Interesting that a couple of things I’ve written the past two days have been judged by some as decidedly anti-CFL.
The first was about how several CFL people were telling me how concerned they are by the lack of Canadian talent to fill out 20 roster spots at this time of year, once the injury bugs bites.
This was viewed by many as saying there are no good Canadian players, which of course there are. It's just an issue of quantity not quality. (It was amusing how may people wrote to me or posted messages certain that one of the unnamed CFL people complaining about Canadian talent was Argos GM Adam Rita. I won’t get into confirming or denying who I spoke to about this, but it wasn’t one official from one team).
The fact is, the issue I wrote about is absolutely real. In fact, I had a CFL executive write to me to say he was upset with my item because he thinks teams should be doing something about the problem, not complaining about it or looking for the quota to be cut. But this same executive agreed the problem exists and his team is facing it right now as well.
Are there solutions that could help to better cultivate the talent in this country? It would seem there should be since there’s no doubt that more and better football is being played in this country than 20 years ago. And yet the same complaints resonate from the CFL about not having enough good Canadians.
It's a story that requires more digging because the problem isn't just in the head of one or two lazy general managers.
The second story that touched a nerve was the one about the lack of returns for touchdowns in the CFL, including a span of 58 games and roughly 640 kickoffs without one being brought back for a score. This was interpreted as an attack on the CFL even though the story was high in its praise for cover teams, both in terms of the way they are coached and the athletes who participate on them. Nowhere did the article suggest there was anything wrong with the returners in the CFL. Yet some readers insisted this was a story drummed up to make the CFL look bad.
Part of sports reporting is looking for trends in the games. Some are good for the game and some are not. The bottom line is when you go four months, and more than 600 kickoffs without one being brought back for a score, you've got yourself a trend. And my job is to try and explain it, which I attempted to do without casting any negativity on the players and coaches in the CFL. The story is about how the advantage has swung to cover teams over return teams in the CFL. That is a completely legitimate story. No apologies from me on that one.
Back to the ratio topic for a minute. It seems nothing stirs debate in the CFL like a discussion of the Canadian quota. Over the years, I've gone back and forth on it with my own opinion. At one time I was an abolishionist who wanted to see the best players play. Right now I believe it’s probably necessary to have a quota because of the way the game is being marketed as a piece of Canadiana. And it makes the league unique, gives it some local flavour and forces teams to cultivate homegrown talent.
But I also understand those who hate it.
Now, since the quota topic creates such interest, here’s another way to look at it.
