I’m sure it can work. But I’m of the opinion that VRRP is MORE useful on the LAN side. So clients get a stable gateway to the cluster. Splitting the WANs as shown works fine with the “VRRP’d LANs” approach (e.g. if one router has to reboot/upgrade/etc, it’s a minor disruption to clients (e.g. existing tracked connections will drop, but will be re-established quickly — with users need to hit “reload” browser the only typical visibility of failover). The “LAN only” approach is simple, outside the slight distribution due to changing upstream WAN connection tracking.
VRRP on the WAN side gets tricker. VRRP has “connection tracking” which can be used to make seamless. But what’s services/speed/etc your ISP is (or can) provide on the modems is CENTRAL question. Like they may offer BGP, or ISP may offer bonded/etc connections for HA, etc. But to use “VRRP on WANs”, you’d ideally want to bridge the modems between the two routers and the modem (and another bridge 2nd WAN) — but whether that’s possible depends on what ISP is providing for IP subnets.