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

[Goggin Our Best]

I rate the Collingwood team of 2010-11 as good as I have seen them in my 40-odd years of supporting them, so on that score I rate Geelong's 2011 flag pretty highly. So as much as I hate Geelong, I would have to go with them at No.1 for longevity and quality.

Not as good as your 1970 side in my opinion - and i did go to the 1970 second semi and GF - so i saw 1st hand how good that Coll side was

Premierships are full of joy and are the be all and end all - but to me Premierships are a tad overated in judging things

Like last year Geel got Sth Melb - in 1990 Coll got a washed up dads army called Ess

And Rich - the best year in the 4 years streak in my opinion was 2018 - they were clearly the best team - and finished on top of the ladder - and that year they played the Cats late in the year - only won narrowly - but should have won by about 15 goals - i watched in awe of them - they were that good - but they didnt win the Premiership

 

[dean33]

Not as good as your 1970 side in my opinion - and i did go to the 1970 second semi and GF - so i saw 1st hand how good that Coll side was

Premierships are full of joy and are the be all and end all - but to me Premierships are a tad overated in judging things

Like last year Geel got Sth Melb - in 1990 Coll got a washed up dads army called Ess

And Rich - the best year in the 4 years streak in my opinion was 2018 - they were clearly the best team - and finished on top of the ladder - and that year they played the Cats late in the year - only won narrowly - but should have won by about 15 goals - i watched in awe of them - they were that good - but they didnt win the Premiership

True, I always felt our 2018 team was the best one. We just tapered off the last 6 weeks which cost us.

 

[dean33]

The home of WA footy for a century was almost as narrow as ours.

Will there come a point where the idiots pissing their pants about the shape of our ground realise that Geelong’s record AWAY from KP over the last 16 years generates a win percentage that would guarantee us a finals spot every year?

No sport, save for cricket where every defeated team blames the pitch, is as full of excuse makers as AFL.

I didn’t bring kp into the discussion, your mate did. What I was saying is it’s much more difficult to have a win streak at the mcg than any other ground as so many teams are familiar with it and play regularly on it. The record we broke was melbournes from the 1950’s.

 

[RUNVS]

I keep coming back to the fact that AFL is unrecognizable from before to after the Richmond dynasty.

-The game whose very DNA was 'no offsides', now bans more than 6 players in any part of the field at bounces(!)
-The fullback can now run 20 metres from a kick-in without anyone being allowed to approach him(!!)
-Defenders can now be penalised 50 metres for running backwards away from the mark(!!!)

No other modern dynasty had even 20% of that legacy effect on the game.

Of course, it helped that the second best side during the Richmond Dynasty effectively ran the rules committee and was given carte blanche powers to modify the structure of the game, lol.

and you think Richmond caused these changes? Someone has a very high opinion of themselves.

The changes were in the works for years, they just happened to be implimented when Richmond were winning flags. The changes were in the same idea of creating the deliberate out of bounds rule and the changes in the ruck rule, all about spending up the game and promoting more scoring. Richmond had nothing to do with it.

 

[Taper]

A ground that is shaped like no other, that you train on and no other team plays on. 22 games at the g is equivalent to 50 games at kp.

Our record of 29 wins in a row at home will stand forever.
Not even the Collingwood machine team of the 1920s and 1930s won as many games in a row at Victoria Park.

 

[dean33]

Our record of 29 wins in a row at home will stand forever.
Not even the Collingwood machine team of the 1920s and 1930s won as many games in a row at Victoria Park.

Possibly, I think our record at the home of football might take some beating as well.

 

[Fadge]

Not as good as your 1970 side in my opinion - and i did go to the 1970 second semi and GF - so i saw 1st hand how good that Coll side was

Premierships are full of joy and are the be all and end all - but to me Premierships are a tad overated in judging things

Like last year Geel got Sth Melb - in 1990 Coll got a washed up dads army called Ess

And Rich - the best year in the 4 years streak in my opinion was 2018 - they were clearly the best team - and finished on top of the ladder - and that year they played the Cats late in the year - only won narrowly - but should have won by about 15 goals - i watched in awe of them - they were that good - but they didnt win the Premiership

Spot on, but not a very popular opinion on this forum.

How many times have I read 'If you're not first, you're last'. Though with the intellectual capacity of those writing and subscribing to that statement, it's usually written as 'If your not first your last'...

