Expansion 18 clubs? Final 9?

[FootyJunkie]

This Final 9 won't ever happen since we would most likely have only 8 finals in comparison to the current 9, but thought I'd throw this in out of interest.

Week 1 - Elimination Finals

1, 2, 3 - Bye

EF1 - 4 v 9
EF2 - 5 v 8
EF3 - 6 v 7

Week 2 - Qualifying Finals

QF1 - 1 v EF3 Winner
QF2 - 2 v EF2 Winner
QF3 - 3 v EF1 Winner

Week 3 and 4 - Preliminary Final(s) and Grand Final

If 1 wins QF1...
PF - QF2 Winner v QF3 Winner @ whoever is higher seeded.
Winner plays 1 in GF

If 1 loses QF1...
PF1 - 1 v QF3 Winner
PF2 - QF2 Winner v QF1 Winner @ whoever is higher seeded.
Winners playoff in GF

 

[wally funk]

you definately worked it out pretty well FJ, but i reckon a final 8 is the best option with the amount of teams there is now.

 

[scarecrow2k1]

This Final 9 won't ever happen since we would most likely have only 8 finals in comparison to the current 9, but thought I'd throw this in out of interest.

Week 1 - Elimination Finals

1, 2, 3 - Bye

EF1 - 4 v 9
EF2 - 5 v 8
EF3 - 6 v 7

Week 2 - Qualifying Finals

QF1 - 1 v EF3 Winner
QF2 - 2 v EF2 Winner
QF3 - 3 v EF1 Winner

Week 3 and 4 - Preliminary Final(s) and Grand Final

If 1 wins QF1...
PF - QF2 Winner v QF3 Winner @ whoever is higher seeded.
Winner plays 1 in GF

If 1 loses QF1...
PF1 - 1 v QF3 Winner
PF2 - QF2 Winner v QF1 Winner
Winners playoff in GF

So top of the ladder only has to beat 4 or 9 and gets straight to the Grand Final?

 

[FootyJunkie]

So top of the ladder only has to beat 4 or 9 and gets straight to the Grand Final?

No, either 6 or 7. Win that, they get in the GF. They get a week off, and two cracks to get into the GF, because they deserve it. The only club that gets a double chance.

 

[Docker Clint]

Haven't the AFL mentioned 2 conferences if they expand?

If that is the case, it will be two final 4s. With the winner of of each meeting in the GF.

 

[Farmy]

18 teams is too many.

There is already enough teams in the AFL.

That is all.

 

[scarecrow2k1]

No, either 6 or 7. Win that, they get in the GF. They get a week off, and two cracks to get into the GF, because they deserve it. The only club that gets a double chance.

I disagree, I think that at the moment they play 3-4 games, this can only be cut to 2-3, just one is too little, and many would say detrimental to sucess with so much time on the sidelines, which has been the case with teams like Essendon in 1990 and also quite often in Baseball. But with 9 teams its hard to make a system without a team missing a few weeks

 

[huntos]

18 teams is too many.

There is already enough teams in the AFL.

That is all.

Why is there too many, if anything there is not enough because places who love the game don't have a representation in Australia's premier league despite producing quality players.

 

[FootyJunkie]

Haven't the AFL mentioned 2 conferences if they expand?

If that is the case, it will be two final 4s. With the winner of of each meeting in the GF.

I'd prefer "divisions" over "conferences" if i had to choose. They are both used to justify the home and away draw, but for "divisions" come finals, the first two spots go to the division leaders, even if 2nd spot in one division has a better record than the division leader in another. The rest of the field is then based on record regardless of what division clubs are from. In "conferences", we have the whole strong vs weak conference debate.

 

[FootyJunkie]

I disagree, I think that at the moment they play 3-4 games, this can only be cut to 2-3, just one is too little, and many would say detrimental to sucess with so much time on the sidelines, which has been the case with teams like Essendon in 1990 and also quite often in Baseball. But with 9 teams its hard to make a system without a team missing a few weeks

1990 - Blame Peter Sumich and lack of league foresight to allow outdated finals replays in a national competition.

The Final 5 allowed the minor premier to only have to get one win to get into the GF for 20 years.

 

[scarecrow2k1]

1990 - Blame Peter Sumich and lack of league foresight to allow outdated finals replays in a national competition.

The Final 5 allowed the minor premier to only have to get one win to get into the GF for 20 years.

Things have changed in the last 20 years though, now there are 9 teams rather than 5 in the finals, or in this system. Therefore there are many more finals, so just one win is a much bigger advantage. With the finals almost doubled now, it would be more equal to double necessary wins to two

 

[Dont be a lemon]

"I guess I'll take the NFC helmets, and you can have the AFC helmets."

 

[Docker Clint]

Why is there too many, if anything there is not enough because places who love the game don't have a representation in Australia's premier league despite producing quality players.

Cant wait till Bunbury have a side in.

Make it 26 teams so the 38 year old fat prick playing full forward in the ammos can get a game at the highest level too.

 

[wotdude25]

8 is the right amount of numbers to have in the finals. The next appropriate number would be 12, but we would need 8 more teams. So if 8 out of 18 make the finals, it is more important to win and you can't break even. So only the good teams will make it. Who here wants bad teams in the finals. Some teams make the eight just even though there not very good. this would not happen with 18 teams and 8 places ion the finals

 

[Jesbo]

I wish it was final 9 this year... ... then maybe Geelong could have beaten St Kilda in the grand final instead

 

[judd5]

I really hope that this hole 18 team thing doesn't happen, this being one of the main reasons.
I think that the competitions only going to work well with either 16 or 20 teams, so that the finals can be an even number, rather than a 'final 9' which is absolute rubbish.
It seems like the AFL are ready to change the whole football league just to allow for one team in the near future, and then another one around 10 years later.
I think that things will work so much better if they can convince teams relocate rather than introducing new teams.

 

[Hopelesslyaddicted]

I imagine Richmond supporters would think that a final 9 would be a great idea as they have had a reputation of frequently finishing in that position over the years

 

[Bomber32]

A final 9 is absolutely unworkable. It will never happen.

 

[blue_cookie]

i think that if the AFL went to 18 teams, they should just stick with the top 8 and not reward mediocrity for being better than half the teams. even now, you can scrape into 8th spot and have a crack at the premiership.

 

[Mr Crow!]

Why on Earth would you want a Final 9?

The final 8 is crap as it is, as it REWARDS mediocrity. Ie: 50% of the competition gets in the finals.

At least with a 17 or 18 team competition, it would be:

8 / 17 = 47%
8 / 18 = 44%

 

[murph#3]

at least richmond will start playing finals.

 

[McCrann]

A final 9 can work - it just means you can reward the Best team during the Home & Away with a bye in the first week!

Believe me, I've worked out a perfect Final 9 system that includes 13 finals over a 5 week period.

I reckon that would be a real winner with crowds, TV revenues, building excitement etc.

I can't see any reason why we should stick to the final 8 for ever more, afterall, we've had final 6, a final 5 and various versions of a final 4 in the past - why should we stop at 8?

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

you definately worked it out pretty well FJ, but i reckon a final 8 is the best option with the amount of teams there is now.

Even with 18 teams, I'd prefer to revert to the final five - but I'm sure the AFL will try and work a final 10 somehow.