Opinion Geelong in the last 17 years. Best team of the 21st century?

[Falcon3518]

Well....yes. I have to agree. Otherwise we'd have to tell Falcon3518 that Dusty is not GOAT after all

Deal, we’ll take Leigh’s words for it then. Cats are the most successful and Dusty is the GOAT. Very happy with that conclusion

 

[Meteoric Rise]

V

Very rational and detailed analysis.

4 premierships by Hawks is superior to all and sundry. No argument there.... IF premierships was the only measure taken into account. Leigh Matthews based his rankings on the following:

“Three categories - playing in a finals series, how many games you’ve won in the last 20 years and how many premierships you’ve won,”

1. Premierships - Hawks on top with 4
2. Finals appearances (years) - Swans 17, Geelong 16
3. Overall games won/lost - “Geelong have had 315 wins, Sydney have had 279"

Leigh's overall conclusion - “Geelong and Sydney, two outstanding clubs so far this century.” But Geelong's longevity edges out Swans - "Geelong have been outstanding pretty much the whole century. The last time they had a losing season, lost more games (than they won), was 2006."

So maybe the debate should be whether Leigh Matthews was right to bases his assessment of best team of the 21st Century (thus far) on the three areas, or whether it should be just premierships.

I can see what he is getting at. But “finals appearances” and “overall games won/lost” are essentially the same thing, because you can only qualify for finals by winning home and away games. So his 3 categories are actually 2 categories.

He hasn’t actually given any precise formula he applies as to how many extra home and away wins equates to extra Grand Final wins or even Preliminary Final wins.

I am a punter, that is how I scrape out my living. And one thing I keep reminding myself is it does not matter between now and next year how many times I go to bed a winner or loser because I had a winning or losing day. Absolutely the only thing that matters is what position I am in at the end of the year. So I don’t ever try to win on any given day. I just try to do things that will put me in the best position at the end of the year. And that is more or less how I see the world. I don’t have a “winner’s” mentality. So I barely rate routine w/l in footy teams at all. I would for example rather be an Essendon supporter than a Geelong supporter right now, because I think Essendon are a bigger chance to win a flag from their current track than Geelong. It wouldn’t trouble me going to sleep on loss after loss as a bomber fan right now, so long as I can see the club building towards being a real threat for the most important goal.

As a punter who communicates with other punters, I realise others see the world differently to the way I see it. Plenty of people I know form strategies around trying to win on as many days as possible, and some of those people do fine.

I personally don’t think Leigh Matthews has thought that through really well. I think he has seen a good Geelong performance, it has reminded him of their consistency over a long period, and he has wanted to praise that consistency. I think his intentions are legitimate, I don’t think he got his thoughts quite right. ie the 3 categories being only 2 in reality, and on top of that I don’t agree with the underlying principle of what he is saying. But I am just one person, with one type of way of looking at things like this.

 

[Falcon3518]

1. The high point thus far of Mason Cox's no-exactly-substantial oeuvre (I would guess less than half a dozen games) would undoubtedly be his Queens Birthday performance in 2022.
2. Collingwood was beating the s**t out of Richmond before Mason Cox's cameo. You were never in it.

Queens Bday > prelim. What an odd thing to say, you’ve lost all little credibility you had left.

 

[Sttew]

I can see what he is getting at. But “finals appearances” and “overall games won/lost” are essentially the same thing, because you can only qualify for finals by winning home and away games. So his 3 categories are actually 2 categories.

He hasn’t actually given any precise formula he applies as to how many extra home and away wins equates to extra Grand Final wins or even Preliminary Final wins.

I am a punter, that is how I scrape out my living. And one thing I keep reminding myself is it does not matter between now and next year how many times I go to bed a winner or loser because I had a winning or losing day. Absolutely the only thing that matters is what position I am in at the end of the year. So I don’t ever try to win on any given day. I just try to do things that will put me in the best position at the end of the year. And that is more or less how I see the world. I don’t have a “winner’s” mentality. So I barely rate routine w/l in footy teams at all. I would for example rather be an Essendon supporter than a Geelong supporter right now, because I think Essendon are a bigger chance to win a flag from their current track than Geelong. It wouldn’t trouble me going to sleep on loss after loss as a bomber fan right now, so long as I can see the club building towards being a real threat for the most important goal.

