The Finals System

[Mr Meeseeks]

If teams weren't rewarded for for being rubbish in the AFL, I would agree, a final 6 would be sufficient.

However, a final 8 with 18 teams would mean that there would be 3 or 4 teams every year who are virtually out of the race halfway through the season.

Tanking would be rife.

And this year is not an example to say tanking is dead, there is no reward for it this year. It will be back in a couple of years mark my words.

A 10 team finals series would still leave hope for finals for many clubs deep into the season. Finals footy is great, the more games the better IMO.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

Ah, but at the moment you're defending a system that gives 1st no advantage over 2nd, and come Preliminary Final time, no advantage over any other team that happens to have made it that far either.

So, I'll ask again:

Why shouldn't you receive an advantage for finishing on top?

You do. Its slight but it is still an advantage. Finish top you get 4th, finish second you get 3rd. Using the past two seasons as an example that has been a great advantage as 4th was clearly a level below 1st, 2nd and 3rd.

Prelims are a different beast anyway, anything can happen.

6 games over 4 weeks? Not enough football.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

"But surely, we could have a Final 5 series for the TRUE finalists, and then a "best of the rest" type of competition for the other teams? That way, we get the best Finals system, there is still something to play for for the remaining teams, and the AFL gets more games and more money."

Thats the worst idea in this thread.

 

[vealesy]

You do. Its slight but it is still an advantage. Finish top you get 4th, finish second you get 3rd. Using the past two seasons as an example that has been a great advantage as 4th was clearly a level below 1st, 2nd and 3rd.

Prelims are a different beast anyway, anything can happen.

6 games over 4 weeks? Not enough football.

This.

You get home ground benefits and you get to play 4th.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

some sort of conference system ... each group of nine has the old final four in place, winners of each conference play the grand final.

Not for mine. There's a 50% chance of the best 2 teams being in the same conference, so over a period of time, it'll be impossible for the best 2 teams to meet in the GF on average every second year.

 

[luthor]

A 10 team finals series would still leave hope for finals for many clubs deep into the season. Finals footy is great, the more games the better IMO.

OK Einstein.....a final 10!

Care to come up with something resembling a sensible format that involves a final 10?

When I was at school, I was not half bad at maths, probability theory and permutations and combinations.....but trying to come up with a Finals series involving 10 teams does my head in.

I've tried a few scenarios in my head and even on paper but nothing works!

Over to you.....exactly how would this Final 10 work?

 

[estibador]

In an ideal system 1st would get a bigger advantage over the rest of the top 4.

But... in an ideal system everyone would play everyone twice and you would know that 1st truly deserves 1st place. In the current system 1st finishing one game clear of 2nd could come entirely down to which team had the easier fixture. Given that, the current rewards for 1st are more than adequate.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

OK Einstein.....a final 10!

Care to come up with something resembling a sensible format that involves a final 10?

Haha since you asked so nicely I'll give it a go! How about this:

Week 1

1 & 2 get the week off

3 v 6 winner to play 2nd, loser to play winner of 7 v 10
4 v 5 winner to play 1st, loser to play winner of 8 v 9

7 v 10 loser out, winner to play loser of 3 v 6
8 v 9 loser out, winner to play loser of 4 v 5

These four games act as qualifiers for the following week where the system reverts to the one we have in place right now. So...

Weeks 2-5

Exactly as they are now.

----------------------------------------------------

1 & 2 get a week off then double chance guarunteed
3 - 6 get 1 double chance if they lose, 2 if they win
7 - 10 get no double chance.
If the 'expected' teams win, we have a system exactly like we do now for weks 2-5.

I think the system we have now is near perfect and there is no need to change it. A 10 team finals would just mean 1 extra week of footy with 4 games and the 2 weakest teams knocked out. Then we're back to the system that works... Teams 7-10 have it all to do, just like 7-8 do now.

More importantly, it retains the traditions of our game such as double chances and home ground advantages AND can be done without the need for bloody conferences

Whaddyareckon?

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

But... in an ideal system everyone would play everyone twice and you would know that 1st truly deserves 1st place. In the current system 1st finishing one game clear of 2nd could come entirely down to which team had the easier fixture. Given that, the current rewards for 1st are more than adequate.

Very good point. Never thought of it like that.

I change my opinion of the current system being near perfect, to it being perfect

 

[doppleganger]

Whaddyareckon?

