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

[PJays]

Inability to defend a flag rules the cats out unfortunately. A great side nonetheless.

Are you suggesting that a 2nd or 3rd flag in a row is automatically greater than an isolated flag?

So for example, Brisbane's 2002 flag where they defeated 13-9 Collingwood by 9 points in a very tight GF, was automatically greater than Geelong's 2011 or 2009 flags because Brisbane were defending their flag but Geelong weren't?

 

[captain blood 17]

Let's look at some 'facts' from a pro-Collingwood perspective, instead of conveniently stopping where a 7 game winning streak for Collingwood commences if you were to go any further back...

1. Richmond have won 1 of their most recent 4 matches against Collingwood;
2. Record since 2008 (including 2008 for the benefit of Meteoric Ruse), which is reasonable since it is at around the start of the careers of some of the older players in the respective teams: Collingwood 10, Richmond 7 (one draw);
3. All Time Record: Collingwood 119, Richmond 91 (two draws);

Record comfortably in Collingwood's favour.

How do you like them 'facts'?

i think you’re reaching. So 2018 Richmond win both home and away games. Lose the prelim. 2019, one all. Draw in 2020. So that’s 3 Richmond, 2 Collingwood and a draw. You’re still behind. FACTS.

 

[captain blood 17]

You’re under selling it ...GWS were missing : Ward, Greene, Coniglio & Whitfield ... plus an injured Davis.

And as outlined many times, GWS are terrible at the MCG with a 3-9 record, right? But the Pies were going to beat Richmond 8-9 times out of 20 without DeGoey ... a Richmond team whose record at the G is 43-7 in the last 50 or something ridiculous. No, I doubt it.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

FACTS.

 

[captain blood 17]

Collingwood 2 flags in 60 years. FACTS. But of course they were robbed in 2019. Laughable.

 

[Rich01]

Are you suggesting that a 2nd or 3rd flag in a row is automatically greater than an isolated flag?

So for example, Brisbane's 2002 flag where they defeated 13-9 Collingwood by 9 points in a very tight GF, was automatically greater than Geelong's 2011 or 2009 flags because Brisbane were defending their flag but Geelong weren't?

I’m suggesting defending a flag when you are the hunted vs being the hunters is much more difficult.

Time to take the cats out of this discussion.

 

[Pessimistic]

Or:

Bris 60.7%
Geelong 20.2%
Hawthorn 15.8%
Rich 3.3%

It's all about the aura. Brisbane just had it. In spades.

They dethroned the great Essendon team who'd had the most dominant season in 70 odd years the previous year. In 2003 people were starting to think Brisbane were getting past it before they belted a red hot Collingwood team for their 3rd in a row. Essendon and Collingwood are power clubs who get the media and the vibe going in Melbourne when they're up and about. Both those games are etched into people's memories and contribute massively to the folklore surrounding Brisbane. Along with many strong finals performances.

The thing is, an aura is a feeling. When you analyse it rationally by reviewing all the stats and trying to remember watching Brisbane play rather than the feeling you got about them afterwards, you realize they weren't quite as great as you felt at the time.

And have a wooden spoon tucked Behind those trophies in the cabinet

 

[PJays]

I’m suggesting defending a flag when you are the hunted vs being the hunters is much more difficult

Geelong weren't being "hunted" in 2009 or 2011?

St.Kilda weren't being "hunted" after about round 5 of 2009? Could've fooled me.

Essendon weren't being "hunted" through their 2000 season?

What does "hunted" mean? I just take it to mean, teams are trying to figure out how to beat you and really want to beat you. Teams are thinking ahead in knowledge they may have to go through you if they want to win. You're a benchmark they're trying to emulate or defeat, or both. In all those cases that's true.

Don't professional sports teams desperately want to beat the top side- whether it's the Saints who won 19 in a row and looked unbeatable at times but never won a flag, or a team going for their 2nd or 3rd in a row but struggling through the season at times (Rich 2020, Bris 2003)?

Is it really that much more difficult for you if you're defending your flag? I doubt it.

 

[Noidnadroj]

2015 - 2017 are irrelevant.

