If a Wildcard Weekend was in place this year...

[Johnny Bananas]

Not in favour until we go to 20 teams.

 

[doppleganger]

100% this. Stink it up for 5 months, then have a decent one off game and hey presto, Finals! GTFO

But that can happen anyway with the actual GF

2002, Pies were just a decent team - finished 13-9 and a % of just 109%

But then won a final in Adelaide, and almost pinched a GF.

If you want to reward the team that is best all season, don’t even bother with finals.

 

[Supercoach Bargain]

I would like to see less sides in the finals. Better to have some unlucky than some rewarded for mediocrity.
Also means making the finals is worth more.

 

[Le Grille]

This is a bad idea, even this season there are clubs that shouldn’t be in the finals minimise the number of finals spots not add

 

[HairyO]

We finished 9th. We dont deserve finals.

 

[Americanpies]

Wild Card? What is this.. Tennis now?

 

[Snarls Barkley]

Think Essendon this year was a good measuring stick. They had some decent runs of form but generally had a pretty poor season. If you finished lower than them you didn’t deserve to make finals.

 

[Carringbush2010]

So the pre finals weekend wasteland passeth by and we still have the conundrum:

• No official games,
• Some disrespectful poor attempt at comedy in the name of the great Mr. Football Teddy Whitten

And yet we still have the thirst for a proper hitout to satiate the fans. The conundrum is that in order to have a real contest in the bye week that gives incentive for teams to compete also rewards mediocrity i;e the 7 v 10 and 8 v 9 model.

Preferably for mine I'd like to go back to the final 6 and completely disregard mediocrity, the trade off is more dead rubbers than a stationary manufacturer can produce.

The other end which has a lot of support is the wildcard weekend ......... this awards mediocrity so it can't really be taken seriously even though the incentive increases for more teams - less dead rubbers.

One idea that has the negatives of neither of the above is playing off for draft picks, it won't effect finals or award mediocrity but it will give clubs incentive to win. Maybe this could fill our insatiable void, not sure how it would work but better than no footy or dead rubber footy.

Anyone with an idea how to set this up?

 

[telsor]

The only valid reason I've heard for a 'wildcard' is to correct the inbalance in the fixture due to some teams playing each other twice, while others don't.

Trouble is, I've yet to see a way this could be compensated for that's workable. (not that that would stop the AFL of course).

 

[FootyJunkie]

Preferably for mine I'd like to go back to the final 6 and completely disregard mediocrity, the trade off is more dead rubbers than a stationary manufacturer can produce.

A Final 6 over 5 weeks?
So just add a week to the old Final 5?

Week 1

1 v 2
3 v 4
5 v 6

Week 2

Bye - Winner 1/2
QF - Loser 1/2 v Winner 3/4
EF - Loser 3/4 v Winner 5/6

… Final 5 continues as per normal up to the GF in Week 5

Under such a system, 1 v 2 could play each other 3 times over the Finals Series... 2 is the only side 1 could ever play!
The system relies on upsets to happen, otherwise it could become a dull series with repeat match ups.
Perhaps add a caveat that for a repeat match up in Week 3 and 4 the home sides are flipped?
ie. a side gets the benefit of the bye, but may play as the away side the following week

On the other hand, you would have 9 finals... same number of finals we have now with a more elite group of sides competing compared with the current 8.

No fairytale premierships from 7th though.

 

[Carringbush2010]

A Final 6 over 5 weeks?
So just add a week to the old Final 5?

Week 1

1 v 2
3 v 4
5 v 6

Week 2

Bye - Winner 1/2
QF - Loser 1/2 v Winner 3/4
EF - Loser 3/4 v Winner 5/6

… Final 5 continues as per normal up to the GF in Week 5

Under such a system, 1 v 2 could play each other 3 times over the Finals Series... 2 is the only side 1 could ever play!
The system relies on upsets to happen, otherwise it could become a dull series with repeat match ups.

On the other hand, you would have 9 finals... same number of finals we have now with a more elite group of sides competing compared with the current 8.

No fairytale premierships from 7th though.

Yeah that is a conundrum, I remember the old final 5. In the premiership year we ran into the bomb outs twice and won but that was among 14 teams not 18.

Ideally I'd like 7 v 8 play off for the last place in the final 6 in the "void" weekend. And also have draft playoffs with the bottom 4 or 6 in the "void" weekend.

Better than what we got at the moment. I cringe at that mutation being the "legends" game and the unintended disrespect to Teddy and that foundation.

 

[ConcreteWaters]

 

[00Stinger]

if Wildcard weekend was in place this year it would still be a ******* joke, like it would be any year that is was in place with a comp of 18 teams

 

[Kappa]

Wild card will come In when there's 20 teams, until then stick with 8.

 

[NetworkNerd]

Not a fan of rewarding mediocrity. However, looking at the matchups:

Bulldogs would have smashed Port at Marvel (assuming it was available)
Essendon v Hawthorn would have been a decent match but even so, the winner would then have to go up against a well rested and angry west coast.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

Rewards mediocrity?

