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

[Cdog71]

More betting markets

The AFK have to pay the organ grinder

 

[GC2015]

To all the people saying no to this - what is your solution for the finals system when Tasmania enters the league in a few years from now? IMO the finals system is going to have to change soon anyway so why not just do it now so its all in place for Tassie (and the 20th team) when they enter in a few years instead of trying to implement an untried concept in an expansion year. Do it now and iron out any creases over the next few years.

 

[offtherails9]

I like the idea. I think 8th vs 9th would be a good way to start it. Then you have half the competition making the 'post-season'.
But the thing that infuriates me if the fact that all the media are referring to it as an NBA thing? It's been an NFL thing for 50 years, and worked pretty well. In one off games (like AFL is/would be), not series like the NBA. Plus this year in the NBA there was actually a team trying to avoid making the play-in to not affect their draft order.
Anyway it's fine, I would like to see footy on that bye weekend as opposed to no footy, so it's a simple answer. Just shits me when they talk about the NBA when the idea is from the NFL.

 

[banzai]

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

But thats like calling the current system a final 4 and the teams 5-8 playing off to see who gets to play them.

 

[Toump Ass]

To all the people saying no to this - what is your solution for the finals system when Tasmania enters the league in a few years from now? IMO the finals system is going to have to change soon anyway

Dilute the talent pool further with Tasmania and there'll be even more irrelevant teams in finals.
Thus my solution is make qualifying for finals finishing the H & A season in the top 6.

 

[sthmelb_dimmies]

Post season, have the AFLW premier play the AFLM wooden spoon.

Winning team continues in AFLM season; loser is relegated to AFLW.

Would be a spectacle, that’s for bloody sure

 

[GROTTO]

The difference between mens and womens AFL league is so vast, that the bottom VFL,SANFL or WAFL Clubs would beat any AFLW premier.

 

[GC2015]

Dilute the talent pool further with Tasmania and there'll be even more irrelevant teams in finals.
Thus my solution is make qualifying for finals finishing the H & A season in the top 6.

A top 6 finals system with 19-20 teams in the league? Righto. Don't think many people are going to agree with you on that one.

 

[TheUnicorn]

A top 6 finals system with 19-20 teams in the league? Righto. Don't think many people are going to agree with you on that one.

I'd pick top 6 over top 10

 

[GC2015]

I'd pick top 6 over top 10

Top 6 would mean your team wouldn't have played finals since 2002...

 

[mike14]

Top 6 would mean your team wouldn't have played finals since 2002...

It is possible to support an opinion/idea which doesn't directly benefit the team you support...

 

[HBFlanker]

Bring it in once Tassie is in.

Way too mediocre with the 10th seed getting to essentially play finals.

And dont compare it to the NBA. Completely different beast.

 

[GC2015]

It is possible to support an opinion/idea which doesn't directly benefit the team you support...

Sure.

Would you be happy knowing the rule change would have your team on a 21-year finals drought though? If the answer is yes then the answer to your question is yes. We'll all have to start getting used to regular finals droughts though. Carlton have copped it for their current 10-year finals drought and we'd see even longer droughts occurring under a top 6 finals system. No biggie for my club because we're used to it but I'm not sure the Essendonians that run the show at Bomberland would be thrilled with a 21-year finals drought. If we add Tassie (and a 20th team) but don't expand our finals system then we're going to see exactly what I just detailed. More and longer finals droughts.

 

[TheUnicorn]

Top 6 would mean your team wouldn't have played finals since 2002...

and?

 

[mike14]

Sure.

Would you be happy knowing the rule change would have your team on a 21-year finals drought though? If the answer is yes then the answer to your question is yes. We'll all have to start getting used to regular finals droughts though. Carlton have copped it for their current 10-year finals drought and we'd see even longer droughts occurring under a top 6 finals system. No biggie for my club because we're used to it but I'm not sure the Essendonians that run the show at Bomberland would be thrilled with a 21-year finals drought. If we add Tassie (and a 20th team) but don't expand our finals system then we're going to see exactly what I just detailed. More and longer finals droughts.

I would be, yes.
Maybe a top-6 actually makes Essendon get it's shit in order, swings and roundabouts...
But what 'Essendon wants' isn't really relevant to this converstaion, or why you felt the need to refute a point by saying that it would mean someone's team hadn't played finals since 2002 (which I'm guessing he knew).

Top 6 for the past x years, no worries IMO. Top 8 when Tassie and then the next one arrive, also no worries. So as we're already at 8, just leave it as is and they can go bigger if they're ever dumb enough to go above 20

 

[Clark G]

If it comes in, call them for what they are, which is extra elimination finals.

 

[Roby]

The AFL is run like a corporation that is looking at it's bottom line. This will increase it's bottom line so it will come in regardless of what a few naysayers on a forum or call back radio say.

And don't think they won't add more finals than this is the future. Almost as sure as taxes and death.

By the way, those that are against it, are you going to protest; protest and not turn up to watch your team in the wildcard game? Nobody will watch it on TV?

 

[M Malice]

It is laughable that some people think women can compete with men in any sport that requires a modicum of strength, power, speed and athleticism.. it is peak delusion.

