2024 McClelland Trophy

[010203]

I'd be happy to see it changed so there's a separate trophy for each of the men and women's comps. While the current setup is meant to recognise a combined club effort across two competitions I do think because half the prize money goes directly to the players that it should actually go to the best performed club in each comp.

Unfortunately for you, Brisbane still wouldn't win it. Even if you included finals. Sydney won 19 games to your 18 (and that was from one less final for the Swans) in the men's. And in the women's as long as North win their PF they'll have a better record than Brisbane too.

My gripe isn't Brisbane missing out, it's the format i dont agree with. If I had my way, Sydney and North Melbourne would get a McClelland trophy each for finishing top of the pops for their respective competitions. I'd only have a combined McClelland trophy if every team played each other at least once in the AFLW regular season.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Pretty simple resolution.

If the intent is to include finals results (which certainly wasn’t the case when the McClelland was awarded to the minor premier by default), attribute a points value to final (post finals reseedings) ladder finishing position, and then default back to the current system as a tiebreak (or even better, club results head to head during the year).

Something like:
25 - 1st
20 - 2nd
17 - 3rd
16 - 4th
14 - 5th
…incrementally down by 1 from here.

Or simply accept that the McClelland is designed only to capture home and away performance and is therefore subject to the whims of the doctored fixtures the AFL delivers in the name of “equalisation”.

 

[cryptor]

Pretty simple resolution.

If the intent is to include finals results (which certainly wasn’t the case when the McClelland was awarded to the minor premier by default), attribute a points value to final (post finals reseedings) ladder finishing position, and then default back to the current system as a tiebreak (or even better, club results head to head during the year).

Something like:
25 - 1st
20 - 2nd
17 - 3rd
16 - 4th
14 - 5th
…incrementally down by 1 from here.

Or simply accept that the McClelland is designed only to capture home and away performance and is therefore subject to the whims of the doctored fixtures the AFL delivers in the name of “equalisation”.

I don't really see the point of including finals into the equation. It would be doubling up. The winner of finals is already awarded the title of premiers. It has its own trophy and prize money.

Perhaps the reason some people (ie. some Brisbane supporters) are getting tied up in knots over this is because Hawthorn have been named "champion club" as a result. Which is a pretty loaded title when you consider the literal definition of "champion" is "one to have surpassed all rivals". Something we didn't actually achieve in either comp in H&A or finals.

The "minor premiers" title was at least clearly tiered behind the more sought after "premiers" title.

So rather than complicate things with weighted values for finals - which is really just a mechanism to ensure the eventual premiers end up winning it, and will just result in this same discussion again in the event that it doesn't - it would be a lot simpler just to have a minor premier in each comp and leave it at that.

 

[bungalow_bill]

At the end of the day this is all that matters.

 

[Sentinel]

My gripe isn't Brisbane missing out, it's the format i dont agree with. If I had my way, Sydney and North Melbourne would get a McClelland trophy each for finishing top of the pops for their respective competitions. I'd only have a combined McClelland trophy if every team played each other at least once in the AFLW regular season.

This is it. The AFLW contributing 47% of the total points in the McClelland Trophy whilst teams in that competition play just 59% of the opposition make it a nonsensical format. Added to that the double-ups in the men's.

It's fine to have an award to cover the H&A seasons only, and to cover both AFL and AFLW together, but whilst the fixture currently is what it is the award itself has little credibility - no matter how much cash the AFL throws at it to try to make it relevant.

 

[Philhawk]

You played one top 4 team and they doubled your score and then you went out in straight sets.

 

[Elixuh]

Can you at least use some more recent coloured examples of tears. Perhaps this

 

[Duckimus Prime]

IT'S not about Hawthorn or Melbourne last season the system was always going to be flawed when they changed it last year more people have noticed how flawed the system has become this year

It wasn't as bad last year because the Dees finished top 4 in both competitions.

This year its been won by a side that finished 7th in the Men's competition, and then grabbed second in the Women's thanks to a soft draw.

 

[Philhawk]

Can you at least use some more recent coloured examples of tears. Perhaps this

View attachment 2168134

It’s ok. You’ll get your McClelland next year.

 

[Elixuh]

It’s ok. You’ll get your McClelland next year.

Don't be shy now. Do you think it makes it into the top 5 finals moments? Cotchin choosing to kick into a 10 goal wind, Carlton going 60-0 and Sammy Mitchell becoming hysterical and crying in a presser while describing Kenny Hinkley as a predator. We truly do live in the best timeline, don't we?

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

My gripe isn't Brisbane missing out, it's the format i dont agree with. If I had my way, Sydney and North Melbourne would get a McClelland trophy each for finishing top of the pops for their respective competitions. I'd only have a combined McClelland trophy if every team played each other at least once in the AFLW regular season.

The McClelland has always been "home and away across the club". For a while, basically the national competition era pre-AFLW, clubs only had one team so it became a minor premiership thing.
Mixing AFL and AFLW makes sense as a club-wide performance thing. If minor premier trophies, and/or an after finals average trophy, were to be added, fine. That's not the McClelland, though.

AFLW needs more rounds, and to have all teams playing each other once. But that's another argument entirely.
I despise all things Hawthorn, but unfortunately they did what they had to do for this largely unrecognised and unimportant trophy.
Even $1m is very little compared to the merchandise profits coming off a mens premiership or in the scheme of an AFL club's costs.

 

[saintal]

Irrelevant trophy and a waste of $.

Even the Saints have "won" a few of them..