Brownlow medal v AFLCA Award v AFLPA MVP

[00Stinger]

In your opinion which carries more weight as to who the best player is?

Now obviously the Brownlow medal is the most prestige award, that can't be questioned. But most supporters feel that the umpires can not even umpire correctly, so should their opinion on the best player be the most important?

Or should the AFLPA MVP, the award voted by the players carry the most weight? If so, does it matter that most players openly say they don't watch much football, so should their opinions be the most important?

Or should it be the AFLCA award, the one voted by the coaches? Even though coaches can vote for their players as well as opposition players potentially leading to a bias opinion?

 

[KissKiss]

AFLCA > Brownlow >>>>> MVP

Per game voted awards are better than a limited field popularity vote at the end of the year. In fact I'd say that things like the Herald Sun player of the year is better than the MVP as an award

 

[Masqualero]

A lot of players don't watch footy.

Brownlow is awarded by the people who are running all day adjudicating the game.

The Coaches award is by far the most valuable.

 

[BlueTucker456]

AFLPA MVP is pretty much just whoever the brownlow favourite is. Don't think it's the best indication.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

AFLCA > Brownlow >>>>> MVP

Per game voted awards are better than a limited field popularity vote at the end of the year. In fact I'd say that things like the Herald Sun player of the year is better than the MVP as an award

With the MVP, players vote on which 3 players from their own club will be the club nominations for the actual MVP voting. Every player in the league then votes on their 1, 2 and 3 for the season. You are not allowed to vote for the players from your own club. For me, that's not too bad a system.

For the Brownlow, using Priddis as an example. He would tell you and anyone else with half a brain will tell you that he wasn't and never was the best player in the competition. What he did for that season though, was to play well enough, in enough games, that the umpires thought he was one of the best 3 players on the ground. He could have polled 3 votes in a game where there were other players that you could have given 3 votes to and no-one would have raised and eyebrow. He could have polled 3 votes where he was the clear standout player on the day. He could have polled 1 vote when there were 5 others that the umpires could have given that vote to but they may have given it to Priddis because he didn't back chat them or they noticed his hair or he thanked them for their efforts in umpiring as they were walking off the ground. There are so many variables in why Brownlow votes are given. In another game on the same weekend, there could be 3 clear standouts on the day who share the votes and the person receiving the 1 vote could have had a much better day than Priddis did in his game but Priddis happened to play in a game of a much lower standard on the day.

I think even coaches would go into their games carrying biases. They have just spent the week analysing their opponents for the week and have really concentrated on key players.

In answer to the OP, probably the coaches award.

 

[kade]

Doesn’t matter if players don’t watch all games, they play against them on the field so they would have a fair idea who the best players are. In saying that Gawn treated it like a joke by voting witts. Ild say Brownlow

 

[juss]

Coaches award by far.
The Brownlow is an umpires award, the players dont watch enough footy and are easily media influenced because of that.

The coaches understand the game at a tactical and influence level better than most.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Don't the players just vote at the end of season? Umpires clearly have no idea. Coaches vote after each game and are far better than umpires

 

[Monkey King]

Each award has its flaws. I like the MVP in theory, because it’s based more on perceptions of league-wide performance rather than in-game performance. Problem is some players don’t even watch games. In the two in-game voting systems, an inferior performance from one player in one match, can attract the same score as a much better performance from another player in a different match.

I think the AFLCA award would win hands down if they didn’t have to hand out max votes every game.

 

[Back One Out]

The AFLCA award has been more hit & miss than the Brownlow

AFLCA Award winners: were they the best player?

2018 - Max Gawn - NOPE (Mitchell, Cripps)
2017 - Dustin Martin - yes
2016 - Patrick Dangerfield - yes
2015 - Daniel Hannebery - NOPE (Fyfe)
2014 - Robbie Gray - NOPE (Fyfe)
2013 - Scott Pendlebury - NOPE (Ablett)
2012 - Trent Cotchin - NOPE (Ablett, Watson*, Franklin)
2011 - Marc Murphy - NOPE (Judd, Swan)
2010 - Dane Swan - yes
2009 - Gary Ablett - yes
2008 - Gary Ablett - yes
2007 - Gary Ablett - yes
2006 - Adam Goodes/Simon Goodwin - NOPE/NOPE (Judd)
2005 - Barry Hall - NOPE (Cousins, Kerr, Judd, Cox, Pav)
2004 - Warren Tredrea - yeah, maybe (Riewoldt, Judd)
2003 - Nathan Buckley - hmm, maybe (Voss, Ricciuto)

 

[100action]

All are s**t. Aflca best of the listed.

