If you still think divisions or conferences are a good idea - get in here and I'll change your mind

[Barry_Badrinath]

Yep, it's this thread again. However I think now is an appropriate time to prove my point. Have a look at the standings in the NBA this year:

Conference inbalances will develop and quality teams will be denied a finals series they deserve. The West has been the superior conference for over a decade now but it's reaching farcical levels. 13 of the best 16 teams come from the Western Conference, yet five of them will miss out on the playoffs to accomidate 5 teams that can't even win 50% of their games in the insipid "Leastern" Conference. The West lead interconference games 77-33 this year, that's a 70% winning ratio!!!!

The uneven draw in the AFL is not desirable, but conferences are not the answer. Especially if you put the bigger richer clubs (Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Richmond, Hawthorn) in the the same conference/division like many suggest.

 

[Messenger]

NBA has some entrenched inequalities, they are only a quarter of the way through the season and the conference system is designed to reduce travel.

You haven't convinced me it couldn't work in the AFL - a far more even competition.

 

[FootyJunkie]

the idea behind divisions is that sides can be fairly compared because they have the same schedule of opponents, not the BS dog's breakfast we have with the AFL... i think divisions would be neat in the AFL as over time, games that wouldn't generate much interest now would eventually build up more weight with more frequent encounters with the division at stake

not to say that divisions are perfect, but at least there is a systematic formula in place with the scheduling so that all sides get a crack at everyone else in shortest amount of time over lapping seasons... it makes the AFL look like complete amatuers compared to say the NFL in those regards

imo, NBA shouldn't even have divisions/conferences... everyone plays eachother twice, 58 games, less is more

 

[Richo83]

NBA has some entrenched inequalities,

So does the AFL

they are only a quarter of the way through the season

Sure, but after around 6 games, there's already about 4 teams who obviously wont make finals, which is somewhat comparable to the nba.

and the conference system is designed to reduce travel.

You haven't convinced me it couldn't work in the AFL - a far more even competition.

That's the thing, with 12 of the 18 sides 3 hours flight from each other or less, does the AFL really need conferences?

 

[Borussia Teeth]

Comparing the NBA divisions & conferences to a hypothetical AFL conference system doesn't "prove" anything.
Why not look at NFL or NHL too?
Regardless, the issue in the AFL is the grossly uneven fixturing. Compared to US sports, it's poorly formulated.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Divisions/Conferences IS THE BEST SOLUTION to the AFL as well, now that it's beginning to scratch the surface of being a national comp.

 

[Kim Hagdorn]

No thanks.

 

[Exe Gesis]

In the AFL the best method is NO conferences, but 4 divisions.

NORTH: Lions, Suns, Swans, Giants
EAST: Blues, Magpies, Bombers, Tigers, Demons
SOUTH: Hawks, Cats, Kangaroos, Saints, Bulldogs
WEST: Power, Crows, Eagles, Dockers

When the AFL either brings in 2 more teams, then they can be split to the north and west to make 4 equal divisions of 5.
Or, if the AFL reduces back to 16 teams, then 4 equal divisions of 4.

Some sort of work-around for the divisions with 5 teams in regards to the above scheduling.

Until then....

Each team plays division rivals twice a year, and all the other divisions once.
Winners of each division qualify for playoffs. Then the next best four teams as wild cards.
Or, top two from each division qualify for playoffs.

Teams seeded based on a number of tie-breakers. See NFL for examples.

Knockout playoffs. Home team gets home field a la NFL.

 

[Tas]

Victoria
The Rest

 

[FootyJunkie]

No thanks.

"so who is playing who twice? and where?" every October

 

[Exe Gesis]

Ideal national comp structure....

NORTH: Brisbane, Gold Coast, Sydney, GWS, Cairns
EAST: Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Richmond, Melbourne
SOUTH: Geelong, Hobart, Launceston, Canberra, Hawthorn
WEST: Adelaide, Port Adelaide, West Coast, Fremantle, Darwin


I.e...

Relocate Saints, Kangaroos, Bulldogs to Cairns, Darwin and Canberra
Bring in new home-grown Hobart and Launceston teams.

 

[FootyJunkie]

Victoria
The Rest

 

[Handsuper47]

I don't follow that sport, but am I seeing a team based on chicken nuggets? Or is it some other kind of nugget?

 

[Exe Gesis]

An alternative "next best" is....

Two conferences....

Victorian: Blues, Magpies, Tigers, Bombers, Demons, Saints, Hawks, Kangaroos, Bulldogs, Cats
National: Power, Crows, Eagles, Dockers, Swans, Giants, Suns, Lions (+ eventually two new teams)

Each conference plays each other twice, and then a selected number of teams from other conference, to make say 20-22 games.

Each conference is sorted by a traditional Ladder. The top 5 from each conference make the playoffs.

Old 5 team playoff format, #1 gets a bye, etc. So each conference finals is just played separately.

The Grand Final winner from each conference THEN meets in a 'Super Bowl' type game.

 

[Crawb]

For all those thinking conferences are the best thing since sliced bread, present me a structure that is able to work when half the competition literally based in 1 city.

 

[Crawb]

An alternative "next best" is....

Two conferences....

