Final 8 System

Here it is boys and girls!!

Has team 8 ever had an easier run to the GF.

Played:
5th
4th
2nd

Which makes me wonder, why should team 3, the Broncos, get penalised in week 2 having to play the higher ranked Team 7, and team 5 gets the reward of playing the lower ranked team 8, when both teams won in week 1?

Why in week 3 is Team 1 playing a higher ranked team than Team 2?

Wouldn't happen in the "Ice System" and in fact is the opposite of the McIntrye System, where the last time team 8. Eels in 2009, made the GF, that had to beat team 1, team 3 and team 2 to make the GF.

It's a fair point.

The higher ranked team should be playing the lower ranked team in week 2 for sure.

And in week 3 also. The reason they don't is because for some reason they fear a week 1 game being repeated in week 3, but who cares? If you want the two highest ranked teams in The GF, (which is what a system should aim to achieve) then id rather a game be repeated in week 3 as opposed to the GF.

The highest ranked team should get the advantage of a game against the lowest ranked team. Why they decided Team 1 is better off in week 1 against team 4 as opposed to team 8 in a game they can't be knocked out in is beyond me.....well, it's not beyond me, I know why, I just don't think it's right.

And team 8? For Christ sake, under this system they don't have to meet Team 1 until the GF.

You know I never really looked into it. You make a good point the higher team should face the lower team

I really like that all top 4 teams get a second crack. The very chance of coming third and being knocked out in your first week ruins the mcintyre system.

I don't think the McIntrye System is the way to go with 8 team finals.
But then I'd prefer to actually go back to the 5 team finals. Yeah won't happen but it would make sure the Storm are playing a team that had a more consistent season the the Cowboys.

It's this sort of discussion that got that clusterfuck of a system that is the McIntyre introduced....

Rankings throughout the season align you to a certain path and then (via a SIMPLE process) your destiny is in your own hands.....not to mention you know what you have to do ahead of your game.

And if the Cows have to go through 5th, 4th, 2nd and then 1st to become premiers.....well then what dimwit would suggest that is an easy run and isn't well deserved???

They've gradually worked their way through the teams above them and up towards the #1 team - perfect system and quite frankly we were robbed far too often of gutsy fairytales like this with that other horrific system.
Other than the Eels flukish run, teams 7 and 8 were never really given the opportunity that the Cows have had to work their way through teams that finished around the same part of the ladder.

The only team that could have any sort of gripe on the Cows is the Broncos and we had every opportunity to align ourselves to that side of the draw but weren't able to.....tough titties.

In summary; get fucked Icicle.

Pieman wrote:I really like that all top 4 teams get a second crack. The very chance of coming third and being knocked out in your first week ruins the mcintyre system.

I think Top 2 should have a significant advantage over the next best 4. I think 7 and 8, if they have to be there, which they do for Money, should get the least advantage.

I'd bracket them:
1&2
3 to 6
7&8

4 is alway closer to 5th in terms of points and ability, but get a massive advantage compared to 5th. They get treated more like than are Minor Premiers than a team that might scrape into an old Top 5.

Oz Sport Mad wrote:It's this sort of discussion that got that clusterfuck of a system that is the McIntyre introduced....

Rankings throughout the season align you to a certain path and then (via a SIMPLE process) your destiny is in your own hands.....not to mention you know what you have to do ahead of your game.

And if the Cows have to go through 5th, 4th, 2nd and then 1st to become premiers.....well then what dimwit would suggest that is an easy run and isn't well deserved???

They've gradually worked their way through the teams above them and up towards the #1 team - perfect system and quite frankly we were robbed far too often of gutsy fairytales like this with that other horrific system.
Other than the Eels flukish run, teams 7 and 8 were never really given the opportunity that the Cows have had to work their way through teams that finished around the same part of the ladder.

The only team that could have any sort of gripe on the Cows is the Broncos and we had every opportunity to align ourselves to that side of the draw but weren't able to.....tough titties.

In summary; get fucked Icicle.

Haha, you're awesome.

I'm not suggesting it's an easy run, just an easier run than any other team inthe history of top 8 systems, that is a cold hard undeniable fact.

But go ahead, advocate for a system that increased the chances of 8 making the GF and reduced the chances of team 1.

And remember, I'm not pro McIntrye, I'm pro Ice.

That said, The issue of knowing what you had to doahead of your game could have been easily fixed I. The McIntyre system, but also, how's this for a concept in finals footy, WIN, or risk elimination in week 1 unless you have been good enough to finish first or second.

