We’ve got less than two votes separating the top-eight of our Brownlow leaderboard after Round 11.
| Pos | Player | Club | Votes | Odds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | N.Daicos | Coll | 13 | $4.50 |
| 2 | L.Neale | BL | 12.75 | $19 |
| 3 | J.Dawson | Adel | 12.25 | $6.00 |
| =4 | M.Gawn | Melb | 12 | $41 |
| =4 | B.Smith | Geel | 12 | $5.00 |
| =6 | N.Anderson | GC | 11.75 | $26 |
| =6 | C. Serong | Fre | 11.75 | $21 |
| =8 | Z.Merrett | Ess | 11.25 | $15 |
Best Bet
Nick Daicos was my best bet after Round 10 and moved into outright leader following 38 disposals in Collingwood’s win over North Melbourne. But it’s hard to ignore Lachie Neale’s price and his upcoming opponent.
Neale sits just 0.25 votes behind Daicos on our weighted averages system after another 30+ disposal effort in Brisbane’s win over Hawthorn. He now faces an undermanned Essendon at the Gabba.
Neale averages 35.3 disposals and 2.3 Brownlow votes across his last seven games against the Bombers. Could another three votes be coming?
Lay
Merrett will likely feature in the votes again for Essendon, but he’s starting to play wider, with less contested ball, and has even spent time as a half forward.
More importantly, Essendon’s next eight weeks are tough. They’d be lucky to grab two wins, and their injury crisis won’t help.
The Essendon skipper might still poll in losses, but those are more likely to be minor votes.
Value Bet
Still flying under the radar behind teammate Matt Rowell, Anderson’s season has been enormous.
The Gold Coast skipper is averaging a career-high 30.1 disposals per game, with contested ball back up to 12.5, close to the numbers that got him 22 Brownlow votes in 2023.
With the Suns a chance to win 15 or 16 games this year, Anderson could easily push toward 25 votes in what looks like a relatively low-count season.
The Voting System
Why We Use a Weighted Average Approach
We use a weighted average system for Brownlow voting to improve accuracy and fairness in assessing player performances. The traditional 3-2-1 method limits vote allocations to whole numbers, often forcing a clear distinction between players whose performances may have been nearly identical. By contrast, our weighted system allows for decimal-based scoring (e.g., 2.5, 1.5, 0.5), providing a more nuanced reflection of each player’s impact on the game.
This approach maintains the same total vote count per game (six votes) but offers greater flexibility in how those votes are distributed. As a result, it reduces arbitrary decision-making and captures subtle performance differences more effectively. Ultimately, this leads to more precise predictions and a leaderboard that better mirrors how games are perceived by fans, analysts, and the broader football community.
