"AFL Considering September Shake-Up For 2026"

[Cyclops]

So in summary, it's not a wildcard, it's not in September, and gets stupider the more you look at it.

 

[Gavin Excell]

This

With the desperation for a cash grab why wouldn’t you just add more finals to a top 10 finals series? Why stop at 2 and not add 3v6 and 4v5?

Calling something Wildcard when it’s not as we don’t have divisions and only gives you half the games in week 1 you could have is just silly.
Add 3v6 and 4v5.

Btw it’s weeks 2-5 that would be played as how the current top 8 is now.

Yes yes but Wildcard sounds so sexy

 

[Seattle Mariners]

Suits the BOG ordinary team like your Carltons, St Kildas, Ports, Melbournes, Essendon's etc....

 

[theprospector]

It's not a wildcard round, it's a Final 10.

 

[AFaiL]

Why the outrage? (Besides the obvious that people love to be outraged)

We currently take 24 rounds to go from 18 to 8, then 4 weeks to go from 8 to 1...

New plan has 24 to get to 10, 1 to get to 8 and 4 to get to 1...

How many flags have come from 7/8 in the last 25 years? I would say 1,2? So the worry around 7th losing 10th and adding a shit team to the finals series is a moot point, 7/8 are rubbish anyways when you look at the history.

 

[Walshawk]

Why the outrage? (Besides the obvious that people love to be outraged)

We currently take 24 rounds to go from 18 to 8, then 4 weeks to go from 8 to 1...

New plan has 24 to get to 10, 1 to get to 8 and 4 to get to 1...

How many flags have come from 7/8 in the last 25 years? I would say 1,2? So the worry around 7th losing 10th and adding a shit team to the finals series is a moot point, 7/8 are rubbish anyways when you look at the history.

So, teams 7 and 8 have won I once, but going forward they will never win five straight finals. What is the point? Two mediocre games, those clubs will rest players in the last round if they can’t go up or down. Lame.

 

[Seattle Mariners]

Which scenario would you rather?

Scenario A - With an AFL free round of football, you watch 2 flies go and up and down the wall, and once you lose sight of one of the flies, you flick on a quarter or 2 of AFLW.

Scenario B - You get to watch 2 high stakes games of footy with massive implications played in front of huge crowds.

 

[Whiskers]

If we had a final 10 this year it would’ve been so boring a long way out.
Sydney were never finishing below 10th and the mad scrap to not finish 9th wouldn’t have happened.

 

[Bostonian]

More ****ing garbage from those campaigners of things that run the game. Time to identify who they all are and start throwing milkshakes at them on the streets.

Power to the fans.

 

[Bostonian]

Why the outrage? (Besides the obvious that people love to be outraged)

Because it's a ****ing stupid idea that fans didn't ask for.

 

[Bostonian]

Which scenario would you rather?

Scenario A - With an AFL free round of football, you watch 2 flies go and up and down the wall, and once you lose sight of one of the flies, you flick on a quarter or 2 of AFLW.

Scenario B - You get to watch 2 high stakes games of footy with massive implications played in front of huge crowds.

A.

 

[Dan26]

Because it's a ****ing stupid idea that fans didn't ask for.

I can remember when the final-8 was introduced in 1994. This was pre-internet, but there was uproar because the usual talk-back radio knobs were complaining that if you weren't good enough to make the top-6 after 22 games why should 7th and 8th be allowed to make it? You're rewarding mediocrity, they said. You have to win a knockout Prelim to get into the Grand Final even if you finished top? NOT fair, they said! What if you lose the Prelim? This was outrageous!

Within one year, no one complained ever again about 8 teams being in the finals. There were complaints about the TYPE of final-8 that was getting used, and they altered it in the year 2000, but after the initial uproar in 1994, no one complained about 8 teams being in the finals from 1995 onwards.

