Expansion The perfect AFL fixture requires 22 teams.
- Thread starter SgtSchulz
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Yep, exactly...or even the somewhat compromised, but more likely to be implemented, 18-4 model
The other high level options:
The OPs rapid expansion to 22 teams: Oblivious to the substantial costs involved
US style conference system of various types: all themselves "clunky" and flawed in different ways
Reduce the season to 17 games: Oblivious to the substantial loss of revenues involved
Expand the season to 36 games: Oblivious to......well, just oblivious
Some variation of the 17-5 (18-4) model - ie broadly where a single round robin league qualifiers teams into top/mid/bottom single round robins - is the most elegant solution that both achieves a genuinely independent fixture while at the same time increasing interest / revenue
telsor
Hall of Famer
Considering the lose money on members as it stands, that would drive them broke! (OK, it would require the AFL to subsidise GWS and their members even more).
Last edited:
telsor
Hall of Famer
Well, that's a legitimate way of charcterising it (particularly models where points don't carry over) but it is not an argument against it.
telsor
Hall of Famer
Carry over points or not, you're cutting it down to the 'finals' teams and those who aren't...AKA, it's a finals series either way.
9 weeks is too long for finals.
Any complaints about the end of the H&A season having too many dead rubbers would be far more true for a week finals series, and the majority of teams fans would have turned off long before you get to the GF.
officialjc
Club Legend
- Sep 24, 2016
- 1,527
- 1,358
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
why cant the afl have a fixture where u play each side once + your biggest rival again (crows v power) and 4 different teams over 4 years.
for example:
year 1 double ups for the crows: power, eagles, swans, roos, dees
year 2: power, pies, bombers, cats, suns
year 3: power, hawks, lions, giants, saints
year 4: power, dogs, blues, dockers, tigers
year 5: reset of 4 different teams
the double ups should be drawn (champions league style) each year.
for example:
year 1 double ups for the crows: power, eagles, swans, roos, dees
year 2: power, pies, bombers, cats, suns
year 3: power, hawks, lions, giants, saints
year 4: power, dogs, blues, dockers, tigers
year 5: reset of 4 different teams
the double ups should be drawn (champions league style) each year.
Paratus78
Cancelled
- Dec 18, 2016
- 373
- 1,034
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
I have a radical new fixture. The following teams play each other twice:
Melb
Ess
Coll
Carl
Foot
Fitz
Sth
Nth
STK
Rich
Haw
Geel
If this isn't workable people should stop complaining and move on. Perhaps follow another sport or create your own league of utopian equality. The draw will never be truly equal. GET OVER IT
Melb
Ess
Coll
Carl
Foot
Fitz
Sth
Nth
STK
Rich
Haw
Geel
If this isn't workable people should stop complaining and move on. Perhaps follow another sport or create your own league of utopian equality. The draw will never be truly equal. GET OVER IT
For a perfectly equitable fixture within the restrictions of the AFL season (22 games, 23 weeks), it’s 12 teams. Play every team twice. But that’s not gonna happen so we have to make do with what we’ve got. 17 game season and every team has 1 mandatory split gate match (at some point during the season) to give everyone 8.5 home games. Then finals. Players can have two byes and we can fit it in to the calendar.
Should get rid of the draft and salary cap as well.
I don't agree at all...putting aside the semantics of calling it "finals" and then following with "9 weeks is too long for a finals series", the rest of your assertions are incorrect
There would be demonstrably less "dead rubbers" and one sided games than we have now. 2/3rds of teams will, for the most part, be playing high stakes games right up to the last week
Why would people have "turned off long before you get to the GF"? This is a particularly weak assertion ...Currently we have the inevitable petering out of the season, some teams with hard draws, others with easy draws against teams that have tapped out already. Replacing this with "reset" round robins between the top and middle teams would only enhance the season....this argument seems to boil down to "too much grouse is bad"
Is there "intense match fatigue" in players and teams? Well, if there is, right now it is asymetric
Adelaide's last 5 matches they played teams that were still alive when they played them
Richmond only had one such opponent in the last 5 games
Under a 17-5, both teams would have played the other 5 teams in the top 6.
Totally agree, just a rolling fixture. It is the only way to go with the amount of teams we have. I just don't understand that something so simple is never ever mentioned in discussing the fixture.
Who cares if their is not two derby's each year or showdowns or two Essendon Collingwood games. No one cares about any of this.
