Was 2017 a weak year, and is this a bad thing?

[Benny78]

Winning the premiership and placing minor premiers in the same year is better, high percentages help too.

Usually their footy just speaks for itself.

 

[Numtums]

15,16 and 17 were weak years.

We were the best of a bad bunch in 15 and just fortunate we played the best of the rest which were worse.

Dogs 16 (+112 aside) and Tigers 17 were just in the right spot at the right time, like us in 15.

The only reason our 15 side will be remembered is it completed a threepeat. But otherwise we weren't really that good or a memorable Premiership side.

 

[gordo2016]

15,16 and 17 were weak years.

We were the best of a bad bunch in 15 and just fortunate we played the best of the rest which were worse.

Dogs 16 (+112 aside) and Tigers 17 were just in the right spot at the right time, like us in 15.

The only reason our 15 side will be remembered is it completed a threepeat. But otherwise we weren't really that good or a memorable Premiership side.

Yer, just in the right spot, at the right time. **** winning a flag is easy. I cant believe how St. kilda and the Bulldogs have only 3 between them.

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

Gilligan wants variety....

 

[gavaniacono]

2017 was clearly one of the toughest seasons on record given how likely higher sides could be beaten or challenged by lower sides. Very few easy pickings. Richmond coming out so superior in such a tough season places them as one of the great teams of all time.

 

[schmuttt]

I have no idea what a weak year is as opposed to a strong year. Was it a strong year when Collingwood won in 2010, when the Saints were the best team all year? Was it a weak year in 2008, when Geelong dominated all year but Hawthorn won it?

All I know is that teams, who list their VFL premierships are weak years because only 10 clubs played back then not 18.

Collingwood were two wins and 20% better than the saints in 2010.

 

[Carson Dial]

2017 was clearly one of the toughest seasons on record given how likely higher sides could be beaten or challenged by lower sides. Very few easy pickings. Richmond coming out so superior in such a tough season places them as one of the great teams of all time.

No more cones for you tonight mate

 

[gavaniacono]

No more cones for you tonight mate

Oh comon. One more!

 

[Hap Hapablap]

i think the word weak is unfair

more equal and competitive is probably the more fairer term

 

[Sixpence]

Calling any year a weak year is just something losers say.

 

[hoianbulldog]

Isn't a closer competition a stronger competition.

Surely its easier to win when you are 1 of 2 or 3 breakaway teams rather than 6 or 7 close teams.

I don't follow the logic.

 

[Aramis]

I have no idea what a weak year is as opposed to a strong year. Was it a strong year when Collingwood won in 2010, when the Saints were the best team all year? Was it a weak year in 2008, when Geelong dominated all year but Hawthorn won it?

All I know is that teams, who list their VFL premierships are weak years because only 10 clubs played back then not 18.

Wouldn't do that, your club would be back to 0 premierships in a strong year then

 

[ThirdLegUp]

And as for tactics, they are constantly improving. There’s a reason no one plays 6 forwards, 6 mids, 6 backs anymore. It wouldn’t work. Similarly, teams of the 90s would get flogged by modern sides. You can argue about the great offensive play, but those sides had almost no defence, and their attack would be undone by zones, and the fact modern sides lay a minimum of 60 tackles per game rather than 30.
Mind you, that doesn’t make those years any weaker. That’s just progression.

I don't don't know man... Hawks 89 would have left very little of Hawks 2014 for the forensics crew to build a murder trial.

Sure the skill is better and they lay tackles more... but i can't see any modern player surviving such a contest. The old mob would beat the living s**t out of them and every one of their "stars" would be broken and battered before the first bounce. And you can't lay 60 tackles when dermie or dipper are using your severed arms as back scratchers. Which backman is going to stop the silverback Dunstall. He would break someone like Rance into a thousand pieces.

You have to look at it in context, your just seeing the skill of the modern game... you have to remember the hard brutality of the old game. it is like saying a modern car is better then a kingswood. sure in a none contact straight line race, but not in a smash up derby, which is what football is.

