Comparing the McIntyre System to the AFL's Top 8

[TigersFan4Life]

I know it's probably too early in the season to be doing this, but I was thinking about it and decided to. There's been a lot of debate over the years about the fairness of the McIntyre System compared to the AFL's Top 8\. So I took a look at each finals series for the last eleven years, starting in 2000 when the AFL went to their current format. What I determined is that, not only is the AFL's system fairer to the top four teams, it also produces more quality matchups.

In those eleven years, there has not been a SINGLE year when the AFL's grand final did not feature two of the top four teams. Additionally, there were only two seasons when one of the top four teams didn't make it to the third week of the finals. In comparison, there has not been a single season in the NRL finals where all of the top four teams made it to week three. There has always been one that misses out and in 2009 two of them missed out. Three of the eleven NRL grand finals ('05, '09, '10) have involved a team from outside the top four.

As for quality matchups, it's quite staggering. When i say quality matchups, I mean games between top four teams. These are the total number of matches during the last eleven finals series to feature games between top four teams:

NRL 24
AFL 53

The AFL does have an advantage in this area as their format features the top four playing each other in week one, but even when you take away those 22 games they've still had 31 matches compared to the NRL's 24\. So the simple conclusion is that the AFL's system is both fairer and better as far as quality goes than the McIntyre System.

 

[Juro]

The way I look at it, the NRL system favours teams 1, 2, 5, 6 and the AFL favours teams 3, 4, 7, 8\. By this, I mean that team 1 needs to beat team 8 to get the week off in the NRL while it has to beat team 4 in the AFL. Similar statements can be made for the rest of the teams. Also, teams 3 and 4 are guaranteed not to be eliminated in round 1 of the finals in AFL.

I actually prefer the NRL system, since it means each game is important for each team. Team 4 losing in the first game has to worry about the results of 3 vs 6, 2 vs 7 and 1 vs 8\. I like that the NRL gives more variety in who gets through the first couple of weeks.

As to whether games are quality matchups, it all depends on the form of the teams playing, not their final position. You could have the minor premiers who get hammered by injuries in the week before the finals, who get hammered by team 8 who have hit form at the right time of year. Just saying that 1 vs 4 is better than 1 vs 8 is a bit simplistic…

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

I am not the biggest fan of the NRL system, but the key difference is State of Origin. We have the McIntrye system because teams are disadvantaged by State of Origin.

For example, a team heavily hit by Origin commitments may only finish 6th, when in reality, without origin it may have finished in the top 4\. Under the McIntrye system, this team may not necessarily be out of the competition if it loses its first finals match, whereas under the AFL system, they would be out.

 

[Marshall_magic]

The McIntyre system has it's flaws, but it's no worse than the AFL system. I don't think 1 v 4 is enough reward for winning the minor premiership, and I don't think 5 v 8 is tough enough of the bottom ranked top 8 team. If a better system can be thought up I wouldn't mind changing to it, but it should be to an improved system, not one with similar flaws.

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

The McIntyre system has it's flaws, but it's no worse than the AFL system. I don't think 1 v 4 is enough reward for winning the minor premiership, and I don't think 5 v 8 is tough enough of the bottom ranked top 8 team. If a better system can be thought up I wouldn't mind changing to it, but it should be to an improved system, not one with similar flaws.

Perhaps a top16 finals series. Solve a lot of arguments on this forum regarding sheens' record of making finals.

 

[Marshall_magic]

The McIntyre system has it's flaws, but it's no worse than the AFL system. I don't think 1 v 4 is enough reward for winning the minor premiership, and I don't think 5 v 8 is tough enough of the bottom ranked top 8 team. If a better system can be thought up I wouldn't mind changing to it, but it should be to an improved system, not one with similar flaws.

Perhaps a top16 finals series. Solve a lot of arguments on this forum regarding sheens' record of making finals.

He'd still find a way to miss them.

 

[happy_tiger]

Would prefer a top 5 or top 6 personally , but it is all about money for the NRL . As for the NRL or AFL sytem thinks ours is better because you get rewards for top 2 which is deserved .