As a punter who communicates with other punters, I realise others see the world differently to the way I see it. Plenty of people I know form strategies around trying to win on as many days as possible, and some of those people do fine.

I personally don’t think Leigh Matthews has thought that through really well. I think he has seen a good Geelong performance, it has reminded him of their consistency over a long period, and he has wanted to praise that consistency. I think his intentions are legitimate, I don’t think he got his thoughts quite right. ie the 3 categories being only 2 in reality, and on top of that I don’t agree with the underlying principle of what he is saying. But I am just one person, with one type of way of looking at things like this.

And hand on heart Meteoric Rise can you say your hatred of Geelong isn't clouding your judgment at all?

 

[Sttew]

Deal, we’ll take Leigh’s words for it then. Cats are the most successful and Dusty is the GOAT. Very happy with that conclusion

Life is all about compromises

 

[Bostonian]

Unless it's of all time then who cares about one small part of a long history.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

And hand on heart Meteoric Rise can you say your hatred of Geelong isn't clouding your judgment at all?

It does cloud my judgement Sttew. But I allow for that in my reasoning.

Otherwise I would just say Geelong are despicable sh!t sport corrupting salty campaigners deserving of no respect as they burgled their only three modern flags in a weak era against Grand Final minnows.

 

[PhatBoy]

I can see what he is getting at. But “finals appearances” and “overall games won/lost” are essentially the same thing, because you can only qualify for finals by winning home and away games. So his 3 categories are actually 2 categories.

He hasn’t actually given any precise formula he applies as to how many extra home and away wins equates to extra Grand Final wins or even Preliminary Final wins.

I am a punter, that is how I scrape out my living. And one thing I keep reminding myself is it does not matter between now and next year how many times I go to bed a winner or loser because I had a winning or losing day. Absolutely the only thing that matters is what position I am in at the end of the year. So I don’t ever try to win on any given day. I just try to do things that will put me in the best position at the end of the year. And that is more or less how I see the world. I don’t have a “winner’s” mentality. So I barely rate routine w/l in footy teams at all. I would for example rather be an Essendon supporter than a Geelong supporter right now, because I think Essendon are a bigger chance to win a flag from their current track than Geelong. It wouldn’t trouble me going to sleep on loss after loss as a bomber fan right now, so long as I can see the club building towards being a real threat for the most important goal.

As a punter who communicates with other punters, I realise others see the world differently to the way I see it. Plenty of people I know form strategies around trying to win on as many days as possible, and some of those people do fine.

I personally don’t think Leigh Matthews has thought that through really well. I think he has seen a good Geelong performance, it has reminded him of their consistency over a long period, and he has wanted to praise that consistency. I think his intentions are legitimate, I don’t think he got his thoughts quite right. ie the 3 categories being only 2 in reality, and on top of that I don’t agree with the underlying principle of what he is saying. But I am just one person, with one type of way of looking at things like this.

That’s a reasonable attitude to have but the flip side of that, is that while Essendon realistically probably ARE closer to their next flag than we are, we still have a chance of winning one right now (assuming Melbourne’s malaise continues as they were obviously the side more than any that I didn’t think we could beat this year).

So while Essendon, for argument’s sake, might be $1.60 to our $2.50 to win a flag before the other, we are (in making this up im not sure what the odds are) $9 to win it this year, maybe $15 to win it next year, while Essendon are probably $101 to win in 2022-23.

At any rate after seeing how our younger guys have gone so far this year I don’t think we are as far off regenerating as what most people thought

 

[Falcon3518]

That’s a reasonable attitude to have but the flip side of that, is that while Essendon realistically probably ARE closer to their next flag than we are, we still have a chance of winning one right now (assuming Melbourne’s malaise continues as they were obviously the side more than any that I didn’t think we could beat this year).

So while Essendon, for argument’s sake, might be $1.60 to our $2.50 to win a flag before the other, we are (in making this up im not sure what the odds are) $9 to win it this year, maybe $15 to win it next year, while Essendon are probably $101 to win in 2022-23.

