Oppo Camp Non-Essendon Football Thread XVI

[Mercurial89]

Sure, that sugercoats it.

In 2016 neither made the GF
In 2017 both did (the only year that's happened)
In 2018 1 of them did
In 2019 1 did
In 2020 neither did
In 2021 1 did.

So since it's been introduced, 5 out of the 12 teams that won the Qualifying Final have made it to the Grand Final. When it came in I said that it was taking away the biggest advantage if you win the qualifying final and turn it into a big disadvantage. The evidence so far has proven me correct.

It's been in 6 years so far, not the largest sample size.

You still get a week off which allows you to avoid 1 week injuries/fatigue.

Teams will better adjust to playing few games in a longer period of time once the clubs start to get a better feel for it. It's just probably not exactly know just yet.
We get a first week with every team as healthy as they are going to get after a slog of a year.

This gives us a nice spot where the quality of the product is at its best and teams outside the 4 have a better than nothing chance.

 

[eth-dog]

It's been in 6 years so far, not the largest sample size.

You still get a week off which allows you to avoid 1 week injuries/fatigue.

Teams will better adjust to playing few games in a longer period of time once the clubs start to get a better feel for it. It's just probably not exactly know just yet.
We get a first week with every team as healthy as they are going to get after a slog of a year.

This gives us a nice spot where the quality of the product is at its best and teams outside the 4 have a better than nothing chance.

What happens this week if Brisbane or Collingwood win again? How much evidence do we need? 6 years is a big enough sample size to can the idea and go back to the old version.

Get rid of it. It was a dumb idea before and it continues to show that.

 

[ant555]

Sure, that sugercoats it.

In 2016 neither made the GF
In 2017 both did (the only year that's happened)
In 2018 1 of them did
In 2019 1 did
In 2020 neither did
In 2021 1 did.

So since it's been introduced, 5 out of the 12 teams that won the Qualifying Final have made it to the Grand Final. When it came in I said that it was taking away the biggest advantage if you win the qualifying final and turn it into a big disadvantage. The evidence so far has proven me correct.

How are you correct ? my point is it has been more even since.
Are you really saying it coast Geelong two Grand Final births or that that Richmond was not the best team in 2019 or 2020 ?
There was no sugar coat at all Eth . Just simple facts .
Fact is top 4 sides have filled 9 of the 12 GF spots. This year there will be at least one.
Have a look further back.
In the previous 10 years before the bye the Qualifying final winners both made the GF 8 times and at least on made the GF in the other 2. That number is 18/20.
5/12 is just under 50% which is a reasonable spread and it is not like 5th to 8th are running over them every year.
Is that an even contest ? It was skewed that far the other way it was not funny.
The top 4 get a double chance. The top 4 make the GF more often than not.

 

[ant555]

What happens this week if Brisbane or Collingwood win again? How much evidence do we need? 6 years is a big enough sample size to can the idea and go back to the old version.

Get rid of it. It was a dumb idea before and it continues to show that.

Only if you think all the advantage should go to the Qualifying final winners.
Why not **** the whole finals series off and just let the top 4 play then.
Two years with none.
Two years with one.
One year with both.
Even.

 

[ScrappyCoCo]

Seems a ripper fella too.

Yeah, we need 3 of him and then we will have some real leadership.

 

[eth-dog]

How are you correct ? my point is it has been more even since.
Are you really saying it coast Geelong two Grand Final births or that that Richmond was not the best team in 2019 or 2020 ?
There was no sugar coat at all Eth . Just simple facts .
Fact is top 4 sides have filled 9 of the 12 GF spots. This year there will be at least one.
Have a look further back.
In the previous 10 years before the bye the Qualifying final winners both made the GF 8 times and at least on made the GF in the other 2. That number is 18/20.
5/12 is just under 50% which is a reasonable spread and it is not like 5th to 8th are running over them every year.
Is that an even contest ? It was skewed that far the other way it was not funny.
The top 4 get a double chance. The top 4 make the GF more often than not.

Only if you think all the advantage should go to the Qualifying final winners.
Why not * the whole finals series off and just let the top 4 play then.
Two years with none.
Two years with one.
One year with both.
Even.

You are more likely to miss the GF after winning the Qualifying Final since the pre-finals bye has come in. Fact. Having the week off used to be a big advantage as your stats have shown and since the bye has come in it's proven to be a disadvantage as mine have shown.

I would rather have the two teams who win the qualifying finals to have an advantage rather than a disadvantage. They earned one, and yet the pre-finals bye punishes them for it.

