|
Replying To omahant: "Not sure if there is an 'advantage' to getting two chances in Rds 1 or 1.5 before the AI Last 24, as Prov QF winners also retain twp chances via Prov SFs or Rd 1.5. Essentially, from the twin 16s, 'losers of the losers' are the 1st 8 to be eliminated." A losing provincial SF has a harder qualifier draw than a losing QF.
If they lose their first qualifier match they are out whereas a losing provincial quarter finalist can lose their first qualifier match but still then return at the same round as a losing provincial Semi-finalist.
It doesn't make sense.
It's an insurmountable flaw in the specifics of your proposal.
There are other better ways to guarantee teams 3 matches and to even out provincial imbalances.
Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4221 - 16/11/2016 09:12:12
1934582
Link
0
|
|
Is the Leinster seeding more realistic? Reward provincial semi-finalists with a bye from the preliminary round of the following year. Optional: also seed semi-finalists to avoid each other in the quarter-final draw of the following year.
A seeded Ulster championship will see more teams of an even level enter the appropriate qualifying rounds.
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts:5099 - 14/11/2016 13:51:43
No I would only seed the top 4 Ulster teams based on their National League performance, ensuring they are all allocated separate QF spots, with the top two sides on different side of the draw. I think would give Ulster far more balance, without taking too much away from the overall structure.
2016 was probably the most balanced draw for a long time, with Donegal/Monaghan and Tyrone/Cavan/Derry evenly distributed. Having Tyrone v Donegal on May 25th is not good for the Ulster Championship in general, nor is good for the All Ireland ambitions of those particular sides.
GaryMc82 (Derry) - Posts: 3017 - 16/11/2016 11:24:48
1934624
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Whammo86: "A losing provincial SF has a harder qualifier draw than a losing QF.
If they lose their first qualifier match they are out whereas a losing provincial quarter finalist can lose their first qualifier match but still then return at the same round as a losing provincial Semi-finalist.
It doesn't make sense.
It's an insurmountable flaw in the specifics of your proposal.
There are other better ways to guarantee teams 3 matches and to even out provincial imbalances." I see what you are saying - BUT after Prov QFs, every team has 2 chances to reach the Last 24 - win SF or Qual 1.5 OR win Qual Rd 1 or 1.5.
4 Muns/Conn bye teams do nothing and enter the Quals - they should be subject to elimination in the same rd as any of the other losers - as you know, currently byes enter Rd 2 and 16 teams are subject to Rd 1 elimination - it is so wrong - I address this. In order to achieve, I agree Prov QF wins are devalued. All told, I support my plan - 2 x 16s, but Prov Qf winners retain double chance to AI QFs, their beaten team only for one rd to Last 24.
omahant (USA) - Posts: 2582 - 16/11/2016 18:26:45
1934781
Link
0
|
|
No I would only seed the top 4 Ulster teams based on their National League performance, ensuring they are all allocated separate QF spots, with the top two sides on different side of the draw. I think would give Ulster far more balance, without taking too much away from the overall structure.
2016 was probably the most balanced draw for a long time, with Donegal/Monaghan and Tyrone/Cavan/Derry evenly distributed. Having Tyrone v Donegal on May 25th is not good for the Ulster Championship in general, nor is good for the All Ireland ambitions of those particular sides.
GaryMc82 (Derry)
Ironically it wasn't a great year for Ulster teams. If the Munster seeding was based on league, Tipperary would not have earned their bye to next year's Munster semi-final. Championship wins have to be rewarded. It's the reason I've suggested qualifiers being seeded based on number of championship wins and then league placing. It was influenced by Whammo86 mentioning that preliminary round winners should see some reward for it.
While I've made an argument for seeding the qualifiers, it has to be acknowledged if Ulster haven't a seeding themselves, can they expect the qualifiers in turn to be seeded?
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7842 - 16/11/2016 20:00:09
1934822
Link
0
|
|
Replying To legendzxix: "No I would only seed the top 4 Ulster teams based on their National League performance, ensuring they are all allocated separate QF spots, with the top two sides on different side of the draw. I think would give Ulster far more balance, without taking too much away from the overall structure.
