Greatest Dynasty of the 21st century - Lions vs Cats vs Hawks vs Tigers

[PhatBoy]

A major thing that set the Lions apart IMO is that they travelled to play GFs and on all 3 occasions on their opponents regular home ground.

+ my natural bias of course.

That’s fair enough but equally you can’t penalise other teams for not facing that hurdle

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Im still to see how it makes any difference. They don’t give you a bigger trophy.

Because its sustained performance, the ability to reach the pinnacle and conquer the challenger 3 times consequtively is a better result than winning 1, losing 1, winning another, not making the decider and then winning another.
Im really not sure why Cats fans cant accept that whilst they had a great era, they were beaten during it, when it matters most, by better teams on the day.

 

[Fadge]

Posters don't remember who finishes top of the ladder because in the scheme of things it means not much except for a good position to start a finals assault.

This is factually incorrect.

I for one can recall who finished top of the ladder in every season since I've been watching footy, as it's a key metric when judging the strength of a team across an entire season.

You can't possibly debate the relative strengths of teams if you 'can't remember who finished top of the ladder because in the scheme of things it doesn't mean much'....

 

[Fadge]

An offended Cats supporter directing attention to an angle that favors themselves, who'd have thunk.

The term Dynasty by definition is successive/consecutive rule, Brisbane, Hawthorn, Richmond and Adelaide are the ONLY teams to achieve this feat in the AFL era.
You are correct though about nufty footy fans who vote on individual flags in a thread about consecutive flags.

You should start a thread about continued periods of success which Geelong could win.

The Adelaide 97/98 sides wouldn't rank in the top 15 teams in the AFL era, but their back to backs are considered a 'dynasty', just because...

 

[Fadge]

Lol, take consecutivity out of the equation and you dont have a 'Dynasty'.

There is little doubt that the Cats have been the most succesful H&A team of the AFL era, however, winning consecutive flags must count for more than winning a few individual flags over a short space of time, it is what it is.

Brisbane reigned from September 2001 to September 2004, Hawthorn reigned from September 2013 to September 2016, Richmond reigned from September 2019 to September 2021 and Adelaide reigned from September 1997 to September 1999.
Geelong we're Premiers in 2007, 2009 and 2011, like every other individual flag winners in their particular year.

Yeah, Richmond reigned until September 2021, despite not making the finals that year.

 

[Seeds]

Dry the eyes and maybe you'll see your replying to a Port fan.

Relevance?

 

[The 747]

Because its sustained performance, the ability to reach the pinnacle and conquer the challenger 3 times consequtively is a better result than winning 1, losing 1, winning another, not making the decider and then winning another.
Im really not sure why Cats fans cant accept that whilst they had a great era, they were beaten during it, when it matters most, by better teams on the day.

I see you are trying to ruin another thread. Bravo.

 

[Seeds]

Lol, take consecutivity out of the equation and you dont have a 'Dynasty'.

There is little doubt that the Cats have been the most succesful H&A team of the AFL era, however, winning consecutive flags must count for more than winning a few individual flags over a short space of time, it is what it is.

Brisbane reigned from September 2001 to September 2004, Hawthorn reigned from September 2013 to September 2016, Richmond reigned from September 2019 to September 2021 and Adelaide reigned from September 1997 to September 1999.
Geelong we're Premiers in 2007, 2009 and 2011, like every other individual flag winners in their particular year.

Why? Both clubs were succesful in 3 and failed in 2. Why does the order matter? One has a shorter burst of success while the other has more sustained success. In the end 3=3.

 

[Seeds]

A major thing that set the Lions apart IMO is that they travelled to play GFs and on all 3 occasions on their opponents regular home ground.

+ my natural bias of course.

This is why i have them 2nd or 3rd for toughest grand final opponents out of the 4 instead of last. The travel factor does matter. but it aint everything.

 

[Seeds]

I think we should discount flags where teams "got lucky" and didn't travel at least six times a season (otherwise they how have they proven their longevity to travel every second week like some of their opponents have to), and also exclude flags where the Grand Final was played at a team's home ground vs a team who barely played there in H&A games.

Other than Brisbane, no other interstate side has made more than two Grand Finals in a row (WC played three in four in the early 90s). I think downplaying how teams have to manage their players during the season when they're travelling every second week, especially back when sports science isn't the way it is these days, is a convinient narrative.

We dont discount the flags. a flag is a flag.

But when we are trying to rate which flag side is better we have to compare and differentiate them based on something.

 

[JasRulz63]

lions lucked in big time. They probably should only be a 1-2 times flag winning team if not for the best team choking twice.

