Combined Best 22 of dynasty teams in 21st century

[BF Tiger]

Or played the weaker opposition in their finals series...

Just for fun Fadge, rate these teams out of 100.

2002 Brisbane and Collingwood
2003 Brisbane and Collingwood
2010 Collingwood and St Kilda
2011 Geelong and Collingwood
2017 Richmond and Adelaide
2019 Richmond and GWS
2020 Richmond and Geelong
2023 Collingwood and Brisbane

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Or played the weaker opposition in their finals series...

Bingo

 

[Fadge]

Just for fun Fadge, rate these teams out of 100.

2002 Brisbane and Collingwood
2003 Brisbane and Collingwood
2010 Collingwood and St Kilda
2011 Geelong and Collingwood
2017 Richmond and Adelaide
2019 Richmond and GWS
2020 Richmond and Geelong
2023 Collingwood and Brisbane

Relative rankings, where the strongest team in the discussion gets 100, and based on their performance in the specific season without considering other seasons, and also in consideration of quality of opposition teams at the time:
100 Geelong 2011
98 Collingwood 2011
96 Collingwood 2010
94 Brisbane 2002
93 Collingwood 2023
92 Brisbane 2003
90 St Kilda 2010
88 Richmond 2017
87 Brisbane 2023
86 Richmond 2019
85 Collingwood 2002
85 Collingwood 2003
84 Adelaide 2017
83 Richmond 2020
81 Geelong 2020
75 GWS 2019

Pretty easy exercise.

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

Bingo

Prolly right...we only played and smashed the Scats over a 4 year finals campaign!

 

[PhatBoy]

Prolly right...we only played and smashed the Scats over a 4 year finals campaign!

I love how you wrote this like you think it’s an insult or something to get pissed off about when an actual Cats fan has just openly stated that he feels our team, among others, was relatively weak at the time.

 

[STPer18]

Prolly right...we only played and smashed the Scats over a 4 year finals campaign!

The mighty mighty Geelong Cats of 17-20, with all due respect to them, aren't even in the same ballpark of the 07-11 side which this thread is discussing.

 

[BF Tiger]

Relative rankings, where the strongest team in the discussion gets 100, and based on their performance in the specific season without considering other seasons, and also in consideration of quality of opposition teams at the time:
100 Geelong 2011
98 Collingwood 2011
96 Collingwood 2010
94 Brisbane 2002
93 Collingwood 2023
92 Brisbane 2003
90 St Kilda 2010
88 Richmond 2017
87 Brisbane 2023
86 Richmond 2019
85 Collingwood 2002
85 Collingwood 2003
84 Adelaide 2017
83 Richmond 2020
81 Geelong 2020
75 GWS 2019

Pretty easy exercise.

Thanks Fadge. Your honest appraisal is appreciated.

Interesting to see that you rated Richmond 2019 15% better than the next best side in the competition (86/75=1.15). This is far and away the most dominant that the Fadge-ratings has rated the premiers over the runners-up (notionally the next best in the competition), admittedly within this small sample size. For comparison Fadge-ratings has Collingwood 2023 not even 7% better than the runners-up Brisbane.

If you wish to extend the sample size I’d be interested to see if any other team gets close to being 15% better than the next best team.

 

[Fadge]

Thanks Fadge. Your honest appraisal is appreciated.

Interesting to see that you rated Richmond 2019 15% better than the next best side in the competition (86/75=1.15). This is far and away the most dominant that the Fadge-ratings has rated the premiers over the runners-up (notionally the next best in the competition), admittedly within this small sample size. For comparison Fadge-ratings has Collingwood 2023 not even 7% better than the runners-up Brisbane.

If you wish to extend the sample size I’d be interested to see if any other team gets close to being 15% better than the next best team.

Yep.

That's what happens in a weak era.

You'll also notice I rank the best Richmond premiership team 6% worse than the worst Collingwood premiership team.

