Wildcard Round

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

10 hours ago, The Jackson FIX said:

There is multiple games they roll through in the NBA play-in which makes it a bit more like a handicapped mini-tournament and there is a decent enough volume of games to make it a revenue spinner.

Not true. The play-in yournament in the NBA is 3 games in each division, 6 games in total. A marginal revenue spinner. I suspect the main reason it exists in the U.S. is to reduce the number of meaningless games in the latter half of the season, to stop fans of the lower-ranked teams checking out, and to discourage tanking (which is also why they introduced the draft lottery). 

3 hours ago, rpfc said:

I’m not immediately against the idea.

The impact on the NBA has been profound. More teams interested in the season for longer and less teams tanking their last couple of weeks of games.

I am not sure about how we would do it - 7 v 10 is not the equation in the NBA. 7th gets two chances to play finals, not one; it’s 7v8 and 9v10 then the loser of the first meets the winner of the second to see who gets the last spot in the finals.

If we are about to have 19 teams then I can see this being needed to keep teams interested longer.

Well, you can't do it the NBA way because you would need to extend the Finals by 3 weeks (you can't play football off 3-day breaks). The proposed way (already adopted in the VFL) will just be using the space currently occupied by the pre-finals bye. Yes, the impact in the NBA is significant but I suppose it depends where you're coming from. In the NBA you can actually win from 10th because it's such a marginal advantage to finish higher up the table. I hate that because I think there should be a significant advantage to the higher teams (if there isn't why play the H&A Season at all?). It's great that we at least have that differentiation in AFL but introducing a wildcard round where it's already virtually impossible to win from outside the Top 4 is pointless and degrades the meaning of making the Finals imo.

3 hours ago, Bringbackbarassi said:

a 10th team getting in based off one game doesn't add up. play-ins in the US have some merit at least as it's a multi-game series so there's some credibility to a series win. a once-off game just isn't representative. There's so many examples of lower teams having one-off decent games and getting a win this season, and then haven't looked like finals contenders otherwise. 

No, the play-ins in NBA are not multi-game. Obviously you can't play AFL as a multi-game series in any case regardless of the system employed.  

[Macca 16,923]

16 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

How so? League is slowly dying.

Seen the last broadcast rights money?  Enormous and in the $Billions.  Actually over $2Billion over the next 5 years

And it's dying?

If you're talking about crowd numbers, they've never been big

RL aren't as obsessed with crowd numbers as we are in the AFL

Most people I know have gone from never watching the NRL to watching quite a lot of RL ... with peak interest with Origin games.  And nearly all Melbournians

You'd never know it on this site but this is a Demons site with all things AFL being front & centre

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

Let me guess, it’s an anonymous vote….

[Fat Tony 5,220]

I prefer all finals be knockout. The double chance is a silly and unique part to our sport.

The old NFL finals system with 12 teams is the best IMO. It involves the top four seeds getting a week off, with 5 vs 12, 6 vs 11, 7 vs 10 & 8 vs 9. The eight remaining sides then play off according to seedings in quarter, semi and grand finals.

[von 1,559]

The afl need to stop. Just shut up with new announcements and changes for 5 years. You are custodians of an old game with many traditions. You are not running a vibrant start up or cutting edge business. The game is healthy. The afls priority should be getting its gambling money replaced and finding a way to look after concussion without ruining the game. Beyond that, please just stop. I want less rules, less American entertainment ideas. Just less generally.

[kev martin 9,809]

4 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

It makes finishing 7th or 10th basically irrelevant.

I imagine the team finishing higher get the home ground advantage.

Unless you mean, that the extra game without a week off, makes it that they won't have a chance to make or win the grand.

Edited July 18, 2023 by kev martin

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

1 hour ago, kev martin said:

I am a yes.

Evens up a unleveled fixture a bit.

Has the game more focused on the end of season form, so teams can build and try things earlier on and still get a chance to play finals.

More teams stay alive come the end of the season, so less going through the ropes, and keeps more H&A games relevant.

Top 4 get an even greater advantage with week off.

If they are good enough they get a chance.

More do or die footy.

 

Unleveled fixture? Yes, the lower you finish on the ladder the better draw you get for the following season. The lower you finish on the ladder the better access you get to higher-ranked draft picks. Northern academies get you preferential access to juniors in non-AFL states (NSW, Queensland). The whole point of this is to even up the competition over time and it has largely worked. Not perfect because the best players want to move to the better-performed sides, Gold Coast in particular have to pay over the odds to get/keep players, Geelong the opposite. But the Finals system is not the way to even up the comp because there should be some significant reward for outperforming during the H&A.

The fact that there are Finals (unlike say the Premier League) means you have to be in form to win. If your H&A record allows you to experiment with different structures, rest players etc. that's how it should be. I agree that having more finals places makes more games relevant (for mid-table teams at least) but making Finals should actually be an achievement.

The Top 4 don't get an advantage with a week off. Currently every finals team gets the pre-finals bye. This was introduced in 2016 so every team could be freshened up and field their best line-ups. It also stopped teams mass- resting players in the last round to get an advantage (North Melbourne, 2015). There were complaints in 2016 after the Bulldogs came from 7th to win but no side has won from outside the top 3 since.

