Discussion in 'Parramatta Eels' started by MarkInTheStands, Jun 2, 2014.
Is that funny?
The AFL do that in their preseason, basically its 2 games in one night
Yes but not funny haha, funny weird
I spent way to much time thinking about this sitting in Sydney traffic a few years ago but here is my take.
A) Conference, teams 1, 3, 5, 7 from last years ladder after GF
B) Conference, teams 2,4,6,8 as above.
A) Conference plays each other twice, home and away.
B) Conference plays each other twice, home and away.
At 3 integral times of the year conference A) plays Conference B) - top of each ladder play each other ie, 1st plays 1st, 2nd plays 2nd all the way down to last.
If you do this as the first game you have a GF replay every year.
You have another mid year and then at the end of the regular season.
You will be having blockbuster games guaranteed.
Even the last place games would create interest for spoon bragging rights.
After the end of the regular season you join both comps on paper to one and take your top 8 to play the finals.
The following year start from above.
I'd reckon this would create great interest for tv when you played the 3 blockbuster rounds and also for teams that may not have played each other over a season or even possibly 2. It would certainly throw up some variables.
I think that teams who finish below 8th will be pretty pissed off at being relegated.
Everyone plays each other once to round 15. Then we play origin 1 2 and three over a two week period (Tuesday, Saturday and Wednesday) then the top 8 plays each of the bottom 8 once.
This would mean that teams in the bottom 8 would be facing the best teams every week. It would give teams an incentive to be in the top 8 at round 15.
That would make 23 rounds of NRL.
I don't mind it, but you run the risk of grounds not being available when you are arranging draws (for the second half of the season) with only a couple weeks notice.
Yeah that was my thought too. I just wanted to put something out there.
This is my life's work. This could be all I'm remembered by.
Probably better if you were remembered for leaving it to the experts.
Why an expert? Somebody has to come up with something.
I already have.
f**ks sake HJ he said an expert, not a sexpest.
To be fair though he is an expert sexpest.
Though not a professional.
Yup... That's the big problem with having a sydney conference and national conference...
The difference in travel miles between the conferences would make it unfair.
The conference system does have merit... But each conference would need to have an even spread of sydney and national teams... Which f**ks up the local Derby aspect of the conference system.
The other thing about conferences is that more local derbys aren't always a good thing... In super rugby there looking at moving away from local derbys as the RSA and NZ derby games are more physical tougher encounters compared to the Aussie derbys which are normally a cake walk.
It's an interesting topic though..
Just piss off all the non Sydney teams.
I think you'll find that the NRL would f**k most sydney clubs off before they f**k the Broncos or the Warriors off.
They add the majority of value to TV contracts and sponsorship footprint.
Actually I think you'll find that every other sydney club will f**k off another sydney club before getting rid of one of those 'national' clubs...
The Eels included...
Your mistake is taking ME seriously.
Separate names with a comma.