CFL Rule changes - as if Canadian football wasn't already wild and woolly enough

[Northern Piper]

The Canadian Football League has announced four rule-changes (http://www.canada.com/imput+prompts+make+rule+changes/1587922/story.html) for the upcoming season, suggested by the fans:
Moving back the kickoff following a safety touch, to reduce the number of times a team chooses to take a knee in its own end zone. The kickoff following a safety will be moved back from the 35-yard line to the 25, which is meant to encourage coaches to kick the ball away rather than take a knee in the end zone;

Enabling coaches to use "wildcat'' formations that would move the quarterback around, instead of requiring him to stand behind or under centre;

Requiring a team that kicks a successful field goal to kick off to its opponents, increasing the number of kick returns. Previously, the receiving team was given the option of scrimmaging from its own 35-yard line;

Awarding a team a third instant replay challenge if its first two challenges are successful.

If I'm reading them right, three of the four changes will make the game even more fluid:

- kicking off from the 25 yard line after a safety touch, instead of from the 35 yard line, diminishes the value of the safety touch by giving the receiving team better field position from the kickoff, and marginally increases the chance of a successful run-back, so there may be less incentive to take the safety and instead gamble on getting the ball out;

- mandatory kick-off after a field goal increases the chances of run-backs;

- the wildcat rule I'm not so sure about - it sounds as if it will make the offensive options more fluid, but I'd be interested to hear comments from others;

- the third replay challenge - well, replay challenges tend to slow the game down, but it will reward coaches who use their challenges wisely, so I think it makes sense.

Anyone else have any reactions to the new rules?

[borschevsky]

Moving the post-safety kick is a good change; there have been too many intentional safeties given up recently. Although those safeties do give me one of my favourite things to complain about, when the kicker inexplicably tries to run around for a few seconds before giving the safety, even when it's like 7-3 in the first quarter.

I'm not sure exactly what formations are being made legal under this new wildcat rule, but I generally think that allowing more freedom in setting up formations can be a good thing.

The third challenge is an improvement, although I think it probably doesn't go far enough. If you win a challenge, it shouldn't cost you one of your challenges at all.

The kick-off after a FG is good for endgame strategy as well. In the NFL, in many cases when down 10 points, the correct strategy is to kick the FG first, then onside kick and try for a TD. This wasn't possible in the CFL because the other team would just take the ball after the FG.

[Northern Piper]

The third challenge issue actually came up in a Riders-Bombers game last year, the Banjo Bowl. The Riders coach, Miller, threw the challenge flag twice, successfully, and then there was a third time he wanted to throw it for what he saw as a bad call, but couldn't.

Hadn't thought of the endgame strategy point - that makes sense as well.

[Rysto]

I'm not sure exactly what formations are being made legal under this new wildcat rule, but I generally think that allowing more freedom in setting up formations can be a good thing.
The wildcat formation has the running back taking the snap.

[Really Not All That Bright]

The wildcat formation has the running back taking the snap.
Or a wide receiver, theoretically. Essentially, the only "guaranteed" thing in the wildcat is that the quarterback will not be lined up under or behind center; he'll be split wide or off the field completely.

[zamboniracer]

The wildcat formation has the running back taking the snap.

In my day we called that formation the "single wing", by cracky! :D