21 minutes ago, Dappa Dan said:

 

Fair enough. To each their own. I think my point is that the whole sense of entitlement of "making the 8" is redundant once it's not a final 8 anymore. If you're not good enough to make the 6, then you deserve to have to work harder to get to a grand final than everyone else.

Also, there is an advantage. It's not complete pot luck. If West coast got 10th, and demons were 7th, we play at the MCG against an away team. How is that not a complete advantage?

But yeah opinions are opinions. One man's trash is another man's treasure and all that.

West Coast deserve to be drinking on Mad Monday if they finish 10th 

stop diluting the finals series just to satisfy the TV Networks 

(That is what it is....)

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

West Coast deserve to be drinking on Mad Monday if they finish 10th 

stop diluting the finals series just to satisfy the TV Networks 

(That is what it is....)

Says who? That's what I don't follow. If you prescribe to the theory that you have to win more games than you lose to make finals, then sure. But if you set the entire league with the knowledge that 10th is a finals chance, the season stays alive longer, stays interesting. Young teams developing learn more about finals football.

Just now, Dappa Dan said:

Says who? That's what I don't follow. If you prescribe to the theory that you have to win more games than you lose to make finals, then sure. But if you set the entire league with the knowledge that 10th is a finals chance, the season stays alive longer, stays interesting. Young teams developing learn more about finals football.

If you lose more games than you win, then you have no right to be in a final series after 22 games

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

If you lose more games than you win, then you have no right to be in a final series after 22 games

Sure. If that's your opinion then of course you'll hate it. I don't agree. I don't think it's written anywhere that that's how it "should" be. To each their own.

Just now, Dappa Dan said:

Sure. If that's your opinion then of course you'll hate it. I don't agree. I don't think it's written anywhere that that's how it "should" be. To each their own.

We will never agree. People like you turn a competition that is Brutal and Tough into a Circus for TV. 

10 wins should never play September

Q.E.D.

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

We will never agree. People like you turn a competition that is Brutal and Tough into a Circus for TV. 

10 wins should never play September

Q.E.D.

And people like you whine and moan about "tradition" that doesn't exist. You haven't said anything that's changed my mind, or made me think differently about the game. And I suspect you feel the same way about thing's I've said.

NFL is an absolutely brutal game, and teams make playoffs with 7-9 records. Doesn't seem to hurt their game. Club leaders seem to like the Wild Card system, was their support that got everyone talking. But no, I'm sure the sooks know better.

4 minutes ago, Dappa Dan said:

And people like you whine and moan about "tradition" that doesn't exist. You haven't said anything that's changed my mind, or made me think differently about the game. And I suspect you feel the same way about thing's I've said.

NFL is an absolutely brutal game, and teams make playoffs with 7-9 records. Doesn't seem to hurt their game. Club leaders seem to like the Wild Card system, was their support that got everyone talking. But no, I'm sure the sooks know better.

All 16 Pesidents signed off on GW$ and GC too. 

I don't believe everything that comes out of AFL HQ. Particularly when the have sold the TV rights for over $2 Billion. 

The Broadcasters get what they want. 

They want an extra week of September Revenue to pay the Bills. 

10th on the ladder has no right to a finals berth when 18 teams exist. 

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

All 16 Pesidents signed off on GW$ and GC too.

Yes. And you have a problem with that too? Not everyone is footy is as resistant to change.

Whoever makes finals under the rules put forward by the AFL has the right to a finals berth. Have whatever opinion you like. Won't change the facts.

1 hour ago, Dappa Dan said:

Yes. And you have a problem with that too? Not everyone is footy is as resistant to change.

Whoever makes finals under the rules put forward by the AFL has the right to a finals berth. Have whatever opinion you like. Won't change the facts.

The AFL make money for themselves

The fan is a distant 2nd

The reason i refuse to put a foot inside Etihad Stadium. 

The Facts are that a side who plays in September should be expected to win more than they lose. 

