The 17-5 season

[P-man 13,366]

5 minutes ago, jackaub said:

What even  if you win the last five?

 

After having played every team once? Yes.

As Clint says, think of it as a 17 match season first and foremost, with a pre-finals series to cement the order.

I'm not gung ho on the idea, but far too often everything the AFL does is met with torches and pitchforks.

Edited February 10, 2017 by P-man

[daisycutter 29,622]

doesn't really solve any problems of fairness, just shifts the problem elsewhere. purely revenue raising 

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

3 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

doesn't really solve any problems of fairness, just shifts the problem elsewhere. purely revenue raising 

Every team plays each other once, that is the most fair thing they can do (aside from each team playing twice both at home and away).

[Macca 17,009]

I can see the AFL throwing in a blockbuster/rivalry/derby round in amongst those last 5 mooted rounds of matches. 

Slightly compromises the idea but appeases a number of the clubs, the moneymen,  TV, sponsors and (at least in theory) allows the clubs to have an even spread of home games and away games (9 & 9) before the jockeying for positions begins.

[AzzKikA 2,371]

47 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

You are right that it will make the AFL more money, but it is on the back of them actually trying to improve the competitiveness of the whole competition int he long-term.

In the past, the AFL would have just flooded the fixture with multiple blockbusters but with this system they are potentially giving up a a lot of blockbusters if the likes of the South Australian teams only play each other once for example.

Can we have the interstate teams play each other again in the last round (22), that way no one travels before finals too?

 

[ex52k2 238]

fifty- 5  reports  that  big footy  says  all  teams  play  17  games,  then  teams 13-18  are  finished  for  the  year.  Great  so  those  6  teams  get  gate  and  sponsor   revenue  loss  so  not  only  do  you  get  kicked  out of  the  comp  you  get  to  lose  money  also.

What  about  keeping  it  simple,  play  34  games  home  and  away.

Get  rid  of  the  preseason  games,  bye  and  move  the  finals  back  a  couple  of  weeks.

Start  the  season  now,  run  34  weeks  and  play  the  finals,  save  another  week  by  only  have  a  final  6.

And  if  anybody  says  that  is  too many  games  for  the  players limit  the  total  number  player  can  play  in  the  h&a  season  to  26.

As  the  meerkat says  SIMPLE  EH.  

[Sir Why You Little 37,052]

2 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

You can from 13th after say round 12.

I think you are upset at this just for the sake of being upset at everything the AFL does.

No. I just dont like restrictions on everything. It's to rigid

The game will never be perfect, stop trying to find perfection

[Sir Why You Little 37,052]

2 hours ago, P-man said:

If you're 13th after 17 games, there's a decent argument that says you don't deserve to play finals that year.

Maybe. But you are taking away any chance

5 games equals 20 points and if you win them you should have the chance to rise without hitting a barrier of a conference table

[Dr. Gonzo 24,235]

10 hours ago, Wells 11 said:

They would still pack out stadiums when they play each other. Essendon and Collingwood could be last and second last and still get 90, 000 to a game. They already do on Anzac day. 

Don't believe the hype. Check the stats for attendances particularly the return games. The "big" clubs rarely rate higher than most other big games.

[Diamond_Jim 12,598]

They are still thinking about it for as early as 2018

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/feb/15/radical-overhaul-of-afl-fixture-still-on-cards-for-2018-season

One of the main problems apparently is the 11 home games promised to clubs

Not sure why it is a big problem because with alternate home and away seasons in the first 17 rounds you get 8 one year and 9 the next.

Of the remaining 5 you would have to get two so at most every second year you miss one  home game. With some financial wizardry (gate sharing for example this issue could be fixed.)

To me it seems to be one of the lesser problems but then again to the power house clubs that make big money out of home games (not the MFC) I can see them hollering.

[daisycutter 29,622]

14 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

They are still thinking about it for as early as 2018

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/feb/15/radical-overhaul-of-afl-fixture-still-on-cards-for-2018-season

One of the main problems apparently is the 11 home games promised to clubs

Not sure why it is a big problem because with alternate home and away seasons in the first 17 rounds you get 8 one year and 9 the next.

Of the remaining 5 you would have to get two so at most every second year you miss one  home game. With some financial wizardry (gate sharing for example this issue could be fixed.)

To me it seems to be one of the lesser problems but then again to the power house clubs that make big money out of home games (not the MFC) I can see them hollering.

just take the gate earnings of those club's home games after home game 11

put it into holding account

pay it evenly to clubs who got <11

no doubt too hard for all concerned, but

[Pennant St Dee 13,241]

It's a ridiculous formula. Makes absolutely no sense. Everything swings and roundabouts on what we currently have. So we have 4 choices.

A) 34 game season home and away - can't work with such a demanding game and the season would be to long.

B) Stay as we are

C) 17 game season Play each team once and if you are at home against a particular side the following season you play them away and vice versa 

D) 26 game season

Year 1

Play each side once 9 home 8 away

Play 9 sides a second time either home or away dependent upon where you played the first time 

Year 2

Play each side once 8 home 9 away

Play the other 9 sides you didn't play twice the previous season and obviously home/away alternates

This is an issue with Queens birthday and other blockbusters but on the plus side we'd get home gates against the Bombers Hawks Tigers Blues Pies and Cats at least every second year. We could keep QB and make sure we always played against the Pies every second year and another big drawing Melbourne based club the alternate year as the home side.

