Opinion Non-Crows AFL 13: Offseason

[kirky]

Whilst there hasn't been too much commotion about the wildcard round ......just wait until 10th beats 7th in a playoff .....the **** will really hit the fan then

Why? Generally 7th doesn’t finish that many games against 10th and with the exception of 2016 and 2025, the difference has been one or two games.

 

[daniel_4tw]

Zach Merrett has stepped down as Essendon Captain.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Zach Merrett has stepped down as Essendon Captain.

Had to happen

Was untenable

Hilarious situation (for non-Essendon fans)

 

[Golumless]

Whilst there hasn't been too much commotion about the wildcard round ......just wait until 10th beats 7th in a playoff .....the **** will really hit the fan then

Undeserved too, if your 7th and you **** up at home against 10th, it's rather fraudulent (and really funny).

I'll give the controversial take in that I don't have an issue with the AFL adding in a wildcard round. It's clear the league is going to expand to 20 teams in the near future (owing to how much the AFL administration hates the weekly bye) and eventually finals is going to need to adapt to these additions (noting the top 8 was initially for the upper 50% of clubs making finals). Seems a genuinely low-impact solution to that impending problem instead of something that influences the best teams in the league shot at it.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Are those games going to be counted as finals for statistical and historical purposes, or not?

 

[daniel_4tw]

Are those games going to be counted as finals for statistical and historical purposes, or not?

 

[rocket18]

Undeserved too, if your 7th and you **** up at home against 10th, it's rather fraudulent (and really funny).

I'll give the controversial take in that I don't have an issue with the AFL adding in a wildcard round. It's clear the league is going to expand to 20 teams in the near future (owing to how much the AFL administration hates the weekly bye) and eventually finals is going to need to adapt to these additions (noting the top 8 was initially for the upper 50% of clubs making finals). Seems a genuinely low-impact solution to that impending problem instead of something that influences the best teams in the league shot at it.

Whilst I'm against the competition expanding (it should come back to 14 teams) it does make sense to increase the teams that qualify for finals.

But drop the 'wildcard' wank and just call it a final 10 and this is the new format.

Teams 1-6 earn the weeks break
Teams 7-8 earn a home final
Teams 9-10 have a very hard road to the GF

Edit: How can it be a 'wildcard' when everyone knows what happens with each team that finishes in the top 10. "Wildcard' to me is an oddball selection given to a player/team to participate in a competition. There is nothing 'wildcard' about this whatsoever.
Is this what overseas comps call a similar setup??

 

[daniel_4tw]

Whilst I'm against the competition expanding (it should come back to 14 teams) it does make sense to increase the teams that qualify for finals.

But drop the 'wildcard' wank and just call it a final 10 and this is the new format.

Teams 1-6 earn the weeks break
Teams 7-8 earn a home final
Teams 9-10 have a very hard road to the GF

Edit: How can it be a 'wildcard' when everyone knows what happens with each team that finishes in the top 10. "Wildcard' to me is an oddball selection given to a player/team to participate in a competition. There is nothing 'wildcard' about this whatsoever.
Is this what overseas comps call a similar setup??

Not really.

Most US sports have divisions. The way the playoffs work is you qualify if you finish top of your division/top 6 whatever. Then they’ll have wild card for the teams that missed out but had the best record overall generally regardless of division.

It’s more of a wild card because it’s not just the next 2 on the ladder, because you have several ladders. MLB has 6 divisions across 2 leagues. If you finish top of your division you’re in, then there’s another 6 wildcard spots for best record regardless of division (3 from each league).

It’s supposed to stop good teams being in a hard division missing out when they’ve been better teams against the wider comp. And teams can win. Dodgers just won the World Series coming through the wild card.

The AFL are just doing an extended top 10… but want to go with the name.

 

[Golumless]

Not really.

Most US sports have divisions. The way the playoffs work is you qualify if you finish top of your division/top 6 whatever. Then they’ll have wild card for the teams that missed out but had the best record overall generally regardless of division.

It’s more of a wild card because it’s not just the next 2 on the ladder, because you have several ladders. MLB has 6 divisions across 2 leagues. If you finish top of your division you’re in, then there’s another 6 wildcard spots for best record regardless of division (3 from each league).

It’s supposed to stop good teams being in a hard division missing out when they’ve been better teams against the wider comp. And teams can win. Dodgers just won the World Series coming through the wild card.

The AFL are just doing an extended top 10… but want to go with the name.

Which also has precedent in American sports, hello NHL. Though admittedly they drag the "lucky" teams in the East or West into a series with the two division winners in each conference.

 

[daniel_4tw]

Which also has precedent in American sports, hello NHL. Though admittedly they drag the "lucky" teams in the East or West into a series with the two division winners in each conference.

I think the big problem with US sports is a lot of sports don’t start until the playoffs start.

There’s much more of a culture of resting players, okay with losing certain games, even % doesn’t matter since tiebreaks aren’t done on points but H2H.

Teams just want to make playoffs with less focus on where. 1st v 8th isn’t such a big task when you get 7 games and alternating H&A compared to AFL where every spot gives you a better advantage come finals.

