Length of season

[Grin]

Carlton Tigers
Collingwood bombers
Hawks cats

Theyre the easy ones

Sent from my SM-T815Y using Tapatalk

Actually the easy ones are
Melbourne Geelong (Traditional rivals)
Essendon Carlton (Traditional rivals & neighbours)
North Dogs (Traditional rivals & neighbours)
Richmond Collingwood (Traditional rivals & neighbours)
Hawthorn StKilda (Sort of neighbours)

 

[Wallaby]

34 rounds. Fair. Even. Consistent.

'Oh no, the players can't play more than 22 games!!'. Says who? Just do it. You have 40+ player on your list. Manage them. Just do it. Play night games in Feb. Scrap pre-season practice game crap - no one cares, and it's only to see how good your kids are.

Meaningless games?? Oh, well, I guess we won't get the Suns/Brisbane game this week. Or the Carlton/Bulldogs.

 

[loki04]

1. I'm not talking about collision injuries
2. You need to read my posts. I talk about continuous backing up season after season. Have a look at the second year blues issue. Its real because players don't recover between seasons. Season after season it takes a toll on players.
3. It's not just about injuries. Don't be narrow.
4. Better quality. Less is more. How many poor quality games are there post round 17? Two poor teams, or a really poor team and a great team. We already know in most cases who the bottom six are by about round 10. We know the best two teams by round 12ish, and by round 13-14 most of the teams have settled. We really don't need rounds 18-22.
5. I'm not in to the economics of it all.
6. Yes, but you're not getting a second dead rubber game are you?

Recovery over off season and accumulations is a part of footy. Players run less now then they did a 15 years ago yet are whinging louder and harder. If players in Buckley Voss Harvey Era can bust a nut for 14 years they can damn well do it now while ave 3 to 4km a game less.

There was poor footy for the entire first half of the year hence all crying and rule changes being introduced.

There also plenty of quality games in the last 5 rounds with teams in and around the 8.

Poor games will happen regardless of length Carlton vs GC quality teams will be s**t to watch wether round 19 or 4.

Quality wont change unless coaching tactics change reducing games wont cause it.
It won't improve s**t just take away more footy from us and no not all games in back half of year are s**t. Not every season are teams in the 8 decimated by injury.

 

[loki04]

The human body can only take so much, and the game has progressively gotten faster. Would it not be right to address this transformation of the game? Footy in the 80s was essentially man on man with half the level of fitness.

Mate I was a teen in early 2000s. Buckley Voss Hird generation 98 to 2004 footy peaked.
Blend of skill, hardness, athletiscm and endurance.
We had the balance right back then. Buckley ran 20km a game. Forwards were running 12-16km which is what elite mids today run...

 

[Mr north man]

If the season is reduced and game time reduced will the players salarys be reduced too and made public?

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

If the season is reduced and game time reduced will the players salarys be reduced too and made public?

And prices for admission cut as well? I'm willing to bet "no".

 

[Elite Master]

Why is AFL the only sport where people want a shorter season? I want to go all year except maybe break for 6 weeks mid winter and a another short break just before Christmas until late Jan. More footy!!

I'm convinced that people like to think they sound smart and sophisticated by arguing for a shorter season and/or shorter games.

It's the same type of armchair experts who value tackling pressure and team defense rather than high flying marks and goals kicked.

 

[tigertigertiger]

I enjoy the current length of the season but I don’t mind the idea of everyone plays once then finals, that’s just a good fair system!

However I think people will miss the current format if it’s switched

 

[RobbieGray17]

The AFL talks about integrity, how can they do that when they compromise the game.

1. Introduce GWS at the expense of every other team, and its no wonder we have so many struggling clubs. They've had so much talent pouring into the club and have moved on an equal amount.
2. "FIX" fixtures for maximum revenue at the expense of fairness and evenness of the competition.
3. Allow sides to benefit from finishing 12th to 14th by giving them relatively soft draws. This gives a team on the verge of something a bigger chance of success.

I have been relatively close minded about 18 games, but have recently given thought to the other side of the coin in having 34 games per season.

I would strongly consider the following for discussion:

1. Fold Gold Coast. I don't believe footy is sustainable for two teams in Queensland.
2. Merge two Victorian teams and move the team to Tasmania. This will reduce the number of "Home" games for the Victorian clubs giving more balance in the competition. The reduction in teams will strengthen the talent pool.
3. Reduce game time to 15 minutes, or approximately 21-23 minutes actual game time.
4. Have a season of 30 games per season with NO byes. (structuring would be an issue).
5. Teams would have 60 players to choose from.
6. Teams would be responsible for player management. Like the NBA, they would manage players strategically, however some players may have the game style or fitness to sustain a full season. So in today's game for example, Geelong may have rested a couple of players.
7. Club memberships could be half 7 game memberships (first in first serve) or full 15 game memberships.

Without club changes it's just 34 games per season. This would mean footy every night. This is the only real way to have a fair system, ignoring the variables such as weather etc.

 

[footyfan1978]

Right... God help us from these clowns and their silly ideas.

 

[Rezzzz]

I am also a member but I would prefer quality over quanity. Find something better to do with your life for the remaining 5 weeks. 17 rounds.

Nobody wants to do it, but if the price went up, would you still buy? There's
waiting lists for some clubs' ticketed memberships, so the demand is there, and I don't think the demand entirely centres around affordability. A team like the Eagles may still have 9-10 games in Perth under a 17-game format, so the difference might not be that great.

There's room for the AFL to test people's loyalty with a price rise, and I'd imagine they'd do it, and mask it as a "cost of doing business" style increase. As I said earlier as well, it's incredibly cheap for us to go to the footy as it is (compared with other sporting leagues), so the AFL are probably leaving money on the table right now.

Also, with a 17 game season, the clubs and league will likely cut a lot of travel and associated admin costs, which can help make up for lost revenue from ticket sales and TV rights as well.

 

[Damon_3388]

And prices for admission cut as well? I'm willing to bet "no".

Why would a product becoming more scarce (less total games to go to) result in the price of said product going down?

 

[its free real estate]

What's the big deal? My team aside, pretty much every game this round has been top quality, even the dead rubbers.

Why would a fan want a shorter season?

 

[iameviljez]

North Dogs (Traditional rivals & neighbours)
Richmond Collingwood (Traditional rivals & neighbours)

No they aren't, not either of these.

 

[Grin]

No they aren't, not either of these.

Lol.
Geelong supporters

 

[iameviljez]

Lol.
Geelong supporters

Please describe this famed North vs Dogs rivalry?

Bulldogs don't really have a rivalry tbh.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Anyone else sick of Dangerfield and his whinging?

Imagine the whinging when they shorten the season or the games and then find out their salaries have been cut due to reduced advertising revenue

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

We all know that the season will not be shortened and that 18 teams will remain. Its financial suicide to consider reducing it.

22 games a year but with a rolling draw. Everybody plays everybody the same amount of times in the medium term (a 2-3 turnaround). If anybody lucks out on a good draw....well then it is luck but at least its not entrenched in perpetuity and next year they likley would get a harder draw.

Or better still as a compromise to pacify the masses and ease travel considerations, a modified rolling draw with one locked in return game against a traditional rival every year and four on a roster. The return games are the obvious derbies/showdowns plus Haw-Geel, Coll-Ess, Car-Rich, NM-WB, Mel-StK or similar. The other four teams you play twice change on a yearly basis

 

[Knox Harrington]

Get rid of the four least viable teams.
Have a 14 team league.
No more mediocre players.
No more mediocre clubs needing handouts.
No more games played in front of low crowds.
Everyone Plays everyone twice 26 rounds.
Top two play off in grand final.

 

[kaiserchief13]

What happens if they make all these adjustments and there is no change

Made the wrong changes then which is poor management so bye Gil

 

[Billy ray]

I still think my 20 game season with 3 double ups would be the most fairest way to address a few issues floating about. not that I agree with these issues needing to be addressed, but if the AFL is hellbent on changing stuff, well, lets hope they choose the best options.

Firstly, it would reduce the length of season by 2 weeks - 18 games. could still structure season over 23 weeks and allow the networks to have their prized Friday and Saturday night games. 20 rounds, 10 home and 10 away games each. Will come back to this.

Second change they could do is drop length of qtrs. from 20+ time on to say 18 + time on - wouldn't really notice this other than the fact that qtrs. would run 27-29 mins all up rather than 30-32 mins.

so, the 3 double ups- as I said in earlier post, the three follow-ups would come from groups of 1-6, 7-12, 13-18, this always allowing rivalry return games.
they could do the draw for the double ups in the bye round after the season and before the finals start - make it a tv event.
Balls in a bowl like world cup draw so it is purely random - except for the guarantee of return games for the rivals (which can be done in a way that the balls are a certain colour and hence drawn out first). im sure they can come up with a method to do that.

 

[loki04]

I am also a member but I would prefer quality over quanity. Find something better to do with your life for the remaining 5 weeks. 17 rounds.

How would it improve quality? It's a mind numbingly stupid concept.

The injury list 5 weeks ago was just as bad as now for many teams.

The spread of talent for 18 teams doesn't change with less games.

Even the last 4 weeks have had some cracker games with a lot of top 8 teams playing off.

Even Brisbane games have improved as the year has gone on.

Pure shite teams regardless of season length will be involved in poor spectacles.

 

[loki04]

Why would a product becoming more scarce (less total games to go to) result in the price of said product going down?

Because there is less product to sell even if ticket prices rise they would never make up for 5 rpunds of games worth of revenue.

 

[Damon_3388]

Because there is less product to sell even if ticket prices rise they would never make up for 5 rpunds of games worth of revenue.

Yes, but you don't lower the price of something that is becoming more scarce. That's just dumb business.

If we had the exact financials available to us, with an increase in ticket and membership costs, and reduction in travel and associated admin costs, I'm sureca sweet spot could be found that maintains the same level of profitability as there is currently.

 

[its free real estate]

Yes, but you don't lower the price of something that is becoming more scarce. That's just dumb business.

If we had the exact financials available to us, with an increase in ticket and membership costs, and reduction in travel and associated admin costs, I'm sureca sweet spot could be found that maintains the same level of profitability as there is currently.

What you would find is that no, there would not be a sweet spot in which shortening the season would maintain the same level of profitability.

Not a single business in history has done better by shrinking the volume of their product, unless they are in the process of going broke and it is the only way to survive.