First off, I don't really understand the poll question. The options are 'current' which I imagine means the East-West system that has worked well for decades in the CFL and 'best of three semifinals' which seems to be the calendar that you've laid out but I can't be certain.
I'm not interested in any system that has 3 tiny divisions in a league as small as 9 teams. It's silly and invites weird results like a 6-12 team winning such a small division. Not to mention that the CFL does not divide geographically well into 3s as evidenced by your insistence on the surgical removal of Montreal from the East to plunk randomly into the prairies apparently forever more. How could you do that to Montreal? Their rivals are Ottawa Hamilton and Toronto. Likewise, how could you tear Sask and Winnipeg away from Calgary Edmonton and BC? That would be tragic. If the league ever gained lost or moved teams it may need to realign but right now there is absolutely no need to whatsoever. Three divisions is NOT a good idea in any way and I've told you this before.
Next, I do not like the idea of best of three playoffs - at all. Football playoffs should be one-and-done games. Football is played weekly and to prepare properly and heal from the previous games this is necessary. It is not the least bit practical to reserve three whole weeks to play a playoff round, especially if one of those weeks ends up not necessary due to a 2-game sweep. How do you tell your broadcaster that you have no games for them this week because both semis swept? You can't move Grey Cup a week forward. Everyone has their hotels booked months in advance. It's a non-starter. The league would never ever ever go for this, and for good reason.
Then there is the matter of seeing the same team a ga-jillion freaking times in one season. Can you imagine Hamilton and Toronto playing 4 times this year and THEN playing a best of three playoff? Other than 3 or 4 traditional rivalries (basically Labour Day) fans in general are not all that fond of back-to-back games to start with. Three weeks of the same team would drive everyone nuts.
I also do not like the fiasco known as the 2-game total point playoff. Seen it, been there, done that. It only makes the first game redundant. You're basically making a 120 minute game. It's pointless. That first game isn't really played to win. It's only to see how many points you can score. You won't see decisions made to win the game (like 2-pt converts or onside kicks), you will just see teams play the percentages to score points. The chances of a good dramatic 4th quarter plummet. You're just creating THREE halftimes and one of them is a week long. A close game is 60 minutes long and decided in the last 5 minutes. In a 2-game total point the game would just be 120 minutes just to get to those last 5 minutes. It's redundant. We had one back in 1986 and it's kinda neat in a novelty way but if we saw it every year it would get old really fast.
Furthermore the league would consider a 4-team playoff system a non-starter. Not only are you eliminating 22% of the league's teams from the playoffs, meaning lost revenues for those teams, you're also killing the playoff races, making more games down the stretch meaningless. For example, this season if only the top 2 teams in each division qualified, the Calgary-BC game a couple of weeks back would have seen Calgary rest a bunch of dudes. Every year there will be one or two extra meaningless games down the stretch as two more teams get eliminated a week or two earlier. It's bad business for the league and the governors would never ever go for it, and for good reason.
Does that answer your question?