Just hand the flamin flag to the pies and be done with it

[KissStephanie]

Thanks for the laugh. One player is an All-Australian. I'll let you guess which one.

Probably the one that is three years older (Taylor). That said, I think Harry Taylor only had a slightly better season than Ben Reid last year, and I think Reid has been slightly better than Taylor to date this year, and his price and average score in both Dream Team and SuperCoach this year supports my opinion.

However, it doesn't matter because it wasn't my point anyway. A Geelong supporter included Taylor in a group of important young Geelong players, but he did not include Reid in a group of important young Collingwood players which was unfair considering there is very little between the performances of the two.

Pales in insignificance compared to some of the crap some Pies fans have come up with in this thread though, especially KS.

If you disagree with my opinion, then that is your choice, but there is no need for that. I feel comfortable with my opinion, and I haven't seen anything from you or anybody else that makes me feel differently, but go right ahead and explain your reasons if you want to. Maybe you're just in denial and you don't want to accept what I have said, so instead of attacking the topic, you've just decided to attack me instead which is weak.

 

[Suspense]

but oh no bartel is way too old and is a hack.

disagree.

Interesting how no rule changes were implemented when the Cats won their flags.

disagree.

 

[Conan Troutman]

Collingwood are better than both those sides ATM.

Better than Geelong 08 and Essendon 01?

LMFAO

 

[Conan Troutman]

IF it bleeds folks...

Season is long from over.

Being far too kind to Collingwood, bringing out the "if it bleeds" line there frednirk - that is meant for teams who are dominating the competition.

Collingwood have already shown they bleed easier than 99% of previous reigning premiers, having had 2 attempts at the grand final. One kick, and this discussion wouldn't even be taking place.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Probably the one that is three years older (Taylor). That said, I think Harry Taylor only had a slightly better season than Ben Reid last year, and I think Reid has been slightly better than Taylor to date this year, and his price and average score in both Dream Team and SuperCoach this year supports my opinion.

oh god

 

[boncer34]

The second someone turns to supercoach and dreamteam to justify an argument is the second you know they're having you on.

 

[MOONEY 21]

yes, got a lot to thank Thompson for

no, we have Stephen Wells to thank.

 

[KissStephanie]

Collingwood have already shown they bleed easier than 99% of previous reigning premiers, having had 2 attempts at the grand final. One kick, and this discussion wouldn't even be taking place.

Actually some of the best teams in history lost a final before rebounding to make the Grand Final and win it. Carlton in 1972 and 1982. Richmond in 1973. Essendon in 1984. Brisbane in 2003 and many others. Collingwood didn't lose a final though and won three finals against the other three top-4 teams by a combined total of 159 points.

The second someone turns to supercoach and dreamteam to justify an argument is the second you know they're having you on.

It supports my opinion because Ben Reid is an important young Collingwood player, so please elaborate.

 

[damuzzdu]

Being far too kind to Collingwood, bringing out the "if it bleeds" line there frednirk - that is meant for teams who are dominating the competition.

Collingwood have already shown they bleed easier than 99% of previous reigning premiers, having had 2 attempts at the grand final. One kick, and this discussion wouldn't even be taking place.

OMG we have the one kick theory back again. Guess what sunshine ...

Enjoy the picture, I do.

 

[Conan Troutman]

Actually some of the best teams in history lost a final before rebounding to make the Grand Final and win it. Carlton in 1972 and 1982. Richmond in 1973. Essendon in 1984. Brisbane in 2003 and many others. Collingwood didn't lose a final though and won three finals against the other three top-4 teams by a combined total of 159 points.It supports my opinion because Ben Reid is an important young Collingwood player, so please elaborate.

Yeah and the same can be said that many GF winners - which are not considered all-time greats - have gone through without losing a final too.

Were 99% of them closer to losing the GF than Collingwood 2010? No.

RE: Ben Reid, as has been pointed out earlier, Taylor was subbed off in one game due to illness. Reid only has a 1 point higher average in both DT and SC, so with only 5 games played, it's pretty safe to say that in the games were Taylor and Reid are not subbed off, Taylor has a higher average than Reid - higher than the 1 point margin Reid currently has when including Taylor's sub game.

 

[Pera]

Bitch fights everywhere, close thread.

 

[Falchoon]

As to Sharrod Welingham - meh. I was just shocked when St. Kilda rejected him as part of Luke Ball trade/nontrade. I could easily the potential in Sharrod W. Heck at this stage last year, we had just lost to St. Kilda so thinking of premierships was well back in the thinking.

Never offered to St kilda to reject.


Don't believe everything KS tells you, joel Bowden is not the best defender of the last decade

 

[Conan Troutman]

OMG we have the one kick theory back again. Guess what sunshine ...

