The NRL finals format is always questioned at this time of year but with the competition moving to 17 teams next year, is it time to tweak the system?
For the first time since 1994, there will be more teams missing the playoffs than qualifying.
This means the NRL is not rewarding mediocrity with a side unlikley to be sneaking into eighth spot with a losing record.
In the 2022 season, the Broncos missed the cut despite having a 13-11 record while St George Illawarra’s three late wins meant they went 12-12 but finished 10th.
The NRL has considered the possibility of a 10-team finals system where the top six teams automatically qualify and the teams ranked 7-10 playoff for the last two spots.
There has also been plenty of conjecture about stadium hosting rights in the finals following the controversial decision to allow Penrith and Cronulla to host week-one matches at their suburban stadiums instead of larger venues in Sydney.
The Roar experts have their say and if you’d like to do likewise, fire away in the comments section below.
Experts Roar – Finals format
Michael Hagan (premiership-winning player and coach)
I would leave the current top-eight system as it is apart from one small alteration.
The current set-up rewards teams enough if they finish in the top four with a home-ground advantage and then a week off for the two highest-placed winners.
What I would consider would be rewarding the winning teams from the first round with hosting rights in the second week so Raiders vs Parramatta would be at Canberra and Rabbitohs vs Sharks would be at Accor Stadium.
Canberra Raiders (Photo by Daniel Pockett/Getty Images)
Paul Suttor (Roar expert)
When the NRL expands to 18 teams, hopefully by 2026 or ’27 at the latest, the NRL should revive the wildcard weekend idea. Give the top six teams the week off to freshen up the best talent for the playoffs and let the next four teams battle it out for the last two finals berths.
The naysayers will say nay, as they do, because it rewards mediocrity but that’s missing the point – those four teams would have little to no chance of going all the way to the Grand Final by winning five straight matches, particularly if they’re facing rested opponents in an Elimination Final.
It would also create more interest in the final month of the season for the teams in the middle to lower end of the table, boosting crowds and TV ratings, which in theory should make the NRL a more valuable product, if administered professionally.
Mike Meehall Wood (Roar expert)
The top eight system is pretty decent in that it’s designed to create a month’s worth of fixtures and does that well. The old system didn’t really make any regard between finishing 1st and 4th, so that wasn’t great, and this one affords the double chance.
My major gripe would be that it rewards mediocrity: this top eight is the first one in a long time where all teams have actually been good, and usually someone with a losing or even record makes it.
The top six system in place in Super League would be a greater reflection of who is actually elite, because in my mind, at least one good team should miss out for it to be a proper finals set-up.
That said, I can totally see why the three-week system in SL wouldn’t work, and why increasing the number of teams with nothing to play for in the late regular season would also not work, so happy with it as it is.
Danielle Smith (Roar expert)
This is one topic I’m very torn over. On one hand, I’m happy with the system. I like the top eight, and I like the two chances and sudden-death split. On the other hand I don’t like how two teams that finish in the top four miss out on a home final in the first week yet two teams that finish in the bottom four do get a home game.
And the only way to fix that would be to go back to the old McIntyre System with 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6 and 4 v 5 … and I don’t know if I like that idea either.
Stuart Thomas (Roar expert)
There is little doubt the NRL finals always produce in terms of quality and excitement for fans, yet the determination of the participants themselves remains based on the most compromised of methods that fundamentally violates the notion of fairness.
With a 17th team about to enter the fray, it is time for the home and away season to become 16 weeks long, with standalone representative weekends and a finals series that features a play-off for eighth spot between the teams that finish eighth and ninth on the ladder and two-legged play-off matches to decide who advances.
Should the powers at be want to involve those teams outside the top eight in some sort of plate or trophy competition where money or salary cap benefits are on the line, so be it. Yet the current format continues to be broken and 16 weeks of parity where teams play each other once on a home and away basis is the only real solution.
Mary Konstantopoulos (Ladies Who League)
I am comfortable both with the format and number of teams involved in the finals. What I would like to see is a week off included either prior to finals kicking off or prior to the Grand Final to give teams the opportunity to refresh.
