Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Play-offs to expand to six teams?

2»

Comments

  • orpingtonRED
    orpingtonRED Posts: 3,474
    Money Money Money
  • Radostanradical
    Radostanradical Posts: 858
    Uboat said:
    Not this season, obviously, but the Athletic is reporting that discussions are taking place. The model would be similar to the National League system, but the semi finals would be 2 legged, unlike that model. 
    Personally I don’t think the team who finish 8th should go up, but it’s more drama, so why not. 
    Because it's a stupid idea that start to reward mediocrity in the pursuit of international tv money. Why not 8 teams and have a mini tournament ? Why not 10, 12 etc. If its not broke dont fix it.
  • thai malaysia addick
    thai malaysia addick Posts: 18,388
    I seem to recall a team with negative goal difference got into one of the play-offs (maybe non-league) recently. I accept goal difference is not related to points entirely, but we could have teams that lose more than they win if you go down to 9th.
  • iaitch
    iaitch Posts: 10,246
    edited September 12
    thai malaysia addick said:
    I seem to recall a team with negative goal difference got into one of the play-offs (maybe non-league) recently. I accept goal difference is not related to points entirely, but we could have teams that lose more than they win if you go down to 9th.
    A team could win many games by one goal and lose a few by several goals and have a negative goal difference despite winning more games than losing.  
  • Briston_Addick
    Briston_Addick Posts: 11,786
    I have absolutely no problem with expanding the play-offs to six teams ... as long as it's done properly with as much advantage given to the higher-ranked sides as possible.

    The problem with the National League fixturing last season was that the final round of regular-season matches were played on Bank Holiday Monday, 5th May and the first round of play-off matches weren't until 14th/15th May with the semi-finals (when the top two ranked sides joined the fray) on 20th and 21st May. That meant that York (2nd) and Forest Green (3rd) hadn't played a game for over a fortnight ... and both lost.

    If this is the format you're going to have you need to make it as tough as possible for the lower-ranked sides so if the last round of matches are played on the Saturday you play the first round of play-off matches the following midweek with the semi-finals the following weekend. That way the bottom four-placed sides have to play Saturday-midweek-Saturday whereas the top two can play Saturday-Saturday and have a little more recovery time.

    The AFL has employed an eight-team play-off system since the mid-90s with the current format used since 2000.

    The original version had 1st v 8th, 2nd v 7th etc in Week 1 with the two lowest-ranked losers eliminated and the two highest-ranked winners progressing to Week3, one win away from the Grand Final and the other four teams playing in Week 2 for the right to progress to Week 3. The anomaly with this format was that if there upsets in all four matches the teams that finished 3rd and 4th would be eliminated and the 5th and 6th-placed sides would have qualified for the Preliminary Finals ... which was harsh as it gave no reward for finishing higher.

    The current format has the top four play each other in Week 1 (1st v 4th, 2nd v 3rd) with the winners qualifying for the Prelim Finals in Week 3 and the losers playing in Week 2 against the winners of the sudden-death finals (5th v 8th, 6th v 7th).

    From 2000 to 2015 the winners of the Grand Final came from the top four i.e. those who had the double-chance in Week 1 (i.e. you could lose your first game but not be eliminated) and you hardly saw a top-four side get eliminated in "straight sets" i.e. lose the Qualifying Final in Week 1 and the Semi-Final in Week 2.

    In 2016 the League decided to have a bye week between the end of the regular season and the start of Finals to try and stop finals-bound sides resting lots of players in the last round. Since then two sides have won the Premiership from outside the top four: Western Bulldogs in 2016 (their first title since 1956 and hot on the heels of Leicester's Premier League title leading to the commentators calling it the Year of the Underdog) and Brisbane last year. In addition, top four sides have gone out in straight sets nine or ten times in this time.

