Talk:Canadian Football League

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Canada / Sport (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian sport.
WikiProject Sports (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports, a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of sport-related topics on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Canadian football (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canadian football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canadian football and the Canadian Football League on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
The current Canadian football collaboration is Demetris Summers

Category:Canadian Football League[edit]

See Category talk:Canadian Football League. heqs 07:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Paragraph One: Since when is the CFL a two-hand touch league? I've been a follower for over 50 years and to my eyes it looks like there is some serious tackling going on there. (talk) 16:09, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Championships, CFL vs Grey Cup (In infobox)[edit]

It appears very clear to me, but numerous users keep trying to change the League Champions information in the info box to reflect the Grey Cup champions stats. With the article being for the CFL and not the Grey Cup, it seems obvious this should reflect CFL championships, not Grey Cup Championships. The Grey Cup has it's own page that can reflect the Grey Cup champion stats, should it be chosen to. This means any team's Championships BEFORE the CFL was founded in 1958, do NOT count towards this total. The Edmonton Eskimos therefore have 11 league championships (not 14), and The Toronto Argonauts have 6 league championships, not 16. Am I wrong? I'm going to keep reverting to this until somebody posts and undeniable argument countering this point. Or unless it gets voted as such, haha. Sportyguy03 (talk) 00:03, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

It was a good idea to put in the note, because this had tripped me up for a second when I noticed it last week, then I realized what was going on. -- Earl Andrew - talk 00:41, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
I thought clarification would help, but yet the last person to edit it decided to just ignore and remove the note as well! haha. Sportyguy03 (talk) 02:50, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Canadian Football League/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Very good article, certainly a B. TFCforever (talk)

Last edited at 05:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 10:47, 29 April 2016 (UTC)


The timeline is riddled with errors and inconsistencies, which were recently introduced with this edit. I have fixed them but have been reverted. In particular,

  • It conflates teams and cities. Unrelated teams that happened to be located in the same city are listed in the same row, misleading readers to believe that these are the same team. I made this clear by changing the section title to "Timeline of CFL teams by city", but was reverted with the edit summary "actually, they are considered the same teams by the league." However, as per Facts, Figures and Records (2015), published by the CFL, this is not correct. Some of the teams listed are not considered to be the same franchise. It should be made clear to the reader that we are listing teams by city, and not by franchise. Alternatively, we could make the timeline actually list teams (ie separate rows for unrelated teams that shared a city.) This could be done either using the CFL's revisionist history (ie the Alouettes never folded) or de facto history (three rows for the Alouettes). Either is fine with me, as long as we are clear what we are doing, and we do it correctly and consistently.
  • The timeline is inconsistent with how it handles the pre-CFL history of existing teams. In some cases (ie Argonauts + Rough Riders) it is included. For others (ie Eskimos) it is not. I added it, but was reverted with the edit summary "The graph is only for CFL teams that were in the league at the time of 1958." But what is the relevance of that? The CFL considers the Alouettes to have been on hiatus in the 1990s, and the Eskimos to be on hiatus in the 1950s. For the former we include the history, while for the latter we do not. If we include pre-CFL history, what's the relevance of whether the team was on hiatus when the league was founded? The CFL recognizes the Eskimos's pre-CFL history, just like the other teams, so why should we exclude it?
  • Also, the edit summary of this revert said "Not playing for WWi or WWII does not mean the team folded." This is presumably referring to the Bronks? Although it is somewhat of a semantic argument (did the team fold in 1940 or did it just stop playing in 1940 but continued to exist throughout the war until 1945 when it folded), I'm again just following the CFL's publication on this, which gives the date of 1940 for the Bronks. If you think the CFL is wrong, and have a better source to support your date, I've got no objection to using 1945. But in the absence of that, and given the authoritativeness of the source for 1940, we should use that.

