Lions vs Cats vs Hawks - Which dynasty is the best?

[toomanysquibs]

Bris era vs. Hawks era on paper match-up. Hawks smash Lions in game plan and coach's box - but different era, so whatever....

I'm sure there are Brisbane players left out of this, that I probably should have remembered.

Where no clear winner (in my view) exists, I left both names in regular font.

I hear people everywhere calling me a F$#@ for not bolding Voss over Mitchell. I think Mitchell is arguably the best Hawthorn player in this side (no matter what 'experts' or umpires believe) a complete warrior and bezerker at the contest, like Voss, and out of respect to Mitchell, I can't possibly make him second to anyone. I hold Voss in exceptionally high regard, freak, leader, tough, talented - versatile (mitchell only two positions).



B: Chris Johnson Mal Michael Darryl White - incredibly agile, sublimely skillful, massive toe
B: James Frawley Brian Lake Brent Guerra - absolutely elite user of the ball and harder (White not soft by any stretch). No Brisbane supporter will agree.

HB: Luke Power Justin Leppitsch Nigel Lappin
HB: Shaun Burgoyne Josh Gibson (stiff) Grant Birchall (close, Lappin in talent, Birch in hardness)

C: Jason Akermanis Michael Voss (c) Martin Pike
C: Shane Crawford Sam Mitchell Jordan Lewis

HF: Ashley McGrath Jonathan Brown Robert Copeland
HF: Luke Breust Lance Franklin - maybe Cyril Rioli

F: Craig McRae Alastair Lynch Daniel Bradshaw
F: Mark Williams Jack Gunston Jarryd Roughead

Foll: Clark Keating Simon Black Shaun Hart - competitive beast
Foll: Max Bailey Brad Sewell Luke Hodge (c)

Int: Jamie Charman Blake Caracella Marcus Ashcroft Richard Hadley/Des Headland - career best form
Int: Liam Shiels/Puopolo Isaac Smith Bradley Hill Trent Croad/David Hale

 

[Goggin Our Best]

When it matters, we beat you.

Does not matter if u beat us 20 on the trot, we beat you in finals.

You realise flags are won in September right?

I'm not gonna give you all the stats, you would know them by now.

You remember the 2013 Prelim final yes, where we came back and ripped your soul out. Remember? That game alone has brought me all the happiness I need. We crushed that Geelong spirit and you guys still haven't recovered.

Since then you got knocked out in straight sets 14 and didn't make finals in 15.
Since then we have won 3 flags. Every flag since that match.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it brother

The GF scorecard between Hawthorn and Geelong is 2-1 Hawthorns way 2-1 mate for goodness sake

You are a typical arrogant Hawthorn bandwagonner flog - you carry on like the GF scorecard is 5 zip Hawthorns way

Premierships are the name of the game - and its 2 - 1 Mate - feuuck !- exactly the same GF scorecard that Essendon have got with you

 

[STFU Donnie]

Where's Nakia?

 

[Hawkk]

The GF scorecard between Hawthorn and Geelong is 2-1 Hawthorns way 2-1 mate for goodness sake

You are a typical arrogant Hawthorn bandwagonner flog - you carry on like the GF scorecard is 5 zip Hawthorns way

Premierships are the name of the game - and its 2 - 1 Mate - feuuck !- exactly the same GF scorecard that Essendon have got with you

Who are you kidding?

Finals matches that were decisive in determining the premiership...

1963
Major SF Geelong 101 def Hawthorn 82
GF Geelong 109 def Hawthorn 60 (Geelong flag)

1989
GF Hawthorn 144 def Geelong 138 (Hawthorn flag)

1991
Major SF Hawthorn 95 def Geelong 93 (Hawthorn flag)

2008
GF Hawthorn 115 def Geelong 89 (Hawthorn flag)

2011
QF Geelong 98 def Hawthorn 67 (Geelong flag)

2013
PF Hawthorn 102 def Geelong 97 (Hawthorn flag)

2014
QF Hawthorn 104 def Geelong 68 (Hawthorn flag)

The non GF matches were decisive in setting up the premiership bid (the 1963, 1991 and 2013 matches all allowed for entry to the Grand Final)

When it matters Hawthorn holds a 5-2 advantage

 

[Smooth Banana]

The GF scorecard between Hawthorn and Geelong is 2-1 Hawthorns way 2-1 mate for goodness sake

You are a typical arrogant Hawthorn bandwagonner flog - you carry on like the GF scorecard is 5 zip Hawthorns way

Premierships are the name of the game - and its 2 - 1 Mate - feuuck !- exactly the same GF scorecard that Essendon have got with you

So if your team who you have followed throughout your life starts kickin ass and winning flags, do the supporters of that team become bandwagon supporters? Is that how it works im seriously confused..

