- Banned
- #26
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 8 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Is this Richmond side as good as Geelong 07-11?
- Thread starter HardcoreGeelongFan
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Banned
- #28
what a piece of detective work
and conversely also the least disadvantage too, so you'd expect them to win more "away" games to balance it out.
When you consider that 12 win steak consider they played 9 of those games at the G, one at marvel against St Kilda, one at metricon against GC and one against a Brisbane team who hadn't played finals in a decade, nor beaten Richmond in a decade. Impressive finish to the season but one they're unlikely to repeat, they need to leave Victoria 4 times in the last 9 weeks. Had a great run against teams they've faced in the finals in recent years, faced Geelong twice in their flag years who are perennial finals chokers, GWS twice on the MCG where they historically play poorly and heavily undermanned in their debut GF performance last year, Adelaide who haven't even made finals the 2 years since, and like I just mentioned Brisbane who hadn't played finals in a decade nor beaten Richmond in a decade. Hopefully this season they'll face some teams that tend to actually give them a challenge like WC, Collingwood or the dogs.
WC were a man down for most of the game against the tigers after Hutchings did his hammy, Grimes at least returned to play out the match. Riewoldt kicking 2 goals with 15 disposals definitely isn't a stinker either. The rain definitely suits Richmond's game style more than West coast's and it was bucketing down from late in the 2nd term to midway through the 4th which is coincidentally when West coast wrestled back control of the game. A dry day, Naitanui and Kelly in the midfield and that game could look very different, so it will be very interesting to see how the clashes between the 2 teams eventuate this year. I think you'll be quite surprised if you think that game was an anomaly, WC match up very well against the tigers.
Another point you miss is JK, not sure if you're aware but he hadn't had a preseason since 2016 until this year, to be expected his form tapered off toward the end of last year as just turned 32. He's finished a full preseason this year for the first time in 4 years and kicked 6 goals in the rain against Essendon so don't be so sure that he's going to be a non factor going forward, he could give the coleman a shakeup this year.
WC also only have one player more than Richmond over the age of 30, JK, Hurn, Jetta and Schofield. Schofield is borderline B22 anyway, and Hurn was AA last year, and Jetta arguably in some of the best form of his career.
You need to make more than a surface level analysis next time.
This is true, regardless 12 game win streaks under any circumstances but particularly when it includes 3 finals are exceedingly rare are hard to do regardless of every caveat you put in.
We don't see that often, and I think it shows that in 2019 they were a class above everyone else, the finals series proved it.
That's just one season though, the next 2 years will be really interesting to see the challenge compared to Geelong's achievements.
- Sep 18, 2014
- 22,510
- 20,719
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Man United, San Antonio Spurs
I’m not a betting man but if Geelong of 07-11 played this current Richmond team, I wouldn’t hesitate to put good money on that cats team to win very comfortably, 50+ pts.
Richmond's rise from "worse than Fitzroy" at the start of 2010, to "potential dynasty in the making" at the start of 2020, was a calculated and methodical rebuild of a football club, in all facets, completed during a time of AFL expansion from 16 to 18 teams, thinned out talent pools, draft concessions to new clubs and old (looking at you Melbourne), and equalization agendas that were far stronger than anything really seen during the time of Geelong's build up in the early 2000's.
I think on paper it is very hard to argue that the on-field Richmond sides of 17-19 are "better" teams than the Cats of 07-11 were, however I think it's very EASY to make the argument that by the time Richmond's rebuild commenced in the late 00's and early 10's, it was MUCH more difficult to build a "dynasty" side, due to the evenness of the competition and what was happening in the footy landscape at the time.
Call it "footy inflation" if you will, but the Geelong rebuild started in the late 90's and early 2000's, in a time where things were very different. They didn't have to deal with 2 new clubs getting a ridiculous amount of draft concessions due to a dogged AFL agenda desperately wanting equalization, nor deal with coaching spending caps, or anything of the sort.
Geelong also had a pretty good track record of being a finalist, playing in multiple finals series in the 1980's and 1990's, and even several losing Grand Finals. They were never a rock-bottom team that had their culture gutted and destroyed.
Richmond on the other hand, were a hapless club for much of the 3 decades prior to their rebuild, who never looked like they'd escape the doldrums, and were pretty much at complete rock bottom when Hardwick and Gale came into the club at the end of 2009. Only qualifying for just the FINALS twice between 1983-2012 says it all.
