Eddie McGuire wants AFL preseason winner to be granted finals berth

Immediate problem - what if the difference between the 12th and 13th team when his mini finals begin is a small percentage difference. Or even points but team on 12th had a much easier draw up to that point.  I expect the team on 13th would not be happy to miss out on a chance at the finals.

And if the NAB winner proves to be hopeless during the season, which lucky team gets to play them in the finals.

From my recollection we don't play a preseason competition as such now, it's more a bunch of practice games as there is no GF and no real winner. Seemed the clubs wanted it this way.

Are Eddie's ratings flagging?

Is he feeling unloved?

Poor Ed....

Keep it simple silly is a pretty appropriate call for this idea. 

More about Eddie keeping his face in the news.

I don't bother now to read anything he says.

He's just part of the firm now.

I think the AFL needs to find a way to develop a fairer fixture whereby each club plays every other club an equal number of times. Whether that means a 17 game season or introducing conferences, I'm not sure, but I think Eddie's finals proposition for the most part is pretty ridiculous.

10 minutes ago, Good Times Grimes said:

I think the AFL needs to find a way to develop a fairer fixture whereby each club plays every other club an equal number of times. Whether that means a 17 game season or introducing conferences, I'm not sure, but I think Eddie's finals proposition for the most part is pretty ridiculous.

3 conferences - 6 each

play own conference twice, others once ( 5x2=10 + 12x1=12 - total 22 games)

top 2 in each conference to finals plus 2 wildcards gives a final 8

easy peasy

8 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

3 conferences - 6 each

play own conference twice, others once ( 5x2=10 + 12x1=12 - total 22 games)

top 2 in each conference to finals plus 2 wildcards gives a final 8

easy peasy

That is a good setup but the only issue for me is the wildcards. 

A final 12 to play off in finals to improve his Pies chances?

12 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

3 conferences - 6 each

play own conference twice, others once ( 5x2=10 + 12x1=12 - total 22 games)

top 2 in each conference to finals plus 2 wildcards gives a final 8

easy peasy

Some will travel much much further than others by virtue of who is in your conference.

It also means the same teams will get 2 games against big-drawing clubs like Collingwood every year, while others only get 1 max.

It's difficult developing a system that isn't imperfect.

I reckon a final 16 is the go. Only those battling out the spoon don't get a look in 

Every now and then Eddie comes out with something interesting. 

This isn't it.

just another attempt to find some way to give Collingwood another chance at getting into the finals without getting into the final 8. Nice try eddie, but final 8 is more than enough as those in 6-8 position really are only also rans to pad out the finals.

I like how everything Eddie suggests benefits Collingwood.

 

You can be sure the Collingwobbles will be finishing 13th and still make the finals.

I think Eddies chins are choking off the blood supply to his brain.

I just read it and it seems a pretty good idea.

 

18 minutes ago, Franky_31 said:

I just read it and it seems a pretty good idea.

 

Me too, I think we need a change but if you only play once who do you determine travel?

 

I like the quote of taking "fix" out of fixture, completely random and no one can whinge 

Utter garbage.

There is always a push from certain corners (usually the ones that stand to profit) to make pre-season practice matches more than they are.  The should be about bringing players up to match-fitness, implementing and refining gameplans, and allowing players to practice with new team mates or positions.

That's not to mention the utter absurdity of 'wildcards' where teams are allowed to play off against teams that have earned the privileged.  The entire concept cheapens the concept of finals football.     

I had to actually listen to the audio to understand what he means.

As I understand it, the top 12 after 17 rounds play off in the last 6 rounds to form a top 10.

Bottom 6 play off for an 11th wildcard spot. The NAB Cup winner takes up the 12th spot in the finals. I don't know what happens if the NAB Cup winner finishes in the top 10. I assume the team finishing 11th comes in.

I immediately hate the idea of 12 teams in an 18 team comp playing finals, and the pre-season is meant to be a hit out rather than competitive. A team that wins the NAB could potentially spend the rest of the season preparing the team for finals. Teams on the edge of the bottom six could tank in order to play weaker teams for a wildcard entry. There are so many potential downfalls.

I don't mind the teams playing each other once for 17 rounds as a starting point, but there should be no more than 8 teams playing finals. History tell us it's invariably only the top 4 that has a chance of winning it.

Agree with P man

12/18 playing finals is just too much reward for mediocrity

 

 

12 in finals - terrible

Nab cup in finals - laughable

Bottom 6 playing off for 5 weeks - shithouse

11th and 12th missing out in finals for those 2 above - also bad

This is Eddie's plan to guarantee 2 or 3 home games in the final 5 rounds against big drawing in contention for finals opponents. Once he schedules his home games against Carl, Ess, Richmond, Hawthorn in the first 17 rounds he's guaranteed most of his 11 home games will be big crowds.

The teams who end up stuck in the bottom 6 (and it won't be Collingwood any time soon) for any more than 1 or 2 years will be completely stuffed as they won't play good opponents or draw crowds, becoming reliant on the AFL and therefore by comparison Eddie increases his power.

