Geelong's performance in the 21st century

[rapidfire7]

As you may have already seen, this graphic has been doing the rounds on social media in the past week or so.

Whilst it is mighty impressive just how far we are ahead of the others (in terms of overall wins), do you think we underachieved in terms of Premierships in the same period'?' Even just a little?

Everyone knows how many preliminary finals we have lost since 2011, but the 2 that by far hurt the most were 2019 and 2024. In both instances we were seemingly in control of the game at half time, only to be run over run in the second half, at least partly due to some rather questionable coaching tactics/poor match up decisions IMO.

If we had gotten through even one of those matches, we would have been all but assured another flag against a wornout Giants or hapless Swans side the following week. That's why these losses hurt so much. 2 flags were right there for the taking, but painstakingly, we were unable to seize the moment on both occasions.

Whilst 4 Premierships is a wonderful effort (and I am in no way criticising the club), I just hope we can win another Premiership this year or next to make our total since 2000 a little more reflective of our overall incredible amount of wins/level of dominance this century. Whilst there's no fairness in football, we certainly deserve to get their before the Hawks, Lions or some other team do.

Thoughts?

 

[Baudolino]

If the Bulldogs go on a run and manage to win a flag this year, Luke Beveridge will have the same number of premierships as Chris Scott

Chris Scott

Age

49

Ht

182cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.6

4star

K

11.2

4star

HB

5.4

4star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.4

3star

No current season stats available

D

13.2

4star

K

10.2

4star

HB

3.0

3star

M

2.2

3star

T

2.8

5star

G

0.4

3star

. The fact that that's even possible iss absurd really given how dominant we've been and how many games we've won in the Scott era.

Yes we have underperformed.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

Geelong have had an outstanding run for 20 years

Many many years ago , when Carlton had a tremendous run , i thought at the time , that any player that just pulled on a Carlton jumper then they would simply be a good player , and there would be a hell of alot of people thinking exactly the same thing about Geelong presently

And that is a great compliment , and that is what continuing , or continual outstanding success does to peoples mindsets

 

[rapidfire7]

If the Bulldogs go on a run and manage to win a flag this year, Luke Beveridge will have the same number of premierships as Chris Scott. The fact that that's even possible iss absurd really given how dominant we've been and how many games we've won in the Scott era.

Yes we have underperformed.

Just imagine if we had lost the QF in 2022 and bombed out in the prelim as per usual. 2016-2022 would have been another completely failed era like 1989-1997... A ridiculous number of wins for no reward when it really matters.
No other club has to work harder for their Premiershops than Geelong (at least not in my time).

 

[Kobe Gryant]

Yes and no.

The 2007–2011 side probably should’ve won one more premiership IMO.

Five in a row would’ve been excessive and, honestly, a bit disrespectful to the quality of the opposition during that era.

Something like back-to-back flags, missing 2009 (or not making the Grand Final at all), followed by another back-to-back, would’ve been a fairer reflection of how good that team was though for mine.

The Scott era is a bit harder to assess though.

Despite consistently strong ladder positions suggesting dominance, it hasn’t always felt dominant. We’ve definitely missed a few chances to "pinch" a flag, but outside of 2022, I’ve rarely felt like we were truly the team to beat.

If there are missed opportunities, I’d point to 2013, 2016, and 2024.

In 2013, the qualifying final choke at home cost us what felt like a destined Geelong vs Hawthorn Grand Final. That year had a sense of inevitability to it, and we screwed it up ourselves.

2016 and 2024 were different — both years lacked a truly dominant side. 2024 gets a bit of a pass due to the Holmes injury, which clearly shaped the outcome, but 2016 stings more. We simply didn’t show up from a good position, and those are the ones that hurt.

As for the Richmond years, I don’t personally see those as failures.

They were just better than us, plain and simple. The same way we kept beating teams like the Pies, Dogs, Saints, and up until last year, the Lions, when it counted.

There’s no shame in that. We just lost to a better side, just like they did to us.

If we could win it this year as an underdog, that would go a long way to polishing history up though. Hopefully we can.

 

[MisterMarcus]

Looking back, some of those years between 2011 and 2022, we weren't really THAT good of a side. Arguably we over-achieved during a few of those seasons given what we had.

• Never found a permanent KPF to help out Hawkins until we got Cameron.
• Often had a bit of an unbalanced list with a bunch of 2000s-era guys getting to the end, some unproven youth, and a big gap in the mid-20s age bracket.
• Some Constable-style draft flops, and more than our fair share of bad-luck stories and injuries, that robbed us of good youth coming through.
• For all the focus on our "stealing other players", we blew a fair few draft picks on recycled players who were handy at best and a mistake at worst.
• Shizen happens sometimes - we copped a bit of good old-fashioned bad luck in individual games that cost us big time.

I look at our list now, and it seems far better balanced age-wise and 'spread the load'-wise than for quite a lot of the time in the 2010s.

