Restructing the regular season

[Rocco Jones]

I am sure a lot of posters will agree that the season is too long and the fixture is not equal/fair. I think we should have a shorter season but that's not going to happen with the dollars that come with selling off TV rights, so here's my plan.

18 teams, teams play eachother once + 1 extra rivalry game to ensure there's an even spilt for home and away as well as protecting blockbusters.

Then we go into top 10 (or 12 if TV demands) playing for a few weeks. I'd want it as short as possible, this is just for TV. You can have a pro-forma for this (1st plays 4th, 7th and 10th etc). So it's basically the 10 or 12 teams left jostling for spots in the 8. At the season's end we have the top 8.

Another option is an extended finals series.

So a few less games but more that actually matter.

Thoughts?

[westdog54]

I know its only an idea but how would you structure your top 10 or 12 idea?

Are we talking a draw where ladder positions still change before going into finals proper? I see you've said extended finals as another option. I'll have a think about a few format scenarios over the next few days.

[DragzLS1]

Technically every team should play eChother twice once home and once away but thTs wayy too long of a season.. I like the extended finals idea but how would it work..

[bornadog]

Whats wrong with everyone plays each other once and the remaining games are pulled out of a hat and take pot luck, that is the fairest way for all.

Finals remain as an 8.

[Bulldog Joe]

I actually favour a conference system.

Split the teams into groups of 6.

First 5 rounds against the other teams in your group.

Next 12 against teams outside your group.

Last 5 the return matches of the first 5

22 rounds completed with the top 2 from each group qualifying for finals and the remaining 2 spots going to the 3rd placed team from the groups best performed from the middle 12 rounds.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I actually favour a conference system.

Split the teams into groups of 6.

First 5 rounds against the other teams in your group.

Next 12 against teams outside your group.

Last 5 the return matches of the first 5

22 rounds completed with the top 2 from each group qualifying for finals and the remaining 2 spots going to the 3rd placed team from the groups best performed from the middle 12 rounds.

I think this is the only sensible way to do it. The problem is that the AFL insist each pair of the four two team states must play each other twice.

This means one franchise has to have 4 non-victorian teams and those in that group will travel more.


Personally, I want to see three 6-team divisions, but I want them all fair and pot luck.

I would base it on the previous years ladder.


Div 1 - 1st, 6th, 7th, 12th, 13th & 18th
Div 2 - 2nd, 5th, 8th, 11th, 14th & 17th
Div 3 - 3rd, 4th, 9th, 10th, 15th & 16th.


No guaranteed two Coll v Ess games, no guaranteed two showdowns or derbys.

[Bulldog Joe]

I think this is the only sensible way to do it. The problem is that the AFL insist each pair of the four two team states must play each other twice.

This means one franchise has to have 4 non-victorian teams and those in that group will travel more.


Personally, I want to see three 6-team divisions, but I want them all fair and pot luck.

I would base it on the previous years ladder.


Div 1 - 1st, 6th, 7th, 12th, 13th & 18th
Div 2 - 2nd, 5th, 8th, 11th, 14th & 17th
Div 3 - 3rd, 4th, 9th, 10th, 15th & 16th.


No guaranteed two Coll v Ess games, no guaranteed two showdowns or derbys.

Because the AFL wants the blockbusters it can be accomodated, including the local derb/showdown.

My break up would be
Western - Eagles, Freo, Adelaide, Port, Bulldogs North
Northern - Brisbane, Gold Coast, Sydney, GWS, Melbourne, St Kilda
Central - Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond, Essendon, Geelong, Hawthorn

The last 2 teams could be interchangeable through the groups.

The Finals would consist of the top 2 from each and the next 2 best based on group performance, meaning that finishing 3rd in a group that could not beat any team in another group would not get to finals.

To compensate on the travel front the finals would be structured so that you played teams from outside your group until Prelim at least.

On the above grouping Bulldogs and North would have 2 trips to Perth and Adelaide and 1 to Queensland and Sydney. No other Melbourne side would cop that, but they would be guaranteed NOT to travel to Perth or Adelaide for finals. They would also only get 1 Perth trip in the first 5 weeks and 1 in the last 5. That would be a better travel schedule than currently, particularly as they are playing other teams with the same travel schedule.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Because the AFL wants the blockbusters it can be accomodated, including the local derb/showdown.

My break up would be
Western - Eagles, Freo, Adelaide, Port, Bulldogs North
Northern - Brisbane, Gold Coast, Sydney, GWS, Melbourne, St Kilda
Central - Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond, Essendon, Geelong, Hawthorn

The last 2 teams could be interchangeable through the groups.

The Finals would consist of the top 2 from each and the next 2 best based on group performance, meaning that finishing 3rd in a group that could not beat any team in another group would not get to finals.

