Please no. Less is more. 

Why?

Let’s throw the competitive balance of the league out even more…

Just play a 48 week season + finals and be done with it. 

No thought for players at all. More injuries the likely outcome

15 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

Why?

$$$

5 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

$$$

The players won’t want it. I’m all for an a 20 team comp where everyone plays everyone once, the top 9 play a modified finals with 2 extra weeks and there’s a bye before the GF. 

Just now, Roost it far said:

The players won’t want it. I’m all for an a 20 team comp where everyone plays everyone once, the top 9 play a modified finals with 2 extra weeks and there’s a bye before the GF. 

The players were all over the idea of gather round. I didn’t hear any pushback or bargaining from them.

If they go to 24 home and away games the aflpa should just fold.

 

So they’re adding one more home and away game at the expense of that weekend of meaningless match simulations.

What’s the issue?

27 minutes ago, BDA said:

No thought for players at all. More injuries the likely outcome

I wonder if it's a prelude to publicly consider shortening matches...

16 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

The players were all over the idea of gather round. I didn’t hear any pushback or bargaining from them.

If they go to 24 home and away games the aflpa should just fold.

 

because they got paid for it

the afl season starting in the first week of march is just absurd

27 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

So they’re adding one more home and away game at the expense of that weekend of meaningless match simulations.

What’s the issue?

Have you seen the amount of cramping and injuries in the first two rounds? It’s far too hot to play games in early March. Especially in the northern states. The season is so long already and we are asking so much more from players. 

A practice game is just that, you get extra rotations and players on the bench and you can pick and choose who to play and for how long. Completely different to a proper season match. 

If they keep extending the season they need to also increase the bench to 5+ sub and increase rotations and probably add in a second bye. Otherwise players will break down more frequently, and nobody wants that. 

1 hour ago, Roost it far said:

Why?

The usual mate...$$$

As hard as it was to wait for the season to start, this is a bad idea.

It's basically a winter sport ( or close to) and the Afls want people to play on the cusp of Feb/ Mar.

The humidity in the Swans game was real.

Throw in changing seasons and it starts to become silly playing so early in the year. Especially in WA and Qld.

18 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

Have you seen the amount of cramping and injuries in the first two rounds? It’s far too hot to play games in early March. Especially in the northern states. The season is so long already and we are asking so much more from players. 

A practice game is just that, you get extra rotations and players on the bench and you can pick and choose who to play and for how long. Completely different to a proper season match. 

If they keep extending the season they need to also increase the bench to 5+ sub and increase rotations and probably add in a second bye. Otherwise players will break down more frequently, and nobody wants that. 

Fair points. They'd need to ensure the games are all played at twilight and night if at all possible.

From an entertainment and viewership perspective I have no doubt this will be a successful move.

For years I've felt the AFL have given the NRL a head start in the first half of March.

1 hour ago, Engorged Onion said:

I wonder if it's a prelude to publicly consider shortening matches...

Shortening matches would actually make sesnse EO. Games seem to be going longer than ever these days with the number of score reviews and other nonsense. One would think ticket prices and TV deal money would still increase if matches were 10% shorter, especially if there's an extra 9 games on the TV. 

18 minute qtrs plus time on? What's the down side? 

Is it a recipe for more injuries driven by less player fatigue hence greater volume and ferocity of impacts or possibly even the opposite? 

The answer to all your questions is money

 

If they are going to extend the season, I think it would make more sense to go through to October than start in early March.

9 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

If they are going to extend the season, I think it would make more sense to go through to October than start in early March.

Agree but then again I'm a start in April guy and 17 rounds.

I've certainly not witnessed a great fan demand for more games.

Still waiting for the AFL to explain how the season will work when we have 19 teams. Sure you have a rolling bye for 18 weeks but then you need multiple byes in the last 3/4 weeks to even up game numbers. The ladder will become impossible.

I'm not adverse to a pre-season under 23 comp or similar using some VFL players to make up numbers

Edited March 18, 20241 yr by Diamond_Jim

4 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

because they got paid for it

the afl season starting in the first week of march is just absurd

I’m more than aware they didn’t do it for free but they were adding an extra round and travel for 16 teams, the afl snuck it through cheaply. They should’ve held out for more than they got 

2 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Agree but then again I'm a start in April guy and 17 rounds.

I've certainly not witnessed a great fan demand for more games.

Still waiting for the AFL to explain how the season will work when we have 19 teams. Sure you have a rolling bye for 18 weeks but then you need multiple byes in the last 3/4 weeks to even up game numbers. The ladder will become impossible.

I'm not adverse to a pre-season under 23 comp or similar using some VFL players to make up numbers

this is how it is in mid gippy. everyone gets a bye and then 4 of the last 5 rounds have 3 teams with a bye at the same time. then some poor team gets the bye in the last round before finals. a few years ago newborough had that bye and finished top - which gave them a week off in finals so they played, had a week off, another week off, big final which they won that put them in the GF, a week off and then the GF. so they played 2 games in just under 6 weeks...... and predictably got rolled in the GF by a team that had played the last 4 weeks without a break. 

19 teams means theyd have to get rid of the pre-finals bye and move it to before the GF, surely

5 minutes ago, biggestred said:

this is how it is in mid gippy. everyone gets a bye and then 4 of the last 5 rounds have 3 teams with a bye at the same time. then some poor team gets the bye in the last round before finals. a few years ago newborough had that bye and finished top - which gave them a week off in finals so they played, had a week off, another week off, big final which they won that put them in the GF, a week off and then the GF. so they played 2 games in just under 6 weeks...... and predictably got rolled in the GF by a team that had played the last 4 weeks without a break. 

19 teams means theyd have to get rid of the pre-finals bye and move it to before the GF, surely

Agree it will have to be something like that but what a mess. Imagine the arguments over whether that final section of byes should be alternated/random or fixed. Remember the AFL loves to manufacture tension not to mention blockbusters and if you get rid of the pre-finals bye you have the issue of teams playing interstate.

3 hours ago, Dee*ceiving said:

Shortening matches would actually make sesnse EO. Games seem to be going longer than ever these days with the number of score reviews and other nonsense. One would think ticket prices and TV deal money would still increase if matches were 10% shorter, especially if there's an extra 9 games on the TV. 

18 minute qtrs plus time on? What's the down side? 

Is it a recipe for more injuries driven by less player fatigue hence greater volume and ferocity of impacts or possibly even the opposite? 

Rather than shortening the matches the AFL could pause play within quarters to show more betting ads to kids.

I'm comfortable with an April start and 18 matches when Tassie join. Appreciate this won't happen due to tv rights and revenue but any changes that make the season longer take away from the game.

It's a fascinating conversation and it's definitely all driven by money but I would personally think fewer games, where there are a greater number of games with higher stakes would likely lead to making the competition even richer. 

 

Edited March 18, 20241 yr by Dee*ceiving