? Would a final "Top Ten" compensate for the inequitable home and away fixture.

[Clark G]

When the AFL had a final five or six out of fourteen or fifteen teams, did people consider this 'restricted'?

 

[JoondalupJ]

How does a final-6 make what you are watching on the field, "real footy" ??

Well for starters 7 and 8 haven't got a bloody hope have they NOW, and never will , so have ten teams and you can have 6 no hope premiers and 4 that will play the end out AND MAYBE EVERY 100 YEARS 5 MIGHT SHOW aa la Adelaide Crows . Its really simple . Why play games you aren,t going to win. No 10 in the finals may have lost over half the games they played, they've got no hope. There's no more to say, its just logic and fact.
Its about TV money, not about the game the reality of the game, do you understand that? Its about real chances playing each other, its not about letting Raddish race against Pharlap cause raddish wouldn't make the finish line, do you see yet.

 

[Father Jack]

14 points between 1st and 12th in 1993 (an anomalous year, but still), with a rampaging Geelong missing out on 6th spot by percentage was one year where i think you could say we did.

Looking back at other years, Essendon in '92 finished two games and nearly thirty percentage points out of sixth (getting flogged by Hawthorn by 160 points doesn't help) in 8th place, so it is fair to say that they would have been out of contention for a good month beforehand (they had a bye, a win, a loss and a hammering in that month) so that's 8 teams cooling their heels from late July (but even then Adelaide managed to thump ladder leaders Geelong by 90 odd points a couple of rounds out from the end).

Even now with half the teams making it we are torn between finishing as high as possible on the ladder or going for draft picks once out of realistic finals contention. This is a problem that didn't really exist back then.

 

[compass]

Also, we should ask ourselves what the finals are all about? In my opinion, they serve multiple proposes.

Firstly, and obviously, to find the premier side. But there are a couple of secondary roles for the finals. One of which is for the top teams to prove themselves under the intensity of a final series. But another important role is for the weaker teams (in the finals) to test themselves against the strong sides. This latter point is not as fully appreciated as it should.

A lot of premier sides strengthened their future campaigns by participating in tough finals when they finished 5th 6th 7th or even 8th. Take Collingwood a couple of years ago when they finished 8th and won a tough final in Adelaide. Or Hawthorn, a year before they won the flag, with 2 tough finals in '07.

So if we go with 10 teams we achieve a number of aims. We let more teams the opportunity to build their future premiership campaigns. We make sure more H&A games are meaningful. And by doing this we even help the teams that eventually miss out, because they would have to play a more intense type of footy week in week out, instead of wasting their latter part of the season “playing” for picks.

So for those we say what’s the point if 10th would never win it, I say, this is not what it’s all about.

 

[Dan26]

Well for starters 7 and 8 haven't got a bloody hope have they NOW, and never will

Well, that remains to be seen. But suppose you are right and they have no chance. So what? If they have no chance, why do you fear letting them in the finals? At the very least it keeps the home and away seaosn alive for more teams and creates less dead rubbers.

so have ten teams and you can have 6 no hope premiers.

Well, under a knockout final-10, 5th and 6th are in the same posiiton as 3rd and 4th (excpet they play away to 3rd and 4th in the second week after all those 4 teams have a bye in the first week) so the top-6 would all have a chance at the flag (all would need to win 3 finals.) Only, 7,8,9 and 10 would have little chance. But so what? So what, if 7,8,9 and 10 have hardly any chance?

If they have no chance, why do you worry about having them in it?

Why play games you aren,t going to win.

They are always a chance to win. No one is ever a 0% chance of winning an individual game. Maybe they (9th or 10th) have little hope of winning 4 finals consecutively, but to suggest that they shouldn't play a game they arent going to win is stupid because every individual game taken in isolation, is a chance for either team to win.

There's no more to say, its just logic and fact.

All you've said is that 7,8,9,10 have little chance of winning the flag. I agree. I also say, so what? So friggin what if they have hardly any chance?

Its about TV money, not about the game the reality of the game, do you understand that? Its about real chances playing each other, its not about letting Raddish race against Pharlap cause raddish wouldn't make the finish line, do you see yet.

Of course money is an issue. DUH! Having a final-10 keeps the season alive for more teams, creating less dead rubbers. Does it disadvantage the top teams? I say no. If the top teams are good enough they will still win. West Coast won the flag in 1994, in a 15-team comp, when 8 teams made the finals.

Was 1994 a bad season? Was something wrong with the set-up that year? Was West Coast's premiership chances compromised by having 8 teams make the finals? No. All the final-8 did that year was create more interest late in the season in the lead in to the finals.

The final-8 in 1994 was clearly good for footy. Not the system itself (which was crap) but the fact that 8 teams were allowed to make the finals was good for footy.

 

[FootyJunkie]

i secretly think the AFL want a Final 10 to ensure Vic representation

1987-90 - 3 non vic sides, final 5
1991-93 - 4 non vic sides, final 6
1994 - 4 non vic sides, final 8
1995-96 - 5 non vic sides, final 8
1997-2010 - 6 non vic sides, final 8 (2003, all 6 made it)
2011 - 7 non vic sides, final 8 (worst case, could only have one vic side make it)
2012-? - 8 non vic sides, final 10?

 

[Father Jack]

well, if the competition increases, it will be via non-Vic sides, so I really don't follow your logic ...