If the past 5 are relatively even there's no need to look back that far. Once Collingwood smashed them in a prelim and again early in 2019, games 4 years earlier with totally different line ups mean nothing.

In the eyes of this neutral fan when I'm analysing my tip early in the 2020 season, I'm seeing the H2H history between these teams as fairly even. Nothing that points in either direction.

The comparison was with GWS- what was their record against Richmond on the MCG?

I found some odds which might shed some light on the 2019 season (they can easily be ‘Googled’

1. Pre-season 2019 flag odds:
Richmond: $5
Pies: $7

2. Premierships odds before first final:
Richmond : $3.10
Pies : $5

3. Prelim final odds (slight variation depending on betting agency):
Richmond $1.34. Cats $3.18
Pies $1.32. GWS $3.30

4. Flag odds ‘before’ both prelims were played:
Tigers $2.10
Pies $3.00

I’m only a mug punter so I’ll leave it to others to decipher what that means for likely flag odds of Tigers v Pies.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Rich01]

Geelong weren't being "hunted" in 2009 or 2011 and Richmond weren't being "hunted" in 2019?

St.Kilda weren't being "hunted" after about round 5 of 2009? Could've fooled me.

Essendon weren't being hunted through their 2000 season?

What does "hunted" mean? I just take it to mean, teams are trying to figure out how to beat you, and really want to beat you. In all those cases that's true. Don't professional sports teams desperately want to beat the top side- whether it's the Saints who won 19 in a row, looking unbeatable at times but never won a flag, or a team going for their 3rd in a row?

Is it really that much more difficult for you if you're defending your flag? I doubt it.

Just trying to seperate the four champion teams of the last 20 years. Three have successfully defended their flag. One hasn’t. It’s an easy elimination. For whatever reason, Geelong couldn’t defend their flag. Perhaps the pressure of being the hunted got to them. The others managed to get it done. They are still a fantastic team. Just didn’t achieve what the others did when it was hardest to do.

 

[PJays]

4. Flag odds ‘before’ both prelims were played:
Tigers $2.10
Pies $3.00

I think this suggests if they both had a roughly equivalent prelim finals win and no factors unexpectedly changed (injuries, suspensions, weather that may advantage one team, etc) then the GF odds would be Rich $1.60 or $1.65 and Coll $2.25 or $2.30.

Although I find it surprising Rich was $1.40 in the GF, this suggests odds may have tightened against Richmond after their unconvincing prelim win. Or people figured the MCG was no longer as significant a hurdle for GWS.

In other words, it all depends on prelim form. Like 2014 when Sydney were utterly dominant and Hawthorn scraped through, Sydney started a $1.60 favourite.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Well, the FACTS are we pounded the pies in R19. We were on a 9 game winning streak leading into finals. We won the flag. Collingwood were on a 4 game winning streak (after R19) beating GC at the G, Melbourne at the G, Adelaide at Adelaide and Essendon at the G. All mega soft kills. They beat Geelong by 10 points in the qualifying final and then lose to GWS in a prelim.
We smoked Brisbane in Brisbane in our qualifying final (you know, tiger can't win away from the G etc etc).
There is no form line or anything other than bias and hypothetical rubbish to support your claims. Collingwood lost to GWS at home in wet conditions in the prelim. GWS were missing Greene, Davis was crook on one leg for half a game and Kelly had a bung hammy. And still Collingwood couldn't win. And you're telling us Pies could roll Richmond? Laughable at best.

They were missing Ward, Coniglio, Deledio and Whitfield as well.....Pies lost the genuinely unloseable match.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Noidnadroj]

I think this suggests if they both had a roughly equivalent prelim finals win and no factors unexpectedly changed (injuries, suspensions, weather that may advantage one team, etc) then the GF odds would be Rich $1.60 or $1.65 and Coll $2.25 or $2.30.

Although I find it surprising Rich was $1.40 in the GF, this suggests odds may have tightened against Richmond after their unconvincing prelim win. Or people figured the MCG was no longer as significant a hurdle for GWS.

