In our society, the number 18 represents growth, responsibility and change and should be no different for the AFL on the birth of its 18th club.
The AFL hopes that its venture into Greater Western Sydney will close the divide between AFL and NRL in NSW, but division is exactly what the AFL should be planning for.
I am not calling for war between the codes but in fact that the arrival of GWS is the perfect time for the AFL to launch division football.
The AFL’s newest side will see 18 teams competing this year, 11 more matches then last year and one more side that won’t be taking part in the finals series.
In short, we should expect an increase on last year’s nine losses by over 100 points and disappointingly, an increase in dead rubbers played towards the end of the season. To combat the increasing amount of irrelevant games, the AFL should introduce the following division system to promote equality and competiveness in the modern game.
The AFL should establish three divisions of six teams where each team plays everyone once and everyone in their division twice.
This would equate to a 22 round season and ensure the season is no longer than it already is.
A further benefit is that each team would be playing their own division in the final five rounds, increasing the amount of ‘eight point games’ that could see teams dramatically climb the division ladder.
At the completion of the regular season the top two sides from each division become the top six with their positions decided by their total points during the year.
The final two spots in the eight are decided by a wildcard round that would see the next four best ranked teams from any of the divisions (meaning in theory all four wildcard teams can come from one division) play off to decide the final two spots.
A divisional season structure would mean that teams in the same division have identical fixtures (in terms of teams played) minimising the advantage of getting to play weaker teams twice in the year. This would remove the debate in relation to who has the easier run home to the finals.
Home finals and the spots within the eight would be based upon total points throughout the season, allowing the finals series to be played in the same manner as it has since 2000.
By introducing the wildcard round it allows for more teams to still be in the running for finals towards the closing stages of the year ensuring wins are still vital.
It also ensures the integrity of the final eight isn’t diluted and nullifies the effects of playing in a stronger or weaker division.
There are two ways the AFL could go about assembling the divisions. Option one is by simply having the same sides play in the same division each year. Option two is have the divisions decided by where each team finishes the previous year.
The AFL should look more favourably upon ‘option one,’ as it allows traditional rivals, local derby’s and blockbuster games to be played twice a year as they should be.
For instance, the divisions could be as follows:
Division one: Hawthorn, Collingwood, Essendon, Carlton, Sydney and GWS
Division two: Geelong, St Kilda, Richmond, Kangaroos, Melbourne and Western Bulldogs
Division three: West Coast, Fremantle, Adelaide, Port Adelaide, Brisbane and Gold Coast
This would allow the biggest rivalries such as Collingwood v Carlton and Essendon v Carlton to be played twice as well as all local derbies, showdowns and Q-clashes to be played twice.
The biggest losers would appear to be division two, who will only play three of the big four Victorian teams once a year (or none in the case of Richmond), but would not be required to travel further than Geelong in the last five rounds.
The AFL scrapped rivalry round and rightfully so, as who can seriously name traditional rivals for the likes of the Western Bulldogs, Melbourne and St Kilda?
If the current rivalry between Hawthorn and Geelong as well West Coast and Sydney in years gone past can teach us anything, it is that agonising losses (especially when finals are involved) can create the most bitter of rivalries.
I’m sure if we see Melbourne nudge out hapless Richmond from claiming a long awaited spot in the finals for a few years running then tempers and rivalries will begin to boil.
It is understandable that a revamped format would sound like fingernails on a chalkboard to those traditionalists who want the game left alone.
The simple fact is that every change the AFL has made has been an attempt to improve the aesthetic of the game for the fans. Yet all games need context, and no matter the rule changes, the AFL must eradicate as many pointless games from the fixture as possible to maintain the quality of the product.
The best way to do this in the league’s current format is by introducing division football.
BrianofBrisbane
Guest
If you wouldn't then all it says is that you are just a gold digging glory hunter and not a real sports fan or a real supporter of your club. Try a hobby instead. Maybe shoe collecting or perhaps even watch some paint dry.
BrianofBrisbane
Guest
The AFL will change structure, however not in the fashion described above. I also see it not occurring until there are twenty sides in the current competition. How will it work? Simple. At the start of each season the clubs will be divided into two separate leagues based on their previous years form and these two leagues will run independant of each other with all clubs playing the other clubs in their league for both home and away matches making a total of eighteen rounds in the regular season. At the end of the league the top four clubs will qualify for a finals series. How will the finals series work? Almost identical to the current finals series. There will be a pair of qualifying finals and a pair of elimination finals in the first week with the first place sides playing the second place sides from the opposite league (who they have not played that year) with the winner going on to round three and playing at home while the loser must compete as the home side in round two against the winner of the round one elimination finals. In these round one elimination finals the third place sides play against the fourth place side of the opposite league. So in effect the finals really are identical, the only change is where the clubs come from. Instead of being 1 - 8 of one league (with every two clubs ranking in the finals being identical) it is 1 - 4 of two separate divisions. Much simpler than the above system of conferences and each year the leagues are refreshed based on the previous years league performance. It will make rival matches more interesting as they might not happen every year and when they do they might occur in for the first time in the finals. One day when the club number has increase to 24 there will be two leagues of 12 with 22 rounds in each.