 

[naysayer]

I expect this thread to pick up now that the Cats and Tigers voyage through irrelevance.

 

[PetterdHoisted]

and you think Richmond caused these changes? Someone has a very high opinion of themselves.

The changes were in the works for years, they just happened to be implimented when Richmond were winning flags. The changes were in the same idea of creating the deliberate out of bounds rule and the changes in the ruck rule, all about spending up the game and promoting more scoring. Richmond had nothing to do with it.

well it's not me thinking it, it's the mainstream media claiming it outright - national newspaper fodder - pretty unequivocal about the rule changes being inspired directly by a dominant Richmond, and even naming individual players at RFC. This article is not even debating that, it was focused on who was making the rule changes based on RFC- at that time the AFL was still suppressing the rumour that it was S. Hocking (due to the obvious conflict with his connection to Geelong - perennial bridesmaids to RFC's dynasty - later the AFL would admit openly that it was indeed Hocking, he already had the CEO of Geelong by then)

"And that's exactly how the AFL want it" - never a truer word has been said!

 

[Wojcinski]

well it's not me thinking it, it's the mainstream media claiming it outright - national newspaper fodder - pretty unequivocal about the rule changes being inspired directly by a dominant Richmond, and even naming individual players at RFC. This article is not even debating that, it was focused on who was making the rule changes based on RFC- at that time the AFL was still suppressing the rumour that it was S. Hocking (due to the obvious conflict with his connection to Geelong - perennial bridesmaids to RFC's dynasty - later the AFL would admit openly that it was indeed Hocking, he already had the CEO of Geelong by then)

"And that's exactly how the AFL want it" - never a truer word has been said!

View attachment 1792920

You guys should be kissing Hocking's feet. Prior to his appointment Richmond had won like 2 finals in 37 years, once appointed Richmond won 3 flags, as soon as he steps down Richmond is back to being shit again. Hocking isn't the reason Richmond is shit, that is the clubs own doing. Hocking is the reason they were able to win 3 flags, he was your saviour.

 

[PetterdHoisted]

You guys should be kissing Hocking's feet. Prior to his appointment Richmond had won like 2 finals in 37 years, once appointed Richmond won 3 flags, as soon as he steps down Richmond is back to being s**t again. Hocking isn't the reason Richmond is s**t, that is the clubs own doing. Hocking is the reason they were able to win 3 flags, he was your saviour.

Well that’s one way to look at it, lol!

Bring back Steve!!

 

[Back One Out]

well it's not me thinking it, it's the mainstream media claiming it outright - national newspaper fodder - pretty unequivocal about the rule changes being inspired directly by a dominant Richmond, and even naming individual players at RFC. This article is not even debating that, it was focused on who was making the rule changes based on RFC- at that time the AFL was still suppressing the rumour that it was S. Hocking (due to the obvious conflict with his connection to Geelong - perennial bridesmaids to RFC's dynasty - later the AFL would admit openly that it was indeed Hocking, he already had the CEO of Geelong by then)

Don't forget, it was Steve Hocking who removed the "hands in the back" rule before the 2019 season, a rule which had worked perfectly fine for the previous 12 seasons and had restored high marking to our great game. (Players leaping high for their marks instead of standing and pushing out)

Hocking's cynical ploy has not only seen the high mark disappear from the game once more (why the rule was brought in) but it also enabled Tom Hawkins to experience a career renaissance in his 30's... standing flat-footed and shoving his opponents under the ball on his way to 4 of his 5 All Australian selections from 2019-2022.

That rule change, as much any, put Geelong back into premiership contention during the Tigers dynasty. Hawkins bullied opponents in those years - at boundary throw-ins and marking contests - barely a goal was scored without Hawkins pushing his opponent in the back.

Pretty funny to see the media finally waking up to the push-outs this year now that everyone else does it.

Similar to how the AFL cracked down on the high-tackle shrug manoeuvre only after Joel Selwood retired (with the all-time record for "frees for")

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Don't forget, it was Steve Hocking who removed the "hands in the back" rule before the 2019 season, a rule which had worked perfectly fine for the previous 12 seasons and had restored high marking to our great game.

Hocking's cynical ploy has not only seen the high mark disappear from the game once more (one of the reasons why the rule was brought in) but it also enabled Tom Hawkins to experience a career renaissance in his 30's... standing flat-footed and shoving his opponents under the ball on his way to 4 of his 5 All Australian selections from 2019-2022.