At any rate after seeing how our younger guys have gone so far this year I don’t think we are as far off regenerating as what most people thought

When do you think you should go full rebuild? Once Hawkins and Selwood retire? So about 2 years. Your other over 30s would look vulnerable in 2 years as well. Edwards for us has fallen off a cliff in 1 year, not AFL standard anymore.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

That’s a reasonable attitude to have but the flip side of that, is that while Essendon realistically probably ARE closer to their next flag than we are, we still have a chance of winning one right now (assuming Melbourne’s malaise continues as they were obviously the side more than any that I didn’t think we could beat this year).

So while Essendon, for argument’s sake, might be $1.60 to our $2.50 to win a flag before the other, we are (in making this up im not sure what the odds are) $9 to win it this year, maybe $15 to win it next year, while Essendon are probably $101 to win in 2022-23.

At any rate after seeing how our younger guys have gone so far this year I don’t think we are as far off regenerating as what most people thought

Geelong I agree has a better chance than Essendon of winning a flag in 2022. 2023 I wouldn’t be as sure, I expect Essendon to be an upgraded version of their 2021 team.

Geelong are likely to hit finals this year with a double chance. So far they have had meritorious wins over Bulldogs, Lions and Port Adelaide, two of these at Geelong. They have had performances against Swans and Collingwood that might be read as the efforts of a normal 6-10th ranked team. And slightly concerning losses to Hawthorn, Fremantle and St Kilda. The Cats I think are likely winners this week, but they will need to do well in the run home to get to 15 or 16 wins and a probable top 4 spot still, despite their next 3 opponents having helpful absences.

But given all that goes well, Geelong will enter the finals with presumably 5 or 6 players 32 years or older. Selwood, Hawkins, Smith, Touhy and Dangerfield. Possibly Higgins. And another likely 5 or 6 players 30 years or older. Stanley, Blicavs, Duncan, Rohan, Menegola and Guthrie. The first 4 of those will be 31yo+.

Now these players haven’t been good enough/fit enough to win flags in recent seasons when they were 1,2,3 and more years younger. How Geelong can possibly think they would be able to do so this year escapes me. But I think most Cats fans know this and like yourself are trying to be realistic. The thing with all this is it does and has cost Geelong the young players that may have taken them to future success. If Clarke happened to play in a Fremantle premiership this season or any time soon, and I were a Geelong supporter, I would not be happy. De Koning is doing well this season but 1-2 shaky performances late season or in an early final and I wouldn’t put it past Scott to have him on the emergency list for knockout games.

Players younger than 23 Geelong have actually played this year:

12 matches. De Koning 21yo
7 matches Holmes 19yo
6 matches Stephens 21yo
5 matches Evans 20yo
2 matches Dempsey 19yo, Knevitt 19yo
1 match Neale 19yo

35 matches experience into 7 players below the age of 23 doesn’t seem many to me, though all are actually 21 or younger. And De Koning’s excellent form aside and notwithstanding some decent enough looking performances from most of those given their ages, none have done anything eyebrow raising(bar De Koning of course.) And bear in mind half of those games have been played by 21yo’s.

Let’s compare it was say Essendon players this year not yet 23yo.

13 games Perkins 20yo
12 games Caldwell 21yo, Martin 21yo
11 games Durham 20yo
9 games Hobbs 18yo
6 games Reid 20yo
5 games Wanganeen 18yo, Cox 20yo
4 games Baldwin 20yo
3 games Jones 21yo, Bryan 20yo
1 game Lord 18yo, D’Ambrosio 19yo

85 matches into 13 players, like Geelong no 22yo’s. The Bombers games however are much more skewed to the younger end of the sample. There are 5 first round picks in that lot and a few other smart looking types too.

But the big reason I like the Bombers medium term outlook is the best of these 13 players and another likely top 5 pick this year will join players currently 28yo or younger in coming years:

28yo Stringer
27yo Hind, Kelly
26yo Merrett, Laverde
25yo Wright, Langford
24yo Parish Snelling, Redman, Guelfi, McGrath
23yo Draper, Ridley

14 prime aged players, 2-3 strong mids, a high calibre mid-forward, a quality key back, quality ruck, some decent running backs and a decnet small forward in there.

