SOS vs Scarlett

[The Teflon Dean]

Scarlett is obviously a champion and so was sos.
But SOS is full back of the century which means he is rated as the best full back of all time, so arguing that Scarlett is better than sos means arguing over Scarlett being the best full back in the history of the game. Its very debatable but I wonder how Scarlett would have gone on Lockett, Ablett, Carey and Dunstall back in their prime. Full forwards like that aren't around anymore so Scarlett isn't having such competition as Sos had back then..

The TOTC was rated between 1896 and 1996.

Scarlett wasn't even playing in the AFL in 1996.

 

[mightymightyblues]

The TOTC was rated between 1896 and 1996.

Scarlett wasn't even playing in the AFL in 1996.

Yes i know but I am saying that people are rating Scarlett as the best full back of all time if his opponent made the team of the century. If the team of the century was to be done at the end of Scarlett's career, would you have him their instead of Silvagni.

 

[Thrawn]

Yes i know but I am saying that people are rating Scarlett as the best full back of all time if his opponent made the team of the century. If the team of the century was to be done at the end of Scarlett's career, would you have him their instead of Silvagni.

Would Scarlett be ahead of these names?

Moore.
Regan.
Langford.
Southby.
Dench.

If the TOC was done at the end of his career, he would probably be in the 21st TOC. And that is assuming there are no other better FBs for the next 90 years.

 

[wally funk]

i'm not gonna pull out any stats to prove why silvagni is better than scarlett. i'll just say that SOS is my favourite player of all time, and the most exciting player i ever saw on a footy ground. as good as scarlett can be, he's not in SOS's league.

 

[btdg]

I can't believe people are even making the comparison. SOS won more premierships, more All-Australians, more club best and fairests, and was at his peak for longer and played against better opposition. He was also more versatile (as a forward) and ALWAYS played on the best opposition forward, which Scarlett does not. He also went pretty damn close to winning a brownlow, took mark of the year, and submitted the most perfect finals series ever exhibited by a full-back (in 1995). Basically, SOS has it over Scarlett in every imaginable comparison - his peak was better, he was good for longer, and he did it against toughter opposition.

Its like the comparison between Buddy Franklin and Wayne Carey. I mean, you can see some similarities, but there is a huge difference between being the best forward in the competition for the first 6 weeks of the year, and dominating for 10 weeks straight. Some people either have really short memories, or just want to sell newspapers.

For the argument to even start, Scarlett needs another premiership, a couple more AA berths, and a few club best and fairest wins. Even then, he probably still falls behind on versatility.

 

[Murph_The_Smurf]

i'm not gonna pull out any stats to prove why silvagni is better than scarlett. i'll just say that SOS is my favourite player of all time, and the most exciting player i ever saw on a footy ground. as good as scarlett can be, he's not in SOS's league.

Never seen Gary Ablett snr out there ? by far the most exciting player to watch

 

[cat_fanatic]

Yep - SOS did it against the best power forwards
Case closed

In SOS's day Full backs got away with Murder.

It's much harder to be a defender nowadays considering an enthusiastic spoil is worth a free kick.

Would have loved to of seen how SOS handled the "hands in the back" rule, regardless of his opposition. Scarlett also attacks and creates better than any full back ever.

 

[THEBLOODS85]

You did some work there. You're spot on. well done.

You can add Bernie Quinlan in as SOS gave him a couple of beatings in his very early days.

also add
games 312 sos to 191 scarlett
goals 202 sos to 16 scarlett
brownlow 69 sos to 23 scarlett
kicks aver 12.9 sos to 13.8 scarlett
marks aver 4.3 sos to 4.9 scarlett

SOS still won his fair share of the footy as does scarlett!

 

[Thrawn]

In SOS's day Full backs got away with Murder.

They still do get away with murder.

Would have loved to of seen how SOS handled the "hands in the back" rule, regardless of his opposition. Scarlett also attacks and creates better than any full back ever.

LOL!

Dench? Langford?