That rule change, as much any, put Geelong back into premiership contention during the Tigers dynasty. Hawkins bullied opponents in those years - at boundary throw-ins and marking contests - barely a goal was scored without Hawkins pushing his opponent in the back.

Pretty funny to see the media finally waking up to the push-outs this year now that everyone else does it.

Similar to the way the AFL decided to crack down on the high-tackle shrug manoeuvre only after Joel Selwood retired (with the all-time record for "frees for")

Nailed it.

 

[PhatBoy]

His renaissance that has seen him kick 3 of his 50-goal seasons in the last 5, and 4 of his 50 goal seasons in the 5 years before he turned 30.

Right. Good thing they changed that rule. Btw, did they ever even change it?
I was under the impression that at no stage was it legal for a defender to back into the front of an opponent and not have the player at the back be able to put their hands up to hold their ground.

 

[lordbob]

West coast finished higher on the ladder over the course of the year. I’m not talking about the Hawthorn West Coast specific home and away game. West Coast over 22 games proved the better side.

Then through the first final West Coast won, West Coast at that point had done enough to prove they are superior to Hawthorn.

A ridiculous AFL finals system gave Hawthorn a second chance and got to play West Coast again in the Grand Final, this time though on Hawthorn’s home ground.

I don’t care about hypotheticals, Hawthorn and Brisbane lost to higher ranked teams in the finals and needed a 2nd chance to win the flags those years.

I think you misunderstand how the best team in the AFL is determined. Its not who finishes first over 22-24 rounds of H&A. The best team is the team who can perform the best on the biggest day. If you are good enough to get there then you also need to be good enough to win.

I couldnt give a stuff about who finishes top in the H&A, the real season starts in finals. Finals intensity is a step above. H&A is just about qualifying for finals nothing more. Teams prepare their players to be right for finals. That can mean resting or managing players through the season even if it might hurt their percentage or even resting half a team of players eg ross lyon during a season to ensure they are primed and ready to go for finals. If you dont know that, then you dont understand how AFL is played or what is the true goal for all teams in the comp.


"West coast finished higher on the ladder over the course of the year. I’m not talking about the Hawthorn West Coast specific home and away game. West Coast over 22 games proved the better side." - No one cares who finished first on the ladder. Ask WC players if they'd prefer to have been minor premiers or win a premiership.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I think you misunderstand how the best team in the AFL is determined. Its not who finishes first over 22-24 rounds of H&A. The best team is the team who can perform the best on the biggest day. If you are good enough to get there then you also need to be good enough to win.

I couldnt give a stuff about who finishes top in the H&A, the real season starts in finals. Finals intensity is a step above. H&A is just about qualifying for finals nothing more. Teams prepare their players to be right for finals. That can mean resting or managing players through the season even if it might hurt their percentage or even resting half a team of players eg ross lyon during a season to ensure they are primed and ready to go for finals. If you dont know that, then you dont understand how AFL is played or what is the true goal for all teams in the comp.


"West coast finished higher on the ladder over the course of the year. I’m not talking about the Hawthorn West Coast specific home and away game. West Coast over 22 games proved the better side." - No one cares who finished first on the ladder. Ask WC players if they'd prefer to have been minor premiers or win a premiership.

You qualify for finals and win your last 3 games of the season, you are the best team, no ifs, no buts, everybody knows how it works. As those finals games progress the stakes get higher and higher until the final one when the stakes are highest of all. It matters nowt whether you exercise your repechage rights before winning your last 3 matches. Everyone knows you need to win your last 3 to win it.

 

[My Tilly]

Hocking's cynical ploy has not only seen the high mark disappear from the game once more (why the rule was brought in) but it also enabled Tom Hawkins to experience a career renaissance in his 30's... standing flat-footed and shoving his opponents under the ball on his way to 4 of his 5 All Australian selections from 2019-2022.

Come on BOU, Dunstall was the King of nudging opponents in the back with the forearm. It was his bread and butter and helped catapult a new wave of full forwards who couldn't jump to save themselves.

 

[Back One Out]

Come on BOU, Dunstall was the King of nudging opponents in the back with the forearm. It was his bread and butter and helped catapult a new wave of full forwards who couldn't jump to save themselves.

True

Not just Dunstall... Ablett and Lockett also were the masters of 'holding their ground' AKA holding full backs under the flight of the ball and giving them a subtle nudge out before taking the overhead mark. All three spearheads kicked hundreds of goals from this bread and butter tactic.

