"AFL Considering September Shake-Up For 2026"

[Dan26]

This is the McIntyre Final Eight System all in its name only reborn

No it's f****n not. Why in the hell aren't people bothering to read the system? Jesus Christ. Can someone explain to these people before I lose it.

 

[boncer34]

This is what they should do and what I predict will happen.

KNOCKOUT FINAL 10

WEEK 1 (winners to week 2, losers out)
1st elimination final: 7 v 10
2nd elimination Final: 8 v 9

WEEK 2 (winners to week 3, losers out)
1st Semi Final: 1st vs lowest ranked Elimination final winner (1 v 8)
2nd Semi Final: 2nd vs highest ranked Elimination final winner (2 v 7)
3rd Semi Final : 3 v 6
4th Semi Final : 4 v 5

WEEK 3 (winners to Grand Final, losers out)
1st Preliminary Final: highest ranked team vs lowest ranked team (1 v 4)
2nd Preliminary Final: 2nd-highest ranked team vs 2nd lowest ranked team (2 v 3)

WEEK 4
Bye (ensuring 14 day break for Grand Final)

WEEK 5
Grand Final (1 v 2)

• The earliest exit point for the top-seeded teams remains the same as the current final 8 (week 2 being the earliest exit point)

• The pre-finals bye stays (for the top 6)

• There is a bye before the Grand Final, without extending the finals series any longer than what it is now. So, you get the best of both worlds (pre finals bye for top 6 and a bye before the Grand Final)

• Finals series stays at 9 finals over 5 weeks as it is now (4 weeks plus the bye)

THIS is the final-10 that needs to come in. If you are after a final-10 and the AFL is going to introduce one regardless, THIS is the one to use.

I'll bet you $500 this isn’t used.

 

[parano1a]

Can't have more than half the competition eligible for finals. Dumb idea.

Well it will be a 20 team competition within the next five years.

 

[Dan26]

So no explaining how I'm wrong, because I'm not, so thanks for admitting I'm right.

Dude, read the system. There are no dead rubbers. Win you progress, lose and you're out. It's not difficult. Read the system.

 

[boncer34]

So no explaining how I'm wrong, because I'm not, so thanks for admitting I'm right.

I know fixtures aren't your strong suit, you swore up and down that Essendon v. Gold Coast wouldn't be played in round 24, that the AFL would remove both their midseason byes and redo the entire fixture to put it in midseason, and then when they seheducled it in round 24 you totally disappared.

Bro he's saying all 4 losers in week 2 get knocked out.

 

[maskmcgee]

Dude, read the system. There are no dead rubbers. Win you progress, lose and you're out. It's not difficult. Read the system.

Oh so 1st is eliminated by 10th in 1st's first game of the finals? Yep that's never happening.

 

[Ekomaira]

they can sod off with this suggestion

right. not like they have a whole year to qualify for finals or anything

 

[boncer34]

Can't have more than half the competition eligible for finals. Dumb idea.

Been done before

 

[Dan26]

I'll bet you $500 this isn’t used.

It should be. The alternative (which the AFL have talked about) is a final 10 where 7th,8th,9th and 10th have to win 5 finals. That essentially makes it an 11-match 5-week finals-10 which is too convoluted.

If a final-10 is to be used at all, my system is the one to use. It ticks every box.

• It keeps the finals series the same length as it is now
• The pre-finals bye stays AND the week off before the Grand Final is introduced and this is all done without extending the length of the finals
• The week of replaces the double chance, ensuring the top teams continue to have their earliest exit point in the finals at week 2.

The wildcard crap that the AFL are posturing about produces too many finals and is too long.

 

[boncer34]

It should be.

It won't be

 

[Tackle Bag]

It’s unbelievable how disconnected from public opinion this administration is.

 

[Dan26]

Oh so 1st is eliminated by 10th in 1st's first game of the finals? Yep that's never happening.

What has the fact it's the "first game" of the finals got to do with anything? 1st (Adelaide) can be eliminated by Hawthorn this week in week 2. Under a knockout final-10 they have a guaranteed week off instead of a second chance and likewise can only be eliminated from week 2 onwards.

Last years minor-premier (Sydney) played 3 finals last year and two of them they faced elimination after one loss. Double chances are a load of shit and have no place in a system where the top teams face elimination in the Prelim and Grand Finals.

If 1st play 10th in the second week and get the advantage of playing a team that played the week before while they themselves had a rest, and in addition get the advantage of playing the worst team, and still lose, then they deserve to be eliminated. That's not the finals systems fault. Finals are do-or die. That's the whole point.

 

[Dan26]

It won't be

It should be. It's clearly better than the wildcard convoluted mess. No one wants this wildcard 5-week thing.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

STupid isea, but having said that, finals need a shake up.

Id keep the 8 and play the 1st week as is.(1v4, 2v3, 5v6, 7v8)
Winners of first two go through to semi 1
Losers play each other in wk2 Quali final 3
Losers of bottom 4 go out
Winners of bottom 4 play each other in wk 2 Elim final

Wk2
Winner of Semi takes Prelim 1
Loser of Semi takes Prelim 2
Winner of qf 3 goes to Prelim 1
Loser goes to Elim 4
Winner of Elim 3 goes to Elim 4
Loser knocked out.

Wk3
Elim 4
Winner to Prelim 2
Loser knocked out

Wk 4
PF 1
PF 2

Wk5
GF

And how it would look if games won by rank
QF1&2(1v4, 2v3) EF1&2(5v8, 6v7)
SF1(1v2) QF3(3v4) EF3(5v6)
EF4(4v5)
PF1&2(1v3, 2v4)
GF(1v2)

11 games, 5 wks.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Good news WalshistheGOAT you might just squeak a wildcard match.

Still haven't figured out what kind of tism causes you to tag me every other day about random s***.

I know we've flogged you the last couple times we've played but surely you're over it by now?

 

[SC_Power]

STupid isea, but having said that, finals need a shake up.

Id keep the 8 and play the 1st week as is.(1v4, 2v3, 5v6, 7v8)
Winners of first two go through to semi 1
Losers play each other in wk2 Quali final 3
Losers of bottom 4 go out
Winners of bottom 4 play each other in wk 2 Elim final

Wk2
Winner of Semi takes Prelim 1
Loser of Semi takes Prelim 2
Winner of qf 3 goes to Prelim 1
Loser goes to Elim 4
Winner of Elim 3 goes to Elim 4
Loser knocked out.

Wk3
Elim 4
Winner to Prelim 2
Loser knocked out

Wk 4
PF 1
PF 2

Wk5
GF

And how it would look if games won by rank
QF1&2(1v4, 2v3) EF1&2(5v8, 6v7)
SF1(1v2) QF3(3v4) EF3(5v6)
EF4(4v5)
PF1&2(1v3, 2v4)
GF(1v2)

11 games, 5 wks.

Not a bad effort, but from what you show here by rank

Team ranked 1 wins two games to reach a PF with a week’s break, to play rank 3 which lost week one and beat a lower ranked team week 2 and also got a weeks break. Almost seems an disadvantage to team ranked one.
Ditto for teams ranked 2 and 4.

 

[SC_Power]

Final 10 - just treat them as two final 5’s, with a Grand Final between the two at the end.

How you split the two is the harder bit.

Can’t just do 1,3,5,7,9 and 2,4,6,8,10. That’s a “harder” and an “easier” group.
But some combination.

 

[dazbroncos]

oh ffs no.

not more seppo bullshit

GO Catters

 

[boncer34]

It should be. It's clearly better than the wildcard convoluted mess. No one wants this wildcard 5-week thing.

I do

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Sydney finished 10th this year and we did not/do not deserve to be in the finals.

This is exactly what I came here to post funnily enough.

The talent the Swans could put on the park from tenth would compare favourably to most sides in the eight. But why should we lower the bar so low that a shitshow of a performance through a significant part of the season be rewarded with an opportunity to play off for a premiership at season’s end. It completely diminishes the need to perform over a full season. If you’re somewhat reasonable, under this proposal you’ll only need to perform in one month of the year to win the whole thing.

Same could be said of Collingwood and Fremantle, 9th and 10th last year. Could they have pushed some of the sides that did qualify? Absolutely, but both had periods of dog shit form and didn’t deserve to be there.

Plainly ridiculous imo

 

[Tarkyn_24]

I do

You’re an idiot, so that’s just another reason to not have it imo

 

[boncer34]

This is exactly what I came here to post funnily enough.

The talent the Swans could put on the park from tenth would compare favourably to most sides in the eight. But why should we lower the bar so low that a shitshow of a performance through a significant part of the season be rewarded with an opportunity to play off for a premiership at season’s end. It completely diminishes the need to perform over a full season. If you’re somewhat reasonable, under this proposal you’ll only need to perform in one month of the year to win the whole thing.

Same could be said of Collingwood and Fremantle, 9th and 10th last year. Could they have pushed some of the sides that did qualify? Absolutely, but both had periods of dog shit form and didn’t deserve to be there.

Plainly ridiculous imo

Why do we lower the benchmark so that 8th gets in? Why should a team that were so pathetic they couldn't get into 6th get a chance at the flag? They had a whole season to be better.

 

[boncer34]

You’re an idiot, so that’s just another reason to not have it imo

Says the guy wedded to an arbitrary number.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Says the guy wedded to an arbitrary number.

That arbitrary number for me is actually 5 - and that’s because I believe a top five finals series provides the most significant structural advantage to the best home and away performer(s).

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Why do we lower the benchmark so that 8th gets in? Why should a team that were so pathetic they couldn't get into 6th get a chance at the flag? They had a whole season to be better.

See above. You’ve assumed I prefer eight but that’s not the case at all?

The AFL will never revert back to a top five because of the revenue considerations but to me it is the structure that makes home and away seedings most meaningful and gives the best performers over six months of the season the best opportunity to play in the Grand Final, while still keeping similarly strong contenders playing off.

I can’t think of a year where fifth was not a legitimate heavyweight that could genuinely win a flag, but plenty where eighth is clearly making up the numbers and not of the calibre to contend. Collingwood 2020, Essendon 2009 jump to mind for both our respective sides.