Which way will footy head in the next 5 years

[ripplug66]

Its the off season and this is sort of Saints related so the question is how do you think footy will be played in the next 5 years. Yes its hard to know how the interchange will end up in 5 years time and that will have a big bearing but I would suggest it may get as low as 50 in 5 years so it will change the game.

I'm inclined to think the game will slow down as it must with less interchanges but as the coaches are mostly defensively minded I still think they are going to want the big numbers around and behind the ball. The only way this can be done with less interchanges is to have even less tall forwards and backs play in set or near set positions. As it is now there is only about 4 players per side who stay close to their set position. I expect that to become none and as such I worry for the tall forwards and backs who cant get up and down the ground. Also I think the days of 2 rucks are any trouble if we go that way.

The other alternative is coaching becomes about scoring and with less interchanges we could go back to more set positions and the days of 2 ruckmen. I just don't see coaches doing that unless sides that win the flag are high scoring sides. Even with the Hawks winning the last 3 and being a high scoring side the game is more defensive than ever.

Interested in how others see the game going over a 5 year period because what we have done in the last 2 years and probably the next 2 years in recruiting will be helped or hindered depending on how the game is played. We probably want an attacking game plan as many of our young players are KPP and we also have plenty of rucks. We also have less quality mids which are ideal for low scoring games especially if you have got quality forwards and backs.

[borderbarry]

I suggest that the game will slow down a bit, as it shold because at times it is frantic and not a good look. A bit slower and the players can use more skill. There will still be a requirement of fast players, but hopefully not as frantic as it is at the moment.

[joeyjohnw]

I'm less minding the fact that we are recruiting players that can play in multiple positions- as you say the cap is reducing and it means players will alternate between forward/back and on ball, which will work to our advantage given we have so many mid/fwds and mid/defs.

[asiu]

i reckon it will get quicker 'n more touchfootyish over the next 5
run run run into offense
run the bastards down in defense (just get your hands on em)

rotating multi positional forward and defense units
(half forward through centre + half back through centre)

Sweepers out the back covering the defence goal line arc
Stay at home forwards (also changing through the rmpfu)
Resting ruckman used as part of the long link marking targets
presenting a tad forward of the half forward flanks for the long dob
from our pick up and go hard n quick back unit.

[Devilhead]

Due to a raging everlasting El Niño which will cause devastating drought conditions we will have no choice but to move away from playing on grass

I imagine soon that we will be playing footy on a banked circular track made from hard varnished boards and all players will likely be wearing body armor and probably roller skates - also as there will be a lack of leather due to all our cows dying due to the drought conditions and the ball will become steel sponsored by BHP and magnetic goals will be phased in as will motorcycles but these will be capped at certain number probably 3 - the game will remain a full contact sport and due to increased international interest it will soon become a worldwide phenomenon whereby the teams will be soon be named after cities around the world and owned by global corporations

[Trev from the Bush]

Due to a raging everlasting El Niño which will cause devastating drought conditions we will have no choice but to move away from playing on grass

I imagine soon that we will be playing footy on a banked circular track made from hard varnished boards and all players will likely be wearing body armor and probably roller skates - also as there will be a lack of leather due to all our cows dying due to the drought conditions and the ball will become steel sponsored by BHP and magnetic goals will be phased in as will motorcycles but these will be capped at certain number probably 3 - the game will remain a full contact sport and due to increased international interest it will soon become a worldwide phenomenon whereby the teams will be soon be named after cities around the world and owned by global corporations

So, Rollerball was the late movie I take it?

[#gosaintas]

Rollerball was a great movie

[Bluthy]

I don't think it would take long for player fitness to catchup to a reduction in the interchange so they could still get lots of numbers around the ball. But Hawks show that keeping a structure - having outlets and players planted in key spots to move the ball when you win it - gives you an edge in this day and age of rugby-ball . You've got to have the courage and the cleverness of structure to not flood the ball at every opportunity and keep guys spread out. I think we might see teams start to move in that direction with the amazing success of Hawthorn and so many of its assistant coaches going on to head coaching roles.

