It’s almost ten years ago now that, in anticipation of the Gold Coast Suns and GWS Giants joining the competition, the AFL surveyed fans on a number of expansion related issues, including the size of the finals series.
Fans voted overwhelmingly in favour of retaining the current eight-team finals model, and it was a good choice.
While the additions of the Suns and Giants did increase the size of the league, both clubs were predictably uncompetitive in their early seasons and to so quickly expand the finals series would’ve been a mistake.
Sometimes, however, the passage of time transforms bad ideas into good ones. In 2019, the AFL is ready for a ten-team finals series.
Why? Simply put, the league has now become competitive enough that teams who are good enough to play finals are missing out.
The last four seasons have all seen at least one side win 12 games but fail to make the top eight, something that happened just twice in 16 years prior (not counting Essendon’s 2013 exclusion).
And then last year in 2018, no fewer than four sides – North Melbourne, Port Adelaide, Essendon and Adelaide – finished the season with 12 wins, but outside the top eight.
Now let’s be clear – 2018 was probably something of a mathematical anomaly and is unlikely to happen again anytime soon. Still, it’s clear we have quality teams enough in the AFL to justify an expanded finals series.
For the past three years we’ve had a pre-finals bye round where no AFL-level football takes place, but this could easily be filled by what pundits have often dubbed the ‘wildcard weekend’.
Set up elimination finals in this weekend where seventh hosts tenth and eighth hosts ninth. The losers of these matches are eliminated, and the winners take the places that seventh and eighth would typically fill in the current finals system, which then plays out as it normally does from the following week onwards.
(Photo by Ryan Pierse/AFL Media/Getty Images)
Of course, there are potential variant options. It would be a simple adjustment for example to a top-nine system with only one match on the opening weekend between eighth and ninth, if the league wanted to ensure that only the top half of the ladder qualifies for finals.
The AFL could even bring in a rule that every team which records at least 12 wins makes the cut and plays an elimination match against the corresponding top eight team (this certainly would have made last year interesting).
The AFL wins. They’ve got extra finals matches available to be monetised and no longer have to cop a blank weekend on the calendar, offering the NRL a golden ticket to dominate the back pages.
The clubs win. Everyone wants to play finals and now two more clubs make the cut. That means more momentum and more membership sales for the following season.
The players win. More players get to play finals! Finals, as players often tell us, are the reason players play the game – so players win.
The fans win. More fans get to see their club and players make finals, and we no longer have to say ‘eh, I guess I’ll watch league’ during the pre-finals bye.
Who loses? The teams who finish seventh and eight might be a little peeved at losing a pre-finals bye, but surely this is balanced out by the chance to host – and likely win – a home final.
So why not?
George Apps
Roar Rookie
Rubbish idea! Nowhere is such a system working - we should less finals teams, not more. More teams would reward mediocrity - why should we not have only the best at the pointy end of the season?
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
You may differ, as you wish, but I don't think it is arrant nonsense. I have coached AFL, at high school level, in the Northern Rivers. Anglo and Koori both new to AFL and the Koori kids would do things the Anglos could only dream. My all-time AFL side would be overwhelmingly Koori. An all-time NT side would be no pushover by the big 3. Like how many Rioli's would be on the team?
Seymorebutts
Roar Rookie
Why would Vic, SA and WA be scared to play them?? They will win by 20 goals. I remember an Army team in the 1989 played some rep team from the northern Territory and gave them a flogging, and that was the Brigades second string side as the best players were all in the bush on exercise. When I played juniors there was a club featuring all Aboriginal players, they got thrashed week in week out and that was at under 17 level, only a couple of them would have made it into my side and we finsiehd 4th. Seriously, there is this myth going around that somehow indigenous players have ''supernatural skills''... it is arrant nonsense.
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
Tassie yes. Perth Falcons no (I'm a Redlegs, Crows, Falcons supporter). NT is such a rich area for AFL. No area in Australia could a sporting team have a greater beneficial impact on it's societal fabric. - The AFL are rolling in money. The NRL love to get their hands on the loose change rolling around the floor of the AFL's 5th best car. - It's incredibly stupid that the AFL have not looked after these two areas. If you had an all-time rep team of these two areas Vic, SA and WA would be scared to play them. And that from just 500,000 and 200,000 respectively.