And we all know Collingwood 2011 would have absolutely destroyed any of the Richmond premiership teams (hence the significant differential between the respective teams).

 

[BF Tiger]

Yep.

That's what happens in a weak era.

You'll also notice I rank the best Richmond premiership team 6% worse than the worst Collingwood premiership team.

And we all know Collingwood 2011 would have absolutely destroyed any of the Richmond premiership teams (hence the significant differential between the respective teams).

The thing about strong or weak eras is that they still hand out premiership cups, and they’re all worth the same. Even the ones where Richmond have been the most dominant side compared to the rest of the competition*.

The thing about dynasties is Richmond have had two since Collingwood’s last one.

The thing about this thread is no Collingwood players get mentioned in it, because it is about dynasty players.

* - according to Fadge ratings.

 

[Tiger2709]

Yep.

That's what happens in a weak era.

You'll also notice I rank the best Richmond premiership team 6% worse than the worst Collingwood premiership team.

And we all know Collingwood 2011 would have absolutely destroyed any of the Richmond premiership teams (hence the significant differential between the respective teams).

If only it was that simple.

 

[Caligo]

The thing about strong or weak eras is that they still hand out premiership cups, and they’re all worth the same.

I talk about strong/weak eras as much as anyone but I agree completely. I would have loved to have gotten lucky and jagged a flag in 2016 or 2018 in weak years.

As you say, they all still count.

 

[Fadge]

I talk about strong/weak eras as much as anyone but I agree completely. I would have loved to have gotten lucky and jagged a flag in 2016 or 2018 in weak years.

As you say, they all still count.

Yep. Agree with this as well.

I enjoyed this year's premiership as much as 2010, even though the current era is not as strong as the late 2000's/early 2010's.

 

[nineteen eighty]

Yep.

That's what happens in a weak era.

You'll also notice I rank the best Richmond premiership team 6% worse than the worst Collingwood premiership team.

And we all know Collingwood 2011 would have absolutely destroyed any of the Richmond premiership teams (hence the significant differential between the respective teams).

Oh Fadgy...you never disappoint

 

[Noidnadroj]

Relative rankings, where the strongest team in the discussion gets 100, and based on their performance in the specific season without considering other seasons, and also in consideration of quality of opposition teams at the time:
100 Geelong 2011
98 Collingwood 2011
96 Collingwood 2010
94 Brisbane 2002
93 Collingwood 2023
92 Brisbane 2003
90 St Kilda 2010
88 Richmond 2017
87 Brisbane 2023
86 Richmond 2019
85 Collingwood 2002
85 Collingwood 2003
84 Adelaide 2017
83 Richmond 2020
81 Geelong 2020
75 GWS 2019

Pretty easy exercise.

Bahahaha … some of your best work yet Fadge. Pies of 2023 beat Demons by 7-points (a team who’ve lost their last 4 finals at the G and had their best 2 forwards missing injured). Beat GWS at the G by 1 point (a team who’d finished 7th on the ladder with a % of 107%). Then beat Lions in GF by 4-points (Lions had won something like 2 of their last 15 games at the MCG).

And they’re better than the Lions team of 2003 who completed their third flag with finals win of 42, 44 and 50 points, including a win against Sydney away.

I’m beginning to realise you don’t actually believe what you write so not sure why I get sucked in so easy. If the Pies of 2023 were truly 5th best of all these teams how do they only win their 3 x finals on their home ground against questionable opposition by a total of 12 points?

Fadgelogic at its finest.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Noidnadroj]

Yep.

That's what happens in a weak era.

You'll also notice I rank the best Richmond premiership team 6% worse than the worst Collingwood premiership team.

And we all know Collingwood 2011 would have absolutely destroyed any of the Richmond premiership teams (hence the significant differential between the respective teams).

Pies won their first final of 2011 by 20 points against the ‘mighty’ Eagles at the MCG… Eagles won their next final at home against the Blues by 3 points and got flogged by Cats in PF ….so they weren’t overly strong.

They then scraped over the line in the PF by 3 points and got smoked in the GF.

So yeah nah …. not too much to suggest those Tiger teams who had a percentage close to 200% in finals during their dynasty would’ve been destroyed. If you can’t ‘destroy’ an achieve nothing Eagles team at the MCG in a final, what makes you think you’d destroy a dynasty Tiger team on their home deck? Makes zero sense.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Noidnadroj]

I talk about strong/weak eras as much as anyone but I agree completely. I would have loved to have gotten lucky and jagged a flag in 2016 or 2018 in weak years.

As you say, they all still count.

Why is an era with 2-3 dominant teams per season and not much depth of competition stronger than an era with 11-12 highly competitive teams ? It’s a serious question.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[PhatBoy]

Why is an era with 2-3 dominant teams per season and not much depth of competition stronger than an era with 11-12 highly competitive teams ? It’s a serious question.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Well what makes a runner better: beating one Usain Bolt or beating 10 Ato Boldens?

 

[SSSSSS]

I reckon this may be controversial but basically every side (all but 1) has had Jonathon Brown in it without argument so far and I'm personally not sure he should make it.

Wonderful player for sure but I think his reputation has a been a little elevated due to his country blokey persona, fearsome 'presence' and admittedly wonderful bravery.

As good as he was, he made the AA team twice. won 1 Coleman and averaged 26 goals per season across the threepeat years. He kicked more than 3 goals in a final just twice in his career and kicked 594 in total as a permanent forward.

Those are still impressive numbers but the competition for spots in this side is tough.

Franklin needs no introduction and was AA 8 times, kicked over 1000 goals (nearly double Brown), won 4 Colemans, averaged 87 goals in the flag years (more than triple Brown) and has a great many dominant finals.

Hawkins was AA 5 times, won a Coleman, has nearly 800 goals and a lot more big finals.

Riewoldt has 3 AA's, 3 Colemans, more big finals and more goals in the flag years.

Roughead was a dual AA (in different positions), kicked 272 goals in the flag years (WAY more than anyone else), kicked at least 72 goals in 3 of the flag years (including a Coleman) and ended up with basically the same number of goals as Brown, despite playing multiple other positions. A great many dominant finals too.

Even A Lynch, whose career accolades are a little less, at least was the 'main man' in the forward line for the Lions during their threepeat, leading their goalkicking in every season, kicking over 100 more goals than anyone else over the threepeat and having multiple big finals and Grand finals (most notably kicking 4 in a 1 goal win against Collingwood).

Loved Brown Dog, but think he might get squeezed out of this side, with Buddy at CHF and one of the others at FF.

Brown also was a bit part contributor in the 3peat era. Still growing into his body.

His peak came after the Lions era ended.

Contrast this to Hawkins, Riewoldt & Roughy who were at their best in the Premiership years and were key pillars up forward.

 

[Caligo]

Why is an era with 2-3 dominant teams per season and not much depth of competition stronger than an era with 11-12 highly competitive teams ? It’s a serious question.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I think it is a really good question. The way I think of a "weak" era is a time when an ok team with a bit of luck can jag a flag. When you have 2-4 super teams then the average team can't just get lucky.

I completely agree with you that right now we have at least 10 quite good teams, and it is fair to call that "strong", but I don't think of it that way.

It is all a matter of perspective and I fully understand that my way of seeing it isn't the only way.

I liked Phatboy's analogy. You could also look at tennis. When Nadal, Joker and Fed were going strong good luck winning a slam. But when those guys are gone it feels like anyone in the top 20 has a chance.

Anyhow, I hope it isn't just my bias speaking, since I believe my club was one of the powerhouses during the last strong era.

 

[Mr Meow]

The thing about strong or weak eras is that they still hand out premiership cups, and they’re all worth the same. Even the ones where Richmond have been the most dominant side compared to the rest of the competition*.