If that is not the case then the organization is being run by GREEDY CLOWNS

 

21 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

The Facts are that a side who plays in September should be expected to win more than they lose. 

That's not what a fact is.

You're entitled to your opinion. So are all AFL fans. I think they're doing a cracking job in the face of inevitable change. And I'm glad they don't get stuck thinking the AFL should stay the same as it was when old people were young. I see Soccer coming, I see NRL still sucking precisely because of the unidirectional thinking their supporters carry on with.

But that's my OPINION. I don't misunderstand it as a fact.

Just now, Dappa Dan said:

That's not what a fact is.

You're entitled to your opinion. So are all AFL fans. I think they're doing a cracking job in the face of inevitable change. And I'm glad they don't get stuck thinking the AFL should stay the same as it was when old people were young. I see Soccer coming, I see NRL still sucking precisely because of the unidirectional thinking their supporters carry on with.

But that's my OPINION. I don't misunderstand it as a fact.

Start the finals in May if that is your opinion. 

You are diluting the importance of the Final Series even further if you have a Top 10 when that is more than 50% of the competition. 

That is a fact. 

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Start the finals in May if that is your opinion. 

You are diluting the importance of the Final Series even further if you have a Top 10 when that is more than 50% of the competition. 

That is a fact. 

No. Start them when they start them or a week earlier.

No it's not a fact. This is inane. It's an opinion. Plenty of leagues run with more than 50% competitors playing finals. Even the AFL has done it. Sides can even win the flag after winning the spoon.

See that? That is a fact.

You're boring me and everyone else. Done.

3 hours ago, Dappa Dan said:

Says who? That's what I don't follow. If you prescribe to the theory that you have to win more games than you lose to make finals, then sure. But if you set the entire league with the knowledge that 10th is a finals chance, the season stays alive longer, stays interesting. Young teams developing learn more about finals football.

what is so magical about the number 10. if your argument is to keep the home and away season "alive" why stop at 10, why not 12 or 14 or 16 or even 18?

a false argument by my reading, but i'm sure joan kirner would agree to a system where everyone is a winner 

7 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

what is so magical about the number 10. if your argument is to keep the home and away season "alive" why stop at 10, why not 12 or 14 or 16 or even 18?

a false argument by my reading, but i'm sure joan kirner would agree to a system where everyone is a winner 

Random name to throw up. lol

10 isn't random. It's a little over half. Let's not get carried away. I have a suspicion that GWS and GC won't be the only sides added in the coming years. Hence why they're ok with expanding it. I'm an unabashed NFL fan and fan of divisions and conferences. So that's my leaning there.

41 minutes ago, Dappa Dan said:

No. Start them when they start them or a week earlier.

No it's not a fact. This is inane. It's an opinion. Plenty of leagues run with more than 50% competitors playing finals. Even the AFL has done it. Sides can even win the flag after winning the spoon.

See that? That is a fact.

You're boring me and everyone else. Done.

You are a Clown 

People like you want Las Vegas entertainment just because it is American. 

Having over 50% of the Comp involved in finals with a Win Loss ratio under 50% is just plain money grabbing greed

But you don't care...

Who else am i boring by the way?

i want a thriving competition, but sadly rules are changing to suit broadcasters. 

FACT. 

10 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

You are a Clown 

People like you want Las Vegas entertainment just because it is American. 

Having over 50% of the Comp involved in finals with a Win Loss ratio under 50% is just plain money grabbing greed

But you don't care...

Who else am i boring by the way?

i want a thriving competition, but sadly rules are changing to suit broadcasters. 

FACT. 

I can teach you some emoticons so you can better express yourself if you like, old man.

I hate America. Lived there for years. Horrible place. But they administer sports better than we do. FACT.

You didn't know anything about me, but presumed to know what I like and why. You have no idea what the difference is between knowing something, and suspecting it. FACT.

I'm no clown. I'm just a lot smarter and more experienced in sports than you are. It's ok to admit when you're wrong.

