- Apr 10, 2010
- 6,649
- 9,167
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- AFC Wimbledon
Can't see conferences getting a run in the AFL. There's no appetite for more than 22 games (if anything there's a desire for less), and further expansion of teams just brings us closer to everyone playing each other once.
3 conferences of 6 in a 22 round season is a model they might be thinking of, but that is a much harder sell than what the AFLW are playing, especially in comparison to what's already in place.
Pretty sure they are going that way. So that does offset the imbalance between conferences in that the top 2 teams from conference A would still play in the GF.
Yeah it was definitely reported as 1st vs 2nd from opposite conferences for the prelims and there is every chance that by the end of the seven rounds things will have become more balanced. The problem is, as it appears after just two games, when the top two teams aren't in the best 4 teams overall.
Which raises the question, what really is the benefit of the two ladders? Does it just make it seem fairer that teams can't play every other team? Why not just accept this for now and divide the games up as they have done, doing their best to be fair... and then use a single ladder with the top 4 teams at the end of the year playing off, 1st vs 4th and 2nd vs 3rd.
Last edited: