McIntyre System

@Allan Towle said:
I prefer the AFL system too. Closer games and rewards the top 4 with a deffinate non-elimination.
Click to expand...

If a top 4 side loses to a team outside the top 4, do they deserve to have a guaranteed spot in the second week. McIntyre system puts a great advantage on each rank higher you finish, and if you keep winning (like you have to in finals footy), you will be fine. I don't care what system they use, as long as after week 1, losers are eliminated.
 
Just on another note, do you believe it should be a top 8 system?

Personally I think its a big wrong that half the competition qualifies… Id like to see an ESL style top 6 system and have teams 1 & 2 getting a bye in week one.
 
Something like this, with every game being an instant elimination game, if you lose your goooooone:

Week 1:
1st - bye
2nd - bye
3rd vs 6th - loser eliminated
4th vs 5th - loser eliminated

Week 2:
1st vs (winner of 3rd vs 6th) - loser eliminated
2nd vs (winner of 4th vs 5th) - loser eliminated

Week 3:
The 2 winners of week 2 play off in the grand final

Short and sweet :slight_smile:
 
nah top 8 is best. if you win more than lose then you should make it. also more money is made with more matches.
 
@alien said:
nah top 8 is best. if you win more than lose then you should make it. also more money is made with more matches.
Click to expand...

I just think if your EIGHTH best you shouldn't deserve a crack at the title… And so what if more money is made with more finals matches? Not EVERYTHING has to be about money, thats what is ruining our game to begind with.

In the MLB there are 32 teams, 8 make the playoffs, in Super 14 there are 14 teams, 4 make the finals... 50% of the field is too many imo, you only have to be mediocre to make the finals...
 
@Zaibatsu said:
@alien said:
nah top 8 is best. if you win more than lose then you should make it. also more money is made with more matches.

I just think if your EIGHTH best you shouldn't deserve a crack at the title… And so what if more money is made with more finals matches? Not EVERYTHING has to be about money, thats what is ruining our game to begind with.

In the MLB there are 32 teams, 8 make the playoffs, in Super 14 there are 14 teams, 4 make the finals... 50% of the field is too many imo, you only have to be mediocre to make the finals...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

If you run 8th you basically have to pull of an impossible run to win it. Warriors last year, they beat First, then 4th, then lost to 2nd. If they beat 2nd, they would've had to of beaten 1st/3rd (Storm/Sharks). I don't think 8th will ever win it, unless they start the season awfully and run home all guns blazing and sneak in.
 
@Zaibatsu said:
@alien said:
nah top 8 is best. if you win more than lose then you should make it. also more money is made with more matches.

I just think if your EIGHTH best you shouldn't deserve a crack at the title… And so what if more money is made with more finals matches? Not EVERYTHING has to be about money, thats what is ruining our game to begind with.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I guess we disagree then Z. To finish 8th you will probably have to win more than you lose. 12 wins and 12 loses might be enough if you have a good for and against. If a team wins more than they lose then it's a pretty good season and they should have a shot making at the grandfinal, but the team that does finish 8th has a very tough game week 1 of the finals (and so they should). If they beat the top team at the top team's home ground then they still have to beat 3 more of the top teams to win the comp. Having a top 8 keeps more fans interested during the season too because more teams have a chance of making the finals.
 
@Zaibatsu said:
@alien said:
nah top 8 is best. if you win more than lose then you should make it. also more money is made with more matches.

I just think if your EIGHTH best you shouldn't deserve a crack at the title… And so what if more money is made with more finals matches? Not EVERYTHING has to be about money, thats what is ruining our game to begind with.

In the MLB there are 32 teams, 8 make the playoffs, in Super 14 there are 14 teams, 4 make the finals... 50% of the field is too many imo, you only have to be mediocre to make the finals...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

They play 162 regular season games in MLB, which is why only 8 of the 30 teams make the playoffs. Before '94 they used to have only four playoff teams.

The problem with the NRL is that they are working in a small market and need to maximise the amount of money and fan interest. A top 8 does that by keeping more teams in with a chance later into the season.

Personally I'd prefer a top 6 but I can't see it happening, especially if they end up expanding to 18 teams.
 
@Zaibatsu said:
Something like this, with every game being an instant elimination game, if you lose your goooooone:

Week 1:
1st - bye
2nd - bye
3rd vs 6th - loser eliminated
4th vs 5th - loser eliminated

Week 2:
1st vs (winner of 3rd vs 6th) - loser eliminated
2nd vs (winner of 4th vs 5th) - loser eliminated

Week 3:
The 2 winners of week 2 play off in the grand final

Short and sweet :slight_smile:
Click to expand...

