Eagles 2002 - worst finals team in living memory ?

[Portia]

Originally posted by X_box_X
Port of 99, Brisbane of 95 or WCE of 2002 would be the worst!

Sydney of 99 finished 8th, Port 7th. Not a lot between them - neither had the slightest chance of progressing.

 

[Port01]

Originally posted by X_box_X
WORST FINALS TEAMS SINCE 1992

Port of 99, Brisbane of 95 or WCE of 2002 would be the worst!

On the actual results in finals it would be hard to beat Adelaide of 2001 as the worst, losing by 11 goals to the team that finished 6th overall. I love Adelaide so I thought I would bring them up.

Port of 99 and Brisbane of 95 put in half competitive (more in Bris 95 case) performances in against the eventual premiers.

Port lost to North by 44 points, who beat Bris in the prelim by 45 and Carlton in the GF 35. So it wasn't a ridiculous finals effort.

Bris of 95 lost to Carlton by 13 points, who then beat North by 62 in the prelim and Geelong by 61 in the GF. Again not a shocking finals effort.

 

[TheMase]

Originally posted by Smokin





Aug 26 and Sept 2, Carlton played Fitzroy twice in a row with the latter being the GF.

OH! I see what you mean!

Well I guess they didn't have a choice.

The by-laws would have stated that the winners of that semi final go to the prelimary final. And they did....

 

[*Paul*]

Carlton, as minor premier, had the right of challenge. If they'd won the 26-Aug game , they would have been premiers. As they lost they lined up again.

 

[BrainOfMorbius]

Brisbane of 95 were without a doubt the second-best side in the finals, with six wins from their last seven games. Only eventual premier Carlton had more. And the Bears were the only side to even threaten Carlton during their 16-win run to the flag.

 

[TheMase]

Originally posted by *Paul*
Carlton, as minor premier, had the right of challenge. If they'd won the 26-Aug game , they would have been premiers. As they lost they lined up again.

I know that rule, but it was the prelimary final, not the Grand Final! So it doesn't make sense ...

I think that right of challenge stayed until (somewhere round this) 1931!!.

 

[Jabber]

Originally posted by X_box_X
WORST FINALS TEAMS SINCE 1992

1992 - St Kilda
1993 - Westcoast
1994 - Collingwood
1995 - Brisbane
1996 - Hawthorn
1997 - Brisbane
1998 - Westcoast
1999 - Port Adelaide
2000 - Hawthorn
2001 - Adelaide
2002 - Wesctoast

Pretty obvious ... The teams who just made the finals were pretty much rated worst finals side.

Port of 99, Brisbane of 95 or WCE of 2002 would be the worst!

Although they finished 6th, I doubt you could call West Coast the worst finals team in 1993. Sandwiched between 2 premierships. The difference between finishing first and sixth that year was 1 and a half games.
They punted North Melbourne out in the first final

 

[X_box_X]

Originally posted by Port01

Port lost to North by 44 points, who beat Bris in the prelim by 45 and Carlton in the GF 35. So it wasn't a ridiculous finals effort.

1. I am talking about the whole extent of the 1999 season!
2. Kangaroos and Port Adelaide played in wet conditions!

- Essendon, Kangaroos, Brisbane and Bulldogs were the only serious contenders for the flag that year. You may include Westcoast, but how Carlton got in the GF is beyond me.

 

[X_box_X]

Originally posted by Jabber


Although they finished 6th, I doubt you could call West Coast the worst finals team in 1993. Sandwiched between 2 premierships. The difference between finishing first and sixth that year was 1 and a half games.

They were the worst finals side of 1993 I reckon.
Not saying Westcoast were a crap side that season, but the other teams were pretty awesome. Essendon and Carlton (can't argue with that) Hawthorn and Dunstall were on fire. (Beat us by 12 goals) Kangaroos were awesome (best %) Adelaide and Modra were beginning to become a force.

Westcoast were good, but not as good!

 

[*Paul*]

Originally posted by TheMase


I know that rule, but it was the prelimary final, not the Grand Final! So it doesn't make sense ...

I think that right of challenge stayed until (somewhere round this) 1931!!.

If the minor premier lost either the semi-final or the final (i've used the term preliminary final) they could challenge for the premiership. If Carlton had won the 26-Aug game, that would have been the Grand Final.
OTH, if they'd lost to Richmond , they would have progressed to the GF. Richmond would've played Fitzroy for the other spot.

 

[Jabber]

Originally posted by X_box_X


They were the worst finals side of 1993 I reckon.
Not saying Westcoast were a crap side that season, but the other teams were pretty awesome. Essendon and Carlton (can't argue with that) Hawthorn and Dunstall were on fire. (Beat us by 12 goals) Kangaroos were awesome (best %) Adelaide and Modra were beginning to become a force.

Westcoast were good, but not as good!

Agreed Essendon were good, but I think in a season as close as that, it's pretty much a lottery in the Finals.
Interesting year 93. Up until round 18, St. Kilda could still have finished as Minor Premiers and they ended up 12th.

 

[X_box_X]

Originally posted by Jabber


Agreed Essendon were good, but I think in a season as close as that, it's pretty much a lottery in the Finals.
Interesting year 93. Up until round 18, St. Kilda could still have finished as Minor Premiers and they ended up 12th.

