News ‘Would be unreal’: AFL to consult clubs over addition of ‘wildcard round’ to finals

[LukeParkerno1]

7th will have to win 5 finals games in order to win the premiership with no weeks off since their mid-season bye, meaning 10+ straight weeks of games; whilst their likely top 4 opponent will need to win only 3 finals games, and will enjoy 2 extra weeks off (Wild Card week and Semi-Final week).

You think that is fair all so a 10 win, 12 loss team after 23 games can play finals?

Then do better during the year and come 5th! It should be VERY HARD to win a premiership from 7th.

 

[JyeDye]

The NBA do it because they have 82 games and by the halfway point of the season the lower half teams know they aren't going to make the top 8, so they need something else to play for. It was put in to try and reduce tanking, as any team in that 10-11 mark just said screw this and tanked. We don't need that at all in the AFL, we're going into Round 18 and have no idea who will make the 8.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The NBA do it because they have 82 games and by the halfway point of the season the lower half teams know they aren't going to make the top 8, so they need something else to play for. It was put in to try and reduce tanking, as any team in that 10-11 mark just said screw this and tanked. We don't need that at all in the AFL, we're going into Round 18 and have no idea who will make the 8.

Do feel the one positive is making it harder to win from 7th and 8th and that's a positive. Teams should work to coming top 6 rather than 7th. There is some merit but the NBA works better with their conferences and what not, and like you said tanking, as one player makes a bigger difference than on a AFL field. That said this year it didn't stop half the NBA tanking to try and get Victor Wembyanya (sorry if I haven't spelt that correctly).

 

[jim boy]

7th will have to win 5 finals games in order to win the premiership with no weeks off since their mid-season bye, meaning 10+ straight weeks of games; whilst their likely top 4 opponent will need to win only 3 finals games, and will enjoy 2 extra weeks off (Wild Card week and Semi-Final week).

You think that is fair all so a 10 win, 12 loss team after 23 games can play finals?

That's not quite true - apparently CBA rules stipulate that you have to have two byes, so they have to factor in some sort of bye.

Regardless though I dont mind it. 10 straight games is one thing, but finals are another step up. Winning 5 finals in a row is just massive. You'd know from last year that the swans were spent after 2 and 3/4 finals. Imagine being 7th and having to win five finals!
And that's why I like it, makes it even harder or teams in 7/8 to win and conversely makes it a little easier for teams in 5/6. And as typical footy fans think a million-to-one chance is almost a dead cert, will embrace that slenderest of chances provided by 10th spot.

 

[Hoops]

Uneven fixture
Gather round
Wildcard
Multiball is next

 

[Altum Volantes]

You might find those teams boring, but I can see interesting storylines attached to each of them. The Crows would sell out the Adelaide Oval for a wildcard final (53k) as would Freo at Perth Stadium (60k) so it's not as if those hypothetical games would have terrible atmospheres or anything. Even the Suns would likely sell out a wildcard final (25k) but obviously that's not on the same level as the other two.

It's very likely two of the three big Melbourne teams of Richmond, Essendon & Carlton would be involved in a hypothetical wildcard round this year and there's a fair chance at least one of them will be played at the MCG. That's probably the big selling point for the AFL. If it just so happened to be 8th placed Richmond vs 9th place Carlton (who could only be split be percentage) at the MCG in the wildcard round then 80-90k will show up and I highly doubt anyone is complaining about adding that game to the season. Obviously Essendon are interchangeable in that game as well.

Sorry I should clarify - I don’t personally find those teams ‘boring’ and ‘irrelevant’ but despite occasionally pretending otherwise (when there is a player to be poached usually), the Vic (ie AFL) media most definitely do not care about those teams rattling around in the far reaches of cities that aren’t Melbourne.

So sure, it’d be ‘GOOD FOR FOOTBALL!!1’ if it was Carlton-Essendon, 90k at the G - but the reality is it won’t always be 2 big Vic clubs squaring off and more often than not, it’ll be 2 average middle table plodder teams, fighting for a finals spot that is already kinda debatable.

 

[Hoops]

Now there's a thought.

A dynamic finals system based on finishing with a positive record (>100% if 11W 11D)

Some years you would have 10 teams qualifying, some years maybe 7 or even 6?

West Coast and North games are worth half a win

 

[Sentinel]

What specifically about adding a weekend of 7 vs 10 and 8 vs 9 makes it 'wildcard' compared to a weekend of 5 vs 8 and 6 vs 7 that we already have?

It's exactly the same thing only with teams further down the ladder.

 

[Greggy Dee]

Gives the bombers hope

Since 2009 we make the finals every 2-3 years.
We haven't really had an issue with making finals...it's winning them that we struggle with!

 

[banzai]

What specifically about adding a weekend of 7 vs 10 and 8 vs 9 makes it 'wildcard' compared to a weekend of 5 vs 8 and 6 vs 7 that we already have?

It's exactly the same thing only with teams further down the ladder.

It's nothing to do with wildcards like the NFL or MLB have. It's just a final 10 really.

