Greatest Dynasty of the 21st century - Lions vs Cats vs Hawks vs Tigers

[Blackas87]

But Adelaide had the power stance they must have been mighty powerful! Not our fault they shat the bed on the big day

Adelaide were fake powerful

 

[bzparkes]

Lions, simply due to the fact that they were forced to play home finals away from home whilst 2 of the remaining 3 played the majority/all of their gfs at their home ground against interstate sides.

So Brisbane>Geelong>Hawks>Richmond

Richmond win another and they jump to second. You'd think 4 flags would put them/Hawks first but Brisbane had to do it in a much harder fashion, as well as their first flag being against a supposedly unstoppable Essendon.

 

[Linda Lovelace]

‘yet no mention of the 08 premiers?

It's a fair thing to raise, but I disagree with the premise that 2008-2015 represents a continuous dynasty, so that's why I've excluded it.

In football historical terms Hawthorn 2008 is like the Baby Bombers. A group of quality young players that would combine with some players from a previous generation to pinch a flag before declining and then rising back up to eventually form the core of a dominant side. Only 7 Hawks played in the 2008 and 2015 Grand finals, the same number of Essendon players who played in 1993 and 2000.

 

[dean33]

Oh well if we only beat Collingwood by 5 in one final on their home ground I guess the 225 points worth of wins either side of that in our other two finals don’t count.
Overall it’s debatable if we even deserved the premiership that year after staggering across the line all through the finals.

At the end of the day winning a flag in an 18 team comp is much more difficult than a 16 team comp, just looking at those win numbers in that Cats era says to me there were 3-4 good teams and lots or very poor average teams. That doesn’t mean the top side in those years was better than today, it means they had so few contenders back then. As opposed to today with the competition very tough, hell ever the wooden spooners were a tough team to beat by seasons end.

 

[dean33]

Lions, simply due to the fact that they were forced to play home finals away from home whilst 2 of the remaining 3 played the majority/all of their gfs at their home ground against interstate sides.

So Brisbane>Geelong>Hawks>Richmond

Richmond win another and they jump to second. You'd think 4 flags would put them/Hawks first but Brisbane had to do it in a much harder fashion, as well as their first flag being against a supposedly unstoppable Essendon.

I think if the Tigers win it next year we’d jump to first sitting alone. 4 flags over a 5 year period including a 3peat is something the cats, lions and hawks never achieved.
For now however we enjoy our latest flag and be content to be in the conversation.

 

[PhatBoy]

At the end of the day winning a flag in an 18 team comp is much more difficult than a 16 team comp, just looking at those win numbers in that Cats era says to me there were 3-4 good teams and lots or very poor average teams. That doesn’t mean the top side in those years was better than today, it means they had so few contenders back then. As opposed to today with the competition very tough, hell ever the wooden spooners were a tough team to beat by seasons end.

So a few posts ago all that mattered was whether you beat interstate finalists.

Then the margins of victory in one select final was the important factor.

Now it matters how strong the team in 11th is in any given season.

Make up your mind.

 

[HairyO]

Brisbane. I don't think I've watched a team other than Hawthorn as much as I watched Brisbane between 1999-2004. They played a tough and high scoring brand of football and it felt like every second Sunday you'd tune in to see them absolutely flog someone at the Gabba. Michael, Leppitch, Black, Brown and Lynch is also the best spine I've seen.

Langford
Mew
Platten
Brereton
Dunstall

 

[richcogs]

Lions, simply due to the fact that they were forced to play home finals away from home whilst 2 of the remaining 3 played the majority/all of their gfs at their home ground against interstate sides.

So Brisbane>Geelong>Hawks>Richmond

Richmond win another and they jump to second. You'd think 4 flags would put them/Hawks first but Brisbane had to do it in a much harder fashion, as well as their first flag being against a supposedly unstoppable Essendon.

What if some how Richmond managed to win another 2 flags? Our team has a heap of good young players coming through and the only replacements I see occurring in the next couple years are:

Riewoldt (2021 last year of contract) - We will need to trade in a player for Riewoldt
Cotchin (2022 last year of contract)
Houli (2021 <> 2023 as has indicated he has some time left, no one prepares better)
Astbury (2022 <> 2023)
Edwards (2022 <> 2023)

I think as long as we have Dimma and Dusty together we will be there, thereabouts with a shot at it. He's signed until the end of 2024.

