Guys and gals,
I'd like to express my opinion about the current playoff format. I've always been unhappy with the one game Western and Eastern Final format. I'll explain why but first let me say that it was great to see the Argos get into the Grey Cup and of course it was good to see Calgary but did we truly the best teams in the Grey Cup? Yes, of course we did. Given the current format these teams deserved to get in and yes they were the best last week but I've never been comfortable with the one game sudden death approach.
I remember when it was the best two out of three in the west to settle once and for all which team should advance to the Grey Cup.
Much has been said about how the Lions imploded and for some, the Lions didn't even show up and so on. I'll be the first to say that Calgary easily out played the Lions but in a game as important as the Grey Cup I would have liked to see the Lions and Calgary meet up again and even a 3rd time if necessary. If Calgary beat the Lions again then it is settled. The Stamps would truly be the more worthy team. If the 2 out of 3 game series ended in a tie then this would heighten anticipation for a final game showdown. The same goes for the Eastern Final. Montreal was beaten by a team that was only .500. I'm not suggesting that the Argos were not fully deserving of advancing or that the win was a fluke but I do feel that I would like to have seen the Als have one more crack at it. This is why I think the best 2 out of 3 format has the potential of eliminating what we saw between the Lions and the Stamps and to an extent what we saw between the Argos and the Als.
Now, I know some might be thinking, a game is a game and both teams are expected to be up for it. Winner takes all. This is true but it does have its downside as I've explained. I also believe that a 2 out of 3 game playoff format adds even more credibility to who is battling for the Grey Cup. It is entirely possible that the Stamps and Argos would have been in the GC regardless. It is also possible that I'm skeptical that the best teams in the CFL were actually in the Grey Cup. No offence to the Argo or Stamp fans.
I used to love watching the best 2 out of 3 Western Final years ago and to see the teams duke it out to see who truly should represent the West in the Grey Cup. I was not particularly impressed with the 2 game points total format in the East for obvious reasons. If a team blew the other team out say 45-6, it meant that the losing team was starting the second game already down by 39 points. An almost insurmountable lead to overcome.
I would really like to see the CFL organization give serious consideration to bringing back the original best of three format. It's true that in those days teams were only playing 16 games while today they play 18. I don't see this as a problem. You simply start the season a few weeks earlier. The argument has been made that there is the risk of teams getting beat up more in a best of three series format. To an extent this may be true but it did not seem to pose a problem when it used to be that way.
Concern as to whether or not poor officiating might play a deciding role in which team advanced the Grey Cup would likely be less of a concern. Most importantly football fans would get to see more football.
I'm just thinking out loud guys. Does anyone know why the best out of three format was abandoned in the first place. I'd really like to see a return to it.