The big problem is that Crusades were profoundly tied up with a "feudal" conception of the world. With the appearance of bureaucratic states in Western Europe, crusades ceased to be a real possibility.
Granted, the crusade ideal was maintained as you can see in the Burgundy courts in the XVth century, or in Valois' afterwards. It's essentially coming from an idealized knightood model rather than a real drive to be honest, and after the XVIth, the Crusades are essentially a thing only among some religious circles.
You'd argue that it was as well coming from the failure of Crusade model in late feudal structures. Fair enough.
But even with, say a victory at Nicopolis and a Reconquista continuation in North Africa, it would eventually devolve more and more as "national" expeditions with a religious factor (rather than ground). Basically, Western European expeditions being more akin to what existed in Eastern Europe against Turks.
If you count the expeditions blessed as Crusades, as Spanish expeditions against Turks, you could have more of these with a more important Catholic hegemon in Europe (as having expeditions against North African entities being systematically understood as "Crusades")
But it would be hardly crusades in the common sense : even by stretching the definition as much as humanly possible, the blessing were made a-posteriori, and the expeditions would probably have been made nevertheless even without pontifical agreement.