We keep ANZAC eve and alternate home and away each year with Richmond

No byes increase the playing lists and tell the clubs its their job to manage their players

[old demon me!!! 108]

As long as the ladder works as it does now in the 17-5 system then im ok with it ( i think ) .

You don't want a team in middle 6 not being able to finish top 4 if they are good enough or a team not able to drop out of the top group (any group) if they finish on less wins than teams in the other group after the final 5 rounds   

[daisycutter 29,622]

38 minutes ago, old demon me!!! said:

As long as the ladder works as it does now in the 17-5 system then im ok with it ( i think ) .

You don't want a team in middle 6 not being able to finish top 4 if they are good enough or a team not able to drop out of the top group (any group) if they finish on less wins than teams in the other group after the final 5 rounds   

but that's just it. the ladder won't work the same way

middle 6 can only compete for pos 7 and 8. a team in middle 6 could easily end up with more ladder wins than a top 6 team. in fact a middle 6 team could end up on top of the ladder and only enter the finals as position 7

as at end round 17 only 6 teams can theoretically end up top 4 (and get the advantages that offers)

as at end round 17, the middle 6 teams effectively enter a series amongst themselves to win 2 wild-card finals positions. the top 6 fight for the benefits of top 4 and "home" (some) finals  and the bottom 6 fight for "who the hell knows"

Edited February 15, 2017 by daisycutter

[old demon me!!! 108]

Well thats just stupid, the ladder should be true otherwise whats the point. 

[AzzKikA 2,371]

1 minute ago, old demon me!!! said:

Well thats just stupid, the ladder should be true otherwise whats the point. 

The point is that the AFL can't make as much money unless they change it.

[old demon me!!! 108]

1 minute ago, AzzKikA said:

The point is that the AFL can't make as much money unless they change it.

The integrity if the competition should be rule 1 if the AFL don't have that as best they can with 18 teams and 23 rounds they will end up losing money anyway,i don't think people will like teams winning less games but finishing higher on the ladder than other teams .  

[AzzKikA 2,371]

2 minutes ago, old demon me!!! said:

The integrity if the competition should be rule 1 if the AFL don't have that as best they can with 18 teams and 23 rounds they will end up losing money anyway,i don't think people will like teams winning less games but finishing higher on the ladder than other teams .  

HAHAHAHAHA integrity and AFL should not be in a sentence together silly.

[old demon me!!! 108]

1 minute ago, AzzKikA said:

HAHAHAHAHA integrity and AFL should not be in a sentence together silly.

Fair call , don't know what i was thinking. 

[Diamond_Jim 12,598]

With this system it really is a 17 game home and way season and then a round robin mini final followed by the traditional finals

In theory it could be quite exciting but I expect the "money men" will kill it as there are just too many golden geese that would be lost.

Would also like to see the virtual results of such a methodology applied over the last ten years. It could end up like Formula 1 where they changed the qualifying system and ended up with a dead bore (they dropped the system after 2-3 races)

[titan_uranus 25,020]

I'm in favour of fixture reform but not by way of the 17-5 idea.

The logistics and administrative headaches of having 5 weeks unplanned until the week prior and then having to schedule 5 weeks worth of games all at once is being majorly underrated.

Then there are the problems that will manifest depending on the combinations of 6 that you get. If both Perth sides and both Queensland sides are in the same 6, you get repeat cross-country interstate trips bunched together in the lead-up to finals. Given the first 17 games will be locked in, there could be awkwardness and difficulty in putting the last 5 weeks together (e.g. teams X and Y play in Round 17 and then again in Round 18 or 19, or something like that).

It's unnecessary.

Reform is a good idea, though. My preference would be for a plan which spans 2-3 years, in which time each club is required to be home and away the same number of times with the same number of trips to each state, fairness in hosting every club home and away, but doing it spread out over a period of years to allow for individual quirks (e.g. repeat Showdowns/Derbies, Anzac Day, QBD etc.).

[monoccular 17,438]

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

I'm in favour of fixture reform but not by way of the 17-5 idea.

The logistics and administrative headaches of having 5 weeks unplanned until the week prior and then having to schedule 5 weeks worth of games all at once is being majorly underrated.

Then there are the problems that will manifest depending on the combinations of 6 that you get. If both Perth sides and both Queensland sides are in the same 6, you get repeat cross-country interstate trips bunched together in the lead-up to finals. Given the first 17 games will be locked in, there could be awkwardness and difficulty in putting the last 5 weeks together (e.g. teams X and Y play in Round 17 and then again in Round 18 or 19, or something like that).

It's unnecessary.

Reform is a good idea, though. My preference would be for a plan which spans 2-3 years, in which time each club is required to be home and away the same number of times with the same number of trips to each state, fairness in hosting every club home and away, but doing it spread out over a period of years to allow for individual quirks (e.g. repeat Showdowns/Derbies, Anzac Day, QBD etc.).

Sorry, titan, but that system looks very logical, and almost fair to the "lesser clubs", so clearly there is no way that the AFL will possibly allow that.

[Courtney_Fish 183]

Why don't they just create 5 more teams, give them lots more money and picks, and we play each team once.

OR each team plays each other once and then we have a 9 week finals system

OR a 34 week H&A season where we play each other twice

Really, there's still so much more money to be made out there.

What about the AFL sells passes to training. You can have a reserved seat - the club will bring a chair for you. 

OR sells the rights to dress the unpires, eg McDonalds can dress an umpire as Ronald McDonald

OR sell club naming rights, eg The Collingwood McNuggets or the Collingwood Ajax Scum Lifter.