Has Competitive Equalisation created a need for wild-card finals?

[Freshwater]

The moment a good player misses a GF through concussion the AFL will bring in the pre GF bye.

They have already done this in 2021 for this reason. But then stopped it in 2022, bizarre. The AFL is run by pea brains.

 

[Crankyhawk]

If you'd bothered to look through the thread you'll find numerous posts outlining the benefits of the knockout final 10 (and the issues with the current system). If you want to outline your arguments as to why the double chance system is better, go nuts.

I’m happy with status quo final 8.
AFL historically has had less than 50% qualify for finals. Dead matches at end of year? Tough, be better next year, use you draft picks.
AFL systems always have had a double chance from the old challenge rule through every final’s structure (the 4,5,6 and the 8) though I wasn’t a fan of the previous 8 (with 3v6 and 4v5)

 

[10571z]

Wildcard is just top 10 nothing else. Stupid concept that just makes it harder from outside the top 4

 

[ioppolo]

They have already done this in 2021 for this reason. But then stopped it in 2022, bizarre. The AFL is run by pea brains.

That was only done that year because of our divine leader's COVID rules regarding the travelling teams and fans. The pre finals bye was moved to be a pre GF bye.

 

[Chiz]

I’m happy with status quo final 8.

Sure, you're entitled to your opinion. But that also means you're happy with the top team generally getting a harder PF matchup than the second team, with the top side sometimes getting no advantage over 4th, and with 4th getting a huge advantage over 5th despite historically being separated by a single game or percentage.

AFL historically has had less than 50% qualify for finals. Dead matches at end of year? Tough, be better next year, use you draft picks.

I highly doubt the AFL turns a blind eye to dead rubbers. You might say 'tough', but the league is obliged to keep the season interesting for as long as possible for as many teams as possible. Having around 50% of teams in the finals does this best, and 10 teams will be closer to 50% than 8 once Tassie enter the league.

AFL systems always have had a double chance from the old challenge rule through every final’s structure (the 4,5,6 and the 8) though I wasn’t a fan of the previous 8 (with 3v6 and 4v5)

Yep, and all systems had some combination of repeated match-ups (perhaps ok in a final 4, but not in a final 8) or the higher seed getting a harder match-up - these are unavoidable with a double chance.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Sure, you're entitled to your opinion. But that also means you're happy with the top team generally getting a harder PF matchup than the second team, with the top side sometimes getting no advantage over 4th, and with 4th getting a huge advantage over 5th despite historically being separated by a single game or percentage.

I highly doubt the AFL turns a blind eye to dead rubbers. You might say 'tough', but the league is obliged to keep the season interesting for as long as possible for as many teams as possible. Having around 50% of teams in the finals does this best, and 10 teams will be closer to 50% than 8 once Tassie enter the league.

Yep, and all systems had some combination of repeated match-ups (perhaps ok in a final 4, but not in a final 8) or the higher seed getting a harder match-up - these are unavoidable with a double chance.

I don’t have issues with repeat match ups, and would be open to giving higher placed prelim finalist choice of who they played.

 

[Chiz]

I don’t have issues with repeat match ups, and would be open to giving higher placed prelim finalist choice of who they played.

The AFL obviously have an issue with it as they reverse the PF match-ups. Personally, if a team has to win 3 finals to win the premiership, this should be vs 3 different teams. Under the old final 5 the top side often only had to defeat one side to win the flag (just had to do it twice).

 

[Crankyhawk]

The AFL obviously have an issue with it as they reverse the PF match-ups. Personally, if a team has to win 3 finals to win the premiership, this should be vs 3 different teams. Under the old final 5 the top side often only had to defeat one side to win the flag (just had to do it twice).

Well, given that you have stated issue with both higher placed finalist having harder opponent in prelim and repeat match up, and the double chance being traditional, my preferred option would be to give the higher placed prelim qualifier the choice of opponent. But it really is a small matter to me.

 

[_Mike_]

If the AFL had a conference system you could support the wildcard idea. Not enough teams to do that IMO

 

[scotty13]

How about at the end of the H&A season all teams just draw a card from a standard deck. Highest card wins the flag.