- Oct 9, 2014
- 12,116
- 21,278
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Ch7 care
And out of those 17 games in Vic, the Tigers play 13 against other teams that also call Vic home. Port play 12 Games in SA and only 2 against a team that calls SA home. It’s swings and roundabouts on this point.
Australia doesn’t have the population to support 22 teams, both in terms of supporters of the game and participants of high enough talent to fill the lists. We’ve already seen a dilution of talent across the league. Sure the fixture isn’t perfect, but what’s perfect in this world? Some people expecting too much IMO.
HarryZLA
All Australian
- Mar 1, 2010
- 641
- 1,658
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
The perfect fixture has nothing to do with how many teams there are.
The only thing that would make it perfect is playing every team twice, once at home, once away.
So unless we can expand the season to 36 weeks we won't see it happen.
The only thing that would make it perfect is playing every team twice, once at home, once away.
So unless we can expand the season to 36 weeks we won't see it happen.
Considering that most of these games are Foxtel games I am not sure that’s the case. Except the double up of Vic teams games which for some unknown reason are broadcast on 7 when 3/4 of the country’s population don’t give a toss about it.
- Oct 27, 2016
- 5,949
- 10,675
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Packers, Raptors, Renegades
The only way we are going to add 4 more teams, let alone Sydney teams is if we somehow can import a couple million immigrants from somewhere...
They should add in some country towns, maybe like hte Murray River Cods (could represent multiple towns on the murray river basin) or maybe something like the Mildura Wobbegongs
JT_the_Man
Draft King
But where would they play?
Alternate home and away over two years.
There’d be too many games gone to keep the TV rights near where they are to go for 17 rounds with 18 teams. 20 teams with 19 rounds gives 190 games versus 198 currently - close enough. The talent is already spread too thin to do that for another 20 years.
A better one would be 30 rounds with 16 teams, playing everyone home and away. 240 games so the TV rights would go up (funding larger lists). 2 less teams would improve list quality, allowing it to be that an individual player could play something like a maximum of 26 home & away games, with a maximum of 10 in a row. Thereby removing needs for byes, as every player has at least 4 across the H&A season.
Take out the mid-season and end of season byes, start a month earlier and it’s set. For TV rights nationally there’d still be the requirement for 2 WA, SA, NSW and QLD sides. It’d just need the (lacking) will to remove the historical leftover of 10 teams in one state, bringing Victoria down to 8. It’d still in an [A]FL have as many teams as the rest of the country put together.
The AFL just needs to stop basing the fixture around the big Vic teams. The games featuring the big clubs are slotted into the prime times and everythig else is organized around that ensuring nothing will ever change.
Not one Friday night fixture at the new Perth stadium, seriously.
The Saints, Dogs, Roos and Ds need to join forces with the interstate clubs and demand a more equitable fixture.
Not one Friday night fixture at the new Perth stadium, seriously.
The Saints, Dogs, Roos and Ds need to join forces with the interstate clubs and demand a more equitable fixture.
no, tis a fallacy.
to win, you will need to go thru other dominant teams, on most* occasions, you will still need to beat the best team.
what about suspensions. or when barry hall knocks out staker? does hall only miss games versus your other 16 rival teams? what about weather, and weather influencing percentage? what about plane trips across the continent, ok, here i have contradicted myself, sort of, giving you a free shot? what i mean was, what about perth teams that have to travel 2000miles every second game, except their home round fortnight? what about injuries, does each team need to face off at 100% list health?
You cannot ameliorate the random nature of sport, this is what makes sport, sport, in my opinion. Otherwise, we can all fixture and determine results with an algorithm, and Sergey Brin and Larry Page be chairpersons.
This is where the AFL have failed in my estimation, they failed to communicate the nature of sport, and the AFL game, they introduced goal line technology, when it has interrupted the experience of the fan, it has only hurt the fan, when all it required was a credible CEO to get the fans and clubs and cheersquads onside. For one Tom Hawkins kick in a final. There are thousands of kicks at goal, to change the game over this was a monumental failure, but a failure befit of boffins at AFL hq.
telsor
Hall of Famer
3/4 of the country, perhaps, but when you rule out those who don't care whoever plays, the Vic market is about 50% of the football audience.
telsor
Hall of Famer
The lack of Friday night games in Perth has more to do with time zones than it does 'big vic clubs'. (and a bit to both WA teams not exactly expected to figure hugely next year).
If you don't believe me, check how many such games Adelaide gets.
Similar threads
