Opinion Geelong Team of the 21st Century

[Art Vandelay_]

Disagree 100% about Blicavs. You don't win 2 B&F's by chance at Geelong, and for me his versatility earns him a spot on the interchange at a minimum, ahead of Motlop who was way too inconsistent to be in the conversation IMO

Also, I'd argue Riccardi's best football was arguably in the late 1990's when he won his sole B&F and polled the majority of his Brownlow votes

Seeds' views on Blicavs have as little credibility as the Stewart > Enright call.

 

[iameviljez]

Harley was a good player but no star. Henry is now a premiership player and should be talked about in the same conversation as Harley. I'd take Henry. Bews was mentioned only because we haven't had an elite small defender over the period discussed to include.

Jack Henry is honest, but limited. Harley was a very capable CHB, probably top four-ish in the league.

Taylor of course was better than both.

 

[iameviljez]

He has same amount of flags as thompson but from a lot more seasons. Makes thompson the better coach.

Flags per season aren’t absolutely the only measure

 

[PhatBoy]

Flags per season aren’t absolutely the only measure

I’m still baffled by this whole ‘we had the wrong gameplan’ thing that is - almost ironically - held onto in ironclad fashion like a gameplan in itself.

That wrong gameplan got us leading a triple premiership team with a few minutes to go in a prelim final in 2013. It had us well on top in a prelim against another triple premiership team in 2019 and again in a grand final in 2020, and in the latter two examples if you really exclude one freakish opposition player from their team, as solid as their whole squad was, we probably win those games full stop.

It can’t have been that bad a game plan

So if it WAS that bad a game plan, then what the argument as it stands, is, is essentially this:

‘Since 2007 we have had a side that should have been in every grand final provided it was coached properly.’

Yeah, I’m sorry, but as much as I love and admire all our players, that’s bullshit.

Especially when the person making that argument is among the harshest critics of a lot of those players

 

[iameviljez]

What is your definition of a small defender vs a medium defender

Honestly, I don't think there is such a distinction any more and hasn't been for quite a while.

 

[iameviljez]

I’m still baffled by this whole ‘we had the wrong gameplan’ thing that is - almost ironically - held onto in ironclad fashion like a gameplan in itself.

I think we did move the ball too slowly and too conservatively in 2019-21. It got extremely predictable and made life extremely difficult for our forwards.

It made some kind of sense when we were carrying a very raw Bews and Zuthrie, plus a very slow Hendo and Harry in defence, and a very thin midfielder, but we were too good a team for that by 2019 and it was horrible to watch.

 

[PhatBoy]

I think we did move the ball too slowly and too conservatively in 2019-21. It got extremely predictable and made life extremely difficult for our forwards.

It made some kind of sense when we were carrying a very raw Bews and Zuthrie, plus a very slow Hendo and Harry in defence, and a very thin midfielder, but we were too good a team for that by 2019 and it was horrible to watch.

There’s times that we did but again if you’re leading a grand final by four goals and a team basically beats you because an all time great finals player turns in an all time great 40 minutes of football how bad can your game plan actually be? It gets you there, it gets you into the lead.

 

[Seeds]

Flags per season aren’t absolutely the only measure

You are right. Theres also the team he started with. Thompson wins that argument too as he started with a basket case team with a club that had no money and was near extinction where scott had a team primed for the premiership. Whether we like it or not Thompson had a hand in scotts first flag as well. Theres also the ability to attract gun players. Scott coached in the era where we kept importing gun players like danger and cameron (and about 10 other solid players as well) that enabled him to keep the team in flag contention. Thompson got ottens and justin murphy for 1 year. Going by that, thompsom had it harder. We can also go by finals records. Thompson thumps scott on that count too.

So yes we can also look at non premiership factors. Those overwhelmingly favour thompson as well.

 

[iameviljez]

Thompson wins that argument too as he started with a basket case team with a club that had no money and was near extinction where scott had a team primed for the premiership

I acknowledge that you're not alone in this, but for mine, this is revisionist history.

At the end of 2010, Geelong were pretty widely considered to be in strong decline. Conventional wisdom was that success was cyclical, and Geelong had hit the end of its cycle and were about the go the same way as 90s North and 2000s Brisbane.

As for which was the better coach - honestly, I don't know how to split them. As you rightly point out, Thompson inherited a very fragile club with an ageing and poor playing list - and he also crafted a game style that was unique to the competition, and wonderful to watch. Scott, on the other hand, has had a far stronger foundation, but has also managed to defy pretty much all patterns of success-failure in a way that is unique to the AFL since the introduction of equalisation.