WI: A hybrid gridiron football

For whatever reason, let's say that gridiron football did not split into American and Canadian variations, but mixed-and-matched parts of both. Here are the differences in comparison to OTL American gridiron football:

  • Canadian-size football field (110 yards long by 65 yards wide, with two 20-yard end zones with goalposts in the middle of the goal line)
  • 12 players on the field at a time compared to 11
  • Rouges worth one point.
  • Kicks landing in the end zone (except for successful field goals or if the ball has hit the goal post in flight) are live.
  • Only one foot needs to be in-bounds for a reception to count.
How would this effect the strategies, types of players who would play at the professional level and the performances of famous football players from OTL (assuming they aren't butterflied away)?
 
Anyone?

Here's some examples of questions about this scenario I have for any (gridiron) football experts:

  • In the CFL, players are generally lighter and more nimble than in the NFL due to the bigger playing field & three downs instead of four. If an additional down were given, would it negate the need for smaller players and allow bigger players (like power running-backs like Larry Csonka or Jerome Bettis)?
  • Would the larger field contribute to a more passing-oriented strategy?
  • With a bigger field, would the blitz defense be a wise strategy?
  • If rouge kicks and such were included in the scoring, would kickers and punters be more valuable?
 
Well heres the thing, the two sports were pretty much the same early on, the first Intercollegiate football game was between McGill and Harvard. Having an International College conference with set rules may just do the trick. Fostering closer relations in terms of the Football code in Canada and the United States.
 
Well heres the thing, the two sports were pretty much the same early on, the first Intercollegiate football game was between McGill and Harvard. Having an International College conference with set rules may just do the trick. Fostering closer relations in terms of the Football code in Canada and the United States.

I'm not looking for PODs, but people's opinions/expertise as to how these differences would effect the play and players of gridiron football in this scenario.
 
I'm not looking for PODs, but people's opinions/expertise as to how these differences would effect the play and players of gridiron football in this scenario.

Heres the thing, you can't get a hybrid football without a POD. So you need a POD to get a hybrid football. And there is really no way to know.
 
Heres the thing, you can't get a hybrid football without a POD. So you need a POD to get a hybrid football. And there is really no way to know.

Fine. The POD is that as a result of differences emerging from campus to campus, the International College Football Association is formed. The ICFA regulates the rules and play of football across campuses. This leads to a mishmash of OTL Canadian & American rules of football, and professional football, once it takes off, takes a cue from the ICFA and is played regularly between teams from opposing sides of the border. Canada and the United States each retain leagues which solely play in their own nations, but the main professional football league is the United Football League, which originally had half of its teams in Canada and the other half in the US (due to population and marketing opportunities, though, the ratio has shifted to 1 Canadian team for every 3 American ones).

And I'm not asking for certainties, just people's opinions or insights about how this would alter ATL football from OTL American football. Any expertise from former HS football players would help, too.
 
I think the forward pass may be marginalized and the game will be more running centric. Eventually the game will open up but the forward pass may be far less popular early on.
 

3199

Banned
A little futurist, but "hybrid gridiron" can be the result of the rise in the world aprobation to american football and the decline of canadian football, just change some rules in the game to fusion the CFL and NFL in 2018 an at same time make it more friendly to foreiners.
But change the name of the International Federation of American Football (IFAF) to what? Attacking Football? H for Hybrid or Helmet?
Sorry for the horrible off topic.
 
In the modern era I think the biggest change will be that a passing offense will benefit from the 12th man. Adding another receiver will make it much harder for the defense to cover all players as effectively as they do now.

You did not say whether the forward pass was legal in your TL - OTL the forward pass was brought about in 1905 in order to spread the game out and make it less violent. This is definitely after your POD, so do you intend for the forward pass to be legal?

Anyone?

Here's some examples of questions about this scenario I have for any (gridiron) football experts:

  • In the CFL, players are generally lighter and more nimble than in the NFL due to the bigger playing field & three downs instead of four. If an additional down were given, would it negate the need for smaller players and allow bigger players (like power running-backs like Larry Csonka or Jerome Bettis)?
  • Would the larger field contribute to a more passing-oriented strategy?
  • With a bigger field, would the blitz defense be a wise strategy?
  • If rouge kicks and such were included in the scoring, would kickers and punters be more valuable?

1. Yes, running is a low-risk/low-reward strategy that is better suited to 4 downs than 3.

2. The bigger end zones will definitely reward passing - it is much easier for a pass defense to cover a 10 yard end zone than a deeper end zone.

3. With 12 men & a wider field it will always be more difficult for the defense to cover the pass - even more so if they remove a player from the secondary to blitz. On the whole I think the blitz will be about as effective as now.

4. For placekickers - no, it will still be better to make a successful field goal.
On the kickoff - depends what the kickoff line is. If a good kickoff regularly goes deep into the endzone, then it will be good to have a kicker who can kick that far. If not, then the single makes no difference in strategy.

For punters - it changes the strategy, because punters no longer need to be accurate when any punt deep into opposing territory is rewarded either with points or field position.
 
If Harvard didn't have that small field when they played McGill for the first ever gridiron game, we may see a game that's roughly similar to the CFL of the 1940's...or even the original Rugby Codes.

A lot of the changes in the American Code, such as the forward pass, restricting movements of the offensive backfield and the elimination of the 12th man, resulted because Harvard had such a small field (and all the other American schools followed suit). And the Canadian game OTL, though more conservative in terms of rules, tended to follow some of the changes in the American game after a few decades.
 
It seems to me the bigger field is better suited to 4 downs than 3. In Canadian play, you really only get 2 downs & a punt, & having to cover so much ground is hard. On the U.S. field, 4 downs seems likes making it too easy. I also think you will get a more imporant air game with the bigger field, if not necessarily an easier one, for the same reason.
 
Top