You have to wonder about some of the CFL color commentators

One commentator appears to not quite know the crossover rule. He believes that the 4th place team in one division can only cross over and bump the 3rd place team in the other division by having more wins. My understanding is the team has to have more points, like one more point. Montreal can cross over if it has one or more total points than the 3rd place team in the west.

The one that really got me going was hearing the two commentators during the overtime segment between the Eskies and Lions. It was the first mini-game and the Eskies move the ball down to around the Lions 10 yard line. It was about 3rd and 1, maybe 3rd and 2.

One commentator kept saying the Eskies coach had a decision to make. He had a decision to make. What decision?? The other thought it "might be worth going for it". Hello? What was there to think about? What decision was there to make? Why would any coach in his right mind gamble on 3rd and one in overtime? If the Eskies gambled and failed, the ball goes over to the Lions and it is their turn to start at the 35. All the Lions kicker would have to do is boot the ball through the end zone and the Lions win the game.

Am I missing something when it comes to the overtime in the CFL?

Man, it is bad enough being a Lions fan and watching the Lions come up with every conceivable way of losing a game but then to hear the commentators saying the stuff they say?? Sheesh!

my thinking for esks is that because the asinine rule of starting at the 35, bc already in field goal range, so they go for the TD and the way they were moving the ball, they probably would have made it and the D probably would have prevented a bc TD. It is possible the commentator was thinking along those lines

From the CF Rules, it's points

If the fourth-place team in division A has more points, not tied, than the third-place team in division B, the fourth-place team will crossover to division B, replace the third place team in division A, and compete against the second-place team of that division.

We really should have a weekly thread for the shit these guys say

No doubt he was thinking that but man that is a huge risk. You go for the 3 points and hope the Lions have to kick a FG to force another mini-game. And then you have another go at it. Add to that the fact that Leone [Lions' kicker] is becoming unpredictable and it seems like a no brainer to me. Yes, it's true the Eskies were moving the ball well in that 1st mini-game but to even consider going for it and risking not getting the 1st down would have almost guaranteed the Lions the win.

here's an idea how about all you apply to be color commentators for the CFL... since you seem to know more than they do.

I imagine there is people on this board that could do a lot better. But we do need better ones.

Not so simple a decision. If it's third and 2 then go for the FG, but third and 1 should be automatic in the CFL because the D has to give a yard off the LoS. If they fail, aside from the fact someone on the o-line should be benched, the Lions don't go for it on 1st and 10. That would mean a 42 yarder which is not a chip shot, just ask the Als about the 2009 Grey Cup. Teams will run a few plays to get as close as possible for a FG and then they may never get in FG range. Just ask the Als about the 2005 Grey Cup.

My personal favorite was a couple weeks back where "Montreal and Toronto have a great provincial rivalry".

That has to be a Rod Blackism.

A coach throws the yellow review flag, albeit right after seeing the play live.

The announcers after umpteenth video reviews, always have to have sides on it, even though the reviews were clear on what side the decision will be on. I could understand if it is close call. but NOT if is going to be an obvious call. No imagination on how to fill the time for the refs to look at it.

And another beauty tonight. "The sure handed Getzlaf". The guy has never played a game in his career that he hasn't dropped at least 2 passes a game. Granted he comes up big lots beyong that but "sure handed"? That's like calling the Rider Defence a steel curtain that bends a little at times and misses the odd tackle.