Cats best youngsters can look forward to playing with the following 23-28yo’s:

28yo Bews
26yo Kolodjashnij, Atkins
25yo O’Connor,
24yo Parfitt
23yo Z Guthrie, Ratugolea, Henry Stengle Miers

A quality hybrid defender, good small forward some useful backs and a couple of b and c grade mids, and I will leave my thoughts on Miers out of this report.

Obviously Cats will have retirements and be able to bring in more quality prime aged players, but then the cycle carries on, they hit finals playing against teams who have played a lot more games together as a team, OR are younger and in their prime so able to run all over you.

 

[PhatBoy]

When do you think you should go full rebuild? Once Hawkins and Selwood retire? So about 2 years. Your other over 30s would look vulnerable in 2 years as well. Edwards for us has fallen off a cliff in 1 year, not AFL standard anymore.

I don’t.

I have a fundamental problem with the attitude that you have to do it.

I’ve said many many times on this subject that it’s one of the few areas in which the NRL has the AFL beaten hands down. Yes, the NRL has no draft and less restrictions on player movement but the expectation at the start of every single season with the odd very rare exception, is that all 16 teams are playing for a finals spot, and of those 16, there may be 8-9 who believe they can challenge for the premiership.

I hate that in any given year in the AFL there are at least 4-5 teams who are not even aiming for a finals spot, and another 4-5 teams who would be fairly open in admitting they don’t believe they ‘are in the premiership window.’

Almost as a means of proving a point - that you don’t have to be a slave to cycle and equalisation - I’d like Geelong to come to a loose agreement of never ever making a conscious decision to tear things down and start again.

This does not mean avoiding youth or trying to phase out older players. It does mean trying to pick your best first 17-18 every game, though.

 

[Sttew]

When do you think you should go full rebuild? Once Hawkins and Selwood retire? So about 2 years. Your other over 30s would look vulnerable in 2 years as well. Edwards for us has fallen off a cliff in 1 year, not AFL standard anymore.

NEVER!! Look how long Carlton, Melbourne and North languished at the bottom. A full rebuild is a recipe for catastrophic disaster, IMHO.

We have been rebuilding since 2007. There are now only 2 players on the list from 2007 (Selwood & Hawkins), and from 2011, only 3 players (including Duncan) Swans and Geelong have proven you don't need to do anything more than continual soft rebuild.

 

[Falcon3518]

I don’t.

I have a fundamental problem with the attitude that you have to do it.

I’ve said many many times on this subject that it’s one of the few areas in which the NRL has the AFL beaten hands down. Yes, the NRL has no draft and less restrictions on player movement but the expectation at the start of every single season with the odd very rare exception, is that all 16 teams are playing for a finals spot, and of those 16, there may be 8-9 who believe they can challenge for the premiership.

I hate that in any given year in the AFL there are at least 4-5 teams who are not even aiming for a finals spot, and another 4-5 teams who would be fairly open in admitting they don’t believe they ‘are in the premiership window.’

Almost as a means of proving a point - that you don’t have to be a slave to cycle and equalisation - I’d like Geelong to come to a loose agreement of never ever making a conscious decision to tear things down and start again.

This does not mean avoiding youth or trying to phase out older players. It does mean trying to pick your best first 17-18 every game, though.

Look I get what you are saying but I think you do eventually need to bottom out. We got Gibcus last year just from 1 year going from premiers to 12th now back in contention. He will be our best fullback in the next generation that we will build around, what a steal. You guys do starve yourselves of picks by perennially contending. It’s a fact.

 

[Sttew]

Look I get what you are saying but I think you do eventually need to bottom out. We got Gibcus last year just from 1 year going from premiers to 12th now back in contention. He will be our best fullback in the next generation that we will build around, what a steal. You guys do starve yourselves of picks by perennially contending. It’s a fact.

Yes, and we have adapted well without top 10 picks. - Tom de Koning will be our full back for the next 12 years!!

 

[PhatBoy]

Look I get what you are saying but I think you do eventually need to bottom out. We got Gibcus last year just from 1 year going from premiers to 12th now back in contention. He will be our best fullback in the next generation that we will build around, what a steal. You guys do starve yourselves of picks by perennially contending. It’s a fact.

And that’s one way to give yourselves a better mathematical chance of picking up a good player like that but a) you didn’t have to do a full rebuild to do it and b) without even falling that far we picked up a player who, if it wasn’t for Scarlett and Enright, would already be considered our best defender in the last 30 years. If he was still at Geelong it’s hard to imagine Tim Kelly not being our best midfielder as well, and he was picked up the same way. If rebuilding guaranteed success then I’d be a bit more open to it but carlton, north, the demons, Brisbane to some extent, the Suns - they are not exceptions anymore they’re more of the rule. Sure with Melbourne there’s been that trophy at the end of it but boy oh boy did they go through some embarrassment to get it. Carlton wasted the careers of potentially great players like Murphy and Gibbs and Kruezer because they would get to a mid table point, something would go wrong and they’d throw it out and start again. I don’t want to see my club doing that.

 

[Phipppppa]

No- if we had have won 2008 and one between 2011 and now. It would’ve been an easy yes.

I doubt we’ll do another round of picking up washed up stars from other teams. We seem to be starting to put more games into young players, that may mean we drop out for a few years. But if it means another 07-11 period. I’ll happily take a few years out of the 8 so we can get a new dynasty team assembled.

 

[BigVic]

They’ve been around from 2004-present

 

[Sttew]

Hawks aren’t anywhere near 20:80

Hawks aren't Team A

 

[TheUnicorn]

Essendon, obviously.

 

[Falcon3518]

Yes, and we have adapted well without top 10 picks. - Tom de Koning will be our full back for the next 12 years!!

The higher the pick the higher % they will be a gun. You may get it right with De Koning but in the long run you will be worse off than getting the higher picks.

 

[Falcon3518]

And that’s one way to give yourselves a better mathematical chance of picking up a good player like that but a) you didn’t have to do a full rebuild to do it and b) without even falling that far we picked up a player who, if it wasn’t for Scarlett and Enright, would already be considered our best defender in the last 30 years. If he was still at Geelong it’s hard to imagine Tim Kelly not being our best midfielder as well, and he was picked up the same way. If rebuilding guaranteed success then I’d be a bit more open to it but carlton, north, the demons, Brisbane to some extent, the Suns - they are not exceptions anymore they’re more of the rule. Sure with Melbourne there’s been that trophy at the end of it but boy oh boy did they go through some embarrassment to get it. Carlton wasted the careers of potentially great players like Murphy and Gibbs and Kruezer because they would get to a mid table point, something would go wrong and they’d throw it out and start again. I don’t want to see my club doing that.

Which ever way you look at it it’s worse off for you. If you guys could make guns out of pick 30s for example imagine what you could do with picks 1-10.

 

[Conan Troutman]

Unless it's of all time then who cares about one small part of a long history.

Well this Geelong team did break the all-time records for most wins from 50 games, 100 games, and 200 games - records which had been held since the 1920's. Also quite a few other all time records, including Largest Grand Final margin, Most All Australians in one year, Best Home & Away Season, etc.

 

[Warhorse]

Geelong I agree has a better chance than Essendon of winning a flag in 2022. 2023 I wouldn’t be as sure, I expect Essendon to be an upgraded version of their 2021 team.

Geelong are likely to hit finals this year with a double chance. So far they have had meritorious wins over Bulldogs, Lions and Port Adelaide, two of these at Geelong. They have had performances against Swans and Collingwood that might be read as the efforts of a normal 6-10th ranked team. And slightly concerning losses to Hawthorn, Fremantle and St Kilda. The Cats I think are likely winners this week, but they will need to do well in the run home to get to 15 or 16 wins and a probable top 4 spot still, despite their next 3 opponents having helpful absences.

But given all that goes well, Geelong will enter the finals with presumably 5 or 6 players 32 years or older. Selwood, Hawkins, Smith, Touhy and Dangerfield. Possibly Higgins. And another likely 5 or 6 players 30 years or older. Stanley, Blicavs, Duncan, Rohan, Menegola and Guthrie. The first 4 of those will be 31yo+.

Now these players haven’t been good enough/fit enough to win flags in recent seasons when they were 1,2,3 and more years younger. How Geelong can possibly think they would be able to do so this year escapes me. But I think most Cats fans know this and like yourself are trying to be realistic. The thing with all this is it does and has cost Geelong the young players that may have taken them to future success. If Clarke happened to play in a Fremantle premiership this season or any time soon, and I were a Geelong supporter, I would not be happy. De Koning is doing well this season but 1-2 shaky performances late season or in an early final and I wouldn’t put it past Scott to have him on the emergency list for knockout games.

