Time to get rid of the 8???

[brokendigit]

Some good points...

However, I believe that until the teams in this competition are playing each other twice in a truly even 'home & away' season, the First Past the Post theory is blatantly unfair.

Also, there are countless examples of top-flight sports where the season/series/premiership comes down to a single game. Isn't that a part of what makes you a champion - your ability to deliver the goods in the crunch game, at the critical moment?

Do you think the English Premier League wouldn't have a Finals series of some kind if they could fit it in??? Are you mad? Do you know how many squillions of Pounds/Euros that would generate? The trouble is, they've got about a 6 week off-season as it is, & no time to play it...

I believe that the debate over the merits of the current finals system will die a slow death, just like the debate when they introduced Grand Finals, just like when they introduced limited tackles etc...

 

[Hindyscrack]

If the NRL actually signed a decent TV rights deal they could recover any revenue that would be lost by one or two less finals matches in a top 5 format.

16 teams, top 5 sounds good to me. Every year we see a team limp into 7th or 8th (My Broncos included) that don't have a hope in hell of going any further than week 1 of the finals.

Cowboys 2004 ring a bell?

Top 8 to Stay

 

[Hindyscrack]

Well without finals our season would be over, crowds dwindling and TV ratings down the drain... scrap finals, great idea...

 

[Evergreen]

Top 8? YES

McIntyre System? NO

AFL System? YES

The top 8 IMO is one of the best concepts in the game. The first week of finals football, with four top games, is a highlight of the season.

The AFL top 8 system needs to be adopted. It promises more even games and even has an element of the top 5 to it, I.E top teams playing top teams, lower teams playing lower teams, second chance for top teams, elimination for lower teams.

 

[lemon rabbit]

With a top five we would have missed that fairytale run by North Queensland last year - something that was great for rugby league, particularly in QLD.

I like the top eight.

I don't look at it as "the best of the best". I look at is a halving of the competition, and the start of a new competition.

Chances are we'll end up with the same result whether it's a top five, six, seven or eight. Why not keep it at eight and enjoy the extra footy.

 

[pantherz9103]

Some good points...

However, I believe that until the teams in this competition are playing each other twice in a truly even 'home & away' season, the First Past the Post theory is blatantly unfair.

Also, there are countless examples of top-flight sports where the season/series/premiership comes down to a single game. Isn't that a part of what makes you a champion - your ability to deliver the goods in the crunch game, at the critical moment?

Do you think the English Premier League wouldn't have a Finals series of some kind if they could fit it in??? Are you mad? Do you know how many squillions of Pounds/Euros that would generate? The trouble is, they've got about a 6 week off-season as it is, & no time to play it...

I believe that the debate over the merits of the current finals system will die a slow death, just like the debate when they introduced Grand Finals, just like when they introduced limited tackles etc...

Just on the EPL not having a top 8. It would be laughable to give a EPL club like Manchester City (8th in 04/05) the chance to win the EPL when Premiership winners Chelsea lost just 1 game all season.

38 Rounds is more than enough to decide who the best team is for the elite level of English football. The FA Cup, Carling Cup, UEFA Cup and Champions League provide the finals like excitement of knockout matches.

Rugby League needs a finals series because we have no extra cup competitions and you could argue quite strongly that the team who tops the table after 26 Rounds isn't the best team anyway. They may have had an easier draw than the 2nd placed team, because you only play 10 teams twice and 4 teams once. The Broncos deserve alot of credit this season because they are clear leaders even though they only get one match v Newcastle, Souths and Penrith.

 

[Dog-E]

Have a big cup competition.

Cos they haven't won yet.

Have a big cup competition. By removing the finals considerations in the regular season, people will start to work out that they don't necessarily need a good reason to go watch a football game - other than the fact that there will be some good footy on display.

Look, I'd actually really LOVE to see a knockout cup comp!

But the issue with that & a first past the post format, as opposed to what happens in European football - is that would have to be a scenario where everybody plays EVERYBODY else twice - as others have pointed out - and Rugby League is tougher on the body than soccer...a LOT tougher!...and there is a lot more money floating about in player wages in Euro footy - Hence, the squads are much bigger!...Can most RL clubs afford that?

Throw into that - if you want to keep rep footy alive there needs to be some kind of Tri Nations - played at least every 2nd year - Plus SoO..Plus City v Country....its just too much Rugby League for the average human body to take, mate!...Players would be retiring at 28 or 9 instead of 31 and 2!

Unsustainable in the long term....Unless we have LESS teams - and....do you want that?? Rugby Union would make huge inroads into 'marginalised' areas such as The Central Coast, Melbourne, etc etc etc....

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

With 15 teams the top 8 is ridiculous. The top 5 would be much better (plus it is the fairest system).

However i'm fine with 8 when we go to 16. But like most, the McIntyre system is a joke. Bring back the ARL (had it before the AFL) final 8.

 

[panthersballboy]

The grand Final is an institution in this game that if removed - would remove a LOT of the tension & drama that IS Rugby league!!

Why don't we just hand the Broncos the trophy right NOW, then!??