If we get 5 premierships though I think we should be rated ahead of Brisbane 01-03

 

[Fadge]

Which is shocking why? As good as they were (and they were), their run at the top was 4 years for 3 flags. After the last grand final they fell hard and fasat, finishing 11th.

The Lions "Dynasty" runs as this

Merged with Fitzroy & operated with additional list, draft and salary cap concessions compared to every other opponent

Lions
1997 - finished 8th, Lost Elimination final to St Kilda by 46 points
1998 - 16th, Wooden Spponers.
1999 - 3rd, Lost Prelim to Kangaroo's by 48 points
2000- 6th, lost Semi Final to Carlton by 82 points
2001 - Finished 2nd, won Flag by 26 points
2002 - Finished 2nd, won Flag by 9 points
2003 - Finsihed 3rd, won flag by 50 points
2004 - Finished 2nd, Lost GF by 40points
2005 - Finished 11th
2006 - Finished 13th
2007 - Finished 10th

Geelong
2006 - Finished 10th
2007 - Finished 1st, won flag by 119 points
2008 - Finished 1st, Lost GF by 26 points
2009 - Finished 2nd, won GF by12 points
2010 - Finished 2nd, Lost Prelim by 8 points
2011 - Finished 2nd, won GF by 38 points
2012 - Finished 6th, lost EF by 16 points
2013 - Finished 2nd, Lost PF by 5 points
2014 - Finished 3rd, Lost Semi by 6 points
2015 - Finished 10th

Hawthorn
2006 Finished 11th
2007 - Finished 5th, Lost SF by 33
2008 - Finished 2nd, Won GF by 26
2009 - Finished 9th
2010 - Finished 7th, Lost EF by 33
2011 - Finished 3rd, Lost PF by 3
2012 - Finished 1st, Lost GF by 10
2013 - Finished 1st, Won GF by 15
2014 - Finished 2nd, won GF by 63
2015 - Finished 3rd, won GF by 46
2016 - Finished 3rd, Lost SF by 23
2017 Finished 12th

Richmond
2012 - Finished 12th
2013 - Finished 5th, Lost EF by 20 points
2014 - Finished 8th Lost EF by 57 points
2015 - Finished 5th Lost EF by 17 points
2016 - Finished 13th
2017 - Finished 3rd, Won GF by 48 Points
2018 - Finished 1st, Lost PF by 39 points
2019 - Finished 3rd, Won GF by 89 points
2020 - Finished 3rd, Won GF by 31 points


Looking at these broken down like, Hawthorn holds the cake for longevity, while Richmond are the most clinical.

Hawks - 4 flags over 8 years including a 3peat + 2 minor premierships. Their 3peat follows 2 years where they lost a Prelim by a few points and a Minor Premiership + narrow GF loss by 10 points.

The Lions however had the 3peat but never won a Minor premiership and had the shortest run of anyone at the top. They also got heavily beaten in all the finals they lost & their finals run was crazily broken up with a wooden spoon. This suggest that as good as they were, they didn;t deal with failure well.
Plus, like it or not, they had several list & cap advantages their opponents did not. That has to count for something.


Cats had 3 but could never win a back to back which is vital when judging a dynasty. Their 3 are only divided by a minor premiership + shock GF loss and a narrow bitting prelim loss. Had the potential to possibly win 5, ultimately didn't.

Richmond are right on the Hawks neck though. 3 flags, including a back to back, with the 1st flag only separated by a convincing minor premiership & a shock Prelim loss. Also have the highest avg GF winning margin & only team to not lose a GF.

Great post, but you might just want to check the margin in Geelong's 2010 Preliminary Final. They were 10 goals behind at half time...

 

[dean33]

So a few posts ago all that mattered was whether you beat interstate finalists.

Then the margins of victory in one select final was the important factor.

Now it matters how strong the team in 11th is in any given season.

Make up your mind.

All of the above.

 

[PhatBoy]

All of the above.

It’s good to know that the quality of the teams down the bottom end, who any premiership side should beat 9 times out of 10 anyway, whether they are 1-21 or 6-16, is so critical to this debate.

Boy we really were a bad side weren’t we.

We should have been beating those low teams by 200 and airlifting Subiaco into Melbourne just to make it fair for everyone.

 

[dean33]

It’s good to know that the quality of the teams down the bottom end, who any premiership side should beat 9 times out of 10 anyway, whether they are 1-21 or 6-16, is so critical to this debate.

Boy we really were a bad side weren’t we.

We should have been beating those low teams by 200 and airlifting Subiaco into Melbourne just to make it fair for everyone.

