Welder

Honestly,instead of a crossover or essentially having 6 teams make the playoffs...I would prefer to go back a 2 game total point set up if we have a situation like we had in the East this year with Montreal and Hamilton not having stellar records. It worked OK for Hamilton in '86...
"I did not mean that conservatives were generally stupid; I meant that stupid persons are generally conservative."  John Stuart Mill

DAN38

Honestly,instead of a crossover or essentially having 6 teams make the playoffs...I would prefer to go back a 2 game total point set up if we have a situation like we had in the East this year with Montreal and Hamilton not having stellar records. It worked OK for Hamilton in '86...
     Wow, I was going to suggest this earlier. Way to go, Welder !
Si vis pacem... para bellum

dcmoses

Quote
Quote
Funny to read the spin. Western fans meme use to be "The real season starts after labour day".

In the end the winners of each division are going to the GC, which ridicules their arguments about destroying the divisions even more.
Then why isn't Ottawa in the big game? Argos were 4-6 prior to the LDC and Ottawa was 3-6-1. From there it was a back and forth battle down the stretch with Hamilton putting pressure on both by going 6-4 in those final 10.

That little fact aside you honestly believe that the Grey Cup would still be Calgary-Toronto if the Argo had started on the road against Saskatchewan before (if they won) travelling to Winnipeg or Calgary for a shot at the big game in Ottawa? I'm a die hard Argo fan and even I'm not arrogant enough to say that would have been a given. If anything the way the playoffs played out just reinforces to absolute need for drastic changes to the play off system and seeding.

Unless of course you're just waiting for the next 5-11 team to go to the Grey Cup.
I don't care. The Argos won their division, they did everything they had to do to earn their spoils. To the winners go the spoils as they say. Meanwhile, the Riders had THREE teams finished ahead of them. Not one, not two but three out of four teams finished ahead of them and they should be rewarded with a home game???
 
Saskatchewan is lucky there is a crossover rule. Every league has rules and every team knows going into the season what those rules are and how they will be ranked.

There are teams in the NFL almost every year that don't make the postseason while teams with lesser records get in. The NFL's Wildcard best of the rest is very similar to the "by" system in the CFL. They even stagger their schedules to make the weaker teams look better than they really are.

The University of Montreal was left out of the final four losing to Laval while Acadia gets a seat. What a game that was, gave up 68 points to Western before Marshall sent in his rookies.

Boston Bruins missed the postseason last year with a 42-31 record while the Nashville Predators made the postseason with their 41 win season.

NCAA football is the most comical of all.

Now let's see the East win another GC to reinforce the point.
You open with a statement in support of the status quo then go on a long rant making my point and agreeing with me that we need to fix this mess.

Have no idea where you stand on this at all.

Before you respond though consider this, the Riders may have finished 4th in the west but they finished ahead of BOTH eastern teams they had to face. NOT one but BOTH of the eastern teams finished behind the Riders and they are rewarded with 2 road games against those team with one of those teams getting a bye ???. Did they not play the same teams Toronto and Ottawa played? 

Count Floyd

I'm in favour of scrapping the crossover.  The fact that no western team has advanced through the east in the 22 years of the crossover's existence is proof that the rationale that put it into place to begin with is flawed.  The reason it was done was to appease western whining, as someone else posted above.  

I'm curious as to whether the guys who want to see "the best 6 teams make the playoffs" are also in favour of scrapping the ratio rule.  After all, those guys use the rationale that they want to see the best players play.

This is Canadian football.  The East/West matchup for the GC game is a long tradition.  There is zero evidence for the assertion that having a team with a losing record in the playoffs is "hurting the league". 

HfxTC

I'm in favour of scrapping the crossover.  The fact that no western team has advanced through the east in the 22 years of the crossover's existence is proof that the rationale that put it into place to begin with is flawed.  The reason it was done was to appease western whining, as someone else posted above.  

I'm curious as to whether the guys who want to see "the best 6 teams make the playoffs" are also in favour of scrapping the ratio rule.  After all, those guys use the rationale that they want to see the best players play.

This is Canadian football.  The East/West matchup for the GC game is a long tradition.  There is zero evidence for the assertion that having a team with a losing record in the playoffs is "hurting the league".
Useless hyperbole. 22 years is a meaningless numbers. There are like five western crossovers and winning two consecutive road games one against a team resting for two to three weeks is the reason why they have been unsuccessful, they have not been successful. Their odds are slightly worse than a third place team making it to the GC getting there. It isn't a crossover thing, it has to do with being the third seed.
Everything I write is just an opinion formed from various sources. Some more reliable than others, it is expressed as a composite of facts, innuendos, emotions, personal experiences and complete fabulation into a gumbo for entertainment purposes alone.

