GLOBAL PLAYERS MUST PLAY FOR CFL 2.0 TO GAIN TRACTION
The league should mandate that at least one international must be on the field
Please regard this column as a Global Transformation Hub.
If it were mandatory for some foreign players to be starters, as opposed to token fillers of rosters and Gatorade jugs, the CFL'S global draft would instantly become worthwhile, intriguing and fabulous fun.
So here is the one essential change that would enable the CFL 2.0 initiative to finally become meaningful: Mandate that at least one global player must be on the field at all times.
Offence. Defence. Special teams. Problem solved.
The fatal flaw in the current format is that teams are simply required to draft and dress global players, without an accompanying obligation to put them on the field — the only place where they can make an impact and a difference.
As it stands, all 24 offensive or defensive starters emanate from Canada or the United States, to the invariable exclusion of the globals.
This can be easily fixed by tweaking the roster composition.
Maintain the minimum mandate of seven starting Canadians. Insert one starting global player. Reduce the number of American starters from 17 to 16.
If each team were to delete its 17th-best American — surely a manageable change — the global draft would go from being a source of mockery and dismissiveness (see: Friday's column) to an event of considerable importance. Presto!
Just like that, the global influence would increase exponentially.
Due to the possibility of injuries, teams would need to dress a backup for each global starter on offence and defence.
The result: FOUR global players — the same number each team was obligated to select on Thursday.
The CFL would then have something meaningful to sell to interested parties in faraway lands, as opposed to hype, hope and hot air.
Instantly, there would be an incentive for television networks in other countries or on other continents to show CFL games.
Then, and only then, can the global initiative begin to realize the potential that is touted by commissioner Randy Ambrosie and other proponents of this program.
Until the global players are more visible, there will not be an appreciable change. The entire concept will reek of tokenism and continue to be an obligatory, unwieldy exercise.
It could be argued in rebuttal that the existing ratio creates a scenario whereby Canadian players are tokens. The crucial distinction, though, is that teams draft Canadians knowing that at least seven of them must start and that others will be required on special teams. There is a defined purpose to the proceedings.
Global players are likewise drafted, but then what? It is all so murky.
The infusion of a clear global influence would create appetizing matchups and, quite conceivably, more offence in a league that could use more sizzle.
Conventionally, there is a high concentration of Americans on CFL defences. It isn't uncommon for 10 of the 12 defensive starters to hail from south of the border.
Such an imbalance inhibits offences by reducing the likelihood of favourable matchups.
Now, suppose that each defence were to include one global starter. Imagine the degree to which offensive co-ordinators would plot and scheme and salivate.
What if, say, Saskatchewan Roughriders wide receiver Shaq Evans were to line up against a global cornerback?
In such an instance, quarterback Cody Fajardo wouldn't be able to call for a snap quickly enough. Bombs away!
The defence, of course, would have to compensate by shading the safety over to the side of the defensive player who is deemed to be vulnerable.
That would leave speedy slotback Kyran Moore one-on-one with an unfortunate defensive halfback, without an annoying safety to get in the way.
More offence. More points. More explosion plays to tweet, retweet and, hopefully, engage a younger audience that is accustomed to 51-48 shootouts that a video game — Madden — can offer.
Another scenario to ponder: Suppose that the wide-side global receiver were to line up against an international cornerback. Instant isolation shot.
Show THAT on television in Mexico, France, Germany, Finland, etc.
Get the picture?
The automatic objection, of course, is this: At this stage, global players generally fall into the not-ready-for-prime-time category.
But if that is the case, why are they even dressing for games in the first place?
Because teams are not obligated to play the global draftees, they are unlikely to receive meaningful reps during practice sessions. How are they to improve?
The solution, then, is to implement a format that compels coaches to include global players in the game plans.
The global program can work — but only if there is an identifiable path to playing time.
Failing that, utilization of the global players will continue to be a foreign concept to most coaches. The globals will continue to dress, without any realistic prospect of success. And what is to be gained from that?