Getting rid of the crossover (its not what you think)

Read number 3
What an excellent idea.

[url=] ... sion-time/[/url]

Number 2 has some super interesting stats comparing the nfl to the CFL.
I was trying to find stats comparing punting and found this. This also compares penalities. Id like to see these same stats for the 2015 season

The cross over is a necessary evil right now. If the league ever does expand to the 10th team and preferably the east, then it can be done away with it forever. Top 3 in each division and first place getting a bye is ideal IMO

I like the overtime idea as well. I'd rather have it resemble the rest of the game. Going further OT, keep ties if OT solves nothing, it's rare and don't care for the NHL style-force a winner.

I like it. The problem... and correct me if I'm wrong... doesn't it take a home game away from the 2nd place team in the Conference where only 2 teams make the playoffs?

I LOVE the OT the way it is now. I would just make it longer - play until someone wins.

In a top 2 situation, the second place team still gets a home game. It would be just the first game of the 2 game series vs. the 1 seed.

What I don't like about that format is it removes the incentive of finish first. Both first place teams would lose the bye.

The first place team where 4 make it in could go down in the division semi one and done while the one where 2 make it in kind of gets a second chance. It would hurt the importance of the regular season in my view.

Johnny's idea. Keep all CAT themed teams from making the playoffs :rockin:

  1. No - Overtime is already long enough as it is, it puts the pressure on now with the mandatory 2 point attempt as punishment for not getting it done in the game, but in a fair way that ensures both sides have equal chance to win.

  2. Hell No - Yes, the clock is whistled in at the Refs discretion but the giant 40 second play clock allows way too much time for audiables and allows WAY too much clock management to decide games in the 4th quarter.

  3. Also No - The first round bye is the incentive to finish first. It's a major advatage that gives the season more meaning. Meaning that is desperately needed in a 9 team league, where a losing record and winning three games can win you a the cup. Even with these new rules, teams with losing records could still make it to the Grey Cup so it doesn't really address the real problem. Also, playing the same team twice while the other side plays different teams can be an advantage in itself and makes scouting much easier for the "Loser" conference. I'd much rather have the crossover (and the travel disadvantage that comes with just barely squeaking in) then a point series. Lest we forget, no Crossover team has ever even made it to the Grey Cup, yet alone won it, so claiming it's a problem that needs fixing I just can't see.

  1. OT
    Find any OT format pointless, unless a winner is guaranteed. Current format is ok, just keep going until someone wins. If baseball can go over the scheduled 3hr mark at 7 innings and continue to be televised well into the 15th inning, the CFL can continue until there is a winner.
    Would prefer the old 2x 10 minute halves. But keep the mandatory 2 point convert. Once each team has one opportunity on offence, game can be decided by any means including a rouge.
    In the CFL where a team can score 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, or 8 points at a time, there should not be any ties.

  2. 20 sec clock is fine. CFL games are still generally shorter than NFL games. Not sure if it was stated, but NFL historically run the ball more, and I think running plays generally take less time, the QB is not waiting for the receivers to run their routes and the QB is not going through their progressions.
    Having said that, if the league wanted to try the idea of the 30 second reset clock in exhibition games, why not see if it moves the game quicker.

  3. The playoff idea is interesting, however, like others, it takes away the goal of finishing first to get the bye week. Also, when the CFL had the US experiment, they moved to the first vs 4th format and I know going to the games in Calgary, no one showed up for the semi-final. Not sure if it is a CFL quirk, but people don't seem to take advantage of getting to see more games.
    As for the cross-over, when it was first brought in, I loved it. Now, not so much. I find myself (most seasons) cheering for the 3rd place team in the East at the end of the season, to beat out the 4th place team in the west.
    Honestly, now, I would like to see the cross over go away, which won't happen until a tenth team, or scrap the 2 divisions as everybody is already playing each other twice. Just introduce a weighted schedule for the remaining games.

No, I don't like the 2 game total point. It's really just one 120 minute game where strategy of winning the first game goes out the window. You can't get your 4th quarter lead and grind out, you have to keep scoring in the first game, so it's not really a proper game. Scoring as much and as often as possible is only ONE strategy to WIN one football game. In 2 game total point, sadly it becomes the ONLY way to play that first game. 2 game total point is something they do in soccer and I don't like it.

Overtime. I've always maintained that shootout OT is an abomination of football. It's like playing 2 on 2 hockey. It's not football, it's just garbage. No clock management, no field position, no special teams (other than FGs).

Why do we have overtime? Because apparently fans hate ties. I tell you some of the most exciting games I've ever seen ended in ties. There was a game at Ivor Wynne in 1981 when the big bad Eskimos had to come back from 20 points down to tie the game. The 2005 Grey Cup, ended tied after regulation. But the main point that needs making is that ties are quite rare in football. Without overtime the CFL average is about 2½ ties per season league wide. Are ties really such a menace? Hardly. It's not like hockey where Buffalo used to finish up 32-28-20! I'd rather see a tie than one team outscore the other 14-12 in OT with no clock and instant field position.

Now playoffs is different, OT is required to settle games. We must ask: why is the shootout format used? It's for TV. The network (and back in the day it was the CBC) didn't like long games and the 2 5 min halves took too long. Well BOO F'n HOO! CBC and TSN have no problem broadcasting 2 or 3 triple and quadruple OT hockey games every spring and if sacred playoff hockey OT was ever touched we'd have riots in the streets. Why should football be forced to bastardize itself? So even those who actually LIKE shootout OT must even admit that playoff games and Grey Cups should be decided by proper 5 or 10 minute halves of football with field position and special teams. After all, it's only one long playoff game every 4 or 5 years, and only 2 OT Grey Cups in over 100 years. I think TSN can handle that if they can handle those ridiculous hockey OTs multiple times per year.

I think with the 10 team league, they should still have it (the crossover). Tighten it up even more...

I love the mini-game system for overtime.

I hate the current system, but if you’re going to do it, don’t put teams in instant scoring position. At least start them from the center line.