Opinion Time to change the finals structure

[demondavey]

Also after week 1 of the finals the opposition gets to pick your teams best 3 players to play for them, and you get to pick their best 3 players to play for you.

I also think there needs to be 2 different games happening at the same time on the same field, so Sydney can play Melbourne and Carlton and Collingwood can play each other but both matches sort of ignore each other while playing, every so often a Sydney player accidentally bumping into a Collingwood player who is in the way or vise versa but everyone bouncing off and continuing.

And I think if you get a free kick you can nominate a player in the forward 50 from either Collingwood or Carlton to kick for you.

 

[demondavey]

The AFL doesn't like teams throwing games at the end of the season, and this is what will happen if there's no pre-finals bye. I mean, what makes you think that teams would stop doing it if they thought they'd get an advantage from it? I can live with the bye easier than a compromised last couple of rounds.

Really? The AFL throws games anyway by wording up the umpires.

 

[demondavey]

My stab at how it could work

W1 - 5x6(A) 7x8(B) 3x4(C)
W2 - 2xWinner-B(D) Loser-CxWinner-A(E)
W3 - Winner-D x Winner-C (F)
W4 - 1 v Winner-F

Home & Away ladder Advantages:
1 - GF spot
2 - SF spot against lowest ranked team
3/4 - Double Chance
5/6 - Semi against lowest ranked top 4 team
7/8 -no benefits

People will no doubt say unfair draw! But I say, the table is still pretty reflective (eg a ladder based on on the first meetings of all teams this year would still see geelong on top). Sure luck might play a part, but the answer is luck will play a part, it always plays a massive part. If we take out of the equation there would always be an undefeated team each year and team with zero wins. Doesn't happen. Anyway the challenge for the number 1 team is to keep form.
Incidentally the old 1920's finals system (argus) was actually not too bad. The first place team was given the advantage of a single slip up not being fatal. Second place team was guaranteed at worst a prelim spot. Every weekend was a single match, I like that focus. The biggest issue and fatal flaw was that 'Grand Final' was not necessarily final if the top spot team hadn't spent it's 'slip-up get-out-of-jail-free card'. Could never work now

So whoever finishes first gets 3 weeks off? Jesus….

That’s just awful

 

[pz5151]

I also think there needs to be 2 different games happening at the same time on the same field, so Sydney can play Melbourne and Carlton and Collingwood can play each other but both matches sort of ignore each other while playing, every so often a Sydney player accidentally bumping into a Collingwood player who is in the way or vise versa but everyone bouncing off and continuing.

Just imagine how good this would have been in Round 23 if the Bulldogs Hawthorn game was played and you had Dogs players "accidentally" knocking Carlton players out of contests to ensure they made the 8.

 

[Grin]

Re. The bye - the 360 piece was laughable, saying that 40% of the time since the bye was introduced the winners of the QFs have both lost the PF compared to 0% before. Big number.

Well that’s five years data (2016-2020) so it’s 2 out of 5. Not a massive sample size but let’s see what they were.

First year was 2016, where one of the grand finalists was Sydney (who actually finished top but lost the QF) and the dogs (who won 15 games despite finishing seventh).

Second year was 2020 - COVID affected with hubs, shorter games etc and the QF winners were Port and Brisbane who hadn’t been disrupted as much. Beaten by Richmond and Geelong in the PFs, the other top four teams and arguably the better sides across the year anyway.

Exactly. Wheatley seems convinced that his club won't even make the Grand Final, much less win it, and is pre-emptively coming up with the narrative of why "We was ripped off".
AFL 360 is the media mouthpiece for Geelong and James Hird.

 

[SuperVolley11]

When for example QF winner Richmond beat QF loser Geelong in the 2019 PF, it was Richmond’s 3rd game within a 26 day window. If it worked out slightly differently then it would have been the 3rd game in a 30 odd day window. It didn’t stop Richmond smashing their way through finals in 2017-19. Nor did it stop too many top teams from having a fair chance under the old final 5 system, where it was regularly the case they had 1st and 3rd weeks of the finals off. For example Hawks won Premierships in 88-89, Blues won in 87, Essendon 85, Blues in 81 in that scenario. I am sure if you go back into the 1970’s you will find it continues in a similar vain.

Teams need to get their preparation right but that is the same no matter what system is used.

The two years, 2016 and 2020, that you are relying on to say there is an increased rate of QF final winners losing PF’s were extremely exceptional finals series for the reasons already given, in one of them the best team finished 7th, which is previously unknown, in the other there were shortened matches, also previously unknown.

Whether the finals system could be improved or not I am uncertain, but you are not likely to improve it by making radical moves based on such limited and unclear data, that is for sure.

