No Oppo Supporters General AFL discussion and other club’s news - Part 10

[extractasam]

What if you are tenth, 4 games behind 7th, and can't finish higher or lower, but 7th has a chance at 4th. So in the last couple of rounds, 7th goes all in, and 10th rests their players. And walks over 7th because they have fewer injuries and a fresher list.

I know this is a hypothetical, but this actually happened going into the last round with GC/Sydney being 4 games apart. Would’ve been super interesting to see how that would’ve played out. Sydney almost certainly would’ve rested all their players for their trip to Perth

 

[Manila_Hawk]

I think that everyone is missing the point here.

The ONLY purpose of this "wildcard" round is to give the Scum* a chance to win a final.

 

[unitedhawk2]

From 4 out 12 to 5out of 12 early in the 70s, then 6 briefly...then 8.

I think it was originally 8 out of 16 teams, which many thought was dodgy enough...half qualifying for knock-out was a bit 'participation prize' for a lot of us old farts... (EDIT: 8 out of 15 from 1994 to 1997, when Port joined)

Having more than half the teams qualify for knock-out round is even worse...it kind of defeats the purpose of having a rigourous H&A season at all.

It'll eventually be 10 out of 20 in a few years - not ideal, but better than 10 out of 18, I suppose.

The "rigourous H&A season" isn't really fair and equitable though, is it? Ideally, you'd have a 'league' season where each team plays every other team once - but that would leave a 4-5 week hole in the calendar. So, are there any alternatives to that?

If I was advising the AFL, I'd ask them to consider a floating fixture for the last 4-5 H&A rounds, to be determined after all the teams have played each other once in the 'league' phase. Who plays who in those last 4-5 rounds would depend on ladder positions at the end of the 'league' phase. Not ideal by any means but perhaps a bit fairer than the current scenario where the double-ups are determined by the finishing order in the previous season. I'd also get rid of Opening Round because it provides an additional (unfair) bye to the teams that play in it and introduce a bye for all teams after the 'league' phase instead.

 

[Maybloomer]

So, a team finishes 2026 a game clear in 7th with a great percentage and has a bad day in the Wildcard W@nk Weekend and drops to 10th and out of finals. Yeah, that seems fair

 

[Nugett]

Think I’d be more interested if they made it that teams 1&2 have a bye. Have 3vs 6 and 4v 5, with the winners getting a double chance the following week while the teams that lost are playing in elimination finals the following week, and don’t call it a wild card round. Just call it for what it is, a top 10 rather than the top 8.

 

[unitedhawk2]

So, a team finishes 2026 a game clear in 7th with a great percentage and has a bad day in the Wildcard W@nk Weekend and drops to 10th and out of finals. Yeah, that seems fair

You could make exactly the same argument for a team that finishes 5th in an 8-team finals scenario.

 

[Changa10]

16, not 20, teams in the two NFL conferences - your quoted percentages would change accordingly.

True, thanks. Updated accordingly.

 

[Buzz Hawk]

So we really have a final 6 after this rubbished is introduced? These guys really are clowns.

 

[unitedhawk2]

Think I’d be more interested if they made it that teams 1&2 have a bye. Have 3vs 6 and 4v 5, with the winners getting a double chance the following week while the teams that lost are playing in elimination finals the following week, and don’t call it a wild card round. Just call it for what it is, a top 10 rather than the top 8.

That actually makes a great deal of sense - and includes two additional games, which would please the AFL and its media partners.

 

[hardway]

We may never miss another finals series!

 

[SammyC]

I don't hate it actually.

If the impact is that the top 6 have a distinct advantage over 7-10, then I'm ok with that.

Also, we are about to have a 19th team and I don't think its a stretch to say that a 20th team will follow at some point beyond that - Northern Australia or something like that.

So if we have a 20 team comp, with 10 teams eligible but 6 having a distinct advantage, then I think thats not horrible and I really hate hte pre finals bye.

 

[Maybloomer]

You could make exactly the same argument for a team that finishes 5th in an 8-team finals scenario.

I just struggle with the concept of a team in the bottom half of the ladder with probably more losses than wins jumping three spots on the basis of one win.

Imagine Essendon in 10th displacing Collingwood in 7th by a Zach Merrett kick after the siren.
Mother-in-Law, cliff, your new Ferrari. Pies fans will have Dillon strapped to the bonnet.

 

[unitedhawk2]

I just struggle with the concept of a team in the bottom half of the ladder with probably more losses than wins jumping three spots on the basis of one win.

Imagine Essendon in 10th displacing Collingwood in 7th by a Zach Merrett kick after the siren.
Mother-in-Law, cliff, your new Ferrari. Pies fans will have Dillon strapped to the bonnet.

The ladder at the end of the H&A season doesn't necessarily reflect the true standing of the teams, though, does it? The team in 7th may have had substantially easier double-ups than the one in 10th and if 10 beats 7 in a knock-out final, despite 7 having the additional advantage of hosting the game, I don't have a problem with that.

