Conference System

[TheGoatBaron]

With the 2 new teams being introduced in the next 2 years, what do Swans supporters think of having a US-style conference system into the AFL?

• All teams play each other once in rounds one to 17. After round 17, clubs are reallocated into three divisions based on their ladder positions (top six, middle six and bottom six). The top six play each other in the last five games and jostle for ladder positions. The middle six play each other in the last five games and battle for the last ... See moreavailable places in the finals (a final eight or 10 could be used). The bottom six play each other in the last five games, but they are already excluded from finals contention.

I don't mind this idea to be honest, if they are not going to go with a 17 round season. Do you think a conference system will be fairer? Do you think it'll work?

 

[MF]

What's the source for that system you've listed? I've heard the AFL are taking feedback from the public and are considering a few different systems.

I'm generally against adopting anything American in our sport but the conference idea has some merit. It really depends how it works though.

 

[jsmoove]

think its pretty stupid idea, would have to be broken into interstate and vic but still isnt een numbers unless a vic team relocates.

its a pretty crappy system in the US aswell i think, dont see why the AFL keep trying to fix things that aint broke, just leave the fixture as is, or make it that eeach team plays each other once or twice.

i also beleive the final 8 should stay the same, so sick of afl experimenting in new crap

edit: sorry i read a different version of conferences, this one is nothing like the USA and is still very stupid

 

[bungee]

I prefer 51 rounds playing each of the other 17 teams 3 times with a bigger list to prevent fatigue and a heap more footy. Christmas will be the only non-footy weekend. Players can take leave when they're injured. This will encourage them to take more risks and hit the packs hard. All our young players will get a game.

Just think. All that wonderful footy. The coleman medal will need at least 300 goals in a season to win it. Heck, Richmond might even win a game.

 

[TheGoatBaron]

What's the source for that system you've listed? I've heard the AFL are taking feedback from the public and are considering a few different systems.

I'm generally against adopting anything American in our sport but the conference idea has some merit. It really depends how it works though.

Source is here!

I think the system I have pointed out has some merit, but, I am sceptical of the conference idea though.

 

[CAS79]

I'm anti the conference system. the ladder system is designed to allow the best teams no matter where there from progress. The conference system is to divi up which teams make the play offs between region and supporter groups.

The problem lies with the draw not the ladder.

 

[robbieando]

Source is here!

I think the system I have pointed out has some merit, but, I am sceptical of the conference idea though.

The system you picked has major flaws after the Round 17. The SPL has a split in the League after each club has played each other 3 times into two groups of 6 (Top 6 and Bottom 6) and each year without fail the fixturing of the post split fixtures results in more than one club playing more away matches than home matches (and more home games than away games) and thus making the fixture unfair and hurting the clubs on a financial basis as well as a sporting basis.

I not in favour of a split of the fixture once we hit a certain point in the season.

 

[robbieando]

I favour this system.

Dividing the 18 clubs into three conferences - play all teams in the same conference twice (10 games) and the teams in the other two conferences once (12 games). After the end of the home-and-away season either two or four teams from each conference qualify for the finals.

You play everyone ONCE and you only play teams TWICE five times and keep the fixture at 22 round.

 

[CAS79]

I favour this system.



You play everyone ONCE and you only play teams TWICE five times and keep the fixture at 22 round.

It still splits the group group playing finals to include teams with a worse loss ratio than a team than a team who misses out.

I'm not anti change for traditions sake but if you are going to change a tradition it should be to improver the league not change for change sake while leaving the same problem right where it was.

I actuality prefer the ladder system but with a three year draw that equals out to everyone having played each other an equal number of times 9mentioned in Melbourne MX this evening). still not perfect but to me it beats the conference system.

 

[BarneyBent]

I like the idea mentioned in the OP. For one thing, it ensures everybody plays everybody else once, and the extra games will only be against teams roughly equal to where you are on the ladder, minimising the "playing all the good teams twice" effect.

If combined with a new draft system, I think it would work really well in terms of tanking. Picture this: after round 17, the ladder gets split into thirds. The bottom third will get the bottom 6 picks, but in a lottery system (either lightly weighted or not weighted at all). Also, before round 17, teams will be clambering to get into the middle 6, which provides 2 of the final teams. If a team can get into the middle six, then if they play good footy, they'll play finals. Much greater incentive not to tank, much lesser incentive to tank.