 

[FootyJunkie]

well, if the competition increases, it will be via non-Vic sides, so I really don't follow your logic ...

with more non-vic sides, the (unlikely) possibility that all 8 spots could be taken up by all of them remains... hence the AFL expanding the final series

silly... but all 6 non vic sides did make the finals in 2003

 

[Dan26]

with more non-vic sides, the (unlikely) possibility that all 8 spots could be taken up by all of them remains... hence the AFL expanding the final series

silly... but all 6 non vic sides did make the finals in 2003

You're deluded if you think that. That's right up there with conspiracy theories like the faked moon landing.

For what it's worth, the statistical probability of all 10 Victorian teams making the final-10 in an 18 team comp is 0.002%

Yes, that is 1 in 50,000.

And if that did happen, how would that be any different to 8 Victorian sides making it in a final-8? Is this some sort of "deluded brain" theory from people that live in a state other than Victoria?

 

[Dan26]

with more non-vic sides, the (unlikely) possibility that all 8 spots could be taken up by all of them remains... hence the AFL expanding the final series

The chances of all 8 non-Vic sides making a final-8 are 1 in 43,758

 

[Father Jack]

The chances of all 8 non-Vic sides making a final-8 are 1 in 43,758

whew, lucky for us they got the whole MCC contract thing sorted out.

 

[kouta70]

Was against a top 10 but the OP makes a good point.

Why not? There has always been arguements about the draw. The top 10 ends this.

No more can a team say we had a tough draw, we had to travell etc. If you can't get in the 10 then you really shouldn't be there

 

[roostersgal4eva]

Nope

when GWS comes in there will be 8 'interstate teams' there is NO excuse for every vic club to travel any less then 8times per year during the regular season (and no travelling 2 hrs to geelong doesnt count!)

Brings me to another bug bear....why in the fxxxx are West Coast/Freo made to play in Tassie - dont they earn enough frequent flyer points as it is?????

 

[Dan26]

Nope

when GWS comes in there will be 8 'interstate teams' there is NO excuse for every vic club to travel any less then 8times per year during the regular season (and no travelling 2 hrs to geelong doesnt count!)

Take your average Victorian club. They will play 5 teams twice and 12 teams once for their 22 games.

Non Vic sides make up 8 of their 17 opponents (47%).

So, 47% of the 5 teams they play twice (so either 2 or 3) will be non Vic sides and about the same number of sides they play once (5 or 6 out of the 12 sides they play once)

So, if they play 3 non-Vic sides twice that is three guaranteed travel games. And suppose they play 6 non-Vic sides once, half of those will be at home and half away.

So, that's 6 travel games (and that's supposing they play 3 non-Vic sides twice and not 2. If it's 2, it would only be 5 travel games.)

So, not counting home games sold interstate, the average Victoriann club should travel 5-6 times per year, which is more than enough.

Any Victorian side that travels 8 times (excluding home games sold interstate) is getting totally screwed. Eight travel games would be totally unfair, unless they played 8 home games versus travelling opponents to balance it out equally.

 

[FootyJunkie]

The chances of all 8 non-Vic sides making a final-8 are 1 in 43,758

 

[Consolaçao]

I realise that two wrongs don't make a right...but think about it. Given that the home and away fixture will always be compromised because not all teams play each other twice a Final Top Ten would most times give a good team with a bad draw at least some sort of reasonable chance to make the finals. In other words if you can't make the finals you can't blame the dodgy fixture.

silly.

name me a side that hasn't managed to make a top eight, but that you think would've won a flag had they had a friendlier draw.

 

[Father Jack]

silly.

name me a side that hasn't managed to make a top eight, but that you think would've won a flag had they had a friendlier draw.

what's wrong with simply making the top eight and taking it from there? No need to put the cart before the horse.

 

[speedpeck23]

Was against a top 10 but the OP makes a good point.

Why not? There has always been arguements about the draw. The top 10 ends this.

No more can a team say we had a tough draw, we had to travell etc. If you can't get in the 10 then you really shouldn't be there

Wow !! It finally happened !!

 

[NetworkNerd]

Hopefully marvel tenants can host their wildcard games at Marvel stadium.

Or Geelong at GMHBA too.. but finishing 7th/8th is rare for them and unlikely to happen any time soon

 

[Obeanie1]

Considering Collingwoods list looks aging and on the decline no.

They still make finals after finishing 10th.

Their 14 games at the MCG even with a weaker rebuilding list gets them finals.

 

[crows dude]

Considering Collingwoods list looks aging and on the decline no.

They still make finals after finishing 10th.

Their 14 games at the MCG even with a weaker rebuilding list gets them finals.

I used to complain about this to. But really is it any different to what we have. Crows and Port currently with gather round play 13 at Adelaide Oval. West Coast and Freo play 12 at Perth Stadium. Collingwood games at MCg are also against other MCG tenants which ours are not unless we are playing Port. So its not as bad as it seem.

 

[Sttew]

I used to complain about this to. But really is it any different to what we have. Crows and Port currently with gather round play 13 at Adelaide Oval. West Coast and Freo play 12 at Perth Stadium. Collingwood games at MCg are also against other MCG tenants which ours are not unless we are playing Port. So its not as bad as it seem.

And until 2025 Geelong got 9 games at GMHBA, increased to 10 in 2025. However a "top 10" is a money-grabbing joke.