 

[Billy ray]

Everyone plays eachother once

At end of season big 4 automatically through regardless of ladder position

Then remaining best 8 teams play 4 knockouts. Winners play away to big 4 in following week.
If big 4 loses they get double chance. But if big 4 wins its straight knockout

 

[Chiz]

Well, given that you have stated issue with both higher placed finalist having harder opponent in prelim and repeat match up, and the double chance being traditional, my preferred option would be to give the higher placed prelim qualifier the choice of opponent. But it really is a small matter to me.

I suspect you get more repeated matches if the higher placed side gets to choose - why wouldn't they choose to play the side they've already beaten?

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

If you want to jazz up the finals, let the teams finishing first and fifth pick their week one QF/EF opponent from the teams that finished 2nd-4th and 6th-8th.

 

[Dan26]

Here is another knockout final 10 version 2. I don't like it as much as the original knockout final-10, but the probabilities are actually fairer.

(winners in bold)

WEEK ONE
1st elimination final: 5 v 6
2nd elimination final: 4 v 7
3rd elimination Final: 3 v 8
4th elimination final: 2 v 9
5th elimination final: 1 v 10

Three highest placed winners straight to Preliminary Final


WEEK TWO
Semi-final: 4th-highest winner vs 5th highest winner: 4 v 5

Winner to Prelim


WEEK THREE
1st Preliminary Final: highest week one winner vs semi-final winner: 1 v 4
2nd Preliminary Final: 2nd-highest week one winner vs 3rd highest week one winner: 2 v 3


WEEK FOUR
BYE (ensuring 14 day break for Grand Final)


WEEK FIVE
Grand Final: 1 v 2


Probabilities
1st - 12.5 %
2nd - 12.5 %
3rd - 12.5%
4th - 11.72%
5th - 10.55%
6th - 10.55%
7th - 9.375%
8th - 7.81%
9th - 6.25%
10th - 6.25%

 

[jdstorm]

I’d say so.

The whole top4 teams playing each other twice a boring and lacks drama.

Go top12 with all the top4 getting a week off at the start of the finals. No double chance (because it sucks)

 

[Dan26]

If ever you want a reason to have a final-10 and wonder about the financial ramifications of having dead rubbers, look at what the Melbourne-Collingwood match this Friday night could have been.

It would have been a genuine Elimination final, with the winner making it and the loser missing out.

1. SYDNEY 16-6
2. PORT AD-15-7
3. GWS 15-7
4. GEELONG 14-8
5. BRISBANE 13-1-8
6. BULLDOGS 13-9
7. Hawthorn 13-9
8. Carlton 13-9
9.Fremantle 12-9-1
10.Collingwood 12-10.....100.1%
11. Essendon 11-10-1
12. Melbourne 11-11..........101.1%

Could have potentially got 90,000 on Friday night.

Fremantle, Carlton and Hawthorn would have all all still had possibilities of making the top-6.

 

[SC_Power]

If ever you want a reason to have a final-10 and wonder about the financial ramifications of having dead rubbers, look at what the Melbourne-Collingwood match this Friday night could have been.

It would have been a genuine Elimination final, with the winner making it and the loser missing out.

1.SYDNEY 16-6
2. PORT AD-15-7
3. GWS 15-7
4. GEELONG 14-8
5. BRISBANE 13-1-8
6. BULLDOGS 13-9
7. Hawthorn 13-9
8. Carlton 13-9
9.Fremantle 12-9-1
10.Collingwood 12-10.....100.1%
11. Essendon 11-10-1
12. Melbourne 11-11..........101.1%

Could have potentially got 90,000 on Friday night.

Fremantle, Carlton and Hawthorn would have all all still had possibilities of making the top-6.

I reckon if we had a top 18, we could really light up the finals series.

North v West Coast to see who’s finishing in 16th and lift their chances of a flag from 0.00001% to 0.000013%.

 

[jdstorm]

Personally I think top 12 is the way to go.

Give top 4 a week off then single elimination.

AFL bands teams into 3 tiers when doing season difficulty so top 12 is just all band 1 and 2 teams making finals

 

[ioppolo]

This is the only season in my living memory where a top 10 wildcard would've been a decent system. Every other season, 9th and 10th were so far off it and would've been a waste of everyone's time.