All I'm really saying is a minor tweak to the current system could see it improved, that is, in week 3, ensure the highest ranked winner from week 1 plays the lowest ranked winner from week 2. This strict adherence to "sides of the draw" lead to clear disadvantages to higher ranked teams.

I'm not sure about your comments on the Broncos. Both them and the Eels couldn't get it done in week one, why then do the Broncos face a harder opponent than the Eels in week 2 when they finished ahead of them?

Finals should have gone like this:
Week 1: Same games

Week 2:
Team 3 v 8 (Broncos v Cowboys) What a game and atmosphere at Suncorp) Lets assume Cows continued their run and won.
Team 4 v 7 (Eels v Panthers) Wow, massive Western Sydney Derby would have got a bigger crowd at ANZ than they did at Suncorp. Hard to see Panthers winning this given the Eels form against the team that beat the Panthers

Week 3:
Storm (1) v Cowboys ( (Another Qld Blockbuster...Melbourne, that's in Qld)
Roosters (2) v Eels (4) (another Massive crowd in Sydney) Eels spring upset here......(maybe not )

Grand Final
2009 Grand Final Replay, where the cap rorters of 2007 - 2009 play the cap rorters of 2014-16 and we can sort out once and for all who is King

Now please, someone tell me how this isn't better, game quality, TV Audience, crowd attendance, fairness to top ranked teams, than the way the system has panned out.

One simple modification is all it would take.

Ice wrote:

Haha, you're awesome.

I'm not suggesting it's an easy run, just an easier run than any other team inthe history of top 8 systems, that is a cold hard undeniable fact.

But go ahead, advocate for a system that increased the chances of 8 making the GF and reduced the chances of team 1.

And remember, I'm not pro McIntrye, I'm pro Ice.

That said, The issue of knowing what you had to doahead of your game could have been easily fixed I. The McIntyre system, but also, how's this for a concept in finals footy, WIN, or risk elimination in week 1 unless you have been good enough to finish first or second.

All I'm really saying is a minor tweak to the current system could see it improved, that is, in week 3, ensure the highest ranked winner from week 1 plays the lowest ranked winner from week 2. This strict adherence to "sides of the draw" lead to clear disadvantages to higher ranked teams.

I'm not sure about your comments on the Broncos. Both them and the Eels couldn't get it done in week one, why then do the Broncos face a harder opponent than the Eels in week 2 when they finished ahead of them?

Finals should have gone like this:
Week 1: Same games

Week 2:
Team 3 v 8 (Broncos v Cowboys) What a game and atmosphere at Suncorp) Lets assume Cows continued their run and won.
Team 4 v 7 (Eels v Panthers) Wow, massive Western Sydney Derby would have got a bigger crowd at ANZ than they did at Suncorp. Hard to see Panthers winning this given the Eels form against the team that beat the Panthers

Week 3:
Storm (1) v Cowboys ( (Another Qld Blockbuster...Melbourne, that's in Qld)
Roosters (2) v Eels (4) (another Massive crowd in Sydney) Eels spring upset here......(maybe not )

Grand Final
2009 Grand Final Replay, where the cap rorters of 2007 - 2009 play the cap rorters of 2014-16 and we can sort out once and for all who is King

Now please, someone tell me how this isn't better, game quality, TV Audience, crowd attendance, fairness to top ranked teams, than the way the system has panned out.

One simple modification is all it would take.

It is better, but that's not a result of your modification of the finals system but a stars-aligning of the order the teams finished in, derbys wouldn't just happen to fall in place continually as a result of the change

to be honest i never thought there was enough wrong with the McIntyre system that it needed to be scrapped in the first place, just a simple change of 'the higher ranked team gets the home game' was all that was needed.

McI system was the best. Current system is bugger all difference between coming 1st and 4th and too big a difference between 4th and 5th.

All they needed to change was that the higher ranked team always gets the home game.

as mentioned, there is no sensical reason for a team that finishes higher and loses in round 1 - but then has to play the higher ranked winning team while the lower ranked teams play each other.

It's actually a massive, massive blunder.

The thing that rules the mcintyre system out - is that if you come third or fourth, you can be knocked out after week 1. That, to me, is insane. Yeah was unlikely but jeez, imagine coming third and getting knocked out after week 1

I think the current system is great - change it so the higher ranked loser plays the lower ranked winner after week 1 though and its spot on. Home ground advantage should always go to the higher ranked team until the GF too.

surmo13 wrote:

It is better, but that's not a result of your modification of the finals system but a stars-aligning of the order the teams finished in, derbys wouldn't just happen to fall in place continually as a result of the change

to be honest i never thought there was enough wrong with the McIntyre system that it needed to be scrapped in the first place, just a simple change of 'the higher ranked team gets the home game' was all that was needed.

