Certified Legendary Thread Race for the flag, in squiggly lines

[SJ]

Look at that frickin' Giants icon. Recall that all their best players are 21 years old. It's going to be a rough few years for the rest of us. We can only hope that this is the year they fall short, becoming bitter and hungry, before dominating the next five years, falling into an arrogance-induced decline, and asking for a priority pick.

Just to add to the unfairness, the Giants finished 3rd yet don't have to travel, a benefit normally reserved for Victorian teams.

So hopefully Sydney's experienced heads come in and steamroll them. THE FUTURE IS YOURS, GIANTS FANS, JUST LET US HAVE ONE THAT ISN'T HAWTHORN FIRST. Sydney spent most of this year in the Ross Lyon quadrant before kicking into gear in Round 19. They're now the top-rated team, both on the regular squiggle and on Flagpole, with a top-2 run at the GF.

Sydney 83 - 72 Greater Western Sydney

Flagpole: Sydney 1st, GWS 3rd

A lot of their best players are older. As a proxy for output of player, let's use their top 15 in the AFL Player Ratings:

http://www.afl.com.au/stats/player-ratings/overall-standings#club/CD_T1010



Ward 26
Shiel 23
Shaw 30
Mumford 30
Williams 21
Greene 22
Griffen 30
Scully 25
Coniglio 22
Kelly 21
Johnson 33
Smith 23
Cameron 23
Haynes 24
Davis 25

 

[Final Siren]

Final Siren , firstly enjoy your holiday/work trip.

Looking back over this thread I noticed you predicted Fremantles drop for this year. If you have time now or after you come back , can you give us a Squiggle look at the team to drop , if one has shown up for next year?

Fremantle really was unusual... as I wrote at the time, I think you could play 2015 over a hundred times and Fremantle wouldn't win the minor premiership again once. A lot of things had to align for them and they all did.

Most years won't have a Fremantle. This year, outside the finalists, there isn't even an Adelaide or a West Coast, where the squiggle rates them quite a bit differently to their ladder position. Instead everyone is within a few places of their ladder rank.

That said, Collingwood will probably be tipped to make 2017 finals at North's expense if the Roos crash out this weekend.

Hawthorn are primed for a fall if they have a bad finals season, since they're 3rd on the ladder but 6th on squiggle, and will enter 2017 with a difficult fixture. But the gap between 6th and 7th (Dogs) is wide, so it would need to be a pretty bad season. Even then, they'll probably be tipped for the lower spots in the Eight rather than missing out altogether.

 

[old55]

Any chance of a Roos' Demons before you go on holiday Final Siren ?

 

[Final Siren]

A lot of their best players are older. As a proxy for output of player, let's use their top 15 in the AFL Player Ratings:

http://www.afl.com.au/stats/player-ratings/overall-standings#club/CD_T1010

View attachment 285372

Ward 26
Shiel 23
Shaw 30
Mumford 30
Williams 21
Greene 22
Griffen 30
Scully 25
Coniglio 22
Kelly 21
Johnson 33
Smith 23
Cameron 23
Haynes 24
Davis 25

This article uses a very similar methodology:

Only goes up to May, though.

 

[Headless]

Any chance of a Roos' Demons before you go on holiday Final Siren ?

Imagine Daniher '07 - 'Roos 16. Would be interesting viewing.

 

[JD-Roo]

Final Siren,

For what it's worth I had a squiz through 1897.

Something odd happens with South Melbourne in Round 2 and onwards. They only win by four points, with no outlandish scores yet the squiggle has them rocketing off to the right a couple of times that season. Maybe it was a sign of things to come!!

Geelong's season seems odd to. I'd like to say Essendon's as well but their scores seem to match their movements..... ratbags.....

 

[gothecrows]

Final Siren,

For what it's worth I had a squiz through 1897.

Something odd happens with South Melbourne in Round 2 and onwards. They only win by four points, with no outlandish scores yet the squiggle has them rocketing off to the right a couple of times that season. Maybe it was a sign of things to come!!