 

[TheFourPillars]

The ladder at the end of the H&A season doesn't necessarily reflect the true standing of the teams, though, does it? The team in 7th may have had substantially easier double-ups than the one in 10th and if 10 beats 7 in a knock-out final, despite 7 having the additional advantage of hosting the game, I don't have a problem with that.

Ladder is the ladder that's where you finished if you finished 10th, you ****ing finished 10th

No finals for you

 

[bigmaxi]

I thought the bye for all the finalists was to reset and give all the teams a week off to freshen up so they start on an equal footing. Give 8th a chance to win thru. No one is going to get there outside the top 6! But then 2 extra games means more footy so good or bad, I will wait and see.

 

[hfc70]

Merrett misses Scum first training ! Apparently doesn't even know the people ? Just needed an excuse to sit this one out

 

[unitedhawk2]

Merrett misses Scum first training ! Apparently doesn't even know the people ? Just needed an excuse to sit this one out

Bombers mate tells me he's at a family wedding in Qld. Besides, he's not due back at training for another fortnight. Only Years 1-4 started today.

No surprise if the media is click-baiting though.

 

[StillAtLarge]

What if you are tenth, 4 games behind 7th, and can't finish higher or lower, but 7th has a chance at 4th. So in the last couple of rounds, 7th goes all in, and 10th rests their players. And walks over 7th because they have fewer injuries and a fresher list.

This will happen regularly. Absolute joke of a league

 

[triple treat]

Andrew Dillon in charge reminds me of when we had Garvey as President.....

Is he an Essendon supporter? Hes just trying to finally get them into a final. 2027 he'll drop it to a top 14 for finals to get them in.

 

[I wanna pash Nash]

Because professional sport is about rewarding achievement not celebrating mediocrity. If you finish 10th after 24 rounds you don't deserve any kind of shot at winning the flag.

Seems like a fairly arbitrary line to draw though. I understand the sentiment but if 10th can win 5 in a row they deserve it. I just don't think it's that big of a deal. Yes it's silly but it's the AFL.

I appreciate your point though, because if you take my point to it's complete conclusion why bother with a ladder and not just have let every team have a crack. You do need some cut off. I personally just don't have a huge issue with 10 teams getting to have a crack at the end.

The world surf league did a similar thing when they went from an outright winner to a stupid final 5 system. It's been terrible.
Thankfully they're going back to a ranking system from next year.

 

[I wanna pash Nash]

Bit of a faulty premise, this. I fundamentally disagree with priority picks but I'm not saying we hand back the flags we won in part because of them.

You obviously have to play within the bounds of the arena you're given, but you don't have to just accept huge changes when you haven't been given a compelling reason for the change to be introduced. Like Round 0 this introduces more issues with stats keeping, records, fairness of the draw, finals etc.

I just don't feel it is a huge change. I would have expected a final 10 system once we eventually got to 20 teams. Hopefully they tinker with the formatting though. I think there's a better way to run a final 10 than what they've currently proposed.

 

[ahhhhhh]

Bombers mate tells me he's at a family wedding in Qld. Besides, he's not due back at training for another fortnight. Only Years 1-4 started today.

No surprise if the media is click-baiting though.

May it continue all year.

 

[KermitJagger]

I just don't feel it is a huge change. I would have expected a final 10 system once we eventually got to 20 teams. Hopefully they tinker with the formatting though. I think there's a better way to run a final 10 than what they've currently proposed.

Fairly significant change.

I disagree with there being a need for 20 teams, I disagree that even if there were 20 team we would need a final 10. The 8 team finals bracket we currently have is great, I'd argue it's the best finals bracket system for a professional sport in the world.

It has the perfect level of providing reward to the best 4 teams in the competition, while still making it somewhat possible to come from outside the best 4 teams in the regular season to win the flag.

Change isn't bad, but I've yet to see the AFL present a change like this with a compelling reason as to why it's improving the product.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I just struggle with the concept of a team in the bottom half of the ladder with probably more losses than wins jumping three spots on the basis of one win.

Imagine Essendon in 10th displacing Collingwood in 7th by a Zach Merrett kick after the siren.
Mother-in-Law, cliff, your new Ferrari. Pies fans will have Dillon strapped to the bonnet.

It's silly, just an excuse to retain that boring week between minor round and finals in the hope that the Carltons and Essendons could squeeze into the top 10 and hopefully draw a crowd. Seriously, the AFL are finally off their rockers, this is possibly the silliest thing they've done yet, which is saying something. One thing that would put an end to it is Hawthorn finishing 10th and knocking 7th place Sydney out.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

The ladder at the end of the H&A season doesn't necessarily reflect the true standing of the teams, though, does it? The team in 7th may have had substantially easier double-ups than the one in 10th and if 10 beats 7 in a knock-out final, despite 7 having the additional advantage of hosting the game, I don't have a problem with that.

Please provide a list of all 10th placed sides that have been widely considered as unlucky to have missed the finals because of their draw.

Again - if you can’t make the finals because you had too many double ups against top 8 sides then you simply don’t deserve to play finals.