In other words, it all depends on prelim form. Like 2014 when Sydney were utterly dominant and Hawthorn scraped through, Sydney started a $1.60 favourite.

If anyone can find some Premiership odds after the Tigers prelim let us know.

$2.10 v 3.00 prior to prelims is pretty comprehensive when Tigers were slightly less favoured than Pies in prelims.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Noidnadroj]

If anyone can find some Premiership odds after the Tigers prelim let us know.

$2.10 v 3.00 prior to prelims is pretty comprehensive when Tigers were slightly less favoured than Pies in prelims.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I found it:

Tigers were $1.55 immediately after beating Geelong, then TAB got some big bets which wound them into $1.50.

Tigers : $1.50
Pies: $3
GWS: $13

Still think a big Pies win (which everyone was expecting) would have seen them close to equal billing Fadge?

Can’t get ‘em all right I guess Fadge.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[PJays]

Still think a big Pies win (which everyone was expecting) would have seen them close to equal billing Fadge?

Dunno about Fadge, but I do...Collingwood win that prelim by 10 goals, the GF is close to equal, probably Rich $1.80 to Coll $2.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Dunno about Fadge, but I do...Collingwood win that prelim by 10 goals, the GF is close to equal, probably Rich $1.80 to Coll $2.

You are stretching it, but regardless, there is one main issue.

The Pies were about 11 goals short of winning by 10 goals…against GWS reserves. In modern parlance, Richmond would have given exactly zero f*cks about playing either of them. Sadly for the competition, after Richmond made a mess of the Cats in the second half of the Prelim, there was no team left who could go with the Tigers. Certainly not a Collingwood team that was beaten by a bashed up GWS team on the MCG in their Prelim.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Dunno about Fadge, but I do...Collingwood win that prelim by 10 goals, the GF is close to equal, probably Rich $1.80 to Coll $2.

So help me understand this ....you are saying punters see $1.55 with the expectation Tigers will almost certainly be playing Collingwood (not a single person tipped GWS), and they hammer that quote and it shortens to $1.50.

Then when the Pies win well, which everyone expected, the Tigers drift to $1.80....

wouldn’t those same punters who jumped all over the $1.55 thinking Richmond were going to be playing Collingwood, sell their own children to snap up the $1.80 when low and behold, Richmond were playing Collingwood..?!??

Maybe I just don’t know enough about odds.... doesn’t seem right to me.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Fadge]

Still think a big Pies win (which everyone was expecting) would have seen them close to equal billing Fadge?

Can’t get ‘em all right I guess Fadge.

Um, this is a debate you're having with PJays, not me.....

In my one comment on the topic, I suggested Richmond would have started $1.65 or $1.7, but in all honestly I couldn't give a rat's clacker...

 

[captain blood 17]

They were missing Ward, Coniglio, Deledio and Whitfield as well.....Pies lost the genuinely unloseable match.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Yep, they went the full Bill Shorten or John Hewson. Lost the unloseable.

 

[HTT]

Dunno about Fadge, but I do...Collingwood win that prelim by 10 goals, the GF is close to equal, probably Rich $1.80 to Coll $2.

So if Collingwood were a far better team than they actually were, it would’ve been lucky we avoided them. Thanks for clearing that one up.

 

[captain blood 17]

So anyway, enough about Collingwood who have one 2 flags in 60 years and aren't even in the topic of discussion (which they actually aren't unless we are going back to the 1920's and a 6 team comp or whatever it was). Let's focus on the big 4. Brisbane, Cats, Hawks and Tigers. They are the discussion.

 

[PJays]

You are stretching it, but regardless, there is one main issue.

The Pies were about 11 goals short of winning by 10 goals…against GWS reserves. In modern parlance, Richmond would have given exactly zero f*cks about playing either of them. Sadly for the competition, after Richmond made a mess of the Cats in the second half of the Prelim, there was no team left who could go with the Tigers. Certainly not a Collingwood team that was beaten by a bashed up GWS team on the MCG in their Prelim.