The thing about dynasties is Richmond have had two since Collingwood’s last one.

The thing about this thread is no Collingwood players get mentioned in it, because it is about dynasty players.

* - according to Fadge ratings.

Having your club win premierships in both weak and strong seasons allows one to be unbiased if they choose. 2007 and 2023 were objectively "easier" flags than 2009 and 2011. The comp has been weaker with only one (at most) great side each year from around 2016 onwards.

 

[Fadge]

Bahahaha … some of your best work yet Fadge. Pies of 2023 beat Demons by 7-points (a team who’ve lost their last 4 finals at the G and had their best 2 forwards missing injured). Beat GWS at the G by 1 point (a team who’d finished 7th on the ladder with a % of 107%). Then beat Lions in GF by 4-points (Lions had won something like 2 of their last 15 games at the MCG).

And they’re better than the Lions team of 2003 who completed their third flag with finals win of 42, 44 and 50 points, including a win against Sydney away.

I’m beginning to realise you don’t actually believe what you write so not sure why I get sucked in so easy. If the Pies of 2023 were truly 5th best of all these teams how do they only win their 3 x finals on their home ground against questionable opposition by a total of 12 points?

Fadgelogic at its finest.

You forgot to mention:
Collingwood 2023 finished a game and percentage clear at the top of the ladder and won 3 from 3 finals to win the flag.

Brisbane 2003 finished 3rd at the end of the home and away season and lost their first final.

But let's not consider 90% of the dataset, and instead cherry pick a small subset of games played in each respective season (albeit acknowledging they are important games).

You'll also note my assessment of Brisbane's opposition in 2003... but I must be biased towards Collingwood....

 

[SSSSSS]

FB: J.Gibson Scarlett C.Johnson
HB: Hodge (c) Leppitsch Enright

C: Lappin - Voss (c) - Bartel

HF: Akermanis - Roughy - D.Martin
FF: Breust - Franklin - Rioli

RR: Ottens - Black - GAJ
INT: StevieJ - S.Mitchell - Selwood (c) - Burgoyne
Coach: Clarkson

Hawks - 8
Geelong - 7
Lions - 6
Richmond - 1

My additions are purely based on how they played in their Premiership years.

Toughest decisions was the following;

I've chosen Roughy at CHF. By far the most goals scored and 2xAA + 1x Coleman's in Premiership years which is a resume only matched by Bud. The likes of Brown and Hawkins were not yet in their prime during their Premiership era. Riewoldt was arguably fading when Richmond started their era.

I've gone Leppa > Rance. If Rance had a bit more longevity he probably gets a nod. Leppa's 2x AA in flag years trumps Rance's 1x AA in a flag year and 1x AA as a Grand Finalist.

Burgoyne and Bartel are automatic selections for mine. Simply the two best plug and play players I've seen in the last twenty years. Could play anywhere on the oval bar ruck and play their role to perfection. When the team needed an injection of class both these guys would step up in the big moments.

I've gone for co-captains which I hate but it's almost impossible to split Voss and Hodge. I've added Selwood there too because whilst I believe Voss and Hodge are above him, he belongs in their company.

A pretty good split between Hawks, Cats and Lions. I think if we were to pick based on their overall career ended up you would have to drop Roughy for Brown/Riewoldt, and probably Leppa for Rance.

 

[Tiger2709]

Well what makes a runner better: beating one Usain Bolt or beating 10 Ato Boldens?

Neither, it might make your marketability higher but it doesn't make you a better runner.

Break the World record drug free and its Usain who?

 

[Fadge]

Neither, it might make your marketability higher but it doesn't make you a better runner.

Oh my.

 

[Tiger2709]

Oh my.

Oh my what? how does beating someone make you a better runner, I would think its all the training that makes you a better runner.

"The more I practice the better I get"