 

[allrighty]

Add to all of this the fact we have not had a top ruckman since Ottens is quite amazing. That is not to denigrate Stanley, who I actually love as a player and a bloke, and has been such a great leader in the Club.

 

[Jimmy Yamazaki]

Would've been nice to pinch a couple more flags in that time. The fact that we've had all this time up and had the same amount of flags as Dawks is annoying.

 

[rapidfire7]

Looking back, some of those years between 2011 and 2022, we weren't really THAT good of a side. Arguably we over-achieved during a few of those seasons given what we had.

• Never found a permanent KPF to help out Hawkins until we got Cameron.
• Often had a bit of an unbalanced list with a bunch of 2000s-era guys getting to the end, some unproven youth, and a big gap in the mid-20s age bracket.
• Some Constable-style draft flops, and more than our fair share of bad-luck stories and injuries, that robbed us of good youth coming through.
• For all the focus on our "stealing other players", we blew a fair few draft picks on recycled players who were handy at best and a mistake at worst.
• Shizen happens sometimes - we copped a bit of good old-fashioned bad luck in individual games that cost us big time.

I look at our list now, and it seems far better balanced age-wise and 'spread the load'-wise than for quite a lot of the time in the 2010s.

Yes, the amount of 1st round picks which didn't turn out is staggering (too many to even begin naming).
Some because of injury, yes, but most just didn't live up to expectations at all. It's interesting how Wells is almost universally praised for every mid-late pick and rookie pick who turns into half a decent player, but never cops a hint of criticism for the enormous amount of blundered/underwhelming early draft picks over the past 15 years or so. This is in no way a criticism of him as he undoubtedly Geelong legend, but I do find it interesting, especially when some other recruiters cop it very hard in the footy world for their f ups. A big part of it is that he obviously has a lot of runs on the board over a long period prior to all this (in particular).

 

[rapidfire7]

Would've been nice to pinch a couple more flags in that time. The fact that we've had all this time up and had the same amount of flags as Dawks is annoying.

And only one more than Richmond despite their absolute ineptness as a footy club for all but a brief period.

 

[allrighty]

And only one more than Richmond despite their absolute ineptness as a footy club for all but a brief period.

... and then there is Carlton

 

[jim boy]

The 2007–2011 side probably should’ve won one more premiership IMO

yea maybe, I would have preferred to have won in 2008 - even if that means giving up 2011

 

[bulletproof]

Just imagine if we had lost the QF in 2022 and bombed out in the prelim as per usual. 2016-2022 would have been another completely failed era like 1989-1997... A ridiculous number of wins for no reward when it really matters.
No other club has to work harder for their Premiershops than Geelong (at least not in my time).

I think a Collingwood fan would take issue with that final statement.

 

[dudusmaximus]

I don't know why (Number of Premierships / Number of Games won) is even pertinent. It is only the "Number of Premierships" that matters and we are equal first.

"Number of Games won" only counts because it is a winning habit. Rain or shine, injury-ridden or not, young or old, home or away and suspended or not, we win consistently. I'm sure if CS wanted to improve "Number of Games won", we could have easily won more (e.g. not resting crucial players).

Losses sting for us supporters because they are rare. We've lost the habit of rationalising away a loss (e.g x had a wonderful debut, y scored 3 goals in a quarter etc.).

By reaching the prelims we are increasing the odds of a premiership to 1 in 4. It is as cold/calculating as that.

 

[PzBlinky]

yea maybe, I would have preferred to have won in 2008 - even if that means giving up 2011

I'd swap 2009 for 2008, even though I loved the fact we bounced back so strongly (and winning the GF was even sweeter after the ultimate H&A game earlier in the season).

But I personally wouldn't have minded giving the Saints their second flag if we could have knocked off the Hawks the year before. 2011...want to keep that one. Beating the Hawks, Eagles, and Pies presented as the perfect catalog of finals foes past and present.

 

[winty]

I don't know why (Number of Premierships / Number of Games won) is even pertinent. It is only the "Number of Premierships" that matters and we are equal first.

"Number of Games won" only counts because it is a winning habit. Rain or shine, injury-ridden or not, young or old, home or away and suspended or not, we win consistently. I'm sure if CS wanted to improve "Number of Games won", we could have easily won more (e.g. not resting crucial players).

Losses sting for us supporters because they are rare. We've lost the habit of rationalising away a loss (e.g x had a wonderful debut, y scored 3 goals in a quarter etc.).

By reaching the prelims we are increasing the odds of a premiership to 1 in 4. It is as cold/calculating as that.

Unlike every other club in the league, we haven't bottomed out or had an academy to fall back on to build up our list either. We're the only team in the league never to have finished lower than 12th, and haven't finished bottom 4 for nearly 40 years (last bottom 4 finish was back in 1986).

In a time where the AFL is supposedly all about equalization, we've done insanely well to buck that trend.