Geelong lucked in big time. They probably should only be a 1-2 times flag winning team if not the best team (side who won the minor premiership since we're judging it on the ladder) choking twice.

 

[JasRulz63]

We dont discount the flags. a flag is a flag.

But when we are trying to rate which flag side is better we have to compare and differentiate them based on something.

This is why i have them 2nd or 3rd for toughest grand final opponents out of the 4 instead of last. The travel factor does matter. but it aint everything.

Why? Both clubs were succesful in 3 and failed in 2. Why does the order matter? One has a shorter burst of success while the other has more sustained success. In the end 3=3.

I think you're conviniently (and I get it, I'm biased too, as is most of this forum) increasing the weight of what elevates Geelong's claim and downplaying what would decrease Geelong's claim/increase the claims of the others.

 

[boncer34]

Relevance?

Well you clearly thought they were a Brisbane fan. And if we can't trust you to understand something under your nose it calls into question your recollection of teams from 20 years ago.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Yeah, Richmond reigned until September 2021, despite not making the finals that year.

Well they did, same as Geelong are reigning Premiers despite sitting on the bottom of the ladder yeah.
If they dont scrape into the 8 until the final moments of the H&A season does that mean they're not reigning Premiers until then or if they dont make the 8 at all, not reigning Premiers now?

Its actually quite surprising how many people dont comprehend what a Dynasty is or what reigning means.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

The Adelaide 97/98 sides wouldn't rank in the top 15 teams in the AFL era, but their back to backs are considered a 'dynasty', just because...

Neither would the Hawks from the 80's or Collingwoods current team in 15yrs time.
Not sure that is actually worthy of discussion other than to say in their moment they we're the best and backed it up.

 

[PhatBoy]

Because its sustained performance, the ability to reach the pinnacle and conquer the challenger 3 times consequtively is a better result than winning 1, losing 1, winning another, not making the decider and then winning another.
Im really not sure why Cats fans cant accept that whilst they had a great era, they were beaten during it, when it matters most, by better teams on the day.

Sorry how do we not accept it? St Kilda and Collingwood were both better than us in 2010 and Hawthorn while not as good generally fully deserved to win on the day. It doesn’t shrink the trophy cabinet or change the fact that we were at or orbiting the summit for long enough with the same group of players to win 3 titles

 

[Fadge]

Well they did, same as Geelong are reigning Premiers despite sitting on the bottom of the ladder yeah.
If they dont scrape into the 8 until the final moments of the H&A season does that mean they're not reigning Premiers until then or if they dont make the 8 at all, not reigning Premiers now?

Its actually quite surprising how many people dont comprehend what a Dynasty is or what reigning means.

Don't you see the problem with your statement?

Richmond 'reigned' between September 2019 and September 2021, despite not making the finals in 2021.

Conversely, you're telling us Geelong's 2007 to 2009 was inferior because they didn't have a consecutive 'reign'.

Richmond 2019 to 2021:
Premier, Premier, 12th
Won 44, lost 24 (64.7% of games won)
5342 points for, 4682 points against (114.1%)
7 finals, 6 wins.

Geelong 2007 to 2009:
Premier, Runner-Up, Premier
Won 68, lost 10 (87.2% of games won)
8524 points for, 5738 points against (148.55%)
9 finals, 8 wins.

How anyone can say with a straight face that Richmond's 'period of reign' was superior to Geelong's 'period of non-reign' is beyond me.

I mean, surely if you're referencing any 'period of reign' for Richmond, you would add 2017 and 2018 (where they won a flag and a minor premiership) and remove 2021?

 

[Fadge]

Neither would the Hawks from the 80's or Collingwoods current team in 15yrs time.

Huh? I've no idea what you're saying here.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Sorry how do we not accept it? St Kilda and Collingwood were both better than us in 2010 and Hawthorn while not as good generally fully deserved to win on the day. It doesn’t shrink the trophy cabinet or change the fact that we were at or orbiting the summit for long enough with the same group of players to win 3 titles

Heres what I know, 270 independant football followers voted and Brisbane came out overwhelming winners to the tune of almost 3:1 over your Club but as is the norm with your posts you'll probably just label them all idiots for doing so.
What the result shows is that those 160 people understand what a Dynasty is and appreciate how they went about it.
The lack of support for the remaining 3 is because in the scheme of things, they are just making up the numbers for reference.
The most comforting part in all of it is that with the GF locked away at the MCG for another 30 odd years there is no chance any of your Vic clubs can ever take Brisbanes mantle as the greatest Dynasty in AFL history for doing it on the road, against Vic clubs and in succession.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Huh? I've no idea what you're saying here.

