Greatest Dynasty of the 21st century - Lions vs Cats vs Hawks vs Tigers

[PJays]

We have a winner here.

Flags indeed aren't everything.

Would you rather have been a Sydney fan for the past 20 years or a Richmond fan or a Brisbane fan?

Sydney- made finals 16 times. 2 flags.

Richmond- Made finals 8 times. Went 11 years in a row without finals. 2 wooden spoons. 9 seasons finishing in the bottom 6. 8 seasons winning 8 games or less.

Brisbane- Made finals 7 times. Made finals once in 14 years. 8 seasons in the bottom 4.

But Richmond and Brisbane won 3 flags.

If I could have a time machine and pick one team to follow, I go Sydney.

 

[Roby]

Was that 10 games and hawthorn won more than twice, and the entire world just didn’t realise?

The 12 that followed suggest I’m wrong actually. If they played 10 times we’d have won more than 8.

Before the Grand Final, everyone thought they would win the GF, if played 10 times they would've estimated that they would've won 8-9 out of 10. Even Matthew Scarlett

Matthew Scarlett

Age

44

Ht

192cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.8

4star

K

9.5

4star

HB

5.3

4star

M

5.0

5star

T

1.5

3star

No current season stats available

D

3.8

1star

K

3.2

2star

HB

0.6

1star

M

2.0

3star

T

0.8

3star

said, at their best nobody could beat them. Too bad hey?

The 1 out of 10 the Hawks win you would assume they would just get over the line. And yet...

Hawks were down 3 players at half time, and yet still won comfortably. Did Aliens come and affect the result? I've yet to hear or see an explanation (a detailed one) of why Geelong lost 2008, other than magic or aliens.

You're all happy to analyze any of the other 200 games but not this one? Why?

Either way, the following dozen games later proved that after the Hawks beat Geelong in the GF that this should've been seen as 50/50 game. Just like the Round 17 game in 2008 were Geelong won by 11 points.

Of the next 14 games between Hawthorn and Geelong, Geelong won 12 games, with only one game been over 30 points, and two by 19 points, the rest Geelong won by 10 points or less. Even the 19pt wins, Geelong were up by less than goals at three-quarter time. So yes, you could argue out next 14, all but one were 50/50 games.

 

[Roby]

Flags indeed aren't everything.

Would you rather have been a Sydney fan for the past 20 years or a Richmond fan?

Sydney- made finals 16 times. 2 flags.

Richmond- Made finals 8 times. Went 11 years in a row without finals. 2 wooden spoons. 9 seasons finishing in the bottom 6. 8 seasons winning 8 games or less.

But Richmond won 3 flags.

If I could have a time machine and pick one team to follow, I go Sydney.

Easy...

 

[PhatBoy]

Before the Grand Final, everyone thought they would win the GF, if played 10 times they would've estimated that they would've won 8-9 out of 10. Even Matthew Scarlett

Matthew Scarlett

Age

44

Ht

192cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.8

4star

K

9.5

4star

HB

5.3

4star

M

5.0

5star

T

1.5

3star

No current season stats available

D

3.8

1star

K

3.2

2star

HB

0.6

1star

M

2.0

3star

T

0.8

3star

said, at their best nobody could beat them. Too bad hey?

The 1 out of 10 the Hawks win you would assume they would just get over the line. And yet...

Hawks were down 3 players at half time, and yet still won comfortably. Did Aliens come and affect the result? I've yet to hear or see an explanation (a detailed one) of why Geelong lost 2008, other than magic or aliens.

You're all happy to analyze any of the other 200 games but not this one? Why?

Either way, the following dozen games later proved that after the Hawks beat Geelong in the GF that this should've been seen as 50/50 game. Just like the Round 17 game in 2008 were Geelong won by 11 points.

Of the next 14 games between Hawthorn and Geelong, Geelong won 12 games, with only one game been over 30 points, and two by 19 points, the rest Geelong won by 10 points or less. Even the 19pt wins, Geelong were up by less than goals at three-quarter time. So yes, you could argue out next 14, all but one we’re a 50/50 game.

Scarlett was right. At our best no one would beat us. We weren’t, Hawthorn were, they did.

Where have I said I’m not happy to analyse that game?

It’s been analysed to death in this place. We probably were a bit arrogant, hadn’t been tested properly for months, sprayed some kicks, and didn’t know how to respond when we needed to. A couple of hawthorn players turned it on and aside from Ablett I don’t think any cats player really played their best footy.

 

[Roby]

Scarlett was right. At our best no one would beat us. We weren’t, Hawthorn were, they did.

Where have I said I’m not happy to analyse that game?