 

[Schauermann]

It is more of in some years it is almost unthinkable that a bottom 4 team could beat a top 4 team, but in 2016 and 2017 it was possible. I am not sure how much it happened but the gap between the top 4 and bottom 4 was less than it had been in a lot of years.

I always like about Football that any team could be any team on their day.

In my first season in 1995 the all conquering Carlton side kicked 3 goals against St. Kilda who finished 14th just the wekk after being hammered by Sydney who finished 12th.

Don't think there has been a season without a major upset since.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

It’s been getting weaker since 2010, not due to a lack of talent, but the fact the talent is now being spread more thin. Fitness and legspeed is now more important than footskills

 

[Snake_Baker]

Isn't a closer competition a stronger competition.

Surely its easier to win when you are 1 of 2 or 3 breakaway teams rather than 6 or 7 close teams.

I don't follow the logic.

You need to factor lopsided draws that undermine the integrity of any given year.

 

[HTT]

I don't don't know man... Hawks 89 would have left very little of Hawks 2014 for the forensics crew to build a murder trial.

Sure the skill is better and they lay tackles more... but i can't see any modern player surviving such a contest. The old mob would beat the living s**t out of them and every one of their "stars" would be broken and battered before the first bounce. And you can't lay 60 tackles when dermie or dipper are using your severed arms as back scratchers. Which backman is going to stop the silverback Dunstall. He would break someone like Rance into a thousand pieces.

You have to look at it in context, your just seeing the skill of the modern game... you have to remember the hard brutality of the old game. it is like saying a modern car is better then a kingswood. sure in a none contact straight line race, but not in a smash up derby, which is what football is.

Modern players would cop that. They’re now 100% full time athletes. There’s not as much in the way of intentional hits and the like today, mainly because you can’t get away with it, but there’s incidental hits harder than anything from the 80s all the time.
The car analogy doesn’t work. Modern cars are designed to break so you go buy another one. There’s no reason to do that with footballers.
There is absolutely no chance any team from 30 years ago could knock off a team from now.

 

[Snake_Baker]

There is absolutely no chance any team from 30 years ago could knock off a team from now.

Carlton/Hawthorn 1987 trained up to modern standards would absolutely EAT Richmond 2017.

 

[HTT]

Carlton/Hawthorn 1987 trained up to modern standards would absolutely EAT Richmond 2017.

I can’t argue with that. But they weren’t, so you can’t say that those teams were better.

 

[Mningasimisonda]

Modern players would cop that. They’re now 100% full time athletes. There’s not as much in the way of intentional hits and the like today, mainly because you can’t get away with it, but there’s incidental hits harder than anything from the 80s all the time.
The car analogy doesn’t work. Modern cars are designed to break so you go buy another one. There’s no reason to do that with footballers.
There is absolutely no chance any team from 30 years ago could knock off a team from now.

Pretty sure Ablett would still destroy a modern backline. There are very few markers, kickers or crumbers who are anywhere near that standard in the AFL today (especially who weigh 100kg).

 

[HTT]

Pretty sure Ablett would still destroy a modern backline. There are very few markers, kickers or crumbers in the same league in the AFL today (especially who weigh 100kg).

Maybe if he played as a stay at home FF. But his team would get smashed because that means it’s 17 on 18 up the ground. He’d be required to run the field like a modern FF. Sure, with training he’d probably do it. But he wasn’t.

 

[Mningasimisonda]

Maybe if he played as a stay at home FF. But his team would get smashed because that means it’s 17 on 18 up the ground. He’d be required to run the field like a modern FF. Sure, with training he’d probably do it. But he wasn’t.

Ablett played wing and half forward flank most of his career.

 

[threesixpio]

Merge with weakest premiership ever thread

 

[threesixpio]

Isn't a closer competition a stronger competition.

Surely its easier to win when you are 1 of 2 or 3 breakaway teams rather than 6 or 7 close teams.

I don't follow the logic.

No way. Hawthorn beating Geelong in 2008 was bloody hard work

 

[Snake_Baker]

I can’t argue with that.

Okay.

But they weren’t, so you can’t say that those teams were better.

So you can't make this conclusion either.