AFL exploring new mid-season tournament for cash prize

[The Feeder Club]

i disagree

what if it was say 1 (collingwood) v 8 (west coast) and the day of the collingwood home game its a stormy wet day at mcg, low scoring and the pies get up by 1 pt, and then the week later in perth its sunny and eagles win by 22 points.
take external factors out of it. best of 3.

and the 2 legs v 3 legs is perfect to build in recovery and byes for teams that do a sweep in round 1 and/or round 2 (noting thats all there is before the grand final).

As per soccer, the higher ranked team would play at home last, which is an advantage. And you're creating unusual scenarios to justify something that would create a scheduling headache with bigger problems

 

[Billy ray]

As per soccer, the higher ranked team would play at home last, which is an advantage. And you're creating unusual scenarios to justify something that would create a scheduling headache with bigger problems

whats unusual about weather conditions?

literally zero scheduling issues here. the whole bracket can be set up at the start

anyway, we can agree to disagree
im just trying to get some more finals games, and rivalries and make up the games that come from dropping unfair double up games

 

[Underarm]

The whole thing is Rediculous. From who’s allocation would the 1900 HF tickets come?

They'll just take them from the AFL members like they do every other time they have to find tickets.

 

[Hackysack]

They already have it, it’s called the vfl they just need to market it and broadcast it with people that can commentate.
Lastly to make it work they need to make umpiring a professional job and pay them accordingly we may then get consistency across the board in all aspects of the game.

 

[Walshawk]

The AFL is jumping at shadows. Just because this season only nine teams can make the eight is no reason to change anything. Season 2025 is an anomaly. Usually there are 12 - 14 teams in with a shot of playing finals at this stage. Hawks were still 13th this time last season. In 2023 at this stage Swans were 14th but just six points out of the 8.

 

[Dan26]

The AFL is jumping at shadows. Just because this season only nine teams can make the eight is no reason to change anything. Season 2025 is an anomaly. Usually there are 12 - 14 teams in with a shot of playing finals at this stage. Hawks were still 13th this time last season. In 2023 at this stage Swans were 14th but just six points out of the 8.

10 teams should make the finals. We had 8 teams making it in a 16 team league and everyone liked that. Then we've added two more teams but not increased the amount of teams in the finals. People can't support 8 out of 16, then also support 8 out of 18? Which it is? Do you support half, or less than half?

The formula for the amount of teams in the finals should be as follows:

If half the teams in the AFL equals an even number then HALF make the finals *example: 8 out of 16)

If half the teams in the AFL equals an odds number then HALF +1 make the finals (example 10 out of 18)

1​ Collingwood Magpies TBP​ 16​ 14​ 2​ 0​ 87.50%​ 56​ 1508​ 1085​ 138.99%​ Won 8​ 2​ Brisbane Lions​ 17​ 12​ 4​ 1​ 73.53%​ 50​ 1539​ 1318​ 116.77%​ Won 3​ 3​ Adelaide Crows TBP​ 16​ 11​ 5​ 0​ 68.75%​ 44​ 1569​ 1135​ 138.24%​ Won 2​ 4​ Geelong Cats TBP​ 16​ 11​ 5​ 0​ 68.75%​ 44​ 1601​ 1210​ 132.31%​ Won 1​ 5​ Hawthorn Hawks TBP​ 16​ 11​ 5​ 0​ 68.75%​ 44​ 1441​ 1212​ 118.89%​ Won 4​ 6​ Western Bulldogs TBP​ 16​ 10​ 6​ 0​ 62.50%​ 40​ 1716​ 1288​ 133.23%​ Won 4​ 7​ Gold Coast Suns TBP​ 15​ 10​ 5​ 0​ 66.67%​ 40​ 1432​ 1169​ 122.50%​ Won 2​ 8​ GWS Giants TBP​ 16​ 10​ 6​ 0​ 62.50%​ 40​ 1405​ 1255​ 111.95%​ Won 3​ 9​ Fremantle Dockers TBP​ 16​ 10​ 6​ 0​ 62.50%​ 40​ 1354​ 1245​ 108.76%​ Lost 1​ 10​ Sydney Swans TBP​ 16​ 7​ 9​ 0​ 43.75%​ 28​ 1265​ 1354​ 93.43%​ Won 1​ 11​ Port Adelaide Power TBP​ 16​ 7​ 9​ 0​ 43.75%​ 28​ 1248​ 1425​ 87.58%​ Lost 1​ 12​ Carlton Blues​ 17​ 6​ 11​ 0​ 35.29%​ 24​ 1311​ 1399​ 93.71%​ Lost 4​ 13​ Essendon Bombers TBP​ 15​ 6​ 9​ 0​ 40.00%​ 24​ 1084​ 1419​ 76.39%​ Lost 5​ 14​ Melbourne Demons TBP​ 16​ 5​ 11​ 0​ 31.25%​ 20​ 1253​ 1446​ 86.65%​ Lost 5​ 15​ St Kilda Saints TBP​ 16​ 5​ 11​ 0​ 31.25%​ 20​ 1270​ 1482​ 85.70%​ Lost 4​ 16​ North Melbourne Kangaroos TBP​ 16​ 4​ 11​ 1​ 28.12%​ 18​ 1237​ 1601​ 77.26%​ Lost 2​ 17​ Richmond Tigers TBP​ 16​ 3​ 13​ 0​ 18.75%​ 12​ 1015​ 1610​ 63.04%​ Lost 7​ 18​ West Coast Eagles TBP​ 16​ 1​ 15​ 0​ 6.25%​ 4​ 1055​ 1650​ 63.94%​ Lost 6​

