WXV Divisions

[ossie85]

The poor teams will still be poor no matter what type we play Nails, the only differences under this way they have a greater chance of winning a few games. The poor teams will still play the good teams, just not as many of them.

I don't know what your point about Dublin is? All teams that are good enough will make it, no matter how bad/good they were last year.

10 rounds is a long time, and if you have injuries that cause you to lose, you're not likely to do very well in the ladder anyway.

Nails - I don't think you're seeing the bigger picture. I don't want a competition where only 4-6 coaches have any real shot, and the other coaches just come and go, and not really building. The comp will fall. You have to offer something for everyone, without doing things drastic like putting strict caps on.

[Toga]

I quite like it, Oz, and think the geographical system would probably fit the best to keep the World's feel :)


And HP ---> I don't think the C Conference teams' end of season would be meaningless at all, as it's likely it'll be close for the spoon as it was this year!

[Nails]

It's like the AFL, only 4-6 teams have a chance each year. Pretty sure since the new finals system has been in place a team has never won it from outside the top 4?

I'm not going to abandon the Dillos when we turn to shower, which I think we can all agree looks pretty inevitable right now. I think the fun aspect for me will be seeing my team climb from last place to 3rd last, to 5th last and eventually back into the 8.

Seeing those awesome upset victories. It's going to not be that much fun (imo) if I have those wins handed to me by being chucked in a shower easy division.

I also don't think coaches who opted to go young and drafted teams that were always/they could take a fair guess were going to be shower shouldn't be rewarded and handed easy wins on a platter because they get to play other easy teams.

Like if this was brought in there's absolutely no incentive for me to just trade every single one of my remaining kids for old farts and just get couple easy wins in the gay team division/

[ossie85]

It's like the AFL, only 4-6 teams have a chance each year. Pretty sure since the new finals system has been in place a team has never won it from outside the top 4?

Yes, but AFL coaches and players and clubs get paid. We don't.

I'm not going to abandon the Dillos when we turn to shower, which I think we can all agree looks pretty inevitable right now. I think the fun aspect for me will be seeing my team climb from last place to 3rd last, to 5th last and eventually back into the 8.

Which is great, but that still applies whether it is the current system or the proposed one...

Seeing those awesome upset victories. It's going to not be that much fun (imo) if I have those wins handed to me by being chucked in a shower easy division.

Upset victories will still happen. And you'd only be in a bad division if you are bad also.

I also don't think coaches who opted to go young and drafted teams that were always/they could take a fair guess were going to be shower shouldn't be rewarded and handed easy wins on a platter because they get to play other easy teams.

They won't climb the ladder/divisions though if they stay bad.

Like if this was brought in there's absolutely no incentive for me to just trade every single one of my remaining kids for old farts and just get couple easy wins in the gay team division/

I don't understand this point. The incentive is to win the flag either short term, medium term or long-term - this new system doesn't make that go away.

[Nails]

RE: Last point (I'm about to go down street, will read rest later)

My point is right now I have kept kids around like Jordie McKenzie/Lyons/Dea/Barlow etc. to give my team a little bit of a future

If I'm just going to get to go into an easy division when all my olds retire, there's no incentive for me to really have a player below age 30 in my team. Just get in all old farts who I know will get selected and who I know will get decent points as opposed to risking on kids like Lyons/McKenzie/Dea and someone like Barlow who's admittedly the future of the club could just be traded for 2 30yo midfield premos instead

kinda thing.

[Justin Bieber]

Calling Barlow a kid made me laugh :P.

[JBs-Hawks]

Calling dea/Mckenzie/lyons kids gave me a laugh

[Nails]

He was only 25 less than 12 hours ago ;)

Also I list kids and then say "someone like Barlow" I'm not explicitly calling him a kid. Though @ 25 he's likely to have a good 8 seasons left, I'd still put a 25yo in the kid bracket. I have to considering I'm 24 in 2 weeks.

pfft, they are kid as flower JB

k bbl

[ossie85]

RE: Last point (I'm about to go down street, will read rest later)

My point is right now I have kept kids around like Jordie McKenzie/Lyons/Dea/Barlow etc. to give my team a little bit of a future

If I'm just going to get to go into an easy division when all my olds retire, there's no incentive for me to really have a player below age 30 in my team. Just get in all old farts who I know will get selected and who I know will get decent points as opposed to risking on kids like Lyons/McKenzie/Dea and someone like Barlow who's admittedly the future of the club could just be traded for 2 30yo midfield premos instead

kinda thing.

