Who would you rate as the strongest premiership side in the AFL era?

[adammania9]

Can you read big words & grasp concepts?

Are ‘dominate’ and its suffixes considered ‘big words’? Because that’s about the most complex word you typed and it’s there about 15 times.

 

[carnaroys08]

Are ‘dominate’ and its suffixes considered ‘big words’? Because that’s about the most complex word you typed and it’s there about 15 times.

Well rather than being a flog, why don't you come up with a better standard which one can measure a teams strength Archimedes.

 

[adammania9]

Well rather than being a flog, why don't you come up with a better standard which one can measure a teams strength Archimedes.

The Brisbane Lions won 14 out of its 22 games in the 2003 Home and Away season and lost its first final. Essendon won 21 out of its 22 and won their first final by 125 points and its grand final by ten goals. You tell me which team was more dominant.

 

[carnaroys08]

The Brisbane Lions won 14 out of its 22 games in the 2003 Home and Away season and lost its first final. Essendon won 21 out of its 22 and won their first final by 125 points and its grand final by ten goals. You tell me which team was more dominant.

I've stated it clear enough. I measure a POWERFUL side by how many times they can smash their opponent & put a game to bed in a quarter of football. Come up with a better standard to measure it then.
Yeah, the Lions lost a low scoring affair to Collingwood early in the Finals that year. We DOMINATED you R19 & in the GF. The $7 for Lions over 39.5pts was a luxury. We embarrassed you twice, made you look weak twice. You scraped home once in one of those s**t booring kick it along the boundary line & flood styles of games. Didn't get you far.

 

[bh90210fan]

Richmond were stronger in finals. As I said, they had the fifth highest percentage in finals of all time. They only conceded a total of 167 points across three games while scoring 302 points themselves. That’s a lot more comprehensive that West Coast’s performances. You also needed a dubious non-call to get you over the line the Grand Final.

Richmond also beat better sides. Adelaide (GF) and GWS (PF) are a lot stronger than Collingwood (GF) and Melbourne (PF). Pies (QF) probably pip Geelong (QF) though, so have that. Richmond then went on to become to strongest MCG tenant of all time. They’re quite literally the best ever side to play the MCG, but you think we wouldn’t beat the majority of this list? Richmond’s home and away record in 2018 also proves they were a stronger outfit than West Coast because they finished above them with a premiers draw. One loss at the end of the season does not define us.

On paper, we have a stronger defence and midfield. You have a stronger forward line (but that now changes with the addition of Lynch). Furthermore, we are better coached. As Terry Wallace once said: “Richmond are the best drilled side I have ever seen”.

You should be flattered I’m even having this discussion with you.

Mate, you’ve only beaten one top 8 team away from the mcg in two years. If you played a final away from the mcg last year Richmond would’ve lost. You got lucky. There’s no way Richmond are in any conversation for the strongest premiership team in afl history.

You finished on top with a tougher draw this year but it means squat if you don’t even make the grand final.

I’m not sure how you can think that Richmond are the best mcg tenant in the history of football when you’re not even the strongest tenant this decade. Hawthorn and Collingwood have both been stronger tenant clubs and that’s just since 2010.

One loss doesn’t define a season? The game was over by quarter time. Richmond got totally shown up. It wasn’t just a loss, it was a spanking.

West coast matches up well against Richmond all over the park, your comparisons are just fanboi bull crap. Not sure how you can rate Richmond stronger everywhere when West Coast thumped them by 8 goals last time they met.

 

[MacMum]

Dusty has fended off bigger stronger players than Voss, would have no problem putting Voss on his ass

Hahaha! You seriously believe that? Voss would've done his own don't argue on the little squirt! Dusty would've shat his pants!

I get the feeling you weren't old enough to grasp how Voss played.

 

[adammania9]

I've stated it clear enough. I measure a POWERFUL side by how many times they can smash their opponent & put a game to bed in a quarter of football. Come up with a better standard to measure it then.
Yeah, the Lions lost a low scoring affair to Collingwood early in the Finals that year. We DOMINATED you R19 & in the GF. The $7 for Lions over 39.5pts was a luxury. We embarrassed you twice, made you look weak twice. You scraped home once in one of those s**t booring kick it along the boundary line & flood styles of games. Didn't get you far.

That’s a pretty silly way to measure dominance. No team that loses eight games in a season is dominant in any measure.

If we had an extra 10% salary cap and free pickings of the AFL’s worst team, we’d probably have won some premierships in the early 00’s too.

 

[MacMum]

I doubt it..

 

[Captain_Bender]

Hahaha! You seriously believe that? Voss would've done his own don't argue on the little squirt! Dusty would've shat his pants!

I get the feeling you weren't old enough to grasp how Voss played.

Dude Dusty is bigger than Voss

 

[carnaroys08]

That’s a pretty silly way to measure dominance. No team that loses eight games in a season is dominant across any measure.

That's your opinion.

If we had an extra 10% salary cap and free pickings of the AFL’s worst team, we’d probably have won some premierships in the early 00’s too.

You obviously haven't learn't how to be a gracious looser yet, despite having had so many growth opportunities.

 

[adammania9]

That's your opinion.

You obviously haven't learn't how to be a gracious looser yet, despite having had so many growth opportunities.

You brought up Collingwood for absolutely no reason whatsoever. I don’t care how Brisbane fared against Collingwood that year - we were the fourth or fifth best side at best.

You cannot seriously think that a Brisbane side that lost eight games in one year were one of the most dominant premiership teams of all time, especially based on a stat as ridiculous as the number of times beating a team by six goals in a quarter. That’s the single most cherry picked stat I’ve ever seen in my whole life. How can you even type that with a straight face?

