I know Box Hill got the points to get in there and beat Williamstown home but the Seagulls on their day (which was not often) could play decent footy. I think it is a shame they didnt get that 8th spot, they got so close!
I think the competition becomes a bit of a joke when we have games like we did last weekend. The Bullants were uncompetitive, as were Box Hill. I know the Hawks have an excuse.
Just wonder right now if anyone has a better finals system? I think the VFL needs to reward the top side more. Perhaps with a final 6 or 7 the top side could be like the reserves comp, one win and they get into the Grand Final.
Any thoughts?
With 13 (maybe 14 next year). I think we need to go back to a final 6 system. It just gives the comp a bit more credibility. I think having a final 8, with a a 13 team competiition is rewarding mediocrity.
Would the 14th side be the Kangaroos if they decide to run a VFL side, like what Geelong do ?
Like your new logo Onslaught. Should definately be six. You just can't have more teams in finals than not. Just another case of trying to be like the AFL, to the point of looking stupid.
I think keep the 8 at least if your side finised 7,8 u still have a little bit of hope for the season, probaly only chance Frankston, Roosters &Tassie have of making finals, also Port if on thier own next year.
Without wanting to be critical, you have got no idea!
Frankston were not out of the 8 all year, and until the last couple of rounds were lower than 6th for one week.
Tassie finished 6th and will probably play in the 3rd week of the finals.
Port will do fine, maybe not next year, but once they settle down their list, they will be fine.
Thats correct so thats my point if it was a final 6 your team would have had one less week of training,the best stand alone clubs will do is bottom 4 of 8.Also Frankston would have beaten Bullants this week(in fact Frankston under 10 would prob beat Bullants this week.)
I'd take 8 if the finals then were like the NHL playoffs (barring best-of-seven series).
Sure, 1v8, 2v7 - but three weeks of finals and not 4. Basically if you lose, you're gone. None of this double-chance rubbish. Tournament style. Week 1 - 8 teams, week 2- 4, week 3 - 2 GF teams.
Every final being do or die and with the journey reduced to 3 full-on weeks and not 4, would be better, at minimum worth a trial. The VFL can trial that and not be AFL-light.
Why do you think every final should be knock out ?
Surely a team deserves a second chance for finishing on top and same for second as well as third, that's my opinion any way.
I don't think there's a need (other than following convention) for there to be this second-chance draw and weeks off in a month of playoffs.
1 plays 8. That's a massive advantage. A team with a win-ratio of maybe 80% plus gets a team that on average can win (at best) half of its games. Add a home-ground factor for the high ranked team and there's help.
The added benefit of each game being possibly the last makes it tense, and three weeks of going hammer and tongs makes it easier than 4 with rests and consolatory chances.
Its worth a try and you wouldn't start in the AFL, VFL is a good ground for it.
I don't like it.. 1 v 8, a home ground advantage isn't enough, you want to reward those that have finished in the top bracket.
The double chance system has been used in the VFA for .. hmm must be atleast 1930's I wouldn't like to see it changed just for the sake of making it different to the AFL.