Cross-Over Rule/Mathamaticly possible(merged)

Let's say that Montreal beats Toronto all 4 times yet Toronto ends up with 24 points in the standing to Montreal's 22...

Why should Toronto get first place and the bye when based on your argument. Montreal is the better team? They beat Tor all 4 times yet Toronto gets first?

The point is you cant say that one team is better just because they beat another team

Ro, your argument about no one else does it sounds good until you take it out of the theoretical realm.

NHL - after the division winners, all 5 conference playoff spots are wildcards, meaning they earn spots based on ranking, regardless of division standings.

The same in the NFL.

Now, while neither league crosses conferences, there are a lot more teams, and the gap between who's in and who's not is small - in football, rarely more than a game. I can't remember the last time a team two games worse made the playoffs over another. In hockey, maybe 4-6 points at most, after an 82 game schedule.

This year, it is more than likely that an 8-9 win team will finish 4th in the west, while the third place teams in the East could have as few as 5, possibly even 4 wins, despite playing a far weaker schedule. Other than geography, what precisely has that team done to earn a spot?

The anti-crossover movement was born in the East for obvious reasons - it takes a playoff spot away from a weak eastern sister, and throws a much tougher opponent into the Eastern playoff mix. There's no doubt Montreal would rather wipe up whatever "winner" comes out of the Toronto-Hamilton-Winnipeg mess, but toss in ANY Western team, and that's a whole 'nother matter.

This would not even be a discussion if the relative strength of the divisions were reversed.

As it stands I would rather see the top 2 teams in each division advance, and the remaining 2 spots be wild cards to advance, no matter which division the came from. If we ever had 2 five team division with interlocking games(ballanced games against one another)the playoffs still should be based as above. That way we are always watching the best teams in Canada compete. East and wert rivarley is still in the playoff senerio, but the top teams will only be in the Grey Cup.

The Grey Cup ceased to be an East vs. West game since the late 80's when Winnipeg first went into the East. Winnipeg has been the Eastern Champion a number of times and has won the Grey Cup as the eastern representative.

Isn't Winnipeg in Central Canada?

Dosen't it bother anybody that the crossover team has proven since the rule is in place has not been able to advance.

Hamilton playing at Rogers centre even with a worse record would have a better chance the the current crossover team (Lions) of competing. What are the chances of BC winning 3 consecutive games on the road in Eastern Canada after traveling to Calgary in week 19?

Pretty much NONE.

It is mathematically possible for the 4th place team to have a better record than the 1st place team. Just not likely. Nearly happened in 2001 though.

The closest we ever came, I believe, to the 4th place team having a better record than even the 1st place team was in 2001. Then it was the West that were the weak sisters. Still fluked out a Grey Cup victory though.
I don't mind the crossover, but generally am completely in favour of maintaining the East-West rivalry. If the cross over causes the odd West-West Grey Cup, or East-East Grey Cup, so be it. Hasn't happened yet. But if you ever went with a straight top 6 teams ranked in order, you don't just screw with the East-West Grey Cup rivalry, you also screw with the intensity that divisional rivalries cause--both during the season and in the play-offs. Without divisions, it would be conceivable to have no eastern or no Western team host a play-off game and that would not be good for the league. And by maintaining the divisions, we guarantee that in most years, there will be great rivalries in the play-offs. And as the cross over as it stands has proven, most years there is not a real need and when it does happen, no cross over team has ever even won a game let alone get to the show, so really, talking about how the "better team" deserves to get in is not proven out by the facts.

Just last year Nashville made the playoffs with 91 points while Carolina was out with 92 points
The year before Colorado missed the playoffs with 95 while the rangers Lightning and Islanders had 94,93 and 92 points
Last year
The 9-7 redskins made the playoff while the 10-6 browns didnt
9-7 Broncos missed.....8-8 Giants were in

2007 MLB
85-77 Cubs in 90-73 Rockies out 88-74 Tigers out
83-78 Cardinals in...88-74 padres out 87-75 B-Jays out 86-76 Red socks out 90-72 White socks out

Well based on every one's argument they should cross over conferences.....We want to see the best teams in the playoffs don't we?

They are in a different division! That's all they need....The cup is east vrs west!

Yet no crossover team has ever won a game so its not really a tougher opponent is it.

I would still be against the crossover no matter which direction.....but getting back to how it was born....A large part was created when the west threw a game to stop an eastern team from crossing over.....

I wish I could remember when and who but I do remember that if 2nd place A had beaten 3rd place B then 4th place C in the east would have crossed over but Team A decided to play none of their starters, only second stringers played so that team B would win and keep the east out... That played a major part in the anti-crossover uh! movement

I want to know why the cross-over rule is still in effect. That rule was brought in when them was an odd number of teams. There were 5 in the west and 4 in the east. Now that the league is even on both sides, why does it still exist? This way at least 2 of the 4 teams in each division will be able to host playoff games, boosting revenues in the east and west evenly. Your viewing audience will also be stronger.
Imagine this, BC crosses over and plays in the east and wins. They go on to play Edmonton in the Grey Cup. Who is going to care? There needs to be an assurance in the league that each division will be represented in the Grey Cup.

We like to watch winners, not loosers during the playoffs. Canada is one big country not 2 parts.

As per the bolded, that happens regardless of a crossover or not. The first two teams of a division get to host the games regardless. The Crossover team comes in as the 3rd place team even if the crossover team has a better record than the 2nd place team.

Keep the crossover. puts the top 6 teams in

Lose the crossover. its only there to keep the whiners quiet

I often thought in place of a crossover rule, you have the two only teams play a two game total points.
Just like the 70's I beleive and it can be very exciting except if there is a blow out in the first game.

I Agree! Let the best teams compete. If you doubled the points this season at the halfway point, a 4-14 team would make the playoffs when an 8-10 does not.

I hope we never, never, ever go back to two point total points.

ro, don't tell me you are worried about my 8-10 (Projected season ended record)Lions crossing over and winning the rubber game with Montreal and representing the East in the Grey Cup, now are you? :wink:

I'm sure you could stop us 6 times from the one! :wink:

Not worried at all, its the principle I am against

Hey sm why don’t you like the two game total points?

Well, Id watch the Grey Cup team even if it was 2 Eastern teams. If my team is out, I really dont care who wins the Grey Cup, I just enjoy watching a football game. Hell, I watch the Superbowl, dont care who wins that game either.
Its about the love for the game as much as its about "bragging rights" for me.

If the first game is a blowout (See Yesterdays Calgary Vs Edmonton) And the other team "Edges" the win in a second game. They are literally screwed.

I think Calgary will bounce back in Edmonton. They would both getb two points for a win. But in a two game total points, If Calgary won 32-30 on Friday, then by two game total points Edmonton would win.

Just doesn't seem right.

A loss is a loss but it should not carry over to the next game