To compensate on the travel front the finals would be structured so that you played teams from outside your group until Prelim at least.

On the above grouping Bulldogs and North would have 2 trips to Perth and Adelaide and 1 to Queensland and Sydney. No other Melbourne side would cop that, but they would be guaranteed NOT to travel to Perth or Adelaide for finals. They would also only get 1 Perth trip in the first 5 weeks and 1 in the last 5. That would be a better travel schedule than currently, particularly as they are playing other teams with the same travel schedule.

That is exactly the system the AFL would bring in and exactly the system that would ensure the strong clubs stayed strong forever.

This breakup would ensure we got the lowest attendances and the least TV coverage. Sponsors would flock to the big clubs that regularily played each other and within a decade we (and North) would be broke, have few supporters and fold.



Then the AFL would have their the 16 team competition I'm sure they want (two 8 team conferences, 4 Vic and 4 non-Vic teams in each).



No set conferences, no compromised draw!

[westdog54]

That is exactly the system the AFL would bring in and exactly the system that would ensure the strong clubs stayed strong forever.

This breakup would ensure we got the lowest attendances and the least TV coverage. Sponsors would flock to the big clubs that regularily played each other and within a decade we (and North) would be broke, have few supporters and fold.



Then the AFL would have their the 16 team competition I'm sure they want (two 8 team conferences, 4 Vic and 4 non-Vic teams in each).



No set conferences, no compromised draw!

My thoughts exactly when I read that plan.

John Elliot essentially had the same idea a few years ago. Two conferences, us, North and the Interstate teams in one, everyone else in the rest. He thought it was a wonderful idea too.

[Bulldog Joe]

That is exactly the system the AFL would bring in and exactly the system that would ensure the strong clubs stayed strong forever.

This breakup would ensure we got the lowest attendances and the least TV coverage. Sponsors would flock to the big clubs that regularily played each other and within a decade we (and North) would be broke, have few supporters and fold.



Then the AFL would have their the 16 team competition I'm sure they want (two 8 team conferences, 4 Vic and 4 non-Vic teams in each).



No set conferences, no compromised draw!

I do agree that our position is not strong, BUT that is where we are at. We need to build our position by continued success as Hawthorn did particularly in the 80's.

In my proposal you still play EVERY team home and away over 2 years and you get a fair crack at finals.

You largely avoid being sent interstate with a Collingwood to play on a shortened break AND your finals position is determined by your standing within the group you have played home and away in that year. Additionally it is more likely to retain an interest in the last 5 weeks when group positions are what is being determined.

There would also be more sponsorship opportunities in the other states as they would now be more interested in our results because it impacts on their standing.

[Maddog37]

Maybe we could just play each other twice and whoever wins the most games is the champion. No finals.

Draft pick goes in order 9th team first through to 18th and then 1st to eigth.

[westdog54]

Because the AFL wants the blockbusters it can be accomodated, including the local derb/showdown.

My break up would be
Western - Eagles, Freo, Adelaide, Port, Bulldogs North
Northern - Brisbane, Gold Coast, Sydney, GWS, Melbourne, St Kilda
Central - Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond, Essendon, Geelong, Hawthorn

The last 2 teams could be interchangeable through the groups.

The Finals would consist of the top 2 from each and the next 2 best based on group performance, meaning that finishing 3rd in a group that could not beat any team in another group would not get to finals.

Could you swap one of the interstate 'pairings' with Richmond and Essendon/Carlton (depending on who you had as Collingwood's 'Rival')?

How would:

WC, Freo, Carlton, Richmond, Bulldogs, North
Brisbane, GC, Syd, GWS, Geelong Hawthorn
Collingwood, Adelaide, Port, Essendon, Melbourne, StKilda

Go?

[Bulldog Joe]

Could you swap one of the interstate 'pairings' with Richmond and Essendon/Carlton (depending on who you had as Collingwood's 'Rival')?

How would:

WC, Freo, Carlton, Richmond, Bulldogs, North
Brisbane, GC, Syd, GWS, Geelong Hawthorn
Collingwood, Adelaide, Port, Essendon, Melbourne, StKilda

Go?

I think the AFL would want Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond and Essendon to always meet twice, but I like the idea of rolling a different pair of teams into their group each year. In fact you could look at pairs or 4's for the other 14

West Coast and Freo
Brisbane and Gold Coast
Sydney and GWS
Adelaide and Port
Melbourne and St Kilda
Bulldogs and North
Geelong and Hawthorn

[Murphy'sLore]

I strongly dislike the idea of locking particular teams into geographic or other divisions.

If it's based on ladder position, that's fairer for everyone. Which is why it won't happen.

(btw, should the name of this thread be Restructuring? Destructing? Or Deconstructing?)