 

[bedford]

I prefer 51 rounds playing each of the other 17 teams 3 times with a bigger list to prevent fatigue and a heap more footy. Christmas will be the only non-footy weekend. Players can take leave when they're injured. This will encourage them to take more risks and hit the packs hard. All our young players will get a game.

Just think. All that wonderful footy. The coleman medal will need at least 300 goals in a season to win it. Heck, Richmond might even win a game.

If you don't get the footy news over there, Richmond has won 2 games and good on them with a decent coach. Also if you haven't caught up with the news over there, Jesse White will be playing against the filth next week. The conference system sucks we don't need it.

 

[Swansujelly]

I favour this system.



You play everyone ONCE and you only play teams TWICE five times and keep the fixture at 22 round.

on another thread i put forward the idea of every one playing each other once, alternating home ground every 2 years, and the other 4-5 rounds made up of the "special" rounds, like Rivalry, Anzac Day round etc..

 

[robbieando]

It still splits the group group playing finals to include teams with a worse loss ratio than a team than a team who misses out.

You could have conferences for the purposes of the deciding the fixture, but still have a normal Ladder to decide positions and finals matchups. You can have Conference Ladders purely for Conference Titles. Remember the ideas put forward aren't 100% the only idea they are going with, they might go with a mixture of ideas.

I'm not anti change for traditions sake but if you are going to change a tradition it should be to improver the league not change for change sake while leaving the same problem right where it was.

We'll never solve the problem of the uneven fixture without cutting teams from the competition. Hence the reason they are looking for ways to figure out better more even fixture ideas.

I actuality prefer the ladder system but with a three year draw that equals out to everyone having played each other an equal number of times 9mentioned in Melbourne MX this evening). still not perfect but to me it beats the conference system.

If we don't go the conference system, that would be a good idea. But that removes clubs "certain" matches such as ANZAC Day, Queens Birthday and Sydney vs Collingwood in the split Round. Clubs are going to be wary of it.

 

[legend166]

You could have conferences for the purposes of the deciding the fixture, but still have a normal Ladder to decide positions and finals matchups. You can have Conference Ladders purely for Conference Titles. Remember the ideas put forward aren't 100% the only idea they are going with, they might go with a mixture of ideas.

That defeats the entire purpose of a conference system, which is to make it so that you're only competing for finals spots against teams who have the same draw as you do.

That's why the current system is unfair. We're competing for finals spots against teams who don't even play the same teams we do over the season. The AFL and NRL are the only (relatively) major sports competitions around the world that do this. EPL, everyone plays each other twice. All the American sports have conferences.

 

[MushroomRocket]

Reduce the normal season to 20 games, play finals series with 10 teams.

 

[MushroomRocket]

I prefer 51 rounds playing each of the other 17 teams 3 times with a bigger list to prevent fatigue and a heap more footy. Christmas will be the only non-footy weekend. Players can take leave when they're injured. This will encourage them to take more risks and hit the packs hard. All our young players will get a game.

Just think. All that wonderful footy. The coleman medal will need at least 300 goals in a season to win it. Heck, Richmond might even win a game.

I actually like this, it will weed out permanently injured players and will reduce most teams to our skill level circa 2007

 

[BIGBEZ]

I prefer 51 rounds playing each of the other 17 teams 3 times with a bigger list to prevent fatigue and a heap more footy. Christmas will be the only non-footy weekend. Players can take leave when they're injured. This will encourage them to take more risks and hit the packs hard. All our young players will get a game.

Just think. All that wonderful footy. The coleman medal will need at least 300 goals in a season to win it. Heck, Richmond might even win a game.

haha I like the sound of non stop footy, but what about finals?

 

[CAS79]

haha I like the sound of non stop footy, but what about finals?

Christmas day lightning premiership.

 

[Reggi05]

So

1 The draw needs to be done for the entire year. Usually I travel interstate a few times a year, you look at the draw and decide & book months in advance. Very difficult with no draw in advance - do I book now or wait for better games?

Every team needs to play every other team once. If only so that year latter S&Don supporters can't complain "you wouldn't have won that Premiership if you had played us that year...blah blah blah"

I hate this idea

 

[Reggi05]

I prefer 51 rounds playing each of the other 17 teams 3 times with a bigger list to prevent fatigue and a heap more footy. Christmas will be the only non-footy weekend. Players can take leave when they're injured. This will encourage them to take more risks and hit the packs hard. All our young players will get a game.