 

[BF Tiger]

If ever you want a reason to have a final-10 and wonder about the financial ramifications of having dead rubbers, look at what the Melbourne-Collingwood match this Friday night could have been.

It would have been a genuine Elimination final, with the winner making it and the loser missing out.

1. SYDNEY 16-6
2. PORT AD-15-7
3. GWS 15-7
4. GEELONG 14-8
5. BRISBANE 13-1-8
6. BULLDOGS 13-9
7. Hawthorn 13-9
8. Carlton 13-9
9.Fremantle 12-9-1
10.Collingwood 12-10.....100.1%
11. Essendon 11-10-1
12. Melbourne 11-11..........101.1%

Could have potentially got 90,000 on Friday night.

Fremantle, Carlton and Hawthorn would have all all still had possibilities of making the top-6.

Ok, that’s great for season 2024. Now work back through the past seasons to 2012 when the comp moved to 18 teams.

 

[Dan26]

Ok, that’s great for season 2024. Now work back through the past seasons to 2012 when the comp moved to 18 teams.

Last year would have been pretty good. This waas the ladder going into the last round.



The West-Coast Adelaide match in the final round would have been a quasi-final for the Crows. Adelaide would have snatched a finals berth by winning (and Essendon losing) as the Crows would leapfrog the loser of Geelong vs Bulldogs. Geelong wouldn't have rested half their team versus the Bulldogs (which is what happened in reality last year), and in fact probably would have finished 9th (and the Bulldogs 11th) had they won in the last round with a full team.

The Crows-Eagles match and Geelong-Bulldogs match would have more riding on them. Essendon also wouldn't have had a dead rubber versus Collingwood on the Friday night.

Whichever way you look at it, it's a more interesting finish with more "live" games.

Once Essendon lost on Friday night, you would have had the amazing scenario where Adelaide would be guaranteed to make it if they won, as they would overtake the loser of Geelong vs Bulldogs.

 

[SC_Power]

If you want a finals system only for teams who earn it, how about we say that every year is a finals series for teams that finish above 50% wins, or 50% wins and >100 percentage?

And have a finals series system for every possible number of finalists.

So this year, it’s a top ten so far, Essendon and Melbourne have to win to make it a top 12.

2023? A top 9.
2022? A top 9.
2021? Top 8
2020? Top 9
2019? Top 10.
2018? Top 12.

Some year like 1997, only a top 7.

It’s future proof, as it doesn’t matter how many teams there are in the competition.

 

[Dan26]

This is the only season in my living memory where a top 10 wildcard would've been a decent system. Every other season, 9th and 10th were so far off it and would've been a waste of everyone's time.

Last year, it would have been incredible.

 

[peetoo]

If ever you want a reason to have a final-10 and wonder about the financial ramifications of having dead rubbers, look at what the Melbourne-Collingwood match this Friday night could have been.

It would have been a genuine Elimination final, with the winner making it and the loser missing out.

1. SYDNEY 16-6
2. PORT AD-15-7
3. GWS 15-7
4. GEELONG 14-8
5. BRISBANE 13-1-8
6. BULLDOGS 13-9
7. Hawthorn 13-9
8. Carlton 13-9
9.Fremantle 12-9-1
10.Collingwood 12-10.....100.1%
11. Essendon 11-10-1
12. Melbourne 11-11..........101.1%

Could have potentially got 90,000 on Friday night.

Fremantle, Carlton and Hawthorn would have all all still had possibilities of making the top-6.

Hawthorn got big crowds beating carlton and Collingwood, essentially elimination games. Might not have been the interest if it was a final 10. Why should hawks be forced to beat them again instead of the week off bulldogs get, for the same wins?

 

[Chiz]

Hawthorn got big crowds beating carlton and Collingwood, essentially elimination games. Might not have been the interest if it was a final 10. Why should hawks be forced to beat them again instead of the week off bulldogs get, for the same wins?

The difference between finishing 4th and 5th is far greater than the difference between finishing 6th and 7th (and is a major flaw with the current system in my view). 4th has three times the probability of winning the grand final, plus a guaranteed home semi or prelim - looks like the difference this season will be half a game, in other seasons it has just been percentage.