TL;DR - I do think Geelong's teams are "better" football sides, and would win a head to head fantasy match, but if you adjust for all the other factors, Richmond's efforts to win 2 flags in 3 seasons (and an 18-4 season in between) are equally as valid and impressive as Geelong's efforts were, due to the tougher overall landscape they had to navigate while rebuilding.
We live in an era where teams can win the flag from 7th, and make Grand Finals from 6th. Back in Geelong's day, there were maybe 1 or 2 standout challengers to their dominance, and anybody who finished below 4th could be pretty much discounted as a threat... Richmond's done what they've done when there have been about 4 or 5 teams that could realistically have won it all, had things gone right for them on the day.
I think on paper it is very hard to argue that the on-field Richmond sides of 17-19 are "better" teams than the Cats of 07-11 were, however I think it's very EASY to make the argument that by the time Richmond's rebuild commenced in the late 00's and early 10's, it was MUCH more difficult to build a "dynasty" side, due to the evenness of the competition and what was happening in the footy landscape at the time.
Call it "footy inflation" if you will, but the Geelong rebuild started in the late 90's and early 2000's, in a time where things were very different. They didn't have to deal with 2 new clubs getting a ridiculous amount of draft concessions due to a dogged AFL agenda desperately wanting equalization, nor deal with coaching spending caps, or anything of the sort.
Geelong also had a pretty good track record of being a finalist, playing in multiple finals series in the 1980's and 1990's, and even several losing Grand Finals. They were never a rock-bottom team that had their culture gutted and destroyed.
Richmond on the other hand, were a hapless club for much of the 3 decades prior to their rebuild, who never looked like they'd escape the doldrums, and were pretty much at complete rock bottom when Hardwick and Gale came into the club at the end of 2009. Only qualifying for just the FINALS twice between 1983-2012 says it all.
TL;DR - I do think Geelong's teams are "better" football sides, and would win a head to head fantasy match, but if you adjust for all the other factors, Richmond's efforts to win 2 flags in 3 seasons (and an 18-4 season in between) are equally as valid and impressive as Geelong's efforts were, due to the tougher overall landscape they had to navigate while rebuilding.
We live in an era where teams can win the flag from 7th, and make Grand Finals from 6th. Back in Geelong's day, there were maybe 1 or 2 standout challengers to their dominance, and anybody who finished below 4th could be pretty much discounted as a threat... Richmond's done what they've done when there have been about 4 or 5 teams that could realistically have won it all, had things gone right for them on the day.
I’d happily bet against you on that. Cats handball game under Thompson was broken by 2010. Even their 2011 game would be absolutely cooked in 2019.
Hell, Richmond 2017 would lose by 5 goals to Richmond 2019.
That doesn’t mean I think the current tigers are better than those cats, 3 in 5 is undeniably better than 2 in 3. If we make it 3 in 4 this year though...
A Cut Above
🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 in my lifetime 😁
Richmond have done it without ever associating with Stephen Dank, Dean Robinson or Mark Thompson. Hence why I rate their achievement higher.
Back to back is just a statistic, and one used to denigrate Geelong by simpletons who weren't watching the game. It actually doesn't mean anything because all that matters is the here and now. When distinguishing teams like Geelong 07-11, Hawthorn 13-15, Brisbane 01-03, the current Richmond team, it's really talking about their optimal play and/or body of work for that period.
Geelong are number 1, and that's it. They were rock'n'roll football and are the only team that you enjoy watching them smash other teams (Including your own). They heightened the enjoyment of footy and raised the game. For all their success, the subsequent Hawthorn and Richmond teams are a beneficiary of the accumulated football knowledge that occurs over time.
We might not get to see if Richmond could better Geelong's era results wise in 2020, as at best we have a significantly disrupted season, at worst we might not get one.
Richmond are better on paper than our threepeat side, but not at the level of the Cats or Brisbane in talent, work and coaching...which is more a statement of how good those two sides were as opposed to any denigration of Richmond's qualities. Our coach is the GOAT, our work ethic matches the big two, but our line up wasn't even as good as a couple of the sides we beat in 2013-15, let alone these three...again, Clarko is god...
Should the Tigers contend again for a couple more years at the pointy end, and they've got a track record of outlasting adversity as all three of the others did, then they might overtake us clearly. I can't imagine anyone this century so far having line ups as good as the Lions and Cats though...that's just not there...the Tigers might go down as a great era side with more flags if they can snag another two (they're the only team with a "potential dynasty side" caption above their heads running around at the moment), but like us not get the gong for being "as good"...