Just think. All that wonderful footy. The coleman medal will need at least 300 goals in a season to win it. Heck, Richmond might even win a game.

I am not sure we should have the week off for XMAS. We could cancel the boxing day test and Boxing day could be a real draw card. Teams could get new players in a Kris Kringle on XMAS day, the could be revealed in the game boxing day.

We could put Ed BArlow into the Kris Kringle

 

[RMercadi]

Conference Sytem would be o.k. as long as the AFL respected the Swans Sth Melbourne Heritage and included them in the "Southern Conference".

All of the non-Melbourne teams could play in one conference Gold Coast, GWS, Pt Adelaide, Adelaide, West Coast, Freeo, Geelong and maybe Footscray (its not really in Melbournes). That's 8 teams in the "non-Melbourne conference" and 10 in the other.
We should get the first 6 places in the final 8, with the other 2 made up from the Interstate/non-Melbourne conference.

This is very fair - AFL was invented where the MCG now stands - so we need to respect our elders and our Heritage.

 

[MG Swannie]

The AFL are seeking and getting lots of feedback on the 18 team comp. See:

http://www.afl.com.au/*****/*****Season/tabid/16355/Default.aspx

Can't see the AFL going with any system that hurts Collingwood.

 

[jsmoove]

I don't see the problem with just playing each team once, the only downside is less footy. And the finals is extended to 10 teams, have no split round with a break the week before finals start.

The other option would be to play each other twice and have 34 round with two separate off weeks for the player's sake.

Only really fair way of making a fixture

 

[legend166]

Conference Sytem would be o.k. as long as the AFL respected the Swans Sth Melbourne Heritage and included them in the "Southern Conference".

All of the non-Melbourne teams could play in one conference Gold Coast, GWS, Pt Adelaide, Adelaide, West Coast, Freeo, Geelong and maybe Footscray (its not really in Melbournes). That's 8 teams in the "non-Melbourne conference" and 10 in the other.
We should get the first 6 places in the final 8, with the other 2 made up from the Interstate/non-Melbourne conference.

This is very fair - AFL was invented where the MCG now stands - so we need to respect our elders and our Heritage.

This is a troll right?

 

[WoGiTaLiA]

I don't see the problem with just playing each team once, the only downside is less footy. And the finals is extended to 10 teams, have no split round with a break the week before finals start.

The other option would be to play each other twice and have 34 round with two separate off weeks for the player's sake.

Only really fair way of making a fixture

It is not a fair system though, the only way for a fair system is to have every team play each other twice, one home and one away game. Otherwise certain teams are going to be greatly advantaged and disadvantaged.

I don't mind a conference system except it will be damn near impossible to implement.

You can't do north and south or east and west. You can't do AFL and VFL, it would have to be some random system and that would have all kinds of flaws within it.

How do you account for the interstate teams, do you attempt to foster their rivalries with two games a year, effectively meaning they have to be in the same conferences as each other or do you try and create an equitable travel system, in which case it only makes sense to separate each of the interstate teams.

Travel is the major problem because the teams are not spread evenly. You have the majority of the teams in one city and the rest are all in pairs effectively.

That is what will make conferences damn near impossible. Having "random" conferences destroy's most of the positives of a conference, being that the teams play the same schedule and more importantly, they foster rivalries, if they change every year that is ruined and just plucking teams is going to make schedules wrong.

Personally I don't think there is a big need for change. I think fostering rivalries is a vital part of the AFL. Take Sydney, only makes sense that we would face WCE, GWS and BRI twice. That is game 17, 18 and 19 on our schedule. Leaves a couple for other teams, probably a Collingwood game and two others. Pretty much every team is in the same position where you can fill most of the double games to foster rivalries. Of course this may create travel problems, especially for the VIC teams forced to travel for interstate games to keep the home/away even.

Basically the AFL is in a very tough position imo. I can't see conferences working because there is just no way to fairly establish them. It HAS to be 2 or the whole idea falls to pieces and from there you are back at step one.

The only alternative is to have divisions within the conferences, but even then, you have uneven divisions and geography against it.

Honestly... the easiest way for the AFL is to add games, get it to 26 rounds(get rid of the NAB Cup) and most problems can be worked around. It would be a great opportunity to address what is currenly an inequitable scheduling of games but I just don't see a viable solution.