 

[Hoops]

I'd prefer to see the bottom 4 fight it out for the first pick.

I would prefer to see the bottom 4 fight it out to avoid relegation

 

[banzai]

7th will have to win 5 finals games in order to win the premiership with no weeks off since their mid-season bye, meaning 10+ straight weeks of games; whilst their likely top 4 opponent will need to win only 3 finals games, and will enjoy 2 extra weeks off (Wild Card week and Semi-Final week).

You think that is fair all so a 10 win, 12 loss team after 23 games can play finals?

It all depends how it plays out though, any team can take their own bye in the final round of the season, we've seen it in the past thats why they bought in the pre finals bye. The problem is no one knows who that advantage falls to. A team might be giving its all in 7th to get up to 6th, where as the team in 10th place might be locked into 10th going into the last round and can rest everyone, gaining a big advantage before finals.

 

[Bucking Bronco]

Then do better during the year and come 5th! It should be VERY HARD to win a premiership from 7th.

How about the team that comes 10th just does better lol.

It already is very hard to win from 7th.

4 finals, all away games.

Wildcard fixture would make it impossible, just so a team who has LOST more than they've won can compete in finals so the AFL gets more money.

 

[OxfordCambridge]

Bring back the challenge rule. That's where if the Minor Premier gets beaten in a Grand Final they can ask for a rematch.

Best of 3 GF would be good.

 

[SSSSSS]

11thmond just doesn't have the same ring to it

 

[LukeParkerno1]

How about the team that comes 10th just does better lol.

It already is very hard to win from 7th.

4 finals, all away games.

Wildcard fixture would make it impossible, just so a team who has LOST more than they've won can compete in finals so the AFL gets more money.

It should be practically impossible from
7th. It’s why you come in the top 4. Should be almost impossible to win from
7th. An extra couple of games is not a bad thing anyway.

 

[Bucking Bronco]

It should be practically impossible from
7th. It’s why you come in the top 4. Should be almost impossible to win from
7th. An extra couple of games is not a bad thing anyway.

Then just do a finals top 4, if all the other games are going to be meaningless.

You are in favour of a watered down, pointless fixture, all so you can watch a couple of extra watered down, pointless games.

Lol.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Then just do a finals top 4, if all the other games are going to be meaningless.

You are in favour of a watered down, pointless fixture, all so you can watch a couple of extra watered down, pointless games.

Lol.

I’d rather the old rugby league final 5 or whatever it’s called but I’m happy with the expanded finals if the positive is it takes out 7th or 8th winning anyway.

 

[Truetiger]

Are they that desperate to get Gold Coast to finals.

Might be their only hope. I can't see them getting in any other way. Interesting to see how this plays out in the VFL this season.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

It's not really a wildcard round. It's just a modification of the finals system and an expansion of the teams who qualify. You're increasing top 8 to top 10 and then making tiers of benefits based on finishing position. Top 4 get the double chance, top 6 get the week off and one less game, 7-10 have to play an extra game.

I think branding it as a "wildcard" adds more consternation and contention than if they just said they wanted to change the finals system so they could give more teams chances and tier the benefits of finishing higher. Whether it's fairer or not is debatable but it's all pretty arbitrary. Top 10 is no more or less an arbitrary number than top 8. People will talk about "earning" top 8 like it's meaningful; the difference between 8, 9 and 10 could be percentage points granted only because 8th got to play weaker sides in an unbalanced fixture. The AFL could go the opposite way if they wanted; reduce it to a top 6. Top 2 get a break and the other 4 sides play off first. There are a lot of changes you could make to the finals system, increasing or decreasing the value of finishing higher, giving teams more or fewer chances.

Top 8 as a concept isn't some great prestigious tradition that requires respectful observation and constant adherence to. You look at a finals race like this year's, and you wonder if top 10 isn't a bad idea. There are a lot of sides who will be finishing close to each other, who may end up separated by a few points or percentage. Playing them off against each other doesn't seem like an awful idea.

 

[GC2015]

12-10 is absolutely a mediocre record - and I'd say Carlton were about, ooh, 0.6% more mediocre than the Bulldogs last year...

But seriously, consider what thrilling contests we would've been in the last five seasons:
2022: Western Bulldogs vs Carlton; Richmond vs St. Kilda
2021: Essendon vs West Coast; GWS vs St. Kilda
2020: Collingwood vs Melbourne; Western Bulldogs vs GWS
2019: Essendon vs Hawthorn; Western Bulldogs vs Port Adelaide
2018: Geelong vs North Melbourne; GWS vs Port Adelaide

Regardless of whether a couple of 'big' clubs meeting would draw a crowd, or whether the final results would be close or whatever - those are some pretty uninspiring match-ups when you consider the standard of those sides that missed out (and in some cases, those that actually did make the 8) in those seasons. Hawks and Eagles well off the boil a few years after their flag(s), Ratten's Saints and Hinkley's Power at their most water-treading, GWS not quite putting it all together... all so drearily average, and not at all meeting the increased expectations we rightly have for finalists. Thresholds exist for a reason...

