Opinion What unpopular AFL opinions do you have? - Part 2

[kickazz]

Allow throws, but they have to be caught by teammate on the full or it's a free against. No more need for HTB rule, as now a tackle simply makes it harder to achieve the aforementioned pass legally.

Not so much an opinion as an out there idea.


Edit: still have htb if you don't get rid of it at all.

 

[kickazz]

Didn't it used to be accumulation of the firsts, seconds and under 19s points? It was a champion club type trophy.

Yes it was. But they changed it once some of the non Vic team didn't have reserves or u19 teams.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

The McLelland trophy could be made more prestigious with one simple change: don't award it every year.

Award it only if you finish top and then go on to win the GF. Present it on the dais after the game and make it a distinctively better looking trophy than the premiership cup. Keep totals of who has won them.

It would actually be something aspire to.

That'd be good too, I think the British and Ireland nations do something similar in the Six Nations rugby with the grand slam?

 

[hutchy31]

That'd be good too, I think the British and Ireland nations do something similar in the Six Nations rugby with the grand slam?

No actual trophy for the grand slam, just the six nations trophy for whoever is on top (regardless of whether they went 5-0 or not). But I think the original point of this discussion was a good one, how do you make it more important who finished top?

If we had divisions/conferences it would be possible - the NFL have just done this by expanding the number of playoff teams in each conference to 7, with the 1 seed getting a bye and 2v7, 3v6 and 4v5. 1 seed then plays the lowest seed of the winners so benefits from having a bye that other teams don't have plus they play the lowest ranked team left out of their competitors.

To do it here you'd probably need to reduce the finals to 7 teams (rather than expand from 6 to 7 like the NFL have done for each conference). Then have:

Week 1: Minor premier has the bye, and 2v7, 3v6 and 4v5.

Week 2: PFs - Minor premier plays lowest seed remaining, other two teams play off.

Week 3: GF

AFL will never do that as it reduces finals from 9 to 6. But it would at least benefit the minor premier and make it pretty important.

 

[Billy ray]

have everyone play eachother once before double ups, and award it to the top team after round 17.

 

[Soggy2112]

have everyone play eachother once before double ups, and award it to the top team after round 17.

That’s a lot easier said then done

 

[Billy ray]

That’s a lot easier said then done

its really not.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

have everyone play eachother once before double ups, and award it to the top team after round 17.

Some will argue that 9 teams will have had an extra home game by then.

 

[Soggy2112]

its really not.

Theres heaps of different factors that go into making a draw that’s going to be fair as well as financially optimal that it’s not as simple as just playing every team once before double ups.

 

[kickazz]

Some will argue that 9 teams will have had an extra home game by then.

On that, if they ever went for a 17 round season you could have 8 home, 8 away and then woop woop round where everyone plays at a neutral venue like Darwin or Cairns etc.

 

[Scotland]

Intrigued on your logic about how having more teams diminishes it - I would have thought finishing on top of a longer ladder would carry more weight.

take your point re the draw

They mesh together.

Each team plays everyone once and then 5 teams twice. It doesn't always pan out but a team like Melbourne for example is supposed to have an easier fixture this year than Geelong, Brisbane and Port who were top 4 last year.

The impact is a bit more pronounced for non-Vic sides. In 2018 we played the other 3 top 4 teams once only, 1 at home and 2 away. 2019 we finished 5th and played all 4 top 4 teams away plus Collingwood home also. The difference in performance for us was 16 wins vs 15. Flip that around and we're playing all the top 4 sides at home and then away games against Gold Coast and St Kilda and it's an advantage.

TL;DR the ladder doesn't necessarily reflect what would happen in a full H&A season.

 

[deanc]

Allow throws, but they have to be caught by teammate on the full or it's a free against. No more need for HTB rule, as now a tackle simply makes it harder to achieve the aforementioned pass legally.

Not so much an opinion as an out there idea.


Edit: still have htb if you don't get rid of it at all.

The problem with allowing throws is - in a short space of time tackling would almost become obsolete, then you would soon have the game evolve into basically netball around stoppages with kicking and marking only used for longer passes and scoring..!?!?

I'm happy with some occasional tweaks in the rules but allowing the ball to be thrown would almost completely change the format of the game and I doubt anyone is ready for or will they accept that..!

