Conference Finals System

[Coxy]

Gus had an interesting column about alternative finals system:
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...einvigorate-finals-series-20110910-1k30g.html

Effectively though, this would mean (assuming 16 teams) 10 out of 16 teams make the finals. We already have enough mediocrity as it is. But let's just make it top 4 from each conference instead of top 5.

Regional Conference:
Melbourne
Brisbane
Warriors
Cowboys

Sydney Conference:
Manly
Tigers
Dragons
Bulldogs

Immediately you see a problem, in that on the ladder, Knights finished higher than Bulldogs yet don't get through. But again, let's put that aside.

Week 1 you'd have 1 vs 2 and 3 vs 4 from each conference. 3 vs 4 is elimination, 1 vs 2 the winner earns a week off straight through to the Conference Final (preliminary final in essence).

Week 2 you'd have loser of 1 vs 2 vs winner of 3 vs 4.
Week 3 you'd have winner of 1 vs 2 from week 1 vs winner of the week 2 elimination final.
Week 4 would be the Grand Final, play off of the conference winners.

Pretty much it's like the AFL (old ARL) finals system, but because you stick to regional teams and Sydney teams you can maximise the crowds in the first 3 weeks because the games appeal to the local audience.

Biggest Downfall

The conference system relies on the fact the top 4 of each conference are comparable in quality. It rarely happens these days, but imagine if the top 6 teams were all Sydney teams? You'd have 5 and 6 miss out on the finals, while one of team 7-10 (regional teams) will make the GF.

I think such a system would only work if you had 2 ladders based on those conferences. Essentially each conference playing eachother twice (14 games) and the other conference once (8 games, total 22).

It's an interesting idea, but far too radical for the NRL to consider IMO, especially Gould's involving an extra week of finals. 5 is too much (anyone remember 1998?).

 

[Meat77]

A very American idea for sure. It works pretty well in each of their major sports but as you point out Coxy, the ladder is seperated for the different divisions (or conferences or leagues or whatever the terminology happens to be for each sport).

There's always one or two hard luck stories there similar to your Knights/Bulldogs example, but it's accepted as part f the system there.

I'm not sure whether it's the answer here though - we only have 16 teams whereas in the States you are dealing with 30-odd. My first thought is that it would be a lot of the same old teams making the finals every year, which isn't ideal IMO

 

[Ari Gold]

If you have conferences then IMO you would have conferential teams play each other twice during regular season and non-conferential once. That way even though some non finals teams may have more wins than the finals bound team (due to being in different conferences) the finals team will have hopefully earned it by winning more of their conference games. Sure sometimes some conferences will be stronger but as things are strengths of schedule are already different so I can't see it being a big deal. Having conferential teams play twice a year would also ensure you have more interesting rivalry games throughout the year.

I actually quite like the idea but it will never happen.

And just on the Knights bulldogs thing I doubt both teams had the same teams for all 24 rounds. Maybe knights got in because their unique opponents were easier to beat? I don't know if this is true or not but just because a team has more wins it shouldn't necessary mean they get to play in the finals.

 

[Coxy]

If you have conferences then IMO you would have conferential teams play each other twice during regular season and non-conferential once. That way even though some non finals teams may have more wins than the finals bound team (due to being in different conferences) the finals team will have hopefully earned it by winning more of their conference games. Sure sometimes some conferences will be stronger but as things are strengths of schedule are already different do I can't see it being a big deal. Having conferential teams play twice a year would also ensure you have more interesting rivalry games throughout the year.

I actually quite like the idea but it will never happen.

I pretty much said that about (about playing people in your conference twice, and the others once), so yeah I agree :P
And also agree it will never happen.

It would also mean for example the Broncos only get a game at home against arch rivals like Parramatta, Dragons, Bulldogs once every 2nd year.

 

[Ari Gold]

It would also mean for example the Broncos only get a game at home against arch rivals like Parramatta, Dragons, Bulldogs once every 2nd year.

True, but the flipside is Sydney teams would only have to host teams like NZ, Titans and Cowboys once every second year too. Without making too many assumptions I would say these are some of the least attractive games from a commercial standpoint and I doubt crowds for these games are any good. And by having two Sydney teams' fans travelling to the same game you end up with two fanbases willing to use the tunnels instead of just the one.

 

[Kaz]

Just go back to the final 5 system.

 

[Coxy]

Just go back to the final 5 system.

Reduces the number of finals games to 6. Commercial suicide :P

 

[Kaz]

Then make the finals the best out of 3, except the Grand Final.

 

[Ari Gold]

Reduces the number of finals games to 6. Commercial suicide :P

I still don't understand why they don't float the idea of a best of 3 Grand Finals series. Commercial gold mine IMO.

 

[Meat77]

Probably because it's not Origin where if a player gets injured in game 1 they can bring a player of pretty similar ability into the team. When you've only got a squad of 25 it makes it pretty tough to cover injuries to key players for what should be the showpiece games.

 

[ethos]

I still don't understand why they don't float the idea of a best of 3 Grand Finals series. Commercial gold mine IMO.

Or two, one at each home ground (or home "region"). And then points differential.

 

[Nashy]

I don't see a problem with it how it is now. But then, I don't tend to whinge about BS that doesn't need to be fixed when it's not broken.

 

[Porthoz]

I don't see a problem with it how it is now. But then, I don't tend to whinge about BS that doesn't need to be fixed when it's not broken.

Maybe you should. Without critical spirit, there is no evolution!

 

[Kaz]

I still can't believe Gallop (Yes, I will blame him because it came straight from his mouth) believes that the current finals system is the most ideal. The AFL's sytem is much fairer and much more interesting.

Did Gallop torture your kitten or puppy, for you to hate him so much.

 

[Bucking Beads]

I still can't believe Gallop (Yes, I will blame him because it came straight from his mouth) believes that the current finals system is the most ideal. The AFL's sytem is much fairer and much more interesting.

No doubt it is but Gallop knows best. :rash:

 

[Dexter]

Just another way Pus has come up with to maximize/guarantee Sydney sides in the finals. Personally I can't wait for the day when all of the non Sydney sides make the top 8.

 

[Fozz]

The AFL and the McIntyre system have their own drawbacks and advantages.

AFL:
Positives: Top four are guaranteed a second chance. Draw isn't as up in the air.

Negatives: Possible grand final preview on week one. Less chance of an real upset (Warriors and Melbourne).

NRL
Positives: Builds towards the grand final. Top four get home games.

Negatives: Only top two have guaranteed second chances. Mismatches in week one.

Personally I think the McIntyre is better.

 

[Nashy]

Maybe you should. Without critical spirit, there is no evolution!

Alright.

David Gallop is an idiot who doesn't run the game well at all. He's out of touch, and doesn't know anything about tribalism. The finals system is stupid, and it's his fault, he should change it completely.

Manly should be kicked out. Titans fans are idiots. And how on Earth did the Dragons get around this cap loophole with Gasnier. Gallop's fault completely.

The website's skin sucks. We need a better one. It won't break stuff, why aren't the admins doing a good job. Stupid admins.


Happy/