No one was asking for an 8-team finals series at the end of 1993. No one. But it was clearly the right thing to do in the 15 team league (which would become a 16 team league in 1995)

We are now about to have a 19-team league. And history is repeating itself. The usual backwards knobs are complaining about the same thing the same types of people were whingeing about in 1994. The same arguments. The reality is we need a 10-team finals series in a 19 team league just like we needed an 8-team finals series in a 16-team league.

Do you guys realize you sound like the same idiot bozos complaining about EXACTLY the same thing 31 years ago? Those people were wrong then. And they are wrong now.

We just need to implement the RIGHT final-10, not the wrong final-10.

 

[CanuckSuns]

What are you talking about? That's not how it is at ALL. Read the system. Jesus Christ I'm sick of these people that can't read. I'm gonna lose it soon.

Guys, chill, we don't need Dan26 blowing a gasket.

 

[CanuckSuns]

No, a bad idea. Imagine being a club that finished top 4 losing to a side that finished 9th or 10th.

My proposal is for a participation ribbon for the clubs that finish 9th to 18th. Far more aligned to stereotypes of the current player generation.

If you're a top 4 team, and you lose to a 10th seed, you deserve to be out of Finals.

 

[Bostonian]

I can remember when the final-8 was introduced in 1994. This was pre-internet, but there was uproar because the usual talk-back radio knobs were complaining that if you weren't good enough to make the top-6 after 22 games why should 7th and 8th be allowed to make it? You're rewarding mediocrity, they said. You have to win a knockout Prelim to get into the Grand Final even if you finished top? NOT fair, they said! What if you lose the Prelim? This was outrageous!

Within one year, no one complained ever again about 8 teams being in the finals. There were complaints about the TYPE of final-8 that was getting used, and they altered it in the year 2000, but after the initial uproar in 1994, no one complained about 8 teams being in the finals from 1995 onwards.

No one was asking for an 8-team finals series at the end of 1993. No one. But it was clearly the right thing to do in the 15 team league (which would become a 16 team league in 1995)

We are now about to have a 19-team league. And history is repeating itself. The usual backwards knobs are complaining about the same thing the same types of people were whingeing about in 1994. The same arguments. The reality is we need a 10-team finals series in a 19 team league just like we needed an 8-team finals series in a 16-team league.

Do you guys realize you sound like the same idiot bozos complaining about EXACTLY the same thing 31 years ago? Those people were wrong then. And they are wrong now.

We just need to implement the RIGHT final-10, not the wrong final-10.

The majority of people weren't asking for soulless nothing interstate clubs either.

We don't need 19 teams let alone 20.

Cut it back to 16.

 

[Dan26]

The majority of people weren't asking for soulless nothing interstate clubs either.

We don't need 19 teams let alone 20.

Cut it back to 16.

I 100% agree there are too many teams. But the AFL are going to 19 teams whether we like it or not. My advice is don't be like the idiots in 1994 complaining about the final-8. That's exactly what the same type of people are doing now 31 years later even though the proposed proportion of teams in the finals is about the same.

10 is he way to go with 19 teams, just as 8 was the way to go with 15 teams in 1994, moving to 16 in 1995. Don't fall into the same boring tripe that they were saying 31 years ago...."8 is ridiculous", they said! .. "You have 22 matches to finish in the top-6. If you can't make it, then why allow 7th an 8th to make it?" they all said. It's the same people, or their demented offspring saying the same bloody thing.

We are going to 10. And so we should.

 

[oak79]

The majority of people weren't asking for soulless nothing interstate clubs either.

We don't need 19 teams let alone 20.

Cut it back to 16.

Settle down buddy. Every club started at some point. Just because yours started earlier, way before you were born, doesn't give it some mythical extra specialness. Carlton buying premierships seems pretty souless to me. So Carlton must be a nothing club too. Pretty lame in the last 25 years anyway.

