The Eagles will not win the flag this year, and you know this, so it doesn't support your argument. Having a bad run of injuries MAY discount you for 2016, but (again), how many teams have won from 10th or lower the previous year? Facts this time please.

Yeah, [censored] off Eagles. I don't know why you are bothering?

And I gave the fact of Adelaide in 97 winning the flag. From 12th in 96.

Port Adelaide were 12th in 2006 before making the big one in 07.

Clubs exist to win flags.

They do not exist to play in some mickey mouse league where you are 'biding time' for the following year.

And why are we doing this?

So we have less irrelevant games in a season?!

Hello? Suddenly there are 9 irrelevant clubs from Rd 1!

Edited June 8, 201114 yr by rpfc

This could be an out there proposition but its just an idea...

Firstly, you could actually just the game as it is, it's done pretty well to this point in time, do we really need to tinker with it too much?

Secondly, the problem with fairness is that every team doesn't play each other twice so the fixture is uneven. You can't extend out the season as players will complain about the toll on their bodies, injuries etc. What about though dropping the game length to say a flat 80 minutes, this shouldnt be so taxing on the body, aides in recovery. Could then play games with a shorter break between them, maybe 4-5 days, football gets played almost every night of the week. Borrowing the super 15 idea, can give bonus points for teams that say score over 100 in the game which then hopefully promotes more attacking games. You may still get the 'nothing' games towards the end of the year but I really think this almost cannot be avoided, but maybe look at the draft lottery system in the nba for an idea. Also if bonus points for the scoring, this could at least keep the footy interesting. With the game being longer, it at least isnt that long a time to watch some rubbish footy.

This of course is just an idea, kind of fleshing it out as I was typing it, but I dont like the relegation system as I do think it will kill the lessor clubs.

My third idea is to make the ball round, not let you touch it with your hands, bring in offside rules but this feels like its already been done before....

Hahaha.....interesting ideas. I seriously doubt the AFL will change the points of difference which this game has, and the length of the game is a biggie, as is the scoring system. In the context of the draft and salary cap, can you explain to me how the relegation promotion system will kill the lesser clubs?

That's the way I see it rpfc.

Sorry Webber, I don't think audiences and gate taking would increase.

I think it actually diminishes the care factor.

I really like it and have been thinking the same for quite a while - it eliminates the all the dead-rubbers that we're going to have and really keeps the season alive for all 18 teams all the way through 25 rounds. There's no reason we shouldn't be in the top 9 with the salary cap and draft retained. There'll be more interest in games in teams down the ladder than ever. You'd get 70K to a Richmond-Melbourne round 25 game if relegation-promotion was at stake.

I too like it... . I also dont mind a conference system either. All things have their appeal, all ideas have theoir respective pros and cons. Some will dismiss it out of hand sometimes for ill-considered bias.

I can see, on the surface , how many would think that the lower tier would suffer from a perceived lesser media attention...This might hold water, but then it might not. The apetite for things footy, indded sport in this country knows no real bounds. You would however then have effectively a competition within a competition but this may actually make for closer more competitive hitouts. Often those lower on the pecking order will know they have not much really to play for in a season. You could argue those beyond the door of the eight are already playing a defacto second tier but without any promise of any reward for trying any harder than required.. With the prize of elevation things might just get a bit more 'real' .

id be interested to see ( hear) what the clubs think of it.

Completely forgot!

Geelong won from 10th in 2007!

So that GF wouldn't have happened because the best two teams that year were from the '2nd Division'!!

lol

What a stupid idea. The more I think about it, the more I think we got the right Schwab!

Yeah, [censored] off Eagles. I don't know why you are bothering?

And I gave the fact of Adelaide in 97 winning the flag. From 12th in 96.

Port Adelaide were 12th in 2006 before making the big one in 07.

Clubs exist to win flags.

They do not exist to play in some mickey mouse league where you are 'biding time' for the following year.

And why are we doing this?

So we have less irrelevant games in a season?!

Hello? Suddenly there are 9 irrelevant clubs from Rd 1!

