Was the Final Five the perfect system??

[adamkungl]

My thoughts:

More emphasis on the minor premiership - $100,000 is nothing. How to do this, I'm not sure, without devaluing the Grand Final. Make it half a mil instead of 100k?

I like the McIntyre system. Never had any problem with it. In my opinion is well balanced and rewards those who deserve it.

Keep a final 8 when we expand the comp. 10 would be too much.

 

[adamkungl]

I think the top 5 system was great, to win from 5th you had to beat everyone, but as it's been said, top 5 is not enough in a 16 team competition, I can live with top 8, as it's pretty much stacked against teams 7 and 8 when the finals begin.

i think the fact that parra have had to knock of 1 2 and 3 in sudden death elimination means the current system is doing its job.

 

[Marshall_magic]

i think the fact that parra have had to knock of 1 2 and 3 in sudden death elimination means the current system is doing its job.

I did say that teams 7 and 8 have the odds stacked against them. If they can somehow do it, then good on them. I just think the top 5 system was flawless, whereas we are yet to find a top 8 system that is. Until we do, I'm happy to stick the the McIntyre system.

 

[adamkungl]

i was agreeing with you

 

[stuh]

I wonder whether a top 6 system would work. That way there isn't much loss in revenue for fewer games, and the games will (theoretically) be better.

From memory, every year since McIntyre system was brought in, team 7 & 8 were just making up the numbers anyway, apart from possibly the Eels this year (however it could be argued that they weren't consistent for enough of the year). Team 6 from memory has given it a bit of a shake a few times.

I'm not sure of a format, but that's my two cents.

 

[Parra]

Apparently we should stop the comp after 16 rounds and award a prize for "most consistent".

The rest of us will be watching the Grand Final and not giving a f**k about who led the comp at the half-way point.

And certainly not giving a f**k about what soccer does.

 

[Canard]

IFrom memory, every year since McIntyre system was brought in, team 7 & 8 were just making up the numbers anyway, apart from possibly the Eels this year (however it could be argued that they weren't consistent for enough of the year). Team 6 from memory has given it a bit of a shake a few times.

Not a big league fan I see?

Cowboys in 04 and Warriors just twelve months ago??

 

[Swiftstylez]

Wow, I didn't think a Dragons fan would be predictable enough to do this but here you go. This happens every year and you aren't the first to have a sook about it when the your team chokes at the final hurdle. The Eels would have been one of the most successful teams of this decade if Minor Premierships and consistency meant an English Premier League type victory. We won enough games to deserve our place and we were under immense pressure every week. We have continued that run into the finals destroying every credible team in the process. I always sensed that the right teams were hitting the right kind of form at the right time, and I believe that had some of the teams that missed out on the top eight made the finals they would have beaten the Dragons as well. Why should the grandest stage of them all be played by someone who is printing off premiership T-shirts in April?

The dragons and there fans are a joke. This thread is a joke.

My signature that I made a month ago was not a joke.

Read this and weep, you okie chokie f**ks. Your season is over and the Eels are the ones that are going to be there on the big day, win or lose.

 

[Hass]

Yes, the Final Five was as close to perfect as you could get.

I'm a Parramatta fan and if we win on Sunday I won't be calling for us to hand the trophy back. You can only play to the rules as they stand at the time.

But if I was running the comp we wouldn't have made the finals this year. Or maybe we would have... but we would have had to win two more matches to do it. Instead we were allowed to get away with being less than mediocre for the first half of the season. What's the point of playing 26 rounds? I'd hate to think that the game is just one giant cash cow.

We had a five-team final series in a 16 team comp from 1988 to 1994. These years are supposedly considered the "golden years" of Rugby League. It wasn't "financial suicide" then and it wouldn't be financial suicide now.

Let's see what advantages each team had under the final five.

Team 1 had to win two matches to win the premiership, and was given a guaranteed second chance before the Grand Final.

Team 2 had to win three matches to win the premiership and was given a guaranteed second chance before the Grand Final.

Team 3 had to win three matches to win the premiership and was given a guaranteed second chance before the Grand Final.

Team 4 had to win four matches to win the premiership with no second chances at all.