Victorian: Blues, Magpies, Tigers, Bombers, Demons, Saints, Hawks, Kangaroos, Bulldogs, Cats
National: Power, Crows, Eagles, Dockers, Swans, Giants, Suns, Lions (+ eventually two new teams)

Each conference plays each other twice, and then a selected number of teams from other conference, to make say 20-22 games.

Each conference is sorted by a traditional Ladder. The top 5 from each conference make the playoffs.

Old 5 team playoff format, #1 gets a bye, etc. So each conference finals is just played separately.

The Grand Final winner from each conference THEN meets in a 'Super Bowl' type game.

How on earth is that any different to how the current fixture works then?

 

[FootyJunkie]

I don't follow that sport, but am I seeing a team based on chicken nuggets? Or is it some other kind of nugget?

back when I followed the NBA in the 90s, Denver always reminded me of chicken nuggets, Super Sized for 1994

 

[estibador]

OP, the problem you speak of can be mitigated by having a certain number of wildcard finals spots for the teams with the next best records.

I don't know how the NBA does it, but I like the NFL system in that respect.

 

[Jewbacca]

For all those thinking conferences are the best thing since sliced bread, present me a structure that is able to work when half the competition literally based in 1 city.

It wouldn't matter. If you play your division/conference twice thats one home and one away. The teams from outside of your division you play once, alternates year by year home and away. Qld and NSw teams in one division WA an SA in another. Cuts down the longest trips.

 

[Exe Gesis]

How on earth is that any different to how the current fixture works then?

The devil is in the details....

It's about travel, winning your division being a goal, forming stronger rivalries, ensuring blockbuster games, all while reducing the schedule from 26 weeks to 20 or 18. Less is more.

 

[estibador]

Qld and NSw teams in one division WA an SA in another. Cuts down the longest trips.

The AFL have a habit of taking good ideas and bastardising them, so my only fear with divisions is they will think it's a good idea to put the WA and QLD teams in the same one.

 

[FootyJunkie]

3 divisions, 6 sides each.

10 division games, home and away.
12 games against all sides outside a division (home and away switched the following year).

22 games

Final 8 like we have now...

Division winners and the non-Division winner with the best record are ranked 1st-4th.

Winning a division only guarantees you the double chance, but can still be ranked 4th, potentially on the road in Week 1.

Next best 4 sides regardless of division are ranked 5th - 8th.

South West: WC, Fre, Adel, Port, Geel, WB (south/west expansion division)
Central: Carl, Coll, Ess, Rich, Mel, Stk (melbourne foundation division)
North East: Syd, GWS, Bris, GC, NM, Haw (north/east expansion division)

 

[Rushed_Behind]

If the AFL didn't have the BS of derby's, showdowns, Q clash, battle of bridge and other convoluted imaginings like rivalry rounds, indigenous rd etc the conferences should change every year.

1,4,7,10,13,16.

2,5,8,11,14,17.

3,6,9,12,15,18.

Each team in each conference doubles up against each other and then plays singles against other 2 conferences.

Top 2 in each conference automatically qualify, then next 2 best records make up the top 8.

 

[Crawb]

It wouldn't matter. If you play your division/conference twice thats one home and one away. The teams from outside of your division you play once, alternates year by year home and away. Qld and NSw teams in one division WA an SA in another. Cuts down the longest trips.

The fundamental problem is getting enough teams in areas to make it work fairly. There is only 1 structure that I can see working fairly and well. However it can only be done if 2 teams (Tasmania/Canberra/Cairns/New Zealand and WA3/Darwin) were admitted to the competition.

West: Current WA/SA teams + WA3/NT
East: Current Qld/NSW teams + Tas/ACT/NZ/Cairns
Two 5 team Vic Conferences with teams rotated every year

So why will that never happen? Because I can't see WA3/NT being the next in line after Tasmania quite frankly for a number of reasons. This is the only structure that could work, and it will not happen, therefore there is no point of making conferences.

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

In the AFL the best method is NO conferences, but 4 divisions.

NORTH: Lions, Suns, Swans, Giants
EAST: Blues, Magpies, Bombers, Tigers, Demons
SOUTH: Hawks, Cats, Kangaroos, Saints, Bulldogs
WEST: Power, Crows, Eagles, Dockers

When the AFL either brings in 2 more teams, then they can be split to the north and west to make 4 equal divisions of 5.
Or, if the AFL reduces back to 16 teams, then 4 equal divisions of 4.

Some sort of work-around for the divisions with 5 teams in regards to the above scheduling.

Until then....

Each team plays division rivals twice a year, and all the other divisions once.
Winners of each division qualify for playoffs. Then the next best four teams as wild cards.
Or, top two from each division qualify for playoffs.

Teams seeded based on a number of tie-breakers. See NFL for examples.

Knockout playoffs. Home team gets home field a la NFL.

There's the problem. That Northern conference is going to be weak as piss in the long term. The Lions, Suns and Giants all have small supporter bases and football department spending. The Lions have been weak since their salary cap concessions were removed and something similar will most likely happen with the Swans when the COLA is inevitably abolished.

That Eastern conference is full of tradionally successful teams, they've won 69 flags between them while the South has won only 26. Clubs with large supporter bases and greater resources will generally be stronger and more consistently competitive over a number of years. By grouping them together you'll get conference imbalances.