Should the Tigers contend again for a couple more years at the pointy end, and they've got a track record of outlasting adversity as all three of the others did, then they might overtake us clearly. I can't imagine anyone this century so far having line ups as good as the Lions and Cats though...that's just not there...the Tigers might go down as a great era side with more flags if they can snag another two (they're the only team with a "potential dynasty side" caption above their heads running around at the moment), but like us not get the gong for being "as good"...
RichLeMonde
Club Legend
The team that this Richmond team is most similar to, in some way, is Collingwood in 2010. Both had/have considerable elite talent (though nowhere near as much as a legendary Geelong or Brisbane) but also quite a number of role players who excel through their discipline and work-rate within a defensively orientated game plan - a large part of which is based on forward half pressure - that seems to have caught the rest of the comp out. A lot people thought that Collingwood team would produce a dynasty, but they couldn't sustain it partly because the rest of the comp adjusted to their gameplan, and they were not so stocked with talent that they could just keep winning once things were equalised strategically. Richmond could easily be the same. Wouldn't be shocked if they didn't win another flag. Guess we'll see if the game evolves in a different direction this year, or if Richmond can win with more of the same.
- Jan 25, 2018
- 5,608
- 18,484
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
That Geelong side - I really enjoyed watching them play - 3 in 5 years is a good return, 4 GF's in 5 years suggests they were a very very good football side but even so I feel 3 flags with the side they had was a slight under achievement, they were that good!
If we manage to win it again this year and/or pinch another 1 or two over the next few years then we're in the conversation no matter what anyone says. Winning 2 flags in 3 years is fantastic but its a rung below Brisbane, geelong and Hawks - saying we dont stack up to the saints is laughable
If we manage to win it again this year and/or pinch another 1 or two over the next few years then we're in the conversation no matter what anyone says. Winning 2 flags in 3 years is fantastic but its a rung below Brisbane, geelong and Hawks - saying we dont stack up to the saints is laughable
eth-dog
Tier 1 WW Player
Not right now but they could be. I do agree it was a stronger era in 2007-11, but I think this current era is stronger than the Hawks 3 peat. Depends on how long Richmond stay "up"
Disagree that this richmond side is better on paper than the 3peat hawks.
I think on paper as a collection of players/talent they are below all of Geelong/Hawthorn/Brisbane
RichLeMonde
Club Legend
Were Hawthorn that good on paper though?
Hawthorn had 7 AA's in Hodge, Mitchell, Birchall, Rioli, Roughead, Lewis, Gibson, Franklin as AA,s plus 2 thereabouts (made squad) in Gunston and Burgoyne
Richmond have 8 AAs: Cotchin, Dusty, Rance, Riewoldt, Houli, Grimes, Lynch, Edwards, plus 3 thereabouts (made squad) in Prestia, Caddy, Lambert.
Brisbane had 8 AAs (Voss, Aker, Black, Brown, Power, Lappin, Johnson, Leppitsch), plus several who must have been the squad, like Lynch, Michael, White, Pike, maybe Hart.
Geelong had 17 AAs (Scarlett, Milburn, Enright, Ling, Ablett, Selwood, Chapman, Johnson, Harley, Mooney, Corey, Bartel, Egan, Kelly, Taylor, Hawkins, Mackie). Enough said.
I think Hawthorn were a bit lucky to jag 4 flags. As Danny Frawley said after the 3-peat, there's an asterisk there because the expansion teams entering the comp diluted draft picks for teams on the up during the period of Hawthorn's dominance, making it easier for the Hawks to stay on top. And they were quite lucky that their core senior players' bodies held up so that they continued to play top footy well into their 30s, which is extremely unusual. Let's not forget they had players like Ryan Schoenmakers and Spanger as part of their premiership teams. That Hawthorn team were in the right place at the right time. I think they are actually at a more similar level to dual premiers like West Coast and North Melbourne in the 90s, and Richmond are in the same bracket. Geelong and Brisbane different level of course.
No arguing the depth of the Geelong team
First of all, I don't believe AA's to be a very good way of determining the "better team on paper".
