Opinion Top 20 of all time

[the distributer]

What's so funny? A lot of people think he could end up one of the greatest players to ever play. Players these days are so much better athletically and have better skills now it's a professional sport. I honestly think if a player like Lance Franklin was left one out with defenders in the 70s and 80s, he would kick 150 goals every year. He had 200 odd scoring shots on goal in 2008 in the days of zones, floods and lower scoring games. It is probably a feat we will never see again in the modern game.

I don't think listing a 24 yo, 3 x All Australian, B&F winner in a premiership year, 2 x Coleman medalist as one of the great players you have seen as funny. He has been regarded as one of the top few players in the game for a few years now and is only 24. He is entering the prime age for KPFs in the next few years as well. He could end up with 7 or 8 All Australian selections & 4 or 5 Coleman medals. He is capable of rackng up those accolades and also on track to do so. If all goes well and if he achieves those kind of awards, then people will be saying Franklin > Carey.

I think he's the best player in the comp ATM and he's probably the most gifted player we've seen, but, ranking him in the top 20 of all time on his achievements to date is ridiculous, FTR i think he'll probably go down in the top 10 by the time he's done if everything goes to plan, but if he does a knee next year and doesn't return to his best he wont, this isn't a 'who do you think will end up a top 20 player', it's a 'who are in the top 20'.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

I think he's the best player in the comp ATM and he's probably the most gifted player we've seen, but, ranking him in the top 20 of all time on his achievements to date is ridiculous, FTR i think he'll probably go down in the top 10 by the time he's done if everything goes according to plan, but if he does a knee next year and doesn't return to his best he wont, this isn't a 'who do you think will end up a top 20 player', it's a 'who are in the top 20'.

Fair point.

 

[Hodgepodge]

I think he's the best player in the comp ATM and he's probably the most gifted player we've seen, but, ranking him in the top 20 of all time on his achievements to date is ridiculous, FTR i think he'll probably go down in the top 10 by the time he's done if everything goes to plan, but if he does a knee next year and doesn't return to his best he wont, this isn't a 'who do you think will end up a top 20 player', it's a 'who are in the top 20'.

His career looks pretty complete even if he retires today. 3xAA, 2xColeman and 451 goals is right up there for a player who plays mainly as a half-forward.

 

[the distributer]

His career looks pretty complete even if he retires today. 3xAA, 2xColeman and 451 goals is right up there for a player who plays mainly as a half-forward.

Daicos has Franklin covered if he were to stop today, Daicos didn't make the best 22 of the century (amazingly!!).

 

[Hank_Hill]

Tony Lockett
Gary Ablett Snr
Dick Reynolds
John Coleman
Ron Barassi
Bernie Quinlan
Polly Farmer
Daryl Baldock
Royce Hart
Kevin Bartlett
John Nichols
Alex Jesaulenko
Leigh Matthews
Jason Dunstall
Bob Skilton
James Hird
Wayne Carey
Robert Flower
Chris Judd
Barry Cable

 

[the distributer]

Tony Lockett
Gary Ablett Snr
Dick Reynolds
John Coleman
Ron Barassi
Bernie Quinlan
Polly Farmer
Daryl Baldock
Royce Hart
Kevin Bartlett
John Nichols
Alex Jesaulenko
Leigh Matthews
Jason Dunstall
Bob Skilton
James Hird
Wayne Carey
Robert Flower
Chris Judd
Barry Cable

That is possibly the weirdest list i've ever seen, Quinlan ahead of Carey and Dunstal? ok.

 

[krisholio14]

Wrong.

He had a dislocated knee which at the time ended his career as soon as it happened. He had no choice.

Correct

"There were revelations in early 1958 that Coleman's knee was sufficiently repaired to play on and his true reasons for not playing were unrelated to his knee"

Got a source for that quote?