What irks me most in this comparison is that suddenly Silvagni's strengths are ignored. Instead of noting his physical strength, his great spoiling and marking ability - you harp on about him struggling if he was playing in today's rules. Totally disregarding every ability that made him such a gun in the first place.

 

[Blue Dawn]

When scarlett can play Full Forward and kick 10 goals on the next best defender in the comp, then he is about even with SOS. i.e. never

Correct! Was there that day and he destroyed Gary Pert, Paul Roos AND Alistair Lynch. When combined with the fact that his 'era' of forward was MUCH better than the current crop means he has to be marked superior - nearly won a Brownlow playing CHF FFS! Scarlett's very good.....but not THAT good.

 

[cat_fanatic]

They still do get away with murder.

Turn it up. You know as well as i do that the rules have changed dramatically since SOS.

The calibre of players is insignificant when considering how the game/rules have changed. Perhaps these players (Ablett etc) would not be held in the same regard had teams flooded the way they do today. Perhaps Pavlich, Brown etc would be seen as equal or better to Ablett and co had they played in that time...

So it's irrational to suggest the players SOS played on were better than todays, the game and the way it has changed impact this to the point it can't be ignored (unless your a Carlton supporter of course).

So, rapping up, i'd suggest if you put SOS and Scarlett at FB against Sydney or Hawthorn today they would be about equal. Who knows though?

The second part of your post is a matter of opinion.

 

[Thrawn]

Turn it up. You know as well as i do that the rules have changed dramatically since SOS.

Yet defenders still get away with chopping of arms, holding of jumpers and holding on to players. Fevola gets kneed in the head, gets pushed in the back on a consistent basis and gets his arms chopped regularly. Rarely any frees paid to him in those little instances. This also applies to many other forwards. Full backs still niggle and claw even today... that the rules have change dramatically is irrelevant if such situations happen time and time again and are not penalised constantly.

The calibre of players is insignificant when considering how the game/rules have changed.

Insignificant? ROFL! If you have superior skills and judgement in today's game, and if you are good enough, you can dominate. If you are good enough, you can dominate in any era. Ability is everything in this instance... in fact it is the most important quality when rating how good players are. You don't rate players based on the rules at the time, you rate them by not only their achievements as players, but what qualities they have that made them so good in the first place.

Perhaps these players (Ablett etc) would not be held in the same regard had teams flooded the way they do today. Perhaps Pavlich, Brown etc would be seen as equal or better to Ablett and co had they played in that time...

But these players have far more ability - are you telling me they cannot dominate simply because the rules are different? That their abilities and strengths don't matter ?

So it's irrational to suggest the players SOS played on were better than todays, the game and the way it has changed impact this to the point it can't be ignored (unless your a Carlton supporter of course).

No, it is not irrational. All of Ablett, Carey, Lockett and Dunstall were superior in terms of their football ability. Especially as forwards because they were a lot more skilful, more dominant and much more consistent. If you're going to argue the rules will impact them, then it would be in a positive way if anything; after all, isn't it harder to be a defender these days according to some people?

You do understand you're comparing Scarlett vs Fev/Hall/Gehrig/etc to Silvagni vs Lockett/Dunstall/Carey? The comparison in terms of quality is not even close. And I'm being irrational for suggestion the latter group is superior? Oh dear.

Who knows though?

That's why hypotheticals are pointless. We can only go by what the players have done.

 

[RAPPA]

Clearly SOS and i don't know why they give space in the paper to Archer. Does not have any input on Footy Classified and the article was nonsensical crap. SOS in a landslide. Great mark and had the super ability to go forward and kick goals. Add in the fact that he competed against possibly the most dominant forwards of all times. Cats fans say that SOS got away with cheap tricks like chopping arms, hands in the back etc. Obviously you never saw the cheap tricks the forwards initiated behind the play back then eh. You know, back in the days when full forwards regularly booted bags of 8+ goals.

 

[Jimthegreat]

Turn it up. You know as well as i do that the rules have changed dramatically since SOS.

The calibre of players is insignificant when considering how the game/rules have changed. Perhaps these players (Ablett etc) would not be held in the same regard had teams flooded the way they do today. Perhaps Pavlich, Brown etc would be seen as equal or better to Ablett and co had they played in that time...

