Schedule if CFL went to ten league team.

[Will]

So let's imagine that the divisions in the CFL look like this:

East

Toronto Argonauts
Hamilton Tiger-Cats
Montreal Alouettes
Ottawa Football Club
Maritimes Football Club

West

Winnipeg Blue Bombers
Saskatchewan Roughriders
Edmonton Eskimos
Calgary Stampeders
BC Lions

The last time the CFL had a 9-team league was in 2005 and if memory serves the format was 3x against 2 of your divisional rivals, 2x against 1 of your divisional rivals and 2x against the other division to equal 18 games! This will probably be the format when we go back to the 9-team league in a few years. But, and I'm getting too far ahead of myself perhaps, what would happen if we went to a 10-team league. The hypothetical scenario I see right now is 2x against the other 4 divisional rivals ad then 2x against the other division. But, then what's the sense of a division rivalry if your playing every other team in the league the same amount of times. Just throwing out a few scenarios:

3-3-3-2= 11 against division
2-2-1-1-1= 7 against west

3-3-2-2= 10 against division
2-2-2-1-1= 8 against west

Either way if we want to make the concept of division rivalries work, we're going to have to make it such that we wouldn't see every west team at home in a season.

[ArgoRavi]

Interestingly, from 1981 through 1986 when there were 9 teams and a 16 game schedule, everyone played one another twice so the Argos played Hamilton as much as they played Edmonton. Prior to that, each team only played teams from the other division once per season meaning that the Argos only visited any western city once every two years. If we ever do get to 10 teams, I would be partial to more divisional games even if it means that the Argos might not host the Esks or the Stamps every season. BTW, why not play divisional rivals three times each and then play the other division only six times in total for the season?

[paulwoods13]

I'm not in favour of any schedule that sees some teams come to town only once every two seasons. Division rivalries are great, but I'd rather see a fully interlocking schedule (9x2 = 18) if and when the league gets to 10 teams. Nine home games, nine different opponents. Or better yet -- and this will draw the ire of some who say players' bodies couldn't take the punishment -- go to a 20-game schedule with two extra home games, against divisional opponents whenever possible.

[ArgoRavi]

I'm not in favour of any schedule that sees some teams come to town only once every two seasons. Division rivalries are great, but I'd rather see a fully interlocking schedule (9x2 = 18) if and when the league gets to 10 teams. Nine home games, nine different opponents. Or better yet -- and this will draw the ire of some who say players' bodies couldn't take the punishment -- go to a 20-game schedule with two extra home games, against divisional opponents whenever possible.

I think that it comes down to what will get teams more gate receipts. I would think that the Argos would prefer to have Hamilton visit an extra time rather than have Edmonton come to town. Likewise, the Lions, Stamps and Esks would all probably prefer an extra visit by Saskatchewan than one by the new Ottawa franchise. Of course, all of the eastern teams might not be that keen on not having the Riders come to town with their travelling fan base.

[paulwoods13]

I hear you, Ravi, but the problem is we already face Ham every preseason (sometimes twice), then three times in reg season and then maybe again in playoffs -- total of five or even six games against one opponent, and only one against two other teams? I get tired of seeing East Division foes so often -- I would like to see nine different home-field opponents every year. I also think a balanced schedule is better for competitive concerns than an unbalanced schedule. Yes, it means each team plays more games (10) outside its diivision than inside (8), but everyone is in that same boat, and it also prevents competitive unfairnesses such as one team (say the Alouettes) facing two lousy western teams twice each and two good western teams once each, while another team (say the Argonauts) faces those two lousy teams once each and the two good teams twice each -- that could really skew the standings.

[ArgoRavi]

One remedy could be to schedule pre-season games in cities where teams are not scheduled to play regular season games. The league appeared to do that back when there was heavy divisional play (up to 1980). The league could also do like the NFL does and tailor each team's schedule to performance from the previous season. For example, Toronto and Saskatchewan would face each other twice this year while facing all other non-divisional opponents once each. With Winnipeg back in the west, perhaps the Als could face B.C. twice.

[argolio]

3-3-2-2= 10 against division
2-2-2-1-1= 8 against west
I'd go with this one. You'd play 4 home and 4 away vs the West, and in a ten-year cycle you'd host each West team eight times. I don't think that's a huge loss.

I think you get a truer division champion by playing more games within the division, and it would make a great case for eliminating the crossover rule. Playing ten games vs the West and only eight vs the East in a fully interlocking schedule makes divisions kind of redundant. It would make more sense to just have one division with that type of schedule.

[argonaut11xx]

your NOT going to lure new fans by playing the same teams OVER AND OVER...... a balanced schedule is nessesary.

one of the biggest knocks on our league is not enough teams...so how is this solved by playing the Ti-cats 4 times plus exhibition in a season?...

yea...for the hardcore fan an unbalanced shedule looks neat, ...but for the casual, or newbie...not so much...they are still trying to figure out who the QB is...

[bluto]

I'd go with this one. You'd play 4 home and 4 away vs the West, and in a ten-year cycle you'd host each West team eight times. I don't think that's a huge loss.

I think you get a truer division champion by playing more games within the division, and it would make a great case for eliminating the crossover rule. Playing ten games vs the West and only eight vs the East in a fully interlocking schedule makes divisions kind of redundant. It would make more sense to just have one division with that type of schedule.

you also get that "familiarity breeds contempt" situation when you see the same team 3 times plus maybe again in the playoffs...

balanced schedules are nice for variety, but if you play each team the same number of times, you may as well do away with divisions (which is maybe what argonaut11xx is advocating?). it also puts a greater strain on travel budgets for teams.

[argonaut11xx]

Hey Bluto...

All im "advocating" is building a new and younger fan base...and while i agree with your comments, playing the same teams OVER and OVER..is not what my 18 yr old son (nor the vast majority of his friends) wants to see...(yes he is an Argo/CFL fan)

[bluto]

Hey Bluto...

All im "advocating" is building a new and younger fan base...and while i agree with your comments, playing the same teams OVER and OVER..is not what my 18 yr old son (nor the vast majority of his friends) wants to see...(yes he is an Argo/CFL fan)

i know what you mean. having 8 teams can look that way no matter how you set up the schedule though.

back to the OP, it sure would be nice if the CFL had 2 more teams...(especially in the east)

[Rideaus]

I can only see two logical options. Option A: 2 games vs. 9 teams = 18 games OR Option B: 3 games vs. 4 intra-division teams = 12 games, 1 game vs. 5 in the other division, plus one "extra" game vs. the other division (either on a rotating basis, or have the previous years #1 play a second game, the #2's, #3's...etc). This wouldn't be that bad, travel expenses would be lower, and it's not like you would be seeing the same team "over-and-over"...I mean every 2 years, you would have 3 home games vs. a division rival.

[marcwagz]

when ottawa and maybe maritimes enter the league they will not have any rivals
it really would be best for their new fanbases to have a team to hate and that means we need to make a slightly unbalanced schedule.

for the argos it could be...
3 vs hamilton 2 home 1 away
3 vs ottawa 1 home 2 away
2 vs maritimes 1 home 1 away
2 vs montreal 1 home 1 away

2 vs winnipeg 1 home 1 away
2 vs Sask 1 home 1 away
2 vs Calgary 1 home 1 away
1 vs BC 1 home
1 vs Edmonton 1 away

9 home 9 away
Only 1 team does not get to come to toronto in any given year.
And Toronto only doesn't get to go to 1 city in any given year. Which means there is still a lot of variety.
In 9 home games over a season 8 different teams are hosted.