Counterpoint is that with crossover you spread yourself thin.
Crossover scouts are probably only looking at top players from each region. Whereas regional scouts have the time to look up and down the lineups of every team right down to the 4th liners. Much higher chance of uncovering gems.
Except every scout is going to believe that their gem from their region is the best gem and the only context they're going to have on the players they didn't see live/meet is going to be tape. Like I said, it lends itself to really heavy bias.
Whereas, in the system I imagine would work best, you'd have your scouts cover multiple regions for set durations. For a month you're covering the WHL, then the OHL for a month, then the QMJHL, USHL, College, Junior A, etc. Not every scout is going to be able to cover every region in a season but at least you'd have scouts that have seen kids play across the country and can properly contextualize some of the standouts they've viewed/talked to.
Then at the end of the year, you're going to have multiple reports from different scouts on players. That's more valuable than one person's opinion.
Part of scouting is building relationships with coaches and players a bit to know how they are off-ice or training. It's hard to do that if you break up bonds. But that's why you collective talk what others see on tape comparedly
I don't think you're breaking up bonds. You're establishing relationships with more than one person.