 

[Mercurial89]

What happens this week if Brisbane or Collingwood win again? How much evidence do we need? 6 years is a big enough sample size to can the idea and go back to the old version.

Get rid of it. It was a dumb idea before and it continues to show that.

6 years is not a big sample size when discussing "how do we handle a week off".
Teams didn't know how to handle it early, that intel will get better and shortened game time over a weekly period will become something that good teams will navigate.
6 years is not long.

I think it's too weighted towards the top 4 before this pre finals bye.
I also think that having fresh teams to fight it out in finals instead of seeing an injured fatigued 8th get knocked out by 80 points is a little more palatable.

It's not dumb, it's an alternate view.
You want a best of top 4.
I'd like a top 8.

 

[Nifft]

6 years is not a big sample size when discussing "how do we handle a week off".
Teams didn't know how to handle it early, that intel will get better and shortened game time over a weekly period will become something that good teams will navigate.
6 years is not long.

I think it's too weighted towards the top 4 before this pre finals bye.
I also think that having fresh teams to fight it out in finals instead of seeing an injured fatigued 8th get knocked out by 80 points is a little more palatable.

It's not dumb, it's an alternate view.
You want a best of top 4.
I'd like a top 8.

We could have a top 16 for finals... every team plays, every game is an elimination. In the first week 1st plays 16th, 2nd plays 15 etc. Second week there's 8 teams, then 4 teams the 3rd week, then 2.

 

[eth-dog]

6 years is not a big sample size when discussing "how do we handle a week off".
Teams didn't know how to handle it early, that intel will get better and shortened game time over a weekly period will become something that good teams will navigate.
6 years is not long.

I think it's too weighted towards the top 4 before this pre finals bye.
I also think that having fresh teams to fight it out in finals instead of seeing an injured fatigued 8th get knocked out by 80 points is a little more palatable.

It's not dumb, it's an alternate view.
You want a best of top 4.
I'd like a top 8.

I think you earn an advantage by finishing top 4. I think you should earn a bigger one by winning the qualifying final. So far that hasn't been the case. If both Sydney and Geelong win this week the numbers raise to 50% since the introduction.

As far as 8th getting knocked out by heaps, from 2009-2015 there were 4 blowouts (8+ goals) in there, to show a similar sample size.

One was Richmond against Port in 2014
One was North against West Coast in 2012
One was us against Carlton in 2012, when we ironically had the bye in the last round of the year due to having 17 teams
And the fourth was us against Adelaide in 2009

Since it's come in we've seen more elimination final blowouts than the previous 7 years actually:

2016 Adelaide smashed North and Bulldogs smashed West Coast
2017 Sydney smashed us
2018 GWS smashed Sydney
2019 West Coast smashed us and GWS smashed the Dogs
2020 they were close
2021 Dogs smashed us
2022 they were close

So that's 7 times we've seen blowouts week 1 from 14 elimination finals.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Just on finals teams playing 1 game on 4 weeks. This used to happen quite regularly under the old final five system. If you finished top you got a bye first week. If win second semi following week it was straight into GF and another week off in the Prelim. Most sides who went that root won GF. Of course teams that finished 4th or 5th had to win four straight with no week off after h&a.

 

[rumply]

 

[jmoo wan]

I find it weird that someone would pledge (under god no less) their loyalty to Australia and its people. Sounds a little cultish for mine.

Just to be clear - That was thepledge he made to become a citizen, and I have not bent the knee to King Charles Cavalier.

 

[faible]

I find it weird that someone would pledge (under god no less) their loyalty to Australia and its people. Sounds a little cultish for mine.

Just to be clear - That was thepledge he made to become a citizen, and I have not bent the knee to King Charles Cavalier.

A King Charles Cavalier would be a more popular leader to be fair…

 

[ant555]

You are more likely to miss the GF after winning the Qualifying Final since the pre-finals bye has come in. Fact. Having the week off used to be a big advantage as your stats have shown and since the bye has come in it's proven to be a disadvantage as mine have shown.

I would rather have the two teams who win the qualifying finals to have an advantage rather than a disadvantage. They earned one, and yet the pre-finals bye punishes them for it.

Not sure how you can say that previously it was okay that 8 out of the 10 years both Qualifying finals winners went through to the GF and say that is not skewed in the wrong direction. Like I said before if that is preferable we may as well just have a top 4 and two weeks of finals.

 

[sameolds33]

You are more likely to miss the GF after winning the Qualifying Final since the pre-finals bye has come in. Fact. Having the week off used to be a big advantage as your stats have shown and since the bye has come in it's proven to be a disadvantage as mine have shown.

