Is the CFL considered an elite pro sports league, or is it more semi-pro, American Hockey League type sport?
When I was in London, England someone asked me where I was from, I said "British Columbia, Canada." He than asked me "How many pro sports teams does Vancouver have?"
I didnt know if he was asking me or quizing me, but I replied by saying, "One. The Vancouver Canucks, a hockey team."
Should I have maybe said two rather than just one? Should I have mentioned the BC Lions?
blubs
Active Member
Posts: 445
Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2003 12:26 pm
I would have said three the Canucks, Lions, and doesn't Vancouver have a pro Lacrosse team. The thing is we live in Canada and the C.F.L is a pro sport league. It will never be in the same catagory as the N.F.L thank god cant stand N.F.L. As for elite league I think it is. Our Canadian players are just as good as I think as any in the N.F.L . There are a few of our boys playing N.F.L. So yeah I would have said the Lions.
Johnny-Canuck
Forum Junkie
Posts: 580
Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2003 2:08 pm
blubs wrote:
I would have said three the Canucks, Lions, and doesn't Vancouver have a pro Lacrosse team. The thing is we live in Canada and the C.F.L is a pro sport league. It will never be in the same catagory as the N.F.L thank god cant stand N.F.L. As for elite league I think it is. Our Canadian players are just as good as I think as any in the N.F.L . There are a few of our boys playing N.F.L. So yeah I would have said the Lions.
But I'm reffering to the "Big 4" of North American sports. Baseball, Basketball, Football and Hockey. If I were from Jacksonville, Florida I would say we have 1 pro team, the Jaguars of the NFL. Lacrosse doesnt really count in this category because its not considered a very elite sport.
mike2277
Active Member
Posts: 218
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2003 5:28 am
Any league in which the athletes are paid a salary is a professional league. That includes the big 4, but also takes in the minor leagues of baseball and hockey, the CFL, arena football, NFL Europe, the Continental Basketball League(until if folded) etc. I would classify the National Lacrosse League as semi-pro, as the players absolutely have to work a "real" job in order to survive. I think the low end salary in the CFL is twenty-five or thirty thousand dollars. Not much, but if you work in the off-season it's not bad.
blubs
Active Member
Posts: 445
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2003 9:21 am
Mike wouldnt you consider CFL semi pro too by your definition, and I see what you are getting at. The players most if not all of them have a second job. I could probably live on the lower pay scale of the CFL quite comfortably I might add. So what do you think CFL semi pro or pro? I mean by your defintion.
mike2277
Active Member
Posts: 218
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2003 9:58 am
Definitely pro.
Johnny-Canuck
Forum Junkie
Posts: 580
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2003 3:52 pm
mike2277 wrote:
Definitely pro.
I would have to say semi-pro. The CFL is like the AHL of football. When a player struggles in the NFL, the CFL picks him up. Same with the NHL, when a player does poorly they send him to the AHL until he improves. Nearly all the players in the CFL (Except Ricky Ray) are really just NFL rejects, and fans cant get too excited once their team gets a big star, cause sooner or later he will just end up in the NFL.
Why doesnt the NFL consider expansion in Canada Anyways? Stadiums would sell out in Vancouver, Toronto, and (especially) Calgary and Edmonton.
blubs
Active Member
Posts: 445
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2003 4:33 pm
Johnny-Canuck wrote:
[ Why doesnt the NFL consider expansion in Canada Anyways? Stadiums would sell out in Vancouver, Toronto, and (especially) Calgary and Edmonton.
I for one would hate to see that. After living in Burnaby and Langley for 8 yrs I could see the nfl going there. BC seems to be big on the NFL. As is T.O AS for Calgary and Edmonton I think the Market would be too small to host a NFL team the cost of the tickets would be just too bloody high.
I am a huge ESKIE fan and I do not want Ricky Ray to go to the NFL I did hear at one point he was talking to the KC Cheifs
Johnny-Canuck
Forum Junkie
Posts: 580
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2003 5:00 pm
blubs wrote:
Johnny-Canuck wrote:
[ Why doesnt the NFL consider expansion in Canada Anyways? Stadiums would sell out in Vancouver, Toronto, and (especially) Calgary and Edmonton.
I for one would hate to see that. After living in Burnaby and Langley for 8 yrs I could see the nfl going there. BC seems to be big on the NFL. As is T.O AS for Calgary and Edmonton I think the Market would be too small to host a NFL team the cost of the tickets would be just too bloody high. I am a huge ESKIE fan and I do not want Ricky Ray to go to the NFL I did hear at one point he was talking to the KC Cheifs
I too, have heard that both Vancouver and Toronto are big for the NFL (Hmm, strange how the 2 biggest fan bases in Canada for the NFL have the smallest for the CFL...). But the chances of the NFL going to Vancouver or Toronto is slim to none, if they were considering it they probably would have done it about ten years ago, the time the NBA expanded (Semi unsuccesfully) into Canada. But there's no real reason why the NFL wont go to Vancouver or Toronto. Both cities have very appropriate stadium capacities as well as fan bases. The only legitimate reason why the NFL wont come to Canada is because they want to keep the league as All-American as they can. However, if the CFL allowed US entry into the league (Something that should never have happened) than I think the NFL owes something to us.
mike2277
Active Member
Posts: 218
Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2003 7:21 am
Johnny-Canuck wrote:
mike2277 wrote:
Definitely pro.