 

[jonesy233]

So Brisbane were more dominant but would lose to Hawks?
Some great logic there mate

Like u said, if it was both teams playing at their best Hawks would smash Brisbane. The game has changed considerably in 10 years.

Brisbane team of champions, Hawks champion team.

Last I checked it was a team sport

The point I was making was that Brisbane seemed to have an aura of dominance about them during their 3-peat and seemed to bully teams into submission, whereas my perception of the Hawka is that they play great consistent footy but with sublime skills. The Hawks have much more chance of going 4peat than Lions did.

 

[dean31]

The GF scorecard between Hawthorn and Geelong is 2-1 Hawthorns way 2-1 mate for goodness sake

You are a typical arrogant Hawthorn bandwagonner flog - you carry on like the GF scorecard is 5 zip Hawthorns way

Premierships are the name of the game - and its 2 - 1 Mate - feuuck !- exactly the same GF scorecard that Essendon have got with you

The Bitterness is strong in this one!

 

[dean31]

The point I was making was that Brisbane seemed to have an aura of dominance about them during their 3-peat and seemed to bully teams into submission, whereas my perception of the Hawka is that they play great consistent footy but with sublime skills. The Hawks have much more chance of going 4peat than Lions did.

Yes they bullied teams into submission with their tally of less wins per season and a lower average percentage.

 

[dean31]

Depends how you look at it. The Hawks have made the most of a talent glut in the competition.

Whereas that talent glut coincided around the time Geelong fell. So lol.

Geelong were superior/better. But Hawks have more flags. Over time the only people who will know Geelong were the better team are those who were alive during their era.

Better like in their absolute peak season of 2008 they were easily accounted for in the big dance?

 

[dean31]

I think everyone accepts they were. Which is why you're more or less validating my point

Not at all, if they were as good as you say they are they would have backed it up by winning atleast 2 in a row. Extremely hard to do for any club and that's where the Hawks clearly demonstrate their superiority over Geelong.

 

[harrislp]

Why is Geelong even in the discussion? Really, I'm serious. Hawks and Lions are the only real comparison. Sorry Cats fans, I don't want to upset you but Lions and Hawks were/are great teams, where Geelong had some of the greatest players of the era and would be easily the third best team of the modern era. No shame in that.

 

[dean31]

Don't agree with that as I can't follow your logic. Are you saying for the last century every single flag has been won by the best side that season?

No If the best team won every year the Hawks would be going for 5 in a row. But a team that it's fans want recognition for as been a dynasty should atleast be able to string a couple together. Given the difficulty of completing that is why Geelong could not reach those heights.
Perhaps we should consult the pole at the top of the page??
Yep it says Hawks top and the Cats 3rd or last which ever you prefer and that has been backed up by your club legend Cameron Ling!

 

[JackOutback]

No If the best team won every year the Hawks would be going for 5 in a row. But a team that it's fans want recognition for as been a dynasty should atleast be able to string a couple together. Given the difficulty of completing that is why Geelong could not reach those heights.
Perhaps we should consult the pole at the top of the page??
Yep it says Hawks top and the Cats 3rd or last which ever you prefer and that has been backed up by your club legend Cameron Ling!

No you wouldn't. If you're going to count 2012, then you would have to take out 2013.

 

[dean31]

No you wouldn't. If you're going to count 2012, then you would have to take out 2013.

Why would I take out 2013? Hawks were clear minor premier as they were in 2012. I rated them higher than the Swans last year despite the media hype also. Hawks were a goal difference in percentage only from the Swans after having a horror run with injuries, a significantly harder draw than the Swans and the coach out for the month. Rated Hawks as the best this year as apart from a rough start they were clearly the best team from round 9 onwards, regularly flogged other top opposition, had the best record against other top 8 teams and were league leaders for attack and defence.

 

[JackOutback]

Why would I take out 2013? Hawks were clear minor premier as they were in 2012. I rated them higher than the Swans last year despite the media hype also. Hawks were a goal difference in percentage only from the Swans after having a horror run with injuries, a significantly harder draw than the Swans and the coach out for the month. Rated Hawks as the best this year as apart from a rough start they were clearly the best team from round 9 onwards, regularly flogged other top opposition, had the best record against other top 8 teams and were league leaders for attack and defence.

Typo, I meant 2014. Swans clearly favourites going into 2014, just as Hawks were in 2012.

 

[dean31]

One side was technically non-canon (AFL funded). While the other has several 4 time premiership players and the team as a whole can't take their game to the next level. The other 2 asserted that dominance without dispute, and established a mark. Hawks haven't despite winning 4.

