Sydney lost to Richmond.. And Carlton got within a goal at the SCG. What's your point?
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
The extra week off for QF winners - good or bad?
- Thread starter philohk
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Sydney lost to Richmond.. And Carlton got within a goal at the SCG. What's your point?
catstorm
Premium Platinum
- Dec 9, 2011
- 7,382
- 9,234
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Toronto Raptors, Cincinnati Bengals
You're making an automatic assumption Geelong would lose both those games to anyone other than Essendon and Brisbane.
A complete unmitigated disaster! You cannot expect finely tuned athletes who train from November through to March and then begin a 23 round qualifying period, to then all of a sudden have the rug pulled out from them with regards to their preparation with one game in 27 days as a reward for winning? It's total bullshit. You must keep playing, maintain momentum and keep that adrenaline rush flowing. Finishing top 4 is now no longer a prerequisite. The best thing that happened to the Swans was to lose to GWS, the best thing that happened to the Dogs was the post season "Bye". The system was fine for years until teams like North and Freo buggered it up in 2015 knowing the AFL had no balls in which to stop them. The "bye" was Gil the dill's idea so i reckon it's here to stay, but it changes everything, training, preparation, psyche etc. 5th is the best place to be in 2017.
No I am not, I am pointing out that the fixture can possibly land you somewhere that may not be where you really sit. As all sides don't have the same fixture.
Exactly.
Eagleboy68
Cancelled
- Jun 11, 2015
- 5,689
- 5,649
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Exactly. And proof is both sides who had the 2 weeks off lost.
I will go further to say the bulldogs would not have beaten the eagles if there was not bye. They brought in 5 key players that would not have played otherwise.
- Aug 3, 2014
- 16,559
- 24,072
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- New England Patriots, Man City
- Banned
- #83
How come no one in America complains about the break they have between the conference championship games and the Superbowl ?
- Aug 3, 2014
- 16,559
- 24,072
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- New England Patriots, Man City
- Banned
- #84
Cry me a river. You don't know that. Just strikes me as ungracious sour grapes
johndemonic
Team Captain
- Sep 9, 2016
- 383
- 532
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
What about the proof that two teams coming from outside the 8 in 2015 (Geel & GWS) winning both their qualifying finals and having a week off has only happened once before, 10 years ago. It's so uncommon.
Lets face it, Geelong were a 10th team without Danger playing an underdone Henderson. And GWS just came up against a team that wanted it more. Both losers were playing teams that have been up there consistently over the last 2 years.
Meh the eagles would have lasted precisely one more week - geelong prob had more of a case
The week off is good. This year you could throw a blanket over the top seven teams. Its just a matter of best team on the day. The rest is still an advantage though.
Swans won after a six day break and apparently they had an unfair advantage....heard it all now...
Swans won after a six day break and apparently they had an unfair advantage....heard it all now...
Geelong had no case. No excuses, they got blown away due to overeliance on two players and a terrible forward structure.
Eagleboy68
Cancelled
- Jun 11, 2015
- 5,689
- 5,649
- AFL Club
- West Coast
And yet even Luke Beveridge said after the game he didn't like the bye but it helped his team massively as those players wouldn't have played otherwise.
Go figure.
johndemonic
Team Captain
- Sep 9, 2016
- 383
- 532
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
What if the reverse is true and the bye prevented Geelong and GWS from losing by more points?
The only answer is a bigger sample size. /Thread
The only answer is a bigger sample size. /Thread
nobbyiscool
Brownlow Medallist
- Aug 11, 2006
- 21,788
- 24,205
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
- Other Teams
- TasTigers, JJs, MV, CRaiders, PhEagles
I don't think the week off is hurting teams at all, and it was curious watching Ross Lyon suggest that it has on Friday night.
More than anyone else in footy, Ross Lyon is responsible for the pre-finals bye. While it obviously didn't work out for his team, his plan at Freo last season was exactly what has happened this year - he rested players in the final round, hoped to win a qualifying final, and then hoped to subsequently play a preliminary final with the majority of his key players having only played 1 game in about 27 days.
Certainly it has benefited teams - the Dogs clearly got players back for their elimination final that wouldn't have been available a week earlier. But it hasn't hurt teams IMO.
More than anyone else in footy, Ross Lyon is responsible for the pre-finals bye. While it obviously didn't work out for his team, his plan at Freo last season was exactly what has happened this year - he rested players in the final round, hoped to win a qualifying final, and then hoped to subsequently play a preliminary final with the majority of his key players having only played 1 game in about 27 days.
Certainly it has benefited teams - the Dogs clearly got players back for their elimination final that wouldn't have been available a week earlier. But it hasn't hurt teams IMO.
nobbyiscool
Brownlow Medallist
- Aug 11, 2006
- 21,788
- 24,205
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
- Other Teams
- TasTigers, JJs, MV, CRaiders, PhEagles
I understand that this post is quite emotive because of the team that you support.
But I just think it's a little ignorant of other sports.