We might see a turning point to a return to more structure as Hawthorn showed it can work spectacularly Flooding and crowding around the ball wherever it is on the field, has almost become a pointless arms race. Paul Roos got an edge doing that initially when he took it to extreme levels but now its less effective. But it would take some courage to not instinctively flood the ball.

[stevie]

I've brought this up before but it's worth revisiting, even though I know my Fellow f***wit plug is against it ( and all power to him lol).

17 game season - possibly solves a lot of current probs in the game:

Fair fixture
Player burnout
Every game means something
May solve the final round resting debacles without needing a bye.

Anyway, thought I'd throw it out there. It's endorsed by Matt Scarlett - prolly the only thing sensible to come from his mouth that didn't involve sledging, lol.

Ok, back to buying a boat. I hear the polar ice caps are melting soon and I wanna be ready. What next...zombies?

[saynta]

I cany see much overall change except that only the mid fielders will rotate, not the key position players.

Seeing that all four on the bench can be rotated, the mid fielders should be able to remain fresh, unless of course, the number of rotations continue to be reduced.

Can't image Plugger ever being rotated. Hopefully the same will apply to our key forwards.

17 game seasons does sound sensible though. Won't happen. Shame.

[ripplug66]

I've brought this up before but it's worth revisiting, even though I know my Fellow f***wit plug is against it ( and all power to him lol).

17 game season - possibly solves a lot of current probs in the game:

Fair fixture
Player burnout
Every game means something
May solve the final round resting debacles without needing a bye.

Anyway, thought I'd throw it out there. It's endorsed by Matt Scarlett - prolly the only thing sensible to come from his mouth that didn't involve sledging, lol.

Ok, back to buying a boat. I hear the polar ice caps are melting soon and I wanna be ready. What next...zombies?

And again I will give you the reasons why I don't think it has a hope of ever happening. Firstly money will mean it will never happen, secondly its still not a fair fixture but of course it is fairer than it is now, thirdly the players wont drop 20% in pay and the game wouldn't be able to fund the same pay rates, fourthly why would every game mean something? Sides still may not be able to make the finals after about 10 rounds and lastly the bye has fixed the issue in the last round. Cant really comment on player burnout but I did notice we had two players reach 400 games this year. Anyway what would we know. We are both F wits.

[stevie]

All good points plug and I can totally accept it, especially with the money side of it. Would still be nice though.

[ripplug66]

All good points plug and I can totally accept it, especially with the money side of it. Would still be nice though.

I think my last point would get the most votes on here especially from the CC guys.

[desertsaint]

They will get smart and alleviate some of the unfairness in the h&a and the mundane finals system by introducing a final 16!
That's right - bottom two miss out and earn their draft picks by missing finals.
four weeks of finals - 1v16, 2v15, etc. Come semis it's likely 1v4, 2 v3. All straight KOs. No second chances. Almost all fans involved. Minor premiers rewarded with easiest path - 16, 8,4, 2. Come outside top four and fifth plays 12 then 4th then if still in face first in the semi (prelim). Oh yeah - no more ridiculous qualifying, elimination, semis, prelims naming convention.
Along with rugby league we have the worst finals system of any professional sporting comp in the world! Time to fix it!

[ripplug66]

They will get smart and alleviate some of the unfairness in the h&a and the mundane finals system by introducing a final 16!
That's right - bottom two miss out and earn their draft picks by missing finals.
four weeks of finals - 1v16, 2v15, etc. Come semis it's likely 1v4, 2 v3. All straight KOs. No second chances. Almost all fans involved. Minor premiers rewarded with easiest path - 16, 8,4, 2. Come outside top four and fifth plays 12 then 4th then if still in face first in the semi (prelim). Oh yeah - no more ridiculous qualifying, elimination, semis, prelims naming convention.
Along with rugby league we have the worst finals system of any professional sporting comp in the world! Time to fix it!

Apart from your system which is clearly a joke what is wrong with the current system? It rewards the top 4 and then the top 2. The only problem is it doesn't reward the top side at all. That is the only issue.