 

[Mitchell54]

Voted AFLCA but then thought that the Brownlow has the best system of the three. I think the AFLCA is more reliable indicator but don’t want it getting too politicised if it were to become the main event in who was the best that year as coaches may vote up or down players for the sake of the award. Brownlow system is the least bias that there is.

 

[00Stinger]

The AFLCA award has been more hit & miss than the Brownlow

AFLCA Award winners: were they the best player?

2018 - Max Gawn - NOPE (Mitchell, Cripps)
2017 - Dustin Martin - yes
2016 - Patrick Dangerfield - yes
2015 - Daniel Hannebery - NOPE (Fyfe)
2014 - Robbie Gray - NOPE (Fyfe)
2013 - Scott Pendlebury - NOPE (Ablett)
2012 - Trent Cotchin - NOPE (Ablett, Watson*, Franklin)
2011 - Marc Murphy - NOPE (Judd, Swan)
2010 - Dane Swan - yes
2009 - Gary Ablett - yes
2008 - Gary Ablett - yes
2007 - Gary Ablett - yes
2006 - Adam Goodes/Simon Goodwin - NOPE/NOPE (Judd)
2005 - Barry Hall - NOPE (Cousins, Kerr, Judd, Cox, Pav)
2004 - Warren Tredrea - yeah, maybe (Riewoldt, Judd)
2003 - Nathan Buckley - hmm, maybe (Voss, Ricciuto)

I think there is a fair amount of support for Gawn & Grundy being the best 2 players of 2018.

Not stat padders like Mitchell & Cripps

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Back One Out]

I think there is a fair amount of support for Gawn & Grundy being the best 2 players of 2018.

Not stat padders like Mitchell & Cripps

Mostly from people looking to gloss over or talk down Mitchell's exceptional season (while ignoring Cripps's stellar season because he plays for a 2-20 rabble.) The players had Mitchell and Cripps 1-2.

This year, it became fashionable in the media to pump up Gawn and Grundy, but I watched them play a fair bit and I reckon they were hyped more than any other players this year.

Bottom line: ruckman are massively overrated. Even the best ones...

People can crap on all they like about taps to advantage and they can jizz themselves 3 or 4 times a game when Gawn takes a pack mark, but these pale into insignificance compared to the best midfielders getting the ball 30-40 times a game, laying 10 tackles and doing another 30 pressure acts throughout the game.

The best ruckmen have their moments, but their overall contributions tend to be overvalued, in my opinion.

Collingwood beat Richmond and they show extended highlights of Grundy kicking Nankervis and Grigg's arses. But the whole Richmond team had shockers. They didn't lose because of the ruck. Collingwood's entire midfield was way too slick. It also conveniently overlooks the fact that Richmond dominated the season (and last year's finals) without a top ruckman.

How did Gawn fare against West Coast? Pushed aside like he was a rookie. Zero impact.

Look back through history - there is no correlation between teams that reach the Grand Final and/or win the flag and teams who have one of the AFL's dominant ruckmen. In fact, I'd venture to say most premiership teams have mediocre/average ruckmen. You just need someone to provide a good contest (negate the opposition star) and let your midfielders take care of business.

 

[00Stinger]

Mostly from people looking to gloss over or talk down Mitchell's exceptional season (while ignoring Cripps's stellar season because he plays for a 2-20 rabble.)

This year, it became fashionable to pump up Gawn and Grundy, but I watched them play a fair bit and I reckon they were hyped more than any other players this year.

Bottom line: ruckman are massively overrated. Even the best ones...

People can crap on all they like about taps to advantage and they can jizz themselves 3 or 4 times a game when Gawn takes a pack mark, but these pale into insignificance compared to the best midfielders getting the ball 30-40 times a game, laying 10 tackles and doing another 20 pressure acts throughout the game.

The best ruckmen have their moments, but their overall contributions tend to be overvalued, in my opinion.

Collingwood beat Richmond and they show extended highlights of Grundy kicking Nankervis and Grigg's arses. But the whole Richmond team had shockers. They didn't lose because of the ruck. Collingwood's entire midfield was way too slick. It also conveniently overlooks the fact that Richmond dominated ther season (and last year's finals) without a top ruckman.