So it's irrational to suggest the players SOS played on were better than todays, the game and the way it has changed impact this to the point it can't be ignored (unless your a Carlton supporter of course).

So, rapping up, i'd suggest if you put SOS and Scarlett at FB against Sydney or Hawthorn today they would be about equal. Who knows though?

The second part of your post is a matter of opinion.

Mate, they're not even close to equal. Don't even try. SOS will always be alot better. To start with SOS will take the top forward, Scarlett won't.

 

[krisholio14]

Christ almighty, did people have a memory wipe recently that wiped out their entire memories of the 90s?

As good as Scarlett is, he is no Silvagni.

I have seen defensive efforts from SOS that Scarlett would have trouble doing - for example, Silvagni was the master of the last second spoil, even when the ball was at his opponent's chest a mile in front of him. Some of the spoils he would do were amazing, and incredibly freaky. You would always shake your head and go "how the hell did he get to that?" This sort of stuff was his artfor mand he would do it week in, week out - and no other FB would come close. Not to mention that he was a better mark - especially in contested situations. If you compare how many contested marks the two players would get 1v1, SOS would be in the lead. And this is against guys who were far superior aerialists than the current patch - guys like Carey, Ablett and Lockett. He was also fantastic 1v1 - perhaps arguably better than Scarlett.

The only thing Scarlett has over SOS is his kicking skills and his rebound from 50 - he did it more often than SOS and was more fluent, but somehow this made the misconception that SOS never made attacking runs himself, which I found quite absurd. Silvagni had quite the tank (no pun intended), and had the fitness and the pace to actually lead up a little into the midfield and he actually did those things, despite the comments from Geelong supporters.

Comparatively, here is what both FBs had to contend with:

Bolded: Silvagni's opponents
Italicised: Scarlett's opponents
Underlined: Both their opponents

1,360 Tony Lockett
1,299 Gordon Coventry
1,254 Jason Dunstall
1,057 Doug Wade
1,030 Gary Ablett
970 Jack Titus
915 Leigh Matthews
874 Peter McKenna
839 Matthew Lloyd
817 Bernie Quinlan
778 Kevin Bartlett
758 Matthew Richardson
748 Saverio Rocca
738 Stephen Kernahan
735 Bill Mohr
727 Peter Hudson
727 Wayne Carey
722 Harry Vallence
707 Dick Lee
681 Bob Pratt
662 Jack Moriarty
633 Alistair Lynch
630 David Neitz
629 Michael Moncrieff
607 Michael Roach
594 Stewart Loewe
593 Kelvin Templeton
588 Tony Modra
575 Simon Beasley
575 Simon Madden
574 Richard Osborne
572 Norm Smith
561 Paul Salmon
554 Chris Grant
549 Peter Daicos
548 Dick Harris
540 Lindsay White
540 Fraser Gehrig
539 Barry Hall
537 John Coleman
527 Brian Taylor
514 Peter Sumich
511 John Longmire

Not to mention the discrepancy between AA jumpers - SOS 7 as opposed to Scarlett's 3. If not anything else, this shows that Silvagni had been dominant in his position for a much longer period of time - also in an era where arguably there were better FBs running around so it's not like he was the only good one out there. He was also a more versatile player, who could kick bags of goals for you.

Should I not mention Silvagni's '95 finals series where he kept all of Carey, White and Ablett to a combined total of one goal? Has Scarlett done anything that impressive? Ever?

Some people seem to think Scarlett is better because of his run from FB alone. They forget that the prime job for a FB is to stop his opponent from kicking goals and having an influence on a game... and SOS was better than him at doing that, on far superior opponents. Everything is secondary and merely a bonus - if you want to discuss run from D50, then that is what CHB and HBFs do more often than not because their positions allow more freedom to do that.

As for the scragging issue, pay no attention to that. Defenders scrag all the time, even today. How many times have we seen Scarlett scrag Fevola for example? Yes, that's right - many times. Yet some Geelong supporters would some believe that the scragging SOS did meant he was an inferior FB. Quoting the different rules and using them as a basis to argue who was better is incredibly foolish - you can only compare players by what they did, what they achieved. By their respective strengths and weaknesses... things that they can use in any era.

