The best possible finals system

[Blackas87]

The existing final 8 system is pretty good. Each week is structured to theoretically have tighter contests, such as in week 1 there is 1v4 and 5v8 compared to a system where 1v8. The top four are also rewarded with a double chance and an opportunity for a home preliminary final.

But with 18 teams now, and potentially 19 with Tasmania, more teams should be in finals, so more teams have games that matter later in the season.

So here is a 12 team final system, that uses the existing week 1-4 top 8 finals. But replaces the pre-finals bye with a week 0 of finals.

In the new week 0, teams 5-12 play an elimination, with 5-8 getting a home game. And the top 4 play off to decide who gets the home qualifying final in week 1.

View attachment 1422112

This means 6 extra games of finals. More meaningful games in the H&A season. The season stays the same length.

Don’t get the point of the QF1 and QF2. Both winners and losers move onto the next week.

 

[Blackas87]

The current system has 1v4 and 2v3 in the first week. If the favourites win and top 4 get through to the prelims it’s 1v3 2v4 to get into the grand final. The top teams gets the harder opponent. A finals tournament should always have the highest ranked team taking on the lowest ranked team.

Also a few times the 2nd ranked team defeats the 3rd ranked team and the 3rd ranked team gets the second chance. 2015 West Coast finished 2nd, defeats hawthorn 3rd in a final and then Hawthorn gets to rematch West Coast in the Grand final. Imo Hawthorn had been beaten in a final by a higher ranked opponent and should of been out.

The only way to have a fair finals system is to have a strait knockout. 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5 for the first week with the higher ranking team getting a 2nd chance to rematch the the same opponent the following week on the other teams home ground. Basically the lower ranking team has to win twice to get through, the higher ranking team wins strait up the skip through to the prelims.

The higher ranking team should always play the lowest ranking team regardless of who gets through. So if 1st defeats 8th, 7th defeats 2nd, 3rd defeats 6th and 4th defeats 5th them it’s 1v7 and 3v4 in the prelims.

Cons if all top 4 win the first week they all skip the next week into the prelims resulting in 7 finals matches, if all bottom 4 teams win forcing rematches we then get 11 finals but this is unlikely. The current system has 9 finals matches which is what the AFL want, guaranteed money, but I prefer a fairer finals system.

 

[glengowan]

The current Final 8 was the best model I reckon (without any byes in the last round).

1 week off becomes an advantage, but any more than that and it can be a hindrance.

Also good to have all teams playing the week before the Grand Final.

However, having more teams has made it harder to make Finals and therefore loss of interest in the season earlier for more teams, and the concussion protocols of a minimum 12 days off makes a bye week between the Preliminary Final and Grand Final a good option, provided there isn't another week off for a team in the lead up.

So, presuming a Tasmanian team comes in as the 19th team, I would fixture as follows.

Minor Round (Games 1-19):
19 Rounds, playing each team once with one bye (9 home games and 9 away games).
Top 12 advance, Bottom 7 eliminated.

Major Round (Games 20-24):
Top 12 teams split in two groups; Group A (1,4,5,8,9,12) and Group B (2,3,6,7,10,11)
Ladders Reset.
Round Robin with top 3 placed teams in each group playing 3 home games and 2 away games, the bottom 2 playing 2 home games and 3 away games.
Top 2 from each group advance to Preliminary Final, Bottom 3 from each group eliminated.

Preliminary Final (Game 25)
1st Group A vs 2nd Group B
1st Group B vs 2nd Group A

Weekend off between Preliminary Final and Grand Final

Grand Final (Game 26)

 

[BigVic]

The current Final 8 was the best model I reckon (without any byes in the last round).

1 week off becomes an advantage, but any more than that and it can be a hindrance.

Also good to have all teams playing the week before the Grand Final.

However, having more teams has made it harder to make Finals and therefore loss of interest in the season earlier for more teams, and the concussion protocols of a minimum 12 days off makes a bye week between the Preliminary Final and Grand Final a good option, provided there isn't another week off for a team in the lead up.

So, presuming a Tasmanian team comes in as the 19th team, I would fixture as follows.

Minor Round (Games 1-19):
19 Rounds, playing each team once with one bye (9 home games and 9 away games).
Top 12 advance, Bottom 7 eliminated.

