The best possible finals system

[Alberton_Magpie]

I think that a top 6 should be the go, hear me out first with the old final 6 format you get the same amount of finals action with a better standard (no teams making up numbers) and spread out over 5 weeks.

In the other thread someone said how can 1st and 4th have the same oppertunities in the finals this system rewards 1st and 2nd by giving them the triple chance, 3rd and 4th get a double chance and for 5th and 6th as soon as you lose your out.

Below is a diagram showing exactly how it works, in the first diagram the home team wins every week, but in the 2007 and 2008 examples a few upsets are in their to show how it could potentialy work out.

 

[The Passenger]

i like it. i think it's something different, and no one has really ever given thought to the idea of a triple chance to any finalists but there's no reason not too really.

the problem is that despite having the same amount of finals, there is still the fact that having 8 teams keeps teams in the season for longer and keeps people coming to the home and away games. and for that reason alone the AFL wouldn't go for it.

My personal preference is a top 5 but it would never happen....

 

[Lensen]

I think that a top 6 should be the go, hear me out first with the old final 6 format you get the same amount of finals action with a better standard (no teams making up numbers) and spread out over 5 weeks.

In the other thread someone said how can 1st and 4th have the same oppertunities in the finals this system rewards 1st and 2nd by giving them the triple chance, 3rd and 4th get a double chance and for 5th and 6th as soon as you lose your out.

Below is a diagram showing exactly how it works, in the first diagram the home team wins every week, but in the 2007 and 2008 examples a few upsets are in their to show how it could potentialy work out.

I'm all for an alternative system and have devised a couple myself, and I'm much more enamoured with a top 6 than a top 8.

However there are a couple of issues with yours which is why it won't work:
1) The finals take five weeks, not four. I completely agree that this is the fairest way to do it but I don't think the AFL will be keen to extend the season.
2) If all matches go according to plan (i.e. the home team wins every game), you'll get 1 v 2 three times in the finals.

 

[meltiger]

Seventhmond? ... nah not the same ring
----------------

I agree with your thinking A-M, as I'm guessing most would, obviously a 5 or a 6 not only increases the standard of the finals series, but makes making the finals more of an achievement BUT I have an issue with your attempts to appease the AFL's desire to have X # finals.


In your example above, there is simply no advantage for the minor premier over the 2nd placed side. I think we still need to reward the minor premier in at least some fashion with some kind of advantage over the 2nd side.

 

[Brasher]

Not a bad system at all.

Only issue with a 16 team (soon to be 18 team) competition going to a final 6 is we can expect some of the rubbish games we've endured over the last fortnight starting about round 15 as teams mail in the rest of the year.

 

[ashley12]

The worst thing about this proposed system is that the team that wins the "major" semi will have a week off before the Grand Final, which could leave them a little flat footed...

Also if the top 2 teams were WCE in first and Collingwood in second, and results went to script, Collingwood would have to travel to WA twice in the space of 3 weeks, before facing a sudden death preliminary, just to make the GF, which could leave a team a bit flat for the GF...

Interesting concept though...

 

[bodazoka]

You are forgetting that 8 teams gives #7 and #8 valuable finals experience. And rewards them (those that were around the bottom the year before anyway) teams that had better years than last. Its a big thing saying that my team made the finals this year or we had a bad year but we atleast made the finals. 6 teams would make it that much harder to get to finals and there may be a bit of an issue with the games won/lost ratio for making finals.

 

[LeFtBehinD]

Dont like it. The two Grand Final teams could face off 3 times against each other during the whole series!

 

[Jezza U Beauty]

A final 6 would be better than the current final 8, but the best system IMO is the final 5 system, as used in the SANFL, BECAUSE the top side has an advantage over the 2nd and 3rd finishing sides, who also have an advantage over the 4th and 5th finishing sides.

 

[bigrayohall20]

Not a big fan. It means the teams that finish 1st and 2nd could possibly play each other 3 times in the series.
If the team that finished 2nd lose in the first 2 weeks they are still in. IMO if you lose the first 2 finals matches you dont deserve to be there.

 

[Otiman]

I don't know about the second week off and double chances.

Also, there is a much larger chance of the grand final being a repeat of an earlier final.

e.g. 2007 week 3 + GF, 2008 possibly week 3 and 5 as well.

 

[mcgarnacle]

finals should all be play-offs........no double chance. give higher seeded clubs the bye in wk 1.

 

[red+black]

finals should all be play-offs........no double chance. give higher seeded clubs the bye in wk 1.

As per someone's suggestion for a Final 9.

 

[lionsrules]

As per someone's suggestion for a Final 9.

but then all of a sudden Richmond would make the finals alot

 

[red+black]

but then all of a sudden Richmond would make the finals alot

When we go to 18 or 20 teams and a Final 9, no doubt Richmond will own 10th.

 

[Alberton_Magpie]

I have come up with a pretty good final 8 system which gives 1st, 2nd ,3rd and 4th a double chance but 1st and 2nd get the first week off, I will post it shortly.

 

[SimSaysBANG]

11 elimination games. A week off for the Top 4 teams. 1st and 2nd seeds can't play each other until the Grand Final.

 

[00Stinger]

View attachment 553011
11 elimination games. A week off for the Top 4 teams. 1st and 2nd seeds can't play each other until the Grand Final.

Top 12?

Why not just have everyone playing finals then

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[caloschwaby]

View attachment 553011
11 elimination games. A week off for the Top 4 teams. 1st and 2nd seeds can't play each other until the Grand Final.

I reckon the AFL would look into this once we have more than 24 teams and thus, millions of more fans.

 

[StillWaiting5689]

Top 12?

Why not just have everyone playing finals then

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

This is my issue with it too, far too many - I’m also unsure why they are called wildcard slots as opposed to just normal finalists.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[demondavey]

Top 12?

Why not just have everyone playing finals then

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Exactly. I can’t see the logic to it. This is what they’re using in the TAC Cup. It’s a gimmick.

 

[demondavey]

Honestly? The best system is the current one. It’s close to flawless.

1. Top two get home finals in week one, two or three.
2. Two and three get home finals in week two or three.
3. Top four all get a double chance
4. Week one winners get a week off
4. Five and six get a home final
5. Bottom four are in a week one knock out.

It’s close to as perfect as you can get.

 

[juss]

View attachment 553011
11 elimination games. A week off for the Top 4 teams. 1st and 2nd seeds can't play each other until the Grand Final.

Why would you want more mediocre teams and also rans in the finals?

What's the point of 22 rounds if some worse than average team can have a hot patch and win from 12th?

 

[Rotayjay]

A triple chance is simply too generous. My club would certainly have not deserved a third chance if we'd ****ed up twice in finals last year.

 

[Baird]

1v8
2v7
3v6
4v5

1v4
2v3

1v2