Combined Best 22 of dynasty teams in 21st century

Remove this Banner Ad

Fadge said:
Yep, because let's just take five stand-alone games from a data set of over 150 games to form our conclusions.

And let's completely ignore the final games of the teams' respective seasons on two occasions, one being a 39 point loss to Richmond in the 2018 Preliminary Final (that loss being against a Collingwood team that would just sneak into the top 10 of that club's best teams in the past 22 seasons), and the other being a 56 point win to Collingwood in the 2010 Grand Final Replay - the match that determined the season's premier under the rules of the day.

And let's just use margins, because it's obvious to us all that the 38 point margin of Geelong over Collingwood in the 2011 Grand Final was as emphatic and comfortable a victory as the 39 point margin of Collingwood over Richmond in the 2018 Preliminary Final (a game that was excluded from the original poster's 'analysis').

And let's completely disregard the quality of the opposition.

Just typical Meteoric Stats Sheet Anlalyst Ruse stuff....
Click to expand...

Fagic - short for Fadge logic - says in order to determine the best team we should focus on:

- the home and away seasons, and not the 5 Grand Finals in order to determine who the best of these teams is

- the one terminal final Richmond failed to win over a 4 year period, and ignore the 4 that Collingwood failed to win over the same period, whichever way you extend it from 2010-11.

Which just leaves the small side issue of explaining 5 separate Grand Final results, not a single one of which would indicate his Collingwood team was better. So Fagic says all five of these results in the games the AFL uses to ultimately determine its best team each season were WRONG. Not 1 of the 5, or 2 or 3 or 4 of the 5, but all 5 of these Grand Finals were wrong according to fagic. Fadge almost poetically reduces these Grand Finals to the status of, and I quote: "five stand-alone games." As if they are not attached to the rest of the season, as if they are not utilised by the game's constitutionally appointed governing body, the AFL, to determine who the best team is. No, Fagic uses a superior determinant, performance in all the rest of the matches.



So let us examine the look 2 teams over 4 year periods including ALL matches they played.

Collingwood best 4 year period they had a record of 77 wins 2 draws 24 losses.

  • Win percentage in all matches 75% That is ALL the matches they played in their best 4 year period.
  • 0 Grand Final wins.
  • 1 Premiership courtesy of the mulligan do again match that occurred the week after the drawn Grand Final in 2010.
  • Grand Final percentage of 80%
  • 2 Minor Premierships by a combined total of 1.5 wins

v

Richmond 4 year dynasty period 71 wins 1 draw 23 losses.

  • Win % in all matches 75%.
  • 3 Grand Final wins for
  • 3 Premierships
  • Grand Final percentage of 222%.
  • 1 Minor Premiership by a total of 2 wins

It seems they had the same win % over their respective best 4 year periods, only Richmond's finals performances were on a different planet, and their minor Premiership was by a greater margin than Collingwood's 2 minor Premierships combined. And under the fagic thinking structure, this of course means Collingwood were the better team. :tearsofjoy:

I will leave Fadge himself to explain the next bit as there is no better person in the world to navigate us through that complicated morass of rating how much more difficult it was to win football matches in Collingwood's peak period than it was in Richmond's....readers definitely do not want to miss this next instalment of fagic, which I am sure he will be along to regale us with shortly. :)
 
Last edited:
Meteoric Rise said:
Fagic - short for Fadge logic - says in order to determine the best team we should focus on:

- the home and away seasons, and not the 5 Grand Finals in order to determine who the best of these teams is

- the one terminal final Richmond failed to win over a 4 year period, and ignore the 4 that Collingwood failed to win over the same period, whichever way you extend it from 2010-11.

Which just leaves the small side issue of explaining 5 separate Grand Final results, not a single one of which would indicate his Collingwood team was better. So Fagic says all five of these results in the games the AFL uses to ultimately determine its best team each season were WRONG. Not 1 of the 5, or 2 or 3 or 4 of the 5, but all 5 of these Grand Finals were wrong according to fagic. Fadge almost poetically reduces these Grand Finals to the status of, and I quote: "five stand-alone games." As if they are not attached to the rest of the season, as if they are not utilised by the game's constitutionally appointed governing body, the AFL, to determine who the best team is. No, Fagic uses a superior determinant, performance in all the rest of the matches.



