Is more footy better? Where do you stand?

[Sttew]

I'd love to see that but footy is too demanding a sport for players bodies to hold up for 37/38 games.

Hence rotation from a list of, say 60 players. Let's face it Geelong started the mass rotations in 2011, resting its stars in the lead up to the finals. Its the way of life now. But imagine if a player could only play a maximum of, say 24 H&A games out of the 34...

 

[nameless]

You won't get a fair draw/fixture playing each other once.

The home grounds, travel and even playing times affect this - yes it'd be more even than it is. But shortening the year by 5 weeks for not a lot of gain isn't really worth it. Both financially and from a supporters point of view.

The finals are fine as well.

Keep it as is.

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

More is better

Would love a 34 week season. Top team is premiers. No need for finals as everyone would have played each-other twice (H&A) so need for balancing it with a top 8/finals

And no games at **** venues UNLESS BOTH teams are in agreement (i.e. St.Kilda/Sydney in Wellington), otherwise the H&A advantage/disadvantage gets thrown out of whack

Either that or add two new teams and have two divisions of 10 teams - 18 game season + finals (because 19 games isn't enough). Also a cup comp with the 20 main teams + 12 state div teams. Also get the AFL players out of the local comps and have a proper reserves league (can also be applied to first idea)

 

[BM123]

Hence rotation from a list of, say 60 players. Let's face it Geelong started the mass rotations in 2011, resting its stars in the lead up to the finals. Its the way of life now. But imagine if a player could only play a maximum of, say 24 H&A games out of the 34...

Not enough talent to sustain everyone having 60 plus players though. Possible in the late future though.

 

[BM123]

More is better

Would love a 34 week season. Top team is premiers. No need for finals as everyone would have played each-other twice (H&A) so need for balancing it with a top 8/finals

And no games at **** venues UNLESS BOTH teams are in agreement (i.e. St.Kilda/Sydney in Wellington), otherwise the H&A advantage/disadvantage gets thrown out of whack

Either that or add two new teams and have two divisions of 10 teams - 18 game season + finals (because 19 games isn't enough). Also a cup comp with the 20 main teams + 12 state div teams. Also get the AFL players out of the local comps and have a proper reserves league (can also be applied to first idea)

So basically the AFL version of the premier league?

 

[EB&W Pieman]

There would HAVE to be a relegation system for the 34 game season to work. Bottom teams find it difficult to stay focussed for 22 weeks - it would be impossible over an extra 12 rounds. Relegation would keep everyone on their toes.

PS In 2011 I found the last weeks impossible anyway. With a finals berth wrapped up, I just wanted the finals to start!

 

[Beth]

Less H&A. I got to the point where I could not have given a toss who won or lost (including Geelong) in the last month of the H&A 2013 season . Having taken an interest in American football over the last 4-5 years I must say I was itching for more at the end of the College season this year and cant wait 7 months from now for the start of the NFL season. I love my footy but I was cooked by the end of the GF last year.

Perhaps this is a function of too many meaningless games towards the end?

 

[nameless]

More is better

Surely after last year you can appreciate how amazing finals football is.

There is no way I would ever accept the game losing that part of it, to me it's what football is all about, the season is just a lead up to those games.

We don't want it to turn in to just a war of attrition, where it's last man standing, it needs to be the best team who wins it in the end.
At the moment lots of teams just flop in to the finals and are easily dispelled due to lack of fitness.

Keeping the season as is allows clubs to better manage their squad, to understand how they need to train pre-season and throughout the year to have their team peaking at the right time.

I can certainly see the appeal of having a completely unbiased and fair draw/fixture, but it just doesn't work for this game, it isn't basketball or soccer where you can have multiple games a week and not break down physically.

 

[hcd199]

The idea that the season is too long because we get some dead rubber matches near the end of it ignores the fact that shortening the season will do nothing to address this - there will still be rounds just prior to finals with matches involving teams who cannot make finals or are set in their position and have no incentive to change it. It would obviously be fairer to have a season in which the H&A season sees every team play once, even taking into account that this involves an imbalance in the number of home games for each team, but then we don't have as many games. An increase to 34 would obviously be too demanding on the players, and indeed other people involved in the league, besides which this means either finding alternative venues to the cricket grounds to play at or playing games more frequently within the same time period, neither of which are particularly palatable options.