Players younger than 23 Geelong have actually played this year:

12 matches. De Koning 21yo
7 matches Holmes 19yo
6 matches Stephens 21yo
5 matches Evans 20yo
2 matches Dempsey 19yo, Knevitt 19yo
1 match Neale 19yo

35 matches experience into 7 players below the age of 23 doesn’t seem many to me, though all are actually 21 or younger. And De Koning’s excellent form aside and notwithstanding some decent enough looking performances from most of those given their ages, none have done anything eyebrow raising(bar De Koning of course.) And bear in mind half of those games have been played by 21yo’s.

Let’s compare it was say Essendon players this year not yet 23yo.

13 games Perkins 20yo
12 games Caldwell 21yo, Martin 21yo
11 games Durham 20yo
9 games Hobbs 18yo
6 games Reid 20yo
5 games Wanganeen 18yo, Cox 20yo
4 games Baldwin 20yo
3 games Jones 21yo, Bryan 20yo
1 game Lord 18yo, D’Ambrosio 19yo

85 matches into 13 players, like Geelong no 22yo’s. The Bombers games however are much more skewed to the younger end of the sample. There are 5 first round picks in that lot and a few other smart looking types too.

But the big reason I like the Bombers medium term outlook is the best of these 13 players and another likely top 5 pick this year will join players currently 28yo or younger in coming years:

28yo Stringer
27yo Hind, Kelly
26yo Merrett, Laverde
25yo Wright, Langford
24yo Parish Snelling, Redman, Guelfi, McGrath
23yo Draper, Ridley

14 prime aged players, 2-3 strong mids, a high calibre mid-forward, a quality key back, quality ruck, some decent running backs and a decnet small forward in there.

Cats best youngsters can look forward to playing with the following 23-28yo’s:

28yo Bews
26yo Kolodjashnij, Atkins
25yo O’Connor,
24yo Parfitt
23yo Z Guthrie, Ratugolea, Henry Stengle Miers

A quality hybrid defender, good small forward some useful backs and a couple of b and c grade mids, and I will leave my thoughts on Miers out of this report.

Obviously Cats will have retirements and be able to bring in more quality prime aged players, but then the cycle carries on, they hit finals playing against teams who have played a lot more games together as a team, OR are younger and in their prime so able to run all over you.

Pretty good post. Main issue is the lack of young star power developing with most of our youngster looking like developing into B-graders at best. Going to need 1-2 drafts in which we nail, a quality free agent or 2 and perhaps a couple of cheap trades to fill gaps. A big ask

 

[Pessimistic]

Is 17 yrs a Mathews criteria too?

Maybe pick the 17 yrs Michael tuck was playing for the hawks? Matthews in there too

 

[Swanks McSwankserton]

I don’t.

I have a fundamental problem with the attitude that you have to do it.

I’ve said many many times on this subject that it’s one of the few areas in which the NRL has the AFL beaten hands down. Yes, the NRL has no draft and less restrictions on player movement but the expectation at the start of every single season with the odd very rare exception, is that all 16 teams are playing for a finals spot, and of those 16, there may be 8-9 who believe they can challenge for the premiership.

I hate that in any given year in the AFL there are at least 4-5 teams who are not even aiming for a finals spot, and another 4-5 teams who would be fairly open in admitting they don’t believe they ‘are in the premiership window.’

Almost as a means of proving a point - that you don’t have to be a slave to cycle and equalisation - I’d like Geelong to come to a loose agreement of never ever making a conscious decision to tear things down and start again.

This does not mean avoiding youth or trying to phase out older players. It does mean trying to pick your best first 17-18 every game, though.

That's interesting, I don't follow NRL but that does sound like a way better sytem.

Question though, one of the things that stands out about the 7-11 Geelong side is a high proportion of players taken in the national draft, do you reckon you would have enjoyed the same success then, and have become the club you are now since, without them? If the draft could be abolished, but it had to start from the late 90s, would you go back and do it?