So let us examine the look 2 teams over 4 year periods including ALL matches they played.

Collingwood best 4 year period they had a record of 77 wins 2 draws 24 losses.

  • Win percentage in all matches 75%
  • . That is ALL the matches they played in their best 4 year period.
  • 0 Grand Final wins.
  • 1 Premiership courtesy of the mulligan do again match that occurred the week after the drawn Grand Final in 2010.
  • Grand Final percentage of 80%
  • 2 Minor Premierships by a combined total of 1.5 wins

v

Richmond 4 year dynasty period 71 wins 1 draw 23 losses.

  • Win % in all matches 75%.
  • 3 Grand Final wins for
  • 3 Premierships
  • Grand Final percentage of 222%.
  • 1 Minor Premiership by a total of 2 wins

It seems they had the same win % over their respective best 4 year periods, only Richmond's finals performances were on a different planet, and their minor Premiership was by a greater margin than Collingwood's 2 minor Premierships combined. And under the fagic thinking structure, this of course means Collingwood were the better team. :tearsofjoy:

I will leave Fadge himself to explain the next bit as there is no better person in the world to navigate us through that complicated morass of rating how much more difficult it was to win football matches in Collingwood's peak period than it was in Richmond's....readers definitely do not want to miss this next instalment of fagic, which I am sure he will be along to regale us with shortly. :)
Click to expand...

Isn’t Fadge taking about two seasons?
 
PhatBoy said:
Isn’t Fadge taking about two seasons?
Click to expand...

If he is comparing that with another teams' 4 seasons then to make a credible comparison he needs to compare 4 seasons from each team. If he is comparing 2 seasons from his team with 2 seasons from Richmond then he is leaving out the small matter of either 2 Richmond Premierships or 1 Richmond Premiership and 1 Minor Premiership.

He isn't convincing anybody Collingwood's best team since 1936 was better than Richmond's best team of the last 7 years by leaving out half of the Richmond team's notable achievements my interloping friend. :)
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Meteoric Rise said:
Fagic - short for Fadge logic - says in order to determine the best team we should focus on:

- the home and away seasons, and not the 5 Grand Finals in order to determine who the best of these teams is

- the one terminal final Richmond failed to win over a 4 year period, and ignore the 4 that Collingwood failed to win over the same period, whichever way you extend it from 2010-11.

Which just leaves the small side issue of explaining 5 separate Grand Final results, not a single one of which would indicate his Collingwood team was better. So Fagic says all five of these results in the games the AFL uses to ultimately determine its best team each season were WRONG. Not 1 of the 5, or 2 or 3 or 4 of the 5, but all 5 of these Grand Finals were wrong according to fagic. Fadge almost poetically reduces these Grand Finals to the status of, and I quote: "five stand-alone games." As if they are not attached to the rest of the season, as if they are not utilised by the game's constitutionally appointed governing body, the AFL, to determine who the best team is. No, Fagic uses a superior determinant, performance in all the rest of the matches.



So let us examine the look 2 teams over 4 year periods including ALL matches they played.

Collingwood best 4 year period they had a record of 77 wins 2 draws 24 losses.

  • Win percentage in all matches 75%
  • . That is ALL the matches they played in their best 4 year period.
  • 0 Grand Final wins.
  • 1 Premiership courtesy of the mulligan do again match that occurred the week after the drawn Grand Final in 2010.
  • Grand Final percentage of 80%
  • 2 Minor Premierships by a combined total of 1.5 wins

v

Richmond 4 year dynasty period 71 wins 1 draw 23 losses.

  • Win % in all matches 75%.
  • 3 Grand Final wins for
  • 3 Premierships
  • Grand Final percentage of 222%.
  • 1 Minor Premiership by a total of 2 wins

It seems they had the same win % over their respective best 4 year periods, only Richmond's finals performances were on a different planet, and their minor Premiership was by a greater margin than Collingwood's 2 minor Premierships combined. And under the fagic thinking structure, this of course means Collingwood were the better team. :tearsofjoy:

I will leave Fadge himself to explain the next bit as there is no better person in the world to navigate us through that complicated morass of rating how much more difficult it was to win football matches in Collingwood's peak period than it was in Richmond's....readers definitely do not want to miss this next instalment of fagic, which I am sure he will be along to regale us with shortly. :)
Click to expand...
Regardless of the fact I never said the Collingwood 2009 or 2012 teams would beat the Richmond 2017-20 teams, can you please tell me who were the equivalent of the Geelong and St. Kilda teams of Collingwood's era that Richmond faced in their era?
 
