"4 in a row" - who does it mean more to?

[bOmBeR_BoY1]

We've heard for decades how mighty the Collingwood team of 1927-30 was to win their four consecutive premierships, but IF Brisbane equal the feat on Saturday - who can lay claim to the more mighty side? You can put up a solid argument for both. While it is difficult to compare two teams from different eras, some points need to be taken into consideration...

The Pies won their four consecutive premierships in a 12 team competition during the Depression when clubs struggled to even put full teams on the ground, also they didn't have to travel interstate every second week - the longest distance may have been an hour train journey down to Corio Oval. Also take into consideration it was only a 'final 4' in those days and even the 4th placed team only had to win two finals games to make the Grand Final. In total, their were only three finals games played in that time and one of them was the Grand Final.

The Lions could possibly win their fourth straight flag in a 16 team league in a national competition where the AFL had reached a stage where it can label itself totally professional. The Lions also have to travel 10 times a year (and that's not including finals) from their home base - which is not even considered to be "AFL territory" yet had still built up a solid following. They have to win their premierships in a top 8 finals format and in the last two years have had to make the Grand Final while playing only one final at home. Yet people may still doubt the 'authenticity' of their premiership wins thanks to an extensive salary cap advantage.

So who do you think will be remembered as the 'greater' side?

 

[beez]

f**k, almost went blind after the first 2 lines!!!

COLLINGWOOD FOR SURE

2003 2nd Qualifying Final Collingwood 9.12 (66) def Brisbane 7.9 (51) DI-DI-DIDAK

 

[Dan26]

Collingwood.

Forget the fact that it's now a national competition. You can only win RELATIVE to the standard if the competiton you are in. As a perfect example, we all know Port have been a great club even though none of their 34 flags were won in the "strongest" league.

Collingwood finished on top of the ladder every season, and in one case in 1929, went undefeated. They were far and away the best team, disputed by no one.

Brisbane have not finished on top, and have not been "far and away the best" team in any season. They have always been at the least the equal of one or two other teams, who have had similar win-loss records.

It pains me to say it, but Collingwood for me.

 

[bigbaddaz]

I believe that The Brisbane Lions are a better team

Solid points have been thrown up, and I can do nothing but agree with them.

In The State of todays game with all the travelling, its much harder to be conistant over 4 years and win away from home, and keep your home form.

This year finals series saw the 2nd placed team have to come down to melbourne to play a preliminary final, so I believe Brisbane are a much better team and therefore...

THE GREATEST TEAM OF ALL TIME 2001 - ????

 

[jezza]

f**k, almost went blind after the first 2 lines!!!

COLLINGWOOD FOR SURE

2003 2nd Qualifying Final Collingwood 9.12 (66) def Brisbane 7.9 (51) DI-DI-DIDAK

Does your blindness extend to 2 weeks after that match?

 

[Pedro]

Pretty hard to compare. I know that Brisbane are a mighty side, and can only presume that the Collingwood side were as well. Its just that my memory of 1927 is a bit faded

 

[Roonaldo!]

Lions, because the comp back then was not a big as it is now.

 

[grayham]

Brisbane easily. Appart from this year, they have had to travel 1000km to the home of the opposition to win the flag.

Some sheep may bleat about TPP, but I'd bet the Collingwood team of the late 20's was paying their players more than the other teams were.

15 oponents, equalised comp, peaking at the right time. Brisbane easily.

 

[jezza]

Counting the time before the first mention of the salary cap....

Both Dan and Baddaz make very good points for both sides, very difficult to put one ahead of the other.

 

[MarkT]

Finishing on top isn't really the issue for me Dan. It is somewhat indicative of quality but we don't have an EPL system we have a knockout final system. You don't have to win games in April you have to win them, in September. If a side can cruise through the H&A season and crunch everyone in the finals they are the best team on the basis we use to classify them.

For me the issue comes down to the fact most teams are prevented from competing in the same market for the same quantity and quality of players. In 1927-30 no one was prevented for competing in any way by anything other than their own shortcomings. Who knows whether Brisbane could have been challenged by Essendon had Power gone to Essendon instead of Caracella to Brisbane. Who knows if Lynch would have fronted up again this year but for a few extra dollars no other club could have found. Who knows if Aka would have re signed if he wasn't able to get his pay rise after feeling others were rewarded better for lesser performances.

 

[LethalsLegion]

Because it is impossible to compare teams from different era's they will go by pure numbers in the future, in this regard the Collingwood team has a higher win rate over the 4 years.
Having said that, is it even between these 2 teams? The Melbourne team that almost won 6 premierships in a row save for an unprecedented act of thuggery in the 58 GF has been widely regarded as the best team of all time, even opposition teams called them supermen and invincible, and their win rate is far superior over a longer period

 

[Homer]

Collingwood.

Forget the fact that it's now a national competition. You can only win RELATIVE to the standard if the competiton you are in. As a perfect example, we all know Port have been a great club even though none of their 34 flags were won in the "strongest" league.

Collingwood finished on top of the ladder every season, and in one case in 1929, went undefeated. They were far and away the best team, disputed by no one.

Brisbane have not finished on top, and have not been "far and away the best" team in any season. They have always been at the least the equal of one or two other teams, who have had similar win-loss records.

It pains me to say it, but Collingwood for me.

If figures... How do you board an airplane? Whoops wrong teams to mention that to. Collingwood and Essendon travelled less than Brisbane this year. Go figure that.

 

[Homer]

f**k, almost went blind after the first 2 lines!!!

COLLINGWOOD FOR SURE

2003 2nd Qualifying Final Collingwood 9.12 (66) def Brisbane 7.9 (51) DI-DI-DIDAK

WOW, you won against us, big frikkin deal. You measured up fairly well to us for two years, but it was pretty obvious the words 'sustained effort' don't apply at Collingwood.

