manlyfan76
There is no A.I. Just better computers
I think you wouldYeah, but you'd feel hard done by if you went through undefeated and didn't make it!
- neutral +/-
- all other teams had less wins, meaning less points available
I think you wouldYeah, but you'd feel hard done by if you went through undefeated and didn't make it!
Horse bolted in 1988 everyone
Dogs “won” from 6th place in 1995.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:View attachment 19073
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.
You sir are a geniusAs 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.
Stirrer.Dogs “won” from 6th place in 1995.
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 |