That doesnt surprise me.

 

[Fadge]

Heres what I know, 270 independant football followers voted and Brisbane came out overwhelming winners to the tune of almost 3:1 over your Club but as is the norm with your posts you'll probably just label them all idiots for doing so.
What the result shows is that those 160 people understand what a Dynasty is and appreciate how they went about it.
The lack of support for the remaining 3 is because in the scheme of things, they are just making up the numbers for reference.

Can you explain how Geelong can possibly be rated second, without even having a dynasty (according to your personal definition), ahead of Hawthorn's 3peat, and Richmond (who barely got a vote, but do in fact have a dynasty whilst Geelong don't)?

Second question - if a team goes Flag - Flag - Runner-Up - Flag - Flag - Flag - Runner-Up - Flag - Flag - under your warped definition it is three separate dynasties and not a 9 year dynasty, right?

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Don't you see the problem with your statement?

Richmond 'reigned' between September 2019 and September 2021, despite not making the finals in 2021.

Conversely, you're telling us Geelong's 2007 to 2009 was inferior because they didn't have a consecutive 'reign'.

Richmond 2019 to 2021:
Premier, Premier, 12th
Won 44, lost 24 (64.7% of games won)
5342 points for, 4682 points against (114.1%)
7 finals, 6 wins.

Geelong 2007 to 2009:
Premier, Runner-Up, Premier
Won 68, lost 10 (87.2% of games won)
8524 points for, 5738 points against (148.55%)
9 finals, 8 wins.

How anyone can say with a straight face that Richmond's 'period of reign' was superior to Geelong's 'period of non-reign' is beyond me.

I mean, surely if you're referencing any 'period of reign' for Richmond, you would add 2017 and 2018 (where they won a flag and a minor premiership) and remove 2021?

Because Richmond didnt lose the title of reigning Premier until they we're succeeded by Melbourne in the 2021 GF, we dont say Melbournes reign ended when they got bundled out in 22, they we're reigning Premiers until Geelong became the next Premier.

Geelong reigned as Premiers from September 2007 until Hawthorn became Premiers in September 2008 who we're reigning Premiers until Geelong became Premiers in 2009.
Geelong then reigned until Collingwood became Premiers in September 2010 who reigned until September 2011 when Geelong became Premiers.

Im really not sure how that is difficult to comprehend to be honest.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Can you explain how Geelong can possibly be rated second, without even having a dynasty (according to your personal definition), ahead of Hawthorn's 3peat, and Richmond (who barely got a vote, but do in fact have a dynasty whilst Geelong don't)?

Second question - if a team goes Flag - Flag - Runner-Up - Flag - Flag - Flag - Runner-Up - Flag - Flag - under your warped definition it is three separate dynasties and not a 9 year dynasty, right?

Because not everyone understands what a Dynasty is by definition as I said before.

Correct, a Dynasty is a period of consecutive/successive rule, you cant rule if youre runner up, what it becomes is an extended period of success.

 

[Fadge]

Because Richmond didnt lose the title of reigning Premier until they we're succeeded by Melbourne in the 2021 GF, we dont say Melbournes reign ended when they got bundled out in 22, they we're reigning Premiers until Geelong became the next Premier.

Geelong reigned as Premiers from September 2007 until Hawthorn became Premiers in September 2008 who we're reigning Premiers until Geelong became Premiers in 2009.
Geelong then reigned until Collingwood became Premiers in September 2010 who reigned until September 2011 when Geelong became Premiers.

Im really not sure how that is difficult to comprehend to be honest.

You're very literal, aren't you?

The reference to 'reigning premier' is based on what a team achieved the previous year.

But in the context of a 'Dynastic Reign', how can you possibly include 22 games of a home and away season where the team you are referencing finished 12th with 9 wins from 22 games? Particularly when you exclude a 23 win/2 loss season from a dynasty, where that very team won a flag the years immediately before and after?

 

[Fadge]

Because not everyone understands what a Dynasty is by definition as I said before.

Correct, a Dynasty is a period of consecutive/successive rule, you cant rule if youre runner up, what it becomes is an extended period of success.

I think you're getting confused with your personal definition of what constitutes a dynasty, and what is generally regarded as a dynasty in the context of sport.

A quick google of 'What is the greatest dynasty in the history of sports' returns the answer 'Boston Celtics - 11 NBA Championships from 13 seasons'.

So maybe you need to understand different people view the concept of a sporting dynasty differently, and that you may be in the minority?