Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Former Richmond Vice-President Schwab has put forward a new relegation system for 2014 onwards.
Richmond would become the west ham of the AFL - up-down-up-down.
Personally i like the idea more than the conference ideas floating around, and with 18 teams we will never see a fair 34 game regular season.
As long as their is an award and money for first in divsion 2 - or i'd actually prefer the first team in div 2 get a finals shot, to increase interest.
Although i do like a final 5 finals - the only decent system that rewards top spot.
desertsaint wrote:Former Richmond Vice-President Schwab has put forward a new relegation system for 2014 onwards.
Richmond would become the west ham of the AFL - up-down-up-down.
Personally i like the idea more than the conference ideas floating around, and with 18 teams we will never see a fair 34 game regular season.
As long as their is an award and money for first in divsion 2 - or i'd actually prefer the first team in div 2 get a finals shot, to increase interest.
Although i do like a final 5 finals - the only decent system that rewards top spot.
I like the idea of two divisions, playing those clubs in your division twice and the other division once, but I would prefer to see the divisions made up of geographically matched teams. For instance the NSW and Qld teams in one division and the SA and WA teams in the other. The Victorian teams for each Division drawn out of a hat or something. But it would cut down on the amount of interstate trips for Victorian teams, and put all teams on an equal footing. That is one reason why it probably wont be adopted by the AFL.
Last edited by borderbarry on Wed 08 Jun 2011 11:29am, edited 1 time in total.
I don't think any club will be down too long - all will have finals/playoff games most years. this gives supporters excitement through the year.
realistically nowadays any team in the bottom four have no chance of doing anything other than chasing draft picks.
With this system they have a chance of getting into the playoffs .
It will probably mean clubs give longer contracts as well to ensure players stick to clubs through relegation periods.
the salary cap will also stop to much player drift.
if we look at the afl club positions over the last 10 years - all clubs will have played in div one. even richmond!
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
Teams that finish 6th & 7th in Div 1 shouldnt be forced into relegation play offs otherwise we would have teams taking dives at seasons end ! Otherwise it is an exciting prospect !
SAINTS another day older another day closer to the Holy Grail!
I just hope the AFL seriously consider 2 divisions.....dunno if we have the economies of scale to support it though.
What effect would it have on TV dollars when it comes to bidding for 5 years rights?
Would there be enough interest in Division 2 ordinary season games at the start of the year?
Remember, Division 2 teams are only playing to try and get promoted to the big league for the WHOLE season.
Basically, you are relegating half the comp (9 teams), as rebuilding/also rans for the whole season.
Perhaps a better solution would be to leave the comp as one division until, say, round 14, and then for the final 10 rounds you do the split into two divisions.
By doing as I've suggested, you get the best of both worlds.
You'd get a mad scramble right now to be in the "top 9" (ie Division 1), from where the premiership can be one.
It would create a pseudo-finals series in the few weeks leading up to round 14, with another huge pressure bout at the end of the season (Rounds 22-24) also.
Now THAT would create genuine excitement, plus would give Foxtel/FTA stations something really enticing to show.
desertsaint wrote:It will probably mean clubs give longer contracts as well to ensure players stick to clubs through relegation periods.
the salary cap will also stop to much player drift.
Leaving aside our own players, can you really imagine a Chris Judd or Gary Ablett agreeing to run around in a Div 2 club?
They may have long contracts but they will ensure there are get out clauses.
desertsaint wrote:It will probably mean clubs give longer contracts as well to ensure players stick to clubs through relegation periods.
the salary cap will also stop to much player drift.
Leaving aside our own players, can you really imagine a Chris Judd or Gary Ablett agreeing to run around in a Div 2 club?
They may have long contracts but they will ensure there are get out clauses.
given the smaller number of clubs in each divison and the much shorter timeframe clubs would spend in any division i don't think this would be a problem - judd willingly went to carlton knowing it would be years before they would contend for the finals let alone a flag. gary ablett to cold coast is another example. lions have no hope of a flag but brown has stayed.
that's basically the three best players in the afl.
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
desertsaint wrote:It will probably mean clubs give longer contracts as well to ensure players stick to clubs through relegation periods.
the salary cap will also stop to much player drift.
Leaving aside our own players, can you really imagine a Chris Judd or Gary Ablett agreeing to run around in a Div 2 club?
They may have long contracts but they will ensure there are get out clauses.
given the smaller number of clubs in each divison and the much shorter timeframe clubs would spend in any division i don't think this would be a problem - judd willingly went to carlton knowing it would be years before they would contend for the finals let alone a flag. gary ablett to cold coast is another example. lions have no hope of a flag but brown has stayed.
that's basically the three best players in the afl.
Maybe, but teams in the bottom half of the ladder are still part of the major comp.
The danger with this system is that Div 1 will be seen by all, especially the media, as the elite comp. Players in Div 2 could see their earning potential dimished by reason they're not in the elite comp. Sponsors could also look at it less favourably.
I can see your point but I'm not sure the players will neccessarily view it the same way.
Play your Conference Home and Away and 1 group of each other conference away and 1 group of each other conference at home.
Conferences would be as follows.
Conference 1 2 WA & 4 Vic split into 2 groups as 1 WA and 2 Vic for fixturing.
Conference 2 2 Qld & 4 Vic split into 2 groups as 1 Qld and 2 Vic for fixturing.
Conference 3 2 SA, 2 Vic & 2 NSW split into 2 groups as 1 SA , 1 Vic & 1 NSW for fixturing.
This makes travel as fair as possible. Whilst conference 3 travels more often it does it over much smaller distances.
Finals
Top 2 from each conference qualify for finals. Next 2 best records for finals.
The top from each conference plus then next best record qualify as the top 4.
The next 4 best records out of the final qualifiers make up the rest of the 8.