Geelong had father sons like every club. The only dirt people seem to pull up on them. Because being the only genuine home grown club in this poll is apparently a bad thing.

That's ridiculous, what other club had players through father son like.
Ablett ( one of the best ever )
Scarlett ( possibly best defender of AFL era)
Hawkins
But I don't hold this against the Cats, father son is just luck of the draw. Cats had their chance for greatness but couldn't string them together to be in this discussion as reflected in The voting at the top of the page where they are in last spot.
Lions were completely manufactured by the AFL and despite your memory of them they did not win as many games per season or come close to the Hawks in percentage. Wins and percentage are what demonstrate dominance as long as it is capped off with the Premeirship otherwise it's just choking or underachieving.

 

[jonesy233]

I was ta

Yes they bullied teams into submission with their tally of less wins per season and a lower average percentage.

Was referring to their style of play.

 

[dean31]

Typo, I meant 2014. Swans clearly favourites going into 2014, just as Hawks were in 2012.

Clearly favourites by what measure though??
The wins/losses were the same and the percentage was around a goal difference. There was a lot of media and buddy hype. Hawks had the harder draw and significant injuries and if not for their depth would have been season defining like 2009. Clarkson was also out for a month. With a near full strength team leading into finals I knew the Hawks were the better team and they clearly demonstrated that in the GF.

 

[JackOutback]

Clearly favourites by what measure though??
The wins/losses were the same and the percentage was around a goal difference. There was a lot of media and buddy hype. Hawks had the harder draw and significant injuries and if not for their depth would have been season defining like 2009. Clarkson was also out for a month. With a near full strength team leading into finals I knew the Hawks were the better team and they clearly demonstrated that in the GF.

So when Hawks were top of the table, they were the best, when they weren't the top of the table they were the best? Am I doing this right?

If you want to claim you were the best team in 2012 because you finished top, you have to give up 2014 and '15.

 

[dean31]

I was ta

Was referring to their style of play.

Yes a very different style of play I agree with that. Lions more a physical 1 on 1 type game style.

 

[Pessimistic]

Don't agree with that as I can't follow your logic. Are you saying for the last century every single flag has been won by the best side that season?

Even if Hawks win next year they won't separate themselves as Mitchell says. It will of course in one aspect but 5, 7 flags etc. If they're all with 6 losses a year.

Play like you did against Carlton against other sides, for a consistency of 2/3-5yrs. Then it doesn't matter how many flags you have, that's greatness.

Flags are relative to the median skill in the competition at the time (excluding anomalies such as chokes/bradburys). Right now the median skill is vastly shitter than last decade. So that in effectiveness is what a flag represents.

They dont count qualifying rounds in fifa world cup and only a few teams get off on minor premiership.

Its merely a qualifying round, they even make it easier for shit teams these days

 

[Pessimistic]

The point I was making was that Brisbane seemed to have an aura of dominance about them during their 3-peat and seemed to bully teams into submission, whereas my perception of the Hawka is that they play great consistent footy but with sublime skills. The Hawks have much more chance of going 4peat than Lions did.

Untill they actually went the biff with port and epic failed

 

[dean31]

So when Hawks were top of the table, they were the best, when they weren't the top of the table they were the best? Am I doing this right?

If you want to claim you were the best team in 2012 because you finished top, you have to give up 2014 and '15.

Ladder position doesn't mean everything. Adelaide a few years ago had the softest draw in memory and finished second and probably 4 teams were better than them. West Coast were clearly better than Fremantle this year in my opinion. Ladder position does not account for everything, does not account for the draw, injuries etc. Maybe this year is debatable between West Coast and Hawthorn with West Coast been the most consistent and the Hawks beltings of other teams in the top 8. Hawks beat 5/8 top teams by more than 10 goals throughout the season. West Coast were consistently dominant most of the year.
Fremantle were the best team after 10 rounds and that's about it. From that point on their form was average at best.

 

[Hawkk]

Depends how you look at it. The Hawks have made the most of a talent glut in the competition.

Whereas that talent glut coincided around the time Geelong fell. So lol.

Geelong were superior/better. But Hawks have more flags. Over time the only people who will know Geelong were the better team are those who were alive during their era.

To everyone say born after 2040, it's a numbers game and 4>3. Despite the team being vastly undermanned in comparison. I mean even Saints were a far superior team than Hawthorn.

Hawks are a side that win when it matters. They'll never wow you but they'll get their flag lol.

LOL

 

[psychobrown]

I'd probably have to say the Hawks, mostly due to the four and achieving the three-peat in an era of two parasitic clubs bottling up high-end talent. Just think though, had mental toughness prevailed, it could well have been Cats vs Hawks vs Port vs Bombers.