You could easily make the same argument about teams that finish 7th and 8th. According to your criteria, the Bulldogs were also mediocre last year so why didn't you advocate for their removal last year? If this is all about keeping mediocre teams out of the finals and a record of 12-10 is considered mediocre, then why even include 7th and 8th in the first place? If people are honestly that concerned about the quality of the teams qualifying for the early stages of the finals then why aren't they arguing for a top 4 finals system?

This just feels like people not wanting any change and finding a reason to justify it, instead of actually believing what they are claiming. It's this kind of attitude that eliminates fairytale runs like the one we saw in 2016 when the Bulldogs went on the most miraculous run to the flag from 7th position on the ladder.

Sorry I should clarify - I don’t personally find those teams ‘boring’ and ‘irrelevant’ but despite occasionally pretending otherwise (when there is a player to be poached usually), the Vic (ie AFL) media most definitely do not care about those teams rattling around in the far reaches of cities that aren’t Melbourne.

So sure, it’d be ‘GOOD FOR FOOTBALL!!1’ if it was Carlton-Essendon, 90k at the G - but the reality is it won’t always be 2 big Vic clubs squaring off and more often than not, it’ll be 2 average middle table plodder teams, fighting for a finals spot that is already kinda debatable.

If this hypothetical 7th v 10th & 8th v 9th wildcard round were to be implemented then there's a fairly high chance at least one Victorian team will be involved in a wildcard game and then you add in the onlookers placed 5th and 6th wanting to learn about their next opponent. For those reasons, I don't think it would be very difficult to get investment from the Vic media and supporters of clubs involved/wanting to know their next opponent.

 

[btdg]

It's not really a wildcard round. It's just a modification of the finals system and an expansion of the teams who qualify. You're increasing top 8 to top 10 and then making tiers of benefits based on finishing position. Top 4 get the double chance, top 6 get the week off and one less game, 7-10 have to play an extra game.

I think branding it as a "wildcard" adds more consternation and contention than if they just said they wanted to change the finals system so they could give more teams chances and tier the benefits of finishing higher. Whether it's fairer or not is debatable but it's all pretty arbitrary. Top 10 is no more or less an arbitrary number than top 8. People will talk about "earning" top 8 like it's meaningful; the difference between 8, 9 and 10 could be percentage points granted only because 8th got to play weaker sides in an unbalanced fixture. The AFL could go the opposite way if they wanted; reduce it to a top 6. Top 2 get a break and the other 4 sides play off first. There are a lot of changes you could make to the finals system, increasing or decreasing the value of finishing higher, giving teams more or fewer chances.

Top 8 as a concept isn't some great prestigious tradition that requires respectful observation and constant adherence to. You look at a finals race like this year's, and you wonder if top 10 isn't a bad idea. There are a lot of sides who will be finishing close to each other, who may end up separated by a few points or percentage. Playing them off against each other doesn't seem like an awful idea.

Absolutely right. It isn't a wildcard, it is just expanding the finals series.

Despite Carlton missing out so narrowly last year, and being right on the cusp again, i have really enjoyed the top 8 with 18 teams and how hard it is to get in. It would be a shame to lose that, and in a season like this we would sacrifice a lot for the sake of two ultimately meaningless games.

If you want a wildcard, i would try to make that more genuine. Perhaps give a 'wildcard' to the team outside the top 8 with the best home and away record against teams who make it, then let them play off vs 8th in the bye week before finals.

That might even help keep teams engaged for longer. This year Freo are probably out of finals contention. But they have 3 wins vs the top 8, whereas GWS and Carlton (in 9th and 10th spot) only have two each. I think all 3 teams play 3 morr top 8 opponents... it would certainly make Freo's home games against Port and Brisbane more interesting if they could use those to lock in a grnuine wildcard from 13th or 14th...

(It also provides a slight advantage to non victorian teams which would counter the occasional slight advantage provided by the gf being in Melbourne)

 

[010203]

No, just no.

 

[FakeTaxi]

It's nothing to do with wildcards like the NFL or MLB have. It's just a final 10 really.

It's not final 10 at all.

Its the final 6 who are confirmed end of regular season.

The remaining 2 spots are up for grabs between 7 and 10. Stop trying to change the narrative

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

Eh, I don't mind it. It's not like it's adding more teams to the finals, just more chance for teams to make that final finals bracket and if you finish above a certain spot you're guaranteed regardless

In Serie B if the third place team is not more than 14 points clear of the fourth place team then the teams from third place to eighth place enter a play-off to decide the final promotion spot.

Worth noting they play each other twice (usually, anyway), so if there really is little to split them at the end of the season, then that argument has more weight to it. I guess the flip side to that is our league has a lopsided fixture every year due to the fact that we don't play each other twice and there are always guaranteed two leg games for lots of teams

The league should probably be looking more at equalising the fixture rather than creating more anomalies and gimmicks, at the end of the day