Final 8 then runs in same format as now.
Much better as every team still have a chance to win the Premiership every year, the best teams are still rewarded fixturing is fairer, derbies stil twice a year.
If its all about making a fair fixture then why cant they just have every club play each other over a 2 year period, and ensure that EVERY team travels interstate the equal amount of time. The thing that makes AFL what it is is the fact that it’s a completely different game to any other in the entire world, some may say its in a league of its own!!
Why should a team that finishes 7th or 8th be penalised with being dropped to a lower division, many many things could explain why they are there and might still be in their “premiership windowâ€
Play your Conference Home and Away and 1 group of each other conference away and 1 group of each other conference at home.
Conferences would be as follows.
Conference 1 2 WA & 4 Vic split into 2 groups as 1 WA and 2 Vic for fixturing.
Conference 2 2 Qld & 4 Vic split into 2 groups as 1 Qld and 2 Vic for fixturing.
Conference 3 2 SA, 2 Vic & 2 NSW split into 2 groups as 1 SA , 1 Vic & 1 NSW for fixturing.
This makes travel as fair as possible. Whilst conference 3 travels more often it does it over much smaller distances.
Finals
Top 2 from each conference qualify for finals. Next 2 best records for finals.
The top from each conference plus then next best record qualify as the top 4.
The next 4 best records out of the final qualifiers make up the rest of the 8.
Final 8 then runs in same format as now.
Much better as every team still have a chance to win the Premiership every year, the best teams are still rewarded fixturing is fairer, derbies stil twice a year.
would the vic clubs swap conferences?
be easier traveling to brisbane, gc than the trip out west.
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
Play your Conference Home and Away and 1 group of each other conference away and 1 group of each other conference at home.
Conferences would be as follows.
Conference 1 2 WA & 4 Vic split into 2 groups as 1 WA and 2 Vic for fixturing.
Conference 2 2 Qld & 4 Vic split into 2 groups as 1 Qld and 2 Vic for fixturing.
Conference 3 2 SA, 2 Vic & 2 NSW split into 2 groups as 1 SA , 1 Vic & 1 NSW for fixturing.
This makes travel as fair as possible. Whilst conference 3 travels more often it does it over much smaller distances.
Finals
Top 2 from each conference qualify for finals. Next 2 best records for finals.
The top from each conference plus then next best record qualify as the top 4.
The next 4 best records out of the final qualifiers make up the rest of the 8.
Final 8 then runs in same format as now.
Much better as every team still have a chance to win the Premiership every year, the best teams are still rewarded fixturing is fairer, derbies stil twice a year.
would the vic clubs swap conferences?
be easier traveling to brisbane, gc than the trip out west.
No Conferences are fixed. Vic teams in the WA conference would only travel to WA 1 time more (2 total) than Vic teams not in WA conference (1 trip).
Vic teams in West conference travel would be 2 WA, 1 SA, 1 NSW, 1 QLD
Vic teams in North conference travel would be 2 QLD, 1 SA, 1 NSW, 1 WA
Vic teams in Central conference travel would be 1 WA. 2 SA. 2 NSW, 1 QLD
You're mostly competing against the teams in your own conference to make finals as the top 2 are guaranteed to qualify and you have a similar fixture to the rest of your conference with the same travel if you are a vic team.
The AFL will not look at any of these kind of changes because of the requirement for all the blockbuster games to be played twice every year to maximize profitability.
The only way to have a truly fair draw is for all teams to play all other teams both home and away each season.
So unless the AFL switch to a 34 week plus finals season a fair draw will never happen. Next year there will be 9 games each weekend and the AFL will not lower the number of teams because that will lower the number of games each weekend which would impact the television rites.
Carlton, Collingwood and Essendon all have to play each other twice each year to maximize profits. Given the financial constraints the only possible way to structure the competition is with a rigged draw.
Clearly a very difficult question, as the number of different ideas coming from the few posters on this thread, have indicated.
My view - let things lay as they are for the next 5 years. The economics are the driver and Melbourne in particular will not be able to support a 2-tier system. Members by the bucket load will drop off the tier 2 teams, advertisers will not want tier 2 matches, the overall TV audience/revenue will drop. The "bottom 6" poor players will turn into the "bottom 12 poor players" in tier 2 teams and they will never get back on top.
As can be seen overseas, the few wealthy clubs dominate their codes.
Revenue is the key to Club sustainability and most Clubs are carrying a lot of debt. As the weaker performing Clubs lose members/following and TV ratings for them fall, so the AFL rights will begin to diminish and the AFL will no longer want to sustain them.
The competitiion will get stronger if a few Clubs go/amalgamate - Safe = Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Geelong. Should stay - Hawthorn, Richmond, St Kilda. Doubtful - move/amalgamate - Western Bulldogs, Melbourne, North Melbourne. Port Adelaide will not last more than a few more years.
SinCitySaint wrote:The AFL will not look at any of these kind of changes because of the requirement for all the blockbuster games to be played twice every year to maximize profitability.
The only way to have a truly fair draw is for all teams to play all other teams both home and away each season.
So unless the AFL switch to a 34 week plus finals season a fair draw will never happen. Next year there will be 9 games each weekend and the AFL will not lower the number of teams because that will lower the number of games each weekend which would impact the television rites.
Carlton, Collingwood and Essendon all have to play each other twice each year to maximize profits. Given the financial constraints the only possible way to structure the competition is with a rigged draw.
My System keeps the derbies.
The only problem is the Carlton Collingwood and Essendon games, as it would be stupid to have all 3 in the same conference.
At most you would have 2 of them in the "Central" Conference.
Having 3 of them in different conferences would mean that they are more likely to make finals against each other.
If they only play one game against each other they would be 3 massive event games each year.