The best result is simply to keep it the same; the only real issue is the inequitable fixture which this produces, but this could mostly be solved by a rolling fixture (not to mention doing it that way means that the late-season games, when people are, supposedly, losing interest, are repeat matches between teams under such a setup, so it doesn't take away from the only matchup between a particular set of two teams). The length of the season is fine - this year will be a bit of a test, I suppose, to see if a few added weeks stretch this too far (with the byes, it's certainly a possibility).

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

So basically the AFL version of the premier league?

Yeah haha and basically every other league in Europe

Surely after last year you can appreciate how amazing finals football is.

There is no way I would ever accept the game losing that part of it, to me it's what football is all about, the season is just a lead up to those games.

We don't want it to turn in to just a war of attrition, where it's last man standing, it needs to be the best team who wins it in the end.
At the moment lots of teams just flop in to the finals and are easily dispelled due to lack of fitness.

Keeping the season as is allows clubs to better manage their squad, to understand how they need to train pre-season and throughout the year to have their team peaking at the right time.

I can certainly see the appeal of having a completely unbiased and fair draw/fixture, but it just doesn't work for this game, it isn't basketball or soccer where you can have multiple games a week and not break down physically.

Yeah I can and I love how unique the finals are here - but at the same time winning the flag isn't just about being the best team. It's about peaking at the right time, having everyone fit and injury free as well as a whole host of other things.

I agree having everyone play each other twice and no finals would be a huge compromise for so many (even though it probably makes sense to a few) - which is why I put forward the two divisions idea

It would stop a lot of dead rubber games (especially if there is promotion/relegation) - Top 4 of the first division could play off to be the ultimate premiers as well. Basically a cup for premiers, a cup for winning the top 4 and a cup aforementioned involving the 20 teams + 12 other state div teams in a play-off cup comp a la the FA Cup

I watch a lot of soccer and despite its problems (mainly money related/no cap on spending) it is a very well organised sport among all levels (FIFA controlling everything etc.)

At least this way we wouldn't lost the magic of finals and imagine one of the AFL modern giants like Hawthorn, Geelong or Sydney facing off against one of the WAFL or South Australian league teams...

 

[Supercoach Bargain]

I think quality over quantity. I'd rather see home and away games down to 17. (Home this year, away the next and vice versa) After all, players are rested, managed, whatever you like to call it now to get through 22 rounds. (Do we want to see players cooked at 26 years old?)

The current final system is OK.

As the financials are important, I think an FA cup style contest could make up the remaining 5 rounds. The AFL sides plus 14 others made up of state league premiers and runners up. With the AFL teams playing 'away' at the VFL/WAFL/SANFL grounds. Even if they put up a weaker side, the local clubs would (I think) get a decent roll-up and get income into the lower levels, not just the Elite. It would give players a chance to mix it with the best and get noticed for a shot at the draft.

 

[DardySingh360]

It's good as it is. As long as the fixture is made as even as possible, although it can never be perfect when you play some teams twice and others once.

 

[Balance]

My perfect world - 34 Home & Away games, with every team playing each other TWICE. With the extra TV rights revenue because of the 55% extra games, clubs are allowed to increase team lists by the same margin (55%) so players can be rotated. Competition starts in February and finishes late October. No NAB Cup, no byes, just pure football.

It won't happen, but one can dream

This CAN be managed.

1 For one, in order to help the cause, we need less finals, this will mean more teams get a rest at the end of the H/A season. The successful teams who do play finals play less games.

2 The extra revenue from having more games, a large part of it, must be spent on preventing injury.

3 There must be a policy in place outlining how much players can train. They must not train over a certain limit.

4 As you said, increase team lists, more players can be rested.

5 No pre-season cup, or any other bulshit.

6 No more expansion teams, otherwise this will be really hard.

7 Increase the bench. Add an extra interchange and an extra sub: 5 interchange players and two subs.

8 Play catch up. There can be two weeks where ALL teams play 3 games that week, which can then be followed by a bye week, a rest.

 

[Hawkinspired]

The major issue with this, once again, is dollars. Ask yourself this, would you pay the same amount for membership to see 2 or 3 less home games? Because I guarantee the clubs would not be prepared to sacrifice revenue, and the players, their salary.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

My preference is for a 17 game season over 19 weeks (2 byes per team). The finals system can stay as it is and you can possibly add in a mid season break for rep games or for the U18 Carnival.

You would play once in each state each year and the non-Vjc clubs would play 5 Vic games each year. Each club would have an even amount of true home, away & neutral games.

