Which way will footy head in the next 5 years

[Sainternist]

[desertsaint]

pluggs, is a huge upset in finals not allowed? Why so terrible? If the top team ever lost to one 15 places below in finals well they obviously aren't deserving premiers. What would you do if a wildcard knocked out Federer in the first round? Demand Fed gets a second chance? Be fantastic for footy and the fans if it ever happened - because it would be a rare, rare event. More chance of a bottom half top eight team making a GF - which has happened how many times? Why do we even bother? Because one day it may, where there's a chance, however slight, there's hope, and the AFL would be celebrating, not thinking - well we'd better change our finals system, that's too big of an upset, can't have that.

[HitTheBoundary]

I don't know what will happen but I know what I would like to happen, and what I miss from the past.

I hope they decrease interchanges and as a consequence players stay in their position more, and there are more one on one contests.

Long kicks to position where packs fly for a mark.
What has happened to the old tussles between CHF and CHB? Knights vs Vanderhaar etc.

I hope onballers start resting forward and kicking goals.

I hope two ruckman play with one resting in the forward pocket.

I hope a genuine FF kicks 100 goals in a year.

I hope they play the seconds before the main game.

I hope they bring back World of Sport on a Sunday, with the voice of Jack O'Toole.

[magnifisaint]

most players will be doing coke

[ripplug66]

pluggs, is a huge upset in finals not allowed? Why so terrible? If the top team ever lost to one 15 places below in finals well they obviously aren't deserving premiers. What would you do if a wildcard knocked out Federer in the first round? Demand Fed gets a second chance? Be fantastic for footy and the fans if it ever happened - because it would be a rare, rare event. More chance of a bottom half top eight team making a GF - which has happened how many times? Why do we even bother? Because one day it may, where there's a chance, however slight, there's hope, and the AFL would be celebrating, not thinking - well we'd better change our finals system, that's too big of an upset, can't have that.

Lets forget all the upsets and look at the illogical process of 16 out of 18 sides making the finals. It renders the home and away season basically a waste and what make us the laughing stock of Australian and world sport. And you say the AFL wouldn't change the system if there is an upset however that isn't true. The only time we have had a similar system to what you are proposing the AFL changed it the first time there was an upset and that was only a 3 gap difference in clubs. Lets be totally honest your system is ridiculous and I say that is the nicest way. There is no comp with close to 18 sides where 16 of them go through to finals. The soccer is bad enough with 6 making it out of 10.

[kosifantutti]

Massive reward for finishing higher up the ladder. If melbourne were 1st and Collingwood 16th it would mean Melbourne were a far better team and Collingwood would be a much easier first round finals opponent than the fourth placed team - who you forget could as likely be Collingwood - how fair is that for Melbourne in the current system?

I agree with the top five - it worked given a small 12 team league. But the finals 8 system doesn't work nearly as well. No advantage for first over second at all, possible to argue second gets it easier as it likely has the easier prelim - which is a KO game. Our current system means the third placed team can lose to the second, yet survive to get the chance to knockout the first (or third) team and make the final. The second team can potentially play the eigth team in a prelim, whilst the top team at best can play the seventh - unless they lose week 1, then they can potentially play the eigth. It's a mess.

Give me the excitement and equity of a straight KO system. Every team gets a fairly balanced reward for their final ladder position. No teams is likely to tank as finals spots are on the line throughout the entire season. The only time the last round would see a meaningless game is if 17 plays 18 with neither able to overtake 16. More likely we'd win a a flag before that happens. Just think - this year we would've played Richmond. Likely we'd lose, but a shock win and then away to Sydney.
Point is, all fans and clubs stay interested and motivated all through the season.

Yes Melbourne are the better side but they get no advantage at in the actual final. And of course sides would tank. You maybe better to lose late in the year knowing a position or two further back in the ladder may avoid an interstate trip. And I agree it would be great for most sides to make the finals but the problem is I would have bugger interest in the 22 games.

Do you honestly think people would accept a system where 16 out of 18 make the finals. We would be the laughing stock of all other sports. The 8 is here to stay because it is the best possible system with 18 sides in the competition.

The odds a team could tank to avoid an interstate trip certainly aren't higher than currently. even harder further down the ladder as teams will be bunched on points and percentages. who'd risk it? And if 16th isn't a much easier match up week 1 than 4th I'll go whee!

Yep 16 out of 18 clubs wouldn't make us the laughing stock of sport anywhere in Australia. Yep 1st versus 16th is easier but there is no double chance for the top side and no finals advantage at all unless playing an interstate side. Derbies have had huge upsets over the years. Imagine freo who finished 16th playing WCE who finished first at a neutral ground in the first week of the finals and WCE lost. Huge uproar and the end of that finals system. There is a precedent in that when we beat the pies after we finished 6th and they finished 3rd. They changed it the next year because it was ridiculous and that was only 3 spots difference.

The finals system wasn't changed after we beat Collingwood. That was the new system.

It was changed after we lost to Geelong the previous year. The loser of 3 v 4 was eliminated while the winner of 5 v 6 continued.

But I agree, re 16 teams in the finals. Why play all year for no real advantage?

[desertsaint]

All year teams play to gain the highest position and easier finals draw. That is the reward. All year basically all teams have something to play for - it keeps everyone interested and playing to win. The current system is a poor compromise of mangling 8 teams into a system that isn't a straight KO. The AFL could have a top 8 KO but would lose too many finals games and the associated revenue. After week 1 we would have a top 8. Sure 9 may beat 8, 10 may beat 7, but those teams are basically equal strength anyway and thanks to our current unfair fixture 9 may well be a better team than 8, but unluckily met more top teams. Under this system that balance is redressed.
Outside of Australia, or the system in non-football shorter game codes like basketball (where finals match ups are best of three or five) a straight KO finals system is in place. It is our system that is unusual and a throwback tradition that only suited four or five team finals. It simply doesn't work very well and my option is just one alternative that i think is a much better, fairer, and esciting system. It doesn't give four a massive advantage over five, when in reality four may have got that advantage due to an easier season draw.

[ripplug66]

All year teams play to gain the highest position and easier finals draw. That is the reward. All year basically all teams have something to play for - it keeps everyone interested and playing to win. The current system is a poor compromise of mangling 8 teams into a system that isn't a straight KO. The AFL could have a top 8 KO but would lose too many finals games and the associated revenue. After week 1 we would have a top 8. Sure 9 may beat 8, 10 may beat 7, but those teams are basically equal strength anyway and thanks to our current unfair fixture 9 may well be a better team than 8, but unluckily met more top teams. Under this system that balance is redressed.
Outside of Australia, or the system in non-football shorter game codes like basketball (where finals match ups are best of three or five) a straight KO finals system is in place. It is our system that is unusual and a throwback tradition that only suited four or five team finals. It simply doesn't work very well and my option is just one alternative that i think is a much better, fairer, and esciting system. It doesn't give four a massive advantage over five, when in reality four may have got that advantage due to an easier season draw.

16 out of 18 playing finals would make us the laughing stock of world sport. And your system isn't even as good as the current one. 8 out 18 sounds sensible to me.

[Jacks Back]

Ball hits a post and bounces back in play - play on (the ball hasn't gone over the goal line). I'm open to say it's a goal if the ball hits the post and goes through for a goal or you can leave it being a point or on the full for the point post (as long as it goes over the respective lines).

Bring back the mid-week night series we used to play but, this time, make it that the winning side wins something substantial (like a few million or more from a sponsor). This could be the knockout type finals being mentioned. And give away a TV to the best player (or not the best player - that part doesn't matter).