The annual finals system debate thread

[Crusher]

The system I most favour is as follows.


a 2 group league where placement is based on previous years results with top 4 from each.

Ie Group 1 = 1,3,5,7,9,11, 13,15
Group 2 = 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16

You play your own group twice and the other group once and end up with a 22 round comp

Top 4 from each group in semis

Then in each group 3 v 4 is sudden death. Winner plays loser of 1 v 2

Then 2 remaining teams from each group play 2 remaining teams from other group in GF qualifiers etc.

System still allows multiple GF options

 

[borat]

if u look on it this year

storm is better then brisbane who finished 3rd and dragons who are 6th beat em and manly beat dogs a few weeks ago!!!!!! think u fool!!! it doesnt matter where 1st finished they have it easy and it makes better games for the finals and better contests other then 1 v 8 and 2 v 7!!!!!! geeeeeeeeeeeeeezzz

I'm the fool? Get over yourself a*se clown. This year 3rd, 4th, 5th & 6th all finished on the same number of points and there wasn't much between them all. But its quite feasible for 6th to be well down the ladder. Look at the previous year, under your poorly thought out system Parra plays the Tigers in week 1 whereas Brisbane get Melbourne. What advantage is that for the minor premiers Parra? Think you fool!!!!

 

[Crusher]

still prefer two divisions of 8 with 4 from each playing finals. fair for everyone

 

[The_Savage_1]

i dont like either of the systems both have there ups and downs i have made my own what do u think

week 1

1 v 4
2 v 5
3 v 6

Highest ranked winner gets week off,

2nd highest ranked winner gets home semi-final.


7 v 8 loser eliminated

week 2


semi 1
2nd Highest ranked winner V 3rd highest ranked loser

semi 2
3rd highest ranked winner V 2nd highest ranked loser

semi 3
4th highest ranked winner V Highest ranked loser

LOSERS ELIMINATED

WEEK 3

prelim final 1

Highest ranked winner V Winner of semi-final 2

prelim final 2
Winner of semi-final 3 V Winner of semi-final 1

losers of both games out
week 4
GRAND FINAL
Winner of preliminary final1 V Winner of preliminary final 2

dont mean to drag this thread out again, but was looking for something, saw this and had to comment.

this system is rubbish. go no further than week 1... out of 1st, 2nd and 3rd, 1st plays the hardest team while 3rd plays the easiest! if anything it would be 1 v 6, 2 v 5 and 3 v 4.

 

[Lego_Man]

bump

 

[Azkatro]

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

22 rounds, first past the post. And add a knockout cup competition for finals-style excitement.

 

[Lego_Man]

First past the post is lame. You end up having something like Storm vs Souths and Dogs vs Cronulla in the final week, see who flogs who by more and they get the trophy. Bit of an anticlimax if you ask me. People want to see the best teams competing in high stakes matches.

 

[Master Vippo]

Yeah, first past the post sucks, cause you can have a winner weeks before the end of the season. I like the Ryan format (though i remember it being the Ryan-someone else system)

 

[BuffaloRules]

The four best sides are left to fight out the premiership this year.

The current system works Ok in my opinion...

 

[Azkatro]

First past the post is lame. You end up having something like Storm vs Souths and Dogs vs Cronulla in the final week, see who flogs who by more and they get the trophy. Bit of an anticlimax if you ask me. People want to see the best teams competing in high stakes matches.

Hence you have a cup competition.

 

[Azkatro]

Yeah, first past the post sucks, cause you can have a winner weeks before the end of the season. I like the Ryan format (though i remember it being the Ryan-someone else system)

The top eight was all but decided a few weeks out this season - why did we bother running the last few rounds?

 

[jamesgould]

I will be perfectly happy with the McIntyre system next year if we go to home semis in week two.

Newcastle (4th) won their first semi and were rewarded by playing Brisbane (3rd). If this was a home match for them, it would have rewarded them much more for winning their first game.

I'm not bleating over Newcastle losing, either, haha. Home advantage wouldn't have made any smidgen of difference this year, but it happens almost every year that a first week winner ends up playing a side that finished above them in the minor premiership in week 2 - and without a home ground advantage, that is harsh.

If the NRL wants to keep neutral finals in Sydney beyond week 2, then the AFL system is the way to go. It would also lead to more exciting match-ups ... and first place would get a proper work-out in week 1. This is aboutt he only year ever that first place has got the week off after a tough semi final.

 

[Hass]

The four best sides are left to fight out the premiership this year.

The current system works Ok in my opinion...

The best four sides may be left to fight out the premiership this year - but they are all doing it on a knockout basis.

Canterbury and Melbourne have been the standout teams all year, have won their first final, yet will not even make the Grad Final if they have one measly loss this weekend.

My post from a year ago (only about 8 or 9 posts back) shows that when you get to your final 4 teams it's got to be...

1 v 2 - winner to GF
3 v 4 - loser eliminated

loser of 1 v 2 plays winner of 3 v 4 for the other place in the Grand Final.

The proposed 5 week Final 8 does this, the English Superleague Final 6 does this and the old top 5 does this.

They're your picks ladies and gentlemen. I prefer a Top 5 because I believe the finals should be the best of the best - but if you want extra teams in the playoffs then its the five-week Final 8 system you want.

The current McIntyre system and the old ARL/current AFL systems are not even options in this debate.

Cheers.