2016 was probably the most balanced draw for a long time, with Donegal/Monaghan and Tyrone/Cavan/Derry evenly distributed. Having Tyrone v Donegal on May 25th is not good for the Ulster Championship in general, nor is good for the All Ireland ambitions of those particular sides.
GaryMc82 (Derry)
Ironically it wasn't a great year for Ulster teams. If the Munster seeding was based on league, Tipperary would not have earned their bye to next year's Munster semi-final. Championship wins have to be rewarded. It's the reason I've suggested qualifiers being seeded based on number of championship wins and then league placing. It was influenced by Whammo86 mentioning that preliminary round winners should see some reward for it.
While I've made an argument for seeding the qualifiers, it has to be acknowledged if Ulster haven't a seeding themselves, can they expect the qualifiers in turn to be seeded?" I do really like the 4 by 4 groups, with provincial champions and finalists qualifying directly with the remaining teams going into a 2 round qualifier series with championship wins determining byes to the second round.
You're getting a really simple format. Evens up the provincial imbalance. It has a group stage that is achievable for most teams but also should still have attractive match ups.
Ulster should be seeded. If even so that semi-finalists and the preliminary round winner avoid the following year's preliminary round.
Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4221 - 16/11/2016 21:55:29
1934875
Link
0
|
|
Ironically it wasn't a great year for Ulster teams. If the Munster seeding was based on league, Tipperary would not have earned their bye to next year's Munster semi-final. Championship wins have to be rewarded. It's the reason I've suggested qualifiers being seeded based on number of championship wins and then league placing. It was influenced by Whammo86 mentioning that preliminary round winners should see some reward for it.
While I've made an argument for seeding the qualifiers, it has to be acknowledged if Ulster haven't a seeding themselves, can they expect the qualifiers in turn to be seeded?
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts:5104 - 16/11/2016 20:00:09 19
Yeah it wasn't a great year for Ulster sides, but I don't think that can be laid at the Ulster Championships door (For once), as the draw was more than fair. The top Ulster teams just didn't cut it in 2016, even though I thought Tyrone and Donegal both showed Improvement from 2015. May sound weird, but I actually thought Donegal could have beaten Mayo this year, while Tyrone were best placed to beat Dublin. It's alright saying that now, but I did think that way early on in Ulster last May/June.
No I don't know if rewarding the Preliminary Round winner is the way to go, unless you maybe seed the Top 3 Ulster sides from the National league, and seed the winner of the previous years preliminary round, giving them all a Quarter final each. My thinking here is to keep the stronger teams apart for longer, and hopefully give them a fairer chance at All Ireland glory. So rather than giving them a buy, I favour simply keeping them apart for the QF's.
GaryMc82 (Derry) - Posts: 3017 - 16/11/2016 22:23:31
1934899
Link
0
|
|
In many sport 'tournaments', there is a non-KO phase (e.g. round robin) prior to the KO phase. The KO phase usually pitches teams against each other in a 'do or die' pairing where the pre-KO results are neutralised (e.g. Soccer World Cup, a 9-pts group winner could be eliminated in the Rd of 16 against a 4-pts team). We could discuss the merits of this, but do we all agree, nobody complains - the rules were set in advance for everyone.
Whether you want to want to neutralise Prov QF results to set up 2x16 (my idea) or give benefit for victories (like mentioned here) is optional - there are merits to both.
For me, I don't like a winless Muns bye team entering Rd 2, while 16 other teams face elimination in Rd 1 (some having won a game in Lein/Uls) - that's why I split the difference - Rd 1.5 where any one of 32 teams could become the 8 eliminated.
Entertaining your preference for Lein/Uls Prel rd wins - should these 'up to 4 teams' be parachuted entry to Rd 2, if they lose their Prov QF ? Then top up with winless NFL ranking to 8 teams, with the weaker winless 16 in Rd 1 (latter could incl Muns SF 'bye' loser.
omahant (USA) - Posts: 2582 - 17/11/2016 16:30:16
1935123
Link
0
|
|
No I don't know if rewarding the Preliminary Round winner is the way to go, unless you maybe seed the Top 3 Ulster sides from the National league, and seed the winner of the previous years preliminary round, giving them all a Quarter final each. My thinking here is to keep the stronger teams apart for longer, and hopefully give them a fairer chance at All Ireland glory. So rather than giving them a buy, I favour simply keeping them apart for the QF's.