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

The AFL is jumping at shadows. Just because this season only nine teams can make the eight is no reason to change anything. Season 2025 is an anomaly. Usually there are 12 - 14 teams in with a shot of playing finals at this stage. Hawks were still 13th this time last season. In 2023 at this stage Swans were 14th but just six points out of the 8.

AFL gotta justify their junkets to see us sports somehow.

This current admin really is quite craven

 

[Walshawk]

10 teams should make the finals. We had 8 teams making it in a 16 team league and everyone liked that. Then we've added two more teams but not increased the amount of teams in the finals. People can't support 8 out of 16, then also support 8 out of 18? Which it is? Do you support half, or less than half?

The formula for the amount of teams in the finals should be as follows:

If half the teams in the AFL equals an even number then HALF make the finals *example: 8 out of 16)

If half the teams in the AFL equals an odds number then HALF +1 make the finals (example 10 out of 18)

1​ Collingwood Magpies TBP​ 16​ 14​ 2​ 0​ 87.50%​ 56​ 1508​ 1085​ 138.99%​ Won 8​ 2​ Brisbane Lions​ 17​ 12​ 4​ 1​ 73.53%​ 50​ 1539​ 1318​ 116.77%​ Won 3​ 3​ Adelaide Crows TBP​ 16​ 11​ 5​ 0​ 68.75%​ 44​ 1569​ 1135​ 138.24%​ Won 2​ 4​ Geelong Cats TBP​ 16​ 11​ 5​ 0​ 68.75%​ 44​ 1601​ 1210​ 132.31%​ Won 1​ 5​ Hawthorn Hawks TBP​ 16​ 11​ 5​ 0​ 68.75%​ 44​ 1441​ 1212​ 118.89%​ Won 4​ 6​ Western Bulldogs TBP​ 16​ 10​ 6​ 0​ 62.50%​ 40​ 1716​ 1288​ 133.23%​ Won 4​ 7​ Gold Coast Suns TBP​ 15​ 10​ 5​ 0​ 66.67%​ 40​ 1432​ 1169​ 122.50%​ Won 2​ 8​ GWS Giants TBP​ 16​ 10​ 6​ 0​ 62.50%​ 40​ 1405​ 1255​ 111.95%​ Won 3​ 9​ Fremantle Dockers TBP​ 16​ 10​ 6​ 0​ 62.50%​ 40​ 1354​ 1245​ 108.76%​ Lost 1​ 10​ Sydney Swans TBP​ 16​ 7​ 9​ 0​ 43.75%​ 28​ 1265​ 1354​ 93.43%​ Won 1​ 11​ Port Adelaide Power TBP​ 16​ 7​ 9​ 0​ 43.75%​ 28​ 1248​ 1425​ 87.58%​ Lost 1​ 12​ Carlton Blues​ 17​ 6​ 11​ 0​ 35.29%​ 24​ 1311​ 1399​ 93.71%​ Lost 4​ 13​ Essendon Bombers TBP​ 15​ 6​ 9​ 0​ 40.00%​ 24​ 1084​ 1419​ 76.39%​ Lost 5​ 14​ Melbourne Demons TBP​ 16​ 5​ 11​ 0​ 31.25%​ 20​ 1253​ 1446​ 86.65%​ Lost 5​ 15​ St Kilda Saints TBP​ 16​ 5​ 11​ 0​ 31.25%​ 20​ 1270​ 1482​ 85.70%​ Lost 4​ 16​ North Melbourne Kangaroos TBP​ 16​ 4​ 11​ 1​ 28.12%​ 18​ 1237​ 1601​ 77.26%​ Lost 2​ 17​ Richmond Tigers TBP​ 16​ 3​ 13​ 0​ 18.75%​ 12​ 1015​ 1610​ 63.04%​ Lost 7​ 18​ West Coast Eagles TBP​ 16​ 1​ 15​ 0​ 6.25%​ 4​ 1055​ 1650​ 63.94%​ Lost 6​

People can support that no way should more than half the teams make the finals.