I would rather have the two teams who win the qualifying finals to have an advantage rather than a disadvantage. They earned one, and yet the pre-finals bye punishes them for it.

but don't you get higher quality games with the week off? As an Essendon supporter I'm more interested in even games between the last 8 teams than advantages to either the top 4 or the bottom 4 of the teams making the finals

 

[TurnOnTheBrightLights]

Dees forward line was Achilles heel most of the season and proved their downfall in the finals. With Jackson leaving, Brown surely getting cut they have a lot to rebuild. Interesting (well sort of) to see what happens to Weideman

No T Mac for majority of the season was a massive factor - theyve got a kid in the 2's Van Rooyn who looks likely. Weideman is not AFL standard. They will continue to win games on the back of their midfield - Jackson leaving wont be the massive factor people think it will hes not been amazing this year. They should push him out the door and freo will hand them two first rd draft picks - they will be set up for a few years sad to say

 

[andleanback]

It takes away the biggest advantage to a top 4 team. You win week 1 and heading into the prelim you've played 1 game in 4 weeks.

I’m all for it. Top 2 already get double chance and 2 home finals, how many advantages do you want. You can’t blame the time, if you’re good enough to win you’ll get the job done. Demons played 1 game in 27 days coming into the grand final and pumped the dogs in the 2nd half.
Just as many teams have been going straight sets since 2016 ( cancel out the results of last year because their wasn’t the pre finals bye). If anything it’s made the final series, 1 - a higher standard of football and 2 - made it more even month of football. 7 years ago you might aswell just had the top 4 teams play in September. How is a team going on a run from 5-8th not good for footy and not good for the the neutral. Just as many teams have gone straight sets as their have been teams that have lost in the prelim in the week off. And it’s not like they’ve got belted, 3 of the results have been thrillers. Gws could’ve easily won in 2016, pies should’ve won in 2019 and port just lost in 2020.
Bye just makes the finals a whole better product imo.

 

[MiguelM]

I’m all for it. Top 2 already get double chance and 2 home finals, how many advantages do you want. You can’t blame the time, if you’re good enough to win you’ll get the job done. Demons played 1 game in 27 days coming into the grand final and pumped the dogs in the 2nd half.
Just as many teams have been going straight sets since 2016 ( cancel out the results of last year because their wasn’t the pre finals bye). If anything it’s made the final series, 1 - a higher standard of football and 2 - made it more even month of football. 7 years ago you might aswell just had the top 4 teams play in September. How is a team going on a run from 5-8th not good for footy and not good for the the neutral. Just as many teams have gone straight sets as their have been teams that have lost in the prelim in the week off. And it’s not like they’ve got belted, 3 of the results have been thrillers. Gws could’ve easily won in 2016, pies should’ve won in 2019 and port just lost in 2020.
Bye just makes the finals a whole better product imo.

I am a convert to the bye. Hate there is no footy but this year's finals series has been one of the best I can remember. There has only been one stinker, last night with Freo.

 

[BrunoV]

What’s going on at Freo??
Lobb, Acres, Logue, ruck guy, and now apparently Liam Henry wanting out ( I may have missed someone)

It was also reported that Kosi Pickett may be on the move (wtf?)

Anyone keen on Henry?
What’s he worth (second rounder and a fourth rounder back?)

Kosi…what’s he worth??

This is what I think the rationale is.

Their 2022 best 22 forward line included neither Logue nor Amiss. Taberner is their number 1 but had his year wrecked by injury. Fyfe is probably as much a forward these days as he is a mid.

So Jackson, at least in terms of the structure is a straight swap for Lobb.

A combination of Taberner, Amiss, who I thought looked sensational in the bits of the semi I saw, and Fyfe replace Logue.

Using a pick from trading Lobb and this years first round they exchange the flake of Lobb with the potential of Jackson.

Johnson and Erasmus are very similar to Acres both in size and athleticism (both very highly touted juniors and locals). I suppose they wear the temporary downgrade and cap relief. Sam Sturt is another high pick with similar attributes (though I wouldn't be surprised if he's delisted).

Meek should be worth at least a second round selection. They dont want him playing anyway. So they downgrade to a mature journeyman quite easily and get the picks to deal for Jackson or to take to the draft.

Ryan is an interesting one. If he can't get a gig behind Schultz and Switkowski we know work rate is the issue. He's infinitely more talented.

They'll likely shed Tucker and Blakely too.

They've built such a deep squad that I think they can wear the risk on Jackson just being a wild card as opposed to the gun key forward you'd assume he is to be paid to play in a team with Darcy.

 

[eth-dog]

This is what I think the rationale is.