Sure. **Yawn** u want to see some POOR crowds?..Well then let's bring that idea in!

There are 2 equally logical arguments to this.... ;-)

Good post!!! To get rid of the grandfinal is the dumbest thing I have ever heard of. GF day is a highlight on the calender for anyone in NSW and QLD. It's bbq's and beer even if your team is not playing. They even schedule it so it's a public holiday the next day so everyone can enjoy it even more.

 

[Sterling]

Since 2000 only once has team 2 beaten team 7 in the Qualifying final. That was in 2003 when the Roosters crushed Newcastle.

The minor premiers have used their 1 V 8 match as little more than a training run though.

i think you will find that the dragons defeated the dogs in 2001 and it was 2 Vs 7.

 

[Tidus_Raider]

I can't beleive people are calling for a Top 5 Finals series. Look at the closeness of the comp at the moment. Any team can beat each other on any given day.

Fans are flocking to the games. Why? Because there team is a chance of making the finals. Anyone remember the cowboys last year? They were a fairytale. They are the peoples team.

Besides why would you pay to see 5 clubs compete for 5 weeks against each other. The top 8 is here to stay and rightly so.

 

[sunny]

8 out of 15 is a joke. 8th out of 15 isn't a good finish, it's a mediocre one, especially after 24 games, a pretty long season. The cowboys did well in the finals last year despite finishing 7th but a.) that sort of stuff is the exception rather than the rule overall and b.) doing well in the finals doesn't always mean you deserved to be there in the first place.

Top 6 for a top 15 comp i say, althoug a top 8 with a 16 team comp is alright because at least its the top half of the comp.

 

[*Paul*]

Some good points...
However, I believe that until the teams in this competition are playing each other twice in a truly even 'home & away' season, the First Past the Post theory is blatantly unfair.

The draw isn't random though, each team gets a similar task.

Also, there are countless examples of top-flight sports where the season/series/premiership comes down to a single game.

The majority of these are multi-division or knock out comps.

Isn't that a part of what makes you a champion - your ability to deliver the goods in the crunch game, at the critical moment?

It is when you make it so.

Do you think the English Premier League wouldn't have a Finals series of some kind if they could fit it in???

Indeed, a financial bonanza, but if the 7th best team happened to win the comp, there'd be an uproar - we're used to mediocre teams being given another shot after they'd failed the first time, but soccer fans aren't.

And just to re-interate, the artifically induced tension of finals series has it's place, but that place isn't deciding the premier team. We just like to say it does by convention.

 

[Azkatro]

Look, I'd actually really LOVE to see a knockout cup comp!

But the issue with that & a first past the post format, as opposed to what happens in European football - is that would have to be a scenario where everybody plays EVERYBODY else twice - as others have pointed out - and Rugby League is tougher on the body than soccer...a LOT tougher!...and there is a lot more money floating about in player wages in Euro footy - Hence, the squads are much bigger!...Can most RL clubs afford that?

This wouldn't be a problem if we didn't have so many Sydney teams.

Throw into that - if you want to keep rep footy alive there needs to be some kind of Tri Nations - played at least every 2nd year - Plus SoO..Plus City v Country....its just too much Rugby League for the average human body to take, mate!...Players would be retiring at 28 or 9 instead of 31 and 2!

Why does the Tri Nations have to be played every second year? I think that's overkill. Trying too hard to "rescue" the International format.

Unsustainable in the long term....Unless we have LESS teams - and....do you want that?? Rugby Union would make huge inroads into 'marginalised' areas such as The Central Coast, Melbourne, etc etc etc....

You're not allowing yourself to think outside the square. This is all hypothetical, of course, but if the general mentality is to find a reason not to do things, nothing will ever improve. I think down the track it will become a priority for the NRL to get a much-needed divorce from the old NSWRL and ARL competitions. Why? Let's face it - at the core, the NRL is still essentially a Sydney competitions. Nine of the current fifteen teams are based in or around the Sydney metropolitan area. That's more than half the teams in the competition. How can you call that national?

I think the NRL should call a spade a spade. Eventually more Sydney teams will have to go - a more reasonable prospect I think would be to have three Sydney teams (city, west and south), Newcastle, Central Coast, Canberra, Brisbane, Gold Coast, Nth QLD, Melbourne, Auckland, Perth. You retain the QLD cup as it is and the lower grade NSWRL competitions are strengthened due to a streamlined national competition which should be run seperately and as it should be - a NATIONAL competition. With 12 teams, you only need 22 rounds for each team to play each other twice. It leaves scope for a cup competition which could include a bunch of lower grade teams as well, to give them an opportunity to raise their profile with a good result in the cup (say Redcliffe or the Jets making it to the quarter finals). That allows the national teams to have more depth and more money if necessary, and a bigger salary cap keeping the competition elite.

I've thought about something like this a few times before and my opinion has never changed. I don't think the game can grow to its full potential until the NRL goes down this kind of road.