What a pissweak argument, especially with a compromised fixture.

The final 10 is coming and I can't wait, it makes so much more sense. They have to stop calling it the wild card weekend though, there are a lot of idiots out there who rail against the idea instantly because of the American terminology.

- Less tanking
- Less meaningless games towards the end of the year
- No stupid bye week (play the 7v10 and 8v9 in the week off)
- Every team is still rewarded more the higher they finish

and best of all

- AN EXTRA WEEK OF CUT THROAT FINALS!

Who the hell doesn't want more finals?! In stead of a week off last week, we would of enjoyed Dogs vs Port and Essendond vs Hawthorn, who wouldn't want to watch those 4 teams duke it out? Beats watching a bunch of has beens play AFLX.

'Rewards mediocrity', give me a spell.

Make it a final 18 so every game is affected and we have a cracking final round. I mean, that’s the goal right?

No its not dude. Every time this topic is brought up there are people trotting out this crap.

Im flabbergasted that so many wums are so against having an extra week of finals footy.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Having a system where 10th could potentially play finals rewards mediocrity.
We don't need that IMO.

Regardless of the "wildcard" label, it would mean 10th always play finals. Giving it a different word doesn't mean its not a final.

Not only is it pointless in "rewarding mediocrity", it also goes against the supposed reasoning of having the weekend off - to stop teams fielding almost seconds sides in the final round if their ladder position is known.

Finals are about determining a premier. IMO, eight is more than should have a chance at that but $ stops it being cut back. ffs, don't expand it. Eight more than compensates for the deficiencies of the fixture. The best few teams who actually deserve a shot at the title pretty much always finish in the top three anyway; so even six would give some leeway for the fixture issues.
Eight is perhaps the right amount for a 24 team competition, ten is far too many for an 18 team competition.

 

[Coolangatta]

I'm against a top 10, but if they did it, here's how I'd do it (based on current ladder).

Pre-finals bye:

Week 1: Geelong vs. Collingwood (QF), Brisbane vs. Richmond (QF), West Coast vs. Port (EF), GWS vs. Hawthorn (EF), W. Bulldogs vs. Essendon (EF)

Highest ranked QF winner goes through to the prelim.

Week 2: Second highest-ranked winner plays lowest-ranked EF winner, lowest-ranked QF winner plays second-lowest ranked EF winner, second-lowest ranked QF loser plays highest ranked-EF winner.

Week 3: Highest-ranked QF winner plays lowest-ranked week 2 winner and highest-ranked week 2 winner plays second-highest ranked week 2 winner.

Sounds complex? I'll show you an example (assuming sides win in finals according to current rankings).

The pro of this is that it gives finishing 1st place the highest reward if they win their QF. Otherwise, 2nd or 3rd gets through to the PF if they win and 1st place doesn't. Finishing 2nd or 3rd also means more than finishing 4th because 4th can't get into the PF. The con of that is that you could finish 2nd or 3rd, win your QF and not go through to the PF, but you still get a double chance and you get to play your SF at home against the weakest EF winner.

Example

Week 1: Geelong vs. Collingwood (MCG) Geelong win
Brisbane vs. Richmond (GABBA) Brisbane win
West Coast vs. Port (Optus) West Coast win
GWS vs. Hawthorn (Skoda) GWS win
W. Bulldogs vs. Essendon (Marvel) Dogs win

Week 2: Brisbane vs. W. Bulldogs (GABBA) Lions win
Richmond vs. GWS (MCG) Tigers win
Collingwood vs. West Coast (MCG) Pies win

Week 3: Geelong vs. Collingwood (MCG) Geelong win
Brisbane vs. Richmond (GABBA) Lions win

Week 4: Geelong vs. Brisbane (MCG) Lions win

Yes, you could have repeat match-ups, but you have to be consistent and give the top-ranked winner the lowest-ranked semi-final winner in my view. If in my scenario, West Coast beat Collingwood, they should play a harder opponent (Geelong, according to rankings) than Richmond because Richmond finished higher than the Eagles did.

 

[Purple Suit]

Rewards mediocrity?

What a pissweak argument, especially with a compromised fixture.

The final 10 is coming and I can't wait, it makes so much more sense. They have to stop calling it the wild card weekend though, there are a lot of idiots out there who rail against the idea instantly because of the American terminology.

- Less tanking
- Less meaningless games towards the end of the year
- No stupid bye week (play the 7v10 and 8v9 in the week off)
- Every team is still rewarded more the higher they finish

and best of all

- AN EXTRA WEEK OF CUT THROAT FINALS!

Who the hell doesn't want more finals?! In stead of a week off last week, we would of enjoyed Dogs vs Port and Essendond vs Hawthorn, who wouldn't want to watch those 4 teams duke it out? Beats watching a bunch of has beens play AFLX.