    What this seems to point towards is that the extra time off before the play-offs start hinders the higher-ranked sides ... and last year's NL play-offs followed this with Oldham (5th) and Southend (7th) getting to the final.
  • MartinCAFC
    MartinCAFC Posts: 3,230
    Radostanradical said:
    Uboat said:
    Not this season, obviously, but the Athletic is reporting that discussions are taking place. The model would be similar to the National League system, but the semi finals would be 2 legged, unlike that model. 
    Personally I don’t think the team who finish 8th should go up, but it’s more drama, so why not. 
    Because it's a stupid idea that start to reward mediocrity in the pursuit of international tv money. Why not 8 teams and have a mini tournament ? Why not 10, 12 etc. If it’s not broke dont fix it.
    To be fair you could already make that argument about involving 5th and 6th placed teams. Why not just have 3rd vs 4th as a one off match at Wembley? Why do 5th and 6th currently need involving? 
  • jimmymelrose
    jimmymelrose Posts: 9,762
    What's the point?
    To make it more exciting? To give more teams a chance? 
    Just get rid of parachute, sorry, I mean trampoline, money.
  • se9addick
    se9addick Posts: 32,072
    jimmymelrose said:
    What's the point?
    To make it more exciting? To give more teams a chance? 
    Just get rid of parachute, sorry, I mean trampoline, money.
    That would ruin the top flight as a competitive entity. Getting rid of the parachute payments would be an incredibly stupid idea. How they are structured & how much they are is maybe open for debate, but the principle is very sensible. 
  • EveshamAddick
    EveshamAddick Posts: 7,027
    Don’t like this idea. Really my preference would be to get rid of the play offs altogether and revert back to top 3 get promoted. It’s already a nonsense that a team in 3rd could finish streets ahead of 4,5 and 6 below them, yet one of them can get promoted instead via the knockout games.
  • BigRedEvil
    BigRedEvil Posts: 11,083
    If we finish 8th I'm all for it 

  • Sponsored links:



  • KingKinsella
    KingKinsella Posts: 1,324
    Why limit it to 6??
    I'd say let 24 clubs play each other home and away collecting points and the highest 3 get promoted.
  • GNelson
    GNelson Posts: 565
    The play-offs are great as they are, don't change them. Some of my best memories supporting Charlton are the Play-Offs, even the years we didn't win. They keep the season interesting, they allow teams with smaller budgets to be in with a chance of promotion when they might not be able to compete with the top three over a season. Play-offs going down to 8th would be overkill, it works well as it is now.
  • hoof_it_up_to_benty
    hoof_it_up_to_benty Posts: 22,484
    KingKinsella said:
    Why limit it to 6??
    I'd say let 24 clubs play each other home and away collecting points and the highest 3 get promoted.
    Stupid idea - would never work...
  • iaitch
    iaitch Posts: 10,246
    KingKinsella said:
    Why limit it to 6??
    I'd say let 24 clubs play each other home and away collecting points and the highest 3 get promoted.
    The EFL will then say after each club plays each other twice the top 12 will go into a promotion playoff and the bottom 12 into a relegation playoff.

    The fourth in the promotion playoff will then play the fourth bottom club from the higher division.

    The fourth bottom in the relegation play off plays the fourth club in the division below promotion play off.

    Hopefully all these play offs will be completed by the time the next season begins.

    Am I complicating things?

     
  • philcafc
    philcafc Posts: 3,893
    Don't like the idea of Play-Offs going down to 8th. Personally I would change the format. 5th v 6th, 4th v 5th/6th - Winner plays 3rd at Wembley
    It won't happen however.

  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 94,734
    philcafc said:
    Don't like the idea of Play-Offs going down to 8th. Personally I would change the format. 5th v 6th, 4th v 5th/6th - Winner plays 3rd at Wembley
    It won't happen however.

    Negative aspect of that, is the fact that 3rd wont play for a few weeks, whilst the other three will potentially keep momentum, as what we saw with the National League Play-Offs this season.

    Best way to deal with that, would be to have 5th vs 6th, and 4th vs the winner in such quick succession after the season ends, that they're crippled slightly by playing matches so close to each other.

    Would be a logistical nightmare though. 
  • cafc999
    cafc999 Posts: 4,970
    jimmymelrose said:
    What's the point?
    To make it more exciting? To give more teams a chance? 
    Just get rid of parachute, sorry, I mean trampoline, money.
    IMHO it would have the opposite effect
  • JustFloydRoad
    JustFloydRoad Posts: 1,652
    Rock Spectacle said:
    And look who finished 8th in the Championship last season 
    You’re not saying it was THAT team that took our European place back in 2004, what a 🔧 in the works

Categories

“Marketplace”