 

[bigman]

Can anyone explain why Port get access to Cochrane despite him seemingly not residing in an NGA zone?

Since when did Port get access to indigenous players in Metro zones? I’m looking at Twomey’s article today and see no changes that suggest Woodville is a zoned area.

What am I missing here? (And no, Port fans need not come here and try to justify it). Did a rule change?

 

[MarcusP2]

Can anyone explain why Port get access to Cochrane despite him seemingly not residing in an NGA zone?

Since when did Port get access to indigenous players in Metro zones? I’m looking at Twomey’s article today and see no changes that suggest Woodville is a zoned area.

What am I missing here? (And no, Port fans need not come here and try to justify it). Did a rule change?

This is what I was talking about earlier. It must've changed without anyone from the AFL saying so as part of this bidding change back to pick 1 onwards, as it used to be pick 40 onwards (hence no Nas for us, no Jesse Motlop for Freo)

Draft bidding and future picks revamp on hold, 'Jamarra rule' to change - https://www.afl.com.au/news/1185295

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

I counted about 10 of our 23 in the semi that would struggle to get a game at any of the prelim sides. I don’t think we’re that much ahead. We’ve had 1 year finishing above them and they had a pretty bad run with injuries and we had a very good run. Like us, I don’t see them competing when the whips are cracking, but won’t be surprised if they notch up enough H&A wins to make the 8.

What are the 10?

 

[Mutineer]

Biggest change they should have made was piss Michael Christian off.

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/mro-overhaul-grading-system-set-to-be-changed-to-deliver-more-lenient-outcomes/news-story/1ab551a93182ad76069efd7cd20b47d5

MRO overhaul: Grading system set to be changed to deliver more lenient outcomes​

The AFL is set to overhaul its match review system to deliver more lenient suspensions for some rough conduct cases, potentially reducing three-match bans to one or two games.

The Herald Sun can reveal the league will introduce a new lever which will allow it to downgrade impact severity and effectively reduce the length of some suspensions.

It means players who have previously received a three-match suspension for concussing an opponent in an innocuous-looking incident may miss only one or two matches in 2026.
The shake-up will give the league extra scope to find some middle ground in some cases instead of the black-or-white situations where players face three-match bans or nothing.

But stomach punches will likely attract tougher penalties including suspensions next year where players are deliberately struck to the mid-section with a closed first or swinging arm.

The new MRO rules will be popular with clubs who have lobbied the AFL to create more flexibility in its match review system.

In particular, there has been a spate of three-match rough conduct and head-high contact bans in recent years.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

A new lever to deliver the outcomes they want, only to be used when they choose

 

[hippyhippy]

A new lever to deliver the outcomes they want, only to be used when they choose

Ie a separate rule for geelong

 

[jackster83]

A new lever to deliver the outcomes they want, only to be used when they choose

The more players eligible for the Brownlow, the more $$$ that gets spent at the betting agencies.

 

[1970crow]

What are the 10?

Laird - role
Milera - mediocre
Murray - form following injury
Hinge - latter year form
ROB - contract signed
Cumming - underwhelming year
Taylor - fringe
Pedlar - fringe
Tex - cliff
Smith - past it
Berry - bog average season

Very few, if any, of the above would have found themselves selected in a prelim at another club.

 

[Tex Danger]

A new lever to deliver the outcomes they want, only to be used when they choose

Did read that way

They just need to add football incident bs non Football incident lever

Whether that’s seperate grading scales depending on the category, or non football incident activates a extra multiplier

Basically something that separates knocking a bloke out while attacking the footy compared to lining him up off the ball

 

[daniel_4tw]

While I agree 3 matches for a football incident that unfortunately resulted in concussion was too long, giving the AFL more discretion is never a good thing.

 

[Carn The Texan]

While I agree 3 matches for a football incident that unfortunately resulted in concussion was too long, giving the AFL more discretion is never a good thing.

It means more Cotchin vs Shiel decisions for big Vic clubs, and more McAdam vs Wehr decisions for the rest of us.

 

[kirky]

Interesting reports on DAZN thinking Foxtel paid too much for TV rights and will be trying to renegotiate the contract.

Yes it is a Sam McClure article but he might be spot on with this one tho.

 

[Scorpus]

Interesting reports on DAZN thinking Foxtel paid too much for TV rights and will be trying to renegotiate the contract.

Yes it is a Sam McClure article but he might be spot on with this one tho.

The real double whammy will be DAZN lowering the rights deal followed by the government (finally, if they ever do it) banning gambling advertising

The two combined will seriously lower the AFL's income and might finally force them to fold St Kilda

 

[kirky]

The real double whammy will be DAZN lowering the rights deal followed by the government (finally, if they ever do it) banning gambling advertising

The two combined will seriously lower the AFL's income and might finally force them to fold St Kilda

Clubs who have signed players past the current TV rights contract (ends in 2031) might have issues. We have Josh Worrell past 2031.

 

[Slim258]

The real double whammy will be DAZN lowering the rights deal followed by the government (finally, if they ever do it) banning gambling advertising

The two combined will seriously lower the AFL's income and might finally force them to fold St Kilda

Hopefully they fold Port Adelaide while they're at it