[stevie]

No, the worst playoff system in world sport is in the NFL, with their outdated conferences and divisions. I'm always telling the Niner boards how rubbish it is and that one single ladder is the best but of course it's too hard a concept to change for them. They do admit the system is wrong when a s*** division winner gets home field over a better wildcard.

I do love my NFL but when the 2 best teams have never met in 50 years of Super Bowls because of the system, then it does spoil it.

[desertsaint]

They will get smart and alleviate some of the unfairness in the h&a and the mundane finals system by introducing a final 16!
That's right - bottom two miss out and earn their draft picks by missing finals.
four weeks of finals - 1v16, 2v15, etc. Come semis it's likely 1v4, 2 v3. All straight KOs. No second chances. Almost all fans involved. Minor premiers rewarded with easiest path - 16, 8,4, 2. Come outside top four and fifth plays 12 then 4th then if still in face first in the semi (prelim). Oh yeah - no more ridiculous qualifying, elimination, semis, prelims naming convention.
Along with rugby league we have the worst finals system of any professional sporting comp in the world! Time to fix it!

Apart from your system which is clearly a joke what is wrong with the current system? It rewards the top 4 and then the top 2. The only problem is it doesn't reward the top side at all. That is the only issue.

My system is similar to that used in all other decent sports comps across the world. when two opponents meet in a final the loser is out. O.U.T. OUT! Not this -
One plays four, they win so they get a rest whilst four plays someone else...
Wait, what? One goes on holiday somewhere whilst Four...Four lost to one didn't they?
Oh yes, so they play the winner of Six and Seven.
And who do Seven play?
Seven are out.
Because?
Because they lost.
Like Four lost?
Yes...but no...
WTF?!

PS - agree stevie - conferences are a good way to wreck finals for exactly the reason you state. As are finals where losers stay in and teams switch sides in the draw.

[BigMart]

I don't know


Perhaps players overlooked by recruiters, deemed not good enough... Will get a second or third chance and be able to make it?

I just hope the club learns from its mistakes and doesn't try to take short cuts, or the easy route

[saintspremiers]

All good points plug and I can totally accept it, especially with the money side of it. Would still be nice though.

I think my last point would get the most votes on here especially from the CC guys.

Agree

I wish we had a longer season not shorter. The off season is way too long. Could easily extend the season by 4 weeks and have an end of October granny. Just have to piss off shield matches from the main venues for a month which shouldn't be a drama

[ripplug66]

I don't know


Perhaps players overlooked by recruiters, deemed not good enough... Will get a second or third chance and be able to make it?

I just hope the club learns from its mistakes and doesn't try to take short cuts, or the easy route

Seems to be the wrong topic BM. Now DS surely you cant call one of the worst systems a system where only 8 out of 18 make it and those up the top of the ladder are rewarded as they should and replace it where 16 out of 18 make it and the top sides aren't even rewarded. Its makes a mockery of the home and away series to play 22 games to lose only 2 sides. Also lets use this extreme example in your system. Melbourne win 22 games and pies win 4 and finish 16. For Melbournes great effort they are rewarded with a home final at the G and play the pies. The only problem is at the game they actually are disadvantaged as there are triple more pies supporters there.

There should never be a system where it is knock out from the start for all sides. All it does is make the home and away season a waste of time. There certainly should never ever be a finals system where more than half the sides make finals and certainly not 16 out of 18. Top sides deserve more of a reward than a home final and playing the worst side each time. The reward in week one should be a second chance. I would go so far to say the 5 was the best finals system in world sport but the 8 isn't that far behind. I would go so far to say your finals system would be clearly rated the worst in world sport. Any comp that had that many sides making the finals would be laughed at and laughed at weekly when games mean jack. I still don't like local cricket finals where 4th plays 1st and 2nd plays 3rd to go straight into the GF. I don't think many like that but lack of weeks means a lot of cricket finals are like that.

Anyway on topic I don't think the finals system will be changed in the next 5 years.