Fadge said:
Regardless of the fact I never said the Collingwood 2009 or 2012 teams would beat the Richmond 2017-20 teams, can you please tell me who were the equivalent of the Geelong and St. Kilda teams of Collingwood's era that Richmond faced in their era?
Click to expand...

St Kilda were only any good on a cross generation scale in 2009, so they are irrelevant to Collingwood being better than the later Richmond dynasty teams, because even you are not arguing Collingwood 2009 was better than those Richmond teams. Richmond beat plenty of teams in finals who were at least as well performed or better than St Kilda were in 2010. And Collingwood only drew with that Saints team in the Grand Final.

Which historically strong teams did Collingwood actually beat in finals? Remembering Geelong 2010 were also beaten by a very middling top 4 team in St Kilda 2010.

Collingwood's only other claim to fame is getting to within 38 points of Geelong in the 2011 Grand Final, after 2 pretty unimpressive wins to even make the Grand Final.

So the question isn't who did Richmond play that was better than the best St Kilda team(2009) or the best Geelong team of their dynasty era(definitely not 2011.) Because Collingwood did not come close to being on terms with either of those teams in either finals or home and away matches.

Collingwood took 2 attempts to beat a 15 win 122% St Kilda in the 2010 GF. Richmond routinely smashed teams that level in finals.
 
Meteoric Rise said:
St Kilda were only any good on a cross generation scale in 2009, so they are irrelevant to Collingwood being better than the later Richmond dynasty teams, because even you are not arguing Collingwood 2009 was better than those Richmond teams.
Click to expand...
Yes, but you were using data from Collingwood's 2009 season in your 4 year comparison with Richmond 2017 to 20.
Meteoric Rise said:
Collingwood's only other claim to fame is getting to within 38 points of Geelong in the 2011 Grand Final, after 2 pretty unimpressive wins to even make the Grand Final.

So the question isn't who did Richmond play that was better than the best St Kilda team(2009) or the best Geelong team of their dynasty era(definitely not 2011.) Because Collingwood did not come close to being on terms with either of those teams in either finals or home and away matches.
Click to expand...
Tell me more about Collingwood not being close to Geelong at any point of the 2011 season...
 
Fadge said:
Yes, but you were using data from Collingwood's 2009 season in your 4 year comparison with Richmond 2017 to 20.

Tell me more about Collingwood not being close to Geelong at any point of the 2011 season...
Click to expand...

My statement is made and it is correct.

Collingwood in the 2 home and away matches v Geelong had a combined score of 17.13 v Geelong 30.34. An average deficit of 17 scoring shots and margin of 49.5 points. What more is there to say?
 
Meteoric Rise said:
My statement is made and it is correct.

Collingwood in the 2 home and away matches v Geelong had a combined score of 17.13 v Geelong 30.34. An average deficit of 17 scoring shots and margin of 49.5 points. What more is there to say?
Click to expand...
I guess that's the conclusion you'd arrive at if you assess a season by looking at the results on AFL Tables instead of watching the matches played.

However, even if you did assess a season by looking at the results on AFL Tables, you should still have noticed their relative positions on the ladder at the end of the home and away season, but I guess that is something you would conveniently ignore.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I seem to remember there’s about 60 triple premiership players and solid players from these teams with less than 3 buddy gaj rance McEvoy Sewell Guerra etc etc, so really, being in the third team selected is no insult at all
 
Fadge said:
If the combined best 22 means anything to you (it doesn't to me), there have been plenty of neutrals post them and have between 11 and 14 from Collingwood.

The Richmond 2017-20 teams would have been smoked by the Collingwood 2010 and 2011 teams. Again, plenty of neutrals have stated this.
Click to expand...