Team 5 had to win four matches to win the premiership with no second chances at all. In some years this team would have to win 5 (or even six matches) if they were tied for fifth with other teams (playoffs were used rather than for and against).

Today, the higher ranked team would also get home finals.

In order to win the premiership (from any position) you had to beat every team above you on the ladder. There was no such thing as being on the right side of the draw.

Had Parra actually won two more games this year and won the premiership from fifth, then that would have been truly amazing. As its stands the run home has been incredible, but I don't think we've done enough to truly deserve being one game away from the premiership. As I said before, we don't make the rules, we can only play by them.

But the rules are wrong. Bring back the Final Five!

 

[Timmah]

Well said Hass.

 

[LeedsRhinos]

You should do a club call in the semi finals, that sh*t was awesome tv just now!

 

[Hass]

I think it's also worth pointing out that going into the final round Parramatta could still have finished fifth (and even fourth if they won big and the Storm got thrashed).

But Parramatta would have needed to beat St George Illawarra in that Rd 26 game. Instead they didn't have to win, and it showed.

Had Parramatta won and Brisbane and Manly lost the Eels would have finished fifth.

Had Parramatta won and Melbourne and one of Brisbane or Manly lost then the Eels would have finished equal fifth and played Melbourne in a midweek play-off for fifth position.

Assuming all the results stayed the same but we were using a final five Manly and Brisbane would have played off for fifth this year.

Despite Parra's woeful start to the season we still would have been a chance of making the semis under a final five system. But we would have needed to be just that tiny fraction better. And those fractions make all the difference.

 

[bender]

I think it's also worth pointing out that going into the final round Parramatta could still have finished fifth (and even fourth if they won big and the Storm got thrashed).

But Parramatta would have needed to beat St George Illawarra in that Rd 26 game. Instead they didn't have to win, and it showed.

Had Parramatta won and Brisbane and Manly lost the Eels would have finished fifth.

Had Parramatta won and Melbourne and one of Brisbane or Manly lost then the Eels would have finished equal fifth and played Melbourne in a midweek play-off for fifth position.

Assuming all the results stayed the same but we were using a final five Manly and Brisbane would have played off for fifth this year.

Despite Parra's woeful start to the season we still would have been a chance of making the semis under a final five system. But we would have needed to be just that tiny fraction better. And those fractions make all the difference.

I havent commented on this for a few years, but the points you have raised are valid.

A top 5 (contrary to what people think) actually raises interest massively in the game much earlier in the season. It gives games meaning. And the fact that there are less teams involved means that it is far better to follow the finals as a neutral. The top 5 worked spectacularly well with 16 teams.

Just to summarise the important facts of a top 5 which are often forgotten:

1. The difference in placing between 5th and 8th is nearly always 2pts or at the most 4 points. I am certain that a look at most recent tables will confirm this. To suggest that this keeps more teams in the hunt is not as accurate as most think. The side finished last might have technically stayed in the race a lot longer, but being honest, most of their fans had wrote their season off well before they relinquished their mathematical hope.

2. A top 5 system is quite often a top 6. So, it is only two extra teams which miss out.

3. Having only one game per week, (or two in the first week) means that each semi final has that grand final type focus.

4. A team that wins the grand final has to beat every single team that finished above it. Therefore, no team can whinge about losing, because they were not good enough to beat the grand final winner.

All in all, the top 8 is simply not as good as the top. It is a shame that most people who argue otherwise really havent had a chance to experience the top 5 system, as it really does change the entire interest in the league product as a whole. I dont think many would want to return to the top 8 after one season, just like not very many fans wanted to change to it in the first place.

 

[parramaniac2516]

I really don't see what people expect. I mean how much more could 7 and 8 be disadvantaged. Also the thing where Parramatta and Brisbane got a home semi in week 2 is not part of the current system, the NRL just brought that in recently so semi's in week 2 were not made to look like a joke if for example the Storm played the Cowboys in Sydney and no one showed up and a couple of years ago all finals from week 2 were played at the SFS or ANZ.

At the end of the day how many chances do you want to give the 1st and 2nd place team.