Because as revealed in the "the Illustrated History Of The Essendon Football Club" a video which is indeed based on both Flying High and Flying Higher, the 2 History Of Essendon books, there was no mention of this.

It's okay - I found it from Wikipedia from what appears to be an unofficial text. Rather the official (and indeed factual) version of the truth!

It was on the front page of the Herald Sun if i'm not mistaken.

Coleman's doctor is on the record as saying he cleared Coleman as fit to resume his career, but that the player was not as confident.

Also find me another player that quit football after dislocating the knee.

Back then there would have been a few..simply because knee surgery wasn't as advanced as today.

Plenty of blokes quit footy due to knee issues - Royce Hart for one. He gave up playing in 1977 because his knee, which had been a problem for much of the 1970's, simply wouldn't work for him.

It didn't even have to be a knee. For example, Brian Dorman of Collingwood had his career prematurely ended during the 1960 PF by a torn hamstring.

Pre-WWII: Albert Thurgood, Dick Lee, Vic Thorp, Roy Cazaly
WWI to 1929: Tom Fitzmaurice, Ivor Warne-Smith, Gordon Coventry, Syd Coventry, Edward Greeves, Allan Hopkins, Albert Collier, Harry Vallence, Harry Collier, Reg Hickey
1930s: Wilfred Smallhorn, Jack Regan, Bob Pratt, Gordon Strang, Hayndn Bunton Snr, Percy Beames, Herbie Matthews, Laurie Nash, Dick Reynolds, Allan La Fontaine, Jack Mueller, Wally Butsworth
1940s: Allan Ruthven, Jack Dyer, Les Foote, Charlie Sutton, Bill Hutchison, Denis Cordner, Ron Clegg, Bob Rose, Roy Wright, Bernie Smith, John Coleman
1950s: Stuart Spencer, Jack Clarke, Ted Whitten, John James, Ron Barassi, Graham Arthur, Kevin Murray, Bob Skilton, John Nicholls, Ken Fraser, John Schulz, Verdun Howell, Bill Goggin
1960s: Bill Barrot, Barry Davis, Doug Wade, Ross Smith, Graham Farmer, Darrel Baldock, Des Tuddenham, Ian Stewart, John Rantall, Len Thompson, Barry Breen, Kevin Barlett, Dick Clay, John Murphy, Peter Hudson, Royce Hart, Alex Jeasaulenko, Don Scott, Francis Bourke, Gary Dempsey, Barry Round, David Dench, Leigh Matthews, Bruce Doull, Bernie Quinlan
1970s: Barry Cable, Geoff Southby, Gary Wilson, Keith Greig, Michael Tuck, Robert Flower, Malcolm Blight, Kelvin Templeton, Peter Moore, Simon Madden, Trevor Barker, Terry Daniher, Tim Watson, Ross Glendinning, Peter Daicos
1980s: Dermott Brereton, Gary Ablett Snr, Paul Salmon, Tony Lockett, Greg Williams, Jason Dunstall, Stephen Silvagni, John Platten, Stephen Kernahan, Garry Hocking, Robert Harvey, Wayne Carey
1990s: James Hird, Nathan Buckley, Scott West, Michael Voss, Darren Jarman, Peter Matera, Mark Ricciuto, Glen Jakovich, Jason Akermanis, Andrew McLeod, Ben Cousins, Warren Tredrea, Matt Scarlett, Simon Black, Adam Goodes
2000s: Matt Pavlich, Chris Judd, Gary Ablett Jnr

Paul Roos would surely have to get a gig in the 80's list wouldn't he?

 

[Hank_Hill]

That is possibly the weirdest list i've ever seen, Quinlan ahead of Carey and Dunstal? ok.

it was hard to decide who actually was better. Lockett was the best of all of them tho.

 

[Monkey King]

I honestly think if a player like Lance Franklin was left one out with defenders in the 70s and 80s, he would kick 150 goals every year.