Thats basically the same as the current system from week 2 onwards with 1st and 2nd having the bye (Just like when 1st and 2nd beat 7th and 8th in week one).

The only prob i have with that system is that it seems harsh on the team finishing 3rd, they may finish equal first (3rd on f/a) yet if they lose 1 game against good opposition, they're gone, i dont think there's enough reward for a team finishing 3rd.
 
Perfer ARL system over MacIntyre

However
top 5>>>>>>top 8

All we are really doing is rewarding mediocre teams either way.

Won't happen but I can dream
 
@kiwitiger said:
Perfer ARL system over MacIntyre

However
top 5>>>>>>top 8

All we are really doing is rewarding mediocre teams either way.

Won't happen but I can dream
Click to expand...

Yeah Top 5 was awesome, sadly I only got to experience the Tigers in the top 5 twice :frowning:

Here's a thought: Would the Wests Tigers have won the premiership from 4th spot if it was a Top 5 finals system in 2005? Brisbane did it from 5th (I think) in 1993..?
 
@NZTiger said:
@kiwitiger said:
Perfer ARL system over MacIntyre

However
top 5>>>>>>top 8

All we are really doing is rewarding mediocre teams either way.

Won't happen but I can dream

Yeah Top 5 was awesome, sadly I only got to experience the Tigers in the top 5 twice :frowning:

Here's a thought: Would the Wests Tigers have won the premiership from 4th spot if it was a Top 5 finals system in 2005? Brisbane did it from 5th (I think) in 1993..?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I think we would have had a great chance. We were the form team tbh. We beat the dragons who everyone was tipping only other team we would have faced who we didn't was the eels.
 
hyperthetically speaking….

1 Parramatta
2 St George Illawarra
3 Brisbane
4 Wests Tigers
5 North Queensland

Week 1:

Dragons d. Brisbane
Tigers d. Cowboys

I think Brisbane were well on the down slope at this stage, and we all know what happened when we faced the Cowboys first week.
Cowboys eliminated.

Week 2:
Eels l. Dragons
Tigers d. Brisbane

The Eels v Dragons would have been a super finals game and a real coin toss...but in the case of this experiment, I've given the match to the team that won their last encounter in 2005 (25-22 to Dragons in R24).
The Tigers would have rolled on as we saw when they did take down the Broncos in week 2.
Eels through to Grand Final.
Broncos eliminated.

Week 3
Tigers d. Eels

Would the Eels have lost 2 finals games in a row in a top 5 format? Eels v Tigers clash would have been a tasty encounter and I'm kinda glad we didn't actually meet them in the actual 2005 finals series tbh. Our recent results against them would have been a huge concern. But in saying that, the Tigers did it against those pesky Dragons in Week 3 so a packed ANZ Stadium would have seen the Tigers take down the Eels to make their maiden Grand Final appearance. :wink:

GRAND FINAL
Dragons v Tigers

Gee...that would have been a terrific GF if that memorable 2005 Qualifying Final was anything to by.
Would the Tigers have done it? Who knows. I say yes :wink:
 
@JRD said:
Didnt we copy the AFL when they were using the McIntyre System?
Click to expand...

We did but the AFL scrapped it a few years later after they realised that it wasn't fair on the 3rd and 4th sides.
Something the NRL needs to do too.
 
I dont think we'll ever lose a top 8 format unless some teams go broke and we have say 13-14 teams.

The NRL will want as many matches as possible to increase the tv coverage and therefore the money they receive from tv rights.

And if we stick with a top 8 system then i think the AFL one is best, simple, and fair.
 
The Macintyre system is rubbish. It is unfair that the team who ran third or fourth can be eliminated because the team who came first doesn't show up and loses to the team that ran eighth. When that happens (as it did last year) it doesn't affect the team that ran first at all, but it kills off somebody else.

The AFL system is much superior. And it has to be top eight, as it creates an extra week of play-offs, TV rights, sponsorships and hopefully excitement. It also keeps the competition alive until the last game often as there are always a lot of teams vying for 7th and 8th.
 
@Paris Cobbs said:
The Macintyre system is rubbish. It is unfair that the team who ran third or fourth can be eliminated because the team who came first doesn't show up and loses to the team that ran eighth. When that happens (as it did last year) it doesn't affect the team that ran first at all, but it kills off somebody else.
Click to expand...

It's finals time, it's about winning. If you win your games you can't get eliminated, if you lose games you aren't the best, to be the best you have to beat all comers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 458 (members: 27, guests: 431)
Forever online: Tigergran, Geo
Back
Top