It's not greed. It's fun for the fans. Works elsewhere. Will work here when everyone in the league, including the professionals sign off on it, and all the dinosaurs can whine and moan impotently as they always have.

I do care. Enough to look overseas for techniques that work, so that the game doesn't end up in amateur obscurity.

Who you boring? Everyone. This is the kind of whining, moaning garbage that makes this place unbearable after a loss. 

lol. You want a thriving competition. Look at the crowd numbers. Look at the free flowing footy. Look at the viewership here and overseas. Don't look now but the game is thriving like it never has in the past. And these "greedy" administrators you're so quick to stick a knife into have engineered the most even comp in living memory. FACT.

Your views are antiquated and ultimately, useless. FACT. You're welcome to them though. You go be a cranky sook and stick your head in the sand. Meanwhile the game will go on thriving with or without you. FACT.

26 minutes ago, Dappa Dan said:

I can teach you some emoticons so you can better express yourself if you like, old man.

I hate America. Lived there for years. Horrible place. But they administer sports better than we do. FACT.

You didn't know anything about me, but presumed to know what I like and why. You have no idea what the difference is between knowing something, and suspecting it. FACT.

I'm no clown. I'm just a lot smarter and more experienced in sports than you are. It's ok to admit when you're wrong.

It's not greed. It's fun for the fans. Works elsewhere. Will work here when everyone in the league, including the professionals sign off on it, and all the dinosaurs can whine and moan impotently as they always have.

I do care. Enough to look overseas for techniques that work, so that the game doesn't end up in amateur obscurity.

Who you boring? Everyone. This is the kind of whining, moaning garbage that makes this place unbearable after a loss. 

lol. You want a thriving competition. Look at the crowd numbers. Look at the free flowing footy. Look at the viewership here and overseas. Don't look now but the game is thriving like it never has in the past. And these "greedy" administrators you're so quick to stick a knife into have engineered the most even comp in living memory. FACT.

Your views are antiquated and ultimately, useless. FACT. You're welcome to them though. You go be a cranky sook and stick your head in the sand. Meanwhile the game will go on thriving with or without you. FACT.

Wow. Serious tickets on oneself

i have relatives in The USA, so i to have spent time there

very strange Flag Waving place it is 

in 1970 121,000 people crammed into The G for the Grand Final. 

Back then it was a true Australian Rules Football code. 

Just because i value a Final series that does not gift mediocrity you consider me antiquated and useless

Not everything American is the way. 

McDonald's is a disgrace of a company

Donald being allowed near Washington are 2 examples

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

Wow. Serious tickets on oneself

i have relatives in The USA, so i to have spent time there

very strange Flag Waving place it is 

in 1970 121,000 people crammed into The G for the Grand Final. 

Back then it was a true Australian Rules Football code. 

Just because i value a Final series that does not gift mediocrity you consider me antiquated and useless

Not everything American is the way. 

McDonald's is a disgrace of a company

Donald being allowed near Washington are 2 examples

Won't catch me disagreeing with McDonalds or Donald criticisms. Very, very sick country. 

And mate I don't have tickets. Calling a stranger on a site a "clown" suggests you know a thing or two about having tickets on oneself though.

Noones claiming America has all the answers. Or many even. I'm not suggesting we become the USA. But I damn sure hope we don't get stuck in some faded memory of what footy was, and resist taking on the future aggressively. I am an unabashed NFL fan, and I reckon if anything we've been slow to borrow some of their concepts and equalisation techniques. We don't have to copy. We can take all of it, borrow what we need, and throw out the rest. Expanded finals/playoffs is a great initiative in my opinion. Wish we'd done it earlier. Same for trading of future picks, free agency etc. I don't expect others to agree. I would suggest you'll see that and more soon though.

Agree to disagree.

So . . .

Does anyone know how the EPL fixture works in terms of equity? Do teams play each other a set number of times? Rivalry and big club exemptions?

On 2017-5-19 at 4:10 PM, Chris said:

And they are too silly to see that 18 healthy viable clubs will make them more money int eh long run, even if they have to take a hit for a few years while it evens out a little. The AFL only seem to be able to see slightly further into the future than our pollies!

