West Coast Eagles Are they really that Good ?

[F-U]

No better than StKilda when they went on their 10 game winning streak. Adelaide peaked early. West Coast and Sydney peaked late.

What you really need to ask is which teams best is the best.

What he said

 

[mudgeathon]

Very true.

In fact, if you look at 2006 overall, Adelaide were the best team by so far, it is almost insulting to put West Coast, Sydney and Freo in the same breath as them. Until the injuries, we were looking at one of the all-time great seasons from a team, ever.

Very few teams have dominated a season like Adelaide in 2006 until they were f****d by injuries. And make no mistake, they were absolutely voilated by injures like no team in their position has ever been. They were so good, that no other team really came close to them. They were just a mile in front of everyone else.

It's just a pity from their point of view, that when you look at the GF winner (West Coast) no one will remember or judge them (Adelaide) to be the best, except the intelligent fans who remember and analysed the season. Oh well, I don't feel sorry for them. I hate Adelaide, lol. They can suffer.

If you can remember, we smashed the '****ing' b'jebus out of Adeliade when they were fully fit and as you say were 'best team by so far, it is almost insulting to put West Coast, Sydney and Freo in the same breath as them.'
Plus in that game we were stuffed injury wise...

 

[Dan26]

I'll ask again, who is saying we are as good as Brisband 2001-2003 or Essendon 2000?
Hahahah do you honestly believe Adelaide was the better performing side than us this year?

Adelaide were so good, that daylight was the second best team. They were headed to be one of the all time great sides in a single season until the injuries hit. The Eagles never reached "best ever" talk like Adelaide was. I know the Eagles play well agaisnt them in a single "team vs team" match-up, but that is only one match-up. There have been plenty of good teams who have had the wood on them by other teams.

At one point, late in the season, they had lost 2 games (both by less than a goal) and had a percentage of over 170%! Then, the injuries hit to about 6 of their key players and they couldn't cope. (what team could?)

I know it's easy to look at the end result of the GF and, use that result to justify an opinion (using the end to justify the means), but if you look a little deeper, you will realise that not only was Adelaide the best team of 2006, they were the best by an absolute mile. They were so far and away the best it isn't funny.

And I'm glad you beat them because I have no love for Adelaide at all. You did everyone a favour.

 

[Bestbird]

Adelaide were so good, that daylight was the second best team. They were headed to be one of the all time great sides in a single season until the injuries hit. The Eagles never reached "best ever" talk like Adelaide was. I know the Eagles play well agaisnt them in a single "team vs team" match-up, but that is only one match-up. There have been plenty of good teams who have had the wood on them by other teams.

At one point, late in the season, they had lost 2 games (both by less than a goal) and had a percentage of over 170%! Then, the injuries hit to about 6 of their key players and they couldn't cope. (what team could?)

I know it's easy to look at the end result of the GF and, use that result to justify an opinion (using the end to justify the means), but if you look a little deeper, you will realise that not only was Adelaide the best team of 2006, they were the best by an absolute mile. They were so far and away the best it isn't funny.

And I'm glad you beat them because I have no love for Adelaide at all. You did everyone a favour.

Every know and the a team dominates for the whole season (Carlton and Essendon in the last 10 years)



I think you will find that in recent seasons

The Saints in 04 - 11-2
West Coast in 05 - 15 -1
Adelaide in 06 - 14-2

Were all "so good, that daylight was the second best team" in the respective years just after the half way mark yet none won the flag

Note that a fully fit Adelaide played an injury hit West Coast and lost by 82 points in Round 17

 

[ronniethewrecker]

]yes they are that good. have an even better engine room that brisbane had a few years back.[/quote]

No Way Dude.

not yet they arent, very good side but the midfeild that Brisbane had in thier best years was one of the best if not the best in the history of AFL.

I suggest you have a look at some old Lions DVDs.

over 5 years their engine room fired that team to win against some very good sides.

This takes nothing away from Juddy, Cuz and Kerr, I like them all a lot.
They dont have the runs on the board yet and in fact are a long way behind Brisbane.

They were AWESOME

 

[Ted Ed Fred]

I told you Mark!!

Here they come!!

Be prepared for the spit and dribble. They are pretty harmless really.

But oh so touchy!!

These posts might actually be funny if there actually WAS ranting Eagles supporters in here

And this coming from the dill who blubbers about 'obsessive' eagles fans because a whole one thread was created to cheekily troll the purple penis eaters

 

[bushie]

These posts might actually be funny if there actually WAS ranting Eagles supporters in here

And this coming from the dill who blubbers about 'obsessive' eagles fans because a whole one thread was created to cheekily troll the purple penis eaters

Ooops, there is that penis eating obsession showing through again.

And don't worry the ranting Eagle supporters will come. They can't help themselves. They are just a bit to busy at present sipping chardy and comparing handbags at the Onyx bar.

And as for only one thread being created? Oh paaallleeeeze!