You forgetting about 2018?

 

[Sentinel]

Why do people see having an extra week off for the QF winner to now be a disadvantage - is it a fitness/conditioning thing? If so, surely they'd be able to replicate that through a practice match/match simulation on the weekend off?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

You forgetting about 2018?

2018 the Premier sailed through their QF and PF.

Richmond of course didn’t but this doesn’t establish that the pre-finals bye stands against winners of QF’s being the most likely preliminary finalists to win the flag.

 

[Purple Suit]

Can't fault that system, well maybe 3rd-6th might tank the final round, but it would be my tick for a final 10 if it came in.

The problem with the old system of highest rank winners / losers are teams potentially not knowing their fate after their game. There becomes this axe over your head scenario that sucks for everyone. Even the winners sometimes might have a chance at playing one of 3 other teams depending on results.

The current system is brilliant as everything is mapped out at the start of the finals series.

I also don't think giving the top 2 rests plus soft games into the prelim will really advantage them. Most likely they are playing finals hardened 3rd & 4th best teams who will have momentum.

 

[Billy ray]

minor change only
teams 1-7 on ladder auto qualify

wildcard knockout game between whatever teams in 8-18 have highest percentage to get final place
this year it would have been port (110.3%) v bulldogs (108.9%).
home game for team with more wins (so this year it would have been bulldogs home game - at marvel

(if teams with two best percentages have equal wins, home team is the higher percentage)


genuine wildcard game.
also helps prevent blow outs during season as your percentage means so much more

 

[demondavey]

The eagles should have been eliminated if they finished 5th and lost.
How is losing when you finish 5th and staying in “shafted”?

Same as Adelaide 98. Finished 5th and got belted by 10 goals week 1 yet somehow stayed in and went on to win the flag.

Atrocious finals system.
Current system is the best.

Melbourne smashed Adelaide then I think we had to play the saints which we won, then got north in the PF.

Yeah it was an awful system but most of the time the premier came from the top 4. Were their many years where it threw up odd results bar 98? I reckon looking at it it’s always been pretty even. I think they should do a wild card round for 7v10 and 8v9 in week 1, winners stay in, then it reverts to current system. So the bye is for the top 6, but we still get two games before W1 kicks off.

Richmond v Saints - saints win they are 8th
WB v Carl - WB win they are 7th

Basically highest ranked winner is higher for W1. Doesn’t matter as they get a chance to progress.

 

[demondavey]

minor change only
teams 1-7 on ladder auto qualify

wildcard knockout game between whatever teams in 8-18 have highest percentage to get final place
this year it would have been port (110.3%) v bulldogs (108.9%).
home game for team with more wins (so this year it would have been bulldogs home game - at marvel

(if teams with two best percentages have equal wins, home team is the higher percentage)


genuine wildcard game.
also helps prevent blow outs during season as your percentage means so much more

I rate that

 

[Father Jack]

The old final 8 often had the middle four teams changing partners and going around again the next week. That famous kick to win after the siren by Billy Brownless was essentially pointless coz they still would've been playing the next week for the same reward anyway.

 

[My_Username]

minor change only
teams 1-7 on ladder auto qualify

wildcard knockout game between whatever teams in 8-18 have highest percentage to get final place
this year it would have been port (110.3%) v bulldogs (108.9%).
home game for team with more wins (so this year it would have been bulldogs home game - at marvel

(if teams with two best percentages have equal wins, home team is the higher percentage)


genuine wildcard game.
also helps prevent blow outs during season as your percentage means so much more

Could encourage blowouts...

Rather than taking it easy once you have a clear lead, you push for that extra few goals.

 

[spudmaster]

Top 18 go through to the finals.
AFL can charge finals-prices for the entire season.
Carlton would make a finals series.
Essendon a chance to finally win a finals match.

 

[My_Username]

Top 18 go through to the finals.
AFL can charge finals-prices for the entire season.
Carlton would make a finals series.
Essendon a chance to finally win a finals match.

17 rounds of H&A to determine seeding, a weeks bye, and then a 10 round finals series with all clubs involved for the first 8.

 

[PhilX]

minor change only
teams 1-7 on ladder auto qualify

wildcard knockout game between whatever teams in 8-18 have highest percentage to get final place
this year it would have been port (110.3%) v bulldogs (108.9%).
home game for team with more wins (so this year it would have been bulldogs home game - at marvel

(if teams with two best percentages have equal wins, home team is the higher percentage)


genuine wildcard game.
also helps prevent blow outs during season as your percentage means so much more

I don't really like it, but that's mainly because I'm coming from an "ain't broke" perspective. At least you understand what "wildcard" means.