Good attempt, simply duplicating everybody's fav old final 5.....if the AFL happy to extend finals to 5 weeks tis the best option.

Means more finals are played = more $$

More teams are involved in finals = more $$

More of an advantage for finishing 1 & 2 =

 

[swiftdog]

Quickly thought of 2 final 10 systems based on the old final 5 system.

System 1

Week 1
1 + 2 get the week off
Initial Final 1 - 3 vs 6: winner to play EF2 winner, loser to play IF2 loser
Initial Final 2 - 4 vs 5: winner to play EF1 winner, loser to play IF1 loser
Elim Final 1 - 7 vs 10: winner to play IF2 loser, loser out
Elim Final 2 - 8 vs 9: winner to play IF1 loser, loser out

Week 2
Prelim Final 1 - 1 vs 2: winner to grand final, loser to play QF 3 winner
Qual Final 1 - W IF1(3) vs W EF2(8): winner to play QF2 winner, loser out
Qual Final 2 - W IF2(4) vs W EF1(7): winner to play QF1 winner, loser out
Qual Final 3 - L IF1(5) vs L IF2(6): winner to play PF1 loser, loser out

Week 3
PF1 winner - week off
Semi Final 1 - L PF1(2) vs W QF3(5): winner to play SF2 winner, loser out
Semi Final 2 - W QF1(3) vs W QF2(4): winner to play SF1 winner, loser out

Week 4
PF1 winner - week off
Preliminary Final 2 - W SF1 vs W SF2: Winner to grand final, loser out

Week 5
Grand Final - W PF1 vs W PF2

* Qualifying Final 3, Semi Final 2 & Preliminary Final 2: the team that finished higher on the ladder after the H&A season is the "home" team.
** Grand Final: the winner of Preliminary Final 1 is te "home team"

Advantages:

1st - Guarenteed home ground advantage (HGA) every game bar grand final. Potetentially only needs 2 wins for the premiership. Otherwise, requires 3 wins with at least 2 HGA.

2nd - Same as 1st except is away team in Preliminary Final 1.

3rd & 4th - Double chance and guarenteed home finals in weeks 1 & 2. Needs 4-5 wins for premiership.

5th & 6th - Double chance. Needs 4-5 wins for premiership.

7th & 8th - HGA week 1. Needs 5 wins for premiership.

9th & 10th - Needs 5 wins for premiership.

Barring the obvious flaw of a 2 week break for the winner of Prelim Final 1 I think it's pretty fair in terms of advantages 1st down to 10th get. I prefer a top 8 though. Just something a little different. Unfortunately due to an uneven fixture 1st probably shouldn't get such a big advantage.


EDIT: My 2nd system is identical to chunkyducklings

 

[Koutafidamedis]

Haha since you asked so nicely I'll give it a go! How about this:

Week 1

1 & 2 get the week off

3 v 6 winner to play 2nd, loser to play winner of 7 v 10
4 v 5 winner to play 1st, loser to play winner of 8 v 9

7 v 10 loser out, winner to play loser of 3 v 6
8 v 9 loser out, winner to play loser of 4 v 5

These four games act as qualifiers for the following week where the system reverts to the one we have in place right now. So...

Weeks 2-5

Exactly as they are now.

----------------------------------------------------

1 & 2 get a week off then double chance guarunteed
3 - 6 get 1 double chance if they lose, 2 if they win
7 - 10 get no double chance.
If the 'expected' teams win, we have a system exactly like we do now for weks 2-5.

I think the system we have now is near perfect and there is no need to change it. A 10 team finals would just mean 1 extra week of footy with 4 games and the 2 weakest teams knocked out. Then we're back to the system that works... Teams 7-10 have it all to do, just like 7-8 do now.

More importantly, it retains the traditions of our game such as double chances and home ground advantages AND can be done without the need for bloody conferences

Whaddyareckon?

Very well done.

I used to be totally against a top 10 system until I read this. 1st and 2nd can potentially have 2 out of 3 weeks off, leaving them very fresh for PF + GF.

Also I really like that fact that it makes it even harder for teams 7 + 8 to win the flag than in the current system. Winning 5 games in a row would be near impossible for a team 7-10.

Hopefully the AFL will look at something like this if they expand to final 10.

 

[Roby]

I would be happy with a 5 or 6 finals system if some of the teams on the bottom were relegated to a lower league. Otherwise this thread is completely pointless as the AFL will soon introduce a final 10.

