The Big 4 If It Were Decided Today

[DTRAIN87]

Who would be in if this concept was created today?

My view is that Richmond and possibly Carlton would be out and replaced by West Coast and either Hawthorn or Geelong. Clubs with bigger recent success and a strong supporter and finance base.

What are your thoughts?

Discuss!

 

[Donkson]

Why are people fascinated with this concept?

 

[Spuddage]

Geelong
Collingwood
Westcoast

4th place would have a few contenders depending on how far back you were going. Hawthorn based on more recent form, brisbane if you went back a bit further.

 

[ManWithNoName]

I'd probably say it was irrelevant and not bother.

 

[s_cranberry]

Geelong??

Once your period of success ends Geelong will go back to be a mid sized club... Your finances are up due to the recent success and as with all success the bandwagon factor.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Essendon
Collingwood
Carlton
Richmond

 

[vinum coupe]

The big 4 will always be the big four.
The relevance is seen over a period of 100 years, not 5 seasons.

Ask me again in 2050

 

[vinum coupe]

ong will go back to be a mid sized club... Your finances are up due to the recent success and as with all success the bandwagon factor.

As much as I disagree with the OP your post is a complete load of tripe.

 

[DTRAIN87]

Geelong??

Once your period of success ends Geelong will go back to be a mid sized club... Your finances are up due to the recent success and as with all success the bandwagon factor.

This is ironic considering how Essendon 2000 showed how many bandwagoner Essendon fans there were. All these people started suddenly coming out of the woodwork saying they supported Essendon. Geelong's fiannces were up before the success. This has merely helped.

 

[Glorious couch life]

Give it a rest - please.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

Geelong, Hawthorn, West Coast, Essendon & Collingwood. Those 5 by a fair way are the biggest clubs going around in the last 10 years.

Carlton & Richmond have had very little relevance recently.

 

[Matching Mole]

Why are people fascinated with this concept?

Because A LOT of people's self-worth seems closely related to the success of their club. They need to feel rated, and walk with a swagger. They need to know their club matters. They want a sig that lists all their premierships, even if the majority of them occurred before man walked on the moon. They need to feel their "part in this" involves more than the poster sitting in the crowd and cheering.

I've got no problem with supporting a club - duh, I'm here - but the way some people go about it is weird, like someone flexing their muscles in a mirror. When I see the "Big 4" thing rear its head, I see that.

inb4 Sydney supporter would say that.

 

[yibbida]

what is the criteria for the "big 4"? Crowd numbers at games? memberships? games won? premierships? opperating profit?

 

[STC]

Who cares? It's an imaginary group that is irrelevant in modern football.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Why are people fascinated with this concept?

People just misunderstand the concept. It’s relevant in say England where financial clout means a “Big 4” or “Big 6” club can only realistically win the title. They’re basically playing themselves for the title, therefore they’re effectively in a league of their own – the Big 4.

We have such an equalised system here that it holds no relevance. There’s nothing to stop any club winning a flag apart from bad luck and incompetence.

 

[Rioli magic]

E&Y, Deloitte, KPMG, PWC.

 

[Glorious couch life]

We have such an equalised system here that it holds no relevance. There’s nothing to stop any club winning a flag apart from bad luck and incompetence.[/FONT]

And a favourable draw.

Some clubs are more equal than others.

 

[Jade]

This is ironic considering how Essendon 2000 showed how many bandwagoner Essendon fans there were. All these people started suddenly coming out of the woodwork saying they supported Essendon. Geelong's fiannces were up before the success. This has merely helped.

Geez I love statements with no basis in fact.

Essendon's membership jumped by approximately 2,000 after it's flag.

It's biggest jump occurred this year, after finishing fourteenth.

Geelong's two single biggest membership surges occured in 1990 (the year after losing to the Hawks by a slim margin in the GF), and 2008 (the year after your first flag of this era).

Now I don't give a toss if success drives a membership / revenue boost. Matter of fact I think clubs can and SHOULD leverage anything it can to boost these figures.

But as far as your bandwagon comment goes, it's abundantly clear you don't have the slightest freakin clue what you are on about, and have just made an ass of yourself.

 

[Pessimistic]

Collingwood Essendon West Coast Adelaide

Geelong Hawthorn new challengers to the old guard Carlton Richmond

The other 10 to be known as "the rest"

 

[Hipster Doofus]

Collingwood
Carlton
Essendon
West Coast

 

[Tzatziki_Man]

LOLZ

This again! I bet this will turn to a 100 page thread.

The BIG 4 was a concept created in the 60s-70s.

It referred to the dominant Melbournian teams that powerful on field, off field and had the largest derbies against one another. Back then it was Richmond, Carlton, Collingwood & Essendon. Whichever way you want to look at it.

Since then however, the VFL has become the AFL, 8 new clubs were introduced and elements to the game have changed (players don't drink at the pub after a win anymore).

Historically the BIG 4 is just a term to coincide with the strength of these four clubs at the time of its inception. Right now however, the competition has become so competitive, that the BIG 4 would change constantly, one could argue the BIG 4 was Brisbane, Collingwood, Port Adelaide & Essendon only 10 years ago. Now however it would be Hawthorn, Geelong, Collingwood & West Coast. In 10 years it may be Gold Coast, GWS, Melbourne & Fremantle.

Get with the times, its an old term, its a dead term and it was a term created for Coll, Carl, Rich & Ess.

 

[DTRAIN87]

Geez I love statements with no basis in fact.

Essendon's membership jumped by approximately 2,000 after it's flag.

It's biggest jump occurred this year, after finishing fourteenth.

Geelong's two single biggest membership surges occured in 1990 (the year after losing to the Hawks by a slim margin in the GF), and 2008 (the year after your first flag of this era).

Now I don't give a toss if success drives a membership / revenue boost. Matter of fact I think clubs can and SHOULD leverage anything it can to boost these figures.

But as far as your bandwagon comment goes, it's abundantly clear you don't have the slightest freakin clue what you are on about, and have just made an ass of yourself.

So what you are saying is that the bandwagoner factor only relates to membership numbers and not those who claim to support a club but who aren't members? .

 

[HolyRioli]

E&Y, Deloitte, KPMG, PWC.

More correct than anything else in this thread

 

[kreuze control]

Who would be in if this concept was created today?

My view is that Richmond and possibly Carlton would be out and replaced by West Coast and either Hawthorn or Geelong. Clubs with bigger recent success and a strong supporter and finance base.

What are your thoughts?

Discuss!

the whole point of the big 4 is that it can stand the test of time. otherwise by your criteria there'd be a different big 4 every year. most other clubs would never have been able to go through what richmond (30+ years of general shitness) and carlton (7 years of insipidness) has gone through recently and still have such a huge supporter base, membership, sponsors etc.

 

[SexyBlueGirl]

Richmond cannot survive in the top 4 after over 30 years without a flag. There is a poll on Bay 13 to vote for the 4th member, please vote.