HfxTC

Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Funny to read the spin. Western fans meme use to be "The real season starts after labour day".

In the end the winners of each division are going to the GC, which ridicules their arguments about destroying the divisions even more.
Then why isn't Ottawa in the big game? Argos were 4-6 prior to the LDC and Ottawa was 3-6-1. From there it was a back and forth battle down the stretch with Hamilton putting pressure on both by going 6-4 in those final 10.

That little fact aside you honestly believe that the Grey Cup would still be Calgary-Toronto if the Argo had started on the road against Saskatchewan before (if they won) travelling to Winnipeg or Calgary for a shot at the big game in Ottawa? I'm a die hard Argo fan and even I'm not arrogant enough to say that would have been a given. If anything the way the playoffs played out just reinforces to absolute need for drastic changes to the play off system and seeding.

Unless of course you're just waiting for the next 5-11 team to go to the Grey Cup.
I don't care. The Argos won their division, they did everything they had to do to earn their spoils. To the winners go the spoils as they say. Meanwhile, the Riders had THREE teams finished ahead of them. Not one, not two but three out of four teams finished ahead of them and they should be rewarded with a home game???
 
Saskatchewan is lucky there is a crossover rule. Every league has rules and every team knows going into the season what those rules are and how they will be ranked.

There are teams in the NFL almost every year that don't make the postseason while teams with lesser records get in. The NFL's Wildcard best of the rest is very similar to the "by" system in the CFL. They even stagger their schedules to make the weaker teams look better than they really are.

The University of Montreal was left out of the final four losing to Laval while Acadia gets a seat. What a game that was, gave up 68 points to Western before Marshall sent in his rookies.

Boston Bruins missed the postseason last year with a 42-31 record while the Nashville Predators made the postseason with their 41 win season.

NCAA football is the most comical of all.

Now let's see the East win another GC to reinforce the point.
You open with a statement in support of the status quo then go on a long rant making my point and agreeing with me that we need to fix this mess.

Have no idea where you stand on this at all.

Before you respond though consider this, the Riders may have finished 4th in the west but they finished ahead of BOTH eastern teams they had to face. NOT one but BOTH of the eastern teams finished behind the Riders and they are rewarded with 2 road games against those team with one of those teams getting a bye ???. Did they not play the same teams Toronto and Ottawa played?
What rant? I gave you concrete real-life comparisons that show the CFL system is favorable compared or inline with other leagues with numbers to back it up. The teams that win the divisions get preferential treatment, as it should. The runner-up gets a home game, which keeps teams fighting for the spot throughout the season, again a good thing and because the Western division houses an extra team they opened up the third seed in each division to make room for the best of the worse. What is the issue?

ExPat

There is zero evidence for the assertion that having a team with a losing record in the playoffs is "hurting the league".
Zero evidence, you say?  You must not have read the multiple posts in which Hank01 asserted it as fact.

Hank01

I'm in favour of scrapping the crossover.  The fact that no western team has advanced through the east in the 22 years of the crossover's existence is proof that the rationale that put it into place to begin with is flawed.  The reason it was done was to appease western whining, as someone else posted above.  

I'm curious as to whether the guys who want to see "the best 6 teams make the playoffs" are also in favour of scrapping the ratio rule.  After all, those guys use the rationale that they want to see the best players play.

This is Canadian football.  The East/West matchup for the GC game is a long tradition.  There is zero evidence for the assertion that having a team with a losing record in the playoffs is "hurting the league".
 Lets see how they would do if they played at home and had the bye like Toronto then see or even if they played at home against  Ottawa . Staying for a an extra  week on the road was an extensive chore this late in the season for any team .

As far as hurting the league exhibit A the lack of interest in attendance is huge evidence people aren't buying into this kids soccer league playoff system .

Would you as a player want to play in such a ridiculous system .

 I am a big advocate of Canadians playing in the CFL and it would have been a lot better for me and a few other pro Canadians to see Canadian QB Bridge in Ottawa playing in the 150th year in Ottawa where the last Canadian QB Russ Jackson played . What a great story that would have been .

Hank01

 
 Actually surprised at HfxC countering the argument expected more from you being a Montreal booster.

