Canadian Football League (CFL) Commissioner Stewart Johnston has a bold vision for the league, complete with new rules, a reconfigured playing field, and a clear eye on expansion. If he revises his end zone changes and keeps the goal posts at the goal line where they currently are, he can meet his expansion goals with less offence to the traditional fan base. And if he doesn’t, the result will be a league playing an over-hybridized version of football at odds with the Canadian amateur game.The commissioner shocked fans a year ago when he announced that the CFL was getting rid of its 20-yard end zones, reducing them to 15. Like the NFL, the field would be 100 yards long, and the goal posts would be moved to the back of the end zone. Soon thereafter, he announced a playoff format of multiple weeks that allowed eight teams to qualify. Some fans wondered why every team played 18 games to eliminate only one from the playoffs. What they should have caught is that the commissioner intends to have more teams when the changes take effect in 2027.A new eastern team would mean two teams would be eliminated from the playoffs. Alternatively, two new eastern teams and one new western team would leave a balanced league and ensure the regular season still means something. There are rumours about new teams in Quebec and Halifax, but there are other possibilities.Given the riches of the CFL’s new 2027 contract with DAZN and its low salary cap, the economics of running a CFL team in the United States are better than they were in the 1990s, the last time the league tried US expansion. Although Baltimore and Las Vegas now have NFL franchises, most other markets the league tried then are still there, should nostalgia or interest demand a return. Memphis, Shreveport, Birmingham, San Antonio, and Sacramento don’t have NFL teams. And, unlike 30 years ago, St. Louis and Oakland don’t have them either. These and other markets are possible for any ownership group with a good business plan..We should see this potential as the real reason for the field changes, more so than the analysis Johnston claims the league conducted. The CFL’s field is 65 yards wide, compared with the NFL’s 53.3-yard-wide field. That 11.7-yard difference is easier to accommodate than the current CFL field that is 30 yards longer (10 yards more in each end zone and 10 more in between them). The new configuration would be only ten yards longer than an NFL field, which is also easier to squeeze into US stadiums.There are downsides, however. The league’s current teams, including attendance leaders Winnipeg and Saskatchewan, designed stadiums with the current field dimensions in mind. Now there will be a lot of space between the playing field and the end zone seats.I moonlight as a security guard in Pil Country at Mosaic Stadium in Regina, where five levels of fans stand in front of metal shelves where they can put their beer. It’s a great place to watch a game when the action gets close, but if these field changes take place, that will never happen anymore.It’s true that moving the goal posts to the back of the end zone might allow more plays up the middle when teams are close to scoring, which is the cited reason for the change. But removing one-quarter of the end zone space will also limit options, perhaps even more so.While it’s true that having the goal posts at the back might be more familiar to American audiences, that doesn’t mean they’ll gravitate to the Canadian game any more because of that change. It’s not the place of the CFL to be a cheaper version of the NFL with more affordable tickets and lower-paid players. The value of the game is its exciting nature and the novelty of a different way to do football..Currently, if a long field goal is missed, a returner might catch it in the end zone and run it a long way back. But if the goal posts are at the back, that won’t happen anymore unless a field goal attempt falls short. An exciting, unique part of the Canadian game will be all but gone. Putting the goal posts at the back of a 15-yard end zone will create the largest dead zone in football. This is the awkward space on the field where a team is too close to the opponent’s end zone for a traditional punt and too far for a reliable field goal attempt. The commissioner hopes more teams will try to keep the ball on third down. It’s more likely we’ll see a few more gambles but even more short punts.If the league wants to accommodate franchises in American venues with playing areas too cramped to hold the traditional long field, there’s a better way to do it. Follow through with reducing the 110-yard field to 100 yards. Then allow stadiums to have 15- to 25-yard end zones, whatever they can fit. The CFL had 25-yard end zones before shrinking them to 20 yards in 1986.With a 25-yard end zone, the total length of the playing field will be the same as it is now. The space lost in a shorter field is claimed by longer end zones. The fans in Pil Country might still see some passes caught near the back of the end zone. And, either way, they are close to where the playing field ends instead of looking at concrete or turf without lines.The fact that some stadiums would have shorter end zones than others is no big deal. In any given game, each team will have the same limitations, so there’s nothing unfair about it. Some personal stats might be slightly distorted, given less room for touchdown passes for some quarterbacks and receivers, but that is not a big deal. Although Major League Baseball sets field dimensions, it accommodates differences between ballparks. The CFL could do the same. It’s easy.Football Canada, which governs amateur football, has rejected the CFL’s proposed new field dimensions and goal post movements. However, with the revision suggested here, it might just come on board. Let’s hope the commissioner has the humility to revise his plans, keep the game exciting, and not offend a significant portion of Canadian football fans.