In the absence of these errors being fixed, we'd be better off going back to the prior timline which didn't have these issues as it only included history post 1958 when the CFL was founded. TDL (talk) 03:08, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

I would endorse that last idea. This is the timeline of the CFL, not its predecessor organizations. It should only cover the years the league has existed. It's the timeline for the league, not the entire history of Canadian football. oknazevad (talk) 04:17, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
As no one has objected, I've gone ahead and made the change. TDL (talk) 04:22, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
This chart was created from the timline template of all the major sports leagues which show the origin of the franchise no matter what league. This chart is only for franchises that have been in the CFL and the franchises past history. Ottawa is different franchises according to the CFL but Montreal/Edmonton is the same franchise. I have used as a source for dates and franchises. TDL (talk) 20:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
I see you've now accepted some of my corrections in your latest version: the removal of the Bronks and numerous date corrections, plus you've kept part of the Edmonton history. However, versus my corrected version you're still missing part of Edmonton's history as recognized by the CFL, you've reverted to incorrect Saskatchewan dates, and you're still conflating teams with franchises for Hamilton. And you've introduced a new error by splitting the Ottawa teams, which the CFL considers to be a single franchise. I've relied on the CFL's own publication, which I cited above, for franchise histories and dates, the reliability of which is second to none. As CFLDB is a WP:SELFPUBLISH source and hence not reliable, it is not usable to WP:verify content, especially when it contradicts authoritative sources.
As I said above, I don't have a strong objection to including pre-CFL history, but it needs to be done correctly. Otherwise it's better to omit than to misinform readers. I've again made these fixes. If there is something that you object to, please discuss here rather than making a full revert again. TDL (talk) 04:33, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Please leave the Hamilton franchise alone. It is the same team only merged with the Wildcats and changed name. What evidence of Ottawa being the same franchise? They all have different wiki pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rreemmett (talkcontribs) 11:23, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Well, Ottawa does claim all prior history as their own, as seen here. As for the TiCats, though it's a edition from a couple of years ago, the official CFL record book seen here clearly lists them as starting in 1950; the problem with any other date is that both predecessor teams were both in operation simultaneously after the Tigers restarted but before they merged to form the TiCats. So which record were inhereted by the current franchise? The answer, officially, is neither. It was a merger of equals. That's why putting any Hamilton listing before 1950 is wrong. Because they are not only one predecessor team, nor are they both. They are neither. oknazevad (talk) 17:51, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Rreemmett, as I have explained to you numerous times, the "evidence" is that the CFL has published a book (Facts, Figures and Records (2015)) which explicitly refutes your claims. For example, under Hamilton in the directory it is listed "Club founded (by merger) 1950 (IRFU)" and the first Grey Cup listed is 1953 (no mention of Grey Cups by earlier Hamilton teams). Under the RedBlacks all Ottawa Grey Cups are listed (1925-26, 1940, 1951, 1960, 1968-69, 1973, 1976) and there is the following note "Ottawa football history & records are considered to be continuous for these years under three separate clubs." Additionally, there is a table titled "REGULAR SEASON STANDINGS & SCORING: 1936 TO 2014" on pg 163 which lists the following franchises:


  • EDMONTON Eskimos 1938-2014
  • CALGARY Stampeders 1945-2014
  • WINNIPEG Blue Bombers 1936-2014
  • MONTREAL Alouettes-Concordes 1946-1986, 1996-2014
  • BC Lions 1954-2014
  • HAMILTON Tiger-Cats 1950-2014
  • SASKATCHEWAN Roughriders 1936-2014
  • TORONTO Argonauts 1936-2014
  • OTTAWA Rough Riders-Renegades 1936-96, 2002-05, 2014


  • HAMILTON Tigers 1936-1947
  • MONTREAL (IRFU)* 1936-1945
  • CALGARY Bronks 1936-1940
  • VANCOUVER Grizzlies 1941
  • HAMILTON Wildcats 1948-1949
  • BALTIMORE CFL-Stallions 1994-1995
  • LAS VEGAS Posse 1994
  • SHREVEPORT Pirates 1994-1995
  • BIRMINGHAM Barracudas 1995
  • MEMPHIS Mad Dogs 1995

