Banter Who will be Better in 2025, Collingwood or Carlton? Part 4

[Fadge]

U keep making out as if Owies is irreplaceable... He's a complete spud idk wtf ur talking about? It's like when u nuffies say Cox or McSpud are big losses... They play a role but they suck

Except both Cox and McStay have played big games in big finals - something very few Carlton players have done...

 

[doppleganger]

Essendon couldn't beat Carlton though mate, now you're just talking rubbish.

Pretty straight forward I would have thought, give Essendon two extra gimme wins and they make finals...they dont need to beat Carlton, just North and Richmond.

It doesn't mean Essendon are a better team.

Penny might drop at some point, probably around the time you realise Carlton haven't had a 21st century top4 finish.

 

[JustaBattler]

Pretty straight forward I would have thought, give Essendon two extra gimme wins and they make finals...they dont need to beat Carlton, just North and Richmond.

It doesn't mean Essendon are a better team.

Penny might drop at some point, probably around the time you realise Carlton haven't had a 21st century top4 finish.

and if your auntie was your uncle she'd be your uncle ...

FMD you Collingwood types are thick.

 

[JustaBattler]

Except both Cox and McStay have played big games in big finals - something very few Carlton players have done...

blah blah blah blah blah

 

[Robertio]

Pretty straight forward I would have thought, give Essendon two extra gimme wins and they make finals...they dont need to beat Carlton, just North and Richmond.

It doesn't mean Essendon are a better team.

Penny might drop at some point, probably around the time you realise Carlton haven't had a 21st century top4 finish.

 

[Scritchyscroony]

U keep making out as if Owies is irreplaceable... He's a complete spud idk wtf ur talking about? It's like when u nuffies say Cox or McSpud are big losses... They play a role but they suck

Owies is a spud it's true but he was your best small forward by a mile and your third highest goal scorer..You guys needed that spud.
And it's not like you've recruited a superstar like Schultz to replace him.

 

[doppleganger]

Harry McKay's turning circle?

 

[Robertio]

Harry McKay's turning circle?

Wrong again mate, Harry's is much bigger.

 

[Worm4]

All this talk about Carlton getting rid of Kennedy and Owies, you have to wonder why these players weren't picked up by the Pies ?
They made an error in not topping up with depth players it seems

 

[Fadge]

All this talk about Carlton getting rid of Kennedy and Owies, you have to wonder why these players weren't picked up by the Pies ?
They made an error in not topping up with depth players it seems

Players ranked 15 to 20 for Carlton would be 30 to 35 for Collingwood.

So to add them to Collingwood's list, it would make it 0.5% better, but by Carlton trading them out, it makes your list 7.5% worse.

Remember, they were good enough to play 47 of a possible 48 games at Carlton in 2024.

 

[Worm4]

Players ranked 15 to 20 for Carlton would be 30 to 35 for Collingwood.

So to add them to Collingwood's list, it would make it 0.5% better, but by Carlton trading them out, it makes your list 7.5% worse.

Remember, they were good enough to play 47 of a possible 48 games at Carlton in 2024.

That defies logic considering where both sides finished in 2024

 

[carlton_99]

So to add them to Collingwood's list, it would make it 0.5% better, but by Carlton trading them out, it makes your list 7.5% worse.

You literally just make up numbers as evidence for your point. It's extraordinary

 

[Scritchyscroony]

That defies logic considering where both sides finished in 2024

Nice Carlton logic. Both sides finished on exactly the same points mate.

 

[Robertio]

Nice Carlton logic. Both sides finished on exactly the same points mate.

That's what percentage is for mate, it can put a team in finals and send another to Mexico.

 

[Scritchyscroony]

That's what percentage is for mate, it can put a team in finals and send another to Mexico.

Catch up with the conversation...
Yeah so your higher percentage this year logically means your 15-20 player are better than or equal to Collingwood's. Thats literally the " logic" he was spruiking.

 

[adammania9]

A certain Carlton supporting individual claimed in preseason 2023 that Kennedy would be Collingwood’s best midfielder. It still makes me chuckle to this day

 

[Worm4]

Catch up with the conversation...
Yeah so your higher percentage this year logically means your 15-20 player are better than or equal to Collingwood's. Thats literally the " logic" he was spruiking.

