Football Related Random Thread - PART 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Squiggle (atm) has us making the GF again but going down to Sydney.

What are the historical stats on teams that make the grannie two years in a row and lose both of them ... I suspect year three is traditionally ... problematic ...
Collingwood 2002 and 2003 were the last team. That certainly didn't go too well for them.

Before that Geelong 1994 and 1995. They finished 7th in 96 but lost their first final.

Hawthorn 84 and 85, but bounced back to win in 86, 88, 89 and 91.

Collingwood lost 3 in a row from 1979 to 1981. In 1982 they finished 10th (of 12).

Collingwood also lost in 1955 and 1956, before finishing 5th and just missing finals in 1957.

There's quite a few going back further but as far as recent generations go, it seems only Hawthorn in the 80s and Collingwood in 1981 achieved to a high level after losing consecutive Grand Finals.

I think the key in our time of draft and salary caps is to strike while the iron is hot.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Collingwood 2002 and 2003 were the last team. That certainly didn't go too well for them.

Before that Geelong 1994 and 1995. They finished 7th in 96 but lost their first final.

Hawthorn 84 and 85, but bounced back to win in 86, 88, 89 and 91.

Collingwood lost 3 in a row from 1979 to 1981. In 1982 they finished 10th (of 12).

Collingwood also lost in 1955 and 1956, before finishing 5th and just missing finals in 1957.

There's quite a few going back further but as far as recent generations go, it seems only Hawthorn in the 80s and Collingwood in 1981 achieved to a high level after losing consecutive Grand Finals.

I think the key in our time of draft and salary caps is to strike while the iron is hot.

Thank goodness for academy and father son rorts 🙏
 
Mt. Gravatt beaten by Sherwood 31.18 to 1.2 in the QAFL today and are currently bottom, winless with a percentage of 21.9.

Not sure what’s happened at Dittmer Park, but it can’t be good.
While not super close I do follow the QAFL, mainly on the QAFL board here on Big Footy, Mt Gravatt results this season.

40-141.
45-218.
40-178.
38-211.
34-165.
44-142.
63-132.
19-207.
48-186.
39-192.
57-140.
30-184.
50-159.
22-174.
8-204.

:eek:
 
While not super close I do follow the QAFL, mainly on the QAFL board here on Big Footy, Mt Gravatt results this season.

40-141.
45-218.
40-178.
38-211.
34-165.
44-142.
63-132.
19-207.
48-186.
39-192.
57-140.
30-184.
50-159.
22-174.
8-204.

:eek:
Coach has got to go!
 
While not super close I do follow the QAFL, mainly on the QAFL board here on Big Footy, Mt Gravatt results this season.

40-141.
45-218.
40-178.
38-211.
34-165.
44-142.
63-132.
19-207.
48-186.
39-192.
57-140.
30-184.
50-159.
22-174.
8-204.

:eek:
That 8-204 one sounds like an awesome result for a Pies v Lions GF game :)
 
Coach has got to go!
It is my understanding as we sit here today Mt Gravatt have had plenty of learnings from their season, rebuild is on track.
I say we give the current coach a 5 year extension to help with the rebuilding cause.

It could be worse though, they could rename as Port Adelaide and give the coaching job to Kenny.

Season 8 Wow GIF by Paramount+
 
That 8-204 one sounds like an awesome result for a Pies v Lions GF game :)
Disappointing we conceded a goal on the final siren though to win by only 196 points.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

With talk of how to use the sub across the AFL or whether to scrap it and only have 4 or go to 5 players on the bench, one thing that I think should be considered is particularly if it stays as it is in 2024 is that the sub should be able to be activated whilst a player is forced off for 20 minute HIA assessment and should the player pass the HIA, the sub sits out again until activated.

As it stands, a team could be disadvantaged by a player being forced from the field for 20 minutes due to the act of an opposing team like Starc was when Rankine took him out yet wouldn’t activate the sub whilst the assessment is taking place (let’s assume that player passes the HIA yet is forced from the game for 20 minutes) and being down a player whilst the team that took out the player isn’t disadvantaged yet they wouldn’t if that team could activate the sub even if for that 20 minute period and if a player say is subbed for tactical reasons they could re-enter the game if an HIA takes place.
 
I know it’s only one persons opinion, but for the life of me and he’s not the only one who refuse to put Lachie Neale in AA teams despite the likes of Zac Merrett constantly being put up (VIC bias perhaps?)

 
I know it’s only one persons opinion, but for the life of me and he’s not the only one who refuse to put Lachie Neale in AA teams despite the likes of Zac Merrett constantly being put up (VIC bias perhaps?)


Also; but how is Gawn named ruck over Grundy when Max has or will 3-4 games. I guess Tom Stewart missed like 6 games and still got the nod over Harris despite Harris having a great year and playing every game.
 
I know it’s only one persons opinion, but for the life of me and he’s not the only one who refuse to put Lachie Neale in AA teams despite the likes of Zac Merrett constantly being put up (VIC bias perhaps?)


We have CHB & CHF - the trifecta is not going to happen. Reasonable call, IMO.

The bench is a different question.
 
$40K fine from the AFL for how we handled Andrews' concussion.

Having considered Brisbane’s submissions in relation to the management of Andrews on Sunday afternoon, the AFL has determined that the club was in breach of the AFL Concussion Protocols and have sanctioned the club $40,000. The sanction takes into account the $10,000 suspended sanction from the previous breach by Brisbane in the 2023 NAB AFLW Grand Final, a $20,000 fine to be paid immediately (and to be included in the Soft Cap), and a $10,000 fine suspended and only payable if there is another breach in either AFL or AFLW prior to the end of the 2025.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Football Related Random Thread - PART 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top