very funny Deck. I think 10 teams missing out is a lot though. More finalists the better, and top 10 would be okay, with it being very tough to do from 10th and more meaning to make the top 6
Tbh, I don’t even like top 8. It makes being a finalist… well… a 50/50.
1 Like
But it just can’t be less anymore. Finals = money.
I was also very bored during the pre finals bye. I’d be happy to watch 2 games that weekend
Reckon this and last season are more even than ever. And I think ditching 2 teams and merging 2 more would help that too. As an EPL fan I find it laughable that we don’t play everyone twice (or at least once and only once)
It’d be interesting to see if the same applies to the top 10, but cbf figuring it out.
If you want to get real, 16 out of 17 years with the current system a top 4 team has won the flag, so the bottom half of the 8 is dead weight too.
1 Like
I’d be really surprised if the AFL had any interest in playing less games in a season. Even though it would be a better comp with less teams. And fark the EPL, they don’t even play finals
1 Like
No of course. They’d never reduce the games.
And I actually like that there’s no finals in EPL. Soccer is a game where the best team over the journey deserves to win otherwise smash and grab wins can just be too frequent/unjust.
I have no objection to the AFL Finals but having the ladder/minor premiers/finals positions determined the way we do with a “fixture” is just such a joke I can’t believe we claim to be a professional “competition”. It’s really laughable when you think about it.
1 Like
Less games = less money.
AFL has no interest in a fair competition. Just an even one.
1 Like
I kind of disagree on the no finals thing, it really depends on how you define “best” team. Soccer leagues define best as most consistent, which is a perfectly good measure, but not the only one. Other leagues do it based on who wins when the strongest teams play each other, effectively ignoring consistency for top end quality, and therefore have finals series or playoffs. I think there are arguments either way.
If all you want to do is get a decent indication of who the teams are that should be playing in the finals to decide who the “best” team is, then a fixture can be quite unbalanced before it puts that in jeopardy.
Edit: just realised you meant that you think no finals works better for soccer leagues. Agree entirely on that, because “best at taking penalty kicks” is the worst measure of “best team” going around.
Best solution I’ve read. Take the Demons too.
Other than cups, promotion playoffs, international tournaments, and the various continental competitions from Asia to Europe, there’s just no finals in soccer.
1 Like
Nobody said that
I was going to mention the FA Cup etc. which provide the cutthroat knock-out “finals” experience too.
Why not increase the importance of the league winner, then run a cup competition instead of finals?
Could include a couple of WAFL, SANFL etc teams in the cup. Random draw, no double chances
SEVENTEEN ROUNDS
F
F
SSSSSSSS
1 Like
You could even include the A League, Union, maybe a few beach volleyball teams… instant hit.
3 Likes
Imagine if the AFL were NBA fans. Best of 7 final series, 82 games per team in the regular season!
I’ve got an idea for how Wildcard Weekend could work
Reduce the number of teams in finals to 6.
First week, have 5th and 6th play off against 7th and 8th and call it Wildcard Weekend. Losers knocked out, winners go on to play the losers of the 1st-4th games.
WILDCARD WEEKEND!!!
4 Likes
There should be a floating number of finals spots each year
The finals teams are set with the position one above Richmond’s finishing ladder position*
- If Richmond finish 1st on the ladder, the finals series is cancelled and the AFL automatically awards the Premiership to GWS
12 Likes
I know a few ultimately frisbee teams who would give Carlton a run for their money