No you haven't. SO by all means go ahead.

 

[Pessimistic]

And no one begrudges hawthorn that but if they played 2008 again 10 times, they’d lose 8 of them. We all saw what geelong did to everyone in 2008. The 2011 version was even better

Just 17 points down at 3/4 time? historically teams dont overcome GF 3/4 defecits. But this was Geelong, one of the greatest teams of all time?

If they played the last quarter over and over again, would they win 8 out of 10 (by 17 points)? Would Hawks win 8 out of 10 over Sydney after 2012?

Its conjecture and I'm not even sure it stands up

 

[Pessimistic]

Just on quotes, Hawthorn captain Sam Mitchell was bemused at the negativity before the game. "Just how do you think you can win" some very cocksure journo said"

"By scoring more Goals than Geelong" Cheeky young Bugger

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Welcome to the thread.

Go read the first 45 pages and the analysis that's been on each team's body of work, then get back to me.

As a 10 second summary- Cats won the same number of flags*, against better opponents, by bigger margins and won more games overall. And they didn't lose a finals game in their way to those flags either.

*I'm talking about teams, not clubs.

So this allegedly great team couldn’t even go B2B, let alone win 3 in a row.

A great H&A season, with all the thrashings you want to hang your hat on means sweet FA unless you win the last game of the season. Nobody cares that you beat GC by 150 points in round 4 champ.

 

[PhatBoy]

Just on quotes, Hawthorn captain Sam Mitchell was bemused at the negativity before the game. "Just how do you think you can win" some very cocksure journo said"

"By scoring more Goals than Geelong" Cheeky young Bugger

I actually bet on hawthorn head to head. The arrogance of the media had me convinced we would lose. For once on the punt I was right

 

[PhatBoy]

So this allegedly great team couldn’t even go B2B, let alone win 3 in a row.

A great H&A season, with all the thrashings you want to hang your hat on means sweet FA unless you win the last game of the season. Nobody cares that you beat GC by 150 points in round 4 champ.

‘Couldn’t even.’

Statistically it is rarer for a team to win 3 in 5 years non sequentially than it is to win 3 in 3 years. Get back to page 20 where this issue was first addressed.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Before the Grand Final, everyone thought they would win the GF, if played 10 times they would've estimated that they would've won 8-9 out of 10. Even Matthew Scarlett

Matthew Scarlett

Age

44

Ht

192cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.8

4star

K

9.5

4star

HB

5.3

4star

M

5.0

5star

T

1.5

3star

No current season stats available

D

3.8

1star

K

3.2

2star

HB

0.6

1star

M

2.0

3star

T

0.8

3star

said, at their best nobody could beat them. Too bad hey?

The 1 out of 10 the Hawks win you would assume they would just get over the line. And yet...

Hawks were down 3 players at half time, and yet still won comfortably. Did Aliens come and affect the result? I've yet to hear or see an explanation (a detailed one) of why Geelong lost 2008, other than magic or aliens.

You're all happy to analyze any of the other 200 games but not this one? Why?

Either way, the following dozen games later proved that after the Hawks beat Geelong in the GF that this should've been seen as 50/50 game. Just like the Round 17 game in 2008 were Geelong won by 11 points.

Of the next 14 games between Hawthorn and Geelong, Geelong won 12 games, with only one game been over 30 points, and two by 19 points, the rest Geelong won by 10 points or less. Even the 19pt wins, Geelong were up by less than goals at three-quarter time. So yes, you could argue out next 14, all but one were 50/50 games.

Anybody would think we stole it by a kick given how these sooks carry on.

The baby Hawks with injured players everywhere beat this supposedly great Cats team by almost 5 goals. And it would have been 10 goals had that game gone another 10 minutes. The Hawks ran away with it.

 

[Roby]

Just 17 points down at 3/4 time? historically teams dont overcome GF 3/4 defecits. But this was Geelong, one of the greatest teams of all time?

If they played the last quarter over and over again, would they win 8 out of 10 (by 17 points)? Would Hawks win 8 out of 10 over Sydney after 2012?

Its conjecture and I'm not even sure it stands up

If Brad Sewell

Brad Sewell

Age

40

Ht

181cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

21.1

5star

K

9.6

4star

HB

11.5

5star

M

3.7

4star

T

4.5

5star

CL

4.1

5star

No current season stats available

D

9.4

3star

K

4.6

2star

HB

4.8

4star

M

2.4

3star

T

2.2

4star

kicks one goal instead of his two behinds, the Hawks are up with three minutes to go. There's definitely an argument that the Hawks win that game more often that not. The following year the Hawks beat the reigning premiers by 54 in a final and go on to win the next three grand finals. Gee that's so easy to say.

