-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
hujsh
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.
They say Burt Lancaster has one, but I don't believe them.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
Twodogs
Jack Macrae is waving and his arm is getting sore.
Yeah him and Stringer aren't bad.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
hujsh
Yeah him and Stringer aren't bad.
Which one went at 5?
They say Burt Lancaster has one, but I don't believe them.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
Twodogs
Which one went at 5?
Thought it was Macrae but just checked and it was Stringer surprisingly.
-
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]
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
craigsahibee
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
-
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.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
chef
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
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
bulldogtragic
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.
-
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.
TF is this?.........Obviously you're not a golfer.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Geez this would be frustrating this season
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
Topdog
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.
They say Burt Lancaster has one, but I don't believe them.
-
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.
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 2 Likes
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
chef
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.
-
Re: 17-5 Model
Originally Posted by
Twodogs
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