 

[Dan26]

People can support that no way should more than half the teams make the finals.

It happened in 1994 (8 out of 15 made it) and that years run to the finals was exciting. So there is a precedent ant it worked

I'll sell it to you like this:

You (presumably) supported 8 out 16 (50%) making the finals when it was a 16 team competition as most people did, right?

Now that it's an 18 team competition, 50% equals 9, so you would support 9 teams making it.

But 9 teams being an odd number of finalists is problematic as it's difficult to construct a finals series with 9.

That means it's either half minus one (8) or half plus one (10). This means we have to go to 10, because you always round up not down. If 9 is perfect, but you have to choose between rounding down 1 or up one, you obviously round up. Didn't you learn that in mathematics at school?

It just makes ZERO sense that if nine is the perfect number (but impractical to use) to round down instead of up.

 

[Roobs321]

The proposal tabled last year seems more likely to get up than McClure's suggestion of it compensating for a reduction in H&A rounds:

View attachment 2362890

is this for real? A VFL Cup and Others Cup?

 

[Roobs321]

maybe if the AFL stopped giving TNF/FNF to clubs that haven’t been a top 4 H&A side in a quarter century AND also stopped regarding their groundhog mediocrity as a compelling hot topic, then we might be emancipated from this supposed reality of a dull season with little left to play for.

360 in particular devotes so much undue coverage this year towards Carlton, Essendon and Melbourne

 

[Walshawk]

It happened in 1994 (8 out of 15 made it) and that years run to the finals was exciting. So there is a precedent ant it worked

I'll sell it to you like this:

You (presumably) supported 8 out 16 (50%) making the finals when it was a 16 team competition as most people did, right?

Now that it's an 18 team competition, 50% equals 9, so you would support 9 teams making it.

But 9 teams being an odd number of finalists is problematic as it's difficult to construct a finals series with 9.

That means it's either half minus one (8) or half plus one (10). This means we have to go to 10, because you always round up not down. If 9 is perfect, but you have to choose between rounding down 1 or up one, you obviously round up. Didn't you learn that in mathematics at school?

It just makes ZERO sense that if nine is the perfect number (but impractical to use) to round down instead of up.

Nine is not impractical. 8 v 9 is better than a final 10. I like the final 8 with the week off

 

[Dan26]

Nine is not impractical. 8 v 9 is better than a final 10. I like the final 8 with the week off

So you do support 50% making it. Why didn't you just say so?

8v9 is not idea, though, as it is effectively a wildcard game which I don't like. It requires 8th and 9th to win 5 matches to be premiers which is too many. My solution for the final-10 is not a wildcard round, but a knockout final-10 nine matches over 4 weeks.

There is a way to do a final-9, however.

KNOCKOUT FINAL-9 (winners in bold)

Week One: (top Three week off)
4 v 9: 1st Elimination Final
5 v 8: 2nd Elimination Final
6 v 7: 3rd Elimination Final


Week Two: (highest always plays the lowest)
1st vs lowest placed week one winner (eg 1 v 6)
2nd vs 2nd-lowest week one winner (eg 2 v 5)
3rd vs highest-placed week one winner (eg 3 v 4)

Highest-placed winner to Grand Final. Other two winners to Preliminary Final

Week Three:
second-highest winner from week 2 vs lowest placed winner from week 2 (eg 2 v3)

Week Four:
Highest-placed winner from week two vs winner of Preliminary Final (eg 1 v 2)

 

[SportsCentre]

So you do support 50% making it. Why didn't you just say so?

8v9 is not idea, though, as it is effectively a wildcard game which I don't like. It requires 8th and 9th to win 5 matches to be premiers which is too many. My solution for the final-10 is not a wildcard round, but a knockout final-10 nine matches over 4 weeks.

There is a way to do a final-9, however.

KNOCKOUT FINAL-9 (winners in bold)

Week One: (top Three week off)
4 v 9: 1st Elimination Final
5 v 8: 2nd Elimination Final
6 v 7: 3rd Elimination Final


Week Two: (highest always plays the lowest)
1st vs lowest placed week one winner (eg 1 v 6)
2nd vs 2nd-lowest week one winner (eg 2 v 5)
3rd vs highest-placed week one winner (eg 3 v 4)

Highest-placed winner to Grand Final. Other two winners to Preliminary Final

Week Three:
second-highest winner from week 2 vs lowest placed winner from week 2 (eg 2 v3)

Week Four:
Highest-placed winner from week two vs winner of Preliminary Final (eg 1 v 2)

The potential issue with this system is that the #1 team plays 1 game in the 3 weeks leading into a grand final, almost a month, which in the past has caused a problem with a few clubs. Clubs want finals momentum and consistent football.

 

[Ads734]

Since The early 2000’s the afl leadership has done what no else could.

Footy didn’t suffer from burnout or Bordem like

Soccer
Cricket
Tennis
Rugby
Athletics.

They have the easiest job in the world and yet consistently f it up.

 

[Freshwater]

Season is too long now. Happened with Big Bash. We had an old fairytale that described this about who killed the goose that laid the golden egg. We are early winter and half the teams are out of it. We started much too early with such a long schedule. If we only played everyone once, made each game a premium and bragging rights for that season we would still have interest for all unto August and still historical bragging rights for each game even if having a poor year. AFL is big because it’s a great game in spite of being so poorly administered.

 

[Dan26]

The potential issue with this system is that the #1 team plays 1 game in the 3 weeks leading into a grand final, almost a month, which in the past has caused a problem with a few clubs. Clubs want finals momentum and consistent football.

I wasn't advocating for it. I was just showing how a final-9 would work. It has problems yes, which is why we need a knockout final-10

 

[Billy ray]

If this happens. And i hope it dont. But if it does. Its a tv tournament and can have the weekly Thursday night game. Stupid timeslot

 

[Walshawk]

So you do support 50% making it. Why didn't you just say so?

8v9 is not idea, though, as it is effectively a wildcard game which I don't like. It requires 8th and 9th to win 5 matches to be premiers which is too many. My solution for the final-10 is not a wildcard round, but a knockout final-10 nine matches over 4 weeks.

There is a way to do a final-9, however.

KNOCKOUT FINAL-9 (winners in bold)

Week One: (top Three week off)
4 v 9: 1st Elimination Final
5 v 8: 2nd Elimination Final
6 v 7: 3rd Elimination Final


Week Two: (highest always plays the lowest)
1st vs lowest placed week one winner (eg 1 v 6)
2nd vs 2nd-lowest week one winner (eg 2 v 5)
3rd vs highest-placed week one winner (eg 3 v 4)

Highest-placed winner to Grand Final. Other two winners to Preliminary Final

Week Three:
second-highest winner from week 2 vs lowest placed winner from week 2 (eg 2 v3)

Week Four:
Highest-placed winner from week two vs winner of Preliminary Final (eg 1 v 2)

I don’t. The current finals system is significantly better.

 

[mike14]

A second competition is a must have in my view...so I agree with you Dan26.

If there were just 12 teams in the competition there isn't a great need for a second trophy, but the fact is the AFL is an outlier in terms of major sporting competitions in that it has only one trophy on offer. ALL other major sports throughout the Western world have two or more trophies on offer.
EPL,
MLB (National League, American League and World Series)
NFL (AFC, NFC, Superbowl)
etc.

Why do they keep introducing Dermott Brereton as a "5-time day and 5-time night time premiership player" if it means nothing for him to have won the night premierships? Should we scrub them from his record then?

There is revisionism in terms of how we view the pre-season competition as it petered out due to the Sydney Swans and a couple of other clubs in the last few years of it treating it as a practise round. Up to those final few years either the strongest club in the competition over the last 50 years (Hawthorn) won it on a regular basis or other strong clubs made an impression. If you make the rewards great enough all teams will want to win it.

Dermott Brereton -

• Day Premierships: 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, and 1991.
• Night Premierships: 1985, 1986, 1988, 1991, and 1992.

The trophy argument seems a bit misleading. If you are counting division/conference trophies as 'separate' then you have to include the McClelland Trophy for AFL, so we've already got 2.
But more importantly, the NFL/NHL/MLB/NBA* don't play for those trophies, they are something that is accumulated on the way to the Superbowl/Stanley/Cup/World Series/whatever due to having a conference format.
Edmonton Oilers fans aren't currently celebrating and bragging about winning the Clarence Campbell Bowl two seasons in a row, they are pissed their team didn't win the Cup.
So the only that would fit is the EPL, and to try and mirror that we need some other countries to start playing Aussie Rules, or decide we really want to see Collingwood vs Redcliffe on a Tuesday night in Rothwell...

