Would a Richmond Premiership in 2022 make the team one of the best of all time?

[Fadge]

Don’t believe me ok let’s take a look, imo in no particular order it’s roughly these players, keep in mind it’s the ages they were actually in the team:

Tigers: Rance, Cotchin, Dusty, Lynch, Riewoldt

Hawks: Buddy, Mitchell, Hodge, Roughead, Rioli

Cats: Scarlett, Enright, Bartel, Ablett, Chapman

Lions: Voss, Black, Aker, Lynch and young 20s Brown

Fwd line: Both Tigers and Hawks absolutely destroy a non-existent fwd line of the cats and aker/lynch/young 20s Brown are no way near as good as Lynch/Riewoldt/dusty and Buddy/Roughead/Rioli.

Backline: lions are non-existent they get wrecked by Rance, hodge and co. Cats have a slight edge in defence but Rance imo is in the same tier as Scarlett and Enright. Hawks and Tigers get a team defence/system bonus.

Mid: pretty even here it probably goes Lions, Cats, Tigers, Hawks.

Hawks and Tigers have a star on every line, Cats and Lions don’t. That’s the difference, what you do guys reckon?

Not an argument that means much to me, but Martin, Cotchin, Rance, Riewoldt not to mention Bolton, T Lynch, would give a good account of themselves against anyone, any time. As would the above Lions group you named, and the Hawks and Cats best from their respective dynasties. It is hilarious when these best of discussions come up people think our great players aren’t really that great, our good players relied on our great players, our lesser players relied on our system, and our coach is also not that good, and the only thing that was any good was the system. Which must have magically appeared out of the sky one day.

But fear not, you only have to go to our board and read for a while to see that even some of our own supporters think along these lines.

Why are we limiting 'top end talent' to a team's top 5 players?

22 players take to the field in a Grand Final, and 30 odd players on a club's list take to the field in any given season. We're not comparing basketball teams FFS.

The Richmond dudes mentioning Rance... he played in only one of their flags, right?

Meteoric Ruse mentions Bolton as top end talent - he amassed 9 games in total across 2017 and 2018, and was on the fringe of the top 100 players in the comp once he found his feet in 2019/20.

But FMD - someone lists a team's 'top end talent' and the likes of Selwood, Stevie J and Corey don't get a mention for Geelong? Tom Hawkins was possibly the most influential player on the ground in Geelong's 2011 Grand Final in taking the game by the scruff of the neck in the last quarter (and also played in 2009) - he was more crucial to the Cats' three flags than Rance was to Richmond's 3.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Why are we limiting 'top end talent' to a team's top 5 players?

22 players take to the field in a Grand Final, and 30 odd players on a club's list take to the field in any given season. We're not comparing basketball teams FFS.

The Richmond dudes mentioning Rance... he played in only one of their flags, right?

Meteoric Ruse mentions Bolton as top end talent - he amassed 9 games in total across 2017 and 2018, and was on the fringe of the top 100 players in the comp once he found his feet in 2019/20.

But FMD - someone lists a team's 'top end talent' and the likes of Selwood, Stevie J and Corey don't get a mention for Geelong? Tom Hawkins was possibly the most influential player on the ground in Geelong's 2011 Grand Final in taking the game by the scruff of the neck in the last quarter (and also played in 2009) - he was more crucial to the Cats' three flags than Rance was to Richmond's 3.

You seem to be in a mad panic conflating different positions as if they are one here in a very unimportant argument.

I don’t care much about individual players in these types of discussions about how good a team is, but was just responding to a poster asking something along the lines of who do Richmond have to match half a dozen Brisbane dynasty players. Amongst them he mentioned Brown who was just a kid when the Lions were winning flags, similar to Bolton in Richmond’s dynasty. If you don’t think Bolton was an important player in the Richmond dynasty period then I suggest you watch a replay of the 020 GF paying particular attention to him and his 9 contested possessions, 1 contested mark, 7 tackles, 2 goal assists and 4 clearances in what was a 64 minute footy match. His contribution was critical to the result in that match. All dynasty teams and all teams in fact have marquee players and Richmond’s dynasty marquee players would not defer to any group I have seen. But as I posted, neither would Hawthorn, Geelong or Brisbane’s marquee players from their dynasty.

If you need Rance not to have been a major part of the Richmond dynasty, then believe that all you like as far as I care. But it only means other Richmond players must be better than people are making out to win the flags we did without him.

The argument about individual players is a bit silly anyway. People are saying x team is better because their top 6 players were xyz. But if the team was better for that or any other reason, then of course this will come out in their Premiership count Mr Fadge.

 

[Falcon3518]

Why not take tactics and systems into account? Because they are s a GIVEN, and can be applied across the board. Are North not playing some sort of team defence these days? Of course they are. They ALL are.

Comparing teams of different eras is an utterly pointless exercise if you can't baseline it against 'the norm' of that era.
Including tactics and systems as the game EVOLVES means that OBVIOUSLY more recent teams could beat teams of different eras IF TIME TRAVEL WAS POSSIBLE.

It's getting very boring pointing this out to you.

It’s getting pretty boring pointing out AGAIN that tactics only provide an advantage not an absolute win. Hence why North would still get flogged by 200 point by teams like the cats. I really don’t wanna have to explain this again.

But thank you for agreeing with me that teams get better overtime. Maybe you don’t like comparing and think it’s pointless but other people actually like having these discussions. Nobody is forcing you to be on here.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Falcon3518]

You can point it out until the cows come home... the dude simply does not have the mental aptitude to grasp it.

You are just a nasty human being who can’t handle opposing views. Hence you start name calling like a high school bully. Pretty sad but unfortunately there are millions of people in this world like you who haven’t grown up.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Falcon3518]

You do realise that Lethal only played in one of Hawthorn's flags in the 1980's, don't you?!?

Yes, and?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Falcon3518]

Why are we limiting 'top end talent' to a team's top 5 players?

22 players take to the field in a Grand Final, and 30 odd players on a club's list take to the field in any given season. We're not comparing basketball teams FFS.

The Richmond dudes mentioning Rance... he played in only one of their flags, right?

Meteoric Ruse mentions Bolton as top end talent - he amassed 9 games in total across 2017 and 2018, and was on the fringe of the top 100 players in the comp once he found his feet in 2019/20.

But FMD - someone lists a team's 'top end talent' and the likes of Selwood, Stevie J and Corey don't get a mention for Geelong? Tom Hawkins was possibly the most influential player on the ground in Geelong's 2011 Grand Final in taking the game by the scruff of the neck in the last quarter (and also played in 2009) - he was more crucial to the Cats' three flags than Rance was to Richmond's 3.

Because I think the top 5 combined with team systems is enough for the hawks and tigers to win.

I said I’m comparing ages of the players at the time. If you wanna put teenage Selwood and Hawkins in that’s fine. Imo it’ll just make the top 5 worse. What changes would you make then?

Again what’s with the 1 flag business he was part of the team? Buddy and GAJ only played for 2 you wanna exclude them as well?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[JasRulz63]

Lions: Voss, Black, Aker, Lynch and young 20s Brown

Nigel Lappin or Justin Leppitsch were better than young 20s Brown. Lappin especially is underrated as to how good he was.

Fwd line: Both Tigers and Hawks absolutely destroy a non-existent fwd line of the cats and aker/lynch/young 20s Brown are no way near as good as Lynch/Riewoldt/dusty and Buddy/Roughead/Rioli.

Alastair Lynch had tallies of 58, 74 and 78 goals during the years Brisbane won the premiership. Bradhsaw was a pretty handy second forward (46, 38, 28 goals), and Brown was still decent (though he wasn't at his peak until a few years after the premierships). Akermanis was also a very good goal kicker.

Brisbane were either the 1st or 2nd highest scoring side during their regular season in their premiership years, despite travelling every second week. You underestimate the ability of the Brisbane side to score strongly.

Backline: lions are non-existent they get wrecked by Rance, hodge and co. Cats have a slight edge in defence but Rance imo is in the same tier as Scarlett and Enright. Hawks and Tigers get a team defence/system bonus.

Non-existent? Justin Leppitsch was a three time All-Australian (two times in premiership years). Mal Michael was in the top 2-3 full backs in the league during the premiership period. Add in Chris Johnson, the Scott brothers, Darryl White etc.

 

[SuperSub17]

Apparently zone defences were only invented in 2013.

You learn something new every day.

 

[gouki88]

Nigel Lappin or Justin Leppitsch were better than young 20s Brown. Lappin especially is underrated as to how good he was.



Alastair Lynch had tallies of 58, 74 and 78 goals during the years Brisbane won the premiership. Bradhsaw was a pretty handy second forward (46, 38, 28 goals), and Brown was still decent (though he wasn't at his peak until a few years after the premierships). Akermanis was also a very good goal kicker.

Brisbane were either the 1st or 2nd highest scoring side during their regular season in their premiership years, despite travelling every second week. You underestimate the ability of the Brisbane side to score strongly.



Non-existent? Justin Leppitsch was a three time All-Australian (two times in premiership years). Mal Michael was in the top 2-3 full backs in the league during the premiership period. Add in Chris Johnson, the Scott brothers, Darryl White etc.

The underrating of that Lions backline really bothers me. They had really strong players on each line.

 

[Falcon3518]

Nigel Lappin or Justin Leppitsch were better than young 20s Brown. Lappin especially is underrated as to how good he was.



Alastair Lynch had tallies of 58, 74 and 78 goals during the years Brisbane won the premiership. Bradhsaw was a pretty handy second forward (46, 38, 28 goals), and Brown was still decent (though he wasn't at his peak until a few years after the premierships). Akermanis was also a very good goal kicker.

Brisbane were either the 1st or 2nd highest scoring side during their regular season in their premiership years, despite travelling every second week. You underestimate the ability of the Brisbane side to score strongly.



Non-existent? Justin Leppitsch was a three time All-Australian (two times in premiership years). Mal Michael was in the top 2-3 full backs in the league during the premiership period. Add in Chris Johnson, the Scott brothers, Darryl White etc.

Ok so I’m assuming you take out brown for Leppitsch then? That’s fine, they are still the weakest defence of the 4 and 3rd in attack. Riewoldt, Buddy and maybe Roughead are all better than Lynch (Lions). Lynch also doesn’t have a KPF partner which makes it even worse. The 2 KPF fwd line combo that the hawks and tigers have make them so much better it’s not funny. Then out of the the 3rd attackers Dusty is the best and Rioli/Aker are about the same. When you actually analyse the lions team they aren’t as good as you think. But their mid is probably the best. The other 2 lines are poor compared to these guys and they don’t have a system which is why I put them as 4th. I think it’s pretty clear cut.

Problem when people analyse the lions is that they mistakenly think that all the players in the team we’re all in their prime. Eg Brown, we was at his peak later not during the 3peat. It makes the team look better than it was.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Fadge]

Because I think the top 5 combined with team systems is enough for the hawks and tigers to win.

I said I’m comparing ages of the players at the time. If you wanna put teenage Selwood and Hawkins in that’s fine. Imo it’ll just make the top 5 worse. What changes would you make then?

Again what’s with the 1 flag business he was part of the team? Buddy and GAJ only played for 2 you wanna exclude them as well?

What changes would I make? I wouldn't argue the relative strength of one team over another by trying to identify the top 5 players of each team, when 22 players take to the field in any given game, and 30 odd different players take to the field over the course of any given season.

