Essendon 2000 has to be the greatest Team of all Time?

[Yoda_]

Leave town you cowards

quit whinging ya sook

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Let them have it. They won a single premiership with it, 20 odd years ago.

 

[Yoda_]

I'm pretty confident Geelong of the late 00's seasons would defeat the Essendon 2000.

When coming to this conclusion I'm looking at who their competition was during that time. I think Geelong had harder competition with the likes of St Kilda, Collingwood and to a lesser degree Bulldogs. Essendon of 2000 really only had an over the hill Kangaroos side as any sort of threat and when a very good side did come along in 2001 (Brisbane) Essendon was shown up.

In short Geelong were the best in tougher seasons, while Essendon were the best in a comparatively weaker season.

That'd be an awesome match up,

Peak Lloyd versus peak Scarlett,
Peak Hawkins versus peak Fletcher
Peak Hird versus peak Enright
Peak Selwood versus peak Misiti
Peak J.Johnson versus peak Gary Ablett
Peak Steve Johnson versus peak Damian Hardwick
Peak Mark Johnson versus peak Mark Chapman
Peak Harry Taylor versus peak Scott Lucas


I think the top end talent of the Cats beats the top end of the Bombers (although we still had 8 all Australians named at one point in time in that 2000 grand final) and half a dozen exceptionally good role players that made us GOAT worthy (Blumfield, Heffernan, Caracella, Moorcroft, Long, Ramanauskas, Barnard)

 

[Defabs]

Periods of over 12 months:

1. Essendon 2000 to late 2001
2. Geelong early 2007 to very late 2008
3. Collingwood mid 2010 to very late 2011

St Kilda 2009 the next best.

Collingwood in a 35 game period, had won 32, lost 2 games and drew 1 from the QB draw 2010 to round 23 2011.

They did not concede 100 points once during that time which is an incredible stat unknown to most. Their % was crazy during that time (I think 175% going into round 23 2011) and were belting teams weekly.

Their two losses were to Hawthorn and Geelong each by a few points in final round 2010 and the Cats in round 7.

Had Beams nailed his shot at the end of the match and Pendles goal overruled as insufficient advantage, there may have been no losses.

Definitely Collingwood’s most dominant period I can ever recall and one of the most dominant season and a half in the history of the game.

 

[boncer34]

Let them have it. They won a single premiership with it, 20 odd years ago.

Yes that it what is on offer each season. A single premiership.

 

[Cyclops]

This (US inspired?) obsession with numbers is something we usually see from Hawthorn supporters. Our game is too complex to be easily digested like simpleton dumbed down made for TV sports.

If the stats nerds are serious, where are the 1929 Pies? Lost 0% of the games during the season, surely that's the best single season ever. Their sole (and surprising) loss came in suspicious circumstances, with the state in recession (I think the Great Depression had kicked off in the US but prolly hadn't hit here yet). I'd hate to accuse anyone of throwing a game for a quid, but the clubs unofficial patron was an ex bookie...

That team also proved it wasn't a fluke by winning four in a row (a "fourpeat" for our seppo converts). They also had a better forward line ( including a better FF than flash in the pan Coleman) a better midfield and defence and rucks than the 2000 "adjusted GOATs". Oh and the coach made Sheedy look like Ross Lyon.

I didnt see them so my opinion is flawed but those who did state it was "the Machine". The fear it generated led to rules changes to give lesser clubs a chance.

I don't recall any fear around the 2000 side, just some arrogance.

Sorry, but even on some basic stats like games won, percentage etc, 2000 has Lions and Hawks covered.
The Dons outfit in 2000 put it all together for all to witness.
They were just overwhelming.

Sure it's a nice set of numbers. The team did not produce the best single season of footy. There have been better sides who overcame tougher comps to produce similar numbers.

Wait till you find out who Brisbane played in the grand final.

They played a little diminished Essendon. Port and the Crows improved, IIRC the Swans did too.
Melbourne didn't fade that badly but finished out of the 8. The league improved enormously and that brings Essendons quality into focus. 2000 was a very weak year.

 

[boncer34]

This (US inspired?) obsession with numbers is something we usually see from Hawthorn supporters. Our game is too complex to be easily digested like simpleton dumbed down made for TV sports.

If the stats nerds are serious, where are the 1929 Pies? Lost 0% of the games during the season, surely that's the best single season ever. Their sole (and surprising) loss came in suspicious circumstances, with the state in recession (I think the Great Depression had kicked off in the US but prolly hadn't hit here yet). I'd hate to accuse anyone of throwing a game for a quid, but the clubs unofficial patron was an ex bookie...

That team also proved it wasn't a fluke by winning four in a row (a "fourpeat" for our seppo converts). They also had a better forward line ( including a better FF than flash in the pan Coleman) a better midfield and defence and rucks than the 2000 "adjusted GOATs". Oh and the coach made Sheedy look like Ross Lyon.

I didnt see them so my opinion is flawed but those who did state it was "the Machine". The fear it generated led to rules changes to give lesser clubs a chance.

I don't recall any fear around the 2000 side, just some arrogance.