 

[Perry Pie]

I think the top 8 will work fine in an 18 team competition - please no more teams cluttering up the finals.

If we have to have something for teams below 8th, how about a second level of finals. Call it the ANZAC cup and have the profits go to ex servicemen support.

Teams in 9th - 12th play off in week one qualifiers, in week 2 the winners from week one meet the losers from the main elimination finals (prob 7th & 8th), ANZAC cup final in week 3 (same week as the prelim finals). Could also have the final outside Victoria unless 2 Vic teams playing.

For, all teams above 8th are guaranteed 2 finals games, 9th - 12th have something to play for. Against, will anyone care?

 

[FuManchu]

Good attempt, simply duplicating everybody's fav old final 5.....if the AFL happy to extend finals to 5 weeks tis the best option.

Means more finals are played = more $$

More teams are involved in finals = more $$

More of an advantage for finishing 1 & 2 =

5 week finals wont work. We just had the example of the 2011 season and the MCG drama for the first week of October. They cant start the season early because of the same limitations on the use of the MCG. So unless they are going to schedule games for the first 3 or 4 weeks of the season away from the 'G', I'd say a 22 week (23 with the bye included) season and a 4 week finals will remain after the 2011 season.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

5 week finals wont work. We just had the example of the 2011 season and the MCG drama for the first week of October. They cant start the season early because of the same limitations on the use of the MCG. So unless they are going to schedule games for the first 3 or 4 weeks of the season away from the 'G', I'd say a 22 week (23 with the bye included) season and a 4 week finals will remain after the 2011 season.

Wont need the bye after 2011. Get rid of the split round, play 22 straight rounds, make the finals 5 weeks, and the season will be no longer than it is now.

I never liked the idea of a split round anyway. It has the potential to give an advantage to teams that play in the first week rather than the second.

 

[_Mike_]

Expanding the finals to accomodate 10 teams will only reward mediocrity. Leave the system as a final 8, in its current format. The best system was the original top 5 VFL finals system. Rewarding the teams that were the most consistent throughout the year

But ofcourse we all know the AFL is about more money... more finals = more money.

 

[Wallaby]

5 week finals wont work. We just had the example of the 2011 season and the MCG drama for the first week of October. They cant start the season early because of the same limitations on the use of the MCG.

First of all - forget this. The AFL has approximately 100x the money the ACB has. The ACB only needs the MCG from Boxing Day until mid-march. The AFL paid most of the money for the MCG upgrade (completed for the Comm Games in 2006). There would be no issue extending use of the MCG until the end of October, if push comes to shove. Last year, the AFL used the MCG for 53 matches for 2.8 million spectators. Cricket probably had 5 days of test cricket, 4 or 5 one dayers, 2 x 20/20 - lets give them 500K pectators, plus a total of about 50K for all the shield and state one-dayers. The MCG is primarily a football ground.

However.

The Final 5 was far and away the best and fairest system ever. Simply, if you wanted to progress, you had to beat the sides that finished ahead of you or immediately below you. Also, you couldn't win the premiership without knocking off the team that finished H&A on top.

Finals are inherently unfair compared to the regular season. The fairest system is the EPL - every team plays each other home and away - best overall record wins. No finals.

Charles Barkley used to refer to the regular NBA season as the 'pre-season'. Hs rationale was 'make the finals, and get into it'. Of course the NBA finals system offers no benefit for finishing high up in the regular season (beyond home-court advantage 4-3 in a 7-game playoff series). Brisbane's and Adelaide's flags in the last 10-15 years are examples of this in the AFL.

 

[vealesy]

So are you guys saying its easy to win a flag if you finish from 5th to 8th?

You still have to win ALL FOUR GAMES.

I agree with the great Sir Charles.

This H+A is just a pre season to finals.

Finals are what matters.

Finals are what players work hard all year for.

Not to finish with the minor premiership and an easy route to the GF.

 

[FootyJunkie]

Wont need the bye after 2011. Get rid of the split round, play 22 straight rounds, make the finals 5 weeks, and the season will be no longer than it is now.

I never liked the idea of a split round anyway. It has the potential to give an advantage to teams that play in the first week rather than the second.

The Final 5 is basically a promotion/relegation type system, the team at the top plays every other week while the team at the bottom gets kicked out.

