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

[Starburns_]

Aside from the impractical 34 round season, there is no absolutely fair system, that's why we have finals. Conferences overall are change for the sake of change, and it's been quite some time since a team made the top four who genuinely didn't deserve to be there. The current system may not be perfect, but it's still getting the right results in the end. An automatic 3 teams qualifying from one conference actually becomes a less fairer system than what we have.

Further to this, I'm not against the idea floated earlier by Hank Scorpion where the fixture rolls over across a 4 year period (whilst also retaining rivalry games), so long as automatic qualification isn't part of the process. It makes the whole set up more transparent, soft draws become more about luck than potentially being about design too.

With the way such a format is broken up, combined with a top 8. If you theoretically have one very even division of 6 ("division A"), where all 6 teams are 5-5 within that division, then balance it against the other two (divisions B and C) where perhaps the best 4 in each (enough to lock the best team in division A out of finals) win as many division games as possible, with 5 and 6 winning no games. The biggest gap you get is 8th spot being 7-5, 2 games clear of division A's leader at 5-5.
Then factor in the remaining 12 matches, the division A leader will have one match against 8th, plus matches against the four teams that didn't win division games. If that's not enough to close the 2 game gap, then they don't deserve to play finals. This is also the most extreme example in that format too.

 

[walhawk]

The first thing the AFL should so is rotate the fixture so each club plays each team at home one year, away the next.
+ derby, then they can still mess around with / manipulate the other four games.

 

[Albert Ross]

The first thing the AFL should so is rotate the fixture so each club plays each team at home one year, away the next.
+ derby, then they can still mess around with / manipulate the other four games.

But this also just enshrines the inequity. The year you have WCE, Adelaide, Sydney, Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney away is tougher than when you cop them all at home.

 

[walhawk]

But this also just enshrines the inequity. The year you have WCE, Adelaide, Sydney, Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney away is tougher than when you cop them all at home.

If it fell like that the following year would be the reverse so it evens out.
It least this would take most of the FIX out of the fixture.

 

[mcgarnacle]

this BS about the fixture evening out over a few years ignores the different competitive performances and windows of different clubs.

great in terms of the financial side of the ledger. totally disregards the sporting side of the League in any given year which even amongst most fans who follow the game, seems to be relegated to a lower priority.

group the teams based on region. same teams play twice each year, same teams have a similar home & away advantage against common opposition, and same teams are initially compared to each other for finals qualification.

i can't believe that Oz pro leagues such as the AFL & NRL continue to utilise this bastardised form of single & 0.29411765 (for the AFL) home & away round robin robin tournament with different schedules and home & away advantages, yet compare each and every team in the same ladder.

how amateur can you get?

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

I still reckon divisions would work

Top division of 8 teams - 14 rounds plus top 4 finals system (3 extra rounds)
Lower division of 10 teams - 18 rounds plus play off for teams 3-5 (3 extra rounds)

Top 1 of div2 go up
Bottom 2 of div1 go down

Remaining teams 2-4 of div2 play it out for final promotion (play each other once each as a group, top 2 play off)

Cup competition with existing 18 teams + foxtel cup teams/best teams for state divs to make up comp

Div2 teams + 6 teams from foxtel cup/best teams fight it out for 8 spots which then get pooled with top 8 teams for final 16
Round of 32
Round of 16 (2 legs)
Round of 8 (2 legs)
Semi final (2 legs)
final

8 extra rounds

Champions cup could also be played with just the top 8 teams as they would only get around 16 games per season if they miss out on finals and get knocked out of the cup in the first round - this would allow for more games for players - either that or top div teams play each other 3 times each (alternate who plays who twice at home as the league will have 6 out of possible 8 teams from previous year regardless) which would make it 21 rounds + 3 possible finals + 7 possible cup games

Overall there would be about 32 weeks of games - if you allow for play offs for div 2 and finals system for div 1 to be overlapping

Vague and messy, yes but would be better than what we have now - have watched enough football to know that it works and creates interest all year round

 

[Ice-Wolf]

In regards to my 3 Confrence setup:

Here is a draft of the conference splits.

Eastern Conference (Matthews Cup)
Brisbane Lions
Gold Coast
Hawthorn
St Kilda
Richmond
Carlton

Western Conference (Farmer Cup)
West Coast Eagles
Fremantle
Geelong
Essendon
Western Bulldogs
North Melbourne

Central Conference (Barrassi Cup)
Sydney Swans
Greater Western Sydney Giants
Adelaide
Port Adelaide
Collingwood
Melbourne

FYI: A trophy is awarded to the Conference Champion

EDIT: There is a good reason why the "Big 3" are split up amongst the 3 conferences it is to ensure that in each Conference each team would have at least 1 home game against at least 1 of them and will probably play 2 of them at home. Central Conference getting Collingwood as it is the weakest Conference commercially.