Enjoy the picture, I do.

hehe, yeah.... I did say they were the reigning premier, but feel free to ignore that, along with ignoring the drawn game.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

The second someone turns to supercoach and dreamteam to justify an argument is the second you know they're having you on.

Of course, and when you're talking about key posi defenders? Ludicrous.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

Being far too kind to Collingwood, bringing out the "if it bleeds" line there frednirk - that is meant for teams who are dominating the competition.

Collingwood have already shown they bleed easier than 99% of previous reigning premiers, having had 2 attempts at the grand final. One kick, and this discussion wouldn't even be taking place.

You can't win a flag with one kick.

 

[Conan Troutman]

You can't win a flag with one kick.

No you can't, but you can lose one.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

No you can't, but you can lose one.

No you can't. It takes many kicks, kicking many goals. St Kilda didn't kick enough. It's as simple as that.

 

[KissStephanie]

Yeah and the same can be said that many GF winners - which are not considered all-time greats - have gone through without losing a final too.

Name some of them as I have done. I actually agree with this thread which ranks the Collingwood premiership team of 2010 as the 26th best of 114 premiership teams of all time, which is very, very good! That means that only Essendon of 2000 and Geelong of 2007 are ranked higher in the past fifteen years.

Were 99% of them closer to losing the GF than Collingwood 2010? No.

Collingwood won 20 matches and lost only 4 for the season, and finished with a percentage of more than 147% after winning three finals by a combined total of 159 points. It was one of the great seasons. I'm glad now the Grand Final was a draw too because the second youngest premiership winning team of all time got to experience two Grand Finals which is great, and the near loss in the first one was a great lesson for the future as well so that it doesn't happen again.

RE: Ben Reid, as has been pointed out earlier, Taylor was subbed off in one game due to illness. Reid only has a 1 point higher average in both DT and SC, so with only 5 games played, it's pretty safe to say that in the games were Taylor and Reid are not subbed off, Taylor has a higher average than Reid - higher than the 1 point margin Reid currently has when including Taylor's sub game.

Well done for pointing that out. And as I pointed out earlier, Ben Reid was subbed off in Round 4 after hyper-extending his knee during the third quarter of that match. Ignorance is bliss.

 

[Suspense]

Being far too kind to Collingwood, bringing out the "if it bleeds" line there frednirk - that is meant for teams who are dominating the competition.

Collingwood have already shown they bleed easier than 99% of previous reigning premiers, having had 2 attempts at the grand final. One kick, and this discussion wouldn't even be taking place.

it's quite simple. (generally speaking) we lose the contested ball, we lose the game. we can lose the contested ball (see the second half of the first GF) but we don't lose it very often and we won it both times we last played geelong and in the GF replay.

also, so long as the differential isn't significant, we can occasionally still win games despite losing the contested ball (we were slightly beaten last week vs essendon who are ranked second in 2011 (we are 1st) but we were more effective going forward).

comments such as "collingwood bleed easier than 99% of previous reigning premiers" are empty nothing statements; you are literally saying nothing. why even post?

 

[Conan Troutman]

And as I pointed out earlier, Ben Reid was subbed off in Round 4 after hyper-extending his knee during the third quarter of that match. Ignorance is bliss.

lol, now that is embarrassing
my apologies for being a bit of knob there.

 

[Conan Troutman]

Name some of them as I have done. I actually agree with this thread which ranks the Collingwood premiership team of 2010 as the 26th best of 114 premiership teams of all time, which is very, very good!

Collingwood won 20 matches and lost only 4 for the season, and finished with a percentage of more than 147% after winning three finals by a combined total of 159 points. It was one of the great seasons.

Adelaide '97 is the first which comes to mind. Kangaroos 99, Hawthorn 08, Geelong 09 etc I don't think lost any finals. Would they be rated above the greats you mentioned, who did lose a final?

26th is a good rating, and I generally have agreed with Dans posts over the years - I don't agree with that ranking though.

What makes Collingwood '10 so much better/different to West Coast '06 (82nd), Hawthorn 08 (56th), or Geelong '09 (42nd)?

Geelong 09 (18-0-4) actually finished with one more win than the Pies (17-1-4), while West Coast 06 (17-0-5) and Hawthorn 08 (17-0-5) had the same number of wins, with a draw being the difference (Hawthorn combined margin of 131 btw). All three teams have almost the same record as Collingwood last year - but with one glaring difference - they did not have a drawn Grand Final. West Coast's margin of 1 point cannot be any smaller to win, yet they were still 1 point better in their GF attempt than the Pies. The second GF is irrelevant in these comparisons, because the first one still happened - Geelong, WC and Hawthorn were good enough to not need the second one.