When people compare Lance Franklin's goal tally to the other champion forwards, they need to remember that Buddy played the vast majority of his career (his best years) with the hands in the back rule. God knows how many more goals he would've kicked if he'd been allowed to push his opponent in the back or hold them under the ball with his long levers.

 

[Blackas87]

I think you misunderstand how the best team in the AFL is determined. Its not who finishes first over 22-24 rounds of H&A. The best team is the team who can perform the best on the biggest day. If you are good enough to get there then you also need to be good enough to win.

I couldnt give a stuff about who finishes top in the H&A, the real season starts in finals. Finals intensity is a step above. H&A is just about qualifying for finals nothing more. Teams prepare their players to be right for finals. That can mean resting or managing players through the season even if it might hurt their percentage or even resting half a team of players eg ross lyon during a season to ensure they are primed and ready to go for finals. If you dont know that, then you dont understand how AFL is played or what is the true goal for all teams in the comp.


"West coast finished higher on the ladder over the course of the year. I’m not talking about the Hawthorn West Coast specific home and away game. West Coast over 22 games proved the better side." - No one cares who finished first on the ladder. Ask WC players if they'd prefer to have been minor premiers or win a premiership.

Real season starts in finals, West Coast beat Hawthorn in a final.

Yes you need to perform on the biggest day. But you have to get there. Hawthorn lost a final to a higher ranked team in West Coast. Hawthorn shouldn’t have even been in the Grand Final. Flawed finals system that allows losing lower ranked teams a 2nd chance is the reason that Hawthorn got that flag

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Real season starts in finals, West Coast beat Hawthorn in a final.

Yes you need to perform on the biggest day. But you have to get there. Hawthorn lost a final to a higher ranked team in West Coast. Hawthorn shouldn’t have even been in the Grand Final. Flawed finals system that allows losing lower ranked teams a 2nd chance is the reason that Hawthorn got that flag

How would you construct the finals series?

 

[lordbob]

Real season starts in finals, West Coast beat Hawthorn in a final.

Yes you need to perform on the biggest day. But you have to get there. Hawthorn lost a final to a higher ranked team in West Coast. Hawthorn shouldn’t have even been in the Grand Final. Flawed finals system that allows losing lower ranked teams a 2nd chance is the reason that Hawthorn got that flag

You play the comp how its set up. you get top 4 so you get a double chance. If WC couldnt win it on the last day in september then they werent good enough.7

 

[My Tilly]

True

Not just Dunstall... Ablett and Lockett also were the masters of 'holding their ground' AKA holding full backs under the flight of the ball and giving them a subtle nudge out before taking the overhead mark. All three spearheads kicked hundreds of goals from this bread and butter tactic.

When people compare Lance Franklin's goal tally to the other champion forwards, they need to remember that Buddy played the vast majority of his career (his best years) with the hands in the back rule. God knows how many more goals he would've kicked if he'd been allowed to push his opponent in the back or hold them under the ball with his long levers.

It goes both ways.
Franklin has been well and truly looked after in the modern era. By the time he was in his mid 20's, the bump was dead and he had an umpire at that end of the ground watching the defender on all occasions.

 

[Blackas87]

How would you construct the finals series?

1 v 8
2 v 7
3 v 6
4 v 5

If the top 4 lose they get a 2nd chance against the same opponent but now at the other teams home.

This year it would be Collingwood vs Sydney at the MCG. If Collingwood win they go strait through to the prelim, Sydney are out. If the Swans win they play again next week at the SCG, winner then goes through to the prelim, loser is out.

 

[Blackas87]

You play the comp how its set up. you get top 4 so you get a double chance. If WC couldnt win it on the last day in september then they werent good enough.7

Yeah doesn’t mean it’s a terrible set up.

When comparing dynasties you see which ones lost finals to higher ranked teams needing the 2nd chance to win the flag, and then you look at teams that won all their finals for their premierships not needing 2nd chances it looks more impressive.

 

[Roby]

1 v 8
2 v 7
3 v 6
4 v 5

If the top 4 lose they get a 2nd chance against the same opponent but now at the other teams home.

This year it would be Collingwood vs Sydney at the MCG. If Collingwood win they go strait through to the prelim, Sydney are out. If the Swans win they play again next week at the SCG, winner then goes through to the prelim, loser is out.

This makes no sense.