AFL looking to bring in 17/5 split fixture in 2017: Ch 7

[one-eyed]

Mark Stevens said, after the top 8 being locked away early this season, the AFL is seriously considering altering the Draw next year along the 17/5 split fixture idea mentioned previously. Apparently, has the support of the AFL head honchos and clubs.

Each club plays the other once (first 17 H/A rounds) and then ladder is split into three groups of six (top, middle and bottom) and each club plays the other teams in their respective group once more (last 5 H/A rounds).

So if applied to this year at round 17:

Top 6:                    Middle 6:                  Bottom 6:
Hawthorn                Geelong                   Richmond
Adelaide                 North Melb.               Carlton
Bulldogs                 Port Adel.                  Gold Coast
GWS                      St Kilda                     Fremantle
Sydney                  Melbourne                 Brisbane
West Coast             Collingwood              Essendon


You can't rise or fall below your respective group level. So in our case, we couldn't finish any higher than 13th.

Thoughts?

[Dougeytherichmondfan]

Mark Stevens said, after the top 8 being locked away early this season, the AFL is seriously considering altering the Draw next year along the 17/5 split fixture idea mentioned previously. Apparently, has the support of the AFL head honchos and clubs.

Each club plays the other once (first 17 H/A rounds) and then ladder is split into three groups of six (top, middle and bottom) and each club plays the other teams in their respective group once more (last 5 H/A rounds).

So if applied to this year at round 17:

Top 6:                    Middle 6:                  Bottom 6:
Hawthorn                Geelong                   Richmond
Adelaide                 North Melb.               Carlton
Bulldogs                 Port Adel.                  Gold Coast
GWS                      St Kilda                     Fremantle
Sydney                  Melbourne                 Brisbane
West Coast             Collingwood              Essendon


You can't rise or fall below your respective group level. So in our case, we couldn't finish any higher than 13th.

Thoughts?

Don't mind it at all. Makes the part of the season we're in right now far more interesting. I am concerned about the potential for tanking in the bottom two tiers, however I've heard they're thinking of bringing in a scenario where draft picks are allocated at the end of round 17 OR that a lottery system exists and the more games you win after round 17 the more lottery tickets you get. Still gives teams the possibility to tank, but I think on the whole has a lot of potential.

[YellowandBlackBlood]

Can they stop changing the rules all the time?

[mightytiges]

Can they stop changing the rules all the time?

This. Once again the AFL overreacting to a one-off event and wanting to "fix it" when there's nothing to fix.

The 17/5 split fixture penalises sides making a late run. Geelong for instance which could be back in the top 4 after this weekend, would be stuck in 7th with nowhere to go up under that split system. You'd also still find sides tanking to get into the bottom six by round 17 if there's season is shot early like many sides outside of the Top Eight this year.

[🏅Dooks]

Ultimately need a 22 team comp. Play 21 games and swap home and away games every year. A top 10 to have another week of finals.

First point of call - a bloody team in Tassie.

Leaves 3 more licenses. Extra team in perth, adelaide and a toss up for the last licence between Canberra, darwin or townsville.

Hopefully relocate norf.

[Stalin]

Much of the sport is a joke. 

The worst - is not playing everyone once or twice

Amateur hour

[🏅Dooks]

Much of the sport is a joke. 

The worst - is not playing everyone once or twice

Amateur hour

Amen

[Dougeytherichmondfan]

Can they stop changing the rules all the time?

This. Once again the AFL overreacting to a one-off event and wanting to "fix it" when there's nothing to fix.

The 17/5 split fixture penalises sides making a late run. Geelong for instance which could be back in the top 4 after this weekend, would be stuck in 7th with nowhere to go up under that split system. You'd also still find sides tanking to get into the bottom six by round 17 if there's season is shot early like many sides outside of the Top Eight this year.

I think there is a massive problem with the backend of the fixture being largely uninteresting but for "development of the kids" and the occasional game per round with the big dogs playing off for position. Hardly an over reaction - the masses have been baying for an altercation to the fixture for years now; since before the plastic teams came into the comp.

Doesn't penalise sides making late runs? If they want a top 4 position, they need to be in the 6 by round 17. Simple!

As for your last point, well I suppose there might be a few, but the incentive of finals from the middle tier seems reasonable enough. If we look at this years ladder, which of the middle band teams would be tanking for bottom 6 position and didn't have a chance of finals?

[Yeahright]

The 17/5 split fixture penalises sides making a late run. Geelong for instance which could be back in the top 4 after this weekend, would be stuck in 7th with nowhere to go up under that split system.

Doesn't penalise sides making late runs? If they want a top 4 position, they need to be in the 6 by round 17. Simple!