 

[Dan26]

Of course in a head-to-head contest, Brisbane would beat the Collingwood side of the 20's. It is now a national competition. Duh!

But that's not the point.

It's not Collingwood's fault, that the VFL hadn't evolved into a national competiton yet. You can only perform relative to the standard of the competition you are in, and in VFL-AFL history, Collingwood's 4 year era is the most dominant 4 year era of any club.

If you look at the 108 premiership sides from 1897 to 2004, you can make a valid argument that not one of Brisbane's four flag sides (as indvidual flag sides) would be in the top 30 out of 108. None have dominated a season or finished on top of the ladder.

Collingwood dominated the league, Brisbane didn't, so really the choice is obvious. Collingwood's four year club achievement was total domination, something Brisbane hasn't been able to do.

 

[beez]

wow, to quote an unquotable "this thread is on fire"

Seriously though, the melbourne team of the 50's and 60's is, was an always will be known as the greatest team of all time

Lets hope Voss does his knee at training this week

 

[Cap]

Collingwood.

Forget the fact that it's now a national competition. You can only win RELATIVE to the standard if the competiton you are in. As a perfect example, we all know Port have been a great club even though none of their 34 flags were won in the "strongest" league.

Collingwood finished on top of the ladder every season, and in one case in 1929, went undefeated. They were far and away the best team, disputed by no one.

Brisbane have not finished on top, and have not been "far and away the best" team in any season. They have always been at the least the equal of one or two other teams, who have had similar win-loss records.

It pains me to say it, but Collingwood for me.

yeah but they did lose a semi in the both 28-29 and where gifted a GF because they finished first

Brisbane for me they have proved more minor rounds wins are nice but its the finals when it counts

Collingwood 27-30 - 6 wins 2 losses
Brisbane 01-04 - 10-1

 

[Homer]

But the plain fact of the matter is, that teams rock-up to training in November with the goal to win the Premiership in September. StKilda were certs in May, Collingwood had mastered June and Essendon always manage to look good sometime in August, but whoever wins the game on the last Saturday in September is the champion team for the season.

Moral: Premierships are won in Late September.

 

[beez]

yeah but they did lose a semi in the both 28-29 and where gifted a GF because they finished first

Brisbane for me they have proved more minor rounds wins are nice but its the finals when it counts

Collingwood 27-30 - 6 wins 2 losses
Brisbane 01-04 - 10-1

Omg, thats just a lame argument..................and let me remind you who that 1 loss was to!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Homer]

wow, to quote an unquotable "this thread is on fire"

Seriously though, the melbourne team of the 50's and 60's is, was an always will be known as the greatest team of all time

Lets hope Voss does his knee at training this week

Yeah, whilst jogging and watching Nathan Buckley crash head-on into a truck?

Seriously, ease up with the hoping for injuries.

 

[bOmBeR_BoY1]

Omg, thats just a lame argument..................and let me remind you who that 1 loss was to!!!!!!!!!!!

Well that makes the Collingwood side of 1927-30 more greater than because their 2003 edition was able to beat the Brisbane Lions in a final... right?

 

[Dan26]

wow, to quote an unquotable "this thread is on fire"

Seriously though, the melbourne team of the 50's and 60's is, was an always will be known as the greatest team of all time

You can't look at it that way. Premierships are won in individual years. That's the structure of football seasons, so it makes more sense to look at who have been the msot dominant teams in individual seasons.

For the best club era's you have to state how long your era is.

For a 6 year era, Melbourne's 1955-60 club achievment was the best. Six times top of the ladder for five flags. A four year era would be Collingwood's club achievement from 1927-30 as the best.

A 17 year era may see Hawthorn from 1975-1991 as the best 17 year club achievement by any side.

Every era (whether it be one, two, 3 4,5,6,7,15, 30 years) will see a different club take the bragging rights.

If we are talking individual teams (as opposed to a club era over a number of years), I think to comes down to Collingwood of 1929, Essendon of 2000 and 1950, Carlton of '95 and 1908 and Melbourne of 1956 as to who was the best individual side of all time.

 

[beez]

Well that makes the Collingwood side of 1927-30 more greater than because their 2003 edition was able to beat the Brisbane Lions in a final... right?

EXACTLY!!!!!!! glad u see my point

 

[Homer]

Omg, thats just a lame argument..................and let me remind you who that 1 loss was to!!!!!!!!!!!

Need something to hold our hat on do we?

 

[Skoff]

In The State of todays game with all the travelling, its much harder to be conistant over 4 years and win away from home, and keep your home form.

Back in the day it took a cut lunch and a sleep over to reach Geelong sunny.
The young wippersnappers that fly around in luxary up in the air flying things and get to sit on padded seats, whilst we got to sit on splintered benchs on rough roads and even had to pick up after the horses.

There were no drugs in the day sunshine, if some bloke went down with a hammy his leg was amputated, mind you, if he wasn't pack on the park by half time he wouldn't get his lemin. Yes, Lemin, there wasn't even oranges back then.

We kicked balloons around that weren't changed every 1/4 and we didn't get to have showers or even a change of socks at the break. Waiste high mud, except at the Western Oval no one was sure what that stuff was. Not like these softies running around today. Soft grass, new balls, medical treatment on call, doped up to the eye balls at half time, A ROOF!!!!!

They even get to ride bikes with wheels - round ones, and a chain. In the day china it was all in six foot of snow, square wheels and NO chain.

Would love to see the young whippersnappers of today get around in the conditions of the day.

 

[beez]

Need something to hold our hat on do we?

Well i cant hold on to the premiership cup can I

2003 Qualifying Final Collingwood 9.12 (66) Def Brisbane 7.9 (51) DI-DI-DIDAK