'Rewards mediocrity', give me a spell.



No its not dude. Every time this topic is brought up there are people trotting out this crap.

Im flabbergasted that so many wums are so against having an extra week of finals footy.

The bye week is an AFL construct due to a few players being rested. If we fill the bye with 2 extra "finals" then we still might get players rested in Rd 23 if a team is locked into a 7th or 8th spot home final or even can't be booted out of the 1st week from 9th or 10th.

Just get rid of the bye. If the AFL were cunning and just pushing the cash agenda, this has been their plan all along to convince the public that byes are boring, lets have more finals.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Ok so now terminology is a problem? Whichever way you boil it down and dissect it, having 10th play off for a finals spot IS in effect a final and IS in effect rewarding a team in the bottom half of the ladder. By its very definition "final" means last chance saloon.

I've suggested that instead has been's playing AFLX or 7 v 10 how about the bottom teams play off for draft picks? Surely there's a way this could work.

IF we must have a final in the "void" weekend then make it 8 v 9. The punishment for finishing 8th or 9th is no rest, the reward for finishing 7th..........

So if it was this year it would be Ess v Hawks at Marvel, it's a final so % does not count. Has blockbuster written all over it. Win and you're through with no rest, lose and you're off to Bali.

Huge incentive to finish 7th, one less week to play to claim the cup!

• First final of the series kicks off with a one off. Friday night time slot.
• Same weekend bottom teams play off for draft picks 15th to last (winners get higher picks in their 1st round)
• Same weekend middle teams from 11th to 14th play off for draft picks (winners get higher picks in their 2nd round).
• Five games in total.

In any case we can't continue with the week off, it's just not working from a fan base perspective. Surely draft games would be better than what we have now.

Oh and the Teddy foundation, part of gate receipts and/or gold coin donation in these matches.

 

[Matt_TY]

We *have* a wildcard weekend. It's called "Elimination Finals".

 

[mcgarnacle]

There are already wildcards in the current system. Top 4 play off for PF hosting rights and the bottom half of the top 8 play for the right to challenge the top 4. Finals dont really start until the second week imo.

Week 1 has massive bearing on how the following weeks pan out though.

 

[kozi]

Been a few days since another wildcard thread was created. What’s going on?

 

[Underarm]

I'm against a top 10, but if they did it, here's how I'd do it (based on current ladder).

Pre-finals bye:

Week 1: Geelong vs. Collingwood (QF), Brisbane vs. Richmond (QF), West Coast vs. Port (EF), GWS vs. Hawthorn (EF), W. Bulldogs vs. Essendon (EF)

Highest ranked QF winner goes through to the prelim.

Week 2: Second highest-ranked winner plays lowest-ranked EF winner, lowest-ranked QF winner plays second-lowest ranked EF winner, second-lowest ranked QF loser plays highest ranked-EF winner.

Week 3: Highest-ranked QF winner plays lowest-ranked week 2 winner and highest-ranked week 2 winner plays second-highest ranked week 2 winner.

Sounds complex? I'll show you an example (assuming sides win in finals according to current rankings).

The pro of this is that it gives finishing 1st place the highest reward if they win their QF. Otherwise, 2nd or 3rd gets through to the PF if they win and 1st place doesn't. Finishing 2nd or 3rd also means more than finishing 4th because 4th can't get into the PF. The con of that is that you could finish 2nd or 3rd, win your QF and not go through to the PF, but you still get a double chance and you get to play your SF at home against the weakest EF winner.

Example

Week 1: Geelong vs. Collingwood (MCG) Geelong win
Brisbane vs. Richmond (GABBA) Brisbane win
West Coast vs. Port (Optus) West Coast win
GWS vs. Hawthorn (Skoda) GWS win
W. Bulldogs vs. Essendon (Marvel) Dogs win

Week 2: Brisbane vs. W. Bulldogs (GABBA) Lions win
Richmond vs. GWS (MCG) Tigers win
Collingwood vs. West Coast (MCG) Pies win

Week 3: Geelong vs. Collingwood (MCG) Geelong win
Brisbane vs. Richmond (GABBA) Lions win

Week 4: Geelong vs. Brisbane (MCG) Lions win

Yes, you could have repeat match-ups, but you have to be consistent and give the top-ranked winner the lowest-ranked semi-final winner in my view. If in my scenario, West Coast beat Collingwood, they should play a harder opponent (Geelong, according to rankings) than Richmond because Richmond finished higher than the Eagles did.

What benefit does the winner of Brisbane/Richmond get in week 1? The match is completely irrelevant if Geelong win.

 

[Coolangatta]

What benefit does the winner of Brisbane/Richmond get in week 1? The match is completely irrelevant if Geelong win.

Home final against the lowest-ranked EF winner but yeah, that's the biggest weakness in my system. I'd have them play before 1 v 4, otherwise, interest in the game would be lessened if we know 1's already in the prelim.