How did Gawn fare against West Coast? Pushed aside like he was a rookie. Zero impact.

Look back through history - there is no correlation between teams that reach the Grand Final and/or win the flag and teams who have one of the top ruckmen in the AFL.

And Mitchell did sweet * all v Melbourne in the final too.

The problem is Mitchell and Cripps pick up uneffective disposals that do not hurt the opposition. But people will look and go wow he got 35 touches today.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Back One Out]

And Mitchell did sweet **** all v Melbourne in the final too.

Pig's arse.

Mitchell was probably our best player. He was shadowed by Harmes, bashed from pillar to post (by Jones, Jetta, etc) and stuffed his AC shoulder joint and went into the rooms for a jab during the 1st quarter, yet he still managed to keep Hawthorn in the contest with a team high 10 tackles, 8 clearances and 13 contested possessions.

Mitchell and Smith were overwhelmed at times by Viney, Oliver, Brayshaw, Harmes, Jones, Petracca, etc, but they fought valiantly and were chiefly responsible for the Hawks ranging to within 2 goals of Melbourne during the last quarter.

Really, we should've lost that game by a lot more.

The problem is Mitchell and Cripps pick up uneffective disposals that do not hurt the opposition. But people will look and go wow he got 35 touches today.

People who parrot this line over and over don't watch closely enough. They are criticising Mitchell for not being Martin or Dangerfield and producing game-breaking flashy play. They're missing the 20-25 quick possessions Mitchell gets in the middle which get Hawthorn going. They are missing all the good defensive work he does; the stuff which goes unnoticed and uncredited by the know-all dingbats who only have eyes for the flashy superstars.

There was no harder working player in the AFL this season than Tom Mitchell

People should just STFU and watch the game closer.

Makes me laugh how the know-alls criticised Rioli for not getting enough possessions and now they're criticising Mitchell for getting too many possessions and not doing enough with them. Any danger people could put aside their silly prejudices, watch the f**kin games, see their impact and judge them on their merits?

 

[00Stinger]

Pig's arse.

Mitchell was probably our best player. He was shadowed by Harmes, bashed from pillar to post (by Jones, Jetta, etc) and stuffed his AC shoulder joint and went into the rooms for a jab during the 1st quarter, yet he still managed to keep Hawthorn in the contest with a team high 10 tackles, 8 clearances and 13 contested possessions.

Mitchell and Smith were overwhelmed at times by Viney, Oliver, Brayshaw, Harmes, Jones, Petracca, etc, but they fought valiantly and were chiefly responsible for the Hawks ranging to within 2 goals of Melbourne during the last quarter.

Really, we should've lost that game by a lot more.

People who parrot this line over and over don't watch closely enough. They are criticising Mitchell for not being Martin or Dangerfield and producing game-breaking flashy play. They're missing the 20-25 quick possessions Mitchell gets in the middle which get Hawthorn going. They are missing all the good defensive work he does; the stuff which goes unnoticed and uncredited by the know-all dingbats who only have eyes for the flashy superstars.

There was no harder working player in the AFL this season than Tom Mitchell

People should just STFU and watch the game closer.

Makes me laugh how the know-alls criticised Rioli for not getting enough possessions and now they're criticising Mitchell for getting too many possessions and not doing enough with them. Any danger people could put aside their silly prejudices, watch the f**kin games, see their impact and judge them on their merits?

maybe you should do what you preach champ.

Gawn and Grundy were definatly in the top 5 best players of the season. Very realistically 1 and 2

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Juddernaut08]

Brownlow is the most prestigious and is remembered the most. BUT it often means the least.

AFLCA is pretty good, probably the best of the 3.

AFLMVP is unscientific in that its just a gut feel sorta thing...but probably best represents popular sentiment.

 

[Back One Out]

maybe you should do what you preach champ.

Gawn and Grundy were definatly in the top 5 best players of the season. Very realistically 1 and 2

NOPE

1. Mitchell
2. Cripps

 

[Juddernaut08]

And Mitchell did sweet **** all v Melbourne in the final too.

The problem is Mitchell and Cripps pick up uneffective disposals that do not hurt the opposition. But people will look and go wow he got 35 touches today.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Your spelling of uneffective makes your post ineffective. Lol sorry to be mean.