 

[Tommy Smith]

Just on the EPL not having a top 8. It would be laughable to give a EPL club like Manchester City (8th in 04/05) the chance to win the EPL when Premiership winners Chelsea lost just 1 game all season.

38 Rounds is more than enough to decide who the best team is for the elite level of English football. The FA Cup, Carling Cup, UEFA Cup and Champions League provide the finals like excitement of knockout matches.

Rugby League needs a finals series because we have no extra cup competitions and you could argue quite strongly that the team who tops the table after 26 Rounds isn't the best team anyway. They may have had an easier draw than the 2nd placed team, because you only play 10 teams twice and 4 teams once. The Broncos deserve alot of credit this season because they are clear leaders even though they only get one match v Newcastle, Souths and Penrith.

It should also be pointed out that Aussie fans are much more fickle than the English...infact most European fans.

Every home game in the EPL is an event not to be missed, regardless of the position on the table, and hence a full house is guaranteed for most clubs.

In Australia if there was no finals series crowds would drop...but in england fans turn up no matter what. Tottenham, Villa...always finish mid-table but that doesnt stop them from filling the stadium.

 

[Grantwhy]

An interesting stat I can remember is that I believe the 7th placed team has beaten the 2nd team in every semi almost since about 2000 (accept one year roosters beat knights i think)

8 out of 15 is a joke. 8th out of 15 isn't a good finish, it's a mediocre one, especially after 24 games, a pretty long season. The cowboys did well in the finals last year despite finishing 7th but a.) that sort of stuff is the exception rather than the rule overall and b.) doing well in the finals doesn't always mean you deserved to be there in the first place.

using http://stats.rleague.com/rl/rl_index.html
(hopefully i've got this all correct :lol

2004 Cowboys (7th) defeated Bulldogs (2nd) (Cowboys won the next week)

2003 Easts (2nd) defeated Newcastle (7th)

2002 Dragons (7th) defeated Newcastle (2nd) (Dragons lost the next week)

2001 Dragons (7th) defeated Bulldogs (2nd) (Dragons lost the next week)

2000 Eels (7th) defeated Easts (2nd) (Easts won the next week)

1999 Eels (2nd) defeated Newcastle (7th)

Looks like 7th beating 2nd is the rule, not the exception , and when 7th did win half the time they made it into the 3rd week of the finals.

 

[Eddie.]

Thank god some of you guys are not running the game

Its been said by the people with their heads screwed on in here, that Top 8, keeps teams interested and playing better footy, keeps fans interested, keeps media talking about the games, gives us do oe die matches each week

Yeah lets have the Top 5 and watch 8 or 9 teams going through the motions for the last 6 weeks in front of small crowds.

Geez.

 

[brokendigit]

The draw isn't random though, each team gets a similar task.

I think I understand what you're getting at, but when will 'similar' ever be the same as 'the same'?

The majority of these are multi-division or knock out comps.

I think you'll find that this is due to the sustainable numbers of teams in the competition - see EPL & NFL as examples.

It is when you make it so.

And the alternative (a Premiership which is decided in retrospect, by a lot of 'non-crucial' moments) is better? Hmmm... I'm not so sure.

Indeed, a financial bonanza, but if the 7th best team happened to win the comp, there'd be an uproar - we're used to mediocre teams being given another shot after they'd failed the first time, but soccer fans aren't.

Would there? Really? I quite enjoyed the 'uproar' of Greece winning Euro, & I would've been quite pleased for Nth QLD last year if they had've created 'an uproar'.

And just to re-interate, the artifically induced tension of finals series has it's place, but that place isn't deciding the premier team. We just like to say it does by convention.

You're a tough judge...
Try telling the supporters of the teams who make the eight, that they are being 'artificially induced' to remove their fingernails from their seats after their beloved team gets up/goes down in a do-or-die battle, against a team they 'didn't have any right' to be playing against...

 

[brokendigit]

It should also be pointed out that Aussie fans are much more fickle than the English...infact most European fans.

Every home game in the EPL is an event not to be missed, regardless of the position on the table, and hence a full house is guaranteed for most clubs.

In Australia if there was no finals series crowds would drop...but in england fans turn up no matter what. Tottenham, Villa...always finish mid-table but that doesnt stop them from filling the stadium.

Comparing the two is a bit silly, really.
You're comparing a competition which is based in a Nation of 60 Million, with nearly 250 people per kilometre, to a Nation of 19 Million, with 2 people per kilometre.

Could you imagine if we multiplied by 125 times the fan base that the NRL currently enjoy? Do you think you would be able to get a ticket to the game? Any game? Every game (except maybe Melbourne ;-) ) would be sold out until 2015!

It's like saying that because every game of ping-pong held in China is sold out, it must be a less-fickle fan base than EPL.
Um, no - it's because they've got a Billion people to choose from.

NRL fans more Fickle than EPL fans? I think not.

And anyway, we all know that the EPL is so popular in England, only because the English Cricket team couldn't win a Test to save themselves... :lol:

 

[Eelectrica]

i think you will find that the dragons defeated the dogs in 2001 and it was 2 Vs 7.

yep, That's correct, Which is what I said.