Will there be a 2016 playoff Crossover?

[BigBlue]

The current league wide standings:

Top Six

8-1-1 Stampeders 

7-3 Lions

6-4 Bombers

5-5 Eskimos

5-5 TigerCats

5-4-1 RedBlacks

Bottom Three

4-6 Argonauts

3-7 Alouettes

1-9 Rough Riders

At the moment Edmonton would cross over to play Ottawa ... is this going to change much if at all by playoff time?

[Atomic]

Toronto isn't making it easy on themselves but when I watch them they look like a .500 team.  They'd have to go 5-3 over the final 8 to make it to 9-9, though.  8-10 seems more likely for them.  Can Edmonton and Winnipeg both do better than 8-10?  I think so.  So yes, there will be a crossover.

[rebusrankin]

I lean towards crossover given how the teams are currently playing.

[Mark H.]

Unless Toronto has a Travis Bond clone or two waiting in the wings - there will be a crossover. Until they can give Ray better protection the playoffs are out of sight for them.

 

[bearpants]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say.... maybe??

[17to85]

lots can change between Labour Day and the end of the season. I suspect there will be a cross over though for one simple reason.... too many wins for western teams when the Riders are sporting the record they are. 

[Atomic]

41 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

Unless Toronto has a Travis Bond clone or two waiting in the wings - there will be a crossover. Until they can give Ray better protection the playoffs are out of sight for them.

 

Yes.... 5 Canadians on the OL is nice, but if they can't protect, it doesn't make much sense...

 

EDIT: My mistake, looks like they are only starting 4 Canadians on the OL now.  Still...

Edited September 7, 2016 by Atomic
confusion

[TBURGESS]

Toronto doesn't look like a very good team right now, even with Ray's great completion %. Their defense is slowly getting better and may be able to give them a chance in the second half, but it's looking more and more like a cross over year.

[wbbfan]

With a healthy ray and wrs To could make a run. But at this point it would be a surprise. The west is much stronger imop.

[Zontar]

Book it. It will be EDM crossing over. Will play OTT in the Semi. And win.

Edited September 7, 2016 by Zontar

[HardCoreBlue]

I know it's been talked about ad nauseam over the years, but I detest the cross over. It's never felt right to me. 

[Atomic]

1 minute ago, HardCoreBlue said:

I know it's been talked about ad nauseam over the years, but I detest the cross over. It's never felt right to me. 

Does a 6-12 team making it over a 9-9 team feel right?

[TBURGESS]

3 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Does a 6-12 team making it over a 9-9 team feel right?

Has it ever been a 6-12 team vs a 9-9?

[Eternal optimist]

Maybe this isn't the place to bring this up, but does anyone else feel that the whole east/west division should be abolished? I mean, there's only 9 teams in the league... why not just have the top 6 make the playoffs? It seems this cross-over thing is an issue every year, I know the counter-argument would be that it makes games against your own division more important... but doesn't it also make non-divisional games less important?

[Rich]

40 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

Has it ever been a 6-12 team vs a 9-9?

Worse.  And there has been quite a few years when a joke of a team made it over a team around and over .500.

http://cflpass.ca/bc-lions/history-cfl-playoffs-crossover/

•  1981

West Division
Edmonton 14-1-1
Winnipeg 11-5
BC 10-6
Saskatchewan 9-7
Calgary 6-10

East Division
Hamilton 11-4-1
Ottawa 5-11
Montreal 3-13
Toronto 2-14

[Atomic]

1 minute ago, Rich said:

Worse.  And there has been quite a few years when a joke of a team made it over a team around .500.

•  1981

West Division
Edmonton 14-1-1
Winnipeg 11-5
BC 10-6
Saskatchewan 9-7
Calgary 6-10

East Division
Hamilton 11-4-1
Ottawa 5-11
Montreal 3-13
Toronto 2-14

You could also point to a year like 2008.  Edmonton was 10-8 and crossed over.  Without that rule, Edmonton would have missed and the 4-14 Argos would have made the playoffs 

[Atomic]

8 minutes ago, Eternal optimist said:

Maybe this isn't the place to bring this up, but does anyone else feel that the whole east/west division should be abolished? I mean, there's only 9 teams in the league... why not just have the top 6 make the playoffs? It seems this cross-over thing is an issue every year, I know the counter-argument would be that it makes games against your own division more important... but doesn't it also make non-divisional games less important?

I like having the East and West divisions, personally.  Makes for better rivalries and more intrigue throughout the season.

The funniest thing about having 2 divisions in a nine team league is this: If you're in the West, you play 10 games against the West and 8 games against the East.  If you're in the East.... you play 10 games against the West and 8 games against the East.  What-the-what?!  #funWithNumbers

[HardCoreBlue]

3 hours ago, Atomic said:

Does a 6-12 team making it over a 9-9 team feel right?

yup sure does. different division.

[Tracker]

I think the league has it right in the current format. The East vs West rivalry gives the Grey Cup a lot of its colour and history.

[HardCoreBlue]

2 hours ago, Atomic said:

You could also point to a year like 2008.  Edmonton was 10-8 and crossed over.  Without that rule, Edmonton would have missed and the 4-14 Argos would have made the playoffs 

But I could also argue the Argos did enough in their division to make it, Edmonton did not. 

[Atomic]

10 hours ago, HardCoreBlue said:

But I could also argue the Argos did enough in their division to make it, Edmonton did not. 

Well I respect your opinion but I disagree fully!

[bearpants]

13 hours ago, Eternal optimist said:

Maybe this isn't the place to bring this up, but does anyone else feel that the whole east/west division should be abolished? I mean, there's only 9 teams in the league... why not just have the top 6 make the playoffs? It seems this cross-over thing is an issue every year, I know the counter-argument would be that it makes games against your own division more important... but doesn't it also make non-divisional games less important?

I don't think there's much momentum to do this... but a way to consider it while still keeping divisional rivalries is making a playoff format something where the division winners take the top spots and the rest fall where they fall... the current "playoff" standings would look like this:

1. Calgary (bye, play the winner of 4 v 5) 
2. Ottawa (bye, play the winner of 3 v 6)
3. BC (home team vs Edmonton) 
4. Winnipeg (home team vs Ham)
5. Hamilton (I believe they'd have the tie-break on Edm)
6. Edmonton

 

[bearpants]

26 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Well I respect your opinion but I disagree fully!

I agree with your respectful disagreement...

[Pete Catan's Ghost]

13 hours ago, Atomic said:

I like having the East and West divisions, personally.  Makes for better rivalries and more intrigue throughout the season.

The funniest thing about having 2 divisions in a nine team league is this: If you're in the West, you play 10 games against the West and 8 games against the East.  If you're in the East.... you play 10 games against the West and 8 games against the East.  What-the-what?!  #funWithNumbers

On the rivalry front; the lack of stability within our own conference has been a huge difference maker for us.

If the BB hadn't floated back and forth between West-East...(has it been 2 or 3 times)? we would have maintained our traditional primary rivalry with Sasky. If you were to poll the 30-40 year old Rider fans, I bet many would identify Calgary or Edmonton as their main rival. To me it is because they (and we) found a different enemy when we moved out of the western division. 

You can't maintain a decades long rivalry unless there is continuity over the generations.