 

[And_ROOS]

Yes the Eagles are that good, that said i dont think they are as head and shoulders above the competition like teams of past (Hawks 80s, Carlton 95, Essendon 2000, Bris Vegas 2001/2/3).
They have their glowing deficiencies in their forward line, and other teams will make serious grounds on them, but they have a premiership cup in their trophy cabinet that proves they were the best in 06.

I disagree with Adelaide being the best team of the season, full squad or not i still dont believe they wouldnt have gotten over West Coast, just as they couldnt last year.

For the better part of the year, most of the talk was on a West Coast Sydney GF rematch, only the Adelaide fans put their team into the equation.

 

[Whiskers]

No They Are Not

 

[johnnyhoward]

In fact, if you look at 2006 overall, Adelaide were the best team by so far, it is almost insulting to put West Coast, Sydney and Freo in the same breath as them. Until the injuries, we were looking at one of the all-time great seasons from a team, ever.

Very few teams have dominated a season like Adelaide in 2006 until they were f****d by injuries. And make no mistake, they were absolutely voilated by injures like no team in their position has ever been. They were so good, that no other team really came close to them. They were just a mile in front of everyone else.

Adelaide simply copped injuries at the wrong time of the season. If it was 4-5 weeks earlier they would have been able to recover and resettle the side.

Before the prelim, the previous few games they'd started to wind up, with big wins over Melbourne and Freo. 22 points up at half-time, another goal after the break would have sunk the Eagles. But West Coast definitely had the wood on them this year (and the past couple as well), ominous signs with that 15 goal thumping at Subi. I don't think you could say West Coast weren't deserved winners despite their patchy mid-season form. Their second half of the season showed why they were the best team going around.

West Coast will continue to improve. Next year they may dip a little to say 4th-5th, but over the long-term they'll be in the top 4 most of the next 4-5 seasons, giving them a good shot at another flag.

 

[thecoastingcoaster]

Very true.

In fact, if you look at 2006 overall, Adelaide were the best team by so far, it is almost insulting to put West Coast, Sydney and Freo in the same breath as them. Until the injuries, we were looking at one of the all-time great seasons from a team, ever.

Very few teams have dominated a season like Adelaide in 2006 until they were f****d by injuries. And make no mistake, they were absolutely voilated by injures like no team in their position has ever been. They were so good, that no other team really came close to them. They were just a mile in front of everyone else.

It's just a pity from their point of view, that when you look at the GF winner (West Coast) no one will remember or judge them (Adelaide) to be the best, except the intelligent fans who remember and analysed the season. Oh well, I don't feel sorry for them. I hate Adelaide, lol. They can suffer.

Are you for real?

West Coast piss on Crows talent wise and on the paddock.

Moron.

 

[thecoastingcoaster]

Yes the Eagles are that good, that said i dont think they are as head and shoulders above the competition like teams of past (Hawks 80s, Carlton 95, Essendon 2000, Bris Vegas 2001/2/3).
They have their glowing deficiencies in their forward line, and other teams will make serious grounds on them, but they have a premiership cup in their trophy cabinet that proves they were the best in 06.

I disagree with Adelaide being the best team of the season, full squad or not i still dont believe they wouldnt have gotten over West Coast, just as they couldnt last year.

For the better part of the year, most of the talk was on a West Coast Sydney GF rematch, only the Adelaide fans put their team into the equation.

Lynch 65 goals and only 23 yrs old.

Fancy a Geelong supporter having a go at someones forwardline.

 

[QL 21]

Very true.

In fact, if you look at 2006 overall, Adelaide were the best team by so far, it is almost insulting to put West Coast, Sydney and Freo in the same breath as them. Until the injuries, we were looking at one of the all-time great seasons from a team, ever.

Very few teams have dominated a season like Adelaide in 2006 until they were f****d by injuries. And make no mistake, they were absolutely voilated by injures like no team in their position has ever been. They were so good, that no other team really came close to them. They were just a mile in front of everyone else.

It's just a pity from their point of view, that when you look at the GF winner (West Coast) no one will remember or judge them (Adelaide) to be the best, except the intelligent fans who remember and analysed the season. Oh well, I don't feel sorry for them. I hate Adelaide, lol. They can suffer.

What injuries did Adelaide have when we thumped them by 82 points?

 

[SWANNIES RULE]

They are not as good as they think they are.

 

[Peninsula Boy]

I'm sad to say I think they can get better. They have a few young South Aussie midfielders who are getting better and their talls can only get better as they have developed a little slower than their midfielders. All their top players are nowhere near 30.

I think they will be better, unless the hunger goes.

dan26, the sad facts are that football teams have injuries. Its how you deal with them. The SAints started off 12 zip one year and didn't take it all. You can't win a flag in the initial minor rounds.

 

[Salopek31]

Better than Port was in 04, and I think better than the Swans in 05.