That's true with the teams I've mentioned, and we might not have got those blockbusters if it was different teams , but the advantages to the higher ranked teams still would have been fairer, which is my main point.

You can't ever design a system around any given years teams and results, it must simply be a numbers based system that places various amounts of importance and advantage on your finishing position, something that can be improved with this system and the old.

The only thing wrong with the last McIntyre system was that the higher ranked teams played away in Week 2, other than that it was fine (although overly complicated). The current McIntyre system is also fine. The ESL system they used to have (and may still have) where the higher ranked team got to pick their opponents was also fine IMO, and also a bit quirky and interesting. The old top 5 system was also fine, as was the top 4 system before that, and even the very early system where the minor premiers went straight to the GF, and if they got beaten they had the right to call for a replay of the decider (yes you read that right everybody).

They are/were all okay as all the clubs know in advance of the season what they have to do to make the grand final and or premiership, and could base their strategy around that (eg resting players, hard training etc). I don't think any we can point to any grand finalists in living memory where we can say they didn't deserve to be there. About the closest might be 2011 when 6th placed Warriors had 50 put on them in the first week and still made the GF, but under the system of the time they knew that might not knock them out and if they won the next two matches away from home they would make GF, so fair enough IMO.

Probably about the only thing I would suggest now (and yes it is tongue in cheek), is that unless Parramatta or the Bulldogs are hosting it, any finals match involving a NSW team and team from outside NSW, that match should be played in the non NSW venue. Apparently there were officially 28K at the Roosters v Cowboys match. Do they think we're idiots? The ground holds 42 K, and on the main grandstand opposite the camera the top tier looked closed entirely, and in the stand behind the goal posts there would literally have been two dozen spectators.

It's amazing how many people can fit in corporate boxes at Allianz

No Worries wrote:It's amazing how many people can fit in corporate boxes at Allianz

Suncorp used to count fast food workers who worked more then 5 hours in the gate counts on slow games for the Reds.

ryno_ wrote:

Suncorp used to count fast food workers who worked more then 5 hours in the gate counts on slow games for the Reds.

I can't remember which ground (might have been all of them for all I remember), but I remember hearing a couple of years back that at one ground, the official attendance included everyone who entered the ground - so that included players and referees etc.

Edit, for the record I don't think it is just a NSW thing. I remember not that long ago thinking that when at Broncos matches the top tier was opened and there were some people there, the official crowd would be around 37K+. When the Broncos played Penrith last week the top tier was closed but there was over 38K in the official attendance. I guess it is possible that being a finals with tickets only being sold for that game, there would have been less spaces in the bottom two tiers whereas they may have more vacant seats for club matches (eg season ticket holders not turning up).

ryno_ wrote:McI system was the best. Current system is bugger all difference between coming 1st and 4th and too big a difference between 4th and 5th.

All they needed to change was that the higher ranked team always gets the home game.

This would be terrible.

Lets just say we did that this year, and Cowboys managed to upset the Storm, and Roosters and Broncos both won.

Then the winner of Eels vs Sharks would play the Storm in an elimination game in Melbourne, and the loser would play the Cowboys in Sydney.

McIntyre created terrible week 2 match ups if there were some upsets in the first week, and nobody should be calling for its return.


It bears repeating that if the Cowboys win this year they'll have beaten 5th, 4th, 2nd and 1st to do so, all of them away from home. What more do you want? Should we have a 7 week final system just to make sure that nobody progresses without beating everyone else?

Milchcow wrote:

This would be terrible.

Lets just say we did that this year, and Cowboys managed to upset the Storm, and Roosters and Broncos both won.

Then the winner of Eels vs Sharks would play the Storm in an elimination game in Melbourne, and the loser would play the Cowboys in Sydney.

McIntyre created terrible week 2 match ups if there were some upsets in the first week, and nobody should be calling for its return.


It bears repeating that if the Cowboys win this year they'll have beaten 5th, 4th, 2nd and 1st to do so, all of them away from home. What more do you want? Should we have a 7 week final system just to make sure that nobody progresses without beating everyone else?

Storm v Eels and Sharks v Cowboys would be terrible finals matchups? Good thing we dont have the McI system or we'd be forced to watch those shit games! Wait a minute....

I dont care how hard or easy a teams' passage to the GF is year by year. You can't slot in teams and hypothetical results to argue a point.

The McI (and Ice system for that matter) system is better because it actually gives a decent advantage between coming 1st and 4th. When you get to 8 teams, why should the minor premiers have basically the same advantage as a team in the middle of the remaining pack of teams? The only difference is the location of the week 1 game? Big woop.