Major changes to the league are near

[Snooperclyde]

With the talk of new teams, it's time to float potential new ideas to combat the problems and inequity in the current system. Following is an idea I came to earlier this year.


It is debatable if the game itself would be better off with fewer teams that are stronger or more teams where the elite players would have a greater impact, adding to the spectacle that is unique to our game.

I have revised, improved and more clearly explained my earlier proposal to compliment the expansion of our National competition. The fundamental requirements as set out in the handbook I received from you have been addressed in this proposal.

The start of this new format would best occur when the League expands beyond Eighteen teams.

Split level home and away season

AFL – would comprise twelve teams that would play each other twice, one home game and one away game, equaling twenty-two rounds.
The top seven teams would then go on to compete in the AFL final Eight. The remaining five teams from this league (eight through twelve) would go on to play off in the AFL Qualifying finals.

Australian Football Challenge League – would comprise all other teams that would play each other over twenty rounds. The top four teams 1v4 and 2v3 would then play off in a knockout finals competition in rounds 21 and 22 of the regular season.
The winner competing in the AFL FINAL EIGHT series. The three other finalists to go on to play in the AFL Qualifying Finals.
The remaining teams from this league could receive priority draft picks, at a cost, as they will automatically enter the AFCL the following season and miss all finals.
This League can expand or contract.


Three sets of finals


AFL FINAL EIGHT


Played as per the current system with the winner of the AFCL Finals entering eighth position. This is the essential ingredient that will marry the Leagues into One. These teams also enter the following season’s AFL.

AFCL FINALS



Played in rounds 21 and 22 of the regular season. A knockout competition 1v4 and 2v3 in round 21. The winners playing off in round 22.



AFL QUALIFYING FINALS



The winners of the four Qualifying Finals fill the remaining places in the following season’s AFL. The losing teams relegated to the AFCL.


An eight teams finals competition over two weeks as below.
(Six extra finals will excite fans from eight teams whose season would normally be over and the extra boost in revenue would be a bonus).


Week 1


1st Qualifying Final - 8th AFL v 11th AFL

2nd Qualifying Final - 9th AFL v 10th AFL

1st Relegation Final - 12th AFL v Lowest ranked loser of the AFCL Finals.
2nd Relegation Final - The other two teams from the AFCL knockout finals.

Week 2


3rd Qualifying Final – Loser QF1 v Winner RF2

4th Qualifying Final – Loser QF2 v Winner RF1



NAB Cup

The NAB CUP format would change anyway with any additional teams.
The format for the NAB CUP would change to a computer draw. The teams in the AFCL would not play one another. They would play at random, four games against the AFL teams. This will ensure the season is not too repetitive in the AFCL. In the future this could be revised as the AFCL expands.
The NAB cup is for the top teams to blood young players to see how they perform and the financially strapped teams go hard to receive the financial benefit and boost membership.
The winner of the NAB CUP would be determined on points and/or percentage and receive the existing financial boost.






Summary

The positives this tiered league would produce, far out way the negatives an ever-expanding competition would bring to the existing format.

• Valuable finals experience for the players and provide an intriguing end to the season for the lower placed clubs.

• Expansion of the League is normally met with much resistance. This model would actually benefit from further expansion in the future, as this would occur in the AFCL, leaving the AFL 100% fair.
• One team is guaranteed, and as many as three teams from the AFCL can gain entry to the AFL the following season.
• It is possible, however unlikely, to win the premiership from the AFCL. Any team able to do this would fully deserve their win.
• Tanking would be a discussion of the past, as gaining priority picks would come at a considerable cost.
• True equality for the teams competing in the AFL.
• In theory, many more games during the regular season would be competitive, clubs and supporters would benefit.

Entry into the AFL is not a right but a privilege that will be hard earned, so any new teams would enter the competition though the AFCL.
The new teams would benefit from entry into the AFCL, as they would be able to start with very young lists then mature into the competition.

Tasmania is an AFL state and should not be neglected, as it may be lost!
Melbourne is forecast to be the most populated city in Australia. So the future may provide support for all the steeped in history and tradition Melbourne based clubs.
Western Australia is growing rapidly and a third AFL team from this state is not too far down the track.

 

[crazywildhorse]

With the talk of new teams, it's time to float potential new ideas to combat the problems and inequity in the current system. Following is an idea I came to earlier this year.


It is debatable if the game itself would be better off with fewer teams that are stronger or more teams where the elite players would have a greater impact, adding to the spectacle that is unique to our game.

I have revised, improved and more clearly explained my earlier proposal to compliment the expansion of our National competition. The fundamental requirements as set out in the handbook I received from you have been addressed in this proposal.

The start of this new format would best occur when the League expands beyond Eighteen teams.

Split level home and away season

AFL – would comprise twelve teams that would play each other twice, one home game and one away game, equaling twenty-two rounds.
The top seven teams would then go on to compete in the AFL final Eight. The remaining five teams from this league (eight through twelve) would go on to play off in the AFL Qualifying finals.

Australian Football Challenge League – would comprise all other teams that would play each other over twenty rounds. The top four teams 1v4 and 2v3 would then play off in a knockout finals competition in rounds 21 and 22 of the regular season.
The winner competing in the AFL FINAL EIGHT series. The three other finalists to go on to play in the AFL Qualifying Finals.
The remaining teams from this league could receive priority draft picks, at a cost, as they will automatically enter the AFCL the following season and miss all finals.
This League can expand or contract.


Three sets of finals


AFL FINAL EIGHT


Played as per the current system with the winner of the AFCL Finals entering eighth position. This is the essential ingredient that will marry the Leagues into One. These teams also enter the following season’s AFL.

AFCL FINALS



Played in rounds 21 and 22 of the regular season. A knockout competition 1v4 and 2v3 in round 21. The winners playing off in round 22.



AFL QUALIFYING FINALS



The winners of the four Qualifying Finals fill the remaining places in the following season’s AFL. The losing teams relegated to the AFCL.


An eight teams finals competition over two weeks as below.
(Six extra finals will excite fans from eight teams whose season would normally be over and the extra boost in revenue would be a bonus).


Week 1


1st Qualifying Final - 8th AFL v 11th AFL

2nd Qualifying Final - 9th AFL v 10th AFL

1st Relegation Final - 12th AFL v Lowest ranked loser of the AFCL Finals.
2nd Relegation Final - The other two teams from the AFCL knockout finals.

Week 2


3rd Qualifying Final – Loser QF1 v Winner RF2

4th Qualifying Final – Loser QF2 v Winner RF1



NAB Cup

The NAB CUP format would change anyway with any additional teams.
The format for the NAB CUP would change to a computer draw. The teams in the AFCL would not play one another. They would play at random, four games against the AFL teams. This will ensure the season is not too repetitive in the AFCL. In the future this could be revised as the AFCL expands.
The NAB cup is for the top teams to blood young players to see how they perform and the financially strapped teams go hard to receive the financial benefit and boost membership.
The winner of the NAB CUP would be determined on points and/or percentage and receive the existing financial boost.






Summary

The positives this tiered league would produce, far out way the negatives an ever-expanding competition would bring to the existing format.

• Valuable finals experience for the players and provide an intriguing end to the season for the lower placed clubs.

• Expansion of the League is normally met with much resistance. This model would actually benefit from further expansion in the future, as this would occur in the AFCL, leaving the AFL 100% fair.
• One team is guaranteed, and as many as three teams from the AFCL can gain entry to the AFL the following season.
• It is possible, however unlikely, to win the premiership from the AFCL. Any team able to do this would fully deserve their win.
• Tanking would be a discussion of the past, as gaining priority picks would come at a considerable cost.
• True equality for the teams competing in the AFL.
• In theory, many more games during the regular season would be competitive, clubs and supporters would benefit.

Entry into the AFL is not a right but a privilege that will be hard earned, so any new teams would enter the competition though the AFCL.
The new teams would benefit from entry into the AFCL, as they would be able to start with very young lists then mature into the competition.

Tasmania is an AFL state and should not be neglected, as it may be lost!
Melbourne is forecast to be the most populated city in Australia. So the future may provide support for all the steeped in history and tradition Melbourne based clubs.
Western Australia is growing rapidly and a third AFL team from this state is not too far down the track.

Where did this come from?

 

[Snooperclyde]

Where did this come from?

It is an idea I thought of when the GC17 and GWS teams were to expand the competition. I sent the idea to AD and most of the clubs, some clubs saw potential while others did not reply.

Surely something has to change or the league fixtures will just get messier when we get more teams, and more teams is inevitable.

 

[Snooperclyde]

Sorry, I have posted this idea in the "Expansion thread".

Please post comments in that thread.

 

[FootyJunkie]

Nice idea, but I still think the AFL are keen on 2xDerby, 2xShowdown, 2xSydney, 2xSEQ, 2xBigFour matches.

 

[stickman11]

Western Sydney and Gold Coast will both flop, especially western sydney. You can't make AFL supporters out of people who have no interest in the game.

 

[maculosus]

I like it.

Fair draw is good.
Promotion/relegation is good.
As many as 3 teams promoted is good.
Lots of teams playing big games at the end of the season is good.
Tanking to be eliminated is unknown. (I believe it will still occur)
Attendences to AFCL games is unknown. (Lower clubs playing each other only)
Probably need a 20 team competition as a minimum of 8 in AFCL seems right.
The effect on a club/team in AFCL for a long period(say > 5 years) is unknown.

 

[melbournemartin]

Having 2 divisions is a horrible idea. Just because soccer does it overseas, we don't have to follow it. There's nothing wrong with just 1 big league, even if we get as big as having 20 teams.

 

[Snooperclyde]

I like it.

Fair draw is good.
Promotion/relegation is good.
As many as 3 teams promoted is good.
Lots of teams playing big games at the end of the season is good.
Tanking to be eliminated is unknown. (I believe it will still occur)
Attendences to AFCL games is unknown. (Lower clubs playing each other only)
Probably need a 20 team competition as a minimum of 8 in AFCL seems right.
The effect on a club/team in AFCL for a long period(say > 5 years) is unknown.

Tanking - all the teams in the AFCL that do not play finals would receive the priority picks.

Advantage
They rebuild or trade to fight back into the AFL.

Cost
No finals
No chance at gaining entry to the AFL the following year
No chance at winning the premmiership.

The teams in the AFCL that finish 1st through 4th get all of the above incentives. I think I would like my team to play off in the finals and maybe gain entry to the AFL than hold back for a priority pick.

True it is unknown, but languishing in the bottom twelve of a twenty team comp for a period will also have a detrimental effect.
The teams in the AFCL would win many more games each year than they would in one big league and therefore give supporters hope and enjoyment.
Normally by mid season half a dozen teams are out of the finals race and the year becomes long and challenging for supporter and club. This model keeps 16 teams on their toes, 16 clubs will have their supporters nervous and excited come finals time.

If my team was in the AFCL and finishes top four then
1) I would be going to watch them play off in the AFCL finals to see if we get to play in the AFL finals and auto entry to the AFL the following season.
2) If we miss that opportunity then i'm still going to the next final to see if we can win our way back into the AFL.

Remember we are talking about teams that would normally be in the news for possible tanking.

 

[skipjack]

Where did this come from?

Well done quoting about 100 lines of text for your one line question.

 

[SM]

Tanking would still happen as teams would just want to be lower down the pecking order and get a better pick.

 

[bergholt]

Tasmania is an AFL state and should not be neglected, as it may be lost!

what, is it going to secede, get towed over to new zealand and start playing rugby?

the rest of your post is ok, i'm sure there'll be some sort of two division system in the next twenty years, and it's not too hard to work out how. but this sentence scare-mongering about tassie is complete crap.

 

[bergholt]

Having 2 divisions is a horrible idea. Just because soccer does it overseas, we don't have to follow it. There's nothing wrong with just 1 big league, even if we get as big as having 20 teams.

nah, you're wrong. it's just unmanageable at that size. you end up with most of the season meaning nothing because there's such a big gulf between top and bottom.

on the other hand, if you have two divisions, you have promotion and relegation playoffs, potentially; and maybe a cross-division cup competition. it actually creates more games of interest, which is good for ratings. not to mention the two divs and the cup can all be sold separately for tv rights purposes. it multiplies your return.

in twenty years there'll be:

- ten vic sides
- one tassie side
- three nsw sides (one act)
- three qld sides
- three sa sides
- three wa sides
- one nt side

that's 24 sides. two divs of twelve works perfectly.

 

[Dekker]

Western Sydney and Gold Coast will both flop, especially western sydney. You can't make AFL supporters out of people who have no interest in the game.

Have to disagree with you here Stickman in respect to the Gold Coast. I was raised and played Aussie rules in WA, lived 10 years in Sydney and recently moved to the GC. Believe me I was surprised by the level of AFL interest on the GC, way more than Sydney and I would say more than Brisbane even. Appears there has been a heap of migration of people from AFL states to the GC in the last 10-15 years and this is where the support will come from. Nearly all I have spoken to will be buying memberships.
West Sydney on the other hand will need to convert supporters over from the rugby codes which will be hard.

 

[btdg]

Actually, all the problems of the draw should be fixed when the league expands to 18 teams.

3 divisions of 6 teams. Something along the lines of:

Division 1:
Carlton
Collingwood
Essendon
Richmond
Adelaide
Port Adelaide

Division 2:
West Coast
Fremantle
St Kilda
Bulldogs
Geelong
North Melbourne

Division 3:
Brisbane
Gold Coast
Sydney
West Sydney
Hawthorn (playing home games against divisional rivals in Tassie)
Melbourne (playing home games against divisional rivals in Darwin/Canberra)

Teams play their own division twice, and the other divisions once. This means that all main rivalries are accounted for, and the draw is fair and balanced. The top team from each division automatically gets a top 4 spot, along with the best second-placed team. Then, the 4 teams with the next best records round out the top 8. Finals are the same.

Priority picks are shifted to the pre-season draft, not the AFL draft (which makes a lot more sense, since it allows the club to sign an uncontracted player who can make the team immediately better, not a 17-yo who won't help the team for 3-4 years). The team in the league with the worst record gets pick 1 in the draft, the same as now.

Promotion/Relegation is a terrible system. Teams at the bottom bounce up and down like yo-yos, losing good players every time they go down (as players want to play at the highest level). You lose rivalries, in particular in the lower league. And there is little evidence to suggest it actually makes teams try harder in the short term.

 

[manboob]

what's the word im looking for....umm... fail.
2 divisions = rubbish. the end

 

[iluvparis]

Actually, all the problems of the draw should be fixed when the league expands to 18 teams.

3 divisions of 6 teams.

Teams play their own division twice, and the other divisions once. This means that all main rivalries are accounted for, and the draw is fair and balanced. The top team from each division automatically gets a top 4 spot, along with the best second-placed team. Then, the 4 teams with the next best records round out the top 8. Finals are the same.

Like it Shane

 

[legend166]

Promotion/relegation is horrible and will kill any team who gets stuck in the bottom.

Conference/division system is needed to ensure an actual draw, but other than that, nothing else should change.

 

[FootyJunkie]

- three nsw sides (one act)
.

No team in Canberra, best they can hope for is two GWS away games each year.

 

[Koutafidamedis]

Actually, all the problems of the draw should be fixed when the league expands to 18 teams.

3 divisions of 6 teams. Something along the lines of:

Division 1:
Carlton
Collingwood
Essendon
Richmond
Adelaide
Port Adelaide

Division 2:
West Coast
Fremantle
St Kilda
Bulldogs
Geelong
North Melbourne

Division 3:
Brisbane
Gold Coast
Sydney
West Sydney
Hawthorn (playing home games against divisional rivals in Tassie)
Melbourne (playing home games against divisional rivals in Darwin/Canberra)

Teams play their own division twice, and the other divisions once. This means that all main rivalries are accounted for, and the draw is fair and balanced. The top team from each division automatically gets a top 4 spot, along with the best second-placed team. Then, the 4 teams with the next best records round out the top 8. Finals are the same.