[desertsaint]

Massive reward for finishing higher up the ladder. If melbourne were 1st and Collingwood 16th it would mean Melbourne were a far better team and Collingwood would be a much easier first round finals opponent than the fourth placed team - who you forget could as likely be Collingwood - how fair is that for Melbourne in the current system?

I agree with the top five - it worked given a small 12 team league. But the finals 8 system doesn't work nearly as well. No advantage for first over second at all, possible to argue second gets it easier as it likely has the easier prelim - which is a KO game. Our current system means the third placed team can lose to the second, yet survive to get the chance to knockout the first (or third) team and make the final. The second team can potentially play the eigth team in a prelim, whilst the top team at best can play the seventh - unless they lose week 1, then they can potentially play the eigth. It's a mess.

Give me the excitement and equity of a straight KO system. Every team gets a fairly balanced reward for their final ladder position. No teams is likely to tank as finals spots are on the line throughout the entire season. The only time the last round would see a meaningless game is if 17 plays 18 with neither able to overtake 16. More likely we'd win a a flag before that happens. Just think - this year we would've played Richmond. Likely we'd lose, but a shock win and then away to Sydney.
Point is, all fans and clubs stay interested and motivated all through the season.

[ripplug66]

Massive reward for finishing higher up the ladder. If melbourne were 1st and Collingwood 16th it would mean Melbourne were a far better team and Collingwood would be a much easier first round finals opponent than the fourth placed team - who you forget could as likely be Collingwood - how fair is that for Melbourne in the current system?

I agree with the top five - it worked given a small 12 team league. But the finals 8 system doesn't work nearly as well. No advantage for first over second at all, possible to argue second gets it easier as it likely has the easier prelim - which is a KO game. Our current system means the third placed team can lose to the second, yet survive to get the chance to knockout the first (or third) team and make the final. The second team can potentially play the eigth team in a prelim, whilst the top team at best can play the seventh - unless they lose week 1, then they can potentially play the eigth. It's a mess.

Give me the excitement and equity of a straight KO system. Every team gets a fairly balanced reward for their final ladder position. No teams is likely to tank as finals spots are on the line throughout the entire season. The only time the last round would see a meaningless game is if 17 plays 18 with neither able to overtake 16. More likely we'd win a a flag before that happens. Just think - this year we would've played Richmond. Likely we'd lose, but a shock win and then away to Sydney.
Point is, all fans and clubs stay interested and motivated all through the season.

Yes Melbourne are the better side but they get no advantage at in the actual final. And of course sides would tank. You maybe better to lose late in the year knowing a position or two further back in the ladder may avoid an interstate trip. And I agree it would be great for most sides to make the finals but the problem is I would have bugger interest in the 22 games.

Do you honestly think people would accept a system where 16 out of 18 make the finals. We would be the laughing stock of all other sports. The 8 is here to stay because it is the best possible system with 18 sides in the competition.

[evertonfc]

I want to see the bench reduced to four subs.

Would be infinitely better for fans. The tactics around when to introduce players and how they can affect the game would be sensational.

And games would be slower; skill would determine matches more as players fatigued. Long kicking would be reintroduced as players struggled to make it from contest to contest. More one-on-ones would result.

Our players simply don't fatigue enough any more. They can get to every contest because they're supremely fit and and rotated multiple times per quarter.

Would there be more injuries? I'm not so sure. The game couldn't be played at the same frenetic pace, which would reduce injuries in itself.

Coaches and sport scientists will try to block this kind of progress, because it's not in their interests.

For fans, however, it would almost certainly assist the integrity of the game, and we'd see a return to football as a test of physical strength, endurance and skill - not just 44 running machines rotated mercilessly.

[desertsaint]

Massive reward for finishing higher up the ladder. If melbourne were 1st and Collingwood 16th it would mean Melbourne were a far better team and Collingwood would be a much easier first round finals opponent than the fourth placed team - who you forget could as likely be Collingwood - how fair is that for Melbourne in the current system?