You realise the Divisions reset every year yeah? The incentive for the Premiership doesn't change, there is plenty of incentive still. Just that when your team is at its lowest, instead of a 3-14 win-loss ratio, they might be able to get a 6-12

[Holz]

RE: Last point (I'm about to go down street, will read rest later)

My point is right now I have kept kids around like Jordie McKenzie/Lyons/Dea/Barlow etc. to give my team a little bit of a future

If I'm just going to get to go into an easy division when all my olds retire, there's no incentive for me to really have a player below age 30 in my team. Just get in all old farts who I know will get selected and who I know will get decent points as opposed to risking on kids like Lyons/McKenzie/Dea and someone like Barlow who's admittedly the future of the club could just be traded for 2 30yo midfield premos instead

kinda thing.

You realise the Divisions reset every year yeah? The incentive for the Premiership doesn't change, there is plenty of incentive still. Just that when your team is at its lowest, instead of a 3-14 win-loss ratio, they might be able to get a 6-12

Ossie, I prefer the normal system but I would be pretty strongly against the divisions and the school captains pick. If it was to work the locations isnt a bad idea. However it doesnt directly solve the gap between the top and weak teams.

Conferences is interesting though.

[Purple 77]

b) By point scorers from last year, while keeping 'rivals' in tact

Conference 1: Mexico City, Toronto, Dublin, London, Pacific, Wellington (scored 13,501 combined last year)
Conference 2: Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Berlin, PNL, New Delhi, Beijing (scored 13,480 combined last year)
Conference 3: Moscow, New York, Cairo, Cape Town, Tokyo, Seoul (scored 13,872 combined last year)

Pros: Keeps rivalry, updates each year, and probably a fairer way for all
Cons: A little arbitrary

Just trying to understand this one, so bear with me.

So you have your 9 pairs of teams, as rivals are kept, and they are put with another 2 pairs so that each Conference as a similar combined total amount of points?

If this is the case, at first glance I like this one the best, although you could argue you are splitting the comp into mini-18s, were there are strong, medium and weak teams in each. Whether thats a good or bad thing, that is the case.

But the Worlds idea is very romantic... it is good and I wouldn't have a problem with it. But the strength in the pools is concerning. BUT, if we employed this structure forever, each conference will have varying years of competitiveness, the America one is strong, but one day it could be as weak as the Asia one, it will keep varying, so you could say the "quality argument" is invalid.


The main problem with this for me a little, is that we are stepping away from the AFL, something we have been striving to mimic. It sort of feels like, we are creating our own sport almost, something completely different to the AFL. Well, thats me anyway.

In 2012 when Berlin was shower, I think I would have liked to have had more of a chance to win games. I was then about say however it would feel less deserving if I made the finals in Division C, ossie rightly points out that if you are good enough, you will win the premiership, and if you are bad enough, you won't go far.

This structure I now like, it is good from me, just a little concerned we might be over complicating our comp a little, and taking a big step away from the AFL.

PS: Strongly against the captains idea, probably just ossie giving us all the options

[ossie85]

^ yeah, that's how it work Purps.

Just saying though that those in Division C won't be playing finals, only Division A and the top 2 from Division B will play finals.

[Nige]

I reckon Option B is probably the way to go. Just looks like the balance is right there.

[ossie85]

I'll do a mock 2013 season based on 2012 results, using Option B to see how it would have worked out :) But give me time!

[Purple 77]

^ yeah, that's how it work Purps.

Just saying though that those in Division C won't be playing finals, only Division A and the top 2 from Division B will play finals.

Meant to say Group C, all these Divisions, groups, conferences... you must be at work doing this lol