Major Round (Games 20-24):
Top 12 teams split in two groups; Group A (1,4,5,8,9,12) and Group B (2,3,6,7,10,11)
Ladders Reset.
Round Robin with top 3 placed teams in each group playing 3 home games and 2 away games, the bottom 2 playing 2 home games and 3 away games.
Top 2 from each group advance to Preliminary Final, Bottom 3 from each group eliminated.

Preliminary Final (Game 25)
1st Group A vs 2nd Group B
1st Group B vs 2nd Group A

Weekend off between Preliminary Final and Grand Final

Grand Final (Game 26)

I like your idea

 

[deck]

You are right I don’t.

My point is the wildcard final adds to the NFL finals drama.

8 v 9 or 7 v 10 and 8 v 9 would add extra drama to the end of the season.

Again you clearly don't understand the NFL wildcard system as it is nothing like what you are comparing.

Yes the NBA system is similar but the NFL system has absolutely nothing in common with what people are trying to add to the AFL system.

 

[BigVic]

The current system has 1v4 and 2v3 in the first week. If the favourites win and top 4 get through to the prelims it’s 1v3 2v4 to get into the grand final. The top teams gets the harder opponent. A finals tournament should always have the highest ranked team taking on the lowest ranked team.

Also a few times the 2nd ranked team defeats the 3rd ranked team and the 3rd ranked team gets the second chance. 2015 West Coast finished 2nd, defeats hawthorn 3rd in a final and then Hawthorn gets to rematch West Coast in the Grand final. Imo Hawthorn had been beaten in a final by a higher ranked opponent and should of been out.

The only way to have a fair finals system is to have a strait knockout. 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5 for the first week with the higher ranking team getting a 2nd chance to rematch the the same opponent the following week on the other teams home ground. Basically the lower ranking team has to win twice to get through, the higher ranking team wins strait up the skip through to the prelims.

The higher ranking team should always play the lowest ranking team regardless of who gets through. So if 1st defeats 8th, 7th defeats 2nd, 3rd defeats 6th and 4th defeats 5th them it’s 1v7 and 3v4 in the prelims.

Cons if all top 4 win the first week they all skip the next week into the prelims resulting in 7 finals matches, if all bottom 4 teams win forcing rematches we then get 11 finals but this is unlikely. The current system has 9 finals matches which is what the AFL want, guaranteed money, but I prefer a fairer finals system.

Basically the flawed McIntyre Final Eight System

 

[Coolangatta]

If we end up with 19 teams I'd go:

1. Top 10, in the bye week 7v10, 8v9.
2. Same top 8 system as we have now except the elimination finals would be: 5 v second-highest ranked winner of 7-8-9-10 and 6 v highest-ranked winner of 7-8-9-10.

 

[Blackas87]

Basically the flawed McIntyre Final Eight System

No, the McIntyre system had the bottom 2 losses drop out the first week and the highest ranked winners skip a week. While the other middle teams played the semis whether the won or lost the first week.

My system is not that. My system is basically a knock out tournament where the higher ranked team gets to rematch the exact same team if the lose the first week.

 

[BigVic]

The system used for the VFLW Finals is actually a good model. A Top 6 Playoff system rather than a Top 8 For more info: See Second McIntyre Final Six

 

[Dazzler9]

The top 8 is not perfect*, but let's not go adding any extra teams into finals. 8/18 is more than enough participants.

* In the top 4, 5 or 6 days, it used to be that teams who earned a double chance couldn't be knocked out until they had used up their double chance or made the GF. That doesn't apply anymore, unfortunately. If you win your QF, you go straight to a knockout prelim where it's sudden death.

I'd like a system where you still retain the double chance until you've used it up, or made the GF. For that we would need more than 4 weeks of finals though.

 

[Blackas87]

The system used for the VFLW Finals is actually a good model. A Top 6 Playoff system rather than a Top 8 For more info: See Second McIntyre Final Six

don’t like it. Basically the loser of 1st vs 2nd gets screwed while the higher ranked winner of the eliminations (potentially 5th) could skip the the prelim and go straight into a Grand final.

 

[footyfan1978]

The current Final 8 was the best model I reckon (without any byes in the last round).

1 week off becomes an advantage, but any more than that and it can be a hindrance.

Also good to have all teams playing the week before the Grand Final.