Making the grand final is not winning it. So Adelaide then, that's it? My club would be far from irrelevant to me if I felt they were a chance to be promoted that year. Would they to you? Really? Do you think we will win the flag this year? Of course you don't, and don't give me the idea that it's the 'possibility' we will, cos that would be BS. Are we irrelevant based on the fact that we won't win the flag this year? You write with passion about this club, so I suspect not.

Completely forgot!

Geelong won from 10th in 2007!

So that GF wouldn't have happened because the best two teams that year were from the '2nd Division'!!

lol

What a stupid idea. The more I think about it, the more I think we got the right Schwab!

You're forgetting that 10th in tier 2 gets you promoted, so it doesn't eliminate Geelong does it?

You're forgetting that 10th in tier 2 gets you promoted, so it doesn't eliminate Geelong does it?

Yes it does!

That performance in 2006 would have got them relegated. They would have finished at the bottom of Div 1 in 2006 and been relegated.

And then the 2007 flag doesn't happen and your grandfather was never born and the Soviets won the Cold War...

Edited June 8, 201114 yr by rpfc

My idea is not changing the scoring system in games, just the 4 points you get for the win becomes say 5 if you kick over 100.

Where I think it will kill lessor teams is through the sponsorship drop off, even ability to attact players if you are in the second division. If this can be made up through an even bigger equalisation payout from the AFL, then it could possibly be an option. If not though, this is where the death will occur. Without the makeup in sponsorship dollars or revenue for the clubs in the second division, they will really struggle to pay their players even if there is a cap in place. If you made the cap so low though that they could still afford the players, presumably the big clubs making the big dollars in the first division will pump this excess funds into their football departments to further widen this gap with the second division clubs such as collingwood is somewhat doing now. They become that much further advanced in their off-field areas that you end up with similar situation in the EPL now in that the same clubs seem to go up and down all the time.

In fact, if you look back at Schwab's plan, 12th puts you in the promotion/relegation playoffs. Something I didn't understand at first. The more I look at it, the fairer and smarter the idea looks. I reckon we should get the Schwab brothers together at MFC.

Your whole answer lives or dies on the idea that the AFL 'would not risk its franchises being in a second division'. You talk about this 'franchise' idea like Collingwood are Man U and North Melbourne are East Scunthorpe. Their is no such franchise domination in the AFL. Of MUCH more concern and value (monetary as well) to the AFL will be to maintain existing supporter bases, and grow the fidelity to each. This all smacks of an 'us and them' mentality, when clearly (and the AFL knows this)it is not in their interests to foster a monopolistic competition. It is for precisely this reason that the salary cap and draft were incorporated. Who devised them?....the big, bad AFL!

My whole answer does not live or die on the risking franchises being in 2nd division. that was just one of a few reasons I gave. I don't know why I am bothering to reply if you can't even read my reply in its entirety

I put 'franchises' in quotes for a good reason. The 'franchises' I was referring to (as you well know) were the teams the AFL bankrolls in the Northern states of NSW and QLD. The AFL has 100's of millions invested in them and from their POV the growing of the code in these states is a higher priority than making the competition 'fairer'

No, my main objection is that Scwabby's 'scheme' would impoverish some clubs quicker than the current scheme

P.S. I didn't mention the salary cap and draft. I talked of sponsorship and membership drop-off. I really wish you'd read my post.

In fact, if you look back at Schwab's plan, 12th puts you in the promotion/relegation playoffs. Something I didn't understand at first. The more I look at it, the fairer and smarter the idea looks. I reckon we should get the Schwab brothers together at MFC.

Those that decry the notion of a two-tiered system ( as put by Schwabb ) will overlook such a view ^^^ ...wont suit their argument....so they'll be out-of-hand dismissive of it..

In fact, if you look back at Schwab's plan, 12th puts you in the promotion/relegation playoffs. Something I didn't understand at first. The more I look at it, the fairer and smarter the idea looks. I reckon we should get the Schwab brothers together at MFC.

Great...

My issue is with the relegation part of it.

We are in our window and we have a horror run with injury. We get relegated, and have a year of irrelevance while still being in the top echelon of clubs.