In the NFL the top 2 teams in each conference get a week off, play 2 finals, then get another week off before the Superbowl.
In a number of European football leagues they take a Christmas/New Year break for 4 weeks and come back hitting the ground running; they also have players who fly half way around the world for international games, don't get a game, and go back to playing again 2 weeks later having essentially flown around the world.
In rugby league at Origin time a lot of players only play 1 game within a 3 week period, it doesn't affect them.
In cricket we deliberately rest players from matches or series and we watch them come back as good as they were before (see Starc in the recent Sri Lanka series.)
IF the bye has negatively affected teams - and I don't accept that it has - it's down to poor planning from the teams coaching, medical and sports science teams. It's not because of anything the AFL has done.
- Sep 15, 2011
- 33,406
- 52,315
- AFL Club
- West Coast
The difference with those examples is both or all teams play under the same conditions. That's not the case here.
nobbyiscool
Brownlow Medallist
- Aug 11, 2006
- 21,788
- 24,205
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
- Other Teams
- TasTigers, JJs, MV, CRaiders, PhEagles
No they're not.
NFL teams play their divisional playoff against teams who won their wildcard game the week before.
Cricket teams all have differing schedules. So do football teams - a lot more players travel around the world from Man City, Juventus, Barcelona etc than do players for Hull City, Chievo or Alaves.
And in the NRL the Storm and Broncos typically lose 3, 4, 5 players - compare that with my Raiders who typically lose 1.
They aren't playing under the same conditions at all.
Sylvia Saint
Cancelled
No it isn't. Adelaide finished 5th and blew any chances they had of a flag right there. Finishing top 4 is still crucial but winning the qualifying final is probably not as important as it once was.
Personally I like the bye. What's the point of having a top 8 if only four of those sides have any real shot of making it? This year we've seen the minor premiers advance and the Bulldogs prove finishing outside the top 4 doesn't spell the end of your season (and why should it, they went 15/7!).
Keep the bye.
- Thread starter
- #96
When I first started thinking about this it was because I thought our percentage might see us finish 5 to 8, then we could reset and play a few good games in a row. Turns out that's the Dogs. Good for them!
Anyway, without a better sample size I don't think we can say for sure, but my feeling is it did hurt the QF winners a bit (as well as helping the Dogs to get those players right). Just look at the way the Swans and Dogs started their games. And the running over the top you often see from the QF winners wasn't a factor.
Interestingly, the Geelong-Swans game turned out almost exactly the same on the scoreboard as their previous one - but the Cats actually did better than the KP game in inside 50s and shots at goal. So maybe the Swans just know how to beat them. But would Geelong have spudded up the start of the game so badly without the break? Maybe, maybe not. I don't think they were a bad side flattered by their draw - didn't they have the best record against the top 8?
Also, re Ross Lyon trying to do this last year, I don't know that he was that keen on the lack of game time - he probably just balanced that against the risk of injury and decided it was worth it.
Anyway, without a better sample size I don't think we can say for sure, but my feeling is it did hurt the QF winners a bit (as well as helping the Dogs to get those players right). Just look at the way the Swans and Dogs started their games. And the running over the top you often see from the QF winners wasn't a factor.
Interestingly, the Geelong-Swans game turned out almost exactly the same on the scoreboard as their previous one - but the Cats actually did better than the KP game in inside 50s and shots at goal. So maybe the Swans just know how to beat them. But would Geelong have spudded up the start of the game so badly without the break? Maybe, maybe not. I don't think they were a bad side flattered by their draw - didn't they have the best record against the top 8?
Also, re Ross Lyon trying to do this last year, I don't know that he was that keen on the lack of game time - he probably just balanced that against the risk of injury and decided it was worth it.
Last edited:
johndemonic
Team Captain
- Sep 9, 2016
- 383
- 532
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Nobody seems to be acknowledging that we had an incredibly rare event this year, two qualifying final winners weren't even in the 8 the year before. It hardly paints a picture of invincibility as home preliminary final hosts.
Geelong played top 8 sides 10 times during the year with an 8-2 record, how has the fixture helped them really? They actually lost to teams 12th or below 3 times! You still have to win games, i'm sorry now they beat Richmond in the comeback match, we would've been better off finishing 5th!
Geelong had a 8 - 2 record against top 8 sides; they deserved where they finished. They just had the misfortune of playing against Sydney who seem to have a good grasp on how to beat them, not to mention an incredibly deep midfield. If it was gws at the MCG Geelong probably wou.ld have won.
In any case everyone knew this was happening and thus if Geelong did lose because of the weeks off then they should have prepared better. It's their fault not the AFL's. I quite liked this final series minus Ye the Geelong loss of course and if the bye means that it gives teams in the 5 - 8 a better chance then so be it. So much more exciting now - it's no longer a dead rubber you fall outside the top 4
Armchair Critic
Cancelled
- Feb 8, 2013
- 9,566
- 11,241
- AFL Club
- Sydney
We smashed Geelong twice.We are not a good match up for them .Geelongs best is not close to ours IMO and it was proven twice