 

[pz5151]

Didn't it used to be accumulation of the firsts, seconds and under 19s points? It was a champion club type trophy.

Yes. It's one of the most bizarre things to do, to randomly change what a trophy is for without changing the name.

 

[pz5151]

Another one:

Teams shouldn't get rewarded with an easier draw the year after finishing lower on the ladder. Why exactly do we punish teams for doing well?

 

[kickazz]

Another one:

Teams shouldn't get rewarded with an easier draw the year after finishing lower on the ladder. Why exactly do we punish teams for doing well?

That's more about making the draw fairer - if it was done randomly then the premier might get an easier draw than fourth, etc.

The punishment for a low finish is crappy timeslots.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

On that, if they ever went for a 17 round season you could have 8 home, 8 away and then woop woop round where everyone plays at a neutral venue like Darwin or Cairns etc.

A good fix. It'll probably rectify itself though if Tassie come in as the 19th team - 9 home and 9 away sorted.

Another one:

Teams shouldn't get rewarded with an easier draw the year after finishing lower on the ladder. Why exactly do we punish teams for doing well?

It's about those first 5-6 weeks, where the minnows are given false hope courtesy of being fixtured against one another. I've lost count of the number of times teams like Gold Coast have seemingly "turned the corner" after nailing 2-3 wins in that first month, only to descend into sub-mediocrity for the last 4 months of the season. But that early sugar hit sells memberships and, more importantly, puts eyes on TV screens.

 

[The_Eagles]

If what I hear and read occasionally that Testosterone in men is lower than 30-40-100 years ago I wonder if we have seen the best players ever already
Plugger, Senior, Matthews, the King etc
They do seem manlier I must admit ..

 

[Soggy2112]

If what I hear and read occasionally that Testosterone in men is lower than 30-40-100 years ago I wonder if we have seen the best players ever already
Plugger, Senior, Matthews, the King etc
They do seem manlier I must admit ..

The fact that Wayne Carey is considered manly is a blight on society.

 

[Ati Tude]

Another one:

Teams shouldn't get rewarded with an easier draw the year after finishing lower on the ladder. Why exactly do we punish teams for doing well?

The answer to all such questions is of course - money. The money hungry AFL want top teams playing each other more as it means more money - for TV rights, for attendance etc. It also, at least theoretically, should mean less blowouts and means crap teams aren't being smashed a couple of extra times and might snag a couple of more wins.

 

[Gethelred]

St.Kilda remain a blight on the Comp. They and North should never have been admitted to the VFL. Port Melbourne were really the go.

St.Kilda have added near zero to the comp, beyond W's in their Oppos win column for nearly a century.

I say amalgamate the resources of Carlton, North and the Saints and take back their licenses.

Issue new licenses to a viable mob in Tassie and Port Melbourne.

I think you're confused. The Stupid Ideas Thread was two threads further down.

 

[deanc]

A good fix. It'll probably rectify itself though if Tassie come in as the 19th team - 9 home and 9 away sorted.


It's about those first 5-6 weeks, where the minnows are given false hope courtesy of being fixtured against one another. I've lost count of the number of times teams like Gold Coast have seemingly "turned the corner" after nailing 2-3 wins in that first month, only to descend into sub-mediocrity for the last 4 months of the season. But that early sugar hit sells memberships and, more importantly, puts eyes on TV screens.

Just as an addition this false marketing, for want of a better term, also influences those that don't even support the so-called 'minnows'.
I've lost count of how many times some of my mates have said; 'Gee, looks like Dew has got his kids playing a good system, reckon they're a real chance to play finals this year! My usual response is simply; 'Really, who have they beaten thus far..?'

 

[sobrave]

The fact that Wayne Carey is considered manly is a blight on society.

Notice the "manly" players are all violent thugs, at least half with criminal records.

 

[Quivorir]

If what I hear and read occasionally that Testosterone in men is lower than 30-40-100 years ago I wonder if we have seen the best players ever already
Plugger, Senior, Matthews, the King etc
They do seem manlier I must admit ..

What does manlier mean?

 

[simba_]

it means they don't full body wax and take selfies of it and send them off to teenagers looking for their 100th ice cream. internet beta cuck behaviour rife with these young chaps

 

[Percel]

The fact that Wayne Carey is considered manly is a blight on society.

To be compared to the great Malcolm is an honour, deserving