What a [Censored] nightmare.

Hell, this might be the difference between us actually winning a flag and not...

Vote NO on Proposition 64!

Edited June 8, 201114 yr by Demonland
Swearing censored

All the posts making comparisons to the NFL and EPL are ridiculous, paranoid reactions. The EPL is the most illogical comparison, for one simple fact.....it has no salary cap and no draft, therefore NO possibility of fairness.... NIL. It is a fantastically dull competition for that reason, and bears no philosophical comparison to the AFL. It's only attraction is that you get the best players across about 6 clubs, which arguably creates an elite 'representative' standard. But it is just woeful for supporters outside the main 6. It's a classic monopoly.

Brendan Schwab's idea is inspired. He has managed to created a situation where every team still plays every other, keeps the salary cap and draft (of which supporters of the AFL should be enormously proud when compared to other sporting competitions worldwide), and rewards consistent on field performance.

The real attraction, which is stated in the article, is that it brings relevance to pretty much EVERY game, and that means relevance for the future. We do not have that in the AFL now. The latter third of the season for up to 6 clubs, currently becomes an exercise in playing out the season, where cynically jockeying for draft picks becomes a soul-destroying exercise.

One of it's clear attractions for me is that it does away with the ham-fisted fixture massaging that season to season gives some clubs an easier/more difficult run than others. Arguably, we have an easy run this year, but I can admit it is unfair. The idea that this evens out over several seasons, is nonsensical for the very reason that teams rise and fall over this same period. Schwab's idea is much fairer from the fixturing perspective.

Change will come to the AFL, and with expansion, there is nothing surer than that the competition WILL split. Schwab's method as to how to do this, seems elegant and fair to me.

All the other competitions in the world don't have what we have - a lop sided spread of clubs. We have 10 clubs in Melbourne. ANd the stadium deals we have are not experienced by other codes.

WE DO NOT HAVE AN EVEN COMPETITION. Stop talking trash about salary caps and drafts - If you want equality fix the stadium deals and the fixture.

Bone headed idea.

Those that decry the notion of a two-tiered system ( as put by Schwabb ) will overlook such a view ^^^ ...wont suit their argument....so they'll be out-of-hand dismissive of it..

Right here.

R.P.F.C.

If you need help spelling it.

Webber still can't see that the Geelong flag would not have happened and they were easily the best team in the comp - easily.

They would have been relegated from Div 1 in 2006 and be in Div 2 in 2007 and the best team would have not won and Geelong wouldn't have broken their duck and Mark Thompson would be coaching Nunawading.

Edited June 8, 201114 yr by rpfc

And why are we doing this?

So we have less irrelevant games in a season?!

Hello? Suddenly there are 9 irrelevant clubs from Rd 1!

Zing.

Why is it?

In an 18-team comp, if you are 4 games out of the eight by round 11 you are basically out of contention with half a season to go. You're playing for draft picks, which is ridiculous.

The current system already has this unhealthy feel to it and it will only get worse with another team added to the mix (and possibly Tazzy and an unknown 20th team in years to come).

Soccer has perfected the relegation system. Just have a look at the ferocious battles that occur in the English Premier League right through until the final day of the season as sides desperately try to "stay up" or get promoted. A relegation/promotion scrap between Bolton and West Ham can be just as suspenseful and entertaining as a top of the table clash between Man U and Chelsea.

Locally, football leagues such as the VAFA use this type of system and anyone who follows amateur clubs will attest to how exciting things can be right until the final round of the year.

Frankly I don't see how the AFL can avoid going down that path.

You make the first 10 picks a lottery between the bottom 10 sides

Absolutely terrible that a division 2 club can't play finals. The top 8 clubs according to games won from each division should be playing finals

Right here.

R.P.F.C.

If you need help spelling it.

Webber still can't see that the Geelong flag would not have happened and they were easily the best team in the comp - easily.

They would have been relegated from Div 1 in 2006 and be in Div 2 in 2007 and the best team would have not won and Geelong wouldn't have broken their duck and Mark Thompson would be coaching Nunawading.

right on cue.

