-
Re: 17-5 Model
Will it water down the finals?
The curse is dead.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
chef
Will it water down the finals?
I think it definitely would. It will water down the whole season.
MJP, I absolutely agree that there are issues with fixture equality but what concerns me is that the AFL will (as usual) bring in this idea when it's only half baked and contingencies haven't been thought through. There is still going to be luck that comes into a season regardless of fixture, and the current fixture at least makes some attempt to equalise based on ladder position. It's not perfect, but I don't see it as significantly worse than the 17-5 model and would like a bigger sample size (they've only been using this model for two years haven't they?).
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
mjp
I understand the angst about the 17-5 but how can we spend the whole year moaning about the inequality of the draw then complain when things get 'equalised'. To me, whatever happens after round 17 - when we have played everyone once - is CAKE. Year after year the point is made that the ladder "hardly changes" after round 12...which means there are a lot of meaningless games at the end of the year. The fact that the last 5 weeks are against the most 'evenly matched' teams possible, well - isn't that good. When we were crap a couple of years ago I would have killed to play all the other bottom teams as the season wound down...at least that way I might have had a bit of hope the game would be close rather than dreading the idea of having to go interstate and play a top team on their home deck and just get destroyed.
Sure there are negatives but how is this worse than the top 8 being so heavily influenced by which teams 'got lucky' by somehow getting to play four of the five worst teams in the comp twice. Plus it gets rid of all the 2x derbies/showdowns/etc per year nonsense...this isn't perfect but is a MASSIVE step forward.
Whats the point of the finals series if you spend the last 5 weeks of the season with teams in position 1-6 playing each other?
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
jazzadogs
There's no real way for it to work, other than potentially a weighted lottery system.
If the 'winner' gets pick one, then the actual worst teams each year don't get the reward that they deserve. Big shame for the guys that finish 13th, and only miss out on pick one by one spot!
If the worst team gets pick one, there is not much to stop the team that finishes 13th from putting all their good players in for surgery, playing the kids and hopefully getting pick one.
If it is a lottery, with say 6 chances for 18th, 5 chances for 17th etc you will have the same issues with minimal reduction compared to option B.
What if it was competing to improve your draft place? So if the 3rd team wins a bunch of games they can get the 1st pick but the 6th team can maybe go up to 3rd or 4th.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
Topdog
Whats the point of the finals series if you spend the last 5 weeks of the season with teams in position 1-6 playing each other?
Yep. I just seems so stupid.
What other leagues do this?
The curse is dead.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
hujsh
What if it was competing to improve your draft place? So if the 3rd team wins a bunch of games they can get the 1st pick but the 6th team can maybe go up to 3rd or 4th.
So the totally crap teams get punished? This year a 6 win difference between 13th and 18th.
Also after 17 games this season the difference between 2nd and 7th was percentage. The difference between 7th and 9th was 3 games. Yet with the new system the team in 7th can miss the finals and finish a maximum of 7th position. Those in 2-6 cannot miss the finals and can finish at worst 6th. Just every way I look at this idea all I see is stupidity.
Interestingly in the past 6 years 6 & 7 have been separated by percentage only in 5 of those seasons.
Rolling draw, still not completely fair but its the best that can be done and it also gets rid of the rubbish 2x rivalry games and manufactured fixtures
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
Topdog
So the totally crap teams get punished? This year a 6 win difference between 13th and 18th.
Also after 17 games this season the difference between 2nd and 7th was percentage. The difference between 7th and 9th was 3 games. Yet with the new system the team in 7th can miss the finals and finish a maximum of 7th position. Those in 2-6 cannot miss the finals and can finish at worst 6th. Just every way I look at this idea all I see is stupidity.
Interestingly in the past 6 years 6 & 7 have been separated by percentage only in 5 of those seasons.
Rolling draw, still not completely fair but its the best that can be done and it also gets rid of the rubbish 2x rivalry games and manufactured fixtures
I understand your point, but to MJPs point, there is % separating 2-6 after 17 games. So everyone has played each other once. That's as equal as it can be. If there was % separating 2-6 at the end of 22 rounds would we complain about it? It's in some ways worse as teams have played different opponents twice. And 7th, being 3 games ahead of 8-12, should be good enough to get through.
17-5 is not perfect but it still has merit
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
Topdog
Whats the point of the finals series if you spend the last 5 weeks of the season with teams in position 1-6 playing each other?
So you are telling me in the last 10 weeks of the year - round 18-22 and then the finals - I get to watch the best 6 teams go at it TWICE? And all the crap teams play each other in obscurity and I don't have to even bother about those games (unless we are one of them?)