However, having more teams has made it harder to make Finals and therefore loss of interest in the season earlier for more teams, and the concussion protocols of a minimum 12 days off makes a bye week between the Preliminary Final and Grand Final a good option, provided there isn't another week off for a team in the lead up.

So, presuming a Tasmanian team comes in as the 19th team, I would fixture as follows.

Minor Round (Games 1-19):
19 Rounds, playing each team once with one bye (9 home games and 9 away games).
Top 12 advance, Bottom 7 eliminated.

Major Round (Games 20-24):
Top 12 teams split in two groups; Group A (1,4,5,8,9,12) and Group B (2,3,6,7,10,11)
Ladders Reset.
Round Robin with top 3 placed teams in each group playing 3 home games and 2 away games, the bottom 2 playing 2 home games and 3 away games.
Top 2 from each group advance to Preliminary Final, Bottom 3 from each group eliminated.

Preliminary Final (Game 25)
1st Group A vs 2nd Group B
1st Group B vs 2nd Group A

Weekend off between Preliminary Final and Grand Final

Grand Final (Game 26)

18 home and away only does not work for broadcast money and clubs in bottom 7 for bottom dollar when they expect 22 home and away matches each.

 

[Coolangatta]

18 home and away only does not work for broadcast money and clubs in bottom 7 for bottom dollar when they expect 22 home and away matches each.

yeah I'd keep the 22 rounds, whether we have 20 teams or whatever it is.

they could even expand it to 24 rounds, beginning in the first week of march, with two byes instead of one

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

If money wasn't the driving factor for the AFL, a three week finals series would suffice.

Elimination A : 3rd v 6th
Elimination B : 4th v 5th

Preliminary A : 1st v Winner Elimination A
Preliminary B : 2nd v Winner Elimination B

Grand Final

But money is the driving factor, so a top 12 is more likely.

 

[Dazzler9]

The top 8 is not perfect*, but let's not go adding any extra teams into finals. 8/18 is more than enough participants.

* In the top 4, 5 or 6 days, it used to be that teams who earned a double chance couldn't be knocked out until they had used up their double chance or made the GF. That doesn't apply anymore, unfortunately. If you win your QF, you go straight to a knockout prelim where it's sudden death.

I'd like a system where you still retain the double chance until you've used it up, or made the GF. For that we would need more than 4 weeks of finals though.

To retain the double chance for the QF winners, you could make it so that they have to be beaten twice in the prelims. If they win the first game, they go straight through to the GF, having a week off before the GF while potentially the other side of the draw has to play a second prelim.

 

[footyfan1978]

If money wasn't the driving factor for the AFL, a three week finals series would suffice.

Elimination A : 3rd v 6th
Elimination B : 4th v 5th

Preliminary A : 1st v Winner Elimination A
Preliminary B : 2nd v Winner Elimination B

Grand Final

But money is the driving factor, so a top 12 is more likely.

13 teams out of running silly idea for a season of football.
Imagine right now a final 6 and how teams sitting in middle of ladder seasons doomed to be playing out time like the Bumbers, Roos, Eagles and Crows right now. Would just add more teams season over earlier in terms of overall race.
Top 6 in 14 team comp would be ok but not with 18 and 19 club in it.
Top 8 is fine.

 

[Dazzler9]

I'd still like to see the 17-5 implemented.

 

[Freomaniac]

If we end up with 19 teams I'd go:

1. Top 10, in the bye week 7v10, 8v9.
2. Same top 8 system as we have now except the elimination finals would be: 5 v second-highest ranked winner of 7-8-9-10 and 6 v highest-ranked winner of 7-8-9-10.

I like it.

Top 2 gets a home final and double chance.

Top 4 gets double chance.

Top 6 gets a home final.

As you said. 5th gets home final and gets the lowest ranked winner and a weekend rest.

6th gets highest ranked winner and a home final and one week's rest.

That also means that more teams still in contention. That means 3 teams fighting for that 10th spot.

 

[L_W_P]

Bring in Tassie.

19 teams all play each other once - 9 home + 9 away.

Keep 22 or 23 rounds to allow for byes.

Top 10 play finals.

Week 1
7 v 9
8 v 10

Week 2
1 v 8/10
2 v 7/9
3 v 5
4 v 6

Week 3
1 v 4/6
2 v 3/5

Week 4
1 v 2

 

[Freomaniac]

Wow, never seen thread before and so used to shit finals system invented by nufties on here I was expecting another stupid OP but yours actually has merit. When looked at diagram it dawned on me really it is the old traditional final five system with an extra week started a week before September to finalize the rankings of the top 6 in exact order of 1 to 6. This is ok considering the home and away series we have now is incomplete as not everyone has same draw of whom everyone plays so a weekend for top 6 to change order around 1 ranking either way I do not mind at all.

There is a real challenge though despite it being a great system to find the best team of the year. You created this OP when it was a 16 team league and now it expanded further to 18. Not sure 6 out of 18 teams making finals fits with AFL view of how to run the whole season.

The final 8 we have now has it flaws but it is not a total dogs breakfast enough to drop back to only 6 out of 18 making finals. A 4 week final 7 I do not mind but even 7 is probably not enough now. Also if we ever get to 20 clubs a final 6 will get thrown out for sure. I honestly think we stuck with final 8 and make the most of it.

I would hate to follow a struggling Victorian club from 1925-1971.

12 teams and 4 finals spots. The final 5 system existed from 1972-1990.

Hawks didn't play finals once between 1925-56.

Had the final 5 system existed from 1925 onwards, Hawks would of had made finals at least once in that 1925-56 period. Finishing 5th might not be much but a few Elim finals over a 20-30 year period makes your club history slightly better and respectable

 

[footyfan1978]

I would hate to follow a struggling Victorian club from 1925-1971.

12 teams and 4 finals spots. The final 5 system existed from 1972-1990.

Hawks didn't play finals once between 1925-56.

Had the final 5 system existed from 1925 onwards, Hawks would of had made finals at least once in that 1925-56 period. Finishing 5th might not be much but a few Elim finals over a 20-30 year period makes your club history slightly better and respectable

It is ok, we sent them Jack Hale to fix their culture from the Mayblooms to respected and eventually made finals.

Final Five system the best I seen but was suited for 12 team comp.
WAFL and SANFL had final four too for much of their time but as they did not have 12 teams is was ok.
SANFL had 10 teams and WAFL 8 for time I was a kid. When it was 10 teams in SANFL think it was final five.
WAFL probably still stuck for final four.
Peel Thunder were not around and in SANFL, West Torrens, Central Districts and Woodville existed.

 

[footyfan1978]

If we end up with 19 teams I'd go:

1. Top 10, in the bye week 7v10, 8v9.
2. Same top 8 system as we have now except the elimination finals would be: 5 v second-highest ranked winner of 7-8-9-10 and 6 v highest-ranked winner of 7-8-9-10.

I'm fine with this if it still has all clubs 22 home and away matches before it.

 

[Freomaniac]

Bring in Tassie.

19 teams all play each other once - 9 home + 9 away.

Keep 22 or 23 rounds to allow for byes.

Top 10 play finals.

Week 1
7 v 9
8 v 10

Week 2
1 v 8/10
2 v 7/9
3 v 5
4 v 6

Week 3
1 v 4/6
2 v 3/5

Week 4
1 v 2

Your system is fine but I want a 20th side. 10 games a week.

 

[L_W_P]

Your system is fine but I want a 20th side. 10 games a week.

If we go to 20 sides (and I assume Darwin in team 20) I would want a 19 game fixture.

9 home.
9 away
1 neutral

The neutral games would be at places like Alice Springs, Ballarat, Cairns, NZ for ANZAC Day etc and rotate it between the teams.

Collingwood vs Tassie in Ballarat.
St Kilda vs West Coast in Alice Springs
Darwin v Geelong in Cairns.
Hawthorn v GWS in NZ

Trying to keep the fixture as 'fair' as possible.

 

[kranger]

Don’t get the point of the QF1 and QF2. Both winners and losers move onto the next week.

In the current system having a pre-finals bye is almost considered a disadvantage to the teams that win the qualifying finals, because when they play the preliminary finals they will have only played one game of footy in the pass three weeks.

So if the pre-finals bye is replaced by the 5-12 elimination games. You need to find something for the top 4 to do.

So the thinking is, the winners of QF1 and QF2 get the advantage by getting to be the home teams in QF3 and QF4.

It also means it is more likely all the top 4 teams will play each other at some point in the finals.