Having a separate tournament and set of trophies, for something that just involves the same teams, seems very pointless and 'artificial'.
The only thing would make a lick of sense is replacing the current pre-season with it, running it during the first term school holidays, and making it basically free to gets and families along.


*no idea how the new NBA tournament works, but the little i've read fan-wise makes me think it's quite unpopular

 

[GoldbergsGold]

Why do they insist on doing everything fans don't want with a proposed short distracting hollow competition that has no merit when compared to a 6 month brutal competition? Potentially giving a team who goes 0-12 or whatever until if they win a couple game tournament a finals sport is incredibly absurd. Every year they waste the opportunity to do what fans actually want with a proper SA v Victoria state of origin game. Heck, since they have such a fixation for finals byes, change the bye week to before the grand final and make it the state of origin game like the Pro Bowl.

 

[GoldbergsGold]

If it’s done right, which is a big if, I don’t hate the idea. It would add something for teams not in the premiership window to strive for, could add something excitement.

The whole appeal of the premiership season is it's a all or nothing brutal 6 month trial. Nobody really values those preseason premierships, because it's just a short hollow competition that teams don't invest in, this would be likewise.

 

[Jim Prideaux]

The whole appeal of the premiership season is it's an all or nothing brutal 6 month trial. Nobody really values those preseason premierships, because it's just a short hollow competition that teams don't invest in, this would be likewise.

I also wouldn’t value a pre season tournament, but a in season knockout with finals/draft picks on the line might be

 

[GoldbergsGold]

Most people responding in this thread have no idea. The proposal would be similar to the NBA Cup in that the tournament games would be incorporated as part of the 23 game schedule (with the exception of the final, presumably). If they can make it work in the fixture, there is really only upside as it has no effect on the number of games.

There is not enough success in the AFL industry. There is one trophy to win with 18 (soon to be 19) teams and the reality is some of the supporters in this very thread will never see their team win anything for the rest of their lives, which is what happens when you have one trophy for 19 teams, and NOTHING else to win.

English Soccer has the league premiership title for finishing on top (the equivalent to winning the Grand Final in the AFL), yet they also have the FA Cup, the League Cup (which is a separate Cup competition for the professional clubs), the Champions League and Europa League. That's FIVE trophies available with clubs able to win up to 4 of them in any season. The FA Cup and League Cups gives a great chance for clubs not in contention for the premiership to win something.

Now for years, I've been on about giving more recognition to the minor premier. I would do the following:

• Give the minor-premiership a different name (Barassi Cup or something)
• Give all 40 players on the list of the winning club $50,000 each for a total cost of 2 million
• give the winning club $2 million (total cost 4 million when added to the players prize)
• award the trophy on the field after the game in which top sport is sealed.

The NBA gives the winning players of the NBA Cup $500,000 each.

A Cup competition incorporated into the AFL regular season games (so as to not increase the amount of games) would be another good incentive for the players with a similar large cash payment to the winning team and players without adding games to the schedule.

There is simply not enough success in the industry. Remember, not every trophy to be won, has to be as prestigious as the Grand Final. There are tiers of prestige. Just like in English Soccer. Some trophies are more important than others and that's fine, but there should more than just the one trophy to win in the AFL. There is simply not enough success or reward for the loyalty of fans in the industry and we need a second (or even third) trophy to add more success to the industry. If that can be done without increasing the amount of games, then it should absolutely be considered.

It takes away the euphoria of reigning supreme winning a premiership over 17 other teams if you start handing out "participation awards" to the loser teams. Part of the appeal is failing for many seasons and overcoming that adversity to be crowned champion of a season.

 

[Dan26]

It takes away the euphoria of reigning supreme winning a premiership over 17 other teams if you start handing out "participation awards" to the loser teams. Part of the appeal is failing for many seasons and overcoming that adversity to be crowned champion of a season.

That's total crap. Total unmitigated crap.

That's like saying that winning the FA Cup (or the League Cup, which is the lesser of the two Cup competitions in English Soccer) takes away from winning the English Premier League. It obviously doesn't take away from winning it at all. In fact, all it means is that you can do the double and win both. Was Liverpool's EPL triumph somehow diminished because some other team won the FA Cup?

The old pre-season Cup which produced massive Grand Final crowds far in excess of what a Home and away game could draw (such as 63,000 for St.Kilda vs North in 1998 among many, many examples) did not take away from winning the main prize 6 months later.

Seriously how in the f*** would winning a secondary trophy somehow take away from the main premiership? That's total rubbish. Total utter crap.