Geelong's season seems odd to. I'd like to say Essendon's as well but their scores seem to match their movements..... ratbags.....

In round 1, you'll notice that every team moves to the right - that's because the scoring was a lot lower back then, and the squiggle uses a base of 85 points.

In round 2, they beat St Kilda 59-2, which is why they shot 50 miles off to the right.

Basically, really low scoring games will cause massive movement in the squiggle. Back then, there were a lot of really low scoring games.

 

[SJ]

In round 1, you'll notice that every team moves to the right - that's because the scoring was a lot lower back then, and the squiggle uses a base of 85 points.

In round 2, they beat St Kilda 59-2, which is why they shot 50 miles off to the right.

Basically, really low scoring games will cause massive movement in the squiggle. Back then, there were a lot of really low scoring games.

Maybe the basis of 85 points should change over time.

 

[JD-Roo]

In round 1, you'll notice that every team moves to the right - that's because the scoring was a lot lower back then, and the squiggle uses a base of 85 points.

In round 2, they beat St Kilda 59-2, which is why they shot 50 miles off to the right.

Basically, really low scoring games will cause massive movement in the squiggle. Back then, there were a lot of really low scoring games.

Ah yep. Round 3 actually. So that's my stuff-up as I thought it was 2 and only looked at that result.

SJ's comment seems valid considering most scores of that era seem to be in the 30s-to-40s. Just my one cents worth...... (most likely not even worth TWO cents )

 

[Hawker_85]

potatoes playing out of their skins.

I lol'd.

 

[Final Siren]

Maybe the basis of 85 points should change over time.

Mmm, but staying fixed at 85 has the advantage of telling you which seasons are higher- or lower-scoring just by looking at them. In the late 80s, for example, all teams are very high (vertically) compared to today, while 100 years ago, everyone's way off to the right.

 

[The Swans Blog]

Mmm, but staying fixed at 85 has the advantage of telling you which seasons are higher- or lower-scoring just by looking at them. In the late 80s, for example, all teams are very high (vertically) compared to today, while 100 years ago, everyone's way off to the right.

The defenders were pretty hopeless in the 80s and 90s and the game style was always towards outright attack. Key forwards kicking 16-17 a game is a long past facet of the game. Even Plugger kicking 8-10 a game will never happen again.

But then neither will teams scoring 200+ in consecutive weeks or in a month happen again. Geelong went close but its probably the closest any team will get.

 

[Rotayjay]

Look at that frickin' Giants icon. Recall that all their best players are 21 years old. It's going to be a rough few years for the rest of us.

THE FUTURE IS YOURS, GIANTS FANS, JUST LET US HAVE ONE THAT ISN'T HAWTHORN FIRST.

God I hate that club. What a ******* waste of talent.

Indeed, we can only hope that their inflated salary cap will squeeze out a couple of their dozen stars and the rest of us will be able to step up and match the Giants within the next few years. God I hate the AFL too.

Edit: text is centred for some reason​

 

[jarrod_island_doggies]

God I hate that club. What a ******* waste of talent.

Indeed, we can only hope that their inflated salary cap will squeeze out a couple of their dozen stars and the rest of us will be able to step up and match the Giants within the next few years. God I hate the AFL too.

Edit: text is centred for some reason​

A waste of talent? If they were all pulling Ben Cousins/Harley Bennell type shit then you'd be justified in saying that. Don't you derive some sense of enjoyment from watching them play exciting & dynamic footy? I get it, you've had to wait 17 years for a flag and now fear it will be more than 20 before you get a shot if you don't get one this year or next. How do you reckon Bulldogs, Swans or Saints fans felt when you and West Coast got "gifted" (in some people's view, not mine) multiple flags each within your first 7 years?

I'd love to see a Giants or Crows flag this season, given my team's insipid performance, because I like how they play. The Giants are shaping themselves as a community club also, which is fantastic to see; it wasn't their fault the Tasmanian team wasn't considered a viable prospect at the time (flawed as that rational may be) and all power to them following in the footsteps of big brother Sydney.