You think Montreal in 81 making the playoffs with 3 wins helped boost regular season sales in Montreal . It made  mockery and joke out of the league .With Ottawa getting there with 5 wins it was bad enough .

Do you think this attracts new fans to the league that our championship caliber team had only won 5 or 3 games that season .

Some people here don't understand why people hate our league this is just one of a few things that needs to be fixed to attract NEW fans . Legitimize our regular season with an accurate playoff seed for a TINY 9 team league .

I use to be a traditionalist but I LISTENED to the people who don't buy tickets or watch regularly and this is one of there BEEFS . Change was needed yesterday .

When we get more teams change back but until then give the competitive advantage to the higher seed .

Yes the CIS or U sports is not happy with the playoff format and do want change as well .

raymarkca

I'm in favour of scrapping the crossover.  The fact that no western team has advanced through the east in the 22 years of the crossover's existence is proof that the rationale that put it into place to begin with is flawed.  The reason it was done was to appease western whining, as someone else posted above.  

I'm curious as to whether the guys who want to see "the best 6 teams make the playoffs" are also in favour of scrapping the ratio rule.  After all, those guys use the rationale that they want to see the best players play.

This is Canadian football.  The East/West matchup for the GC game is a long tradition.  There is zero evidence for the assertion that having a team with a losing record in the playoffs is "hurting the league".
I being the primary supporter of dropping the ratio rule actually am a supporter of the divisions.   Most of those that do not support divisions (far as I can tell ) are all about supporting the ratio.

May the best players play on the field of battle, but know that playoffs/wins/losses do not need to be generic boredom seeding.  That the element of luck DOES factor into wins/losses in many ways including injuries, scheduling and just on the field stuff that happens like officiating and stuff that you just go what!!  Sure the Argos were 9-9 but Wilder did not have a primary role at the beginning of the season and Ray was out for a few games.    Sure Winnipeg had 12 wins but in the end they were not the second best team.   Sure Ottawa had 9 losses but half those losses were headbangers.   Of course it is what is and trying to analyze who the Nth best teams are at playoff time would require a whole team of experts.  So of course wins/losses will play a PART in that however, at the end of the day you CAN NOT be sure that a generic playoff system will matchup the best teams against the worst in any ordered sequence.  The divisional system does a more then decent enough job while at the same time giving the benefits of divisions and rivalries. The crossover while I hate it does at least deal with the issue of there being more West teams and any exteme gaps in win/loss, while not totally killing the divisions.  Bring on expansion and the end of the crossover along with a more divisional schedule system.  

You CAN however put the best players on the field and say go into battle and do you damdist.      You CAN increase the talent pool in the league so that Montreal as an example does not have to be the laughing stock, by putting better players on the field, THUS creating more balance in the league overall, THUS giving less fuel to those who whine about playoff seedings.  They say you are only as good as your Canadian talent pool .... but that is NOT necessarily a good thing.
Life is blog, or maybe it is like a box of chocolates.  Exercise your mind as well as your body.
Warning subject matter may require thinking outside the box.
Visit
http://www.raymark.ca

project.legacy

Leave as is until the day expansion happens. TBH, the Eastern teams and Winnipeg just need to make better hires.

PTBO Dave


May the best players play on the field of battle, but know that playoffs/wins/losses do not need to be generic boredom seeding.  That the element of luck DOES factor into wins/losses in many ways including injuries, scheduling and just on the field stuff that happens like officiating and stuff that you just go what!!  Sure the Argos were 9-9 but Wilder did not have a primary role at the beginning of the season and Ray was out for a few games.    Sure Winnipeg had 12 wins but in the end they were not the second best team.   Sure Ottawa had 9 losses but half those losses were headbangers.   Of course it is what is and trying to analyze who the Nth best teams are at playoff time would require a whole team of experts.  So of course wins/losses will play a PART in that however, at the end of the day you CAN NOT be sure that a generic playoff system will matchup the best teams against the worst in any ordered sequence.  The divisional system does a more then decent enough job while at the same time giving the benefits of divisions and rivalries. 
Certainly there is luck involved in any play, drive, game, season, etc. But we still use the results to decide playoff seeding. Actual results are still the best way to measure a team's success, not geography. 

While you may disagree, for many, the current system does not do nearly a decent enough job of that.

Is it more important to maintain regional divisions than to implement the fairest, most balanced playoff format available? It seems that more and more fans are saying 'no, it isn't.' Do millennials and new Canadians and young fans care as much that Montreal is in the East but Regina is not? Perhaps not.

