You're half right, ro. Yes it is possible, and no they shouldn't host. But the crossover has kept some terrible teams out of the playoffs.
If we had a non-interlocking schedule, I would agree with you a hundred per cent. But as it is, a team that goes 3-15 shouldn't make the playoffs just because another team that was as bad or worse happens to be in their geographic half of the country.
Then why have divisions?
A team with a better record missing the playoffs while a team with a worse record makes the playoff all the time(well, often) in every other sport and you never hear complaints. Why is it only the CFL that whines?
The unbalanced schedule is exactly why there should not be a crossover.
Having a better record does not constitute a better team when you play some teams 4 times and other teams twice!
That being said, even with a 100% balanced schedule, its wrong and bad for the league!
If the Grey Cup this year were to feature 2 eastern teams, how many westerners would travel here to see the game? Far less IMO. The same would apply for 2 western teams playing in the west! The same would happen for TV viewing.... How many from one division would watch if the game featured two teams from the other division?
I would not care who is in the game, I would still watch. A Toronto-Hamilton GC game would be very fun to watch as would a Edmonton-Calgary game.
There is an argument for not having a crossover. In 1981, the Ottawa Rough Riders , with a 5-11 record made it all the way the Grey Cup final, and held a 20-3 lead in that game against the mighty Eskimos. They eventually lost the game, but in a one shot deal such as football anything can happen.
I said you could make an argument for eliminating the crossover... not that I would agree with that, but if you have the better record you should make the playoffs, especially in a smaller league like the CFL.
FYI- I dont really like it when it happens in any other league as well. It totally bush to have a good team miss the playoffs just because you are a different division or conference.
Let's say Hamilton wins tonight, and then both they and Toronto lose all their remaining games. Hamilton will finish in third place at 3-15. Let's double the western records and say that B.C. finishes in fourth at 8-10. What's wrong with the Lions, who managed 8 wins despite playing most of their games against Calgary, Edmonton and Saskatchewan, taking the playoff spot of Hamilton, who managed to win just 3, despite playing Toronto and Winnipeg more than the Western teams did?
If the CFL ever manages to get two divisions of five teams, I will join the crusade against the crossover. The third-place team in a five-team division is unlikely to have a record undeserving of a playoff spot, even if the fourth-place team in the other division has a better record.
Maybe not, but then when the other division has teams that have a worse record than the team that finishes last in the other division, what does that say about the quality of teams in the league?
BTW- BC has a 3-1 record agaisnt Eastern Divison opponents, and they play Hamilton next weekend. BC, I believe has a .500 record agaisnt the Als, the first place team in the division! They have beaten Winnipeg twice, so it will be interesting to see how they fare against the Argos and Cats, the two teams as of right now that hold 2nd and 3rd place.
So if BC wins the 4 games against the Cats and Argos that means they don't deserve the spot if their record is better? I totally disagree with that, if the Lions have proven they can beat those teams, they deserve the spot just on the fact that they have proven they are better than those teams-- they will have beaten all 3 and have the better record than them. One of them will get a playoff spot- and a home game despite the fact that BC will have beaten all three. If the Argos and Cats are tied at the end of the year for 2nd, the Cats are in because they have the season series already against the Argos.