GaryMc82 (Derry)
If Antrim are the lowest team based on the league but get through to an Ulster semi-final, it seems harsh to deny them a seeding. It forms a mini championship within the championship where quarter-final wins guarantees avoiding the preliminary round and possibly avoiding fellow semi-finalists if that seeding is also taken on.
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7842 - 17/11/2016 19:31:02
1935179
Link
0
|
|
You're getting a really simple format. Evens up the provincial imbalance. It has a group stage that is achievable for most teams but also should still have attractive match ups.
Whammo86 (Antrim)
Yeah, I think we have common ground between both our ideas. 4 groups of 4. 8 of the 24 non-provincial finalists should receive byes from qualifier round 1 based on their number of current championship wins and then league placing.
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7842 - 17/11/2016 19:40:23
1935181
Link
0
|
|
I see a major flaw here - A Prelim Rd win by a weak Lein team, takes a hammering in the QF but enters Qual Rd 2 nonetheless -
The Uls Prelim Rd winner engages in three competitive Uls rds, failing to make the Final by one point - also enters Qual Rd 2 - after earning Rd 2 entry with Prelim win,
they get nothing extra for engaging in 2 more Prov rds, incl QF win.
You say I give no value to a Prelim Rd win - instead, you 'kick the can down the road', and take the value I gave to Prov SFs away - why ? Ir doesn't make sense.
You could say my AIC proper starts at the 2 x 16 stage.
omahant (USA) - Posts: 2582 - 18/11/2016 16:25:55
1935383
Link
0
|
|
Replying To omahant: "I see a major flaw here - A Prelim Rd win by a weak Lein team, takes a hammering in the QF but enters Qual Rd 2 nonetheless -
The Uls Prelim Rd winner engages in three competitive Uls rds, failing to make the Final by one point - also enters Qual Rd 2 - after earning Rd 2 entry with Prelim win,
they get nothing extra for engaging in 2 more Prov rds, incl QF win.
You say I give no value to a Prelim Rd win - instead, you 'kick the can down the road', and take the value I gave to Prov SFs away - why ? Ir doesn't make sense.
You could say my AIC proper starts at the 2 x 16 stage." The league also affects seeding. So if there are more than 8 teams to have won (was 10 this year) they wouldn't get a bye. The Ulster team by virtue of their 2 wins would also be a top seed in round 2 so would play a weak round 2 qualifier.
That's pretty good to be honest.
Doesn't involve a back door of the back door.
I like that it has a group phase and that there's only 2 rounds of qualifiers. The qualifiers just aren't popular. Attendances prove that. To get the competition run as the one competition as soon as possible it probably a good thing.
Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4221 - 18/11/2016 17:34:42
1935396
Link
0
|
|
Replying To omahant: "I see a major flaw here - A Prelim Rd win by a weak Lein team, takes a hammering in the QF but enters Qual Rd 2 nonetheless -
The Uls Prelim Rd winner engages in three competitive Uls rds, failing to make the Final by one point - also enters Qual Rd 2 - after earning Rd 2 entry with Prelim win,
they get nothing extra for engaging in 2 more Prov rds, incl QF win.
You say I give no value to a Prelim Rd win - instead, you 'kick the can down the road', and take the value I gave to Prov SFs away - why ? Ir doesn't make sense.
You could say my AIC proper starts at the 2 x 16 stage." There are only 4 preliminary rounds. That means there's only 4 teams who can win 2 games and not make a provincial final.
I suggest 8 of the 24 non-provincial finalists receive a bye from round 1 based on number of current championship games won first before using league placing. All preliminary round winners who make their provincial semi-final will be guaranteed a bye from qualifier round 1.
Seeding for round 2 is debatable. In a vote at congress it might be deemed fair enough to be granting a bye.
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7842 - 18/11/2016 18:18:17
1935401
Link
0
|
|
Replying To legendzxix: "There are only 4 preliminary rounds. That means there's only 4 teams who can win 2 games and not make a provincial final.
I suggest 8 of the 24 non-provincial finalists receive a bye from round 1 based on number of current championship games won first before using league placing. All preliminary round winners who make their provincial semi-final will be guaranteed a bye from qualifier round 1.
Seeding for round 2 is debatable. In a vote at congress it might be deemed fair enough to be granting a bye." So last year you had
Mayo
Monaghan
Cavan
Fermanagh
Meath
Clare
Kildare
Laois getting byes
Louth and Offaly would miss out despite having won a game. That's really not a bad system.
Louth and Offaly should also then be included in the top 8 seeds for round 1. They'd avoid a top team like Cork who lost their first match.
It's rewarding Provincial performance but still making the competition fair.
From the last 16 stage on the competition operates on a straight forward basis, which I think would help hugely with the buy in factor for supporters.
3 home games for provincial champions is a proper incentive also.
Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4221 - 18/11/2016 18:45:14
1935408
Link
0
|
|
3 home games for provincial champions is a proper incentive also.
Whammo86 (Antrim)
It is an incentive.
I think there's a preference in the GAA to guarantee provincial champions a game in Croke Park.
An option with 4 groups of 4 is provincial finalists playing in Croke Park. Provincial winners playing the two qualifiers at home. All other teams in the group getting one home game each.
An example group:
Galway - Connaught winners
Tipperary - Munster runners-up
Derry - Qualifier Round 2 winner
Cavan - Qualifier Round 2 winner
Galway v Tipperary, Croke Park
Derry v Cavan, Derry
Galway v Derry, Galway
Cavan v Tipperary, Cavan
Galway v Cavan, Galway
Tipperary v Derry, Tipperary
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7842 - 18/11/2016 19:30:45
1935415
Link
0
|
|
Replying To legendzxix: "3 home games for provincial champions is a proper incentive also.
Whammo86 (Antrim)
It is an incentive.
I think there's a preference in the GAA to guarantee provincial champions a game in Croke Park.
An option with 4 groups of 4 is provincial finalists playing in Croke Park. Provincial winners playing the two qualifiers at home. All other teams in the group getting one home game each.
An example group:
Galway - Connaught winners
Tipperary - Munster runners-up
Derry - Qualifier Round 2 winner
Cavan - Qualifier Round 2 winner
Galway v Tipperary, Croke Park
Derry v Cavan, Derry
Galway v Derry, Galway
Cavan v Tipperary, Cavan
Galway v Cavan, Galway
Tipperary v Derry, Tipperary" That'd be excellent.
That would have been a very interesting group. Could've seen every one of those teams taking points off the other.
The other groups based on last year would've been:
Kerry, Roscommon, Clare, Sligo
Dublin, Donegal, Cork, Longford
Tyrone, Westmeath, Mayo, Kildare
Some decent games in there
Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4221 - 18/11/2016 22:58:24
1935433
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Whammo86: "A losing provincial SF has a harder qualifier draw than a losing QF.
If they lose their first qualifier match they are out whereas a losing provincial quarter finalist can lose their first qualifier match but still then return at the same round as a losing provincial Semi-finalist.
It doesn't make sense.
It's an insurmountable flaw in the specifics of your proposal.
There are other better ways to guarantee teams 3 matches and to even out provincial imbalances." I wonder if we arriving at a similar place - my Rd 1.5 is also seeded - I have the stronger 8 of 16 ((not necessary SF losers) seeded, although Drawn Away to help make the ties more interesting.
I also prefer 4 Champs Playoff with 20-team Rd 2, in lieu of 8 finalists (Muns team doing less to enter 4x4 groups) and 16-team Rd 2.
omahant (USA) - Posts: 2582 - 19/11/2016 03:58:30
1935442
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Whammo86: " Replying To legendzxix: "3 home games for provincial champions is a proper incentive also.
Whammo86 (Antrim)
It is an incentive.
I think there's a preference in the GAA to guarantee provincial champions a game in Croke Park.