No , I was questioning how a player ranked by your colleague as a 15-20 on carltons list is the equivalent of 30-35 on collingwoods given that both sides were pretty much even apart from %. It's not logical in the slightest

 

[Robertio]

Catch up with the conversation...
Yeah so your higher percentage this year logically means your 15-20 player are better than or equal to Collingwood's. Thats literally the " logic" he was spruiking.

Have a look at the ladder, seems he's right.

 

[Robertio]

No , I was questioning how a player ranked by your colleague as a 15-20 on carltons list is the equivalent of 30-35 on collingwoods given that both sides were pretty much even apart from %. It's not logical in the slightest

Laughable mate.

 

[Scritchyscroony]

No , I was questioning how a player ranked by your colleague as a 15-20 on carltons list is the equivalent of 30-35 on collingwoods given that both sides were pretty much even apart from %. It's not logical in the slightest

Fair enough

 

[Fadge]

Can I infer that your criteria for contending for a premiership is making the grand final?

No.

See the thing is, when your team gets to the pointy end as often as mine does, it's pretty easy to decipher whether or not they legitimately contended for a premiership.

For example, in 2007, my team finished 5th, and progressed to lose the Preliminary Final by 5 points to the team that won the premiership by nearly 20 goals. Collingwood therefore contended in 2007.

In 2009, Collingwood finished top 4, but were comfortably beaten by the two teams who were by far the best teams in the competition that year in their Qualifying and Preliminary Finals. We therefore failed to contended in 2009.

If you ever get to see your team make it to the pointy end, you might find yourself in an informed position to be able to judge whether or not they genuinely contended for the flag. Instead of sitting here in November and saying 'Carlton want for nothing, and are therefore genuine premiership contenders in 2025'.

Because there are about a dozen teams who would be entering 2025 hoping to be a premiership contender, but in any given year, we only see between 1 and 5 teams actually genuinely contend for the premiership.

 

[kreuze_missile]

No.

See the thing is, when your team gets to the pointy end as often as mine does, it's pretty easy to decipher whether or not they legitimately contended for a premiership.

For example, in 2007, my team finished 5th, and progressed to lose the Preliminary Final by 5 points to the team that won the premiership by nearly 20 goals. Collingwood therefore contended in 2007.

In 2009, Collingwood finished top 4, but were comfortably beaten by the two teams who were by far the best teams in the competition that year in their Qualifying and Preliminary Finals. We therefore failed to contended in 2009.

If you ever get to see your team make it to the pointy end, you might find yourself in an informed position to be able to judge whether or not they genuinely contended for the flag. Instead of sitting here in November and saying 'Carlton want for nothing, and are therefore genuine premiership contenders in 2025'.

Because there are about a dozen teams who would be entering 2025 hoping to be a premiership contender, but in any given year, we only see between 1 and 5 teams actually genuinely contend for the premiership.

I fully agree and support your logic.

In 2024, my team was beaten by the team in the finals by the team that won the premiership by 10 goals. Carlton therefore contended in 2024.

In 2023, my team was beaten by the team in the finals that would have won the premiership if it wasn't for some questionable umpiring. Carlton therefore contended in 2023.

 

[Fadge]

I fully agree and support your logic.

In 2024, my team was beaten by the team in the finals by the team that won the premiership by 10 goals. Carlton therefore contended in 2024.

In 2023, my team was beaten by the team in the finals that would have won the premiership if it wasn't for some questionable umpiring. Carlton therefore contended in 2023.

See, when your team regularly contends for the premiership, you don't have to be desperate in your attempts to see them as a contender.

 

[Fadge]

No , I was questioning how a player ranked by your colleague as a 15-20 on carltons list is the equivalent of 30-35 on collingwoods given that both sides were pretty much even apart from %. It's not logical in the slightest

Desperation.

Collingwood had a down year, whilst Carlton's ladder position was inflated by their double up games against the easy beats.

An aberration, as exemplified by the 2022 and 2023 results, and as we'll see in 2025.

That's why we've beaten Carlton in basically every meaningful game we've played in recent times.

 

[kreuze_missile]

See, when your team regularly contends for the premiership, you don't have to be desperate in your attempts to see them as a contender.

Great, so we are in agreeance.

Carlton contended for the premiership in 2024.

Collingwood did not contend for the premiership in 2024.

Good chat