{"id":163189,"date":"2025-09-23T06:47:07","date_gmt":"2025-09-23T06:47:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/163189\/"},"modified":"2025-09-23T06:47:07","modified_gmt":"2025-09-23T06:47:07","slug":"3downnation-contributors-analyze-upcoming-changes-to-cfl-game","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/163189\/","title":{"rendered":"3DownNation contributors analyze upcoming changes to CFL game"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>Photo courtesy: CFL<\/p>\n

The CFL announced a number of upcoming rule changes<\/a> on Monday, which we\u2019ve laid out here along with opinions from a number of our contributors. Don\u2019t forget to also check out the\u00a03DownNation Podcast<\/a> for more discussion on these tweaks.<\/p>\n

Rule change for 2026: a single point will no longer be awarded when a missed field goal attempt goes wide of the goalposts or a punt or kickoff sails through the back or side of the end zone without being touched by a returner. A single point will still be awarded if a returner takes a knee in the end zone on a punt, kickoff, or missed field goal.<\/p>\n

JC ABBOTT: It is what it is. I have always been a defender of the rouge as a reward for field position gained, and not a \u201creward for failure.\u201d The critical thinking skills needed to make that distinction have long been in short supply, and this fixes an optics problem for the league.<\/p>\n

RYAN BALLANTINE: Finally! I got my wish from 2020<\/a>! Ensuring the rouge is downed in bounds makes way more sense than just allowing it to be kicked through the end zone.<\/p>\n

GRIFF BORDIGNON: As cool and unique as the one-point rouge is, I like the idea of making it a tad harder to earn that point.<\/p>\n

SANTINO FILOSO: I\u2019m a rouge purist <\/a>and that hasn\u2019t changed. The rouge doesn\u2019t reward failure, it rewards the offence for getting into range to score. Plus, why would you ever want to take points off the board? This one gets two thumbs down from me.<\/p>\n

JOEL GASSON: I like the idea of having to concede the rouge. I thought we\u2019d only see it on missed field goals but there wasn\u2019t really a hill for me to die on either way here.<\/p>\n

PABLO HERRERA-VERGARA: I preferred the idea of the rouge only being counted outside of the last three minutes of each half, which would have created new possibilities for coaches to get back into one-possession games.<\/p>\n

JOHN HODGE: The rouge was never awarded for missing field goals, it was awarded for kicking the ball through the back of the end zone \u2014 a subtle but important distinction. With that said, I like this change. The rouge still exists as a unique element of the game, though it will be scored less frequently.<\/p>\n

ANDREW HOSKINS: I always wanted to keep the rouge, but have it earned instead of given away. This accomplishes that.<\/p>\n

BRENDAN McGUIRE: There\u2019s nothing wrong with the rouge as it is but I could see this creating more plays where the ball is punted into the end zone and then punted back out. That\u2019s a good thing!<\/p>\n

Rule change for 2026: all stadiums will have team benches on opposite sides of the field. Currently, the teams are on the same side on the field in B.C., Hamilton, Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal.<\/p>\n

ABBOTT: This was the biggest slam dunk possible.<\/p>\n

BALLANTINE: Why was this not always this way? It always seemed wrong.<\/p>\n

BORDIGNON: I\u2019m a fan of this, even if it means Ryan Dinwiddie\u2019s notorious kicks to opponents\u2019 faces are now a thing of the past<\/a>. If the Argonauts opt for the west sideline, they\u2019ll force their opponents to sit directly in the afternoon sun \u2014 a subtle but significant home-field advantage that could impact any game.<\/p>\n

FILOSO: I don\u2019t mind this change at all and frankly feels long overdue. Thankfully, we\u2019ve never witnessed a huge brawl between teams on the same sideline but that potential always lurked. This change eliminates that danger.\u00a0<\/p>\n

GASSON: I find it funny this got included here but it\u2019s an obvious change that should have been made years ago for a variety of reasons.<\/p>\n

HERRERA-VERGARA: This is something that should have been changed years ago \u2014 an absolute no-brainer for me.<\/p>\n

HODGE: This change will not only help stop brawls, it will also prevent players from having to run 75 yards to the huddle when the ball is near the end zone opposite their bench.<\/p>\n

HOSKINS: This is move that I fully support. Having both teams on the same sideline should never have been a thing in the first place.<\/p>\n

