Discussed again by Evans on the couch. says needs more work to be palatable to the clubs biggest problem for me is it needs a lot of changes without commensurate return in the form of improvement
so the general framework is the teams play each other once over 17 rounds, then split into three groups for the final rounds and then finals, maybe changed
I'm thinking the big advantage is over the last five weeks the top six clubs will provide three high quality games, which will be good for TV and attendances. the bad side is this is almost a finals series in itself and to ask those teams to go for another four weeks against some teams from below who have had an easier fixture. also logistics mean the top six clubs might not be able to have a fair draw ie if team x played team y at xs home state in the forest 17 rounds, it should then be at the other teams ground in the final five rounds. To accommodate this completely, there might have to be bye rounds for some teams and play over 6 weeks not 5
So heres yet another attempt at making it work
first 17 rounds - each club plays each other once (and presumably alternate seasons home and away)
then theres three groups of six defined
1. the top six - these play for pecking order going int the finals, for which they have all qualified
2. two more groups of six, split odd and even down the table (7,9,11,13,15,17 in one group and the others in another) These play off for two wild card entries each group
Because the regime for the top group is obviously more taxing, the reward to the top two teams in enhanced.
In the finals, these top two teams take a week off while the take the first week off while the remaining eight finalists play off 3v10, 4v9, 5v8, 6v7, (this would be hard to quantify for teams 7-10, but it could be done something like NFL style with wins, head to head results etc) the point is a team from the top six gets a home final against an opponent which didnt qualify for the original top six
Second week we are back to the old final 6 where its QF 1v2, (winner proceeding to grand final) the other four in semi finals highest winner from week one v lowest winner from week one the losers eliminated.
third week: another week off for QF winners the remaining two play off in a prelim.
fourth week: grand final
it may seem easier for the top two teams than now, but if they have qualified with five straight games v the top six, they will certainly have deserved it. result is its nine finals games just like now, but with the exception of the 1v2 qf (which will be like a grand final for the non corporates) they are all elimination so more attractive
modelling on last years top ten (note the positions could have been different with a new h&a schedule).
Week 1: Haw def Geelong: Syd def Port: Richmond def by N melb: Bulldogs def by Adelaide (wild card)
Week 2 Fre def by WCE (QF): Haw def Adelaide (semi final): Syd def Rich (semi final).
Week 3 Haw def Syd (prelim)
Week 4 WCE v Haw (grand final)
Also would have had to abandon certain teams getting guaranteed two derby type games against each other, but using last years ladder as an approximation for after round 17 ladder, fre and WCE, adel v PtA, coll v carl, would all have had second fixtures
Sorry if its been done before
so the general framework is the teams play each other once over 17 rounds, then split into three groups for the final rounds and then finals, maybe changed
I'm thinking the big advantage is over the last five weeks the top six clubs will provide three high quality games, which will be good for TV and attendances. the bad side is this is almost a finals series in itself and to ask those teams to go for another four weeks against some teams from below who have had an easier fixture. also logistics mean the top six clubs might not be able to have a fair draw ie if team x played team y at xs home state in the forest 17 rounds, it should then be at the other teams ground in the final five rounds. To accommodate this completely, there might have to be bye rounds for some teams and play over 6 weeks not 5
So heres yet another attempt at making it work
first 17 rounds - each club plays each other once (and presumably alternate seasons home and away)
then theres three groups of six defined
1. the top six - these play for pecking order going int the finals, for which they have all qualified
2. two more groups of six, split odd and even down the table (7,9,11,13,15,17 in one group and the others in another) These play off for two wild card entries each group
Because the regime for the top group is obviously more taxing, the reward to the top two teams in enhanced.
In the finals, these top two teams take a week off while the take the first week off while the remaining eight finalists play off 3v10, 4v9, 5v8, 6v7, (this would be hard to quantify for teams 7-10, but it could be done something like NFL style with wins, head to head results etc) the point is a team from the top six gets a home final against an opponent which didnt qualify for the original top six
Second week we are back to the old final 6 where its QF 1v2, (winner proceeding to grand final) the other four in semi finals highest winner from week one v lowest winner from week one the losers eliminated.
third week: another week off for QF winners the remaining two play off in a prelim.
fourth week: grand final
it may seem easier for the top two teams than now, but if they have qualified with five straight games v the top six, they will certainly have deserved it. result is its nine finals games just like now, but with the exception of the 1v2 qf (which will be like a grand final for the non corporates) they are all elimination so more attractive
modelling on last years top ten (note the positions could have been different with a new h&a schedule).
Week 1: Haw def Geelong: Syd def Port: Richmond def by N melb: Bulldogs def by Adelaide (wild card)
Week 2 Fre def by WCE (QF): Haw def Adelaide (semi final): Syd def Rich (semi final).
Week 3 Haw def Syd (prelim)
Week 4 WCE v Haw (grand final)
Also would have had to abandon certain teams getting guaranteed two derby type games against each other, but using last years ladder as an approximation for after round 17 ladder, fre and WCE, adel v PtA, coll v carl, would all have had second fixtures
Sorry if its been done before
Last edited:
