Season structure... Do what works?

[clarency]

After the recent talk about manipulation of the season structure through Gould and... well it gets mentioned on these forums quite frequently, but it led me to have a read through of how NFL (32 teams) is scheduled.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League#Season_structure

• Each team plays the other three teams in their division twice: once at home, and once on the road (six games).
• Each team plays the four teams from another division within its own conference once on a rotating three-year cycle: two at home, and two on the road (four games).
• Each team plays the four teams from a division in the other conference once on a rotating four-year cycle: two at home, and two on the road (four games).
• Each team plays once against the other teams in its conference that finished in the same place in their own divisions as themselves the previous season, not counting the division they were already scheduled to play: one at home, one on the road (two games).

The advantage I can see with this is that it promotes rivalries through repeated match ups and at the same time provides close games through fixed scheduling.

I have never been a fan of conferencing Sydney teams and not-Sydney teams as it affirms the notion that NRL is predominately a Sydney competition, which isn't where I, nor many others would want the NRL to go. The other issue I think worth considering is that if team conferences are fixed (opposed to say, a WC format where groups are based on rank), you can end up with teams from one conference dominating the other, creating a skewed distribution.

I know there are alot of conservatives here who just want to keep things the way they are, but personally I think that if this can lead to more entertaining games and a closer competition (along with player safety and common sense scheduling and all that) then I'd like to see it happen.

 

[ellskimore]

The NFL and NHL do build up really solid rivalries through their conference and scheduling. This could work. but I dont know how the majority of people will respond to an idea like that.
I suppose one of the big points as well that you kind of mentioned is that the Grand Final is the two conference winners. Meaning we may never see a Rabbits vs Roosters GF (although as if thats going to happen anyway).
I think the schedule does need some re-working, and will not be criticising any ideas for improvement.

 

[Jono1987]

I think a four division system in the NRL could work rather well. Say;

NRL
East: Roosters, Rabbitohs, Warriors, Sea Eagles
North: Titans, Broncos, Cowboys, Knights
South: Sharks, Dragons, Storm, Raiders
West: Bulldogs, Eels, Panthers, Tigers

So going off the OP, key, traditional match-ups are retained and new rivalries would be forged. Every team still meets each year. Winners of the divisions get through to the finals. Throw in 2-4 extra spots for other teams to qualify for the finals. Places a big emphasis on winning division matches.

 

[caylo]

If you can build 4 conferences in the NRL with 4-5 teams per conferences and allow scheduling around that It would be a perfect idea IMO.

Conf 1: Parramattta, Penrith, Tigers, Bulldogs
Conf 2: Souths, Roosters, St George, Cronulla
Conf 3: NZ, Canberra, Manly, Newcastle
Conf 4: Brisbane, Titans, Cowboys, Melbourne

Now I tried to break it down but Conf 1 and 2 fit well geographically and 4 fits well with the exception of the Melbourne (they have the link with their players thou) but Conf 3 if a bit all over the place.

If there was in introduction of Central coast, a second brizzy team a perth team and a second NZ team it may work but until then we are still left a little wanting in splitting the groups up fairly.

So with the assume addition of those 4 teams (which may be ten years away) we would look at

Conf 1: Parramattta, Penrith, Tigers, Bulldogs, Manly
Conf 2: Souths, Roosters, St George, Cronulla, Canberra
Conf 3: NZ, Newcastle, Central Coast, Second NZ team, Perth
Conf 4: Brisbane, Titans, Cowboys, Melbourne, second brizzy team

Each team plays the teams in its conf twice (home and away) = 8 games
Each team plays every once (home and away alternating each year) = 15 games
Each team plays one team from every conf twice rotating every year = additional 3 games

total games are 26 per year.

Each conference gets one team in the top 4 (highest in every conference ranked on points and f/a) then the other 4 are decided purely on points and f/a to make up a top 8.

 

[Dogs Of War]

I think a four division system in the NRL could work rather well. Say;

NRL
East: Roosters, Rabbitohs, Warriors, Sea Eagles
North: Titans, Broncos, Cowboys, Knights
South: Sharks, Dragons, Storm, Raiders
West: Bulldogs, Eels, Panthers, Tigers

So going off the OP, key, traditional match-ups are retained and new rivalries would be forged. Every team still meets each year. Winners of the divisions get through to the finals. Throw in 2-4 extra spots for other teams to qualify for the finals. Places a big emphasis on winning division matches.

I would swap the Sea Eagles and Knights around. Knights fans are usually good travelers, so no point putting them with teams so far away. That said, if a second Brisbane team was admitted, the Sea Eagles should stay in that conference, and the Knights should join that conference (what happens if the Bears get in, as that changes things again, you would have to move the Warriors)

I think you have to look at the future state of the game as well. So if you have a 2nd Brisbane team, and a Perth team admitted, you would add them to existing conferences (if you had 20 teams, I think it would be better just to have 5 conferences instead).

Scheduling with 18 teams makes it more interesting, so 8 matches within the conference of 5, only 6 for the other 2 conferences, which means those 2 conferences without an extra team would have to play 2 extra matches against the other 4 team conference to make up for shortfall of matches. In this case, you could have a 21 round season (with each team playing the other conferences in one off games), and the extra home game that some teams would get, should be taken by the NRL to use those games to promote the game into places like Adelaide, Wellington etc (That's only 9 games a year, which would be the perfect amount for promoting the game). THis would then be at a neutral venue (maybe the NRL can underwrite the game, with a nominated amount going to each team). This then leaves plenty of room for the NRL to get the International game, and State Of Origin etc scheduled correctly in the season.

And which conference would suit Perth? Personally I would put them in the Southern conference.