are getting. Now do I think this attracts younger ppl? Hell to the no x 1000. Attracting ppl to games is market specific 

Edited 19 hours ago by Goalie

[Sard]

38 minutes ago, Goalie said:

In its current form the cfl is only sustainable in Winnipeg and maybe Regina (lots of ppl dressed as green seats since Covid) and nowhere else. That appears to be the reality. I’m not sure how old you are, gonna assume late 30s early 40s… I’m in that range, we need to accept that the cfl can’t survive on us and dad really. You need the young ppl and that appears to be a problem league wide. Even here eventho it appears there are younger ppl there is lots of older ones like you and I are getting. Now do I think this attracts younger ppl? Hell to the no x 1000. Attracting ppl to games is market specific 

That's the big concern though, they're making these changes which will do nothing to attract new fans, while at the same time upsetting the existing ones.  The rules are not and have never been the issue with regard to attracting and retaining fans.  The effort that the marketing teams put in, the game day experience (see Winnipeg), and to an extent the results on the field (see Edmonton for the negative side) are what will bring people to the stadiums and drive revenue.  Even if these rule changes did drive up the scoring and 50 points became a regular thing, it would do nothing to attract new fans.  These changes are short sighted and lazy as far as I'm concerned.

[SpeedFlex27]

18 minutes ago, Sard said:

That's the big concern though, they're making these changes which will do nothing to attract new fans, while at the same time upsetting the existing ones.  The rules are not and have never been the issue with regard to attracting and retaining fans.  The effort that the marketing teams put in, the game day experience (see Winnipeg), and to an extent the results on the field (see Edmonton for the negative side) are what will bring people to the stadiums and drive revenue.  Even if these rule changes did drive up the scoring and 50 points became a regular thing, it would do nothing to attract new fans.  These changes are short sighted and lazy as far as I'm concerned.

This is a move to be able to play the game in the US where the money is. There's no money in Canada. The economy is in the crapper. People don't have a lot of spending money. A team in Halifax will bring in minimal new revenue.

I think a merger is in the works here. If the UFL doesn't fold, the CFL may want to be a part of that, If it folds then they can put new CFL teams in stadiums down there. I saw a picture of the new CFL field fitting perfectly in the domed stadium in St. Louis. Which means it'll fit in almost every UFL stadium except (maybe) the one in Dallas that plays in a baseball stadium. . 

Edited 18 hours ago by SpeedFlex27

[brett_c_b]

14 hours ago, Sard said:

One of the things they are using to try and sell the goalpost move is that their analytics says there will be 60 more TDs per year... that's less than 1 per game (72 games per year), but did they measure how many less field goals there will be because you need to get up inside the 30 yard line before you try for one?  If there are 2 less field goals per game, the change is awash, but I believe that the change of kicks happening from the 45 yard line (and sometimes further) to the 30 yard line will reduce the number of field goals by far more, so now you've reduced scoring overall and made the game less exciting.

Sure TDs are more exciting than field goals, but multiple lead changes because of more opportunities to scored is also more exciting.  Overall 0.83 more TD per game is not going to be more exciting than the lead changing 10 times (like the Edmonton & Hamilton game last week).

I just want your math on 72 games

[Atomic]

46 minutes ago, brett_c_b said:

I just want your math on 72 games

18 x 4

Missing the three 3-game weeks 

[Sard]

1 hour ago, brett_c_b said:

I just want your math on 72 games

My mistake, that should have been 81 games... 9 teams, 18 games each, divided by 2 because each game is played by 2 teams.  So 60 TDs over 81 games is only 0.74 TDs per game, so it's even worse than I thought.

[brett_c_b]

44 minutes ago, Sard said:

My mistake, that should have been 81 games... 9 teams, 18 games each, divided by 2 because each game is played by 2 teams.  So 60 TDs over 81 games is only 0.74 TDs per game, so it's even worse than I thought.

Then minus a few for the missed field goal touchdowns we will lose

[Sard]

2 hours ago, brett_c_b said:

Then minus a few for the missed field goal touchdowns we will lose

That was kinda my point originally, as much as their analytics are saying that the changes will add 60 TD per season, that's less than a TD per game (5.185 points per game), but they didn't take into account the number of field goals that won't be scored, so overall scoring will go down.  Even more if you take out missed field goal touchdowns as you suggest.

I think they are using the increase in TDs as a way to try and justify the changes they wanted to make anyway, but they didn't actually do the math.  Sure, 60 TDs sounds impressive, but when you break it down per game, the argument falls apart.

[blue85gold]

9 minutes ago, Sard said:

That was kinda my point originally, as much as their analytics are saying that the changes will add 60 TD per season, that's less than a TD per game (5.185 points per game), but they didn't take into account the number of field goals that won't be scored, so overall scoring will go down.  Even more if you take out missed field goal touchdowns as you suggest.

I think they are using the increase in TDs as a way to try and justify the changes they wanted to make anyway, but they didn't actually do the math.  Sure, 60 TDs sounds impressive, but when you break it down per game, the argument falls apart.

It is all made up math so it doesn't really matter, but we don't know specifically what they included or excluded.

[rebusrankin]

Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, my friends. Forty per cent of all people know that.

[ShyGuy]

There is lots of weird math that is going on

The league is suggesting that the presence of the goal posts along the goal line is somehow surpressing scoring, but teams are 221/360 for red zone opportunities (61.4%) this year. I can't find the NFL as a league average, but in 2024 that rate would put the CFL at number 10, behind the Panthers at 62% and above the Packers at 59%... and none of those teams have to deal with goal posts.

