On Tuesday I started a series of columns with my thoughts on the CFL changes announced Monday. This is my third column.
Today I look at the moving of the goalposts to the back of the shortened end zone.
The official announcement provided several reasons for the move:
To allow passing offences to target the middle of the end zone and to make settling for field goals less attractive, goalposts will be moved to the back of end zones. The shift removes an obstruction that impacts the middle third of the end zone, helping to drive more of football’s most exciting play: touchdowns. The change also benefits teams pinned deep in their own territory, allowing offences – previously limited by the goalposts – to expand their playbooks, as well as enabling punters to kick more freely from their own end zone without interference.
Moving the goalposts removes an obstruction in the field of play, heightening player safety, while also offering more direct sightlines to big plays in the end zone for fans in-stadium and on broadcast.
Projected gains of repositioned goalposts:
- 10 per cent more end zone completions
- 60 more touchdowns per season
With regard to allowing offences to target the middle of the field, Commissioner Stewart Johnston said on CKRM’s SportsCage that it was overwhelming how many more passes went to the left and right side of the end zones versus the middle of the field. He said there were less than half as many attempts to the middle as to the left and right. He said it is common sense there are less passes to the middle because of the obstruction of the goalposts.
With regard to the issue of the goalposts as an obstruction B.C. Lion quarterback Nathan Rourke effectively addressed the issue in 3DownNation:
“I don’t think that [head coach] Buck [Pierce] and I have ever sat down on the night before day three when we put in our red zone stuff and said, ‘What do we do about the goalposts in the middle of the field? That just doesn’t happen. If anything, offensively, we’re using that as a vehicle to be able to get ourselves open — it’s an extra person to be able to rub things off. It was the first time I hit the goalposts this year, that was my own fault. Looking at it, probably would have been good, it probably would have been an interception,” Rourke said.
As I indicated in yesterday’s column, shortening the end zone to accommodate the move of the goalposts also means a reduction in the number and type of pass routes that can be run by offences.
On percentages NFL stats say the highest percentage of passes are thrown to the right. It varies by quarterback but is generally thought to reflect right handed quarterbacks throw more to the right.
I would like to know what the percentages on throws are for areas of the field away from the end zone in the CFL.
My general observation of CFL football is that a higher percentage of passes go to the left and the right up and down the field as opposed to the middle.
Most passes to running backs and screen passes are to the left or right.
Most passes to wide receivers are on the outside.
Only slotbacks catch more of their passes over the middle.
There is a good reason for quarterbacks, especially young quarterbacks, to be careful about passing over the middle. The greatest risk of interceptions is in the middle.
With 81 games in the CFL regular season, the projected increase of 60 touchdowns would mean less than one extra touchdown per game. I would not change the game significantly for less than seven points per game.
On the issue of moving the goalposts to avoid teams settling for field goals I do not think coaching strategies will change. The long distance range for most kickers is 50 - 55 yards. Because kickers can normally kick farther than 55 yards I think the range will become 55 - 60 yards. (For some kickers such as Sergio Castillo the range would be at least 65 yards.) While there may be more misses from the increased distances teams will not have to worry about missed field goals being returned as the ball will have been kicked through the end zone. My projected new range would mean the ball would be snapped from the 33 - 38 yard lines. Coaches may take more gambles at the 35 yard line but I doubt they will gamble often at the 45 yard line.
If the league wanted to discourage field goals I have a simpler alternative that would not require moving the goalposts. The league could reduce the distance between the uprights to make it harder to kick field goals. Field size integrity could be maintained and there would be fewer field goals.
With regard to player safety it is a rare, rare game where a player collides with the goalpost. As Rourke points out it can be used by offences to create opportunities.
On sightlines I can only say the goalpost, crossbar and uprights have never bothered my observation of the game.
I think the CFL should make use of the crossbar being on the goalline by mounting a camera on the crossbar to give a view directly down at the goalline. It would provide a new perspective on goalline plays. Many views from the side are obscured by players. While there will be times an overhead view could be equally obscured there will be lots of plays where you can follow the ball carrier from above.