 

[Air_Chester]

There's a reason BASEketball is so funny, and some of the ideas in this thread do nothing but underline it.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

There's a reason BASEketball is so funny, and some of the ideas in this thread do nothing but underline it.

So you don't want a Captains sack race to determine the winner in the event of a draw? Egg and Spoon race it is then.

 

[Gysenn]

Conferences are a terrible idea. Everybody plays everybody once, or everybody plays everybody twice. That's about as even as you'll ever get it - and how it should be.

 

[Hank93]

Just debating this on twitter, so here's what I put up on excel. I'm a massive fan of the conference system.



Every team within a conference has exactly the same fixture; no advantages to be gained within a fixture.

The conferences are evenly split based on the 2013 season, so again, one conference shouldn't be stronger than the other.

This system would incorporate 25 games; a tad long but for an extra 3 games I'd much rather have fairness and equality over corporate wish lists, shafting of small teams, ratings and crowd preferences.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Just debating this on twitter, so here's what I put up on excel. I'm a massive fan of the conference system.

View attachment 39069

Every team within a conference has exactly the same fixture; no advantages to be gained within a fixture.

The conferences are evenly split based on the 2013 season, so again, one conference shouldn't be stronger than the other.

This system would incorporate 25 games; a tad long but for an extra 3 games I'd much rather have fairness and equality over corporate wish lists, shafting of small teams, ratings and crowd preferences.

What about Home and Away, playing West Coast in Subiaco is a lot harder than being drawn to play them at home.

 

[Hank93]

What about Home and Away, playing West Coast in Subiaco is a lot harder than being drawn to play them at home.

Then you can play against West Coast at home the following year. No perfect formula, but i far prefer it over a fixture almost entirely based on ratings/crowds.

 

[Hank93]

What about Home and Away, playing West Coast in Subiaco is a lot harder than being drawn to play them at home.

Also, that's not to say I'm against another conference system that ensures less games or avoids 13/12 home away split.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Then you can play against West Coast at home the following year. No perfect formula, but i far prefer it over a fixture almost entirely based on ratings/crowds.

With 18 teams I think a 3 Fixed-Conference set up works better.

You maintain a 22 game season.
You also play the same amount of home and away games against the other conferences.

5 H & 5 Away against your own Conference - 10 games
3 H & 3 Away against Conference 2 - 6 games
3 H & 3 Away against Conference 3 - 6 games
Total 11 Home 11 Away - 22 games

You alternate who is played home and away each year.

You can even have both teams in a 2-team state in the same conference and alternate the cross conference games so that teams only travel to each state once.

i.e. Split each Conference up into 2 groups of 3 for Home & Away fixtures.

example below:
Conference 1 Group 1
West Coast
Geelong
Western Bulldogs

Conference 1 Group 2
Fremantle
Essendon
North Melbourne

 

[FootyMaths]

Have to weigh in here...
read this

Principles:
-Conferences get re-drawn every year to eliminate bias.
-Not 'geography based', which is simply stupid.
-No 'must have' blockbuster derbies etc.
-Each of the three conferences have teams from 2 of the previous seasons top 6, 2 from the mid 6 and 2 from the bottom 6. FOR BALANCE!
-Conf winner guaranteed 'double chance' in finals, last double chance to best record of 2nd placed teams.
-Remaining 4 finalists are selected from 'best record' of teams from 2nd to 4th in each confernece
22 game seasons.
-Finals as they are now.
-Draft as it is now.

 

[walhawk]

Wow.
Some really lame ideas here.
When does the season start?

 

[jatz14]

If it fell like that the following year would be the reverse so it evens out.
It least this would take most of the FIX out of the fixture.

Evening out the following year is the definition of an unfair system. It doesnt matter that we get screwed this year, because someone else gets screwed next year? Any system with that as its underlying philosophy is the ultimate in suck

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Why these stupid threads keep coming up is beyond me. Everyone wants a fixture that is fair right? that provides the most money for my club right? That provides the best TV entertainment right?
Well the answer to the above is that it is impossible. You can't have all that.

It is a sporting competition and first and foremost it should be as fair as possible. The only way that can happen with 18 teams is a concurrent fixture that just keeps rolling. Whatever the income from that fixture is will be the real income of the league.