The only way to minimise dead rubbers is to have a conference/division system like the NFL but while this works in NFL I don't like it for AFL. The main problem would be how to split the Vic clubs and the fact you may have the best 2 teams in the same conference so they couldn't meet in the GF as happened in the NFL this year with SF/Seattle. This could be mitigated I guess by ranking the teams from both conferences 1-8 and having a normal final 8 but it kind of defeats the purpose of the conference system in the first place.

 

[McCrann]

I think quality over quantity. I'd rather see home and away games down to 17. (Home this year, away the next and vice versa) After all, players are rested, managed, whatever you like to call it now to get through 22 rounds. (Do we want to see players cooked at 26 years old?)

The current final system is OK.

As the financials are important, I think an FA cup style contest could make up the remaining 5 rounds. The AFL sides plus 14 others made up of state league premiers and runners up. With the AFL teams playing 'away' at the VFL/WAFL/SANFL grounds. Even if they put up a weaker side, the local clubs would (I think) get a decent roll-up and get income into the lower levels, not just the Elite. It would give players a chance to mix it with the best and get noticed for a shot at the draft.

You can't seriously have AFL clubs playing against State League clubs. These clubs would have been beaten easily by GWS last year! GWS!

Would be a complete mismatch and a huge waste of time and money.

 

[Giants FC]

Particularly for clubs like Hawthorn or GWS who have secondary markets, those would be sacrificed if the season was to be cut to 17 rounds.
Hawthorn currently play 4 games in Tasmania. If they only had 8 home games, playing half of them in Tasmania wouldn't leave enough for their Melbourne members. So it would be Tasmanian games that would be cut. Similar with GWS - it would be their Canberra games that would have to be sacrificed.
With that goes the revenue from their jumper sponsors; and footy fans in Tasmania and Canberra would miss out on seeing live AFL footy.

 

[Smokin]

My perfect world - 34 Home & Away games, with every team playing each other TWICE. With the extra TV rights revenue because of the 55% extra games, clubs are allowed to increase team lists by the same margin (55%) so players can be rotated. Competition starts in February and finishes late October. No NAB Cup, no byes, just pure football.

It won't happen, but one can dream

Id even be prepared to reduce the game time - say by 2.5-5 minutes per quarter, to accomodate this.

The biggest drama would be stadium deals with cricket - but probably able to overcome.

No rocket science needed with the team lists either - just increase the Rookie list to say 12 or so players, who can all play a max of 8-10 games.

Perhaps listed players capped at 30 games or so?

 

[shintemaster]

Perhaps this is a function of too many meaningless games towards the end?

Possibly.

As a Geelong supporter you may potentially have just been spoilt for so many years now that you just want to get to the finals.

I do like to think that if the AFL can avoid plucking new random teams out of their rear ends for at least 10-20 years the competition might stabilise more over the next few years and bring the extremes of the top and bottom of the ladder closer together.

 

[PoopingHindi]

17 game season.
1 extra week of finals where 7-10 play off for last 2 spots

 

[Hipster Doofus]

Nah it's pretty good how it is, just lets try and continue to equalise the fixture because that is the main issue people have with it.

 

[Hipster Doofus]

17 game season.
1 extra week of finals where 7-10 play off for last 2 spots

What's the point of the winners of the 7-10 round robin making the finals after a tough week trying to cement a spot, only to then face the top two teams fresh off a weeks rest who will no doubt make short work of them?

 

[PoopingHindi]

What's the point of the winners of the 7-10 round robin making the finals after a tough week trying to cement a spot, only to then face the top two teams fresh off a weeks rest who will no doubt make short work of them?

they wouldnt play the top teams. would play against 5&6 just like now.

 

[the_interloper]

Nah it's pretty good how it is, just lets try and continue to equalise the fixture because that is the main issue people have with it.

Well you can't leave it as it is and expect to equalise the fixture, you'd have to change a few things.

 

[gbatman]

Really hate the nothingness in between the cricket and the footy! For entertainment value, the more footy the merrier but the players need to come into consideration and their long term jeopardy. If we start having these guys playing huge long seasons then instead of seeing these gun footballers running around for 10-15 years we might only get to see them for 8-10 years. The line needs to be drawn to preserve their bodies/careers. If it's shortening careers then the players make considerably less from playing the game and the AFLPA will be involved. I think we have it pretty much right. The pre-season competition is pretty much a non-event but it's more about the club's rather than the fans and them getting a gauge for where their players are at. If the season was to be extended then the pre-season comp should be done away with.