Sure it's a nice set of numbers. The team did not produce the best single season of footy. There have been better sides who overcame tougher comps to produce similar numbers.


They played a little diminished Essendon. Port and the Crows improved, IIRC the Swans did too.
Melbourne didn't fade that badly but finished out of the 8. The league improved enormously and that brings Essendons quality into focus. 2000 was a very weak year.

Who else has gone 24-1?

So they played a diminished side you don't rate that highly?

 

[citizen-erased]

"Were Essendon 2000 the greatest side ever to play the game in a single season?"

And we won the preseason flag too, so it was two flags that year

Still best team of any particular season.
Ppl argue we threw away a dynasty, but i doubt 2000 happens without the 99 PF
And the 01 lions were worthy winners. The late 01 thru 03 lions are the most impervious team ive seen.

 

[citizen-erased]

Given the Dogs were the only team to beat them that year, I’m going to say 2000 Bulldogs, and then hope that no-one thinks I’m being serious

Fair point

 

[citizen-erased]

Best single season I have seen from a team. Geelong 2007 and Carlton 1995 were also very strong.

Off topic, but the 07 v 22 v 19 GFs would be an interesting case study for most impressive pantsing on the big day

 

[BruceTempany14]

Richmond won three in 1973.

Four if you count Essex Heights ….


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[JerryWexler]

Who else can really compare to that team? Losing a single game all season and destroying teams left right and centre is just unheard of. Geelong 2008 had their chance, but they got beaten when it truly mattered. They can't be compared to the great Dons in that respect because there's no flag. It's a results orientated business where nothing else matters but delivering the end product. Balls and nerves of steel and a championship mindset to reign supreme after suffering such heartbreak the year before at the hands of The Koutifides inspired Navy Blues. The word was they all sat down together at dinner ( eating a meal, a succulent chinese meal? ) after the Grand Final of 1999 and vowed to ensure that they take out the cup in 2000. And they fulfilled on that promised to one another and ran through every one in their wake leaving behind a path of destruction and damaged goods capturing The Premiership Cup.

Essendon 2000 is the greatest team to play the game. 16 Teams in the comp, the past teams just had way less teams to compare.

Who could you make comparisons with for arguments sake that they could match it with or topple The Dons? IMO you can't. But why not debate as we all love a good yarn.

But they did suffer at the hands of the Blues so, no they weren't the best of all time.

 

[demondavey]

I suspect you’re still haunted by Longy taking out your big fellow.

Oh please, don’t revert to some childish comeback because you can’t hack the opinion.

 

[demondavey]

2nd on the ladder with 17-5 and 3rd on the ladder with 15-7 smashes first on the ladder with 21-1?

Interesting.

When it mattered the lions so much better. Just take it to the Essendon board if you’re triggered.

 

[Fadge]

Collingwood in a 35 game period, had won 32, lost 2 games and drew 1 from the QB draw 2010 to round 23 2011.

They did not concede 100 points once during that time which is an incredible stat unknown to most. Their % was crazy during that time (I think 175% going into round 23 2011) and were belting teams weekly.

Their two losses were to Hawthorn and Geelong each by a few points in final round 2010 and the Cats in round 7.

Had Beams nailed his shot at the end of the match and Pendles goal overruled as insufficient advantage, there may have been no losses.

Definitely Collingwood’s most dominant period I can ever recall and one of the most dominant season and a half in the history of the game.

Indeed.

By far the best Collingwood team I have seen in more than 4 decades watching football.

Unfortunately it clashed with Geelong's best team in their history, and I'd suggest St. Kilda's best team in their history.

 

[Orange crush]

Well, I guess they’ll always have Paris 2000

 

[boncer34]

When it mattered the lions so much better. Just take it to the Essendon board if you’re triggered.

Lions won all their finals by an average of greater than 10 goals?

Beat the reigning premiers by 125 points?

 

[boncer34]

But they did suffer at the hands of the Blues so, no they weren't the best of all time.

Carlton didn't beat Essendon in 2000? They had 3 cracks and failed everytime.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Yes that it what is on offer each season. A single premiership.

Unlucky.

 

[boncer34]

Unlucky.

How so?

 

[demondavey]

Lions won all their finals by an average of greater than 10 goals?

Beat the reigning premiers by 125 points?

I just don’t think they are. Sorry if you don’t like it.

 

[boncer34]

I just don’t think they are. Sorry if you don’t like it.

I don't care if you don't. You're allowed a different opinion.

 

[demondavey]

I don't care if you don't. You're allowed a different opinion.

Settled

 

[Cyclops]

Who else has gone 24-1?

So they played a diminished side you don't rate that highly?

I don't think there was a smorgasbord of dominant and near dominant sides to beat.

It was a very smart and balanced side and above all got the job done.

They did have to contend with an more even league, so by the same token the tree were less utterly hopeless guaranteed wins. It's still a great effort and Sheedy is rightly lauded for it.

I just recoil from the argument "they're the GOAT because numbers". I'm also unimpressed the selection of options seems to be post 1999. Its not a rigorous or persuasive case.

 

[burger09]

Maybe we re title this 'no other team in 2000 were very good'.
This team was found out within 12 months by a truly great, dynasty level team.