You've listed Hodge, Mitchell, Birchall, Rioli, Roughy, Lewis, Gibson, Franklin + Gunston and Burgoyne (All great players)
What about Lake (Norm Smith/AA's earlier in career), Smith (One of the best wingers in the game for a fair while), Breust (2014/2018 all australian), Hill (Freo BnF the year after he left the hawks)
If I was to create lists of each team's best players i'd say
-Hawks: Hodge Mitchell, Birchall, Rioli, Roughead, Lewis, Gibson, Franklin, Gunston, Burgoyne, Lake, Smith, Breust, Hill (14)
-Cats: Scarlett, Milburn, Enright, Ling, Ablett, Selwood, Chapman, Johnson, Harley, Mooney, Corey, Bartel, Egan, Kelly, Taylor, Hawkins, Mackie (17)
-Tiges: Cotchin, Dusty, Rance, Reiwoldt, Houli, Grimes, Lynch, Edwards, Prestia, Lambert, Caddy (11)
RichLeMonde
Club Legend
Yeah I know AA aren't the be all. I thought including squad selections was a better proxy for 'best team on paper', of course that leaves out what is arguably the most important part of being a premiership team - the strength of your bottom 8 players, where Richmond have been pretty good at not having to play absolute shit-trucks. But happy to take your principle of just nominating very good players.
Yeah I wasn't sure whether to include Lake, who was an AA early in his career, but winding down at Hawthorn, although he had a few great finals games (including a Normie as you say). Don't know why I left Breust off - I think once I wrote Birchall my brain thought I was done with the Bs. Smith is a fine player though not great. Hill didn't do much at Hawthorn to be fair.
To respond in kind, I'd take Hill off and add Vlaustin, who is one of the most versatile and reliable defenders in the league.
- Hawks: Hodge, Mitchell, Birchall, Rioli, Roughead, Lewis, Gibson, Franklin, Gunston, Burgoyne, Lake, Smith, Breust (12 + Franklin, who only played in 1 of 4 flags)
- Tiges: Cotchin, Dusty, Rance, Reiwoldt, Houli, Grimes, Lynch, Edwards, Prestia, Lambert, Caddy, Vlaustin (12 plus some emerging players who might get added to this list in a couple of years)
I think they're pretty comparable, which was my original point - Hawks and Richmond in similar bracket on paper, Cats and Lions cut above. Different story if Buddy stayed, which would push Hawks' era list into that rarefied air
I would have backed Ling to keep Martin quiet most games played against them.
In fact, go back 10 years ago and most teams had a gun tagger.
I also like our tall forwards in Podsiadly and Mooney (later years Hawkins) to have the better of Grimes and Astbury. I reckon Rance would have shut down Podsiadly but not Mooney as he would have pushed right up the ground.
Geelong also had better smalls like Chapman, Johnson and Varcoe.
Clear advantage to Geelong in ruck with Ottens and Blake. Blake was a shit ruck but when it came to endurance and tap work, he was in his element and that would not have bode well for Nankervis.
Obviously, midfield is the key and I'm just not sure if Richmond's mids could do enough for long enough. Bartel, Ablett, Corey, Kelly, Selwood . . . too many weapons on almost every line on the ground.
In fact, go back 10 years ago and most teams had a gun tagger.
I also like our tall forwards in Podsiadly and Mooney (later years Hawkins) to have the better of Grimes and Astbury. I reckon Rance would have shut down Podsiadly but not Mooney as he would have pushed right up the ground.
Geelong also had better smalls like Chapman, Johnson and Varcoe.
Clear advantage to Geelong in ruck with Ottens and Blake. Blake was a shit ruck but when it came to endurance and tap work, he was in his element and that would not have bode well for Nankervis.
Obviously, midfield is the key and I'm just not sure if Richmond's mids could do enough for long enough. Bartel, Ablett, Corey, Kelly, Selwood . . . too many weapons on almost every line on the ground.
Franklin actually played in 2/4 flags btw
Yeah Vlaustin's a pretty solid player and an really good footballer on his day.
To respond about Hill not doing much at hawthorn, and I know this is not a good measure but his highest Brownlow votes per game tally actually occurred at Hawthorn in 2015.
2015 stats:
20 disposals @ 77% efficiency +0.7 goals and 1 goal assist per game
for comparison his 2019 season was
25 disposals @ 67% +0.3 goals and 0.7 goal assists per game
I'd have him on the list personally
- Banned
- #49
Floss is a gun. Criminally underrated, imo
- Banned
- #50
Fancy if Richmond had dank and the weapon though
Jack Graham would be running through walls
Similar threads
