Now that the AFL has 18 teams, it is the perfect time for to make a change to the finals series. The NRL has finally made the change from the McIntyre final system to the one currently employed by the AFL. This is in many ways is an improvement, however this system has many of its own drawbacks.
The main problem with the current finals system is that it doesn’t reach great heights as a series until the preliminary finals. With the top four teams given a second chance if they fail in week one, it makes the qualifying games less important.
The clubs and supporters know that they’re still in it, even if they slip up.
If games are won according to ladder positions throughout the course of the finals series, the first team faces the club that finished third on the ladder in the more important preliminary. I’m sure last year Collingwood would have preferred to play West Coast in the preliminary final than Hawthorn.
So how can the AFL make the finals more exciting but give an advantage to the teams that finished top?
First they will need to increase the finals to 10 teams, which some people will not like as it is rewarding average teams. There is the added benefit of creating more exciting games in the latter rounds of the home and away season, as there more teams will think they can make the finals. Fewer teams will “start planning for next year” looking for better draft picks.
Under the new Final 10, the top 6 teams would have the week off, with teams 7-10 playing a “wild card” round like the NFL. The remaining weeks would all then be sudden death, so the team that finished top would play the team that finished 8/9 in the quarterfinals and then play the team that finish 4/5 in the semi final.
Taking the 2011 ladder as an example, the finals would most likely be played out like this:
Week 1
First Elimination Final 7 v 10 (Sydney v Western Bulldogs)
Second Elimination Final 8 v 9 (Essendon v North Melbourne)
Week 2
First Quarter Final 1 v second EL (Collingwood v Essendon)
Second Quarter Final 2 v first EL (Geelong v Sydney)
Third Quarter Final 3 v 6 (Hawthorn v St Kilda)
Fourth Quarter Final 4 v 5 (West Coast v Carlton)
Week 3
First Semi Final 1st QF v 4th QF (Collingwood v West Coast)
Second Semi Final 2nd QF v 3rd QF (Geelong v Hawthorn)
Week 4
grand final 1st SF v 2nd SF (Collingwood v Geelong)
Although the top 4 have lost their second chance, if anything the sides would have preferred this system last year. Instead of Collingwood having to play West Coast and Hawthorn in weeks one and three, they would have had Essendon or North Melbourne in the second round after having a week off and then West Coast in the third round.
Similarly Geelong would have had Sydney or the Bulldogs then Hawthorn under the new system. Hawthorn and West Coast would have benefited, as they both would have got a week off in the finals, unlike last year, and then face St Kilda and Carlton respectively to make it into the penultimate round.
Teams 5 and 6 benefit greatly by going straight to the second week (St Kilda definitely would have liked that last year), and teams 8 and 9 benefit by the increased chance of making the second round.
The whole second chance sounds great in theory for the top sides, but it does detract from the finals system and it doesn’t help as much as it is perceived to.
Under this system there will be the occasional time that the number 1 team gets knocked out by the team ranked 8 or 9 in the second week. But do they even deserve to be the Premiers if they can’t win a game after a week off against a team that had to fight to make it?
That is a risk, and risk is what makes games exciting.
Zac
Guest
A final 10 - would be about making money for the AFL and nothing else. The final 8 is too many as it is. The finals should be about recognising excellence not rewarding mediocrity How can anyone justify any more than a final 6 - the top third of the competition - unless it is about generating revenue Bit you say a final 8 gives more teams a chance. That's just nonsense. For the past 40 years (since 1974) only 3 teams have been Premiers after finishing 4th or lower after the home and away. For the past 20 years (since the final 8 began) only 2 teams have won from 4th or lower. Only one team in 40 years of VFL/AFL has won from 5th (Adelaide in 1998 and they were the 1997 Premiers) So for the bottom four of the 8 there is almost zero chance of success. They just get the disadvantage of a shorter break before the next pre season. A final 10 would just further dilute the significance in making the finals. Celebrate the excellent and move to a top 6 This is our elite competition.
Paul
Guest
The only Fair System is THE EPL, play each other twice and at the end of the year the most consistent team is the Champion. Semi Finals are there only to make money imo. I dont about everyone else but i am happy idf my team wins more games than they lose through out the season, naturally i hope they win evry weekend but as long as i can watch them win more than they lose then its not that bad a season.
Bob
Guest
Don't know why the AFL bother having an 8. The old VFL final 4 system (1 v 2, 3v 4 then PF and GF) meant every final was memorable. I know 1 and 2 played each other twice most years but you could not say it wasn't a great system.
Veni, Vedi, Sherrin Calcitravi
Guest
hear-hear. I dont know if we would want it at 20 teams though- I still feel uncomfortable with 50% of the competition playing finals football. Maybe when we hit 22 teams..