 

[JasRulz63]

Ok so I’m assuming you take out brown for Leppitsch then? That’s fine, they are still the weakest defence of the 4 and 3rd in attack. Riewoldt, Buddy and maybe Roughead are all better than Lynch (Lions). Lynch also doesn’t have a KPF partner which makes it even worse. The 2 KPF fwd line combo that the hawks and tigers have make them so much better it’s not funny. Then out of the the 3rd attackers Dusty is the best and Rioli/Aker are about the same. When you actually analyse the lions team they aren’t as good as you think. But their mid is probably the best. The other 2 lines are poor compared to these guys and they don’t have a system which is why I put them as 4th. I think it’s pretty clear cut.

Problem when people analyse the lions is that they mistakenly think that all the players in the team we’re all in their prime. Eg Brown, we was at his peak later not during the 3peat. It makes the team look better than it was.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Richmond were 8th, 6th and 5th for points for during their premiership years, and it's not like their percentage was sky high because they were in low scoring games.

Riewoldt also kicked 111 goals from 57 games during the premiership years compared (1.9 goals/game) compared to Lynch's 210 goals from 67 games (3.1 goals/game). In fact, Bradshaw had numbers close to Riewoldt during that period (1.8 goals/game), with some allowance for 2020 having shorter games.

You've got Dusty as the reason why Richmond's midfield is even in the same ballpark as the likes of Brisbane and Geelong, but also as the third best performing forward. Realistically there's only one of him, so assessing him in both forwards and midfields and assuming he spends 100% of his time in both lines is false. Aker spent more time forward she to the strength of Brisbane's midfield, and kicked 40+ goals in a season four times in his career, a feat Dusty hasn't managed (because he played predominantly more in the midfield).

Lol at saying something is clear cut after a bunch of subjective assessments that's is purely based on opinion and nothing else. Weakest defence, based on what? Saying that your statement is clear cut is worth as much as the office it came from.

Also what do you even mean by not having a system? The players were sent out there to run around like headless chooks? Even if you want to believe that 1-on-1 is inferior, it's still a system, a system that relies on each player beating their individual opponent.

 

[Fadge]

they [Brisbane] are still the weakest defence of the 4

Here were the players named in the backline during Brisbane's premiership years:
Justin Leppitsch
Chris Scott
Brad Scott
Mal Michael
Chris Johnson
Luke Power
Nigel Lappin
Daryl White
Marcus Ashcroft

You call that the 'weakest' backline of all four teams?

I'm starting to think you didn't watch much footy before Richmond started to reappear in the finals in the mid 2010's....

 

[dean33]

I think it’s very hard to compare the lions, cats, hawks and tigers dynasties… each had different strengths and all were better than their competitors in their time.

I think the only team we can all agree was best of all was the great Collingwood team of the 1920’s, a time when players wore knickerbockers, nobody had heard of Adolf hitler and when you could lose your semi final by 10 goals but still automatically go through to the grand final.

Ahhh yes the 1920’s… the pinnacle of our great game.

 

[Fadge]

I think the only team we can all agree was best of all was the great Collingwood team of the 1920’s, a time when players wore knickerbockers, nobody had heard of Adolf hitler and when you could lose your semi final by 10 goals but still automatically go through to the grand final.

Ahhh yes the 1920’s… the pinnacle of our great game.

I don't think you have ever said a truer word.

You can only play to the rules of the time.

In 100 years we might be looking back at all the teams that lost their Qualifying Final but went on to win the premiership and saying 'that makes no sense at all and completely devalues that premiership'...

 

[dean33]

I don't think you have ever said a truer word.

You can only play to the rules of the time.

In 100 years we might be looking back at all the teams that lost their Qualifying Final but went on to win the premiership and saying 'that makes no sense at all and completely devalues that premiership'...

Don’t worry what they say about you Fadge, you just keep being you.

 

[Falcon3518]

What changes would I make? I wouldn't argue the relative strength of one team over another by trying to identify the top 5 players of each team, when 22 players take to the field in any given game, and 30 odd different players take to the field over the course of any given season.