[Bigblue204]

Just now, ShyGuy said:

There is lots of weird math that is going on

The league is suggesting that the presence of the goal posts along the goal line is somehow surpressing scoring, but teams are 221/360 for red zone opportunities (61.4%) this year. I can't find the NFL as a league average, but in 2024 that rate would put the CFL at number 10, behind the Panthers at 62% and above the Packers at 59%... and none of those teams have to deal with goal posts.

I saw some guy on twitter that said moving the goal posts will open up 1 3rd of the endzone lol. 

[ShyGuy]

Just now, Bigblue204 said:

I saw some guy on twitter that said moving the goal posts will open up 1 3rd of the endzone lol. 

CFL already has two rules that help in the red zone... major penalties are no longer applied at half the distance and that a big one, and 1 yard off the LOS for defenses is huge... RZ production is up 4.4 points over last year so far this year.

[K-Shack]

23 hours ago, wbbfan said:

WRs have used the uprights countless times late in plays for picks on DBs and get open as well.

Without the uprights, Jade Etienne wouldn't have had any Bomber touchdowns! I was thinking of the Jade Etienne game when I heard the announcement. A fond memory in an otherwise unremarkable career with the Bombers. 

 

[Blue In BC]

On 2025-09-22 at 11:02 AM, Booch said:

hene....the need for nore offence and going for it...no?

I see your point....but the pro's and cons likely balance out

And really...how many missed FG for a TD do we see a yr...not like its an every game ...multiple times thing

Hardly any go for a TD but the returner has to make a decision based on possible field position gained by not giving up the single. Goal post at the back of the end zone means a missed FG has to be short in order to be returned at all. It virtually eliminates the chance of a rouge by going wide. Many a game was won or lost by that rouge on a missed FG.

[Blue28]

1 hour ago, blue85gold said:

It is all made up math so it doesn't really matter, but we don't know specifically what they included or excluded.

I agree. It seems like a shady way of changing the rules so that the league can open up future opportunity to more align with the NFL ruleset - possibilities including farm system for the NFL, a partnership (and thus fully integrating into the NFL ruleset), or even worse - selling out the league to the NFL - where they could eventually move our teams out of our cities. Yes, I am thinking the worst... but nothing else makes sense. 

[Noeller]

1 minute ago, Blue28 said:

I agree. It seems like a shady way of changing the rules so that the league can open up future opportunity to more align with the NFL ruleset - possibilities including farm system for the NFL, a partnership (and thus fully integrating into the NFL ruleset), or even worse - selling out the league to the NFL - where they could eventually move our teams out of our cities. Yes, I am thinking the worst... but nothing else makes sense. 

You're absolutely spot on ..

[Super Duper Negatron]

1 hour ago, ShyGuy said:

There is lots of weird math that is going on

The league is suggesting that the presence of the goal posts along the goal line is somehow surpressing scoring, but teams are 221/360 for red zone opportunities (61.4%) this year. I can't find the NFL as a league average, but in 2024 that rate would put the CFL at number 10, behind the Panthers at 62% and above the Packers at 59%... and none of those teams have to deal with goal posts.

Don't forget the endzones will also be smaller now.

This whole thing has the feel of "vibe commish-ing" rather than anything based on real numbers,

Edited 2 hours ago by Super Duper Negatron

[ShyGuy]

No one has been able to describe even a single reason why the NFL has any interest in any business that is CFL related.

The NFL already has a feeder system, it's called the NCAA. The vast majority of players coming into the NFL are from there, there are maybe a handful of players who fall through the cracks and end up in the CFL and then get another shot that way. Heck, with the advent of NIL there are probably 30+ teams that are paying more to their players than a cap-compliant CFL team would be paying to theirs. 

The only two markets they probably care about is Toronto, which has close ties to the Bills, and Vancouver, who seem to favor the Seahawks. Winnipeg is reasonably close to the Vikings, I'm not sure what East of Ontario favors but i'm guessing whatever team is dominate the time... I can't imagine Quebec catching on with an NFL football team. Alberta and Saskatchewan are both quite far away from any NFL markets, and not desirable media markets. 

[JohnnyAbonny]

1 hour ago, ShyGuy said:

No one has been able to describe even a single reason why the NFL has any interest in any business that is CFL related.

The NFL already has a feeder system, it's called the NCAA. The vast majority of players coming into the NFL are from there, there are maybe a handful of players who fall through the cracks and end up in the CFL and then get another shot that way. Heck, with the advent of NIL there are probably 30+ teams that are paying more to their players than a cap-compliant CFL team would be paying to theirs. 

The only two markets they probably care about is Toronto, which has close ties to the Bills, and Vancouver, who seem to favor the Seahawks. Winnipeg is reasonably close to the Vikings, I'm not sure what East of Ontario favors but i'm guessing whatever team is dominate the time... I can't imagine Quebec catching on with an NFL football team. Alberta and Saskatchewan are both quite far away from any NFL markets, and not desirable media markets. 

This exactly, the NFL doesn’t care about the CFL one iota besides maybe Tor.  Even then not really since the Bills got their new stadium. 

This is about merging with the UFL or attracting smaller American markets. 
 

The NFL gave the CFL a loan however many years ago, after which they still had zero interest in the league up here in any way.
If they didn’t care about it then, what would make anyone think they want to absorb it now when the NFL is billions of dollars richer than it was at the time?