Didn't you watch last years finals?

 

[Jimthegreat]

It's fair to conclude SOS would have coughed up a few as well.

My opinion?

Better full back? Scarlett.

Better overall footballer? Silvagni.

SOS thrashed some of the absolute the best in history, Scarlett, well, does he take the best?

Scarlett the better FB? I laughed hysterically in your face.

Don't even know why there's even a comparison. Only an idiot couldn't see SOS was a better FB. I've seen players compared before but this one is just laughable.

 

[Jimthegreat]

Didn't you watch last years finals?

Scarlett's, as good as he is, is not in the same class. Don't even try. Malakey was the best FB I saw at Geelong.

 

[btdg]

Didn't you watch last years finals?

I'm not sure who Scarlett played on, but the best forwards Geelong played last year were:

Brown? 1 goal
Cloke: 3 goals, listed in the best players
Tredrea: 2 goals

I doubt Scarlett played on Cloke, but that is kind of the point, isn't it? He doesn't always pick up the best opposition forward. And even if you count Rocca as his opponent, he still had more goals kicked on him last year than Silvagni in '95! Compare his (still very impressive) effort to SOS keeping White, Carey and Ablett to 1 goal between them! And Brisbane, North and Geelong in '95 were far better opposition teams than North, Collingwood and Port last year.

Once again, Silvagni's performances were better, and against higher quality opposition. Plus, he was more versatile, playing out to CHB. Completely dominated arguably the two best players in history in back to back weeks. Quite simply, Silvagni's performance in '95 was phenomenal, and I doubt we'll see it ever again.

 

[krisholio14]

Scarlett's, as good as he is, is not in the same class. Don't even try. Malakey was the best FB I saw at Geelong.

Just as I rate Geoff Southby as a better FB than Silvagni.

 

[Beloved]

Just as I rate Geoff Southby as a better FB than Silvagni.

If you think that any player to ever pull on an AFL geurnsey, let alone a Carlton one is better than SOS, you're in pure denial, plain and simple.

 

[Thrawn]

Didn't you watch last years finals?

Yes, I did.

But asking a question to my question is not the answer to it.

Just as I rate Geoff Southby as a better FB than Silvagni.

I think it is important to note that Silvagni still got the FB position ahead of Southby in our very own TOC.

 

[Jezza U Beauty]

This whole issue reminds me of the article written a few weeks back (can't remember who by) about how people these days have very short memories and continue to label current players as the best ever at their position.

Archer has clearly received one too many knocks to the head. I can understand arguments about SOS vs Langford, but Scarlett is not in the same league as those two.

 

[Bluebear]

Probably not the fairest forum to run this poll on.

For mine, Scarlett is very, very good.......SOS was great.......and against the greatest ever.

You list the great forwards of the modern era:
Dunstall, Locket, Ablett, Carey.......SOS played on and beat them all (though not all the time), and esp in 95.....SOS was the best against the best.

Scarlett is very good......but who against?
Maybe in 10 years we will be syaing Fev, Brown, Franklin etc are the best of all time and Scarlett beat them all.........but at this point in time its too early too call.

SOS for mine.

 

[Thrawn]

Maybe in 10 years we will be syaing Fev, Brown, Franklin etc are the best of all time

I won't. That's because they won't be.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

The comparison is made based on who SOS played against and who Scarlett played against, what the rules were back then and what they are now and hypotheticals about how each would have coped with each other's trials and tribulations to contend with.

In the end all we are doing is speculating. Scarlett is a marvellous footballer fully fit. Exciting and dominant. SOS was without peer in his day IMO. I am not sure how anybody can form an argument that without question proves who is better. When you get people criticising others for suggesting either was up there with the other, then you are discounting the opinion of others in preference to your own.

None of it can be proven. Push your opinion but don't denigrate the opinion of others when we are dealing with two quality players. It is not as though we are comparing SOS to Nathan Carroll here.