 

[Lego_Man]

I actually think Hass's system has a lot of merit. I havent gone through and comprehensively weighed up the permutations, but it looks pretty sound. Can you take us through the whole 5 weeks, or point to a post where you have?(too lazy to flick all the way back through this morning). I can see people being against a 5-week finals format though (not that i would be personally).

 

[mepelthwack]

I actually think Hass's system has a lot of merit. I havent gone through and comprehensively weighed up the permutations, but it looks pretty sound. Can you take us through the whole 5 weeks, or point to a post where you have?(too lazy to flick all the way back through this morning). I can see people being against a 5-week finals format though (not that i would be personally).

Hass is a top 5 fan. The top 8 model he likes is actually mine.

It's the GlennC system. The NRL has it on file but won't consider any changes until the clubs themselves want them.

 

[mepelthwack]

again.......

Here's my system (The GlennC system). For the sake of this example the high ranked side wins but no matter which way you shuffle the results teams 1-4 get 2 bites prior to GF day and teams 5-8 play constant sudden death.

nb - E = Elimination

-----------------

week 1 (home teams first)

1v4
2v3

5v8 E
6v7 E

-----------------

week 2 (home teams first)

3v6 E
4v5 E

nb - as can be seen the reward for a top 4 finish is that even if you lose in week 1 you will still have home advantage against the survivors of 5-8.

-----------------

week 3 (from now on always neutral grounds and from here follows week 2 of the old reverred top 5 onwards precisely, right through to completion)

1v2 (winner straight to GF)
3v4 E

-----------------

week 4

2v3 E

week 5 (GF)

1v2

------------------

Ok now under the McIntyre System there are 9 semis. This system extends the series by 1 week and is 10 semis. The extra week is necessary to eliminate all the flaws existing in the McIntyre (and AFL) formats.

There will always be 1 team that plays 3 games only in the 5 weeks. This is unavoidable but cast your minds back to the old top 5. The best of the Minor Premiers in those days did EXACTLY the same, ie. week off on the first weekend then if they won on the 2nd weekend a further week off until GF day. Remember, the best sides can and did overcome this situation. It is arguable in any case that it can be good to get a week off. There are pros and cons either way.

It is necessary (and fair) to allow ALL teams in the top 4 the 2 bites they deserve for a consistent season. IF a team from 5-8 wins the premiership there can be no doubt they deserved it as the road is a long and tough one

 

[Redback71]

ok i was thinking about the finals system (i was bored and my mind started to wonder). some people like the top 8 others hate it, i for 1 am for the 8 but think it needs a bit of adjusting to make it more like the afl system.

that being said and the more i looked at other finals system it seems to me the best ones are those that have a top 6 like the uk super league.

then i started thinking if i could design my own what would i have and here is what i came up with, be interested to see what u guys think.

* top 6 system devided into two groups
* the makeup of the two groups is debatable but lets say:

Group A is:

Teams: 1, 3 & 5 ( so u would have storm, broncos & eagles)

Group B is:

Teams: 2, 4 & 6 ( Dogs, knights & dragons based on this year)

* the teams in each group play each other twice over a 6 week period just like the tri-nations.

* at the end of the 6 weeks the winners of groups A & B play each other in the grandfinal.

simple lots of advantages like:

* each team gets a 2nd chance
* play each other twice in there group
* the teams that make the GF deserve to be there
* better finals series

Negatives only two i could think of:

* season 2 weeks longer
* players from 10 teams get no game time for 6 weeks not good for rep footy.

Fix negatives:

* 16th team means no byes seaon 2 weeks shorter gives extra 2 weeks for finals

* 10 remaning teams play in mini- knock out comp over a 6 week period
* 2 winners play on grandfinal day before the main game.

so none of this let down we all feel cause our team continues to play in some capacity right til the end and we get a double header on grandfinal day.

a minor grandfinal and a major grandfinal.

so what do u guys thinks and what ideas do u have?

 

[melon....]

You know what the problem with league is these days? Too much of it. The game has changed in such ways that its very hard to sustain quality over long periods of time. by finals time, every player is carrying something. They are breaking point staring at Tri Nations. The last thing they need is 100 round robin games.

Give the Premieship to teh Minor Premiers. Play a Challenge cup in the following format.

1 v 2

3 v 4

Winners into Challenge Cup Grand Final. But the Premiers have been decided. 1st over 26 weeks is more important.

 

[caylo]

tbh dont like it, i dont know how teams would percive playing a minor grandifinals, reminds me of super7s a little with the set up. I just dont think teams would take the minor comp very serious, they would be a buch of juniors i guess, which cant be bad though. it could work i think, but a few moer ajusments.

have top 8, but split into groups:
Group A:
1st, 4th,5th and 8th.
Group B
2nd, 3rd,6th, and 7th.

i do that simply because the team that comes first should have more of an advantage of playing lower ranked team, whilst in your make up 2nd actually has that.
id have each team play eachother 1ce, then top 2 go through and play a semi final like game, which is Winner of Group A vs 2nd place of Group B, and vise versa (sorta world cup style exept with 2 groups only). Then as you ahd ur minor finals, we could have it the same
Group A:
9th, 12th, 13th and 16th.
Group B
10th, 11th, 14th, 15th

 

[*Paul*]

Straight knockout 1v8, 2v7 etc. week 1; high plays low, week 2; GF, week 3.