Clearly the CFL does not consider the the Hamilton teams to be the same franchise, while it does consider the Ottawa teams to be a single franchise. Conversely, the only evidence you have presented is a blog, and now you're citing wikipedia, which is WP:CIRCULAR. (You're also inconsistent in your argumentation, citing the existence of multiple team wiki pages for the Ottawa teams as reason for splitting their history, while ignoring the fact that Hamilton Wildcats (Canadian football) and Hamilton Tigers (football) have separate articles while arguing that they should not be split.) We need to follow reliable sources, not blogs. Besides, even if your point was correct you still wouldn't be doing it properly as oknazevad points out. TDL (talk) 01:54, 1 June 2016 (UTC)



  • EDMONTON Eskimos 1938-2014 - Not consistent with the chart you made.
  • SASKATCHEWAN Roughriders 1936-2014 - Roughrider stared in 1910

How accurate is this record book?

remmett June 1, 2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rreemmett (talkcontribs) 11:54, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Rreemmett, read the title of the chart. TDL (talk) 12:30, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
It is the official CFL record book. By any definition, everything else is less reliable. But you actually have to read it. I'd like to point out this passage, found on page 162:


For the history of Canadian Football and the CFL it is impossible to underestimate the importance of the 1936 season. The foundations of the present-day East Division of the CFL date to 1907 but the game was strictly an amateur one until the 1930s. By the mid-1930's players were beginning to be paid openly and commit their time to the game and its development. Most importantly, 1936 marks the foundation of the WIFU (Western Interprovincial Football Union), direct predecessor of the CFL's West Division. Though their roots are in earlier amateur days, Saskatchewan and Winnipeg were founding members of the WIFU that year and continue to be prominent members of the CFL. The 1936 season was the first for inter-provincial play in the West and the institution of many Canadian football rules and standards still in use.

So it acknowledges the amateur roots of the Riders and the Bombers, but uses the year the were founding me where of the WIFU, and became playing outside their province, as the year they start keeping records. (Also happens to be the year they went fully professional.) Also on that page is the footnote explaining that Ottawa is one franchise with two periods of inactivity, and Hamilton's official starting date of 1950. Long story short, they have their reasons for choosing their official records, and deviating from them is WP:OR. oknazevad (talk) 15:31, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps we should follow the CFL's lead and only list seasons played in the CFL or its predecessors the IRFU/WIFU and ignore all the amateur seasons which are not well sourced. TDL (talk) 22:17, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

So this book overides a CFL team's Officail website? Rreemmett June 1/16 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rreemmett (talkcontribs) 17:53, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

It's the official CFL record book. So, yes. The Eskimos website seems to be using when the team resumed operations after WWII as its date, which is not unreasonable, as that's the date that it has continuously operated from, but the league recognizes it as the same club as the 1938–40 incarnation. oknazevad (talk) 04:52, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I wrote an e-mail to the Ottawa Redblacks and they said that the Rough Riders, Renegades and Redblacks are not one franchise. rreemmett (talk) 13:57, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Unless you submit the email via OTRS, so that others can see it, then we cannot verify what you say is true. The league's official record book is explicit that they are considered one franchise with two periods of inactivity, and that is the source used for the timeline. Subsequently, the time line will mirror what the source says, and any change will be reverted as going against the source. oknazevad (talk) 16:22, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
According the CFL FACTS, FIGURES and RECORDS ® 2014 EDITION, "Ottawa football history & records are considered to be continuous for these years under three separate clubs." "All Ottawa clubs including the previous Rough Riders and Renegades are combined with current Redblacks for historical consistency only" Yet under years played and founded only says 2014, which the Alouettes have played/founded 1946 to 2014. rreemmett (talk) 19:35, 9 June 2016 (UTC)