In any case, it's an issue the league surely has to investigate further given this growing discontent from fans around the country.

raymarkca


May the best players play on the field of battle, but know that playoffs/wins/losses do not need to be generic boredom seeding.  That the element of luck DOES factor into wins/losses in many ways including injuries, scheduling and just on the field stuff that happens like officiating and stuff that you just go what!!  Sure the Argos were 9-9 but Wilder did not have a primary role at the beginning of the season and Ray was out for a few games.    Sure Winnipeg had 12 wins but in the end they were not the second best team.   Sure Ottawa had 9 losses but half those losses were headbangers.   Of course it is what is and trying to analyze who the Nth best teams are at playoff time would require a whole team of experts.  So of course wins/losses will play a PART in that however, at the end of the day you CAN NOT be sure that a generic playoff system will matchup the best teams against the worst in any ordered sequence.  The divisional system does a more then decent enough job while at the same time giving the benefits of divisions and rivalries.
"Actual results are still the best way to measure a team's success, not geography." 

Says a few to which you are entitled to believe, but that does not make you right.  
"Actual results  " aka win/losses  are just one way of determining "whose better" but is by NO MEANS an accurate one.   It is nothing more than the accepted norm in most leagues.    Of course there is some truth in those results,  I think Montreal is the worst team and "the record" supports it but that does not make the current system any more right or wrong than a generic system.    

PTBO Dave


May the best players play on the field of battle, but know that playoffs/wins/losses do not need to be generic boredom seeding.  That the element of luck DOES factor into wins/losses in many ways including injuries, scheduling and just on the field stuff that happens like officiating and stuff that you just go what!!  Sure the Argos were 9-9 but Wilder did not have a primary role at the beginning of the season and Ray was out for a few games.    Sure Winnipeg had 12 wins but in the end they were not the second best team.   Sure Ottawa had 9 losses but half those losses were headbangers.   Of course it is what is and trying to analyze who the Nth best teams are at playoff time would require a whole team of experts.  So of course wins/losses will play a PART in that however, at the end of the day you CAN NOT be sure that a generic playoff system will matchup the best teams against the worst in any ordered sequence.  The divisional system does a more then decent enough job while at the same time giving the benefits of divisions and rivalries.
"Actual results are still the best way to measure a team's success, not geography."

Says a few to which you are entitled to believe, but that does not make you right.  
"Actual results  " aka win/losses  are just one way of determining "whose better" but is by NO MEANS an accurate one.   It is nothing more than the accepted norm in most leagues.    Of course there is some truth in those results,  I think Montreal is the worst team and "the record" supports it but that does not make the current system any more right or wrong than a generic system.    
Is there a better system?

Certainly there are intangibles to any team and season, but what is the best way to try to account for these intangibles?

Count Floyd

I'm in favour of scrapping the crossover.  The fact that no western team has advanced through the east in the 22 years of the crossover's existence is proof that the rationale that put it into place to begin with is flawed.  The reason it was done was to appease western whining, as someone else posted above.  

I'm curious as to whether the guys who want to see "the best 6 teams make the playoffs" are also in favour of scrapping the ratio rule.  After all, those guys use the rationale that they want to see the best players play.

This is Canadian football.  The East/West matchup for the GC game is a long tradition.  There is zero evidence for the assertion that having a team with a losing record in the playoffs is "hurting the league".
Useless hyperbole. 22 years is a meaningless numbers. There are like five western crossovers and winning two consecutive road games one against a team resting for two to three weeks is the reason why they have been unsuccessful, they have not been successful. Their odds are slightly worse than a third place team making it to the GC getting there. It isn't a crossover thing, it has to do with being the third seed.
Actually, it isn't "useless hyperbole".  22 years is meaningful, because for 17 of them, the crossover didn't even come into play, & in the 5 years it did, the crossover team didn't make the GC.  So, why keep it?  It's just stupid.
 


Users Online

108 Guests, 17 Users (15 Spiders, 2 Hidden)

Users active in past 15 minutes:
oo DAWG oo, Onemoredork, porter24, brihind88, heapbag, Iconic SR, Mightygoose, Lennywasout, alphamale111, thirdnlong, VICIOUSCIRCLE, djrobertson2017, Lucas Bellemare, Count Floyd, Gerbear20, Yahoo!, Google (14)

Most Online Today: 161. Most Online Ever: 489 (Nov 26 2017, 08:38 PM)