I agree with the top five - it worked given a small 12 team league. But the finals 8 system doesn't work nearly as well. No advantage for first over second at all, possible to argue second gets it easier as it likely has the easier prelim - which is a KO game. Our current system means the third placed team can lose to the second, yet survive to get the chance to knockout the first (or third) team and make the final. The second team can potentially play the eigth team in a prelim, whilst the top team at best can play the seventh - unless they lose week 1, then they can potentially play the eigth. It's a mess.

Give me the excitement and equity of a straight KO system. Every team gets a fairly balanced reward for their final ladder position. No teams is likely to tank as finals spots are on the line throughout the entire season. The only time the last round would see a meaningless game is if 17 plays 18 with neither able to overtake 16. More likely we'd win a a flag before that happens. Just think - this year we would've played Richmond. Likely we'd lose, but a shock win and then away to Sydney.
Point is, all fans and clubs stay interested and motivated all through the season.

Yes Melbourne are the better side but they get no advantage at in the actual final. And of course sides would tank. You maybe better to lose late in the year knowing a position or two further back in the ladder may avoid an interstate trip. And I agree it would be great for most sides to make the finals but the problem is I would have bugger interest in the 22 games.

Do you honestly think people would accept a system where 16 out of 18 make the finals. We would be the laughing stock of all other sports. The 8 is here to stay because it is the best possible system with 18 sides in the competition.

The odds a team could tank to avoid an interstate trip certainly aren't higher than currently. even harder further down the ladder as teams will be bunched on points and percentages. who'd risk it? And if 16th isn't a much easier match up week 1 than 4th I'll go whee!

[ripplug66]

Massive reward for finishing higher up the ladder. If melbourne were 1st and Collingwood 16th it would mean Melbourne were a far better team and Collingwood would be a much easier first round finals opponent than the fourth placed team - who you forget could as likely be Collingwood - how fair is that for Melbourne in the current system?

I agree with the top five - it worked given a small 12 team league. But the finals 8 system doesn't work nearly as well. No advantage for first over second at all, possible to argue second gets it easier as it likely has the easier prelim - which is a KO game. Our current system means the third placed team can lose to the second, yet survive to get the chance to knockout the first (or third) team and make the final. The second team can potentially play the eigth team in a prelim, whilst the top team at best can play the seventh - unless they lose week 1, then they can potentially play the eigth. It's a mess.

Give me the excitement and equity of a straight KO system. Every team gets a fairly balanced reward for their final ladder position. No teams is likely to tank as finals spots are on the line throughout the entire season. The only time the last round would see a meaningless game is if 17 plays 18 with neither able to overtake 16. More likely we'd win a a flag before that happens. Just think - this year we would've played Richmond. Likely we'd lose, but a shock win and then away to Sydney.
Point is, all fans and clubs stay interested and motivated all through the season.

Yes Melbourne are the better side but they get no advantage at in the actual final. And of course sides would tank. You maybe better to lose late in the year knowing a position or two further back in the ladder may avoid an interstate trip. And I agree it would be great for most sides to make the finals but the problem is I would have bugger interest in the 22 games.

Do you honestly think people would accept a system where 16 out of 18 make the finals. We would be the laughing stock of all other sports. The 8 is here to stay because it is the best possible system with 18 sides in the competition.

The odds a team could tank to avoid an interstate trip certainly aren't higher than currently. even harder further down the ladder as teams will be bunched on points and percentages. who'd risk it? And if 16th isn't a much easier match up week 1 than 4th I'll go whee!

Yep 16 out of 18 clubs wouldn't make us the laughing stock of sport anywhere in Australia. Yep 1st versus 16th is easier but there is no double chance for the top side and no finals advantage at all unless playing an interstate side. Derbies have had huge upsets over the years. Imagine freo who finished 16th playing WCE who finished first at a neutral ground in the first week of the finals and WCE lost. Huge uproar and the end of that finals system. There is a precedent in that when we beat the pies after we finished 6th and they finished 3rd. They changed it the next year because it was ridiculous and that was only 3 spots difference.