Their 2022 best 22 forward line included neither Logue nor Amiss. Taberner is their number 1 but had his year wrecked by injury. Fyfe is probably as much a forward these days as he is a mid.

So Jackson, at least in terms of the structure is a straight swap for Lobb.

A combination of Taberner, Amiss, who I thought looked sensational in the bits of the semi I saw, and Fyfe replace Logue.

So using a pick from trading Lobb and this years first round they exchange the flake of Lobb with the potential of Jackson.

Johnson and Erasmus are very similar to Acres both in size and athleticism (both very highly touted juniors and locals). I suppose they wear the temporary downgrade and cap relief. Sam Sturt is another high pick with similar attributes (though I wouldn't be surprised if he's delisted).

Meek should be worth at least a second round selection. They dont want him playing anyway. So they downgrade to a mature journeyman quite easily and get the picks to deal for Jackson or to take to the draft.

Ryan is an interesting one. If he can't get a gig behind Schultz and Switkowski we know work rate is the issue. He's infinitely more talented.

They'll likely shed Tucker and Blakely too.

They've built such a deep squad that I think they can wear the risk on Jackson just being a wild card as opposed to the gun key forward you'd assume he is to be paid to play in a team with Darcy.

I'm guessing Meek will be part of the Jackson trade.

I think long term they're going to look at Treacy, Amiss and Jackson as three very mobile talls inside 50, Taberner is slowing down and has had a reasonable year in the WAFL this year.

Henry I'd be very interested in if he wants out.

 

[citizen-erased]

This is what I think the rationale is.

Their 2022 best 22 forward line included neither Logue nor Amiss. Taberner is their number 1 but had his year wrecked by injury. Fyfe is probably as much a forward these days as he is a mid.

So Jackson, at least in terms of the structure is a straight swap for Lobb.

A combination of Taberner, Amiss, who I thought looked sensational in the bits of the semi I saw, and Fyfe replace Logue.

Using a pick from trading Lobb and this years first round they exchange the flake of Lobb with the potential of Jackson.

Johnson and Erasmus are very similar to Acres both in size and athleticism (both very highly touted juniors and locals). I suppose they wear the temporary downgrade and cap relief. Sam Sturt is another high pick with similar attributes (though I wouldn't be surprised if he's delisted).

Meek should be worth at least a second round selection. They dont want him playing anyway. So they downgrade to a mature journeyman quite easily and get the picks to deal for Jackson or to take to the draft.

Ryan is an interesting one. If he can't get a gig behind Schultz and Switkowski we know work rate is the issue. He's infinitely more talented.

They'll likely shed Tucker and Blakely too.

They've built such a deep squad that I think they can wear the risk on Jackson just being a wild card as opposed to the gun key forward you'd assume he is to be paid to play in a team with Darcy.

the 22 they can build is impressive. I think they can keep Logue & Henry tbh.

Cox Pearce Ryan
Young Logue Walker
Clark Brayshaw Chapman
Henry Jackson Fredericks
Schultz Taberner Amiss
Darcy Serong Brodie
Johnson Erasmus O'Driscoll Fyfe

 

[eth-dog]

the 22 they can build is impressive. I think they can keep Logue & Henry tbh.

Cox Pearce Ryan
Young Logue Walker
Clark Brayshaw Chapman
Henry Jackson Fredericks
Schultz Taberner Amiss
Darcy Serong Brodie
Johnson Erasmus O'Driscoll Fyfe

Clark has been tried and failed on a wing, why would they move him there?

They'll trade Logue because Pearce and Cox are better, Chapman and Young look like exceptional intercept defenders (no point wasting Chapman on a wing) and then Ryan, Walker and Clark are very good medium defenders.

Fredericks and Schultz are going great guns, plus young Western looks to be pretty capable from his WAFL stats as a small. Can see them letting Henry go, depending on what they can get.

I wonder if Fyfe captains next year. I'd be looking at Ryan, honestly.

 

[citizen-erased]

Clark has been tried and failed on a wing, why would they move him there?

They'll trade Logue because Pearce and Cox are better, Chapman and Young look like exceptional intercept defenders (no point wasting Chapman on a wing) and then Ryan, Walker and Clark are very good medium defenders.

Fredericks and Schultz are going great guns, plus young Western looks to be pretty capable from his WAFL stats as a small. Can see them letting Henry go, depending on what they can get.

I wonder if Fyfe captains next year. I'd be looking at Ryan, honestly.

Love the build they've done.
I was mainly plotting the best 22 i see of their future.

 

[Lore]

 

[citizen-erased]

So, we send him an application form?