Originally Posted by bigmac
mainly our "potential" fanbase or lack of it. from what i can gather potential is gonna count for a hell of a lot more than previous exploits, and as someone said previous results count for little
Read the above. This season's stuff only makes up a fraction. You're suggesting subjectivity on the most objective part of the ranking process. Wherever a club finishes they'll be allocated so much ranking points and that's that. If they are deemed crap off the field and have a bad record over the last few seasons then this season can't help you.Originally Posted by Red&White
Originally Posted by bigmac
mainly our "potential" fanbase or lack of it. from what i can gather potential is gonna count for a hell of a lot more than previous exploits, and as someone said previous results count for little
arent we all just magic little monkeys...
I have to agree.I can't see limerick getting a place,even if they are runners up!Originally Posted by Poor Student
No Comment.
Fair enough, it's inevitable some clubs are going to feel hard done by.
There's not really. There's been no outlining of the off-field marks other than to say that they're out of 100, etc. Hypothetically, there's no reason why the FAI can't given 100 marks to teams they want in the Premier and 0 to teams they don't want. The on-field stuff is only worth 360 marks (as you're guaranteed 140 marks), so the off-field could be a good bit more than 50% too. They can pick and choose as they want and come up with some figures to back up their decisions.Originally Posted by Poor Student
Stu I just mean there was a reasonably structured approach to it. Obviously within the off the field criteria there's a huge vagueness. I don't agree with it, but it is happening.
There's a structured approach to the on-field stuff. There's no structured approach, to all intents and purposes, to the off-field stuff. We know where marks are going, but we don't know how to get those marks.
Bookmarks