Stop trying to find a way to make it better, the AFL don't give a flying damn what you or anyone else thinks they should do. It is about money. Your club is now a franchise and a business, not a football club, even your own club does not care about about fair or equal. Stop trying to think that they do.
The AFL has one priority and one priority only.......MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They don't care about the players, the franchise, the supporters or the members. Whatever brings in the most money is all that matters.
Christ the AFL itself pays their own CEO on a salary plus commission basis?????? How else can it be when the CEO of a sporting comp is getting a commission? He will set it up to make sure he maximises his own pay cheque for damn sake. he doesn't care about the sport or the game, he doesn't care about you as a member or supporter. He cares only about his bank balance. The AFL have created this.
The Eagles raised their membership by 13.5% for 2014 after finishing 13 in 2013, they have no extra costs and cannot justify the rise. yet they put it on knowing it will just get paid.

We the supporters of this are the muppets, the AFL is the most dishonest, unfair, lack of integrity sporting comp in the universe.

Stop suggesting they will change this, you know they won't and stop thinking that one day they might wake up and listen to you because they never ever will.

 

[jatz14]

Why these stupid threads keep coming up is beyond me. Everyone wants a fixture that is fair right? that provides the most money for my club right? That provides the best TV entertainment right?
Well the answer to the above is that it is impossible. You can't have all that.

It is a sporting competition and first and foremost it should be as fair as possible. The only way that can happen with 18 teams is a concurrent fixture that just keeps rolling. Whatever the income from that fixture is will be the real income of the league.

Stop trying to find a way to make it better, the AFL don't give a flying damn what you or anyone else thinks they should do. It is about money. Your club is now a franchise and a business, not a football club, even your own club does not care about about fair or equal. Stop trying to think that they do.
The AFL has one priority and one priority only.......MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They don't care about the players, the franchise, the supporters or the members. Whatever brings in the most money is all that matters.
Christ the AFL itself pays their own CEO on a salary plus commission basis?????? How else can it be when the CEO of a sporting comp is getting a commission? He will set it up to make sure he maximises his own pay cheque for damn sake. he doesn't care about the sport or the game, he doesn't care about you as a member or supporter. He cares only about his bank balance. The AFL have created this.
The Eagles raised their membership by 13.5% for 2014 after finishing 13 in 2013, they have no extra costs and cannot justify the rise. yet they put it on knowing it will just get paid.

We the supporters of this are the muppets, the AFL is the most dishonest, unfair, lack of integrity sporting comp in the universe.

Stop suggesting they will change this, you know they won't and stop thinking that one day they might wake up and listen to you because they never ever will.

No

 

[greatwhiteshark]

No

Why No?

 

[blaze036]

Have to weigh in here...
read this

Principles:
-Conferences get re-drawn every year to eliminate bias.
-Not 'geography based', which is simply stupid.
-No 'must have' blockbuster derbies etc.
-Each of the three conferences have teams from 2 of the previous seasons top 6, 2 from the mid 6 and 2 from the bottom 6. FOR BALANCE!
-Conf winner guaranteed 'double chance' in finals, last double chance to best record of 2nd placed teams.
-Remaining 4 finalists are selected from 'best record' of teams from 2nd to 4th in each confernece
22 game seasons.
-Finals as they are now.
-Draft as it is now.

So you sacrifice millions of dollars to the AFL, sacrifice ratings, sacrifice crowds, sacrifice players (making them travel far more than needed) and sacrifice crowd enjoyment (people actually like having 2 derbies) all for the sake of a slightly "fairer" fixture? Either way the best team will win the premiership... so why all this extra silly stuff which hurts the game?

 

[jatz14]

Your post implies that most of the people involved in football management at the highest level are in it only for the money. That no one has any interest in football outside of cash. That the senior people involved in the football clubs themselves are only interested in money.

You state that Demetriou does not care about supporters, or members, or the clubs, or the players, just money. Where does he think the money comes from? True much of it comes from TV, but it is only of value to them due to the supporters.

Many of the changes made by the AFL are cost neutral, or cost negative. They are made due to player welfare concerns (head injuries), or competition balance (support for weaker clubs), or game growth. They spend money on development of womens football, grassroots football and international football. Being a mercenary money grubbing pig, why doesn't he scrap the lot and put it in his own pocket?

You sir, have made a generalised, evidence free, imbecilic rant in defiance of common sense, and a reply of No, is frankly more consideration than it deserved.

 

[Perry Pie]

Wow.
Some really lame ideas here.
When does the season start?

Not soon enough!

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Rolling draw. Everybody plays each other the same number of times over the medium term. The draw will still be inequitable but the "swings and roundabouts" nature of a rolling draw will not entrench a draw that permenantly favours a particular team. And it gives smaller clubs their chance to play more games against the "blockbuster" clubs".

No guaranteed double-up games.....with the arguable exception of interstate derbies to prevent further whinging about travel. So maybe one guaranteed double up (the rival round) per season. But other four double up games on a rotating roster.