McGUIRE: This is an easy one only included in all of this to deflect blame and attention away from the other changes.<\/p>\n

Rule change for 2026: the timing system will be changed to a 35-second play clock that begins automatically when the previous play is whistled dead. Currently, a 20-second play clock is used that doesn\u2019t start until it is whistled in manually by an official.<\/p>\n

ABBOTT: The 20-second play clock has always been one of those CFL myths that never reflected reality. This is a much-needed change, though I wouldn\u2019t be surprised if it is subject to further tinkering eventually. We could see slightly more time run off the clock in end-game scenarios, but as long as refs move at their usual snail\u2019s pace to blow the game clock in, the effect will be minimal.<\/p>\n

BALLANTINE: More consistency between plays all game long makes more sense. I\u2019d have kept the old timing system after the three minute warning, though. Allowing teams to kill more time late only lessens the last minute \u201cNo lead is safe!\u201d mentality.<\/p>\n

BORDIGNON: This can help speed up the game, but, as we\u2019ve seen in the NFL, it might lead to teams running down the clock much more quickly late in the game, which isn\u2019t an ideal scenario for the CFL\u2019s traditionally high-paced, wide-open style.<\/p>\n

FILOSO: I\u2019m on board with this as long the clock still stops after every play inside the three-minute mark. Otherwise, you\u2019ve just Americanized the game and set yourself up for endless boring finishes where leads are very much safe.<\/p>\n

GASSON: The 20-second play clock was a sham as it often took the officials 20-30 seconds just to start it. Some teams were very aware of this and used it to their advantage to kill time in the second half.<\/p>\n

HERRERA-VERGARA: I really like this rule outside of the last three minutes of the half. The Blue Bombers \u2014 among many teams \u2014 have become adept at wasting time in in games, so change was needed. The league the last three minutes the same, though.<\/p>\n

HODGE: We need more information about the last three minutes of halves and, frankly, the league should have done a better job of explaining this change in its press release. With that said, having more plays and less dawdling between them is certainly a positive.<\/p>\n

HOSKINS: I need to hear more about how they will run the last three minutes before I decide fully on this change. I don\u2019t mind the consistency of pushing the game forward but don\u2019t want to lose the dramatics of those final minutes of any half.<\/p>\n

McGUIRE: This clock should be 30 seconds and not 35. They will also have to add timeouts so the last three minutes don\u2019t mirror the NFL where teams get into victory formation much too early. Listening to former CFL coach George Cortez, simply having the officials spot the ball quicker would\u2019ve allowed the league to keep the 20-second clock, which I would\u2019ve preferred.<\/p>\n

Rule change for 2027: the goalposts will be moved to the back of the end zones.<\/p>\n

ABBOTT: The loss of the missed field goal return sucks \u2014 like really, really sucks \u2014 but the potential trade-offs in terms of increased offensive scoring are probably worth it, even if the CFL\u2019s projections end up being overly optimistic. It is truly staggering how little the middle of the end zone is used right now.<\/p>\n

BALLANTINE: This will mostly eliminate one of the most exciting plays in the CFL \u2014 the missed field goal return \u2014 and also force more punts. Who\u2019s ready to see coffin corner kicks from the 40-yard line?<\/p>\n

BORDIGNON: Essentially removing the threat of a missed field goal return does change the game, but it also gives late-game kicks higher stakes. If the game is tied, you can\u2019t miss and still win.<\/p>\n

FILOSO: I would\u2019ve liked to actually see the data the commissioner referenced in his press conference but I can\u2019t argue against the logic that it will be more aesthetically pleasing. Given that the CFL\u2019s own stats from this season <\/a>highlight that touchdown scoring is up, as are big plays and kick returns, I wonder if this was truly necessary. If it leads to less missed field goal returns \u2014 and it surely will \u2014 we will all lose out as those are some of the most exciting plays in the game.<\/p>\n

GASSON: It\u2019s pretty bold for the league to suggest this will lead to 60 more touchdowns per year, but for safety and play-calling at either end, I\u2019m for this change. When you\u2019re backed up, it\u2019s tough to get out when half the field isn\u2019t useable. Fewer obstacles for the passing game is good.<\/p>\n

HERRERA-VERGARA: I\u2019m ambiguous about this change. Is it going to create more offence? Yes. However, 60 more touchdowns? I don\u2019t see that happening. The missed field goals returns are a huge loss for the league, so we\u2019ll need to wait and see for this one.<\/p>\n