An option with 4 groups of 4 is provincial finalists playing in Croke Park. Provincial winners playing the two qualifiers at home. All other teams in the group getting one home game each.
An example group:
Galway - Connaught winners
Tipperary - Munster runners-up
Derry - Qualifier Round 2 winner
Cavan - Qualifier Round 2 winner
Galway v Tipperary, Croke Park
Derry v Cavan, Derry
Galway v Derry, Galway
Cavan v Tipperary, Cavan
Galway v Cavan, Galway
Tipperary v Derry, Tipperary" That'd be excellent. That would have been a very interesting group. Could've seen every one of those teams taking points off the other. The other groups based on last year would've been: Kerry, Roscommon, Clare, Sligo Dublin, Donegal, Cork, Longford Tyrone, Westmeath, Mayo, Kildare Some decent games in there"
Counties involved in provincial preliminary rounds and quarter-finals are best placed to lobby for seeding the first two qualifying rounds on the number of current championship wins.
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7842 - 19/11/2016 10:13:19
1935450
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Whammo86: " Replying To legendzxix: "3 home games for provincial champions is a proper incentive also.
Whammo86 (Antrim)
It is an incentive.
I think there's a preference in the GAA to guarantee provincial champions a game in Croke Park.
An option with 4 groups of 4 is provincial finalists playing in Croke Park. Provincial winners playing the two qualifiers at home. All other teams in the group getting one home game each.
An example group:
Galway - Connaught winners
Tipperary - Munster runners-up
Derry - Qualifier Round 2 winner
Cavan - Qualifier Round 2 winner
Galway v Tipperary, Croke Park
Derry v Cavan, Derry
Galway v Derry, Galway
Cavan v Tipperary, Cavan
Galway v Cavan, Galway
Tipperary v Derry, Tipperary" That'd be excellent. That would have been a very interesting group. Could've seen every one of those teams taking points off the other. The other groups based on last year would've been: Kerry, Roscommon, Clare, Sligo Dublin, Donegal, Cork, Longford Tyrone, Westmeath, Mayo, Kildare Some decent games in there"
Noone is pushing a second championship. That's something people would have to reevaluate the merits of. As mentioned in a previous post, there is flexibility to reward All-Ireland winners and/or second championship winners a place in the group stage of the following year. All this can be done while having the qualifiers inclusive of everyone who does not make a provincial final.
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7842 - 19/11/2016 10:21:35
1935451
Link
0
|
|
Replying To omahant: "I wonder if we arriving at a similar place - my Rd 1.5 is also seeded - I have the stronger 8 of 16 ((not necessary SF losers) seeded, although Drawn Away to help make the ties more interesting.
I also prefer 4 Champs Playoff with 20-team Rd 2, in lieu of 8 finalists (Muns team doing less to enter 4x4 groups) and 16-team Rd 2." There is an imbalance in the provincial structure. At the same time support is there for the provincial structure to be retained.
All formats have to be respectful of provincial finals. All provincial champions have to be treated the same. All provincial runners-up have to be treated the same.
Your scope for fairness is the 24 non-provincial finalists. Seeding their qualifying rounds on current number of championship wins and league placing has been put out there as one option.
A convoluted qualifying system will not meet the criteria of reinvigorating the qualifiers. A seeding based on current championship wins and league placing is not difficult to explain.
It tips balance and fairness towards those who might win 2 provincial matches without making a provincial final.
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7842 - 19/11/2016 10:31:42
1935452
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Donegalman: "Seed the quarter finals. Pair teams who have avoided division 1 opposition or played only 2 games. This would most likely pair Kerry, mayo or Dublin together in a quarter giving them the much needed big game practice which they are crying out for. There will be nor should there be any need for change if this happened." One way to solve this is have your four provincial championships then start from scratch by placing all teams into the melting pot and draw out one team at a time first out home advantage continue to do this until there are only two teams left now how fairer can you get than that. No back door straight knock out. It will not happen of course because it's all about money money money???
The Quiet Man (Cavan) - Posts: 4601 - 19/11/2016 12:58:09
1935463
Link
0
|