This is surely just some fanboi shit from someone who obviously saw little or no footy from the 70's and 80's.

You probably think Jack Riewold would kick 150 every year too?

 

[the distributer]

This is pure fanboi shit from someone who obviously saw little or no footy from the 70's and 80's.

You probably think Jack Riewold would kick 150 every year too?

Maybe not the 80s, but definately the 70s IMO, no one had the tools Franklin's got in those days, every inside 50 would've been directed at him and he would've been one out most of the time, the arm chopping rule wouldn't have had much of an impact as Frankiln mostly plays from behind anyway.

People forget he kicked 100 a few years ago, lots of players have done that yes, but i don't recall many doing it as a FF/CHF, Roughy kicked 70+ in the same year so Buddy wasn't the only target, i'd also bet my left nut Buddys GAs would've dwarfed any FF of the 70s/80s as well.

 

[Monkey King]

Maybe not the 80s, but definately the 70s IMO, no one had the tools Franklin's got in those days, every inside 50 would've been directed at him and he would've been one out most of the time, the arm chopping rule wouldn't have had much of an impact as Frankiln mostly plays from behind anyway.

Not in the 70's either. For a start, with just the one ump, his opponents would have used this to advantage unlike today and someone like Balmey for example would have knocked his head off at some point. Also, Buddy would have been 9-5'ing like most other players and would not be the exact physical specimen he is today. The 70's had a few of the best defenders I've ever seen (although not at today's height).

And really, probably the biggest thing going for him is the fact players were shorter back then and he wouldn't likely have had a lot of blokes able to match his height - or should we be thinking more talent-based and concede that a Buddy born in the 50's and playing in the 70's may have been a little shorter too.

BF is full of kids who claim today's players would kick 150 goals every year 30 years ago and that players from 30 years ago wouldn't be able to make it in today's game. All it indicates to me is that the posters writing such crap have limited exposure to the eras they're referring to and have their head stuck firmly in the only time they know.

People forget he kicked 100 a few years ago ...

And Fev kicked 99 that year too. So what?! You telling me he and Fev are the best players ever? Others have kicked more in other years since then too. So again, is it safe to assume that if Buddy was going to kick 150 goals every year, that Riewoldt would be expected to kick 150+ at least once as well. Of course not. It's fanboi crap.

 

[the distributer]

Not in the 70's either. For a start, with just the one ump, his opponents would have used this to advantage unlike today and someone like Balmey for example would have knocked his head off at some point. Also, Buddy would have been 9-5'ing like most other players and would not be the exact physical specimen he is today. The 70's had a few of the best defenders I've ever seen (although not at today's height).

And really, probably the biggest thing going for him is the fact players were shorter back then and he wouldn't likely have had a lot of blokes able to match his height - or should we be thinking more talent-based and concede that a Buddy born in the 50's and playing in the 70's may have been a little shorter too.

BF is full of kids who claim today's players would kick 150 goals every year 30 years ago and that players from 30 years ago wouldn't be able to make it in today's game. All it indicates to me is that the posters writing such crap have limited exposure to the eras they're referring to and have their head stuck firmly in the only time they know.



And Fev kicked 99 that year too. So what?! You telling me he and Fev are the best players ever? Others have kicked more in other years since then too. So again, is it safe to assume that if Buddy was going to kick 150 goals every year, that Riewoldt would be expected to kick 150+ at least once as well. Of course not. It's fanboi crap.

Fev was in rare form that year, as good as any FF IMO, and, he was a stay at home FF who demaded a lot of ball, pretty much an old style FF, Buddy played a lot as a CHF that year, like he always has, no one's cracked modern defenses like Buddy has, he always finds a way.

 

[Monkey King]

Fev was in rare form that year, as good as any FF IMO, and, he was a stay at home FF who demaded a lot of ball, pretty much an old style FF ...

It was an alright year from Fev, but I think you've developed a bit of a habit of exaggerating. For some perspective, it was probably on par with one of Doug Wade's just-off-best seasons. That's pretty far from the very best you'd see you poor bugger.

Buddy played a lot as a CHF that year, like he always has, no one's cracked modern defenses like Buddy has, he always finds a way.

This reminds me of those who say Carey kicked his goals playing CHF, when he was usually played much closer to goal than a traditional CHF. While Buddy may not play in a traditional FF position, he's not kicking all those goals from CHF.

Still, I'm not sure how any of this supports the belief that Buddy would kick 150 goals every year in the 70's. Apparently he would kick more every year than any player in the game's history, but he can't even kick more every year than those playing league footy today. Eddie Betts would surely have snagged 100 70's goals on last season's form according to this fantasy concoction right?

 

[the distributer]

It was an alright year from Fev, but I think you've developed a bit of a habit of exaggerating. For some perspective, it was probably on par with one of Doug Wade's just-off-best seasons. That's pretty far from the very best you'd see you poor bugger.



This reminds me of those who say Carey kicked his goals playing CHF, when he was usually played much closer to goal than a traditional CHF. While Buddy may not play in a traditional FF position, he's not kicking all those goals from CHF.

Still, I'm not sure how any of this supports the belief that Buddy would kick 150 goals every year in the 70's. Apparently he would kick more every year than any player in the game's history, but he can't even kick more every year than those playing league footy today. Eddie Betts would surely have snagged 100 70's goals on last season's form according to this fantasy concoction right?

The point is the great FFs didn't move from FF, they didn'y have to chase FBs down the ground, they didn't have to provide defensive Zones, they didn't have to do their part in modern presses, they didn't have to put up with defenders filling holes, loose men etc etc, and every inside 50 was directed at them and they were one out the majority of the time, look at the Hawthorn /Colingwood game this year, Buddy had 3 opponants at times, the game plan in the 70s was to get the ball to your FF and they were fed a hell of a lot more ball than modern day FFs, leave Buddy one out in the goal square for an entire match and he's going to hit the scoreboard, and he'll hit it hard.

Fevs 99 was a great achievment, right up there with Locket and Dunstals 130 IMO, his game against Collingwood that year was as good a game as i've seen from a FF, he was simply unstoppable.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

it was hard to decide who actually was better. Lockett was the best of all of them tho.

You don't have Hudon in your list? Lol. The guy has the best goal per game average of all time. 727 goals from 129 games. First VFL player ever to kick 100 golas 5 times in a season and had a season of 150 goals. Yet you think Quinlan was better?

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

This is surely just some fanboi shit from someone who obviously saw little or no footy from the 70's and 80's.

Stop following me around. Who are you anyway? Neil Harvey?

 

[Hodgepodge]

Daicos has Franklin covered if he were to stop today, Daicos didn't make the best 22 of the century (amazingly!!).

Statistically Franklin's record is better than Daicos'

 

[Monkey King]

The point is the great FFs didn't move from FF, they didn'y have to chase FBs down the ground, they didn't have to provide defensive Zones, they didn't have to do their part in modern presses, they didn't have to put up with defenders filling holes, loose men etc etc,

No loose defenders in 70's footy? What do you think ruckmen did? Only one on one contests? Let me guess, you didn't actually watch 70's footy right?

You seem to talk as though every change has been to the detriment of forwards, but hell no. The forward umps, the video reporting system, rules to protect forwards, the improved structures and disposal of modern footballers. These are benefits that Buddy wouldn't have had back in the 70's, among the other points already mentioned in my previous post.

Fevs 99 was a great achievment, right up there with Locket and Dunstals 130 IMO, his game against Collingwood that year was as good a game as i've seen from a FF, he was simply unstoppable.

Well that's your opinion. Suffice to say I don't value it a great deal.

 

[Monkey King]

Stop following me around.

Where have I been following you around exactly? Didn't you just bitch-respond to one of my posts in another thread?

