Brisbane or Hawthorn, the Better Three-peat?

Remove this Banner Ad

Yup. And team talent diluted too, as the Ablett's and Ward's etc went off to play for the new teams otherwise full of kids. Being at the establishment of the 18 team era isn't a tick for extra credit IMO. In fact, much the opposite.

So what you're saying is that every team in the competition had their talent diluted, so nobody was any good, especially the grand finalists?

Where did Lance Franklin play for legs 2&3 of the Hawks 3 peat I wonder, and what advantage did the Hawks have in the years leading up to the 'dilution of talent' people keep talking about?

The AFL has been pulling more and more athletic, highly skilled kids into it's recruitment system as time has progressed. There have never been so many highly athletic and skilled players playing the game, or getting into the system.

If you want to talk diluted talent, go back and look at the years when the VFA was paying players more money than the VFL.

Or when the Eagles/Crows/Port came in after stockpiling players, in a tiny fishbowl of a competition so that they were up and running with solid teams in a way that GWS and GC would have envied.

With less talent in the pool than their is now to boot.

Your. Argument. Makes..... sense....
 

Log in to remove this ad.

This thread would deliver a much more balanced conversation in 10 years time, when there is more objectivity and less fresh emotion. My personal view is that the cold light of history will see them as equal. 3 flags is 3 flags.

Yeh, if only there was a tiebreaker. Like if one of the clubs had won an extra flag shortly before or after the 3 peat
 
So what you're saying is that every team in the competition had their talent diluted ...

The overall talent in the league was diluted, meaning the comp as a whole was generally weaker across the 18 teams, not stronger. Top young talent pooled to the easybeat expansion clubs, rather than strengthening existing clubs; players were taken from existing clubs, weakening the lists of several clubs; and a bunch of 'not-good-enough' players, who would have otherwise been squeezed out of the comp, retained their place on an AFL list.

As for specific teams, take Geelong and Ablett - a strong team in Geelong are weakened and Gold Coast made stronger, but GC are still a weak team who finish bottom of the ladder. Again, the comp for a flag was weakened. It's like a swimming relay race - take Phelps out of the top ranked US squad and put him in with the Kenyans and all it does is weaken the field. The Kenyans don't make it passed the heats, so Phelps pretty much just steps out of the equation, meanwhile the US squad is significantly weakened. This makes it easier for teams ranked 2-5 to win gold, not harder. As for how this plays out for the Hawks, throw Ablett in that 2013 PF you won from Geelong by a kick and the result might be different.

Ifs and buts with Ablett I know, but one thing is for sure, just citing an 18-team comp as an automatic inference of greater difficultly is a poorly conceived notion. Reality is more likely the opposite.
 
This is why #straightsets happened, bathwater has officially been drunk down at Glenferrie. Isaac Smith is exhibit A.

Think the Hawks beat better sides (those pie sides ran on adrenaline IMO) but Brissy the best side.

How did Brisbane go with their tilt at a 5th consecutive GF?

Did they even make the finals in 2005?
 
Brisbane got comfortably closer to a 4peat than the Hawks did.


And at the end, it's still three in a row a piece.

If it's a measuring contest you're after, 5 prelims in a row is a pretty good size - has your length, width and girth well and truly covered!
 
6 finals in a row (2011-2016) vs 5 finals in a row (2000-2004)

4 consecutive seasons as the highest scoring team 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 (Brisbane never achieved that feat). Hawthorn's average winning margin was greater then Brisbane's.

2x Coleman medalists Franklin 2008 & 2011, Roughead 2013

Without a doubt the Hawks forward-line of 2011-2015 is the greatest of the modern era.

Backs: Brisbane
Midfield: Brisbane
Forward-line: Hawthorn
Overall list: Hawthorn
Coach: Clarkson
 
The overall talent in the league was diluted, meaning the comp as a whole was generally weaker across the 18 teams, not stronger. Top young talent pooled to the easybeat expansion clubs, rather than strengthening existing clubs; players were taken from existing clubs, weakening the lists of several clubs; and a bunch of 'not-good-enough' players, who would have otherwise been squeezed out of the comp, retained their place on an AFL list.

As for specific teams, take Geelong and Ablett - a strong team in Geelong are weakened and Gold Coast made stronger, but GC are still a weak team who finish bottom of the ladder. Again, the comp for a flag was weakened. It's like a swimming relay race - take Phelps out of the top ranked US squad and put him in with the Kenyans and all it does is weaken the field. The Kenyans don't make it passed the heats, so Phelps pretty much just steps out of the equation, meanwhile the US squad is significantly weakened. This makes it easier for teams ranked 2-5 to win gold, not harder. As for how this plays out for the Hawks, throw Ablett in that 2013 PF you won from Geelong by a kick and the result might be different.

Ifs and buts with Ablett I know, but one thing is for sure, just citing an 18-team comp as an automatic inference of greater difficultly is a poorly conceived notion. Reality is more likely the opposite.

Carlton has been stockpiling #1 draft picks and talent for years. They are still winning spoon after spoon. So yeh, doesn't stack up.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

No, they didn't...

Brisbane lead at half time in their GF in a bid to win their 4th GF in a row (2004).

The Hawks lead at half time in a SF in a bid to win their 4th GF in a row (2016).


How many did Brisbane win in a row again?

I had the first 5 numbers in lotto, missed out on the 6th - is the same result as I missed my first number in lotto but got my next 5.

WOW!
 
In any case, if I have more money to by more tickets for lotto than the next person, my odds of winning are greater. Hence, Brisbane were gifted better odds to win 3 in a row given the salary cap advantages they had over 14 other clubs.
 
Now that the four-peat is dead, who do you think was the better three-peat and why?

Brisbane 2001, '02 and '03
or
Hawthorn 2013, '14 and '15.

I think Brisbane, they defeated an Essendon side in 2001 that looked unbeatable. "If it bleeds you can kill it". Hawthorn's 3peat was during a time that Free Agency came in, and helped them because they were at the very top.

Also, is Matthew Sucking the Brian Scalabrine of the AFL?

To be fair to Hawthorn, they beat some great sides in 2013-2015

Prelims
2013: Geelong
2014: Adelaide
2015: Fremantle

Grand Finals
2013: Fremantle
2014: Sydney Swans
2015: West Coast

If you look at that they had to beat teams from 4 states (3 WA, 1 NSW, 1 SA & 1 VIC) in their 6 biggest finals during this era - including beating Fremantle away from home in a Preliminary Final!

Pretty good huh.

Who did Brisbane have to beat?
 
Brisbane got comfortably closer to a 4peat than the Hawks did.

We lost in 2012 to a freak kick by Malceski.

Brisbane got their pants systematically pulled down by Choco's chokers and embarrassed on the national stage when they tried to resort to a punch up.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Brisbane or Hawthorn, the Better Three-peat?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top