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
The 8 is good enough. Let's not water down this to 'every kid gets a sticker'. How about letting interstate teams get more games at the G? So dominant is the Victorian bias that most older people, that I come across in NSW and Qld, are surprised to find out that SA, Tas, WA and NT have their own vibrant footy competitions. Preceding the invention of NRL (except NT). This actually would promote fairness. Victorians need to allow the game to be truly national. My dream is for Port and Freo to play a gf, at the G, and only 14,639 people turn up. Having 7,684 teams in the final rewards mediocrity. This is a moneygrab. If Demetriou was Darth Vader, McLachlan is Gomer Pyle.
Rob
Guest
Mine did in 2017 and missed by 0.5%. No calls for a top 10 because it was "unfair" - they had 22 games to kick the 2 goals they needed.
Rob
Guest
This would be manifestly unfair given the dodgy draw. For example... Melbourne has not played West Coast in Melbourne for... i actually cant remember!
Frank Deville
Roar Rookie
Deja vu: old final five system for me
Aransan
Roar Rookie
Percentage is cumulative points for divided by cumulative points against times 100. Presumably "plus-minus" only involves a subtraction. Both methods are flawed as they give different weight to higher scoring games, something which would be overcome by calculating the geometric mean of the ratios for each game.
Amazon
Roar Rookie
Nah, don’t like it
SportsFanGC
Roar Guru
Not opposed to the ideas you have raised Josh. Likely that teams 7-10 are not that far apart in performance or talent and it probably won't matter which of the two progress as they will likely be taken out by teams 5-6 the very next week in any case. The AFL will always go with what makes money - an extra two finals certainly does this and all of a sudden makes Round 23 less of a procession as there may be teams in the 11-13 slot that could still conceivably make the "Wild Card Weekend" depending on what happens in R23.
George Apps
Roar Rookie
Or a top 5 like the old days!
George Apps
Roar Rookie
In most years, 7 & 8 are just making up the numbers IMO, so I think we should be going in the opposite direction - only six finals teams.
Floyd Calhoun
Guest
So basically, ‘for and against’. We already have that. Percentage is calculated on the cumulative tally differential. At least, I thought it was. I might be missing something here, but where is the flaw in that?
Matches
Roar Rookie
I think it's a sensational idea. It's a huge improvement on 22 games in an 18 team comp where mediocre Victorian teams get an easy ride in an uneven draw. i.e. Richmond won only 1 game interstate Collingwood made a GF winning just 3 of 12 games against the top-8 teams (including finals) Melb also lost most of their games against the top-8 sides. In DB's plan everyone plays each other once, then the tail-enders are eliminated, and each week the wost losers are eliminated. Brilliant DB
Matches
Roar Rookie
Sorry but what a ridiculous suggestion. % is far better!
GoGWS
Roar Guru
Add two new teams (Perth3 and Tassie), play a 19 round season with Home/Away rotated every season... and then when you have a larger competition with improved balance of the draw then expand to a 10 team final series. You’re welcome.
anon
Roar Pro
I wouldn't mind a 12 team finals. 5-12 week one with 1-4 getting a bye. Sudden death every weekend.
Timmuh
Roar Guru
Not from me. Eight would be about right for a 24 team comp and is more than required for any realistic size.
Bangkokpussey
Roar Rookie
Definitely not. My preference would be to extend the season and have only 6 finalists. It is unlikely every team will ever play each other twice and this skews the final 8 at present depending on who played the weakest/strongest teams. I would prefer to see a fixture where every team is played twice over 2 seasons regardless of the previous years ladder position and a new points system where an away win earns more points. E.G. draw is 1 point home win is 2 points and away win is 3 points with a neutral game such as two MCG tenants awarded 2 points with percentage being the decider if points are equal. That aside It would be good to have that annoying Saints membership video removed. Don't think I have seen anything more amateurish and embarrassing. If Geelong ever comes out with something that woeful I will buy a lifelong membership at Hawthorn.