Dwaynos
Guest
The only way this is fair is to split the groups of 6 dependant on ladder placings the previous year. So, 1st to 6th one group, 7th to 12th the other, and 13th to 18th the other. Having permanent groups would just be dull and stupid. I can imagine Mr. Ego-Trio (Demetriou) announcing the groups now...Group1- Collingwood, Essendon, Carlton, Richmond, Hawthorn and whoever else... I'd hate to see it come to this. As an Adelaide fan the showdowns are over done with two every season, plus one in the NAB Cup.. sometimes less is more. Pies vs Blues or Eagles vs Dockers shouldn't necessarily have to play each other twice EVERY year. With smart use of the fixture, based on placings from the previous year, crowd numbers could still be maintained. I can recall many situations over the years anyhow, where say, Tigers vs Blues have drawn maybe only 45000, whilst a match against higher ranked clubs, like North Melbourne and The Dogs, have drawn 60000 plus. And if there's club presidents with over sized heads out there demanding we have 'two Magpies vs Blues Blockbusters every year', tell them to harden up. What is this, the ICC with the Indian cricket team?? Obviously, dependant on placings, some of these blockbuster games would double up anyway. I actually think groups of 6 is the way to go.. but only if it's done in this manner. Permanent groups would be crap!
Jaceman
Guest
Would you support a team in the third division???
Lachlan
Roar Guru
What about this. Divisional System, not Conference. This would be this years divisions, according to last years results. Division 1 Geelong Collingwood Hawthorn West Coast Sydney Carlton Division 2 St. Kilda Essendon North Melbourne Western Bulldogs Fremantle Richmond Division 3 Melbourne Adelaide Brisbane Port Adelaide Gold Coast Greater Western Sydney Vs Each Team in your division twice and vs everyone else once. Next Year, the winner in division 2 and 3 move up a division and the losers from division 1 and 2 move down. Finals systems all stay the same, just evens up the draw and enables teams playing against teams about the same ability and enables less blow-out games.
TW
Guest
Jared and any other International Footy fans, According to AFANA.COM ESPN USA will likely not be broadscasting AFL matches this season into the US or their affillates in Canada. That website said ESPN told them no AFL in 2012. However the AFL Media dept told AFANA to take that message down because discussions still underway????? But AFANA will not do that ATM It seems the US MHZ Network will continue on with the cover. Back on topic --- Another article on the mooted revised WAFL comp in 2013. The latest news was the WAFL Clubs rejected the money terms for the deal by the 2 AFL Clubs- Show us more money they said!! But the WA Footy Commission has a new manager who is very bullish about it happening. Note his comments about WA footy being in good shape ATM - (Record partipation - 2 very financial AFL Clubs with waiting lists driving the whole process but there are problems as usual.) link to article -- http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/a/-/wafl/12865830/new-wafc-boss-backs-afl-reserves/ If footy can get both AFL teams into the top 8 this year the whole state will be rocking and interest will never be higher.
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
Apologies for pulling you into another debate (I guess ;)). A lot of people would say its not very Australian promotion/relegation. And judging by other Australian comps that's probably true, but let me ask you this...why is there such correlation between the American and the Australian ways of running comps? I personally don't like the way the NFL can't seeem to find a way of having a team in Los Angeles...but in terms of comps, you couldn't get more different from the NFL in some ways (an ex-suburban comp for one) and yet when it comes to determining what is fair why is there suddenly no difference between the NFL and the AFL?
amazonfan
Roar Guru
I don't understand, when did I mention the NFL? I don't care what the NFL or the EPL or the NBA do. I don't think we should replicate those competotions simply because they are bigger than the AFL. My reasons for opposing pro/rel also don't have to do with a cost-benefit analysis. That would imply that there are benefits. :P :D No, I oppose it because I think it's unfair, and I don't think it will work in Australia. BTW, there is one thing which big overseas comps tend to have, and which I would HATE for the AFL to re/introduce: private ownership.
