How the crossover should work

My 2 cents.
The way the crossover is set up, it rewards a fourth place team in a division with a playoff spot in the other division. Which it should. :smiley:
However as it looks now and will probably end up, the top 3 teams of the league will compete for a spot in the Grey Cup in the same division. Leaving the bottom 3 playoff teams to compete for the other spot. This is not what we want in a championship game.
The rules should be to reward the teams with the best records. As it stands now Edmonton or Winnipeg could be "strategic" to try and be the crossover team for a much easier route to the Cup. Anyway you look at it only one of the top three teams makes it to the cup. ( This year anyway)
My proposal:
*If there is a crossover - keep the same criteria ( 4th place team in one division has a better record than the 3rd place team in the other) and the first place team in the crossover division ( Ottawa - as it stands now), has a worse record than the second place team in the other division (BC - as it stands now), then the second place team would be the team to crossover with the bye, hosting the "division" final. May sound a bit strange, but so does Edmonton vs Ottawa in the east final game.
There are fans who want to keep the traditional east vs west and there are fans who want to see the top teams compete in the cup regardless of division.
I think this would be a good compromise - keeping the divisions, but rewarding the best teams so they have a better chance of being in the cup. :smiley:

How about this, it keeps the 1st place teams in each division with a bye, and then best team gets Home field advantage for the semi’s

Just because there is an off year for a division, doesnt mean that you change the rules.

We have seen in the NFL where some divisions fight for the top spot at 8-8 where in another division a 10-6 or 11-5 team misses out. They dont lose their heads and want to change for the sake of an off year.

Years like this just give the media something to write about without having to go dig for a story.

Interesting, but your 3v6 winner should go against #1 as #1 team should get the easier route to the Final.

No one is going to “lose their heads” !

There are rule changes every season…including the crossover.

Just ideas for trying to make the league better…IMHO

I like it. :smiley:

Get rid of the cross over. No other league has it. And they seem to function well. Tradition means something in sports, Could you imagine the up-roar if MLB got rid of the Designated Hitter?

The CFL didn't have a cross over in the 60's or 70's, it shouldn't have changed. (that's my 2-cents)

That actually isn't a bad idea, I wouldn't be mad and that's coming from a fan in the East. It does seem silly that you pretty much will have a winners and losers bracket this year for each division.

A lot of other leagues have crossovers. They just call it a "wildcard" instead. Different name, but same thing.

Having said that, I also wouldn't mind seeing the crossover done away with, if we had equal divisions. But it's unfair to have one division of 5 teams competing for 3 playoff spots and another division of 4 teams competing for 3 playoff spots. Even with the wildcard, the playoff system in the CFL favours the East division. However, if we add (or subtract) another team, then I think we could get rid of the crossover.

I also wouldn't mind a less interlocked schedule, so that teams play the other teams in the own division more than they play teams in the other division. That way, we'd be less likely to see one division stacked with teams with losing records and the other stacked with winning records, and it would create more of a sense of mystique for the Grey Cup.

The MLB never had wild card games either until a couple of years ago.

The CFL changed to the crossover to help keep the season interesting.

Its only happened like 4 times since it was brought so its not like we see this every season, but the playoff race keeps people engaged.

I voted keep as is.

I know there is more and more fans wanting 1 division.

I would only be in for that if we went back to pre-86 when we had 16 games.

With 9 teams that would mean every team plays every team 2 x.

With 18 games, and 1 division, you would need to come up with a formula for each team to play an opponent a third time.

IMO, the only fair way would be to base it on the previous year standings:

Example as follows:



So every team plays each other 2 X and for the 3rd game it would go like this:



Not if the 3 seed wins. They would have the 3 seed which wouldn't be fair when the 2 seed would play 4 or 5. Don't lock the brackets in. The 1 seed plays the highest seed remaining.

Here is a very interesting article that is basically a recap of how unbalanced things were in the CFL playoffs going back to the infamous 1981 season up to and including the 1996 season ,the last season before the crossover was initiated and the "what if " scenarios that would have been if the league had the crossover rule back then.

For anyone interested in this subject this is a well documented and researched article that is a must read on why exactly the league needed to change over to the crossover and how history might've looked different if it was in play before the 1997 season.

Enjoy and happy reading : :slight_smile: ................. ... crossover/

Divisions don't make sense in this league. We aren't like other leagues as we only have 9 teams. With an 18 game schedule we play each team twice so what's the point of the separation?

Until we have 10 teams just make it a free for all.

It's actually happened 8 times since it was brought in with surprising results in the fact that no crossover team has gone on to represent the East division in the Grey Cup. The crossover team has in fact only twice ever won the ESF and went on to the East final and lost on both occasions. In the 10 crossover games played in history the record stands as 2 wins (ESF) 6 losses (ESF) and 2 losses (EF) so you tally it all up and the crossover overall total game record is 10 gp / 2 wins / 8 losses.


"97" BC LIONS--------------------------lost SEMI-FINAL to Alouettes.....45-35
"02" SASK ROUGHRIDERS----------lost SEMI-FINAL to Argonauts...24-12
"03" BC LIONS-------------------------lost SEMI-FINAL to Argonauts...28-7
"05" SASK ROUGHRIDERS----------lost SEMI-FINAL to Alouettes....30-14
"08" EDMONTON ESKIMOS--------won SEMI-FINAL vs Bombers....29-21
"08" EDMONTON ESKIMOS--------lost EAST-FINAL to Alouettes....36-26
"09" BC LIONS-------------------------won SEMI-FINAL vs Ti-Cats.........34-27 (ot)
"09" BC LIONS-------------------------lost EAST-FINAL to Alouettes.....56-18
"12" EDMONTON ESKIMOS-------lost SEMI-FINAL to Argonauts....42-26
"14" BC LIONS------------------------lost SEMI-FINAL to Alouettes.....50-17

:thup: :thup: :thup:

Keep it the same.

It would be silly to go to one division because the western teams are good now. Then what, have the eastern teams become competitive next year and then go back to East and West again?

Last year, no cross-over was needed plus the worst team in the east had a better record than 2 teams in the west.

If we can ever get a 10th team and in the east, no more cross overs, top 3 per division make it and less chance of a sub 500 team hosting playoff games or qualifying for that matter.

300 you are right, up to the time when MLB only had 2 divisions they did not have a wild card game. Changing of the division set up forced them to change their play-off format. I also agree that it keeps people engaged. You make very good points and I now will refer to my 2-cent thought like what has become of our penny- gotten rid of because they were worthless

The reason MLB introduced wild card games was due expansion . They went from 26-30 teams and simply needed more than 4 teams in their post season .

That is not really true
Yes they have a wild card but they say in their division or conferance

The American league WC will not play against the National league for example

You can still have a team in one league that has a better record than a team in the other and not make the playoffs