The 17-5 season

[Diamond_Jim 12,590]

You need to look at it four sections and then consider the overall pros and cons.

They are the impact upon the comp caused by the 17 round uncompromised draw and then each group of six.

Frankly I am still trying to work it out but I like the idea of the uncompromised draw which I assume would alternate year by year on a home and away basis. Ideally I would like to see no venue shifting... ie Geelong plays home at Kardinia Park against all teams and we play home at the MCG against all teams etc. (Yes I know it is unlikely with games in Darwin, Alice Springs Launceston etc but it would be good to aspire to such an outcome)

As to the remaining pros and cons I'm still thinking

[Delusional demon 82 1,197]

Don't like this conference idea one bit, it stinks too much of NBA/ NFL franchise stuff , may as well throw in a halftime show ,  lots of fireworks, motorbikes cheerleaders and be done with it ! 

Seriously don't see what is so broken with the current system, yes it's not perfectly fair , but fixturing never will be will TVs rights and money driving blockbuster fixtures . At least however with the current model you know exactly who you're playing and when way back in October. And club success is rewarded with prime time fixturing (I.e Friday nights) 

If they really want to make it fair then limit the season to 17 but that's not enough footy 

too much meddling going on, just leave it alone, bring on Rd 1and bounce the friggin ball already, go dees ! 

 

 

[pineapple dee 2,892]

58 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Do I read correctly that the conferences are simply decided by ladder position at the end of 17 rounds.

Boy that will make for some "easy wins" if at the end of 17 rounds you happen to top say the middle conference as distinct from the team at the bottom of the top conference who has five games against "better" teams

 

I posted this as Clint was posting.... will certainly make for a helter skelter final five rounds

This is the major issue to resolve and on the face of it seems unfair on some if not all the top six teams. If they can or want to make this 5 round block fair,

it will be a good innovation. Dont forget, the bullies finished 7th last year.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

1 hour ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Do I read correctly that the conferences are simply decided by ladder position at the end of 17 rounds.

Boy that will make for some "easy wins" if at the end of 17 rounds you happen to top say the middle conference as distinct from the team at the bottom of the top conference who has five games against "better" teams

 

I posted this as Clint was posting.... will certainly make for a helter skelter final five rounds

Tanking to drop down a possy 

Could cause more trouble than we have now. 

Position 7 is SO MUCH better than 6

[Chris 2,892]

1 hour ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

So it would be great if you could be seventh on the ladder after seventeen rounds... then only play the teams below you for the last six rounds, storm into the top four or even top two.  

Doesn't seem right... or am I missing something??

I think the way it works is the top six at the end of round 17 remain the top 6, the last five games are about the order of those 6. The next six remain the next 6 and fight for the last 2 spots in the finals and the bottom six fight for draft picks somehow. Maybe give pick 1 to the top team of the bottom six?

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

6 minutes ago, Chris said:

I think the way it works is the top six at the end of round 17 remain the top 6, the last five games are about the order of those 6. The next six remain the next 6 and fight for the last 2 spots in the finals and the bottom six fight for draft picks somehow. Maybe give pick 1 to the top team of the bottom six?

So you cannot have a huge run to the 8 from way back anymore

how boring

[Chris 2,892]

The biggest issue with this is the bottom six and how to deal with draft picks. I like the idea of a lottery and you could favour certain teams int eh lottery to help the bottom clubs.

This could work something like this.

At the end of round 17 the bottom 6 teams get allocated a number of tickets in the lottery. Bottom gets 6 tickets and 13th gets 1 ticket. You could zero their ladder at this point and start again for the last 5 rounds. At the end of the final 5 rounds you award more tickets, this time the team that finishes bottom gets 1 ticket and the team on top gets 6. This would make teams want to play their best footy at the end of the year as the best position to be in is to finish low at round 17 and high at round 22. You may end up with teams tanking before round 17 though. 

[Chris 2,892]

3 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

So you cannot have a huge run to the 8 from way back anymore

how boring

You can from 12th.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

2 minutes ago, Chris said:

The biggest issue with this is the bottom six and how to deal with draft picks. I like the idea of a lottery and you could favour certain teams int eh lottery to help the bottom clubs.

This could work something like this.

At the end of round 17 the bottom 6 teams get allocated a number of tickets in the lottery. Bottom gets 6 tickets and 13th gets 1 ticket. You could zero their ladder at this point and start again for the last 5 rounds. At the end of the final 5 rounds you award more tickets, this time the team that finishes bottom gets 1 ticket and the team on top gets 6. This would make teams want to play their best footy at the end of the year as the best position to be in is to finish low at round 17 and high at round 22. You may end up with teams tanking before round 17 though. 

Your last sentence would be a massive problem. No doubt

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

2 minutes ago, Chris said:

You can from 12th.

Yes fair call. I just don't like restricting the ladder. 

Draft picks will always produce many problems regardless of rule changes

[Chris 2,892]

5 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Your last sentence would be a massive problem. No doubt

Unfortunately I think it would, I why would you tank if you can't make the middle six, your best option would be finish bottom and then smash the bottom six. 