Never said the cats were a bad side? They were a great side, as were the lions and hawks and now the tigers.

 

[Papa G]

Brisbane and Geelong were the better teams.

Hawthorn probably next.
Then Dusty.
Then Richmond.

 

[dean33]

Brisbane and Geelong were the better teams.

Hawthorn probably next.
Then Dusty.
Then Richmond.

That prelim still hurts doesn’t it?

 

[Rasha]

That prelim still hurts doesn’t it?

Which one?
Port were a finals speed bump for all of the Lions, Cats, Hawks and Tigers during their dynasties.

 

[Papa G]

Which one?
Port were a finals speed bump for all of the Lions, Cats, Hawks and Tigers during their dynasties.

Therefore we are the ones in the best position to judge.

 

[Rasha]

Therefore we are the ones in the best position to judge.

What makes you rate us behind Hawthorn for starters?

 

[Papa G]

What makes you rate us behind Hawthorn for starters?

It's actually pretty close to be honest. Stevic was a star for both of you.

 

[Rasha]

It's actually pretty close to be honest. Stevic was a star for both of you.

15.7.97 v 13.16.94
Bad kicking = bad football.
Not Stevic's fault.

6.10.46 v 6.4.40
Hardwick outcoached Hinkley.
Not Stevic's fault.

 

[SSrixon]

Langford
Mew
Platten
Brereton
Dunstall

Too young to have seen this spine unfortunately .

 

[Boston tiger]

Lions, simply due to the fact that they were forced to play home finals away from home whilst 2 of the remaining 3 played the majority/all of their gfs at their home ground against interstate sides.

So Brisbane>Geelong>Hawks>Richmond

Richmond win another and they jump to second. You'd think 4 flags would put them/Hawks first but Brisbane had to do it in a much harder fashion, as well as their first flag being against a supposedly unstoppable Essendon.

The irony for you must be that in all that Brisbane won their premierships against Victorian teams and then lost the fourth to an interstate team. Proves the theory that it’s better to be away from Melbourne during grand final week hype and just come in and get the job done.

 

[Fadge]

All second rate teams in comparison with 'The Machine' of 1927 to 1930.

 

[Chinacats]

You know what’s funny? Geelong are statistically the worst out of the 4 dynasties in the AFL era when it comes to Premierships (Geelong won 3 in 5). Having said that, I actually think that they were the strongest out of the dynasties. They were downright scary to face and were really dominant unlike the other three dynasties who’d have competition. They kicked above 200 twice (233 against Melbourne in 2011 and 222 against Richmond in 2007). They are the only team to have done that in the shortened quarters and they cleared the 200-point line comfortably. Also, their opponents were the likes of St Kilda, Western Bulldogs and Collingwood of 2008-2011, and they were also quite strong.

For that reason, I’d have them first. The rest are as follows:

1. Geelong
2. Hawthorn
3. Brisbane
4. Richmond

Having said that, if Richmond wins again next year then Richmond go straight to the top of this list because 4 in 5 years (including a three-peat) beats any of the other teams’ achievements. This Richmond side is honestly the fittest side that I have ever seen. It sometimes feels like they can go all day and still perform like they are just getting started.

If we’re talking about success through Premierships though then it’s obviously:

1. Hawthorn
2. Brisbane
3. Richmond
4. Geelong

This is simply because Geelong took the longest time to get to 3 Premierships and Hawthorn also had 4 Grand Finals in a row, but they had a couple of minor Premierships and won the 2008 Premiership with the same-ish core squad as the three-peat. Brisbane didn’t do that.

Being ranked in the top 4 for success throughout the entire AFL era is a really good achievement, so all 4 teams did well to have an era like this. It’s not insulting to rank 4th at all, because at least they all had a dynasty in the AFL era.

Cats won 3 flags over 5 years. Lions and hawks won 3 in 3. Some could argue cats dynasty stretched out longer.. I think 2008 still haunts cats. Missed back to back whereas the others achieved that.
Brisbane and the travel factor needs to be factored in.
Traveling every 2nd week to win 3 gives them the edge.

 

[STFU Donnie]

Lions > Hawks > Tigers > Cats.

In terms of grading dynasties, threepeats trump back to backs, and I'm previously on record nominating Brisbane as the best. But if Richmond threepeat next year, making it 4 in 5, then they'll jump to the top.

 

[branedotorg]

Lions > hawks > cats > tigers

But any team in this discussion deserves respect