 

[RichLeMonde]

Finals structure is absolutely fine, it's just the bye. It's unnecessary. If you want additional freshness in the back half of the season have two mid season byes. One after 8 rounds, one after 16. Problem solved.

Not really.

Currently, if higher placed teams win all their finals, then you get an easier game in the prelim if you finished 2nd than if you finished top of the ladder (since it’s 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 in week one, and ends up 1 v 3 and 2 v 4 in the prelim).

That’s flat out bullshit

 

[HairyO]

Dan Patrick: With the first nine months of the Baseketball postseason out of the way, the playoff picture is starting to emerge.
Kenny Mayne: So, with last night's victory over Boston, next week the Milwaukee Beers must beat Indianapolis in order to advance to Charlotte. That's in an effort to reduce their magic number to three.
Dan Patrick: Right, and then the Beers can advance to the National Eastern Division North to play Tampa.
Kenny Mayne: So, if the Beers beat Detroit and Denver beats Atlanta in the American Southwestern Division East Northern, then Milwaukee goes to the Denslow Cup, unless Baltimore can upset Buffalo and Charlotte ties Toronto, then Oakland would play LA and Pittsburgh in a blind choice round robin. And if no clear winner emerges from all of this, a two-man sack race will be held on consecutive Sundays until a champion can be crowned.
Dan Patrick: Right.

.....................

Ditch the Bye, keep everything else the same.

Did any team win a flag after tanking the final round ?

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Not really.

Currently, if higher placed teams win all their finals, then you get an easier game in the prelim if you finished 2nd than if you finished top of the ladder (since it’s 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 in week one, and ends up 1 v 3 and 2 v 4 in the prelim).

That’s flat out bullshit

How is one finishing spot more important than winning form and a week break?

 

[My_Username]

Not really.

Currently, if higher placed teams win all their finals, then you get an easier game in the prelim if you finished 2nd than if you finished top of the ladder (since it’s 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 in week one, and ends up 1 v 3 and 2 v 4 in the prelim).

That’s flat out bullshit

1 faces 4, and maybe 3
2 faces 3 and maybe 4

They're pretty similar runs, but 1 is marginally better overall due to the chance of 3/4 losing their Semi.

 

[demondavey]

The old final 8 often had the middle four teams changing partners and going around again the next week. That famous kick to win after the siren by Billy Brownless was essentially pointless coz they still would've been playing the next week for the same reward anyway.

Correct.

I am not sure how they worked out that second week, of the semi finals. I mean how did they know who played who?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

This was the McIntyre top 8 system. It’s a bit of a convoluted mess. Two lowest ranked losers are out, two highest ranked winners go to a PF and teams in between duke it out. Talk to West Coast Eagles supporters about how they were shafted in the nineties by not being able to play games in Perth.

Kwality

That was because of the MCG contract, they had to effectively play home finals at the G, it had nothing to do with the finals system.

The old Final 8 system is a bit unfairly maligned. It wasn’t perfect but it was pretty good.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

Looking forward to a second team winning it outside of the top four given how big of a advantage the bye week is…

 

[demondavey]

Not really.

Currently, if higher placed teams win all their finals, then you get an easier game in the prelim if you finished 2nd than if you finished top of the ladder (since it’s 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 in week one, and ends up 1 v 3 and 2 v 4 in the prelim).

That’s flat out bullshit

Does that actually matter?

How much more of an advantage can you give first? It’s probably the most equitable system. As far as top 8 goes, it’s probably the best format. The old McIntyre top 8 wasn’t great. Aside from maybe doing a top 10 and essentially having 2 blocks of a 5 group finals series.

Richmond
WB
ESS
Adelaide
Collingwood
Fremantle
Hawks
Geelong
GC
Port

Group A - 1,3,5,7,9
Group B - 2,4,6,8,10

So say it’s this week 1;
7v9 - Hawks v GC (EF) - Hawks
8v10 - Geel v Port (EF) - Geelong
3v5 - ESS v Coll (QF) - Collingwood
4v6 - Adelaide v Fremantle (QF) - Fremantle

Week 2
Richmond v Coll (QF) - Coll
WB v Fremantle (QF) - WB
ESS v Hawks (EF) - ESS
Geel v Adelaide (EF) - Adelaide

Week 3
Rich v ESS - ESS (SF)
Fremantle v Adelaide - Fremantle (SF)

Week 4
Coll v ESS - Coll (PF)
WB v Fremantle - WB (PF)

Week 5
GF
Coll v WB

So essentially you have two groups using a top 5 system, they each play their own groups in an old top 5 format and then the winners of week 4 play in the GF.