 

[BotsMaster]

It's the insight we'll miss. If I do it I can think of at least 20 posters off the top of my head that'll claim I'm biased and shoeless.

Just do it chunkychicken. What's the worst that could happen...

 

[Final Siren]

I think ideally we want each week to be presented by a supporter of a team that just got eliminated, for the kind of analysis you can only get from people who are choking down bitterness and despair. That's why as a Richmond supporter my insight is always so keen and razor-sharp.

 

[SwampCreature]

Hey Final Siren what would Syd need to win by for that TurtleBots chart to be legit?

Sonething like 300 goals?

 

[The Swans Blog]

Just do it chunkychicken. What's the worst that could happen...

View attachment 285840

Something like that

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

I think ideally we want each week to be presented by a supporter of a team that just got eliminated, for the kind of analysis you can only get from people who are choking down bitterness and despair. That's why as a Richmond supporter my insight is always so keen and razor-sharp.

Guess that rules me out!

 

[Rotayjay]

A waste of talent? If they were all pulling Ben Cousins/Harley Bennell type shit then you'd be justified in saying that. Don't you derive some sense of enjoyment from watching them play exciting & dynamic footy? I get it, you've had to wait 17 years for a flag and now fear it will be more than 20 before you get a shot if you don't get one this year or next. How do you reckon Bulldogs, Swans or Saints fans felt when you and West Coast got "gifted" (in some people's view, not mine) multiple flags each within your first 7 years?

I'd love to see a Giants or Crows flag this season, given my team's insipid performance, because I like how they play. The Giants are shaping themselves as a community club also, which is fantastic to see; it wasn't their fault the Tasmanian team wasn't considered a viable prospect at the time (flawed as that rational may be) and all power to them following in the footsteps of big brother Sydney.

Fair enough. But personally I find huge concessions hard to swallow. I percieve those concessions as far greater than those the Crows and Eagles got.

 

[Here2tellyouwhy]

West Coast didn't get picks or COLA. If anything we saved the VFL/AFL's arse in their greatest time of need.
The COLA is the VFL paying back South Melbourne for being banished to Sydney.

 

[jarrod_island_doggies]

Fair enough. But personally I find huge concessions hard to swallow. I percieve those concessions as far greater than those the Crows and Eagles got.

That's a valid discussion point - even the differences between Gold Coast's and GWS's concessions are potentially worthy of contention. But West Coast and the Crows had the inbuilt advantage of being based in footy heartlands, with a veritable smorgasbord of locally based and/or produced talent to lure. As has been demonstrated by the Lions and Sydney at times, success begets success & people love a winner. For new teams in important yet underdeveloped ("under" developed, but not entirely foreign lands for Aussie Rules, particularly Gold Coast) regions - be it for TV rights or potential for growth in raw player/spectator numbers - it stands to reason that they should be helped on their way somehow.

Nothing lasts forever, as early century fans of Brisbane and Port will tell you when they rode the roller-coaster of being unstoppable interstate juggernauts sealing the end times for Victorian footy one day to bottom-dwelling plebeians touted as worse than Fitzroy the next. Also, as a former Royboy supporter, I want a stable and reliable spread of teams in all states - there should never be another opportunity to sacrifice a team as the preferred solution for any issues.

 

[Rotayjay]

That's a valid discussion point - even the differences between Gold Coast's and GWS's concessions are potentially worthy of contention. But West Coast and the Crows had the inbuilt advantage of being based in footy heartlands, with a veritable smorgasbord of locally based and/or produced talent to lure. As has been demonstrated by the Lions and Sydney at times, success begets success & people love a winner. For new teams in important yet underdeveloped ("under" developed, but not entirely foreign lands for Aussie Rules, particularly Gold Coast) regions - be it for TV rights or potential for growth in raw player/spectator numbers - it stands to reason that they should be helped on their way somehow.

Nothing lasts forever, as early century fans of Brisbane and Port will tell you when they rode the roller-coaster of being unstoppable interstate juggernauts sealing the end times for Victorian footy one day to bottom-dwelling plebeians touted as worse than Fitzroy the next. Also, as a former Royboy supporter, I want a stable and reliable spread of teams in all states - there should never be another opportunity to sacrifice a team as the preferred solution for any issues.

