Fixture Full 2024 AFL fixture released. News and leaks.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back on topic why have eagles been given a hard fixture per the champion data list (published in herald sun) they have been given rating of 3rd hardest; or is it a methodology limitation that because they lost so heavily consistently in 2023 that means everyone is considered a difficult opponent?
 
Back on topic why have eagles been given a hard fixture per the champion data list (published in herald sun) they have been given rating of 3rd hardest; or is it a methodology limitation that because they lost so heavily consistently in 2023 that means everyone is considered a difficult opponent?


Burnie Burns Conspiracy GIF by Rooster Teeth


Because we refused to trade pick 1 to North, most likely.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Compared to playing the same game at KP, a 70k crowd at the G earns the club less money total compared to playing in front of 40k at KP. So by moving the game form KP to the MCG, the club balance sheet takes a hit and so yes that is a loss whether you like it or not.

A 'loss' would imply Geeling are paying money to play at the G.
What you've described is a reduced profit.
 
A 'loss' would imply Geeling are paying money to play at the G.
What you've described is a reduced profit.
If you sell something for $100k that's valued at $200k, that's a $100k loss. "reduced profit" is just a buzzword that business use to explain away a poor result.
 
Back on topic why have eagles been given a hard fixture per the champion data list (published in herald sun) they have been given rating of 3rd hardest; or is it a methodology limitation that because they lost so heavily consistently in 2023 that means everyone is considered a difficult opponent?

Because the Eagles didn’t get scheduled to play the wooden spooners in 2024
 
It's probably been explained, but what's the point of round 0?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

9c765da67d231e5a2fe39c654bcbd3dd.jpg


Completely even and fair fixture we’ve got here. Crows, Hawks, Saints and WB getting their first bye at round 15 after many teams have had two.

Why not just have everyone that played in week 0 have a bye in week 1, ie. play round 1 over two weeks. Or better yet, get rid of something no one asked for or wants.
 
9c765da67d231e5a2fe39c654bcbd3dd.jpg


Completely even and fair fixture we’ve got here. Crows, Hawks, Saints and WB getting their first bye at round 15 after many teams have had two.

Why not just have everyone that played in week 0 have a bye in week 1, ie. play round 1 over two weeks. Or better yet, get rid of something no one asked for or wants.
The whole round Zero is about sticking it up league in Nsw and Qld which is an AFL executive focus. The rest of us don't give a rats toss bag about AFL v NRL

Doesn't bode well for the direction under the new CEO if this is his legacy
 
If you sell something for $100k that's valued at $200k, that's a $100k loss. "reduced profit" is just a buzzword that business use to explain away a poor result.

But Geelong aren't 'selling' anything, MCG games are part of the fixture, and part of the AFL's contract with stadiums. You can't lose something you never had under the current league arrangements.
 
9c765da67d231e5a2fe39c654bcbd3dd.jpg


Completely even and fair fixture we’ve got here. Crows, Hawks, Saints and WB getting their first bye at round 15 after many teams have had two.

Why not just have everyone that played in week 0 have a bye in week 1, ie. play round 1 over two weeks. Or better yet, get rid of something no one asked for or wants.
All they had to do was align the byes of the rdO teams so they were the week before they played each other...then no impact.

They got Dees v Tigers right, as they have the bye in R6 and then play each other ANZAC eve.

Pretty simply to do BL and Coll the bye in Rd2 so they then play each other in Easter Thursday in Rd3

Then just need a Carl v GWS game (they play each other in rd6) so give those two teams a bye in R5.

So then just needed to have Suns v Swans both have the bye before they played (make that fixture gather rd and give them Rd3 as the bye).

Would have been all linked in together nicely.

Missed opportunity.
 
9c765da67d231e5a2fe39c654bcbd3dd.jpg


Completely even and fair fixture we’ve got here. Crows, Hawks, Saints and WB getting their first bye at round 15 after many teams have had two.

Why not just have everyone that played in week 0 have a bye in week 1, ie. play round 1 over two weeks. Or better yet, get rid of something no one asked for or wants.
Thing is, the way the byes are placed, Do Melbourne, Richmond and Brisbane really have 2 byes? They're working in with stupid midweek games.

Their "Byes" are probably evening out the disadvantages of their fixture. tbh

The other 5 can **** off though.
 
Compared to playing the same game at KP, a 70k crowd at the G earns the club less money total compared to playing in front of 40k at KP. So by moving the game form KP to the MCG, the club balance sheet takes a hit and so yes that is a loss whether you like it or not.
No it isn’t a loss.

Anyway, let’s do the sums…

Extra 35k. Some would be AFL or MCc members so let’s call it just 15k. At $50 per ticket, that is $750k. Let’s halve that. How do Geelong make $375k more for a game @ KP, a ground that has less corporate less facilities. Where do that make that up?
 
There is nothing wrong with a split round to start the season like what occurred in 2014. The AFL is being silly with this new setup to start the season next year.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top