Priority picks are shifted to the pre-season draft, not the AFL draft (which makes a lot more sense, since it allows the club to sign an uncontracted player who can make the team immediately better, not a 17-yo who won't help the team for 3-4 years). The team in the league with the worst record gets pick 1 in the draft, the same as now.

Promotion/Relegation is a terrible system. Teams at the bottom bounce up and down like yo-yos, losing good players every time they go down (as players want to play at the highest level). You lose rivalries, in particular in the lower league. And there is little evidence to suggest it actually makes teams try harder in the short term.

Quality post.

I can't find a fault with this system.

If the AFL ever did something like this I doubt they would call name the Divisions 1, 2 and 3. What do people think they could name them.
Would they go the American route (Australian Division, National Division and ??) or could they possibly name them after past greats. (Hird, Voss, Buckley for example)

 

[Kid A]

In response to the first post in this thread, why do people feel the need to quote a whole god damn post when they just post a one line remark in response? One line that doesn't even deal with the post?

 

[Snooperclyde]

what, is it going to secede, get towed over to new zealand and start playing rugby?

the rest of your post is ok, i'm sure there'll be some sort of two division system in the next twenty years, and it's not too hard to work out how. but this sentence scare-mongering about tassie is complete crap.

Agree, i should have proofed it better. At the time of compilation the Tassie issue was raw and I felt for them.

 

[greennick]

Quality post.

I can't find a fault with this system.

If the AFL ever did something like this I doubt they would call name the Divisions 1, 2 and 3. What do people think they could name them.
Would they go the American route (Australian Division, National Division and ??) or could they possibly name them after past greats. (Hird, Voss, Buckley for example)

The American systems are named that way for historical reasons. In the NFL they were actually two separate leagues, the American Football League and National Football League before the merger in the 60's, after which they became the American Football Conference and the National Football Conference. They are also further divided into 4 divisions each, North, East, South and West (though these geographical separations are only loosely adhered to).

Calling it after greats would be rubbish. Who decides who gets chosen? This would really only appeal to the fans of the clubs of the players selected. Everyone else would hate it. I, for one, would not want to play in the Voss division.

I think geographical names would be the best.

Anyway, we all know this will not happen as the AFL likes their FIXture. They like being able to manipulate it to get the outcomes they want. However, they wouldn't want to allow something that "compromises the integrity of the comp" like NM playing a home game at Subi. Although, Melbourne selling a home game to Brisbane is totally different.

 

[POPE]

get a life dude

 

[btdg]

The American systems are named that way for historical reasons. In the NFL they were actually two separate leagues, the American Football League and National Football League before the merger in the 60's, after which they became the American Football Conference and the National Football Conference. They are also further divided into 4 divisions each, North, East, South and West (though these geographical separations are only loosely adhered to).

Calling it after greats would be rubbish. Who decides who gets chosen? This would really only appeal to the fans of the clubs of the players selected. Everyone else would hate it. I, for one, would not want to play in the Voss division.

I think geographical names would be the best.

Anyway, we all know this will not happen as the AFL likes their FIXture. They like being able to manipulate it to get the outcomes they want. However, they wouldn't want to allow something that "compromises the integrity of the comp" like NM playing a home game at Subi. Although, Melbourne selling a home game to Brisbane is totally different.

The best thing about divisions is that the AFL can keep their FIXture, but also remove the inequity. The can play the rivalry games twice a year, move teams around the country, and factor in selling games interstate. So long as teams compete directly within their division (and can get a guaranteed top 4 spot by beating the rest of their division), then its a fairer system than we have now.

I kind of agree on the champion names. You'd want someone who represented the teams in that division, but no-one wants to play in a division named after their bitter rivals.

Maybe it could be named after popular AFL commissioners. Imagine the action as Carlton and Essendon battle to become champions of "Demetriou division". Watch Brisbane and Sydney go to the wire in "Oakley conference". And wouldn't it be great seeing Freo take on North in the "Jackson league".