Call me insular or parochial, but I believe that teams should only exist in footy heartlands. I think that footy heartlands have an inherent right to have a team(s), and the AFL shouldn't try to give GC or GWS leg-ups so they can be successful (at our bloody expense) to attract silly bandwagoners who don't know what 'holding the ball' means. Hence I think Tassie should have an AFL club if at all possible.

So if GWS spend the next 5 years in prime premiership squiggle territory and the rest of our teams are just making up the numbers, what's in it for us supporters of all the other clubs? The game has 'grown' so Gill can have an extra yacht, the Sherrins are extra-polished and the highly-paid players get a bit extra? While we still pay more and more every year for memberships and tickets? To support teams that might not get anywhere near the Giants?

 

[jarrod_island_doggies]

Call me insular or parochial, but I believe that teams should only exist in footy heartlands. I think that footy heartlands have an inherent right to have a team(s), and the AFL shouldn't try to give GC or GWS leg-ups so they can be successful (at our bloody expense) to attract silly bandwagoners who don't know what 'holding the ball' means. Hence I think Tassie should have an AFL club if at all possible.

So if GWS spend the next 5 years in prime premiership squiggle territory and the rest of our teams are just making up the numbers, what's in it for us supporters of all the other clubs? The game has 'grown' so Gill can have an extra yacht, the Sherrins are extra-polished and the highly-paid players get a bit extra? While we still pay more and more every year for memberships and tickets? To support teams that might not get anywhere near the Giants?

Don't get me wrong, I'll be over the moon when Tasmania gets a team (with a third Perth team the next logical choice IMO). It might seem like I'm playing silly buggers, but SA and WA became footy heartlands some years/decade(s) after Victorian teams and competitions were established. In years gone by, the ACT and Queensland were bastions of support for the indigenous game - maybe they will be again? Today's bandwagoners will give way to a new generation that have grown up with footy around them at school, on TV and elsewhere. You'd be hard pressed to say the Swans have only 50,000 bandwagoners following them after 35 years in Sydney.

If money is poisoning the well of footy, then surely the decision to open the gates to the heathen Croweaters and Sandgropers 30 years ago and save a stricken VFL was the wrong one? I tell you what, going from 12 to 14, 15, 16, 17 & 18 teams did Richmond no favours in the hunt for a flag, but it definitely shored up the league's operating base.

As for 5 years of GWS dominance - same was said of Carey's North in the mid to late '90s - they got two flags out of a potential 5-7 quality years as the strongest/near strongest team in the comp. No prizes for guessing who was the biggest thorn in their side. The future is unwritten.

 

[Rotayjay]

Don't get me wrong, I'll be over the moon when Tasmania gets a team (with a third Perth team the next logical choice IMO). It might seem like I'm playing silly buggers, but SA and WA became footy heartlands some years/decade(s) after Victorian teams and competitions were established. In years gone by, the ACT and Queensland were bastions of support for the indigenous game - maybe they will be again? Today's bandwagoners will give way to a new generation that have grown up with footy around them at school, on TV and elsewhere. You'd be hard pressed to say the Swans have only 50,000 bandwagoners following them after 35 years in Sydney.

If money is poisoning the well of footy, then surely the decision to open the gates to the heathen Croweaters and Sandgropers 30 years ago and save a stricken VFL was the wrong one? I tell you what, going from 12 to 14, 15, 16, 17 & 18 teams did Richmond no favours in the hunt for a flag, but it definitely shored up the league's operating base.

As for 5 years of GWS dominance - same was said of Carey's North in the mid to late '90s - they got two flags out of a potential 5-7 quality years as the strongest/near strongest team in the comp. No prizes for guessing who was the biggest thorn in their side. The future is unwritten.

Good post, and yes the future is unwritten. I just get apprehensive about the possibility of a non-competitive era dominated by a super-Hawthorn. Bo-riiiiiiiiiiing.