Sorry, maybe I have a think skull, but I just cannot see how a drawn grand final is anything but a negative when ranking a GF winning team, and I don't understand why it is, that some people seem overlook GF1 like it didn't happen and/or has no value in history. Even you yourself mentioned winning 3 finals by a total of 159 - I know you said 'wins', but the draw should have been included in that (if a fourth game was a win or loss, you could not have excluded it - win for obvious reasons, loss because the stat would be meaningless - so why exclude the draw?) - making the average margin just under 40 per final (compared to Hawthorn's 08 average margin of just under 44, fwiw).

I'm not suggesting the Pies were bad either - they obviously did have a good season, but I don't see it as anything special - nothing more than your average premier which happens every year. The draw knocks them back a few rungs IMO. They may have had an above average home and away season (was certainly better than some other GF winners), but nothing spectacular - the GF runners-up the two previous years (08-09) had better H/A seasons (as did the 09 winner, as I mentioned earlier, with 08 and 06 also being extremely close).

Anyway, I may be be going off topic, but, back to the point of the thread, and the main point I've been trying to make in this thread (admittedly badly in some of my posts), the above shows partly why I think Collingwood last year and early this year have been a little overrated by some - this thread being a good example.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

Adelaide '97 is the first which comes to mind. Kangaroos 99, Hawthorn 08, Geelong 09 etc I don't think lost any finals. Would they be rated above the greats you mentioned, who did lose a final?

26th is a good rating, and I generally have agreed with Dans posts over the years - I don't agree with that ranking though.

What makes Collingwood '10 so much better/different to West Coast '06 (82nd), Hawthorn 08 (56th), or Geelong '09 (42nd)?

Geelong 09 (18-0-4) actually finished with one more win than the Pies (17-1-4), while West Coast 06 (17-0-5) and Hawthorn 08 (17-0-5) had the same number of wins, with a draw being the difference (Hawthorn combined margin of 131 btw). All three teams have almost the same record as Collingwood last year - but with one glaring difference - they did not have a drawn Grand Final. West Coast's margin of 1 point cannot be any smaller to win, yet they were still 1 point better in their GF attempt than the Pies. The second GF is irrelevant in these comparisons, because the first one still happened - Geelong, WC and Hawthorn were good enough to not need the second one.

Sorry, maybe I have a think skull, but I just cannot see how a drawn grand final is anything but a negative when ranking a GF winning team, and I don't understand why it is, that some people seem overlook GF1 like it didn't happen and/or has no value in history. Even you yourself mentioned winning 3 finals by a total of 159 - I know you said 'wins', but the draw should have been included in that (if a fourth game was a win or loss, you could not have excluded it - win for obvious reasons, loss because the stat would be meaningless - so why exclude the draw?) - making the average margin just under 40 per final (compared to Hawthorn's 08 average margin of just under 44, fwiw).

I'm not suggesting the Pies were bad either - they obviously did have a good season, but I don't see it as anything special - nothing more than your average premier which happens every year. The draw knocks them back a few rungs IMO. They may have had an above average home and away season (was certainly better than some other GF winners), but nothing spectacular - the GF runners-up the two previous years (08-09) had better H/A seasons (as did the 09 winner, as I mentioned earlier, with 08 and 06 also being extremely close).

Anyway, I may be be going off topic, but, back to the point of the thread, and the main point I've been trying to make in this thread (admittedly badly in some of my posts), the above shows partly why I think Collingwood last year and early this year have been a little overrated by some - this thread being a good example.

Just wondering... What's your margin for error?

 

[KissStephanie]

Adelaide '97 is the first which comes to mind. Kangaroos 99, Hawthorn 08, Geelong 09 etc I don't think lost any finals. Would they be rated above the greats you mentioned, who did lose a final?

The Collingwood 2010 premiership team is better than those three teams in my opinion.

26th is a good rating, and I generally have agreed with Dans posts over the years - I don't agree with that ranking though.

I have agreed with his rankings in the past too, and I agree with that ranking as well. He has put more time into it than you have as well, so therefore it doesn't mean anything if you don't agree with it of course.

What makes Collingwood '10 so much better/different to West Coast '06 (82nd), Hawthorn 08 (56th), or Geelong '09 (42nd)?

West Coast of 2006 lost more matches after Round 22, and they lost their first final, and their percentage was only 120.4%. Hawthorn in 2008 also lost more matches, and their percentage was only 131.8%, and they didn't win the McClelland Trophy because they weren't minor premiers. Geelong in 2009 also didn't win the McClelland Trophy because they weren't minor premiers either, and their percentage was only 127.4%. It's not very difficult if you just think about this a bit more.

Geelong 09 (18-0-4) actually finished with one more win than the Pies (17-1-4)

But they didn't didn't win the McClelland Trophy because they weren't minor premiers. Collingwood were in 2010.

while West Coast 06 (17-0-5) and Hawthorn 08 (17-0-5) had the same number of wins, with a draw being the difference (Hawthorn combined margin of 131 btw).