Ryan O’Connell (Roar expert)
I think the current finals system works as is. I don’t really see a need to play with it. When it comes to making changes or coming up with new ideas, my first question is always ‘What problem are you trying to solve?’, and I don’t think the NRL has an issue.
The only small wrinkle I could possibly come up with is that the minor premier gets to choose who they play out of the top four. So, say you finish first, but you don’t really like the match-up with the fourth-placed team for some reason (ie: they’re your bogey side, they’re red hot, etc), then you can decide to play someone else in the top four. It’s another reward for finishing on top of the ladder, and it will certainly create some discussion.
(Photo by Matt King/Getty Images)
Joe Frost (Roar expert)
The eight is fine as it is. You really can’t have more than half the comp make the finals, so adding is off the table. As for subtracting, we just saw team eight beat five, team seven beat six, and team three beat two.
The comp starts again in September and the underdog is very much in play. Plus fewer teams means fewer games, at a time of the year when the footy is (mostly) of an excellent standard. I asked it last year and I’ll ask it again of those who want fewer teams in the finals: who hurt you?
Tim Gore (Roar expert)
The current format works. The top four playing off for the week off in the first weekend works well, as do the 5V8, 6V7 elimination games.
The top eight is the perfect size for a comp with 16-18 sides too. Anymore and we are handing out participation awards.
The major change I’d make is – taking a leaf out of the AFL book – is to have a bye weekend that allows all teams to freshen up and so that teams aren’t penalised with short turn arounds while others get a long break between games.
var request = new XMLHttpRequest();
request.open('POST', '/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php', true); request.setRequestHeader('Content-Type', 'application/x-www-form-urlencoded;'); request.onload = function () { if (this.status >= 200 && this.status
Maxtruck
Roar Rookie
Top 5 Stop rewarding mediocrity What coach or club really thinks making the 8 with a 50% win ratio is a good season
criag
Roar Rookie
Let me know when we have an 18 team, 2 conference system and I'll get back to you.
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
"I don’t like the wealthier Sydney clubs not having the burdon of travelling" I thought that was one of the most favourable benefits of this system for the Rabbitohs and the Roosters. Chooks fans can't complain I'm not thinking of them. :silly: A and B are just working titles for each conference. It isn't meant to be translate to 1st and 2nd division. But I'd be happy with some flexibility in the conference system though. The only alternative is to either reduce the number of current teams and give up on expanding the competition or creating a 1st and 2nd division two-tier competition with relegation and promotion of the bottom 2 teams of tier 1 and the top 2 teams of tier 2.
John Hollins
Roar Rookie
I agree with all that apart from keeping ALL Sydney teams in one conference. I don’t like the wealthier Sydney clubs not having the burdon of travelling, forcing the outlying clubs having to do even more travel than they do now. Take the top performing club from the year before and put them in into Conf A. Then take the team that came second and they go into B, 3rd into A, 4th in B, and so on. This makes sure that both conferences have and even spread of talent and travel.
IGOR11
Roar Rookie
2 conferences…Sydney and non…is ridiculous…greater % weaker teams in the non…how would this be fair on the Sydney teams who play these weaker sides only the once?…the draw is flawed and you want to replace with another flawed approach?…that makes sense…sheez…play each other once or twice…that’s the only fair way to go…
Westie
Guest
Already advanced to. After one whole win! It’s a miracle. :thumbup: Roosters at full strength. Or even allowed to play the whole game with the team they picked for the start of the game . Looked way stronger at the start of the game & their forwards were dominating South’s. Only the interesting tactics used , eliminating a few players . Allowed South’s to win it. As a neutral, that’s how I saw it & I think that most other neutral supporters would see that game the same way .
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
Sometimes the truth is a necessary casualty for a good yarn, Cugel. I'm sure mushi would have been none the wiser. Oh well, too late now. OK, to be honest it was a bit of rushed and shoddy research that lead to the boo. I looked at Wiki "2002 NRL season" I went off the numbers next to each team on the chart of the finals progression. The Roosters had 7 next to them. Oops! :happy:
Cugel
Roar Rookie
Easts came fourth in 2002
Duncan Smith
Roar Guru
I'd suggest a McIntyre system mark 2 1v16, 2v15, 3v14 etc.