This is like arguing there's no chance Richmond could've gone with West Coast in 2018 cos Richmond were 7 goals short of beating the Grand Final loser, who West Coast defeated.

Anyway, enough of this tangent. Richmond fans, keep convincing yourself you're in this discussion, but I think a 71-23-1 record and continually scraping into the top 4 in an era without a top shelf challenger is reason why only 9 neutral voters saw fit to crown Richmond greatest dynasty. They're a great side, incredibly well drilled and proven consistent winners in finals. I'm taking nothing away from them.

 

[PJays]

wouldn’t those same punters who jumped all over the $1.55 thinking Richmond were going to be playing Collingwood, sell their own children to snap up the $1.80 when low and behold, Richmond were playing Collingwood..?!??

All depends on Collingwood's form in the prelim. People are fickle.

Collingwood was expected to win the prelim but a 10 goal thrashing would've seen people having second thoughts about how far ahead of them Richmond were travelling. Especially after Richmond’s first half prelim scare.

Maybe $1.70 rather than $1.80 for Richmond if Collingwood had been particularly dominant instead of having an off night. But no way Richmond would've stayed at $1.50 or even $1.55. There would have to be some drift.

I would've rated Collingwood a 4 out of 10 chance even if they scraped through the prelim. But I'm not as impacted by short term form fluctuation as the markets.

 

[HTT]

This is like arguing there's no chance Richmond could've gone with West Coast in 2018 cos Richmond were 7 goals short of beating the Grand Final loser, who West Coast defeated.

Anyway, enough of this tangent. Richmond fans, keep convincing yourself you're in this discussion, but I think a 71-23-1 record and continually scraping into the top 4 in an era without a top shelf challenger is reason why only 9 neutral voters saw fit to crown Richmond greatest dynasty. They're a great side, incredibly well drilled and proven consistent winners in finals. I'm taking nothing away from them.

It’s about how much of history we’re allowed to change. If we were playing well enough to beat Collingwood the way they turned up that night I’d have given us a decent shot at beating West Coast the next week. But the fact is we weren’t playing that well.
If Collingwood were a better team in 2019 they would’ve been more difficult to overcome, that much is true. But that’s an imaginary team. Collingwood in 2019 wasn’t that good.

 

[Noidnadroj]

All depends on Collingwood's form in the prelim. People are fickle.

Collingwood was expected to win the prelim but a 10 goal thrashing would've seen people having second thoughts about how far ahead of them Richmond were travelling. Especially after Richmond’s first half prelim scare.

Maybe $1.70 rather than $1.80 for Richmond if Collingwood had been particularly dominant instead of having an off night. But no way Richmond would've stayed at $1.50 or even $1.55. There would have to be some drift.

I would've rated Collingwood a 4 out of 10 chance even if they scraped through the prelim. But I'm not as impacted by short term form fluctuation as the markets.

Yep, time to move on from the odds.... The 2018 prelim has proven to be an outlier for both teams during our dynasty. And whether you’d have won 4 of 10, 1 of 10 or all 10.... we will never know as you couldn’t beat an injury ravaged GWS on the MCG. A team we kept to their lowest score in their history the following week (they had Greene and Whitfield back as well).


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Final Siren]

Or:

Bris 60.7%
Geelong 20.2%
Hawthorn 15.8%
Rich 3.3%

It's all about the aura. Brisbane just had it. In spades.

They dethroned the great Essendon team who'd had the most dominant season in 70 odd years the previous year. In 2003 people were starting to think Brisbane were getting past it before they belted a red hot Collingwood team for their 3rd in a row. Essendon and Collingwood are power clubs who get the media and the vibe going in Melbourne when they're up and about. Both those games are etched into people's memories and contribute massively to the folklore surrounding Brisbane. Along with many strong finals performances.

The thing is, an aura is a feeling. When you analyse it rationally by reviewing all the stats and trying to remember watching Brisbane play rather than the feeling you got about them afterwards, you realize they weren't quite as great as you felt at the time.

imo a factor was Brisbane executing the first threepeat since the 1950s. Many footy watchers had never seen one, or even thought one was possible in modern football. It was genuinely shocking.