Too many teams in the finals ?

Woodsie

Woodsie

Feast yer eyes ..
Tipping Member
In the telecrap today there is an article saying that an 8 team finals series from a 16 team comp .. simply rewards mediocrity and promotes losers to a station they don't deserve ... hard to argue that when teams with a 9-13 record are vying for a finals birth.

Ponts out that before when we had a 16 team comp we had a 5 team finals series but it was lifted to 8 teams when we went to a 20 team comp, but never dropped back again.

Now we all know that because the NRL get the gate takings for the finals that it is a money making exercise, fair enough ... but it really is a joke when teams on 9-13 and with big negative PD's can call themselves finalists ...

The author may have been an AFL fan ... but he's correct ... a playground for losers and the mediocre ..
 
Woodsie said:
In the telecrap today there is an article saying that an 8 team finals series from a 16 team comp .. simply rewards mediocrity and promotes losers to a station they don't deserve ... hard to argue that when teams with a 9-13 record are vying for a finals birth.

Ponts out that before when we had a 16 team comp we had a 5 team finals series but it was lifted to 8 teams when we went to a 20 team comp, but never dropped back again.

Now we all know that because the NRL get the gate takings for the finals that it is a money making exercise, fair enough ... but it really is a joke when teams on 9-13 and with big negative PD's can call themselves finalists ...

The author may have been an AFL fan ... but he's correct ... a playground for losers and the mediocre ..
Click to expand...
After the first week of semis it usually puts us right where it belongs. I dont mind it as is, it gives teams 7 to 10 hope and creates excitement for those teams in the last few rounds. It doesn't happen often but occasionally teams from 7 and 8 can have a strong run through the semis.
 
I have been saying this very thing for years, why should half the competition make the finals, just daft

It also makes for a non-advantage for coming first. If you come first you have the same opportunity as the people that came 4th to a week off.

Think it should go to a top 7 at minimum if not a top 5. If the league expands then 7 makes a better comp. Give the minor promiers a week off then get into it
 
It’s ALL about the money ( not this year of course ) also why they play 3 state of origins when it’s 2 -0 with a game to play.

Nothing to do with fans , nothing to do with clubs , all to do with TV broadcast money & ticket sales ( other than last year or this year ).

The old top 5 was the way to go , minor premiers get a week off.
 
Woodsie said:
In the telecrap today there is an article saying that an 8 team finals series from a 16 team comp .. simply rewards mediocrity and promotes losers to a station they don't deserve ... hard to argue that when teams with a 9-13 record are vying for a finals birth.

Ponts out that before when we had a 16 team comp we had a 5 team finals series but it was lifted to 8 teams when we went to a 20 team comp, but never dropped back again.

Now we all know that because the NRL get the gate takings for the finals that it is a money making exercise, fair enough ... but it really is a joke when teams on 9-13 and with big negative PD's can call themselves finalists ...

The author may have been an AFL fan ... but he's correct ... a playground for losers and the mediocre ..
Click to expand...
A very valid point which I've always agreed with at these team numbers.

Given the NRL are on the verge of adding another Brisbane team, the prospect of a Brisbane side making the finals will increase, as will the potential financial and promotional benefits in a rugby league 'heartland'. Leaning towards long term good for game as is (and we know it's not going to change).
 
Some years its a good idea to have 8 teams as they are competitive, other years it isn't as close.

Take 2018 for example:
1629689512834.png


I think a top-8 is fine with the current system of 5v8 and 6v7. Top-4 gets suitable reward with double chance/week off as the outcome.

I kinda like the idea of a team making a late-season charge into finals contention after a mediocre season, or a season mired by injury. Parra in 2009 was pretty cool to watch, even if it was the Eels.

I know they say teams outside the 4 never win the premiership, but they have made a fair few GFs in the past. It will happen eventually.
 
Mark from Brisbane said:
It’s ALL about the money ( not this year of course ) also why they play 3 state of origins when it’s 2 -0 with a game to play.

Nothing to do with fans , nothing to do with clubs , all to do with TV broadcast money & ticket sales ( other than last year or this year ).

The old top 5 was the way to go , minor premiers get a week off.
Click to expand...
So in 2019 we came 6th and came within a whisker of beating bunnies and would have been every chance to beat Raiders and make the GF. In a top 5 scenario we wouldn't have even made the semis.
 
I don't mind the system...more footy and adds interest, though the point of allowing mediocrity is valid.
Also an important point is keeping the interest among NRL fans, as example - the Top 4 could be 4 - 5 games in front of 5th place, which would be ok for those in the Top 4 but that's 75% of fans who would lose interest.,,where with a Top 8, basically any of the Top 12 teams are a realistic chance to make the 8, which keeps the fans more interested.
Just 1 other point and we will use Manly as an example...Tom is out half the season and bottom of the table, yet back mid season and get a roll on...Manly scrape into the 8 and have potential on their day to threaten the other 4 sides (with Tom available)....happy to keep the 8 personally.
 
It's pretty simple really. We have to have an 8 team finals series to account for the non stop fukups week after week by myopic bunker clowns and bemused officials with whistles who continually display their complete lack of professionalism or any sense of reality.
 
As King Jong Dan has pointed out, there is not enough reward for winning the minor premiership. Melbourne (or whatever team finishes first in the regular season) deserves some advantage for proving the best over 25 rounds, such as a week off.
I'm in favour of a top five like it once was. Then again, I'm in favour of a singular SOO match each season.
Yes, the NRL would lose some revenue, which it could recoup by scrapping the Bunker.
 
The better Robbo said:
So in 2019 we came 6th and came within a whisker of beating bunnies and would have been every chance to beat Raiders and make the GF. In a top 5 scenario we wouldn't have even made the semis.
Click to expand...

I come from an era when there was a top 4 ... just making the semi's was a great achievement and celebrated .. and the years you just missed out became part of the tapestry and culture of the club that just made you want it more ...

Stars missing a lot of games .. late surges of form ... donald duck wearing trousers .. and bad Ref calls all go into what makes competitive professional sport .. it is unpredictable and doesn't always go to script .. it's not fair ... it's not taking turns .. and it's not everybody gets a participation certificate ...

And yeah Robbo ... in 2019 I would have been devastated to not make a top 5 ... but then I would have said we had 26 weeks like everybody else to do it ... we just weren't good enough .. and I would just want it even more like I do now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 258 (members: 14, guests: 244)

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0

Online statistics

Members online
14
Guests online
244
Total visitors
258
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom