Banter Who will be Better in 2025, Collingwood or Carlton? Part 4

Banter threads are not to be taken too seriously. Have fun. Let others have fun.

Who will be better in 2025

  • Collingwood

    Votes: 124 51.7%
  • Carlton

    Votes: 116 48.3%

  • Total voters
    240

Remove this Banner Ad

I'm happy to discuss other factors/posters, firstly, I just want to confirm you views

You haven't done a ladder prediction, not sure where either side finishes, but Carlton a tad higher, as you prefer to Pies to slide

Have I got that right?
Who will be better?

I wasn't aware that the thread title was "provide a ladder prediction"

If the mods change the title is can give it a crack. Or else you can stop being off topic and address Robertio's off topic TDK injury excuse.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Who will be better?

I wasn't aware that the thread title was "provide a ladder prediction"
It doesn't, other threads do, but you haven't done one, so we wait

If the mods change the title is can give it a crack. Or else you can stop being off topic and address Robertio's off topic TDK injury excuse.

Happy to discuss other posters/content with you soon

3rd time now

You haven't done a ladder prediction, not sure where either side finishes, but Carlton a tad higher, as you prefer Pies to slide

Have I got that right?
 
It doesn't, other threads do, but you haven't done one, so we wait



Happy to discuss other posters/content with you soon

3rd time now

You haven't done a ladder prediction, not sure where either side finishes, but Carlton a tad higher, as you prefer Pies to slide

Have I got that right?
You've got that right, now let's discuss that off topic Robertio post.
 
Who will be Better in 2025, Collingwood or Carlton?

I've answered it many times.

I see you failed to accuse Robertio of not sticking to the above question when he said "Just remember we were 2nd before TDK went down"

Treating your own with a different set of rules, I see.

The stupidest thing someone can do is call another hypocrite when they themselves consistently engage in hypocrisy.
They do it all the time Meow. Drives me nuts.
Usually resort back to it when they are being owned in the off topic discussion... Which happens every discussion..
Carry on. Your contribution is welcome..
 
They do it all the time Meow. Drives me nuts.
Usually resort back to it when they are being owned in the off topic discussion... Which happens every discussion..
Carry on. Your contribution is welcome..
It is nice to feel welcomed by the more courteous and objective posters in this thread. I am still waiting for such a Blue to appear.
 
Nothing to do with the fact that we generally got the top echelon of interstate recruits into the club year after year
Also , my understanding, the zones were drawn out of a hat so , pretty much pot luck. Stop being so bitter about past administrations

It's like the current zones, you take the good with the bad, it shouldn't be an excuse
I would never complain overall about the run Collingwood gets. Like all powerful clubs. I am not bitter about zones but the history is interesting. A good argument can be made they failed in their main aim to make the competition more even. Instead it created a time where flags were just concentrated amongst a few clubs and they all did well from the zones.

Hawks and Carlton were not surprisingly the ones who led the successful bid to block the original plan to rotate zones. If you look at what Hawthorn had, a very large, highly populated, footy rich area its no wonder that ammassed a massive benefit from ther zone and fair to speculate without it they may not have won anywhere near the flag numbers. At the other end was Collingwood. We ended up with the known worst zone and the picking were very slim. Yes it was meant to be a random draw but given the clubs down the ladder all got great zones and the 3 big power clubs that the system was meant to bring back to the field got the bad zones it was , as Ian Collins, your man, once said of that allocation of zones

"I think you would be suspicious, I would be too"

Its an interesting bit of VFL history and there is also an article from 2016 that examines what teams would look like if you applied the country zones to 2016. The weak zones had remained weak and the strong strong. At the end of the day Carlton and hawks did a great job for themselves by blocking the plan to rotate zones yearly. Kenneth Luke being in charge of the VFL allegedly made that happen. The below articles give more detail if you are interested.



 
It's much easier to just hit the safety blanket of the block button, mate. I don't want to actually upset you.
Read back through the posts and see who upset who lol, that was a funny one.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Because of Blue bagger tantrums like we've seen over the past 24 hours.
Lol i knew as soon as i mentioned injuries who was going to throw a tantrum and yep i was right again.
 
I would never complain overall about the run Collingwood gets. Like all powerful clubs. I am not bitter about zones but the history is interesting. A good argument can be made they failed in their main aim to make the competition more even. Instead it created a time where flags were just concentrated amongst a few clubs and they all did well from the zones.

Hawks and Carlton were not surprisingly the ones who led the successful bid to block the original plan to rotate zones. If you look at what Hawthorn had, a very large, highly populated, footy rich area its no wonder that ammassed a massive benefit from ther zone and fair to speculate without it they may not have won anywhere near the flag numbers. At the other end was Collingwood. We ended up with the known worst zone and the picking were very slim. Yes it was meant to be a random draw but given the clubs down the ladder all got great zones and the 3 big power clubs that the system was meant to bring back to the field got the bad zones it was , as Ian Collins, your man, once said of that allocation of zones

"I think you would be suspicious, I would be too"

Its an interesting bit of VFL history and there is also an article from 2016 that examines what teams would look like if you applied the country zones to 2016. The weak zones had remained weak and the strong strong. At the end of the day Carlton and hawks did a great job for themselves by blocking the plan to rotate zones yearly. Kenneth Luke being in charge of the VFL allegedly made that happen. The below articles give more detail if you are interested.



Sobering reading
Screenshot_20241130-143224_Chrome.jpg

On SM-A225F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Lol i knew as soon as i mentioned injuries who was going to throw a tantrum and yep i was right again.
Another example of hypocrisy: Going with the "No YOU'RE the one who threw a tantrum". Original.

Translation: "I considered that I'd be called out for excuse making, but did it anyway and now I'm sooking about it".
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Banter Who will be Better in 2025, Collingwood or Carlton? Part 4

Back
Top