HODGE: I\u2019m mixed on this change. As it currently stands, teams enter field goal range at the opposition\u2019s 45 or 50-yard line. After this change, they\u2019ll need to get to the 30 or 35-yard line, which could very well lower scoring. Missed field goal returns will also become extremely rare, which sucks. However, I like how this change opens things up in the passing game and improves player safety.<\/p>\n

HOSKINS: I can\u2019t see this making the impact the commissioner talked about from a touchdowns perspective. With that said, if you shorten the field, you probably have to push the uprights back, too. It would have been silly to see teams kicking field goals from their own 40-yard line.<\/p>\n

McGUIRE: I get why they want to open up the middle of the field but this will eliminate virtually all missed field goal returns and I\u2019m not OK with that. Missed field goal returns might be the most exciting play in sports and we need more of them, not less. The whining about players being hurt by the uprights on the goal-line is a non-starter for me as it rarely ever happens. The risk might be even worse with receivers diving for catches at the back of the end zone.<\/p>\n

Rule change for 2027: the field will be shorted to 100 yards with 15-yard end zones. Currently, the field is 110 yards with 20-yard end zones. The field width of 65 yards will remain the same.<\/p>\n

ABBOTT: I don\u2019t mind the slightly shorter end zones for the sake of consistency across venues \u2014 Toronto\u2019s and Montreal\u2019s were a little short of a full 20 yards \u2014 but losing the 55-yard line is a kick in the nards. The 55-yard line is an iconic part of the CFL brand and sacrificing it to make scoring slightly more attainable seems like an error. With that said, the ability to play CFL games in a broader array of venues could be valuable down the line, though I\u2019m not convinced that\u2019s a smart path.<\/p>\n

BALLANTINE: There are a few benefits to this, including uniformity of field size league wide, but I wonder if this isn\u2019t being done to make porting the CFL into Madden easier. We\u2019ve always been told that making a CFL video game was more difficult because of the unique field size. Maybe this fixes that problem.<\/p>\n

BORDIGNON: This adjustment allows offences to start closer to the opponent\u2019s end zone, encouraging more aggressive play-calling and higher scoring. I like it.<\/p>\n

FILOSO: The smaller end zone is fine \u2014 especially since, in theory, the middle of it is now open for business \u2014 but I can\u2019t get over shortening the field to 100 yards. Who was pushing to change something that\u2019s been the same since 1896? It\u2019s against the history and tradition of the league and completely screws over U Sports and minor league football. When you remove things that typify the \u2018C\u2019 in CFL, what are you left with?<\/p>\n

GASSON: I\u2019m good with this. Uniform end zones are good and a longer field has only benefited the defence, as they\u2019ve evolved into more of a sit-back zone style.<\/p>\n

HERRERA-VERGARA: The smaller end zones make sense in order to be aligned with the goal posts moving backwards. However, that alone should have been enough. There was no need to reduce the field of play by 10 yards \u2014 it\u2019s one of the iconic elements of the Canadian football.<\/p>\n

HODGE: The (slightly) shortened end zones make sense to help with uniformity across the league but the 100-yard field is too American for me. This change was apparently not made with future U.S. expansion in mind<\/a> but consider me skeptical.<\/p>\n

HOSKINS: Not being able to see the \u201955\u2019 or \u2018C\u2019 on the field will be a gut punch. Of all the moves announced, this is the hardest one for me to swallow. The same-sized end zones is good for consistency but I will shed a tear only having one 50-yard line.<\/p>\n

McGUIRE: I don\u2019t like it but I\u2019m also a dinosaur who still hates the designated hitter rule in baseball. I do like how this opens the door to playing in more venues around North America because variety is something the CFL needs more of. I\u2019m relieved the end zones are 15 yards and weren\u2019t shortened to 10 yards to match the NFL \u2014 that\u2019s a big difference.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Photo courtesy: CFL The CFL announced a number of upcoming rule changes on Monday, which we\u2019ve laid out…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":163190,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[437],"tags":[49,48,521,522,520,82],"class_list":{"0":"post-163189","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-cfl","8":"tag-ca","9":"tag-canada","10":"tag-canadian-football-league","11":"tag-canadianfootballleague","12":"tag-cfl","13":"tag-sports"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/163189","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=163189"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/163189\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/163190"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=163189"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=163189"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=163189"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}