So what would this new proposed Wild Card round do?

• The top 6 teams will get a week off to freshen up, teams 7 to 10 play wildcard round;
• Teams 5-6 will be advantaged because they're rested and play a side that has had to play the previous week, Teams 1-4 won't have that privilege;
• The losers of the qualifying finals will be disadvantaged compared to the winners of the elimination finals (as they're likely to be the 5th & 6th teams);
• It will be virtually impossible to win from 7th to 10th (5 consecutive wins) as it's almost impossible to win from 5th to 8th now (4 consecutive wins- 1 winner in past 23 years).

Pre-1971 there was a Final 4 (12 teams), 1972-86 Final 5 (12), 1987-90  F5 (14), 1991-93 F6 (15), 1994 F8 (15), 1995-2010 F8 (16), 2011 F8 (17), 2012 onwards F8 (18). So even 8 of 18 is historically generous. 10 of 18 will mean sides with a losing H&A record will make finals. No need for change!

 

[kev martin 9,809]

20 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

Unleveled fixture?

I mean unleveled because, they don't play each other twice. Also, if they get a very weak team twice, that influences the percentages, which may have a big say on position.

Those with big home advantages seem to have bigger percentages at the end of home and away. Gives a bit more evenness to that anomaly as well.

Teams will continue to improve or underachieve, from one season to another. The draws can't predict this, and the consequences throw the attempt to level it, out of whack.

 

20 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

But the Finals system is not the way to even up the comp because there should be some significant reward for outperforming during the H&A.

it's the last chance for an even'er-uper.

When 19 or 20 teams, it will still be approximately 50/50 on home and away performance. 

 

["The lower you finish on the ladder the better access you get to higher-ranked draft picks"]

 

Free agency disturbs this a bit.

Edited July 18, 2023 by kev martin

[DeeSpencer 25,477]

4 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

It makes finishing 7th or 10th basically irrelevant.

Why not just make it a top 10? or a top 6? Hell lets have North and West Coast compete to make finals.

The pre finals bye is there because teams going into finals desperately need it. Nobody finishing 7th wants to play yet another game to try and win the flag. You are basically ensuring that a team outside the top 6 will never win a flag again. 

Spot on.

The dogs had mid season injuries and finished 7th in 2016. An absolute triumph. Why would you want to ruin the chance of that ever happening again?

We really need to expand finals just because some people can’t take a breath for a weekend? We’re catering to fast food lovers (geez there’s a lot of maccas ads on SEN, do you think the boss likes the product).

[Diamond_Jim 12,549]

I like it in the sense that 7th and 8th in an 18 team comp is not a great season result.

These 2 teams would get home ground advantage against 10th and 9th respectively.

Realistically 7th and 8th rarely kick on so it gives interest to the nothing weekend.

At the same time I would be happy to reduce the season length by a couple of games and put in a 2 week mid season break. I'd even support a Qld gather round in the colder months

[layzie 33,752]

1 hour ago, Macca said:

Seen the last broadcast rights money?  Enormous and in the $Billions.  Actually over $2Billion over the next 5 years

And it's dying?

If you're talking about crowd numbers, they've never been big

RL aren't as obsessed with crowd numbers as we are in the AFL

Most people I know have gone from never watching the NRL to watching quite a lot of RL ... with peak interest with Origin games.  And nearly all Melbournians

You'd never know it on this site but this is a Demons site with all things AFL being front & centre

Yep, the gameday experience isn't much chop but NRL is the ultimate TV sport and highly sought after. 

[Diamond_Jim 12,549]

32 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

Unleveled fixture? Yes, the lower you finish on the ladder the better draw you get for the following season. The lower you finish on the ladder the better access you get to higher-ranked draft picks. Northern academies get you preferential access to juniors in non-AFL states (NSW, Queensland). The whole point of this is to even up the competition over time and it has largely worked. Not perfect because the best players want to move to the better-performed sides, Gold Coast in particular have to pay over the odds to get/keep players, Geelong the opposite. But the Finals system is not the way to even up the comp because there should be some significant reward for outperforming during the H&A.

The fact that there are Finals (unlike say the Premier League) means you have to be in form to win. If your H&A record allows you to experiment with different structures, rest players etc. that's how it should be. I agree that having more finals places makes more games relevant (for mid-table teams at least) but making Finals should actually be an achievement.

The Top 4 don't get an advantage with a week off. Currently every finals team gets the pre-finals bye. This was introduced in 2016 so every team could be freshened up and field their best line-ups. It also stopped teams mass- resting players in the last round to get an advantage (North Melbourne, 2015). There were complaints in 2016 after the Bulldogs came from 7th to win but no side has won from outside the top 3 since.

So what would this new proposed Wild Card round do?

• The top 6 teams will get a week off to freshen up, teams 7 to 10 play wildcard round;
• Teams 5-6 will be advantaged because they're rested and play a side that has had to play the previous week, Teams 1-4 won't have that privilege;
• The losers of the qualifying finals will be disadvantaged compared to the winners of the elimination finals (as they're likely to be the 5th & 6th teams);
• It will be virtually impossible to win from 7th to 10th (5 consecutive wins) as it's almost impossible to win from 5th to 8th now (4 consecutive wins- 1 winner in past 23 years).