It sounds like the last 3-months of footy would be awesome under this model.
Where do I sign up for this?
What should I tell her? She's going to ask.
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 1 Likes
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
mjp
So you are telling me in the last 10 weeks of the year - round 18-22 and then the finals - I get to watch the best 6 teams go at it TWICE? And all the crap teams play each other in obscurity and I don't have to even bother about those games (unless we are one of them?)
It sounds like the last 3-months of footy would be awesome under this model.
Where do I sign up for this?
Finals is for the best teams to play each other.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
mjp
So you are telling me in the last 10 weeks of the year - round 18-22 and then the finals - I get to watch the best 6 teams go at it TWICE? And all the crap teams play each other in obscurity and I don't have to even bother about those games (unless we are one of them?)
It sounds like the last 3-months of footy would be awesome under this model.
Where do I sign up for this?
Sounds like we should just stop the season at 17 games and have a 9 week finals series.
To gimmicky for me.
The curse is dead.
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 1 Likes
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
chef
Sounds like we should just stop the season at 17 games and have a 9 week finals series.
To gimmicky for me.
If the AFEL had their way they would stop the season after 17 games. It's how to fill the other 5 weeks up with meaningful footy that is the problem. Their ideal solution is probably to pack in all the blockbusters and derbies and showdowns and bridge battles and whatever the freakshow in Queensland is called again.
They say Burt Lancaster has one, but I don't believe them.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
I like the idea, but would like to see it refined. Having a core 17 round season seems a no-brainer, from there I guess there are any number of things you could do. For me, the 5 game round-robin is a bit long to have the bottom two eventual finalists separated from the rest. I'd like to see the back-end of the season more aligned with the structure of the finals.
Maybe three groups of four making up the top 12? A bye before the round-robin - Brownlow weekend. At the conclusion of the 3 game round-robin, the lowest ranked team from the top four moves down into the bottom half of the eight, the lowest ranked team from the middle four misses out and the highest ranked team from the 9-12 bracket gets a wildcard entry. Would make for a 20 game season in total, the bottom six don't miss that much football, we kill off the out of form team in the eight and don't lose momentum going into finals.
'And the Western suburbs erupt!'
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
Topdog
So the totally crap teams get punished? This year a 6 win difference between 13th and 18th.
Also after 17 games this season the difference between 2nd and 7th was percentage. The difference between 7th and 9th was 3 games. Yet with the new system the team in 7th can miss the finals and finish a maximum of 7th position. Those in 2-6 cannot miss the finals and can finish at worst 6th. Just every way I look at this idea all I see is stupidity.
Interestingly in the past 6 years 6 & 7 have been separated by percentage only in 5 of those seasons.
Rolling draw, still not completely fair but its the best that can be done and it also gets rid of the rubbish 2x rivalry games and manufactured fixtures
Well worst case scenario is the totally crap team gets the 3rd pick (and that requires the 3rd placed team to do really well).If teams 6 5 and 4 do the best in that order they'll just shuffle around their picks.
I don't love it but it seems like if we did go the 17-5 model that might be an option that doesn't completely damage the shit clubs and gives incentive for them to at least try when the season's over.
And the punishment is no worse than doing shit in an expansion team concession year.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
I reckon under a 17-5 fixture (which I generally like), the fairest way to allocate draft picks for the bottom 6 teams would be to allocate draft pick 1 to the team that is 18th after 17 rounds, pick 2 to 17th and so on.
This would allow the last 5 rounds for the bottom teams to be a time to fight to avoid the wooden spoon (which would again become a symbol of unambiguous ignominy without having the reward of draft pick 1 attached), but also to play kids and plan for the future without the suspicion/accusation of tanking in the final games.
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 1 Likes
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
PeanutsPeanuts
I reckon under a 17-5 fixture (which I generally like), the fairest way to allocate draft picks for the bottom 6 teams would be to allocate draft pick 1 to the team that is 18th after 17 rounds, pick 2 to 17th and so on.
This would allow the last 5 rounds for the bottom teams to be a time to fight to avoid the wooden spoon (which would again become a symbol of unambiguous ignominy without having the reward of draft pick 1 attached), but also to play kids and plan for the future without the suspicion/accusation of tanking in the final games.
Don't mind it, and taking it further, maybe the 18th team after 17 rounds gets the most entries into a draft lottery, 17th next most etc to round out the top 5 picks.
So even if they tank to be guaranteed bottom after 17 rounds, the bottom team isn't guaranteed pick 1, just the best chance at it.
I really like the idea of a draft lottery for the top 5 picks.