Just post a combined team Fadge… it’s not hard. You may also be enlightened. I get why you don’t want to…. either it’ll show numbers the Tigers way, or your team will include the likes of Ben Johnson and Chris Dawes which is probably even worse…..

And do you have a link to a neutral showing a combined team with 14-8 Pies way? Me thinks you’re making things up. Either that or it’s gonna be one hell of a team containing McAffer and Jarryd Blair.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Meteoric Rise said:
Fagic - short for Fadge logic - says in order to determine the best team we should focus on:

- the home and away seasons, and not the 5 Grand Finals in order to determine who the best of these teams is

- the one terminal final Richmond failed to win over a 4 year period, and ignore the 4 that Collingwood failed to win over the same period, whichever way you extend it from 2010-11.

Which just leaves the small side issue of explaining 5 separate Grand Final results, not a single one of which would indicate his Collingwood team was better. So Fagic says all five of these results in the games the AFL uses to ultimately determine its best team each season were WRONG. Not 1 of the 5, or 2 or 3 or 4 of the 5, but all 5 of these Grand Finals were wrong according to fagic. Fadge almost poetically reduces these Grand Finals to the status of, and I quote: "five stand-alone games." As if they are not attached to the rest of the season, as if they are not utilised by the game's constitutionally appointed governing body, the AFL, to determine who the best team is. No, Fagic uses a superior determinant, performance in all the rest of the matches.



So let us examine the look 2 teams over 4 year periods including ALL matches they played.

Collingwood best 4 year period they had a record of 77 wins 2 draws 24 losses.

  • Win percentage in all matches 75% That is ALL the matches they played in their best 4 year period.
  • 0 Grand Final wins.
  • 1 Premiership courtesy of the mulligan do again match that occurred the week after the drawn Grand Final in 2010.
  • Grand Final percentage of 80%
  • 2 Minor Premierships by a combined total of 1.5 wins

v

Richmond 4 year dynasty period 71 wins 1 draw 23 losses.

  • Win % in all matches 75%.
  • 3 Grand Final wins for
  • 3 Premierships
  • Grand Final percentage of 222%.
  • 1 Minor Premiership by a total of 2 wins

It seems they had the same win % over their respective best 4 year periods, only Richmond's finals performances were on a different planet, and their minor Premiership was by a greater margin than Collingwood's 2 minor Premierships combined. And under the fagic thinking structure, this of course means Collingwood were the better team. :tearsofjoy:

I will leave Fadge himself to explain the next bit as there is no better person in the world to navigate us through that complicated morass of rating how much more difficult it was to win football matches in Collingwood's peak period than it was in Richmond's....readers definitely do not want to miss this next instalment of fagic, which I am sure he will be along to regale us with shortly. :)
Click to expand...

And don’t forget, when there’s an opportunity to put an extra layer of analysis by looking at the ‘actual players taking the field for each team’, Fadgelogic says that’s not at all relevant … it’s the list of 35 that’s important and even if a combined team showed 11-11 or 12-10 Richmond’s way, to Fadge that has ‘zero’ relevance when trying to assess which team may have been superior.

But even if it’s 12-10 Tigers way, Pies would’ve smoked Richmond because Richmond only won 3 flags against the second best team from 3 years with a percentage of 222%. So all roads point to a Pie cakewalk. All roads that is except any that contain logic and data.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
FB: J.Gibson - Scarlett - C.Johnson
HB: Rance (vc) - Leppitsch - Enright
C: Lappin - Voss (c) - Bartel
HF: Akermanis - J.Brown - D.Martin
FF: Riewoldt - Franklin - Rioli
RR: Ottens - Black - Ablett
INT: Chapman - S.Mitchell - Cotchin - Birchall
Coach: Clarkson
 
Vassp said:
FB: J.Gibson - Scarlett - C.Johnson
HB: Rance (vc) - Leppitsch - Enright
C: Lappin - Voss (c) - Bartel
HF: Akermanis - J.Brown - D.Martin
FF: Riewoldt - Franklin - Rioli
RR: Ottens - Black - Ablett
INT: Chapman - S.Mitchell - Cotchin - Birchall
Coach: Clarkson
Click to expand...
No Selwood or S. Johnson, and Rance VC despite only playing in one flag and getting monstored by USA in the 2018 Prelim...