You have no way of knowing how such games may or may not have panned out. ..And for the best part its irrelevant as your imposing a retrospectivity when none is warranted. Its going forward. Were dealing with a 18 team comp in this matter not the 16 team comp of 2007 etc..

but hey...coontinue your disnissiveness...youre quite good at it.

right on cue.

You have no way of knowing how such games may or may not have panned out. ..And for the best part its irrelevant as your imposing a retrospectivity when none is warranted. Its going forward. Were dealing with a 18 team comp in this matter not the 16 team comp of 2007 etc..

but hey...coontinue your disnissiveness...youre quite good at it.

I'll never take your crown, BB...

The fact remains that this 'division' of the comp would have stopped a Geelong 2007 scenario.

Poor Bobby Davis.

This idea is designed to reduce irrelevant games, it doesn't achieve that at all - it increases them.

Have two conferences if you want them but leave relegation to Eurpoean football leagues.

Absolutely terrible that a division 2 club can't play finals. The top 8 clubs according to games won from each division should be playing finals

They would effectively play finals ... promotion battles that would draw massive crowds as a previous poster suggested.

Yes, you are removing the the possibility of the 'anomalous' fairytale premiership push from 10th as the detractors keep stating, but that is a small price to pay for keeping the compeition 'alive' each year for the majority of other clubs who, under the present system, have the cue in the rack by round 11. With yet another club to be added to the mix, that is not 'çompetition'. It's a recipe for apathy and disinterest among supporters.

I like the draft lottery system, too and would add that to the mix. But only for the bottom 9 clubs.

Edited June 8, 201114 yr by Range Rover

They would effectively play finals ... promotion battles that would draw massive crowds as a previous poster suggested.

Yes, you are removing the the possibility of the 'anomalous' fairytale premiership push from 10th as the detractors keep stating, but that is a small price to pay for keeping the compeition 'alive' each year for the majority of other clubs who already have the cue in the rack under the current system.

I like the draft lottery system, too and would add that to the mix. But only for the bottom 9 clubs.

We are quickly reaching a paradox here.

If a promotion/relegation game between Richmond and Melbourne is such a big game then there has to be an inherent gap between the top league and the bottom league. If there is such a gap, then how can clubs survive in such a league?

All Friday, Sat night games will be Div 1 teams.

The sponsors will go to the teams that have a chance to play in the 'real' league.

And an 'injury riddled season' now becomes an 2 year project of irrelevance. Flag windows are cut in half.

Revenue and membership fluctuates wildly.

Not going to happen.

We are quickly reaching a paradox here.

If a promotion/relegation game between Richmond and Melbourne is such a big game then there has to be an inherent gap between the top league and the bottom league. If there is such a gap, then how can clubs survive in such a league?

All Friday, Sat night games will be Div 1 teams.

The sponsors will go to the teams that have a chance to play in the 'real' league.

And an 'injury riddled season' now becomes an 2 year project of irrelevance. Flag windows are cut in half.

Revenue and membership fluctuates wildly.

Not going to happen.

There is some validity in your points (albeit I think you're overstating them) but they get outweighed IMO by the sheer, despressing irrelevance many club's supporters will continue to feel as their sides play dead rubber nothing matches in the second half of the season.

Surely you have to acknowledge that this is a major problem?

As opposed to the irrelevance of playing the ENTIRE season in an inferior division?

There is some validity in your points (albeit I think you're overstating them) but they get outweighed IMO by the sheer, despressing irrelevance many club's supporters will continue to feel as their sides play dead rubber nothing matches in the second half of the season.

Surely you have to acknowledge that this is a major problem?

Yes, it is a problem.

But that problem is not solved by making supporters endure that sheer, depressing irrelevance from round one...

You may say that there are more meaningful matches toward the end of the season, and I would counter and say that the start of the season in Div 2 would contain irrelevant matches attended by not many fans because what is the point?

"All I can hope for this year is an invitation to next year's Div 1 comp."

That'll get the fans excited...

Edited June 8, 201114 yr by rpfc