A decent Under 16 Division 1 boys club side would obliterate any AFLW side.

Which is to be expected, just being realistic not derogatory to women.... males and females are different and the differences are fantastic.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

The difference between mens and womens AFL league is so vast, that the bottom VFL,SANFL or WAFL Clubs would beat any AFLW premier.

To put this in perspective.

The Matildas played a u15 boys team from Newcastle Jets. Lost 7-0. Were ranked no5 in the world at the time.

 

[GROTTO]

To put this in perspective.

The Matildas played a u15 boys team from Newcastle Jets. Lost 7-0. Were ranked no5 in the world at the time.

Matildas lose 7-0 to under-15s boys side

Australian women soccer team the Matildas have had a shock 7-0 loss to a Newcastle Jets under-15 boys team in Newcastle on Wednesday in a disastrous preparation for the Rio Olympics.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[_Mike_]

Against the idea, becomes more of a participation award IMO.

Leave the 8 system as it is, anything else appears to be a cash grab for more “finals type” matches at finals prices

 

[_Cerberus_]

Wish the current AFL board could read the room and F off and resign. No one likes them and their boys club. Constantly going against fans and making unpopular changes, game is worse off than it has ever been.

Going by history, 9th and 10th will have near zero chance of ever winning the flag. it will just reward teams with a potential losing record, with a finals run. Just dilutes the worth of the Home and Away season even more. Even if the league goes to 20 teams, top 8 is still fine. Finals should never be 50 percent of the teams, so keeping the top 8 with 20 teams is perfect.

This is nothing but another attempt to grab extra cash from playing a couple of more games.

For once, leave the effing game alone. If they want to make a good change. Allow AFL members or the clubs to vote for the AFL board every 5 years. Will keep them honest and remove the jobs for mates and the same recycled ideals year after year.

 

[sthmelb_dimmies]

The AFL is run like a corporation that is looking at it's bottom line. This will increase it's bottom line so it will come in regardless of what a few naysayers on a forum or call back radio say.

And don't think they won't add more finals than this is the future. Almost as sure as taxes and death.

By the way, those that are against it, are you going to protest; protest and not turn up to watch your team in the wildcard game? Nobody will watch it on TV?

How will it affect the Power Rankings?

 

[flamethrower]

Adding teams that finish 9th and 10th are not "Wild Card" finals, it is just a top 10 you AFL morons.

If you want a true "Wild Card" finals system, there are a couple of ways to go. Not entirely serious...

1. Have a lottery - team finishing 9th get 10 balls, 10th get 9 down to 18th getting 1 ball - first team drawn plays 8th, 2nd team drawn gets to play 7th.
2. Reward high scoring teams by adding the team with the highest "for" outside the top 8 plays 8th, and remaining team with most scores over 100 points playing 7th.
3. Captain's choice - team finishing 7th gets to choose their opponent from the 10 teams missing the finals, then team finishing 8th chooses from the remaining 9.

We know the only reason the AFL wants a "Wild Card" weekend is to make more money - just double admission prices during finals and forget rewarding mediocrity.

 

[hcd199]

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.

Exact thresholds are arbitrary by necessity - you can always point to entities marginally on both sides of a given line and ask why that particular demarcation was chosen. The point is not where Carlton were at relative to the Bulldogs in 2022, or whether 9th is really that much worse than 8th - it's where teams in that bracket are at relative to the overall competition that matters, to what extent rewarding clubs with mediocre H&A records dilutes the premiership race.

Obviously that's something on which reasonable people can disagree. But making finals inherently means less the more teams you admit, and I think the general sentiment here is, rightly, that a Final 8 sits somewhere between 'about right' and 'slightly too generous' (so will remain about right for a potential 19/20-team competition) - I'd say it's stuck around more because it's structurally neater than any Six or Seven or Nine than because the size is necessarily optimal for letting in only those that 'deserve' it. (The McIntyre Final 5 is a great system, but feels a little too narrow for 18 teams - and a Final 6 is hard to format right: a flimsy three weeks with the top two straight into a prelim? A fatiguing five-week series with a top-two 'triple chance', as seen in the 2010 TSL? A complete abortive shambles, like the variants used by the AFL in the early 90s?)

As for 'fairytale runs'? These things are a lot less interesting when they're massaged into being - scoring quick goals from a centre clearance, or long goals playing on from 50m out, is duller for the rules that make them harder to defend against now, for example. Should the whole 18 teams play finals, just to ensure the possibility of a miracle flag from the bottom 4 remains live? The scramble to make it into finals has just as much 'fairytale' potential of its own, and for that to work the threshold has to feel like something of an achievement - Richmond's nine straight to scrape in in 2014 is worth more for having to go 12-10 than it would've been if they'd only needed, say, 10-12 to qualify.

The core question with expanding finals will always be, does it feel earned or cheap? The 'wildcard' badging does the AFL no favours, but rewarding mediocrity leans toward the latter regardless - the match-ups we would've had that I posted look seriously uninspiring for the 'step up' that you want a finals series to feel like, and the remote prospect of some bog-ordinary team going all the way does very little to liven that dullness up.