Thanks Thanks:  1
Likes Likes:  21
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 77

Thread: 17-5 Model

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    27,890
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Quote Originally Posted by hujsh View Post
    The temptation to tank for pick one over two is less than the temptation to tank to guarantee you get pick 5 minimum instead of 6 (as an example).

    If someone really wanted a lottery I don't see why it can't be altered to find a happy medium between helping the worst teams and providing the proper motivations. That's not applying 'fixes immediately to stop it being broken too' BTW, it's trying to find a compromise then introducing that as a new system.

    I think pick 1 is over rated sometimes. You often can get as good or better players in the top 5 (Hi Bont, hi Jarred Roughead)
    Jack Macrae is waving and his arm is getting sore.
    Have you been reading those Roddy Doyle books again, Dougal!?


    I have, yeah Ted, you big gobshite

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    10,588
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Quote Originally Posted by Twodogs View Post
    Jack Macrae is waving and his arm is getting sore.
    Yeah him and Stringer aren't bad.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    27,890
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Quote Originally Posted by hujsh View Post
    Yeah him and Stringer aren't bad.
    Which one went at 5?
    Have you been reading those Roddy Doyle books again, Dougal!?


    I have, yeah Ted, you big gobshite

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    10,588
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Quote Originally Posted by Twodogs View Post
    Which one went at 5?
    Thought it was Macrae but just checked and it was Stringer surprisingly.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Ailse 31 Level 2 Row B Seat 59
    Posts
    1,771
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Not a fan of the proposed 17-5 draw. It's too much of a "fixed-ture" for me.

    I would much prefer to have the teams seeded based on the previous years ladder positions.

    Rankings
    1 2 3
    4 5 6
    7 8 9
    10 11 12
    13 14 15
    16 17 18

    Each team plays every other team in their column twice (Home and Away) and every team in the other 2 columns once.

    22 games. Sorted. Sure there may be some discrepancies with regards to travel should Freo & Eagles finish in the same group, but it's not that hard to go interstate and win!
    [CENTER][B]WOOF Member 315[/B][/CENTER]

  6. #66
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    6,735
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsahibee View Post
    Not a fan of the proposed 17-5 draw. It's too much of a "fixed-ture" for me.

    I would much prefer to have the teams seeded based on the previous years ladder positions.

    Rankings
    1 2 3
    4 5 6
    7 8 9
    10 11 12
    13 14 15
    16 17 18

    Each team plays every other team in their column twice (Home and Away) and every team in the other 2 columns once.

    22 games. Sorted. Sure there may be some discrepancies with regards to travel should Freo & Eagles finish in the same group, but it's not that hard to go interstate and win!
    Yep, a 5-17 model. Could work well

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kyabram
    Posts
    13,796
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    By the sounds of things Gillons going to give the coaches a big **** you and will bring this in. Wanted to do the wild card this season which is just absurd. Will happen next season.

    God help the AFL.
    The curse is dead.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    32,301
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Quote Originally Posted by chef View Post
    By the sounds of things Gillons going to give the coaches a big **** you and will bring this in. Wanted to do the wild card this season which is just absurd. Will happen next season.

    God help the AFEL.
    They just don't care they're meant to be custodians of the game, not out for more and more bucks way beyond what they'd ever need. Other than to give out bigger bonuses.
    Rocket Science: the epitaph for the Beveridge era - whenever it ends - reading 'Here lies a team that could beat anyone on its day, but seldom did when it mattered most'. 15/7/2023

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    E.J. Whitten Stand
    Posts
    17,162
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Quote Originally Posted by bulldogtragic View Post
    They just don't care they're meant to be custodians of the game, not out for more and more bucks way beyond what they'd ever need. Other than to give out bigger bonuses.
    They're like the board of Fairfax, always looking at the short term financial implications when making decisions, rather than maintaining the highest possible quality.
    Our 1954 premiership players are our heroes, and it has to be said that Charlie was their hero.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,725
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    I agree Comrade.

    Nobody has been able to articulate the benefit of this, other than to quantify that it should deliver the AFL and its strategic partners more revenue.

    Interestingly the 17-5 system was baulked at because local games and traditional blockbusters would be reduced. Once again, nothing to do with what it would bring to the competition.
    Nobody's looking for a puppeteer in today's wintry economic climate.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,438
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Geez this would be frustrating this season

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    27,890
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Quote Originally Posted by Topdog View Post
    Geez this would be frustrating this season
    Who would we have played in the 17-5 model? Beceause we would be in the '5' stage by now.
    Have you been reading those Roddy Doyle books again, Dougal!?


    I have, yeah Ted, you big gobshite

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kyabram
    Posts
    13,796
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    I think we are seeing with the closeness of the comp we don't need to 'invent' anymore interest.

    Just leave as it is.
    The curse is dead.

  14. Likes azabob, Topdog liked this post
  15. #74
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    10,588
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Quote Originally Posted by chef View Post
    I think we are seeing with the closeness of the comp we don't need to 'invent' anymore interest.

    Just leave as it is.
    Needs to keep the interest up in the offseason though.

  16. #75
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    5,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 17-5 Model

    Quote Originally Posted by Twodogs View Post
    Who would we have played in the 17-5 model? Beceause we would be in the '5' stage by now.
    We would be in the 7-12 bracket playing for the last two spots in the 8, with no chance of finishing top 6
    If you kicked five goals and Tom Boyd kicked five goals, Tom Boyd kicked more goals than you.

    Formerly gogriff

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •