New system for AFL fixtures?

[SunshineBoy]

After having a good first 18 rounds and making the top 6 you get rewarded by being forced to play other too 6 teams. Seems pretty bullshit to me and it would encourage teams to tank to get an easy draw for last 5 rounds.

Tanking doesn’t happen in the afl

 

[Cave_Man]

About eight years ago I came up with an idea for AFL fixtures, which I emailed to Gerard Whately who was then at the ABC, but never heard anything back. I was thinking about it again and thought maybe this is a good place to raise it.

It's a way to give all teams something to play for towards the end of the season, and also create better quality matches leading into the finals.

Rounds 1 to 18 involve each team playing every other team, plus one bye per team. After round 18, the top six, middle six and bottom six would be set in stone, although not the positions within each set of six.

Maybe at that point you have the second bye for each team, rather than after round 23? Maybe you launch the AFLW season then? Whatever.

Then during rounds 19 to 23, each set of six teams play against each other. The top six are trying to get double chances and home finals. The middle six are competing for the final two positions in the eight, and the bottom six are competing for a draft advantage of some kind. Maybe you don't just give the top draft pick to the bottom team, but to the best performing team in the bottom six. Or maybe an additional second or third round pick to the best performing bottom six team. Something. I'm not sure how it would look, but something.

This would mean that in the last month before finals, all games should theoretically be between relatively evenly matched sides, and many would have a direct bearing on the finals. For example, you wouldn't have Geelong playing West Coast at Kardinia Park in round 23, as is happening this week.

Another advantage is that it eliminates the unfairness of the current draw. The Cats play both West Coast and North twice this season, which gives them a huge leg-up.

Interested in any comments.

An idea could be that after 18 rounds/everyone has played each other once could be to split teams into
1. The top 6,
2.’Odds’ (7,9,11,13,15,17)
3.’Evens’ (7,10,12,14,16,18)

The Top 6 are guaranteed finals and playing off for the double chance. The Mclelland trophy could also be awarded at the end of round 18 to the top team - recognising the best performed team before double up games. A bonus 4 points also awarded to the trophy winner would be an interesting element as well.

The 3 top teams in each group would play 3 home/2 away.

Odds/Evens would have points/% reset. It’d essentially become a 5 week shootout and give some hope to teams lower down the ladder.

In the pre finals bye weekend 1st Odds would play 2nd Evens (and vice versa) in ‘wildcard’ games for the last 2 spots in the 8

Put teams in pots of 4 (lowest to highest) and pick them out for order of draft.

Just some thoughts on how I think the season could look a bit more interesting.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Bring in Tasmania and another team in Perth.
Makes 20.
Each team plays each other once.
19 game season.
Top 10 play off in an extended 5 week finals.

Problemo solved.

Every argument one can make for '3rd team in Perth' can be made for 'why dont you support Freo?'
What's the point of a new team when the current one only goes at 70% capacity.

Sure. Back in the days of Subiaco, there was an argument to be had, but the move to Optus has made it abundantly clear that there's no need for a 3rd team in Perth.

 

[The_Wookie]

I think your misunderstanding. If your 6th after the first 17 matches, you are locked away in the top 6. 7-12th play off for the last two spots in the final 8.

Would have made this season a lot less interesting.

 

[SuperVolley11]

Would have made this season a lot less interesting.

Not really. It just would of been a different situation.

 

[SurreyBlue]

Create 4 new sides - Tassie, NT or lets get brave New Zealand and 1 additional team in Adelaide and Perth.
Every team plays each other once. Done.

 

[yamborghinidream]

It shouldn't be "random" year to year. The only way to bring in a bit of transparency is to have the fixture known years out, kind of like the NFL (although they still have some randomness with the three games played vs opponents in the same finishing spot)

Lock in 1-2 'rivalry' double ups (essentially what's already done) that are played annually, the derbies are obvious and the Victorian teams can figure it out amongst themselves.

The rest should be gridded up in a way that makes sense with travel (so no dual trips to Perth or Qld within a year)

There will still be differing difficulties with the fixtures obviously but to me this is better than the selection of teams in ladder brackets as they do it now (which is manipulated for $). At least you'd know from the outset and there's no reason to complain.

 

[Igavemyloveachicken]

It shouldn't be "random" year to year. The only way to bring in a bit of transparency is to have the fixture known years out, kind of like the NFL (although they still have some randomness with the three games played vs opponents in the same finishing spot)

Lock in 1-2 'rivalry' double ups (essentially what's already done) that are played annually, the derbies are obvious and the Victorian teams can figure it out amongst themselves.

The rest should be gridded up in a way that makes sense with travel (so no dual trips to Perth or Qld within a year)

There will still be differing difficulties with the fixtures obviously but to me this is better than the selection of teams in ladder brackets as they do it now (which is manipulated for $). At least you'd know from the outset and there's no reason to complain.

I agree, player every team rounds 1 to 17, then repeat that fixture again from round 18 onwards with home advantage reversed until the cycle is completed into the next year...then repeat the fixture from rounds 1 to 17 again and so on.

I could tell you who would play who 5 years from now if you needed to know.

The only thing you'd give up is some of the second up blockbusters each year and certain set games like Essendon v Collingwood on ANZAC Day every year.

 

[Billy ray]

The must have is that in Rounds 1-17 everyone plays everyone else once. And also that the following year, if you played at home against a team, you then play away.

Ideally then a bye.

Then you get the 6 double up games - and you play 2 each against teams from prior year ladder that finished 1-6, 7-12, 13-18.

Yes thats a 23 game season. 24 rounds, 1 bye.

final round should have no sunday games, and multiple game on thursday or friday night - that way the finals can start on thursday the following week (no pre-finals bye). The bye can be the weekend before the grand final to ensure the game of the year has the two teams at tip top shape. can put brownlow on that bye weekend sunday night perhaps.

 

[Coolangatta]

The must have is that in Rounds 1-17 everyone plays everyone else once. And also that the following year, if you played at home against a team, you then play away.

Ideally then a bye.

Then you get the 6 double up games - and you play 2 each against teams from prior year ladder that finished 1-6, 7-12, 13-18.

Yes thats a 23 game season. 24 rounds, 1 bye.

final round should have no sunday games, and multiple game on thursday or friday night - that way the finals can start on thursday the following week (no pre-finals bye). The bye can be the weekend before the grand final to ensure the game of the year has the two teams at tip top shape. can put brownlow on that bye weekend sunday night perhaps.

Agree with this.

If you have 23 rounds though it should be 11h 11a 1n.

 

[Billy ray]

Agree with this.

If you have 23 rounds though it should be 11h 11a 1n.

Yep. 11 and 11. Additional can be at country venues. Or magic round.

 

[endure]

There's a bye for each club so technically every team plays 22 games before finals. You wouldn't need that added game in the fixture.

 

[Billy ray]

and when we get tassie, we should go to the final 10 (which is 2 mcintyre final 5's)

see this based on this year's ladder, Tassie finished 19th, top team always wins in this illustrated examples




this clearly is garbage as i missed an extra week of finals we need between week 3 and 4 in my example!
im an idiot
anyway, two top 5s needed which instead of odds and evens, starts like this (such that higher team gets easier game)

 

[AndyD]

and when we get tassie, we should go to the final 10 (which is 2 mcintyre final 5's)

see this based on this year's ladder, Tassie finished 19th, top team always wins in this illustrated examples

View attachment 1512676

So 8th and 4th end up with the an easier game than 5th and 3rd respectively because you like splitting them up into odds/evens? Why should 3rd play a harder seed (5th in week 1) than 4th (6th in week 1)? I’d also assume it would get worse as it goes along if a higher placed seed loses


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JohnZ]

Create 4 new sides - Tassie, NT or lets get brave New Zealand and 1 additional team in Adelaide and Perth.
Every team plays each other once. Done.

6 new teams, two divisions (top 12 and bottom 12, with 4 promoted/relegated from each division each season)

12 teams in each goes back to the old VFL of 22 proper H+A games. Top 5 for Div 1 and Top 4 for Div 2 in finals.

Hobart (play out of new stadium at Macquarie Point)
Launceston (play out of york park with a KP style upgrade, stand by stand, over a 10-15 year period)
Auckland (play out of the new cricket oval at western springs)
Canberra (play out of manaka with a KP style upgrade, stand by stand, over a 10-15 year period)
NTQLD (Darwin, the Alice and Cairns - 4/3/4 games respectively)
WA3 (Peel or Joondalup, somewhere north. Freo and WA3 to play a few games each year at a suburban ground).

At the same time, introduce an AFL reserves and let the VFL be the equivalent of the SANFL and WAFL. Can keep it as an East Coast comp if needed/wanted. AFL reserves play a curtain raiser every game. AFL reserves need to have at half playing under 22 years old. Draftees come in on 4 year contracts.

 

[AndyD]

6 new teams, two divisions (top 12 and bottom 12, with 4 promoted/relegated from each division each season)

12 teams in each goes back to the old VFL of 22 proper H+A games. Top 5 for Div 1 and Top 4 for Div 2 in finals.

Hobart (play out of new stadium at Macquarie Point)
Launceston (play out of york park with a KP style upgrade, stand by stand, over a 10-15 year period)
Auckland (play out of the new cricket oval at western springs)
Canberra (play out of manaka with a KP style upgrade, stand by stand, over a 10-15 year period)
NTQLD (Darwin, the Alice and Cairns - 4/3/4 games respectively)
WA3 (Peel or Joondalup, somewhere north. Freo and WA3 to play a few games each year at a suburban ground).

At the same time, introduce an AFL reserves and let the VFL be the equivalent of the SANFL and WAFL. Can keep it as an East Coast comp if needed/wanted. AFL reserves play a curtain raiser every game. AFL reserves need to have at half playing under 22 years old. Draftees come in on 4 year contracts.

Certainly creates a bunch of new TV content, but if there was a serious market for a secondary comp/tier, one of the state leagues would’ve likely gotten a better TV deal. The more workable secondary comp would be a televised U18/19 type comp, which wouldn’t be directly competing with the existing comp for eyeballs/attention


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JohnZ]

Certainly creates a bunch of new TV content, but if there was a serious market for a secondary comp/tier, one of the state leagues would’ve likely gotten a better TV deal. The more workable secondary comp would be a televised U18/19 type comp, which wouldn’t be directly competing with the existing comp for eyeballs/attention


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The two divisions are less about TV and more about comp fairness. 12 teams makes a 22 H+A season. Having 18-24 teams in one comp means that you always have a large gap between best and worst teams. Plus having a Div2 flag is a good replacement for the old night series finals and pre-season cups.

But having up to 12 games per week to sell means more money. TV networks like the AFL because it consistently rates. It doesn't drop off after a few seasons like Big Brother or My Kitchen Rules.

 

[Billy ray]

So 8th and 4th end up with the an easier game than 5th and 3rd respectively because you like splitting them up into odds/evens? Why should 3rd play a harder seed (5th in week 1) than 4th (6th in week 1)? I’d also assume it would get worse as it goes along if a higher placed seed loses


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ill rejig it to get away from odds and evens.
in any system, as you move away from the higher place winning it always goes out of whack - all you can do is set it up for if higher team always wins - which granted, does require a move away from odds and evens

 

[AndyD]

The two divisions are less about TV and more about comp fairness. 12 teams makes a 22 H+A season. Having 18-24 teams in one comp means that you always have a large gap between best and worst teams. Plus having a Div2 flag is a good replacement for the old night series finals and pre-season cups.

But having up to 12 games per week to sell means more money. TV networks like the AFL because it consistently rates. It doesn't drop off after a few seasons like Big Brother or My Kitchen Rules.

Collingwoods run this year shows the gap between 17th and the top 4 between years isn’t as big as it can seem (ignoring the fact they beat last years premier). Collingwood this year are also a pretty decent argument against relegation in the AFL. Had they been relegated, a team that results showed clearly deserved to be in the top level would’ve missed out.

And while there are additional games under your model, it is hard to think that the Div 2 comps would be treated the same as the Div 1 comp. Currently there are 9 games played in the top level each week. Your proposal would remove 3 of those top level games that could be televised. There is little to no evidence that replacing bottom of the ladder top level games with top of the ladder lower level games would lead to a net positive. It will just mean less people will watch the top level.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Billy ray]

maybe its like this with two top 5s

 

[JohnZ]

Collingwoods run this year shows the gap between 17th and the top 4 between years isn’t as big as it can seem (ignoring the fact they beat last years premier). Collingwood this year are also a pretty decent argument against relegation in the AFL. Had they been relegated, a team that results showed clearly deserved to be in the top level would’ve missed out.

And while there are additional games under your model, it is hard to think that the Div 2 comps would be treated the same as the Div 1 comp. Currently there are 9 games played in the top level each week. Your proposal would remove 3 of those top level games that could be televised. There is little to no evidence that replacing bottom of the ladder top level games with top of the ladder lower level games would lead to a net positive. It will just mean less people will watch the top level.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Collingwood are an odd case. From top 4 to 17 back to top 4 over a few years. Under my proposal they'd have been relegated, won the flag this year and been promoted back.

12 games of AFL is still 12 games of AFL. For the TV networks it's better, because you can guarantee that the 6 Div1 games will be of better quality every week (essentially like a top 8 game this year), and the current bottom 6 teams will be more competitive in a league of similar level making for a better TV product too (less blowouts which leads to people changing the channel).

As long as the AFL packages games smartly (ie buying a Div1 game means having to show a Div2 game on FTA, all 12 games on streaming) then no one is worse off, and gives "worse" teams more exposure.

 

[BigVic]

The must have is that in Rounds 1-17 everyone plays everyone else once. And also that the following year, if you played at home against a team, you then play away.

Ideally then a bye.

Then you get the 6 double up games - and you play 2 each against teams from prior year ladder that finished 1-6, 7-12, 13-18.

Yes thats a 23 game season. 24 rounds, 1 bye.

final round should have no sunday games, and multiple game on thursday or friday night - that way the finals can start on thursday the following week (no pre-finals bye). The bye can be the weekend before the grand final to ensure the game of the year has the two teams at tip top shape. can put brownlow on that bye weekend sunday night perhaps.

A good idea

and when we get tassie, we should go to the final 10 (which is 2 mcintyre final 5's)

see this based on this year's ladder, Tassie finished 19th, top team always wins in this illustrated examples

View attachment 1512676


this clearly is garbage as i missed an extra week of finals we need between week 3 and 4 in my example!
im an idiot
anyway, two top 5s needed which instead of odds and evens, starts like this (such that higher team gets easier game)

View attachment 1512768

Nice fixture model for Tasmania