Without looking at their draw, how easy is the back end of Geelongs draw compared to say GWS - one of the teams who could be knocked out of the 4 for Geelong? At least playing each other once will make it fairer and as Doufey said, make the 6 by round 17.

[Diocletian]

Ultimately need a 22 team comp. Play 21 games and swap home and away games every year. A top 10 to have another week of finals.

First point of call - a bloody team in Tassie.

Leaves 3 more licenses. Extra team in perth, adelaide and a toss up for the last licence between Canberra, darwin or townsville.

Hopefully relocate norf.

Quality of most matches is bad enough now with 18 sides - we should be reducing the number of sides,not increasing them.

12 team comp. 22 rounds, Final 5 format as it was in the 80's- demote the 4 least supported & least profitable Vic teams North, Footscray, Melbourne , St.Kilda to the VFL and GWS & Gold Coast to the NEAFL or whatever.

[Andyy]

What's the point of winning if you're in that bottom six?

Only makes sense if the draft picks (1-6, 7-12 and 13-18) are randomised within those three groups, or maybe even given to the club that wins the most games from their group (IE if you're 18th and play the other five teams and lose them all/finish 18th you get pick SIX).

There needs to be a reason to win.

[Dougeytherichmondfan]

What's the point of winning if you're in that bottom six?

Only makes sense if the draft picks (1-6, 7-12 and 13-18) are randomised within those three groups, or maybe even given to the club that wins the most games from their group (IE if you're 18th and play the other five teams and lose them all/finish 18th you get pick SIX).

There needs to be a reason to win.

Bang on, there needs to be some incentive for winning in the bottom 6 bracket. A ripping idea I think is to lottery the top 6 picks (last with the most tickets - 13th with the least) and offer a few extra lottery tickets for wins (weighted according to position as well). Still leaves the door open for tanking, but also makes the bottom 6 matches very interesting. And whilst teams can tank for the bottom of the ladder positions a lottery system takes away any guaranteed number 1 pick.

[JP Tiger]

What's the point of winning if you're in that bottom six?

Only makes sense if the draft picks (1-6, 7-12 and 13-18) are randomised within those three groups, or maybe even given to the club that wins the most games from their group (IE if you're 18th and play the other five teams and lose them all/finish 18th you get pick SIX).

There needs to be a reason to win.

Bang on, there needs to be some incentive for winning in the bottom 6 bracket. A ripping idea I think is to lottery the top 6 picks (last with the most tickets - 13th with the least) and offer a few extra lottery tickets for wins (weighted according to position as well). Still leaves the door open for tanking, but also makes the bottom 6 matches very interesting. And whilst teams can tank for the bottom of the ladder positions a lottery system takes away any guaranteed number 1 pick.

The only thing I have against the lottery system is that a genuinely poor side can be wrangled out of pick #1 by a side who don't deserve it.  If anything it makes tanking more tempting, because you only have to finish 13th to get a shot at pick #1.  Can you imagine Whoreforn having a poor year by their standards & finishing 13th only to snag pick #1 by sheer luck, while the genuinely abysmal Brisbane only score pick #6?
The AFL should use the player ratings they generate, add up each team's list by rating & the team with the highest score (the poorest list) should get pick #1.       

[Andyy]

What's the point of winning if you're in that bottom six?

Only makes sense if the draft picks (1-6, 7-12 and 13-18) are randomised within those three groups, or maybe even given to the club that wins the most games from their group (IE if you're 18th and play the other five teams and lose them all/finish 18th you get pick SIX).

There needs to be a reason to win.

Bang on, there needs to be some incentive for winning in the bottom 6 bracket. A ripping idea I think is to lottery the top 6 picks (last with the most tickets - 13th with the least) and offer a few extra lottery tickets for wins (weighted according to position as well). Still leaves the door open for tanking, but also makes the bottom 6 matches very interesting. And whilst teams can tank for the bottom of the ladder positions a lottery system takes away any guaranteed number 1 pick.

The only thing I have against the lottery system is that a genuinely poor side can be wrangled out of pick #1 by a side who don't deserve it.  If anything it makes tanking more tempting, because you only have to finish 13th to get a shot at pick #1.  Can you imagine Whoreforn having a poor year by their standards & finishing 13th only to snag pick #1 by sheer luck, while the genuinely abysmal Brisbane only score pick #6?
The AFL should use the player ratings they generate, add up each team's list by rating & the team with the highest score (the poorest list) should get pick #1.       

Still gives no motivation to win games though... Players can deliberately under-perform to drop their ratings and still effectively tank...

[tony_montana]

Much of the sport is a joke. 

The worst - is not playing everyone once or twice

Amateur hour

x2