Haven't read all 10 pages but....
1) Why is it automatically assumed that Essendon would have beaten North in 1999? North had won 18 of 20 going in and had smacked Brisbane (who had won 10 straight by an average of 10 goals) in the PF. The fact that Essendon struggled against Carlton may have woken them up, but it showed that they had some vulnerability. Either way, an Essendon vs North GF in 1999 would have been a cracker.
2) Lots of people have nominated sides who weren't even the best side that year. (ie: the Dogs in 85 or Collingwood in 2002). All nominations here should be sides would were clearly the best side of that season. Therefore WC in 1991 is the standout - on top after every round, 3 losses by a combined margin of 16 points, undefeated against the other 5 finallists, percentage of 162.
3) Other genuine nominations like North in 1998 or Essendon of 1999 or Port 2002/03 all won a flag with that group of players. The Geelong group of between 1989 and 1995 were the best group never ever to win flag. Four grand final losses and a PF loss in 7 years. In the other two years they missed the finals but were complacent in 1990 and finished in awesome fashion in 1993 to just miss in a tight season. Having said that, the only year they could realistically argue that they were the best side was 1992. In '89, '94 and '95 they ran into some of the best sides ever and in '91 we've already discussed the Eagles. In '92 they finished on top, had a big percentage, beat all other challengers, scored over 3000 points, won two finals easily and got out to a 4 goal lead in the GF a couple of times. However, West Coast only finished half a game behind them in a tight season and beat them comprehensively twice in the finals. They weren't the standout best team in '92 like others we've mentioned, but the fact that this group (Ablett, Hocking, Brownless, Couch, Bairstow, Riccardi, Stoneham et al) never won a flag is astonishing and a credit to the sides who did in that time.
1) Why is it automatically assumed that Essendon would have beaten North in 1999? North had won 18 of 20 going in and had smacked Brisbane (who had won 10 straight by an average of 10 goals) in the PF. The fact that Essendon struggled against Carlton may have woken them up, but it showed that they had some vulnerability. Either way, an Essendon vs North GF in 1999 would have been a cracker.
2) Lots of people have nominated sides who weren't even the best side that year. (ie: the Dogs in 85 or Collingwood in 2002). All nominations here should be sides would were clearly the best side of that season. Therefore WC in 1991 is the standout - on top after every round, 3 losses by a combined margin of 16 points, undefeated against the other 5 finallists, percentage of 162.
3) Other genuine nominations like North in 1998 or Essendon of 1999 or Port 2002/03 all won a flag with that group of players. The Geelong group of between 1989 and 1995 were the best group never ever to win flag. Four grand final losses and a PF loss in 7 years. In the other two years they missed the finals but were complacent in 1990 and finished in awesome fashion in 1993 to just miss in a tight season. Having said that, the only year they could realistically argue that they were the best side was 1992. In '89, '94 and '95 they ran into some of the best sides ever and in '91 we've already discussed the Eagles. In '92 they finished on top, had a big percentage, beat all other challengers, scored over 3000 points, won two finals easily and got out to a 4 goal lead in the GF a couple of times. However, West Coast only finished half a game behind them in a tight season and beat them comprehensively twice in the finals. They weren't the standout best team in '92 like others we've mentioned, but the fact that this group (Ablett, Hocking, Brownless, Couch, Bairstow, Riccardi, Stoneham et al) never won a flag is astonishing and a credit to the sides who did in that time.