Eddies idea itself is as stupid as I have ever heard.  So stupid in fact that it scares me intensely that the AFL 'rule changers' may in fact think its a reasonable idea.  Really.  I'm scared.  His point about making the bottom half interesting and meaningful needs exploring though.  But not with the shite he just offered up.  I dont have any clue what to do but having lived in the Uk for over ten years and getting 'into the EPL and world football in general, I have to say that one of the real genius of football competitions worldwide are the relegation battles.  Its pretty simple really.  The bottom clubs are fighting for their lives.  They have to earn the right to participate in the premier league.  Makes for exciting, emotional stuff.  Great for fans.  Or break your heart.  Of course I get it that most of us aussies cannot fathom this idea.  In fact I dont even reckon we would be emotionally strong enough to deal with a Melbourne/Collingwood relegation game.  I'd be all over the place!  Anyway we are petracking towards not being in relegation battles in the future (if they were to happen). As for where the second tier competition comes from well I dunno, but, you could start with unifying WAFL, SANFL, QAFL, VFL etc etc, into one competition. Conference these all up (NCAA style)and call it the Championship say.   Winners of this granny and the minor premiership, goes up, wooden spooners and second last of afl go down.  Imagine.  We need to beat Collingwood (losing doesnt matter as we are sitting on top, 12 points clear)to ensure their relegation to having to play a regular home and away game at North Ballarat.  Wouldnt even have to be the pies.  Saints, doggies, cats, hawks, any of them, all of them.  Of course, stadium size at some of these non traditional afl clubs is a problem.  But it's not mine.     

17 minutes ago, pinkshark said:

Eddies idea itself is as stupid as I have ever heard.  So stupid in fact that it scares me intensely that the AFL 'rule changers' may in fact think its a reasonable idea.  Really.  I'm scared.  His point about making the bottom half interesting and meaningful needs exploring though.  But not with the shite he just offered up.  I dont have any clue what to do but having lived in the Uk for over ten years and getting 'into the EPL and world football in general, I have to say that one of the real genius of football competitions worldwide are the relegation battles.  Its pretty simple really.  The bottom clubs are fighting for their lives.  They have to earn the right to participate in the premier league.  Makes for exciting, emotional stuff.  Great for fans.  Or break your heart.  Of course I get it that most of us aussies cannot fathom this idea.  In fact I dont even reckon we would be emotionally strong enough to deal with a Melbourne/Collingwood relegation game.  I'd be all over the place!  Anyway we are petracking towards not being in relegation battles in the future (if they were to happen). As for where the second tier competition comes from well I dunno, but, you could start with unifying WAFL, SANFL, QAFL, VFL etc etc, into one competition. Conference these all up (NCAA style)and call it the Championship say.   Winners of this granny and the minor premiership, goes up, wooden spooners and second last of afl go down.  Imagine.  We need to beat Collingwood (losing doesnt matter as we are sitting on top, 12 points clear)to ensure their relegation to having to play a regular home and away game at North Ballarat.  Wouldnt even have to be the pies.  Saints, doggies, cats, hawks, any of them, all of them.  Of course, stadium size at some of these non traditional afl clubs is a problem.  But it's not mine.     

No thanks. The biggest problem with relegation (and there are many) is that it means only a select handful of teams can win the league as they are the powerful teams who don't ever have to think about relegation. The majority of teams will either be battling relegation or in mid table mediocrity. There are other issues as well but the 2nd biggest might be that there isn't enough money or interest for a proper 2nd tier league in Australia.

Making games between bottom teams meaningful is a dumb idea to cater for neutral supporters. It's mainly journo's or league administrators who call for things like this.

It's only something that's become popular since every game has been shown on TV (and live at that) and the simple solution to avoid "meaningless games" between bottom teams is to change the channel! They are usually on at non peak times anyway.

Every Melbourne game is interesting to me and same for true fans of both teams competing in dead rubber games. And games of bottom teams v top teams should be interesting for the upset scuttling the plans of the top team. Unfortunately upsets have been rare over the last 5-10 years of terrible inequality between top and bottom teams. Back in the 90's and early 2000's there were a lot more upsets. 

I think his broad idea has some merit. Maybe with some rejjiging.  Not 12 team finals though. I have thought along similar lines for a while. There needs to be some incentive for struggling clubs to play out the season. Under the current format, too many struggling clubs shut up shop early and make a yawn fest mockery of the second half of the season.  There is no incentive  to improve and no fear of relegation or worse.  Disgraceful performances by us the the second half of last season and for the past decade  say hello.  Another formula for spicing up pre season  games would be for pre season cup winners to be granted premium games the following season.  Like a handsome  guaranteed slice of Saturday night games or hosting  ANZAC day for example. 

Edited January 27, 20169 yr by america de cali

Having HALF the teams in the finals is ridiculous enough.Any attention should be directed at refining the number of finalists not admitting randoms.

3 hours ago, daisycutter said:

3 conferences - 6 each

play own conference twice, others once ( 5x2=10 + 12x1=12 - total 22 games)

top 2 in each conference to finals plus 2 wildcards gives a final 8

easy peasy

yep.

2 wild cards to be the 2 teams with the best record overall that arent in the top 2 of their group.

RE group composition - Make it a TV event. Draw balls out of a hat or something. the fixtures can follow later.