Could easily extend the Final 5 to a Final 6 with another week, have 9 finals like we have now, but really the system is boring... 1 v 2 could meet 3 times, in Weeks 1, 3 and 5 (GF).

Week 1

Game A: 1 v 2
Game B: 3 v 4
Game C: 5 v 6

Week 2 - Final 5 from here on...

Qualifying Final - Loser of Game A v Winner of Game B
Elimination Final - Loser of Game B v Winner of Game C

Week 3

2nd Semi Final - Winner Game A v Winner of Qualifying Final
1st Semi Final - Loser of Qualifying Final v Winner of Elimination Final

you know the rest...

 

[Father Jack]

I couldn't disagree more.

Surely the best thing for our game is to have the 2 best teams of the season in the Grand Final? We need LESS knockout games for top teams, not more!

The most pure way to do it would be to either a) Have no finals at all and just award the premiership to the top team, or b) Have no finals - just one Grand Final between the top 2 teams.

I'm not suggesting that for a minute though. Finals football is as much a part of our game as anything else. Therefore, we need a system that reflects what we all spend the majority of the bloody season watching - the H&A rounds!

Things like knockout rounds etc just make the entire H&A season irrelevant.

If you want to have a pure knockout finals system that doesn't reward performances throughout the season, then why bother playing 22 rounds of H&A football?

Seriously, why bother?

what are you disagreeing with me about?

 

[Father Jack]

Not for mine. There's a 50% chance of the best 2 teams being in the same conference, so over a period of time, it'll be impossible for the best 2 teams to meet in the GF on average every second year.

Who knows if they do now anyway, the lopsided draw makes it nigh on impossible to tell. How many times out of the past dozen years or so have the two best teams definitely been in the GF?

 

[Changa10]

gPhongue, I'm with you mate. I hate how if you finish 1st, win your first final but lose your Prelim you're gone.

I've had an idea that the first two weeks could potentially be to set up the old final 4 system. I'll use the current ladder positions to explain. And I'll assume the higher ranked team wins each game..

Week 1
1. Collingwood V 4. Bulldogs
2. Geelong V 3. St Kilda
5. Fremantle V 8. Hawthorn
6. Carlton V 7. Sydney

Top 2 winners basically go through and Qualify 1st and 2nd in the top 4, and have the second week off.

Top 2 losers play the bottom 2 winners in week 2. Bottom 2 losers out.

Week 2

Bulldogs V Carlton
St Kilda V Fremantle

Final 4 then becomes:

Collingwood
Geelong
St Kilda
Bulldogs

Won't always happen that they end up in the same positions of course.

Final 4 system then starts in week 3;

Second Semi - Collingwood V Geelong (Winner to GF, Loser plays in PF against winner of First Semi)

Fist Semi - St Kilda V Bulldogs (Loser out, winner to prelim)

Week 4 - Prelim

Geelong V St Kilda (Winner goes through to play Collingwood in GF)

Week 5 - GF

Coll V Geelong

Solves the second chance issue. Number of weeks and games increased by one only. Much better system, at least in my opinion.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

You simply cannot have an 18 team competition with 10 or even 12 teams missing finals. That is too great a percentage of the league. Clubs out of the race would lose interest a lot earlier than usual.

Tanking would be rife and there would be far too many nothing games in the final month or two. The bottom line is this league is still about entertainment.

Who cares if the finals are diluted, I've seen many games with poor skills that were just a great war of attrition, a final is a final.

As for a second tier of finals, nobody would give a shit. Players aren't going to put their body on the line to play off for 7th! terrible idea.

 

[McCrann]

You simply cannot have an 18 team competition with 10 or even 12 teams missing finals. That is too great a percentage of the league. Clubs out of the race would lose interest a lot earlier than usual.

Tanking would be rife and there would be far too many nothing games in the final month or two. The bottom line is this league is still about entertainment.

Who cares if the finals are diluted, I've seen many games with poor skills that were just a great war of attrition, a final is a final.

As for a second tier of finals, nobody would give a shit. Players aren't going to put their body on the line to play off for 7th! terrible idea.

The antidote to this is a 4 Division System.

AFL North (5 Teams)
AFL West (5 Teams)
AFL South (5 Teams)
AFL Central (5 Teams)

Yes, yes, I know we are 2 teams short of this - but its not that much further along the line - then every team is competing against 4 others for the Division crown.

All sorts of new medals and trophies can then be introduced as well, and the way the Draft works can also be modified in any number of ways.