It's not just the AFL. The free-to-air broadcaster (and not just the current one) has no care about long-term sustainability as it only has an interest in the life of the current rights deal. It wants to extract maximum dollars with minimal risk so pressures the AFL into giving it more games on Friday and Saturday nights with highly supported teams, irrespective of their ladder position.

On 2017-5-20 at 3:46 PM, Skuit said:

Before I was a lunatic I didn't concern myself much with the financial ins and outs of the club other than red/black. Can someone briefly outline the for/against arguments for why the attendance receipts are divvied up the way they are? So I don't have to use my brain. The big clubs already have a pretty decent leg-up, and much of that is at the expense of other clubs rather than based on marketing investment etc.

The AFL have looked at both methods but has come to the view (correctly in my view) that clubs will do more to promote their home games to attract attendances if they have a financial benefit from doing so. The alternative of equally dividing gate receipts discourages clubs from trying.

As to the idea of "fixture inequality", I have said for many years that I don't think it matters as much as people seem to think. I can't remember the last time a team won the premiership because of any advantage they may have had with the draw. The only thing I would do is ensure every team plays each other in the first 17 rounds. Consideration could also be given to determining draft order at the end of those 17 rounds. The advantages of doing so are (1) the season is still "live" for more clubs (and players who still want to prove themselves to extend their careers) than at round 22 and (2) clubs' draft positions are equally influenced by who they've played (ie, one team doesn't get an improved draft position by having played more top 4 teams than the teams around them.)  The disadvantage may be that there is less interest in the last 5 rounds - but if we're worried about draft position in the last 5 rounds we're probably supporting the wrong outcome in those games anyway.

 

Am starting to wonder if a wildcard and dastardly luck of other teams might be the only way we get to September 

19 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Am starting to wonder if a wildcard and dastardly luck of other teams might be the only way we get to September 

I was thinking that myself. We can only seem to put in our best for 'a special occasion'. Playing the way we did against Adelaide or round one compared to the dross we dish up against what should be beatable opponents is damning.

Goodwin needs to tell the players before each match that we got our timing wrong and accidentally got to the ground late. It's now quarter time and we're 10 goals down. Now get out three and catch up!!!

41 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

It's not just the AFL. The free-to-air broadcaster (and not just the current one) has no care about long-term sustainability as it only has an interest in the life of the current rights deal. It wants to extract maximum dollars with minimal risk so pressures the AFL into giving it more games on Friday and Saturday nights with highly supported teams, irrespective of their ladder position.

The AFL have looked at both methods but has come to the view (correctly in my view) that clubs will do more to promote their home games to attract attendances if they have a financial benefit from doing so. The alternative of equally dividing gate receipts discourages clubs from trying.

As to the idea of "fixture inequality", I have said for many years that I don't think it matters as much as people seem to think. I can't remember the last time a team won the premiership because of any advantage they may have had with the draw. The only thing I would do is ensure every team plays each other in the first 17 rounds. Consideration could also be given to determining draft order at the end of those 17 rounds. The advantages of doing so are (1) the season is still "live" for more clubs (and players who still want to prove themselves to extend their careers) than at round 22 and (2) clubs' draft positions are equally influenced by who they've played (ie, one team doesn't get an improved draft position by having played more top 4 teams than the teams around them.)  The disadvantage may be that there is less interest in the last 5 rounds - but if we're worried about draft position in the last 5 rounds we're probably supporting the wrong outcome in those games anyway.

 

i like your idea of locking in drafting positions based on ladder after 17 rounds......from an equality point of view

re your argument about there be no real disadvantage in the draw, you are really just basing it on the one year. the real effect of the draw inequality is the impact it has on the lower drawing clubs over a longer period than just one season as it impacts greatly on their revenue and membership opportunities

LDVC I'd propose they may well be increased interest in last 5 rounds if draft sorted. Teams might let loose devil may care