Ok, well I’m just arguing top talent. You can either contribute to that convo or not. My suspicion is you realised hawks and tigers have better top end talent. Lions have better depth though, but that won’t win you as many games is top end talent will.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Falcon3518]

Richmond were 8th, 6th and 5th for points for during their premiership years, and it's not like their percentage was sky high because they were in low scoring games.

Riewoldt also kicked 111 goals from 57 games during the premiership years compared (1.9 goals/game) compared to Lynch's 210 goals from 67 games (3.1 goals/game). In fact, Bradshaw had numbers close to Riewoldt during that period (1.8 goals/game), with some allowance for 2020 having shorter games.

You've got Dusty as the reason why Richmond's midfield is even in the same ballpark as the likes of Brisbane and Geelong, but also as the third best performing forward. Realistically there's only one of him, so assessing him in both forwards and midfields and assuming he spends 100% of his time in both lines is false. Aker spent more time forward she to the strength of Brisbane's midfield, and kicked 40+ goals in a season four times in his career, a feat Dusty hasn't managed (because he played predominantly more in the midfield).

Lol at saying something is clear cut after a bunch of subjective assessments that's is purely based on opinion and nothing else. Weakest defence, based on what? Saying that your statement is clear cut is worth as much as the office it came from.

Also what do you even mean by not having a system? The players were sent out there to run around like headless chooks? Even if you want to believe that 1-on-1 is inferior, it's still a system, a system that relies on each player beating their individual opponent.

Using just goals to calculate who is better is floored as it is harder to score goals now that is was back then. Jack is a triple Coleman medalist and has kicked more goals than Lions Lynch. I don’t think anybody would argue Jack would be the Lions best forward if he was in the team. In regards to Dusty, that’s what makes in great, he can play in both when needed he has played 70/30 fwd and 30/70 mid thats how damaging he is.

1v1 is inferior. That’s a fact and why it’s not used primarily to win games today. Team systems get defenders to help in attack and fwds helping in defence boosting both lines more than in the 1v1 era. You don’t see fwds sitting in the goal square not helping and waiting for the ball anymore like back then. The 1v1 teams would literally get bamboozled by seeing defenders the fwd 50 line kicking goals. And would get suffocated in defence from literally the whole whole field in their D50. Big players like the lions team who are slow af but built like tanks are at a massive disadvantage in close quarters, they work best in an open field ie 1v1.




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[JasRulz63]

Using just goals to calculate who is better is floored as it is harder to score goals now that is was back then. Jack is a triple Coleman medalist and has kicked more goals than Lions Lynch. I don’t think anybody would argue Jack would be the Lions best forward if he was in the team. In regards to Dusty, that’s what makes in great, he can play in both when needed he has played 70/30 fwd and 30/70 mid thats how damaging he is.

Scores aren't 40% less than they were back then though, and that's the difference between Lynch and Riewoldt's goal tallies during the premiership years. Lynch also played as full back for decent chunks of his career.

For someone that likes to point out that a player's prime doesn't line up with the premiership years, I'd argue Riewoldt was in his prime for Richmond's first premiership and probably past it for their second and third.

I agree re Martin, but you'd consider him as predominately a midfielder for this comparison, not a forward. Without Martin in the midfield, there's is a severe lack of "top end" talent in the Richmond midfield. There's one time All-Australian (from 5 years prior) Trent Cotchin and that's about it; talk about lacking stars across a line.

 

[Falcon3518]

Scores aren't 40% less than they were back then though, and that's the difference between Lynch and Riewoldt's goal tallies during the premiership years. Lynch also played as full back for decent chunks of his career.

For someone that likes to point out that a player's prime doesn't line up with the premiership years, I'd argue Riewoldt was in his prime for Richmond's first premiership and probably past it for their second and third.