Wowee.
 
Fadge said:
Yes, but you were using data from Collingwood's 2009 season in your 4 year comparison with Richmond 2017 to 20.

Tell me more about Collingwood not being close to Geelong at any point of the 2011 season...
Click to expand...

Round 8 2011. Geelong should’ve been up by 5-goals at 1/4 time, up 2.9 to 1.1. Was 25 scoring shots to 17 at game’s end.

Inside 50’s were 62-42 Geelong’s way. Geelong went at a ridiculously low 12.9% of goals per inside-50. So a close finish of 3-points that belied the actual game.

Round 24 was a 96-point loss.

GF was a 38-point loss.

So across 3 x games for the season:

Scoring shots:
Geelong: 93
Pies: 51

Score:
Geelong 333
Pies: 196

So Geelong went 3-0 against the Pies in 2011 with a percentage of 170%.

But we are supposed to believe that Pies team of 2011 would ‘wipe the floor’ with a Richmond team that won flags by 48/89/31 with a percentage of over 200%, on the basis that Geelong were ‘stiffer opposition’. I agree they were stiffer opposition … and Pies got trounced. But they’d still demolish the dynasty Tiger team who trounced their three GF opponents.

It’s nonsensical and based on nothing but some fading memories of a previous era where Fadge thought his Pies were just the bees knees.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Fadge said:
I guess that's the conclusion you'd arrive at if you assess a season by looking at the results on AFL Tables instead of watching the matches played.

However, even if you did assess a season by looking at the results on AFL Tables, you should still have noticed their relative positions on the ladder at the end of the home and away season, but I guess that is something you would conveniently ignore.
Click to expand...

H&A ladder … FMD … Tigers were 2-games clear and huge percentage clear in 2018…. yet that season is constantly referenced in belittling the Tiger era …. I wonder why. Your fascination with H&A is legendary… Since 2000 the top team has proven to be the best team of the season 9 times. The best team of the year has not been the best team of H&A 61.5% of the time since 2000.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Fadge said:
No Selwood or S. Johnson, and Rance VC despite only playing in one flag and getting monstored by USA in the 2018 Prelim...

Wowee.
Click to expand...

In fairness Stevie J never finished top-5 in a B&F across his 16-season career so it’s not unreasonable to leave him out. Selwood is an oversight however.

Stevie J’s best individual season from an ‘awards’ perspective was 2013:

17th in coaches award (never in top-20 any other season)
4th in Brownlow
*not sure on B&F as he wasn’t top-10. (Lonergan, Christensen and Steve Motlop were …)
He wasn’t AA.

In 2014 he was 9th in Brownlow. Not AA. Not top-20 in coach’s award.
*not sure on B&F as wasn’t top-10 (Rivers and Lonergan were )….

Stevie J had good career stats, but probably whacked the ski’s on a bit too often which didn’t reflect in B&F voting.

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Last edited:
Noidnadroj said:
In fairness Stevie J never finished top-5 in a B&F across his 16-season career so it’s not unreasonable to leave him out. Selwood is an oversight however.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...

He averaged 20 touches and 2 goals across the 3 premierships and was an AA and won a NS medal, I think he probably just managed to do enough
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Combined Best 22 of dynasty teams in 21st century

Similar threads

C
Best at Peak Team of 21st Century
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
peetoo
peetoo
RUNVS
  • Poll
Which is the best team of the 21st century?
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
177
Views
8K
Mr Meow
M
RUNVS
  • Poll
Who is the best Ruckman of the 21st Century?
2 3
Replies
69
Views
6K
GoldbergsGold
GoldbergsGold
RUNVS
  • Poll
Who is the best midfielder of the 21st century?
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
254
Views
7K
RUNVS
RUNVS
RUNVS
  • Poll
Who is the best Key Forward of the 21st Century?
2 3 4 5
Replies
102
Views
6K
GoldbergsGold
GoldbergsGold
RUNVS
  • Poll
Who is the best Key Defender of the 21st Century?
101 102 103 104 105
Replies
3K
Views
43K
Cleansweep17
Cleansweep17
Cleansweep17
Opinion Your teams 21st century FAB FOUR?
2 3
Replies
57
Views
3K
Roscoe44440
R

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top