Yeah except we won all of our finals, won the grand final by 7 goals against a quality side (not the Swans), finished with a percentage of 135 as opposed to their 120, were never run to within a few goals by all four bottom four sides, didn't lose both hometown darbys etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Port 04 >>>>>>>>> WCE 06 >>>>>> any of the Crows flags

 

[Milkman]

And don't worry the ranting Eagle supporters will come. They can't help themselves. They are just a bit to busy at present sipping chardy and comparing handbags at the Onyx bar.

That's so 2003.

We're busy being obese bogans queuing up in Hungry Jacks.

 

[vinros]

Gee, you know things really must be bad for certain members from oppersition sides that they have to start judging how good a premiership side was.
Winning a premiership is the only goal that all teams and players strive for just ask some of the teams who have not won in donkeys years such as st kilda, western bulldogs, geelong, richmond ect. Ask champions who have yet to have a medal around their neck such as buckley, harvey ,grant ect. To win a premiership a team must go through a whole season play home and away games week in week out (fly every second week in some cases) play games with injuries to certain players at certain times , win enough games to make the finals, in the highest possible position, to have a chance in the finals. Get through high preasure elimination finals, just to make the grand final then come up against a team that just like your team would spill blood to win.
So i can assure you that to win one ,yes ,you really have to be "that good" and hence all premiership teams will be looked at as great teams.
So please lets not start getting down to comparing premiership sides.Thats a load of rubbish for certain people from certain teams that did not win it.

 

[LostinScandinavia]

Dan, you also haven't seemed to consider that perhaps we are 'that good', by virtue of the fact that we managed to beat quality sides week in week out, regardless of whether it was by 1 point or 100 points.

Essendon cakewalked the GF by 60 points because they were that good, but also Melbourne and the rest of the competition weren't "that good".

This season and last, particularly this season, teams seem to be stronger than ever, with all four of the top four having improved from last season. Therefore to overcome sides such as Adelaide, Sydney, a much more competitive and determined Fremantle plus others such as the Bulldogs, you could say that we were "that good".

You can't compare different sides from different years all too well, as the competition changes so much from season to season.

With regard to the issue of coming from behind all the time, this too is a moot point. If Adelaide were such a good side, they would've put us away in the Elimination Final...they seemed to be doing well without their stars up until that point...why then couldn't they finish the job? To come from behind like that wasn't luck, and it wasn't Adelaide throwing the towel in, because after all, as you say, they are a great team...we were just "that good".

Quite similar to when Essendon came back from 69 points against the Kangas...they were that good...or would you just say it was luck Dan?

 

[Swans_Premiers]

Dan you need to get over 2000. Who cares if you only lost one game, a premiership is a premiership, you place WAY too much importance on H&A that's why you rate Adelaide as the best team in 2006 which is bull********.

Sydney and WestCoast are EASILY the best teams over the last 2 years that the only finals they have lost are too EACH OTHER...by 4 and 1 points.

Who cares about H&A...look at stkilda 2004.....fremantle won what 9 games in a row this year??

DOesn't mean ********, it's all about finals and the best teams over the last 2 years are Sydney and WestCoast....even your "Superteam" Essendon in 1999-2001 lost finals by more than 4 points...or didn't even manage to make the grand final.

You need to get over things that happened over 6 years ago and start looking to the future...which doesn't look to bright for the bombers...

 

[And_ROOS]

65 goals with the supply he gets from the Eagles midfield is a little bit down wouldnt you think? Thats only 30 goals more then some Half Forwards in lower teams kicked and some didnt play finals.

You would want to hope next year he kicks in the area of 75-80 goals.

And yes, we had Gary Ablett Snr, Bill Brownless and Barry Stoneham at Geelong, so i do know a bit about successful high scoring forwardlines

 

[The_Eagles]

yep Dan26 is a bit of a clown sometimes

e.g. his claims of Adelaide being the best team of 2006

and The Phantom Menace is a great movie




laughable

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Since R14, 2004, WC have gone 47-14.

It's not like they just jumped up in 2006 and pinched a flag.

You can talk up Adelaide because they were dominant for parts of 2006, but WC have been better-performed over the last 2-3 and have Adelaide covered during that period.

WC aren't one of the all-time great sides. Who's saying they are? Seems strange to rebut an argument nobody has actually made.

WC have been the best-performed side over the last 2-and-a-half seasons, and now have a flag to show for it.

On paper, they're as good as any side in the league, and they should continue to improve.

That's how good WC are.

It's stupid to mount an argument that "WC aren't one of the all-time great sides", when no-one has actually made that claim to begin with.

What's next? Is someone going to start a thread revealing that Rowan Jones isn't actually a superstar of the game?

 

[skipper kelly]

Since R14, 2004, WC have gone 47-14.

What is the significance of R14 2004?

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

What is the significance of R14 2004?

That's when we started to play well.

It was when our premiership side started to take shape.

Our second half surge in 2004 set us up for 2005, and we've rolled on from there.