The Educator
Club Legend
- Jan 23, 2023
- 1,096
- 1,134
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
This is well thought out and creative system
You've touched on the underlying principles that you are emphasising - e.g. improving incentive for finishing first, avoiding repeat games etc.
It is important to be explicit about these as an entry point for any chance to have a sane informed discussion on this topic given that people don't actually get the complex dynamics (including the impact it has on the regular season) to start off with so what chance to do they have of relating these to the set of desire principles?
Given the prevelant ignorance, you end up with morons shouting down anyone who doesnt agree with them - asserting that their set of priority principles are ordained by god and throwing around very basic probabilities and confusing it with real analysis
My issue with your system is it flattens the payoff too much between 4th and 9th (and to a lesser extent 10th). This waters down the implications of matches for teams that are heading for that part of the ladder in the last third of the season.
The advantage of the AFL's final 10 over this model is that it creates more "cliffs" that ensure teams are likely to be playing for material outcomes late into the season. (i.e. 4th to 5th, 6th to 7th). It also puts 7th to 10th 4 wins rather than 3 wins from a GF berth
Another factor counting against your system is competitive balance. 1st versus 10th will generally mean a lopsided final - replacing a far more likely closer match in 1st versus 4th.
The reason we shifted from the mcyntire final 8 (during the 90s) to the current final 8 system was due to the importance of competitive balance and to a lessor extent clarity of outcome. That system obviously did reward 1st and 2nd more than the current system does but it turned out that having 4 better balanced first week games with clear outcomes for both participating teams were playing for was superiour.
Your system is somewhat of a hybrid of the essence of the two final 8 systems.
You've touched on the underlying principles that you are emphasising - e.g. improving incentive for finishing first, avoiding repeat games etc.
It is important to be explicit about these as an entry point for any chance to have a sane informed discussion on this topic given that people don't actually get the complex dynamics (including the impact it has on the regular season) to start off with so what chance to do they have of relating these to the set of desire principles?
Given the prevelant ignorance, you end up with morons shouting down anyone who doesnt agree with them - asserting that their set of priority principles are ordained by god and throwing around very basic probabilities and confusing it with real analysis
My issue with your system is it flattens the payoff too much between 4th and 9th (and to a lesser extent 10th). This waters down the implications of matches for teams that are heading for that part of the ladder in the last third of the season.
The advantage of the AFL's final 10 over this model is that it creates more "cliffs" that ensure teams are likely to be playing for material outcomes late into the season. (i.e. 4th to 5th, 6th to 7th). It also puts 7th to 10th 4 wins rather than 3 wins from a GF berth
Another factor counting against your system is competitive balance. 1st versus 10th will generally mean a lopsided final - replacing a far more likely closer match in 1st versus 4th.
The reason we shifted from the mcyntire final 8 (during the 90s) to the current final 8 system was due to the importance of competitive balance and to a lessor extent clarity of outcome. That system obviously did reward 1st and 2nd more than the current system does but it turned out that having 4 better balanced first week games with clear outcomes for both participating teams were playing for was superiour.
Your system is somewhat of a hybrid of the essence of the two final 8 systems.