Spot on!
Amazing how every team except the bottom three (Brisbane, Richmond and Sydney) All won half of their games. When you think about it, that would usually get you into the 8. A very even season 1993. Only 10 points sepearted 1st from 12th

 

[TheMase]

Originally posted by *Paul*


If the minor premier lost either the semi-final or the final (i've used the term preliminary final) they could challenge for the premiership. If Carlton had won the 26-Aug game, that would have been the Grand Final.
OTH, if they'd lost to Richmond , they would have progressed to the GF. Richmond would've played Fitzroy for the other spot.

Crazy Stuff.

 

[BrainOfMorbius]

Originally posted by TheMase


Crazy Stuff.

So next time you get annoyed with the final eight, just remember it could be worse: You could be living in 1916 with John Howard.

 

[JUBJUB]

Originally posted by The Mailman

Were West Coast the worst finals team, if not ever, but for a long time.

Karl,you may have a new name,but you still post the same crap.

 

[*Paul*]

I've always thought that the right of challenge was a good compromise between the obvious fact that the MP are the best team, and the need for a finals series. The MP has to lose twice , sudden death for everyone else. Probably not feasible with more than 4 teams though.

 

[Murph]

Originally posted by X_box_X
WORST FINALS TEAMS SINCE 1992

1992 - St Kilda
1993 - Westcoast
1994 - Collingwood
1995 - Brisbane
1996 - Hawthorn
1997 - Brisbane
1998 - Westcoast
1999 - Port Adelaide
2000 - Hawthorn
2001 - Adelaide
2002 - Wesctoast

Pretty obvious ... The teams who just made the finals were pretty much rated worst finals side.

Port of 99, Brisbane of 95 or WCE of 2002 would be the worst!

Little harsh to say Hawthorn were the worst of 2000.
They defeated Geelong in the elimination final, and lost to Kangaroos by only 10 points in the semis.
The Western Bulldogs that year finished 7th and were eliminated in week 1 by Brisbane by 6 goals.

 

[Mr Q]

Originally posted by The Mailman

Were West Coast the worst finals team, if not ever, but for a long time. Frankly if it wasn't for Geelong's pathetic late season capitulation and the Bulldogs and Hawthorn, grossly underacheving the Eagles really deserved to finish 10th this year.

You just keep believing that . Been a few teams in the past that were worse by a mile. What about the Brisbane side in 1997? that only made the finals because every single candidate for 8th lost in the last week (including the Dockers)

 

[X_box_X]

Originally posted by Murph


Little harsh to say Hawthorn were the worst of 2000.
They defeated Geelong in the elimination final, and lost to Kangaroos by only 10 points in the semis.
The Western Bulldogs that year finished 7th and were eliminated in week 1 by Brisbane by 6 goals.

Believe it or not it was my toughest choice.
The Bulldogs defeated these teams in 2000:

Essendon (1)
Melbourne (2)
Carlton (3)
Kangaroos (4)

Unfortunetly we never beat:

Brisbane, Geelong or Hawthorn.

But a team who can defeat the top 4 teams in a season cannot be classed as a bad side

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by *Paul*
If Carlton had won the 26-Aug game, that would have been the Grand Final.

Only in hindsight.

 

[Captain Random]

C'mon, we're being a bit harsh on our postal chum, aren't we?

This bloke is one of the most skilled posters I have ever read. In the space of one post, he manages to bag West Coast, Hawthorn, Richmond, Bulldogs (all of the last 3 with faint praise), Geelong (pathetic), North (tired), Sydney, Collingwood (wouldn't have made the top 4 in other years), whilst also referring to the fact that Carlton have the spoon.

You, sir, are a champion.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by The Mailman
(I mean in most other years Collingwood wouldn't have made the top 4, let alone the Grand final)

Based on what exactly?
Their win/loss ratio?

They played the same competition as ecveryone else. In other years when higher win/loss ratios were required to make the top 4, the competition was not as hot in the middle rungs. In other years this Collingwood side would have won more games and finished 4th. They would then have beaten Port and Adelaide who would have finished 1st and 3rd respectively to make the grand final. They would also have beated every other finalist during the year.

As for WCE, they are no worse than many other finalists in many other years. they were making up the numbers like a few do every year. Like Carlton last year.

I sure as hell would rather have their list than yours. They have a promising young list full of potential, the highest grossing club in the comp. and a bright future. You have a choice between Jack and Collo. Vote well my friend.

 

[Dan26]

I don't rememebr being particularly impressed with North Melbourne of 1987, who won 13 games, but only had a weak percentage and never looked that good.

Port Adelaide of 1999, were the weakest finals team of the last 4-5 years. They were battlers, but to their credit, pulled out 12 wins. Amazing how good they are now!

I also don't rate the Bulldogs 1995 side that highly.

The best side to ever miss the finals would have to Richmond's 1968 side. In that year the final ladder read (I havn't included all 12 teams):

1.Essendon......16.....3.....1
2.Carlton..........15.....5
3.Geelong.........15.....5
4.St.Kilda..........14.....5......1
--------------------------------------------
5.Richmond........14....6
6.Hawthorn........9.....10.....1
7.Collingwood....9......11

 

[Lockyer24]

Absolute rubbish.

The Eagles are quite a good side. They are a bit like the Crows, experienced backline and pretty awesome midfield, however struggle a tad with goalscoring options.

When they get their away games sorted out theyll be up near the Top 4

 

[snakebite01]

What is the point of this thread? You can't say West Coast are underserved or worst of all time because they deserved to be there. To make the finals they had to travel all the way to Manuka and beat a Kangaroos side that had only been beaten once there since they started. West Coast deserved to make it and then gave Essendon a run for their money for three quarters after coming off a lengthy road trip. How are they unworthy or bad?