[old55 23,593]

FWIW 2016 ladder

R18 (17 games) - R23
01 Haw - Syd
02 GWS - Gee
03 Syd - Haw
04 Gee - GWS
05 WCE - Ade
06 Ade - WCE
07 WB - WB
08 Nth - Nth
09 StK - StK
10 PA - PA
11 Mel - Mel
12 Col - Col
13 Ric - Ric
14 Car - Car
15 GCS - GCS
16 Fre - Fre
17 Bri - Bri
18 Ess - Ess

I do realise that the 1st 18 rounds (17 games) did not consist of each team playing each other team once, but over the 5 remaining rounds...

• Each set of 6 was unchanged
• Top 4 set remained the same
• Top 8 set remained the same
• Teams from 7th to 18th remained in exactly the same position

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

2 minutes ago, Chris said:

Unfortunately I think it would, I why would you tank if you can't make the middle six, your best option would be finish bottom and then smash the bottom six. 

Yeah by about Round 5-6 you would just go to the "drop zone"

[Diamond_Jim 12,590]

4 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

FWIW 2016 ladder

R18 (17 games) - R23
01 Haw - Syd
02 GWS - Gee
03 Syd - Haw
04 Gee - GWS
05 WCE - Ade
06 Ade - WCE
07 WB - WB
08 Nth - Nth
09 StK - StK
10 PA - PA
11 Mel - Mel
12 Col - Col
13 Ric - Ric
14 Car - Car
15 GCS - GCS
16 Fre - Fre
17 Bri - Bri
18 Ess - Ess

I do realise that the 1st 18 rounds (17 games) did not consist of each team playing each other team once, but over the 5 remaining rounds...

• Each set of 6 was unchanged
• Top 4 set remained the same
• Top 8 set remained the same
• Teams from 7th to 18th remained in exactly the same position

Great post.... now if someone could do a phantom ladder that sets off the three sets of six after round 18 against each other based on their most recent results it would be interesting.

Of course 2016 was a bit of an unusual year with the top 8 being way out in front of the rest and only North collapsing towards the end. So we need a spread sheet genius to do it over a sample of say the last five years and see what happens.

[biggestred 5,094]

Honestly what a load of [censored].

22rounds

Pull the last 5 out of a hat

Bring in some actual equalization stuff like removing the minimum salary cap 

Its a competition not a bloody tv show.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

13 minutes ago, biggestred said:

Its a competition not a bloody tv show.

But this is making it more of a competition but making it far more even for all teams.

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,508]

13 minutes ago, biggestred said:

Honestly what a load of [censored].

22rounds

Pull the last 5 out of a hat

Bring in some actual equalization stuff like removing the minimum salary cap 

Its a competition not a bloody tv show.

As obvious as it seems, wouldn't this be the fairest way to carry out the fixture, whilst also satisfying the league and club's desire for a 22 round season??

Rounds 1-17: every team plays each other once.

Rounds 18-22: literally draw them from a hat.  (leave it entirely to chance; some years you'll do well, some years not so well)

[daisycutter 29,616]

56 minutes ago, Chris said:

I think the way it works is the top six at the end of round 17 remain the top 6, the last five games are about the order of those 6. The next six remain the next 6 and fight for the last 2 spots in the finals and the bottom six fight for draft picks somehow. Maybe give pick 1 to the top team of the bottom six?

how is giving top pick to top team (13th) of the bottom six a good idea? what does that do to a draft system based on equalisation? imo that'd be a joke.

[Salems Lot 2,535]

Finish top, problem solved!!

[bandicoot 1,395]

2 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Top 6, middle 6 and bottom 6 after each team has played each other once.

It's a brilliant idea and will rectify a lot of the current scheduling issues we have.

I would have thought the the 2 WA, SA, Sydney and QLD sides need to play each other twice. The WA and SA games are real blockbusters 

[barneymfc 152]

43 minutes ago, biggestred said:

Honestly what a load of [censored].

22rounds

Pull the last 5 out of a hat

Bring in some actual equalization stuff like removing the minimum salary cap 

Its a competition not a bloody tv show.

yes ,just leave it alone,change for the sake of change is just to justfy the boffins their jobs

[Chris 2,892]

33 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

how is giving top pick to top team (13th) of the bottom six a good idea? what does that do to a draft system based on equalisation? imo that'd be a joke.

Would cancel out any tanking, but may not help the bottom teams enough. I put another suggestion a few comments after that one that builds on the idea but still has issues. 

[ManDee 7,153]

Problem.

We have a very even season and after 17 rounds all sides are on 9 wins 8 losses separated by percentage only. Can the bottom side still finish on top?

[Trisul 664]

Say goodbye to last years win over Hawthorn and replace it with a loss to Norf?  

[Micah 59]

Although finals is a different level completely, I have a huge concern regarding the 17-5 set up in that it will ultimately dull down finals.

Entering this system mean that we will already have had these top 6 teams play off against each other just before the finals. Therefore, although not under 'finals' type pressure, we still  possibly see the same teams over and over

Looking at some current day traditional rivals, eg Hawthorn Geelong for example, this game ends up usually being a great spectacle and exciting close contest.

However this system will inevitably end up with a year/s where we could have Hawks v Geelong in round 16, then again once in the final 5 rounds, then again in the early finals, and again in a grand final. That would be 4 meetings of the same two teams over virtually 8 weeks or so.

Though that is an extreme example, I still worry that the top 6 being the 'best' of the year playing each other in the lead up to finals would diminish the excitement of finals when we just repeat similar contests