 

[the distributer]

No loose defenders in 70's footy? What do you think ruckmen did? Only one on one contests? Let me guess, you didn't actually watch 70's footy right?

You seem to talk as though every change has been to the detriment of forwards, but hell no. The forward umps, the video reporting system, rules to protect forwards, the improved structures and disposal of modern footballers. These are benefits that Buddy wouldn't have had back in the 70's, among the other points already mentioned in my previous post.



Well that's your opinion. Suffice to say I don't value it a great deal.

So are you trying to say kicking goals was easier in the 70s compared to today?, and i watched a lot of footy during the 70s, but lets just pretend you know everything and we'll leave it at that.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Zone defences to stop key forwards only became a trend in the Lloyd/Fev era and began being used sporadically in the Dunstall/Lockett era. We all remember the Hawkins move which got him a rising star nom and kept Dunstall goalless (along with Alastair Lynch). Nowadays we see this maneuver as commonplace, but back then it was a novelty.

Ruckmen were often situated in back pockets during games in the 70s, but that was mainly to take overhead marks as a lot of forward entries in those days were long bombs forward. They weren't deployed to double team or stop a particular forward.

 

[Monkey King]

Ruckmen were often situated in back pockets during games in the 70s, but that was mainly to take overhead marks as a lot of forward entries in those days were long bombs forward. They weren't deployed to double team or stop a particular forward.

I don't necessarily disagree with all that you say, but ruckmen, have been dropping back in the hole as an extra man for years.

 

[the distributer]

Zone defences to stop key forwards only became a trend in the Lloyd/Fev era and began being used sporadically in the Dunstall/Lockett era. We all remember the Hawkins move which got him a rising star nom and kept Dunstall goalless (along with Alastair Lynch). Nowadays we see this maneuver as commonplace, but back then it was a novelty.

Ruckmen were often situated in back pockets during games in the 70s, but that was mainly to take overhead marks as a lot of forward entries in those days were long bombs forward. They weren't deployed to double team or stop a particular forward.

Yep, modern day defenses have killed the FF position, look at the mid 90s, we had Locket, Dunstal, Ablett, Salmon, Jakovich, Rocca, Modra, Sumich, Beasly, Hogg, Longmire etc, these were all pretty much stay at home FFs, now look at how many stay at home FFs we have, game plans just don't allow for FFs anymore, any team with a dominant FF will become to predictable, if the defense knows where the balls heading they just get numbers back, the only player to kick a ton against the modern defenses is Buddy, and a shitload of them goals came by doing things Plugger or Dunstal couldn't do in their dreams.

 

[the distributer]

I don't necessarily disagree with all that you say, but ruckmen, have been dropping back in the hole as an extra man for years.

And they still do, another reason goals for FFs have dried up is the fact that teams don't use the coridoor anywhere near as much as they used to, they mostly come in from the flanks severly limiting where a FF can lead to, and if he does get it he's normally on an angle, it's pretty rare now days for a FF to be able to lead str8 up the middle without getting chopped off by the zone.

 

[Monkey King]

So are you trying to say kicking goals was easier in the 70s compared to today?

Can't see where I've said that. You've noted some changes in the game that make it harder for forwards and I've noted some changes that make it easier. Some of those changes would work for or against different players going either way. I think that Buddy would encounter a range of differences that would impact his game as you know it today, whereas you guys seem to be focusing only on upside and talking as though Buddy today would be exactly the same player in the 70's. If you're talking about magically transplanting an elite athlete from today back to the 70's, then maybe I stand corrected, but I'm just trying to look at it more realistically talent wise, which is how I took the original comment tbh.

What I don't agree with, is that a player today would automatically kick twice as many goals in the 70's due to these changes - which is what it would take for Franklin to kick 150 goals every year. Shit! That would mean Fev would have once kicked nearly 200 goals in a season back in the day. It's nonsensical!