On topic, I hate a final 10, and it appears most fans feel the same. Shows the AFL don't actually care about fans, just $$

Edit: btw I agree it should be cut back to 16. A few suburban Victorian teams that don't have the supporters or finances to exist in a national competition (I don't mean Carlton). They should just be in the VFL

 

[Bostonian]

Settle down buddy. Every club started at some point. Just because yours started earlier, way before you were born, doesn't give it some mythical extra specialness. Carlton buying premierships seems pretty souless to me. So Carlton must be a nothing club too. Pretty lame in the last 25 years anyway.

On topic, I hate a final 10, and it appears most fans feel the same. Shows the AFL don't actually care about fans, just $$

Edit: btw I agree it should be cut back to 16. A few suburban Victorian teams that don't have the supporters or finances to exist in a national competition (I don't mean Carlton). They should just be in the VFL

Yes, yes it does. The Vic clubs are the heart and soul of the league. Like that or not.

Some satellite club if they fold very few people would miss.

 

[garlic munchers]

If you're a top 4 team, and you lose to a 10th seed, you deserve to be out of Finals.

A couple of concussions later...........

 

[Bostonian]

I 100% agree there are too many teams. But the AFL are going to 19 teams whether we like it or not. My advice is don't be like the idiots in 1994 complaining about the final-8. That's exactly what the same type of people are doing now 31 years later even though the proposed proportion of teams in the finals is about the same.

10 is he way to go with 19 teams, just as 8 was the way to go with 15 teams in 1994, moving to 16 in 1995. Don't fall into the same boring tripe that they were saying 31 years ago...."8 is ridiculous", they said! .. "You have 22 matches to finish in the top-6. If you can't make it, then why allow 7th an 8th to make it?" they all said. It's the same people, or their demented offspring saying the same bloody thing.

We are going to 10. And so we should.

Adding more teams to the finals didn't make it any better.

It just made it a cheaper concept.

In AFL history how many teams have won a GF outside of the top 5?

Once isn't it?

 

[TheCattery2007]

If you're a top 4 team, and you lose to a 10th seed, you deserve to be out of Finals.

In the past that’s probably right, but the competition is so even these days the difference between 10th and 3rd isn’t that big. For example, Swans (10th) beat Lions (3rd) a few weeks back. It would be the wrong result for the Lions to get knocked out in the first week of the finals.

 

[CanuckSuns]

A couple of concussions later...........

Nice ad hominem.

 

[Dan26]

Adding more teams to the finals didn't make it any better.

It just made it a cheaper concept.

In AFL history how many teams have won a GF outside of the top 5?

Once isn't it?

Oh cmon mate. The final 8 has clearly made the run to the finals more interesting and with less dead rubbers than had a 5 or 6 still be in use. Let’s just call a spade a spade. But like anything, we need to move forward and if 10 teams make the finals in a 19 team comp, that is the same proportion as 8 making it in 16. Well, technically 9.5 teams would be the same proportion, but you round up to 10. It’s the same thing.

 

[Bostonian]

Oh cmon mate. The final 8 has clearly made the run to the finals more interesting and with less dead rubbers than had a 5 or 6 still be in use. Let’s just call a spade a spade. But like anything, we need to move forward and if 10 teams make the finals in a 19 team comp, that is the same proportion as 8 making it in 16. Well, technically 9.5 teams would be the same proportion, but you round up to 10. It’s the same thing.

The fact that only one team outside of the top five has won a GF shows it's nothing more than a cash grab by the league.

You could bring it back to the top 5 and next to nothing would change GF results wise.

Adding 2 more teams to make it top 10 will have even less of an impact on the finals.

Just a money grab.

 

[garlic munchers]

Nice ad hominem.

Nah.

An AH would be me suggesting that you have suffered a few concussions along the way and can't see that losing a game involves many variables, some outside the control of the team (i.e. the flu/gastro goes through a team leading up to a game or a team ends up with several injuries and doesn't have full rotations etc etc etc).

Teams can have honourable losses.