Griffo 09
Roar Rookie
But if there's a strong conference and a weak conference there'll be an inequity anyway, in fact it would be a greater inequity than having no conference where the double matchups are not confined to a group of 9 teams but crossover the whole competition.
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
So in essence you are talking about a two-tiered competition and not a conference system. I could support that given that Souths under Russell Crowe and his billionaire backers will always be in the top tier. :silly: Then just like in the EPL the bottom 2 teams in tier 1 are relegated to the tier 2 competition with the top 2 from tier 2 being promoted into tier 1. I'm not sure if that wouldn't lead to a disparity in the distribution of elite player talent as no elite player would sign on to play in a second-tier competition. Also, sponsors will abandon second-tier teams and rush to sign with tier 1 clubs... like the Rabbitohs. :stoked: Have we thought this through, matth? It could be analogous to the bright idea QLDers had to introduce cane toads to control the cane beetle in sugar cane fields in north Queensland. The ugly poisonous little buggers... the toads aren't much better either. :laughing:
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
I have 3 kids and I love them all equally but only my son is an avid Rabbitohs supporter, so extra points there. :silly: Still there will be nothing equal in my love when the Rabbitohs play the Dolphins next year. It will be like the Dolphins are the neighbours kid then. :silly: On a serious note, I have my fingers and toes crossed that the Dolphins will sign Cameron Munster and I will remain hopeful they can do a deal with the Storm to ensure he plays in 2023.
matth
Roar Guru
I don’t mind the conference but you can’t keep the two conferences the same each year. Inevitably one will get stronger
matth
Roar Guru
As long as the non Sydney teams get a higher salary cap as players would be mad to do that much traveling if they don’t have to, so clubs would have to pay overs. Plus the whole comp would have to pay equally to cover the travel costs. Not much of a TV deal if for most of the year there are only Sydney viewers for Conference A and only Brisbane viewers for Conference B No the conference can’t be geographic. They should be based on the prior year finishing positions to make the conference strengths as even as possible
matth
Roar Guru
I’d prefer them being the Jellybean Drifters.
matth
Roar Guru
Someone told me the other day that I can’t support two teams (for me Brisbane and Dolphins), but I have two kids and I love them equally (at least if anyone asks!).
matth
Roar Guru
I’m a fan of the 7th to 10th wildcard round, which is really just a way to give the ‘real’ finals team a week off, while still having some decent games during that time. I’d love to see a ‘Championship Plate’ where the remaining teams from 11 to 17 have knock out comp for some sort of reward. What would be perfect for me would be teams 11 onwards plus the top QCup and top NSW Cup teams play a four week knockout finishing in grand final week. Play the final at Suncorp or Auckland (or anywhere outside of Sydney) the day before the grand final
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
The message is a team finishing 7th can still add value to the finals. Perhaps the best argument is the 2002 Grand Final. Your Roosters came from 7th to beat the Warriors (1st). If there was only a top 6 finals series the Roosters would have one less premiership. Mind you if the Roosters had been audited for salary cap breaches they would have 3 less premierships on top of that. Let me know if you still favour the 6 team finals series mushi and I'll be only too happy to retrospectively strip the 2002 premiership off the chooks and add it to the NRL premierships discard pile. I will add it to the Roosters 2013, 2018 and 2019 over the salary cap premierships and the Storm's stripped 2007 and 2009 premierships. :laughing:
The Barry
Roar Guru
I haven’t really thought about it yet I guess the late season surge changes things a bit. Finishing up 12th means that coming 10th or something next year isn’t really much of an improvement We should definitely be aiming for the eight. I think it’s a realistic target… not sure how close we’ll get…
Geoff Foley
Roar Rookie
gaah, wrong comment replying to! How do you reckon your Bulldogs will go next year- bottom of the 8 a realistic target?