 

[fleabitten]

Richmond did a Steven Bradbury and backed it up with a dominant season. St Kilda were a lucky bounce away from a flag. They had a dominant 2009 which could be compared to the Bombers 2000 and had stars on every line. St Kilda of 2009 would have killed Richmond of today.

So both teams had dominant seasons. Both teams had stars on every line. One got an unlucky bounce and no trophies, the other destroyed all other finalists and won the premiership. But the Saints would have killed Richmond. Righto, mate.

 

[MacMum]

Dude Dusty is bigger than Voss

....for your information, I'm not a dude.

Dusty's bigger? So? They fall harder!

 

[Brett C]

Probs Brisbane because we beat them heaps at their peak.

Used to hate Sunday arvo games at the Gabba watching cousins, Kerr and mainly Judd destroy us for a couple of hours. The premierships made up for it

 

[tigertigertiger]

Geelong, Brisbane and hawthorn would have kicked ya ass in their prime . Richmond don’t even belong in this thread

Say that again in 5 years from now

 

[Brett C]

Stars everywhere got hawks and Brisbane. Pies had like 1 a grader haha

I’d take 22 b graders and a premiership rather than 5 a graders and nothing. The pies were solid teams those years just didn’t have a couple of extras to get over especially in 2002 when we were a little lucky

 

[Brett C]

That Lions team from 01-03 was horrifyingly good, they had superstars all over the field.

Their 3peat is miles ahead of Hawthorns.

Time has hurt the perception of those Brisbane sides, when Luke Powers' your 5 best midfielder, Brown our 3 best forward and Chris Scott’s your 5 best defender it shows just how strong the lions were.

 

[Brett C]

Correct ... It wasn't Cola, it was purely brought in to assist the Lions in luring players to QLD - which isn't such a bad thing, if they are serious about growing the game in QLD.

You don’t understand at all then. Lynch was the only big name we really got and that was a Hail Mary 10 year deal. We drafted exceptionally well in the early/mid 90’s

 

[Brett C]

Might be struggling with this one, my memory isn't that good - but I think Martin Pike, Alistair Lynch & Jarrod Molloy also came across?? ... again, not 100% sure they all came at the same time?

No even close to correct. We signed lynch to a 10 year deal in 1993 so 3 years pre merger and pike went to Norf first for 4 years

 

[Brett C]

Well rather than being a flog, why don't you come up with a better standard which one can measure a teams strength Archimedes.

I have to agree with the other posters, it’s probably the most random stat I’ve seen used to justify dominance.

 

[Nuggets73]

You don’t understand at all then

You seem like a knowledge lad ... care to educate me on how much Justin Leppitsch was paid as a runner after he retired?
... Not for one moment saying Lions weren’t a brilliant side ... but they were very, very well looked after by the AFL.

 

[My Tilly]

Geelong in 2007-2011 were on some other stuff. I wasn’t following footy when Essendon’s 2000 era happened, but the Geelong side of 2007-2011 were the scariest side that I have seen in the AFL era.

Man, I miss having a standout strong side in the competition. Hasn’t really happened since St Kilda 2009 (even though they did not win the Premiership). I like seeing a side dominate the competition because it is enjoyable watching the skills of a strong side when dismantling others.

I hate it personally.
You can just sense when a team is ready to explode and become dominant. I get that same feeling with Melbourne right now.
They should make the grand final next year, whether they win it is another thing but nothing worse knowing your own team is merely making up the numbers for years on end.

 

[carnaroys08]

You brought up Collingwood for absolutely no reason whatsoever. I don’t care how Brisbane fared against Collingwood that year - we were the fourth or fifth best side at best.

You cannot seriously think that a Brisbane side that lost eight games in one year were one of the most dominant premiership teams of all time, especially based on a stat as ridiculous as the number of times beating a team by six goals in a quarter. That’s the single most cherry picked stat I’ve ever seen in my whole life. How can you even type that with a straight face?

Well come up with alternative indicators. What markers would you use to measure strength & dominance?
So far as the 6+ goals in a qtr goes, I simply noticed around 2000 that the dominant teams of the time like Dons/Port/Lions had something in common. These teams ran riot & smashed opposition in 1 particular qtr more often than other sides; they had the ability to put the foot down & blow teams away. I accept it's not perfect & yes it is simplistic & arbitrary, however it does give an indication of strength. With the lack of any other measurement to go by, I'm happy to use this arbitrary rule as a yardstick. As it turns out, over the last 20yrs it has been fairly accurate. Do better, suggest something serious.
Kicking the ball town the line, flooding, zoning has been successful to certain extent. It's ugly, boring footy & the reason why the AFL have been constantly fiddling with rules.

ps: do you think if Collingwood had the strength to smash out the 1st qtr of the Granny & go into 1/4 time with a 6 goal advantage they would have won?

 

[carnaroys08]

I have to agree with the other poster(s), it’s probably the most random stat I’ve seen used to justify dominance.

What would you come up with to justify dominance? %?

 

[Fabes]

Brisbane was a better team.
The Hawks got lucky playing WCE & Freo
Dont get me wrong. They were still a very good team

Your mob got lucky playing Adelaide. Don't get me wrong. They were still a very good team.

The difference is Hawthorn were a "very good team" for three years in a row. What happened to Richmond's dynasty!? Oh that's right... they got absolutely smashed to smithereens by Collingwood.

And for what it's worth I think Brisbane of '01-'03 were simply the best I've ever seen.