Firstly, both West Coast in 2006 and Hawthorn in 2008 lost more matches than Collingwood, so why are you even mentioning those two teams? Secondly, both of those two teams had a much inferior percentage than Collingwood in 2010. Thirdly, West Coast lost the Qualifying Final to Sydney in 2006, so they actually lost six matches for the season, so forget them for goodness sake.

Also, Hawthorn did not win the McClelland Trophy in 2008 because they weren't minor premiers, and finally their combined winning margin in finals of 131 is less than Collingwood's combined winning margin of 159 points, so why even mention that? What I completely fail to understand is the reason that you're bothering to even mention West Coast of 2006, and Hawthorn of 2008 when even 'Blind Freddy' can see that the 2010 Collingwood team were better.

All three teams have almost the same record as Collingwood last year - but with one glaring difference - they did not have a drawn Grand Final. West Coast's margin of 1 point cannot be any smaller to win, yet they were still 1 point better in their GF attempt than the Pies. The second GF is irrelevant in these comparisons, because the first one still happened - Geelong, WC and Hawthorn were good enough to not need the second one.

No, I've already explained the differences. West Coast of 2006 and Hawthorn of 2008 lost more matches. West Coast also lost a final. Hawthorn did not win the McClelland Trophy, and neither did Geelong in 2009. All three teams had a much inferior percentage as well.

Sorry, maybe I have a think skull, but I just cannot see how a drawn grand final is anything but a negative when ranking a GF winning team, and I don't understand why it is, that some people seem overlook GF1 like it didn't happen and/or has no value in history.

It's not a negative to have a draw. It's only a negative to lose of course. I don't understand why you overlook the McClelland Trophy, and the reason you mention two teams that actually lost more matches during the season, and your failure to compare the teams percentage as well.

Even you yourself mentioned winning 3 finals by a total of 159 - I know you said 'wins', but the draw should have been included in that (if a fourth game was a win or loss, you could not have excluded it - win for obvious reasons, loss because the stat would be meaningless - so why exclude the draw?) - making the average margin just under 40 per final (compared to Hawthorn's 08 average margin of just under 44, fwiw).

Oh for goodness sake. Your bias against Collingwood is nauseating. Hawthorn lost more matches in 2008 than Collingwood did in 2010. Hawthorn did not win the McClelland Trophy either, and their percentage was much inferior. Let it go.

I'm not suggesting the Pies were bad either - they obviously did have a good season, but I don't see it as anything special - nothing more than your average premier which happens every year.

Average premier that happens every year? Oh for goodness sake. Lets just go back to 2000 then when Essendon definitely had a better season. In 2001-2003, Brisbane failed to win one McClelland Trophy, and they lost more matches in each season. In 2004, Port Adelaide lost more matches, and they had a much inferior percentage. In 2005, Sydney lost more matches and did not win the McClelland trophy.

West Coast in 2006 has been covered so they weren't as good either. Geelong in 2007 were better. Hawthorn in 2008 has been covered so they weren't as good either. Geelong did not win the McClelland Trophy in 2009 so that instantly rules them out as well. Therefore, Collingwood in 2010 were not an average premier that happens every year, but would you like to go back even further than 2000?

The draw knocks them back a few rungs IMO. They may have had an above average home and away season (was certainly better than some other GF winners), but nothing spectacular

Ha ha ha! Now which part of Collingwood's extremely difficult fixture of 2010 could you possibly be complaining about? Last season, Collingwood had to play five of the other seven top-8 teams of 2009 twice. The only two that were played once were 5th placed Adelaide and 6th placed Brisbane. We also only got to play six of the bottom seven teams from 2009 once each, so there weren't many easy matches because it was a very difficult fixture!

Now comparing last years fixture to last years ladder, Collingwood played the other top-3 teams twice again, as well as in the finals. The only two top-8 teams that Collingwood had to play once last year were 5th placed Sydney and 6th placed Fremantle. Of the eight teams that didn't make the finals last season, Collingwood only got to play two of them twice (12th placed Melbourne and 14th placed Essendon), so that further confirms that last years fixture was very difficult. How could you possibly be disputing that?

the GF runners-up the two previous years (08-09) had better H/A seasons (as did the 09 winner, as I mentioned earlier, with 08 and 06 also being extremely close).

Oh my goodness. Now you're even talking about teams that didn't even with the premiership. Why would you even bother to do that because they do not count at all? I think I've made it pretty clear in my response here that you do not know what you're talking about, so no wonder you disagree with Collingwood's ranking of 26th best premiership team of all time. If you opened up both eyes instead though, then maybe you would just accept it.

 

[tazhawk]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Hawks 08 Premiership team would flog the Collingwood 10 Premiership team.

I look forward to your 24000 word essay in reply.

 

[tazhawk]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Hawks 08 Premiership team would flog the Collingwood 10 Premiership team.

I look forward to your 24000 word essay in reply.