Republican
Guest
Kasey Ian is first and foremost a product of the commercial persuasion and this may well be a generational trait in his case. Ian as with so many who 'promote' sport today are desensitised to those virtues that you and I espouse. They are genuinely motivated by the unlimited commercial opportunities to engineer a new illusion, available to them in elite sport today. What I find bemusing about those of Ian's persuasion, is not only their denial of the farcical contradictions and illusions that this top down philosophy to growth offers todays prosaic consumer, but also their expectation that they will have their cake and eat it too; i.e. that they will be able to maintain these notions of tribalism and loyalty despite themselves. Strange cattle indeed.
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
I hope you're not a relation of mine ;) Unfortunately the North American system...while it does seem logical considering the AFL and the NFL have superficial resemblences to each other, American sport's rivalries are solely within a division (or I should say rivalries which fans will spill...blood over :D). There are plenty of cross-division rivalries, but the result means much less. Also the NFL's system of a rotating schedule is a massive problem as basically it is unprofitable for a team with much greater turnover of players (Richmond say ;) ) only would get one chance per long period of time to Test themselves against the big boys.
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
But without further expansion these bold steps of expansion are worthless. Not to espouse outright war between codes but the very notion of an Australian Football League while it is too weighted towards Vic is nothing less than a manifesto on expansion. I genuinely believe that expansion needs to be a constant thing vs merely finding the right number which for me is twelve so each team plays each other twice etc ;)
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
Stop using the survival of the fittest analogy...unless you're prepared to expect progression to be in millions of years not days, as in the digital agee ;) Also the analogy's fraught as the whole point of the AFL vs promotion/relegation is that it isn't merely a business...nor even about winning the flag...it's about expansion (perhaps even manifest destiny and commonwealth/federalism) for most clubs. Only the very top can realistically win anyway anymore. But clubs spend a lot of time/energy/money on being a part of this expansionism/make that jingoism...if anything the survival of the collective goes ahead of the survival of the ego
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
Is it just me or are you missing the point. Because there's no Promotion/Relegation there shouldn't be any reason for the WAFL to countenance a third team ;) because it should be seen as a different level. By keeping the WAFL as a Reconstruction-type govt you end up with a lot of kowtowing to teams like Richmond who should be held accountable...not just rewarded in wood. At this point there's very little incentive for them to do well...and there's that other tanking disgrace too! Why I think promotion/relegation could have/could still work is because it prevents there being this no man's land which the AFL claims heir over...even where the feds dare not tread.
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
Is that solely a cost-benefit argument or is it because you think the NFL is a massively profitable comp for its code that the smaller, but local kid on the block should play his cards in the same way ;)? I don't mean to be offensive, but all too often that's te gist of the arg rather than thinking about why it works in many of the world's biggest comps.
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
So far most of the responses here have been let's do this the way the NFL does it? Why is there such devotion to doing it the way a comp which can't est a team in the second biggest sports market in the biggest sports market-continent does it? Apart from the similarities in name...but then again the AFL really is still so bloated by its VFL roots!
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
Yeah as I said above: too American a solution isn't it? In a code where the hearts and minds were bought/brunt at the expense of another competition entirely (hint: one which wasn't all about dosh) ...you can get away with having divisions which are not geographical/historic by any stretch of the imagination. But in an unevenly distributed comp with more than one team per fictional community (say if the NFL had been born out of the NCAA comp for example)...it doesn't work
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
I second that actually: far too much about Victoria and not enough about what gives the code is weighting vs prob any other except cricket in Australia, the fact that more people care about the champions of Australian Football than the NRL say!
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
Can anyone say NFL-isation of the 'All-Australian' football game ;) If we're going to have a look in the history books let's all remember that the NFL sold out most of its foundation clubs pre-1960s in order to compete for the hearts and minds of NCAA Football fans. The Mickey Mouse approach has been mastered in the States...but to follow suit in Australasia ruins the strength of the historic inter-state component in Australian Football (and the same applies in the All-Brisbane travesty at the moment) Promotion/Relegation might help bring back some much needed respect for the non-Victorian hearts and minds. But anyways the AFL doesn't need to do anything but keep growing, when the opportunity presents itself! Also compared to Soccer, the AFL/NRL season (and prob RU's season too) is too short as is...22 weeks just seems so...streamlined
The Cattery
Roar Guru
Yeh - I'd have to agree with Ross - we want all possible combinations being able to make the big one. Anyway, Australia's population is just too spread out, concentrated in five main population zones, that the geographic division just doesn't work. The conference ideas that have been presented thus far, at least the better ideas, are about creating a more equitable draw rather than true conferences as are often used in North America, where the population distribution makes it more feasible.
Ross
Guest
Sorry, but we do not want a East-West Grand Final as it would limit the number of combinations that the Grand Final could produce. For example, the biggest game in the season could never be against Hawthorn and Collingwood because they would play in the penultimate week.