Pre-1971 there was a Final 4 (12 teams), 1972-86 Final 5 (12), 1987-90  F5 (14), 1991-93 F6 (15), 1994 F8 (15), 1995-2010 F8 (16), 2011 F8 (17), 2012 onwards F8 (18). So even 8 of 18 is historically generous. 10 of 18 will mean sides with a losing H&A record will make finals. No need for change!

 

Lots of good points but your best is the relative benefits to the teams finishing 1-6 and in particular the lack of a sufficient advantage to the top 4.

Interstate members of the top 4 get a real advantage from home ground advantage. For Melbourne clubs..sorry it's what happens when you have 10 local teams

 

[layzie 33,752]

I mean thinking about it, we do talk about how you can really only win a flag from top 4, does this give at least a little bit of incentive to finish 5th and 6th in that you will be more more rested and therefore more likely to book a trip to the semis?

Still think it's silly but it's fun to think about. 

[At Least I Saw a Flag 5,222]

[Demonised 1,338]

Has anyone ever had something that was working well and then they fiddled with it until they broke it?

That.

[layzie 33,752]

9 minutes ago, Demonised said:

Has anyone ever had something that was working well and then they fiddled with it until they broke it?

That.

Yes, micromanagers. 

[Kit Walker 225]

Is really finishing 7th or 8th such a massive achievement that it needs to be protected? Can't see that it has an impact on 1-6.

Carlton missed the finals last year by about a goal in percentage, we missed it in 2020 by half a game - I'd be happy for it to be brought in, especially going to 19/20 teams in the next few years.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,693]

41 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Lots of good points but your best is the relative benefits to the teams finishing 1-6 and in particular the lack of a sufficient advantage to the top 4.

Interstate members of the top 4 get a real advantage from home ground advantage. For Melbourne clubs..sorry it's what happens when you have 10 local teams

 

That's counter-balanced by the Grand Final being played at the MCG.

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

27 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Lots of good points but your best is the relative benefits to the teams finishing 1-6 and in particular the lack of a sufficient advantage to the top 4.

Interstate members of the top 4 get a real advantage from home ground advantage. For Melbourne clubs..sorry it's what happens when you have 10 local teams

 

I wasn't necessarily saying that there wasn't a sufficient advantage to the Top 4 under the Wildcard proposal, just that in evaluating it you need to recognise that the advantage isn't as big as it currently is. Also of course you need to acknowledge that sides finishing 7th & 8th are going to be significantly disadvantaged.  I think @WheeloRatings posted somewhere that the estimated typical chances of teams in positions 1-8 winning the Premiership are: 

31%, 24%, 17%, 14%, 5%, 4%, 3%, 2%

This of course partly reflects that the higher you are in the 8 the generally better a side you are rather than the pure mathematical chances. The point here is that because of the double chance there's a massive difference between the premiership odds for 4th & 5th. That would reduce under the proposed system, but odds for teams 7 & 8 would increase. Pure guesstimate:

30.5%, 23.5%, 16%, 12.5%, 7%, 5.5%, 2%, 1.5%, 0.8%, 0.7% 

[Boots and all 1,000]

6 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

It makes finishing 7th or 10th basically irrelevant.

Why not just make it a top 10? or a top 6? Hell lets have North and West Coast compete to make finals.

The pre finals bye is there because teams going into finals desperately need it. Nobody finishing 7th wants to play yet another game to try and win the flag. You are basically ensuring that a team outside the top 6 will never win a flag again. 

This whole idea has been lifted from the NBA's play-in tournament. 

[Macca 16,923]

1 hour ago, layzie said:

Yep, the gameday experience isn't much chop but NRL is the ultimate TV sport and highly sought after. 

Packer described RL as the ideal TV sport where as our game is much better live (when there's only a small amount of congestion)

Over a decade ago Foxtel (or maybe Optus) had a function where you could watch AFL on wide angle with only the crowd noise ... it was very good but took a bit of getting used to

NFL is ideal for TV as well but wide angle would work better so as we could keep an eye on the WR's

 

[BDA 22,735]

Rugby League is the most boring game on the planet.  5 tackles. kick. 5 tackles. kick. I'd rather watch paint drying.

[dl4e 5,851]

Don't care.

[McQueen 17,864]

8 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Bring it on if it means there's football during the week between round 23 and week 1 finals.

The pre finals bye (and the pre season bye before round 1) is the worst part of the AFL calendar.

 

I don’t support it. I agree with other people that have said after a season of trying to make the 8 to play finals then that’s it!
Finishing 9th and 10th? too bad you weren’t good enough. 

However, for a game of football to watch during that weekend, I would absolutely support the bottom 10 teams forming a State of Origin contest to watch. 😎😎

[Macca 16,923]

The play-in game would aid the teams finishing 5th & 6th as they'd get a week off over the teams below them as well as the home ground advantage

But given the history of the final 8, there's barely a team outside of the top 4 that has made the GF

The key element is winning the QF with the current set-up