0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/down_dis.png)
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
It is going to be interesting, as the big crowd pulling matches will also be those that would be hardest on a teams finals chances. If you want to win, play the Cheetahs at home. But if you actually want to pull a crowd and make some money, it needs to be the Crusaders.
Which is where seeding systems fall over. That need to share the big games around is why the fixtures have always worked such that if you were away to a team last year, you'll be home to them this year. Change that and circumstances could conspire such that we might not see some teams here for years at a time. And the problem with seeding is that is presumes that last years form will translate into this years form - how has that borne out for the Reds, Sharks and even us this year? One thing I would certainly hate to see is even the implication that, once a team realises they are out of contention, they tank or "manage their list" for a better draw the following year.
Sure. The AFL has that problem or at least that perception. Another thing the AFL do is concentrate far too heavily on potential earnings from "blockbuster" matches to the detriment of a level playing field in fixtures and home/away/travel. Collingwood love it. I hope we never get anywhere close to that.
"The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David
Spot on shasta; They (SANZAR) need to do the initial draw from names in a hat (ie random) as though every team was playing each other for 14 rounds and perpetuate that. It would have to stop after the round robin bit (for the home conference derbies) and pick up where it left off the following year and then keep repeating itself. ad in finitum. Or at least till the super 16, 18, 20 et al come about...