I agree re Martin, but you'd consider him as predominately a midfielder for this comparison, not a forward. Without Martin in the midfield, there's is a severe lack of "top end" talent in the Richmond midfield. There's one time All-Australian (from 5 years prior) Trent Cotchin and that's about it; talk about lacking stars across a line.

Martin was 70/30 mid in 17-18, 50/50 in 2019 and 60/40 fwd in 2020. He can do it all and he doesn’t get coached, Hardwick let’s him do whatever and he structures the team depending on where he decides to play to help the team. Even if you put Martin at his lowest 30% fwd him combined with Lynch and Riewoldt is a better fwd line than Lions Lynch, 20s brown and Aker by a fair margin.

Cotchin also won a Brownlow btw in 2012. I’m only using his 17-20 version which wasn’t as good.

Riewoldt’s prime imo was 2018 when he won the Coleman but yeah 17/18 were his best years.

In regards to Lions Lynch, we can only judge him as a forward because that’s where he played in the 3peat. Every other position he played beforehand is irrelevant. Jack is a better fwd.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[dean33]

Scores aren't 40% less than they were back then though, and that's the difference between Lynch and Riewoldt's goal tallies during the premiership years. Lynch also played as full back for decent chunks of his career.

For someone that likes to point out that a player's prime doesn't line up with the premiership years, I'd argue Riewoldt was in his prime for Richmond's first premiership and probably past it for their second and third.

I agree re Martin, but you'd consider him as predominately a midfielder for this comparison, not a forward. Without Martin in the midfield, there's is a severe lack of "top end" talent in the Richmond midfield. There's one time All-Australian (from 5 years prior) Trent Cotchin and that's about it; talk about lacking stars across a line.

Ever heard the saying champion team would beat a team of champions? As far as teams go with players playing their roles, tigers are head and shoulders above the rest.

 

[JasRulz63]

Ever heard the saying champion team would beat a team of champions? As far as teams go with players playing their roles, tigers are head and shoulders above the rest.

Again, a completely subjective comment stated by you to be a fact.

How are all of the sides in this conversation not champion teams (as well as being teams with champions)? They've objectively all won 3 premierships over a 3-5 year span.

To say any team was "head and shoulders" above any of the other teams in "playing their role" is subjective BS in my opinion. All four teams had plenty of players that played their role well, as you would expect to achieve what they did. Shaun Hart won a Norm Smith medal as a "role player".

 

[dean33]

Again, a completely subjective comment stated by you to be a fact.

How are all of the sides in this conversation not champion teams (as well as being teams with champions)? They've objectively all won 3 premierships over a 3-5 year span.

To say any team was "head and shoulders" above any of the other teams in "playing their role" is subjective BS in my opinion. All four teams had plenty of players that played their role well, as you would expect to achieve what they did. Shaun Hart won a Norm Smith medal as a "role player".

Of course it’s all subjective, it’s peoples opinions. Game is much more system and role based than it was 10 years ago let alone 20 years ago. Richmond’s game was based on system and everyone playing their role, much more than any of the other 3 teams.

 

[SuperSub17]

You do realise that Lethal only played in one of Hawthorn's flags in the 1980's, don't you?!?

Of all the drivel and contradictions in the last few pages of this thread—and there have been a lot—this probably takes the cake

No what’s sad is that you don’t take tactics and systems into account across eras and just look at the names. That’s primary school level analysis.

Lethal and Dunstal are in that team bro

 

[Falcon3518]

Of all the drivel and contradictions in the last few pages of this thread—and there have been a lot—this probably takes the cake

It’s actually unbelievable how you still don’t understand my comments and you quoted them lol

2000 Bombers and 80s Hawks both played in the 1v1 era. Even if you said bombers had a tiny system advantage. Imo it isn’t enough to outweigh the talent on the list 80s hawks list.

I said TAKE SYSTEMS INTO ACCOUNT, if talent still outweighs it the older team is better like the 80s hawks. My god. That’s the 50th time I’ve had to repeat myself.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com