I would have to say semi-pro.
If you get paid enough to live on it is pro. The American Hockey League is definitely pro. All those hockey leagues in Europe are pro. The CFL, the Arena Football league are pro. You don't have to be in the highest profile (or highest paid) league to be considered a professional athlete.
blubs
Active Member
Posts: 445
Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2003 7:48 am
I think I will stick to sports posting lol politics aint my forte. Anyway after living in BC I have often wondered why the nfl is so big there even high school football you have four downs. my question is why. why does HS football have four downs in BC.
Yo know what I would love to see in BC is pro ball but that would never happen too close to Seattle.
Mike I know what you are saying but can a person call arena football a sport. I admit I have not watch much of it I dont even think we get on tsn or sports net. but from the times I have seen it all I can say is ''yawn''.
mike2277
Active Member
Posts: 218
Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2003 8:07 am
[
Why doesnt the NFL consider expansion in Canada Anyways? Stadiums would sell out in Vancouver, Toronto, and (especially) Calgary and Edmonton.[/quote]
Okay, where do I start? The NFL is NEVER coming to Canada...at least not in my lifetime(and I have a good 35 or 40 years left)
In the near term, there isn't even an NFL team in Los Angeles. This is the largest (or 2nd largest?) television market in the U.S. The next expansion will definitely be to L.A. Keep in mind that California has a larger population than all of Canada. The NFL is not a gate driven league. Their big bucks come from their television contracts.
Even if Calgary or Edmonton could guarantee sell-outs every game, the NFL is not interested in being in such a tiny television market. There are any number of mid-sized American cities that would be a better fit.
If there was only one Canadian team, and it could be marketed as "Canada's Team", you could argue that you now have a television market of 32 million people.
Could Vancouver support an NFL team? How big is the stadium? I've only been to Vancouver twice and don't know enough to make a judgement. Living sixty miles down the 401 from Toronto, however, I feel well qualified to make a judgement about that, and I doubt it would work for long. Skydome is very small by NFL standards (and is a lousy venue for football) so a new stadium would have to be part of the equation at some point.
As for fan support, I'm sure the games would sell out....at first. If you had a consistently good team with a legitimate shot to go all the way every year things would be fine. If you put together a couple of loosing seasons things would start getting tough. Ask the Blue Jays. The Craptors(I mean Raptors) are about to find this out if they don't turn things around soon.
The amazing and often times inexplicable support for the Maple Leafs has created the misconception that Toronto is great sports town. Toronto is, in fact, an exceedingly crappy sports town. It is also a suprisingly crappy hockey town. Toronto is a great NHL town and nothing else.....And before all the basketball fans get up in my grill....wait a couple of years.
mike2277
Active Member
Posts: 218
Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2003 8:16 am
blubs wrote:
I think I will stick to sports posting lol politics aint my forte. Anyway after living in BC I have often wondered why the nfl is so big there even high school football you have four downs. my question is why. why does HS football have four downs in BC. Yo know what I would love to see in BC is pro ball but that would never happen too close to Seattle. Mike I know what you are saying but can a person call arena football a sport. I admit I have not watch much of it I dont even think we get on tsn or sports net. but from the times I have seen it all I can say is ''yawn''.
When I was in highschool, there were a few years when someone went completely insane, and we played 4 downs for 10 metres!(whoever heard of metric in football?) Is that what they're doing in B.C.?
As for Arena football.....be fair. Just because something sucks really, really, bad doesn't mean it isn't a sport.
blubs
Active Member
Posts: 445
Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2003 8:43 pm
I really shouldnt say arena football sucks It really isnt that bad a game. But to me it just isnt football. I guess maybe if they showed more of it on tsn or sportsnet I could become a fan.
In BC I beleive its ten yard god metric would suck. But why did you guys in ontario go for the four down format so to speak. was it because the play book was easier? I wish someone could explain it.
I will tell one thing I sure wish they would show more Aussie rules sure do like that game.
mike2277
Active Member
Posts: 218
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2003 5:22 am
The metric thing was only an experiment for one or two seasons. This was around 1977-78 so metric had just been in use for a few years. We quickly went back to 3 downs for 10 yards. I don't believe in was a provincial thing...just in the Kitchener-Waterloo area....but I could be wrong.
I think it was more of attempt to use metric than it was a desire to move to 4 down football. The crazy thing was the fields were still marked out in yards, and the down markers had a 10 metre chain. It was all very confusing. I still have nightmares.