 

[Roby]

Nobody cares that you beat GC by 150 points in round 4 champ.

They do, they have it on their wall.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

‘Couldn’t even.’

Statistically it is rarer for a team to win 3 in 5 years non sequentially than it is to win 3 in 3 years. Get back to page 20 where this issue was first addressed.

Rarer doesn’t mean harder you dullard.

Any twit with half a brain and an ounce of common sense can tell you that it is more difficult to win 3 in 3 than 3 in 5.

 

[Roby]

I actually bet on hawthorn head to head. The arrogance of the media had me convinced we would lose. For once on the punt I was right

How much was it paying?

 

[PhatBoy]

Anybody would think we stole it by a kick given how these sooks carry on.

The baby Hawks with injured players everywhere beat this supposedly great Cats team by almost 5 goals. And it would have been 10 goals had that game gone another 10 minutes. The Hawks ran away with it.

Lolllllll who is sooking mate? The better team on the day won, that’s as simple as anyone can put it

 

[PhatBoy]

How much was it paying?

$2.80 or $3.20 from memory, one of the two

 

[PhatBoy]

Rarer doesn’t mean harder you dullard.

Any twit with half a brain and an ounce of common sense can tell you that it is more difficult to win 3 in 3 than 3 in 5.

Why? Tell me why it is harder.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Why? Tell me why it is harder.

Oh dear.

 

[JackOutback]

And how many of those were GF's?

Your good, honest team won a few nice individual flags. Both Hawthorn and Brisbane won 3 in a row. Both were dynasties and both, as a body of work stand well above the Cats.

And that is why they are the two greatest sides of the modern era. And by some margin. Then Richmond. Then who cares?

Surely you jest

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Why? Tell me why it is harder.

Well starting with you nonsense premise, we can say with certainty that Hawthorn also won 3 in 5 (2011-15 or 2012-16 or 2013-17).

Your same ridiculous logic can be applied to the Brisbane and Richmond sides too.

 

[RichLeMonde]

Geelong since 2004
3 Flags
5 Grand Finals
Made Finals 15 times
Won 20 finals games
Won 72% of Home & Away games - 264 wins, 3 draws, 101 losses.
0 Terrible seasons – Finished 11th or lower

Hawthorn since 2004
4 flags
5 Grand Finals
Made Finals 10 times
Won 16 finals games
Won 58% of Home & Away games- 214 wins, 2 draws, 153 losses.
5 Terrible seasons- Finished 11th or lower

Who would you rather have been following?

I would rather have been a Geelong fan.

Flags aren’t everything.

I'm with you on this one. Obviously subjective, but from my perspective when I was 32 years old (2012), I'd seen Richmond make the finals twice in my lifetime to that point (watching from 5 years old). in 2017 I was 36, and at the start of September I'd seen Richmond win 2 finals in my entire life. When I'd never seen my team win a flag, winning the premiership was the most important thing. But now that I've seen one, (3 in fact), and with the memories of entire decades of total irrelevancy, moving forward I'd much rather see my team do what Geelong have done, and be highly competitive most weeks, for years at a time, so that I could still be highly invested most years right up until the 3rd week of finals, even if they didn't win another flag, then have years and years in the wilderness and every 15 years bob up for a flag. I know Hawthorn haven't spent years in the wildnerness, but I'm just agreeing with your point that flags aren't everything.

 

[Roby]

Well starting with you nonsense premise, we can say with certainty that Hawthorn also won 3 in 5 (2011-15 or 2012-16 or 2013-17).

Your same ridiculous logic can be applied to the Brisbane and Richmond sides too.

Yeah backended premierships, 2 in 4 has never been done either. From memory, 2 in 8 has only been done twice from (Essendon, Sydney), so by that backended measures they are harder than in 3 in 5.

 

[RichLeMonde]

Well starting with you nonsense premise, we can say with certainty that Hawthorn also won 3 in 5 (2011-15 or 2012-16 or 2013-17).

Your same ridiculous logic can be applied to the Brisbane and Richmond sides too.

Yes, that's the exact point people have making, but it works against you. Geelong's 3 in 5 years is effectively a failed 5-peat. Hawthorn's 3 in 5 years (whether 2011-2015, 2012-2016, or 2013-2017) is also a failed 5 peat, as is Brisbane's, and Richmond's. There's no reason why a 3-peat is inherently superior; it just means you've arbitarily restricted the range of reference to 3 years, instead of 5.

 

[PhatBoy]

Oh dear.

A gif isn’t an explanation.