 

[SET2JT]

I really don't see what people expect. I mean how much more could 7 and 8 be disadvantaged. Also the thing where Parramatta and Brisbane got a home semi in week 2 is not part of the current system, the NRL just brought that in recently so semi's in week 2 were not made to look like a joke if for example the Storm played the Cowboys in Sydney and no one showed up and a couple of years ago all finals from week 2 were played at the SFS or ANZ.

At the end of the day how many chances do you want to give the 1st and 2nd place team.

I think the problem with the current system is that 1st and 2nd place get a 2nd chance if they lose the first game.So the first finnal they just cruz look at the saints/parra game and dogs/ knights game. If the dogs played some 1 else other then the knights in the top 8 this year i think they would have lost.My sugestion is that we keep the top 8(we need to for the money)but team 1 and 2 get the first week off and the 2 bottom placed lossers get knocked out first week. after that its knockout for every 1.

 

[fish eel]

I raised the same complaint at the end of the previous A-League season in 2008 when the Mariners finished with the "premiership", then Newcastle ended winning the "Championship".

Enjoy your runners up medals.

enjoy your medals this year....oh hang on, you got none :lol:

 

[mickdo]

When there were 10 teams in the comp in the 50's and 60's we had a final 4. When the number of teams increased to 12 in the 70's we had a final 5. Now with 16 (and possibly more coming) we have 8. That doesn't seem like an unreasonable progression to me. Maybe 7 would be more mathematically accurate, but 8 works out well for a finals series. As long as they don't increase it from 8 if/when a few expansion teams come in (the 10 team finals series they had in the 90's was just too much), I will be happy.

 

[NorthShoreEel]

Where was this thread 3 months ago?

If the same question was put forward 3 months ago, I doubt we would be hearing Dragon or Dogs supporters saying that the system needs to be changed. Im certain that they would have been happy with it, given the form of their team.

Still looking for excuses. Accept that this year, your teams have played some outstanding football, and yet, they fell short when crunch time came.

FFS - we have had to accept it enough times over the years. The results, and the run of Parramatta this year are historic, and now, because it doesnt suit you, you want to move the goalposts?

If it aint broke, dont fix it. I dont know if it is broken or not - all I do know, is that everyone knows and accepts the way it is going to be at the beginning of the season.

Parramatta may have been mediocre at the beginning of the season, however, they have played knock-out football for many weeks, and have risen to the occaision.

What happens (as it did to a certain extent with St George) when a team plays excellent football for the first 1/2 of the season, and then plays chit footy for the final 5-10 weeks, and yet still gets to play finals footy? Do we have the same argument?

As a 30+ year supporter of the greatest game of all - I believe the emphasis should always be given to the grand final winner. Ask the St George players of yesteryear, when they won so many comps, what would they prefer, more emphasis on the minor premiership or the premiership, and I think we know what they would all answer.

I think this year, should be a celebration for the system, it shows supporters of all teams, that making the final 8, even no.8, is so important, and makes the games at the end of the season all the more exciting. I could only imagine that the Parra V Tigers game would have had a lot less supporters attend, if there were still a top 5 system.

*End Rant*

 

[ElectricEelMan]

McIntyre system is fine
The top 5 system was fine ... twenty years ago.

If the Eels win the premiership this year it will absolutely justify the McIntyre System cause to win the premiership they would have to have beaten the top 4 sides in consecutive weeks. There is no harder task. The Dragons winning the minor premiership was not harder. The Bulldogs coming second was not harder. Both teams lost approximately a third of their games this year.

The Finals are a total different comp then the regular season. It separates the pretenders (Dragons, Titans, Knights, Sea Eagles) from the contenders (Eels, Storm, and to a lesser extent Broncos and Bulldogs). If you can't aim up in the finals go the f*ck home.

 

[hellteam]

I'd like the McIntyre system to stay except the highest placed team in the Preliminary Finals get's to choose their opponent in the Prelim (Super League Style).

So to put that into perspective this year, the Bulldogs (2nd) would have got to choose their opponents for the Prelim Final (Parra or Broncos).

Would make great viewing on TV and really add a lot to the game in my opinion.