AFL considers final nine or final 10 for 2012

[The Coon Dog]

Herald Sun - 12 March

THE AFL is weighing up nine and 10-team finals formats for when the competition expands to 18 teams in 2012.

Chief executive Andrew Demetriou confirmed the AFL was exploring the merits of expanding the home-and-away season to 23 or 24 rounds once Gold Coast (2011) and Greater Western Sydney (2012) join the competition.

And he hinted the league was leaning towards creating a nine-team finals format, although the merits of 10 teams making the finals was also being discussed.

"We're actually doing a huge body of work on 17 and 18 teams," Demetriou said in Perth.

Article in full... (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-looks-at-final-10/story-e6frf9io-1225840160545)

[Mantis]

No way, even now teams that finish 7th & 8th are just making up the numbers.

But I guess more finals = more $$'s and sadly that is all the AFL is interested in.

I guess in saying that our club is heavily reliant on handouts from the AFL (hopefully for not too much longer) to stay competitive so I guess if the AFL is making solid profits we will continue to get assisstance.

[Rocco Jones]

No way, even now teams that finish 7th & 8th are just making up the numbers.

But I guess more finals = more $$'s and sadly that is all the AFL is interested in.


While I agree that the AFL will increased the amount of finals in an effort to make more money, I am not so sure it is actually a financially sound decision long time.

With a final 9 or 10 the AFL would be diluting it's finals product and taking away from their value. An extreme example is the cricket WC in the Windies were the finals went forever. Sometimes less is more.

In the next few years I think the AFL would just like it to the final 'lowest position GC or GWS finish'.

[Go_Dogs]

I think a final 10 would work if it were a 20 team competition, but when it is 18, you do not want to be rewarding sides in the bottom half of the ladder with a finals appearance.

Eventually I think it will become a 20 team competition, with each team playing each other once and then finals played over 5 weeks. A pre-season competition that is more highly valued, perhaps a 4 game per team series, most wins, highest score taking it out.

Can't say I'm looking forward to the awkward 17 and 18 team competition will suffer the next few years. Certainly going to be a big change.

[Rocco Jones]

As much I would dislike a top 10 overall (very much so), a potential positive spin off is adding more value to finishing in the top 2 and finishing 5th. At the moment, if teams from the same state finish 1st and 4th or 5th and 8th, 1st and 5th basically get no extra advantage despite finishing 3 spots higher.

If it's a top 10 I would like to see an American style wildcard play-off scenario for the lower place sides rather than say the 5th placed side in an elimination final against 10th. 7th vs 10th and 8th vs 9th. Top 6 either have a rest or battle for a weeks rest qualifying final style.

[Mofra]

With a final 9 or 10 the AFL would be diluting it's finals product and taking away from their value. An extreme example is the cricket WC in the Windies were the finals went forever. Sometimes less is more.
I'm here. I don't think there is any value in diluting the finals pool when we are already diluting the talent pool of clubs by bringing two more in.

[Sockeye Salmon]

3 divisions of 6

play everyone once and those in your division twice = 22 rounds


The tough call is do the top 2 or top 3 of each division go through?

[Rocco Jones]

3 divisions of 6

play everyone once and those in your division twice = 22 rounds


The tough call is do the top 2 or top 3 of each division go through?

I think the concept is well worth considering however geographical issues could provide a significant stumbling. There are too many Vic clubs to fit into 1 division and too few to fit into 2.

Perhaps the 4 clubs that miss out on being in the all Vic division have a minimised amount of away fixtures against interstate clubs out of their division, as well as home games against the bigger Melbourne clubs.

[azabob]

3 divisions of 6

play everyone once and those in your division twice = 22 rounds


The tough call is do the top 2 or top 3 of each division go through?

Why have you changed from your two division stance?

I think that would be easier to manage logistically.

Perhaps the way they could split the divisions to begin with is if you finished either an odd or an even on the ladder.
Odds in division one, evens in division two

[Mofra]

I think the concept is well worth considering however geographical issues could provide a significant stumbling. There are too many Vic clubs to fit into 1 division and too few to fit into 2.
Interesting concept. The only issue is that the interstate derbys & rivalry rounds will want to be kept by the AFL so fixturing will be a nightmare.

[Rocco Jones]

Interesting concept. The only issue is that the interstate derbys & rivalry rounds will want to be kept by the AFL so fixturing will be a nightmare.

I think there may be a misunderstanding.

The interstate clubs will be in the same division as their state rivals, so they keep their 2 derbies. The WA and SA clubs in one division and the Northern teams in another.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Why have you changed from your two division stance?

I think that would be easier to manage logistically.

Perhaps the way they could split the divisions to begin with is if you finished either an odd or an even on the ladder.
Odds in division one, evens in division two

I can't see it working with 18 clubs