National Forum

Jim Mcguinness: How I Would Reinvigorate Football Championship

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post


There are some simple adjustments to the current system that might solve a few problems.
One change is as follows.
Play the provincial system as is but the 16 losers after the provincial quarter finals go into the qualifiers but are kept separate from the other future qualifiers. The 16 qualifiers have an open draw at each stage and there will be one winner at the end.
Likewise the 8 losers in the provincial semi finals go into the qualifiers and are kept separate and play until there is one winner.

The four provincial winners go into the super 8s and the four losers go into their qualifiers where they play one game against another provincial final loser leaving two of them.

The super 8s are made up of the four provincial winners, two of the provincial final losers and the remaining two qualifiers.

It means teams are playing roughly against teams of their own level and in the case of the losing Provincial final losers, they are playing other teams who are in the same position so not coming up against a team from the qualifiers who have built up a head of steam.

It means teams who lose early at the provincial quarter final or earlier have something to play for as they will compete in a qualifier where one of them will compete in the super 8s and like wise with the losing semi finalists and finalists.

It's not perfect but worth discussing.

ROYALOPTIMIST (Meath) - Posts: 150 - 12/05/2019 13:43:45    2183269

Link

To RoyalOpt -
This is good for the lower and mid range counties - but Kerry and Cork retain the current advantage - winner goes to Super 8 - other needing one Qual win to make it as well.

If we go with a non-group structure based on current two-stream strait jacket, I'd go with my 'Two Plus Six' (2 thru Front Door, Six Back) -

- Extend Front Door (Prov Champs Playoff) and curtail Back Door - each by one rd to enhance fairness.
- Each Prov SF loser joins a current 1st Rd Qualifier 'pairing' in 8 groups of 3 (play each other once) in reformed Rd 1.
- Top 2 in each group join 4 Prov Final losers in 20-team KO Rd 2 (8 group 2nds and 2 worst 1sts play away).
- 10 Rd 2 winners join 2 Champs Playoff losers in 12-team KO Rd 3 (6 lowest NFL ranked from 10 Rd winners play away).
- 6 Rd 3 winners join 2 unbeaten Prov Champs in AI KO QFs (4 Prov Champs or highest non Champ NFL
ranked host at own Prov neatral venue).

I think this has better balance and is fairer.
Ultimately, however, a group phase, merged with the NFL, leading to a post-season KO should be the way to go.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 1494 - 12/05/2019 17:29:45    2183308

Link

In addition, to make the Provs themselves fairer, and in honour of Eugene McGee -
- Start the Prov KO with 4x8.
- Most Northwest 1 county of Lein's lowest NFL ranked 3 counties join Uls 9th ranked in Conn; other 2 of 3 Lein lowest to Muns.
- In each Prov, prior year Prov Final 8 and SF 8 losers start in this year's Prov SFs and QFs, respectively - while there is a 4-team 1st Rd in each Prov for the other 8 Prov QF places.
- Then continue until 2 Front Door and 6 Back Door teams advance to AI KO QFs - guarantees 8 teams 3 matches and the other 24 with 4+ (prior post).

omahant (USA) - Posts: 1494 - 12/05/2019 20:30:26    2183383

Link

Replying To ROYALOPTIMIST:  "There are some simple adjustments to the current system that might solve a few problems.
One change is as follows.
Play the provincial system as is but the 16 losers after the provincial quarter finals go into the qualifiers but are kept separate from the other future qualifiers. The 16 qualifiers have an open draw at each stage and there will be one winner at the end.
Likewise the 8 losers in the provincial semi finals go into the qualifiers and are kept separate and play until there is one winner.

The four provincial winners go into the super 8s and the four losers go into their qualifiers where they play one game against another provincial final loser leaving two of them.

The super 8s are made up of the four provincial winners, two of the provincial final losers and the remaining two qualifiers.

It means teams are playing roughly against teams of their own level and in the case of the losing Provincial final losers, they are playing other teams who are in the same position so not coming up against a team from the qualifiers who have built up a head of steam.

It means teams who lose early at the provincial quarter final or earlier have something to play for as they will compete in a qualifier where one of them will compete in the super 8s and like wise with the losing semi finalists and finalists.

It's not perfect but worth discussing."
It also means the Super 8s won't have the 8 best teams though, if one of them will be a round one loser.

It would be better to have 2 round one qualifiers and 2 round two qualifiers play the 4 provincial finalists.

Al_Maguire (Donegal) - Posts: 110 - 13/05/2019 09:50:48    2183516

Link

Replying To browncows:  "I would not be against it but no matter how you change the format , negative football which he aspired to, does nothing for me. Unfortunately most of our team managers copied him and now we have a situation where that system is being dis-regarded (a lot of slow learners managing teams). It not the formats, or the rules that need changing, but the mentality of managers."
I don't get your point. Debate McGuinness' tactics all you want. But this is about competition format. We should just ignore Jim's proposal because he coached teams in a certain way?

Lockjaw (Donegal) - Posts: 6298 - 13/05/2019 11:12:45    2183559

Link

Replying To Al_Maguire:  "It also means the Super 8s won't have the 8 best teams though, if one of them will be a round one loser.

It would be better to have 2 round one qualifiers and 2 round two qualifiers play the 4 provincial finalists."
Again unfair advantage to Kerry and my Cork is retained - is my 2+6 better ?

omahant (USA) - Posts: 1494 - 13/05/2019 22:38:58    2183841

Link

Replying To Whammo86:  "Last season also shows a flaw in the competition.

You'd Laois who'd won their first 10 matches of the season, including beating Kildare and they would've only been beaten by Dublin and yet they'd be moved into second tier championship.

Laois only won division 4 but under this system they could have won div 3 and not been guaranteed a spot in the tier 1 championship if say a Sligo won Connacht and say Down or Fermanagh won Ulster."
Laois didn't beat Kildare last year Whammo. They didn't even play Kildare.

lilywhite1 (Kildare) - Posts: 2906 - 14/05/2019 15:44:57    2184026

Link

Replying To lilywhite1:  "Laois didn't beat Kildare last year Whammo. They didn't even play Kildare."
Sorry of course, they beat Carlow, who'd beaten Kildare. Was working off memory, it's usually more reliable. Getting old I guess.

It could be very possible that a Laois say beat Meath and Kildare on the way to a Leinster final though and missed out on the tier 1 championship yet the teams they beat made it. It is a bit of a quirk of the system.

I don't wish to be negative but that sort of scenario doesn't feel great.

I agree with others that an easy enough and decent solution would be to move the National League later.

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 2389 - 14/05/2019 19:09:16    2184090

Link