AndyMack
Guest
Not a fan. Agree with Pot Stirrer above, why bother having a season?? If we are going to have a finals system, better to have a fair one that gives the top few sides the best chance to make it to the big game. We want to see the best at the pointy end of the season, not the 10th best who happened to hit a bit of form and win a couple of games in Sept.
Michael
Guest
I think that the top 10 with that format is a pretty good idea. The only issue I have with a top 10 in general is the 9th and 10th sides aren't finals standard. The point you raised 1st playing 3rd in the PF etc if games go according to rank makes perfect sense
Redb
Roar Guru
Pot Kettle Black.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
parko at the moment 5 and 6 get a home game while 3 and 4 don't (in the first week of the finals)
Gucci
Guest
Conversely, why bother having finals, just do the EPL way.
parko
Guest
Was I the only person who noticed that teams 7 & 8 get a home final but teams 5 & 6 don't. This system is STUPID.
RB
Roar Rookie
The real problem with the McIntyre wasn't that 1 played 8 etc, it was highlighted in 1998 when Adelaide who finished 5th lost to Melbourne who finished 4th in the first week, and yet Adelaide still progressed and went on to win the flag. Under this system in 1995, Carlton would of had a week off before possibly facing the Bears in weak 2. A chance of an upset and consequence is what makes games more exciting. Under any finals system, it is not always going to be reflective of the year. Just look at Port Adelaide in 2002-2003. I'm sure Port would have preferred to face the 8 ranked team in both those years after having been the best team in those seasons. If we don't want the top teams to face the lower ranked teams in the finals, then should we only have a top 4 and be done with it?
Pot Stirrer
Guest
Why bother haveing a season, just have an 18 team final series.
TomC
Guest
'So the top teams will belt the mid table teams, but they’d prefer the double chance instead?' Yep. Because in any contest between two finals teams, even when there's a big gap in quality, there's always a chance of an upset. Take the old McIntyre final 8, where 1st played 8th and 2nd played 7th. These were almost always boring, one-sided games.I stand to be corrected on this, but the only time I can recall the top two losing that fixture was when Carlton lost to Melbourne in 1994. Under your system, all of the extra wins accumulated during the season to get a team into 2nd, rather than 7th (or 10th) mean nothing and a serious premiership contender gets booted out. Or what about 1995, when a plucky Brisbane Bears outfit (8th with 10 wins) came within a couple of kicks of knocking off one of the greatest Carlton teams of all time (1st with 20 wins)? Is that seriously going to make the prelim and grand finals more reflective of the whole season? Your system throws up a real catch 22; either these 1 v 8 and 2 v 7 contests are meaningful contests, in which case they don't reward the top teams enough, or they're not, in which case why bother. That's exactly the problem that the AFL changed it's finals system to avoid, and exactly the reason the NRL have just moved away from lop-sided finals. 'So if they can’t win those must win games with the increased pressure that sudden-death brings, do they deserve to be Premiers?' Yes. I don't recall anyone saying that Geelong didn't deserve to be premiers last season because they once lost to Essendon. The measure of a premier is how they go against the best teams, not the mid-table teams.
RB
Roar Rookie
Cheers, I know the main criticism is that moving to 10 team finals system is rewarding losing teams, but with now 10 teams missing out on the finals, there will be even more meaningless games at the end of the season and a bit more conjecture for teams that can't make the finals on whether they're doing everything they could to win. So giving sides an extra incentive to win games and finish higher on the ladder isn't such a bad thing. Plus, 10 teams are needed for this system to work effectively, and keep the same amount of finals.
ted
Guest
Final 10! Count me as one that doesn't like that idea. Why not roll back to a final 5? Personally I don't have a problem with the finals as they are at the moment.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
The top six earn the week off, and then all get a chance at playing 3 consecutive finals, incl the grand final if you get that far, thus building momentum from the "easier" final in the second week - that actually has a lot to recommend it.
RB
Roar Rookie
The first week is to reward the top teams with a week off, plus you still have to have some footy on? So the top teams will belt the mid table teams, but they'd prefer the double chance instead? Is the double chance as useful as it sounds anyway? If Hawthorn had of beaten Geelong in week one last year, Collingwood would of faced the Cats in the preliminary final. Hardly fair on the top side to play the number 2 ranked team before the Grand Final. Under this system, the best teams are getting easier games throughout the finals and not having to face each other until the Grand Final. So if they can't win those must win games with the increased pressure that sudden-death brings, do they deserve to be Premiers?
RB
Roar Rookie
Although this system does not create extra finals. There will still be the same number of weeks, with only 2 games now scheduled for the first week and 4 games for the second.
RB
Roar Rookie
The AFL refusing to earn more money?
RB
Roar Rookie
Although Richmond would have still missed out last year