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

[HTT]

This includes 3 in 4s.

The whole point about 3 in 5 is the length of time the group of players had to remain- or return- to a level of greatness required to win a flag.

Look for

WWLLW
WLWLW
WLLWW

And compare to 3 peats.

You can include 4 in 5 too if you want, but key point is longevity of winning in years 1 and 5.

3 or more flags in 5 years, bookended by flags

Essendon 1946, 1948, 1950
Melbourne 1955, 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960 (you can make two separate 4-in-5s out of this)
Carlton 1968, 1970, 1972
Geelong 2007, 2009, 2011

Additional runs showing more longevity
Richmond 1967, 1969, 1973, 1974 (4 in 8)
Hawthorn 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991 (5 in 9)

 

[Big Ben]

Hawks.

Four flags in eight years with the same coach and core playing group.

We were a NTTAWWTtenth off a four peat (2012) and a NTTAWWTtenth of five consecutive grand final appearances (2011).

 

[McCrann]

That's pretty disingenuous. Tigers 2020 didn't play one game all year with home ground advantage, spent ~105 days or so in a hub, endured constant media criticism, ridiculous match day reports which drove up the media hysteria, and a scandal or two, yet still won the flag. When every coach says it's going to be one of the best and hardest flags ever to win, I don't see how you can knock it down a peg.

By your logic, I could easily say that the Hawks won flags in eras of compromised drafts, and so their 3 flags is more like 1.5... see how stupid that sounds?

My take is that including Hawthorn 2008, it's clearly Hawks > Lions > Tigers > Cats. 3 A 3-peat beats 3 in 4 which beats 3 in 5.

Lastly the Tigers dynasty is not over. If we win in '22 then that'd be 4 in 6 which makes the conversation interesting.

interestingly, Hawthorn was the last team to win 4 Premierships in 6 Years - right at the start of the National Competition. 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991 (4 Premierships in 6 Years - hasn't been done since). The competition went truly national in 1987 so only 1 of these Flags was in a non-national competition. Formally renamed to the AFL in 1990 of course.

 

[Connoisseur]

I think there are two separate - albeit not unrelated - points of discussion here.

Firstly, to what extent did the compromised drafts influence what happened on the field in 2013-15?

I’ve posted previously in this thread - as has Pjays - on how it takes most draftees a while to find their feet at the top level. There’s the occasional player like Judd, Selwood and Oliver who come into the system and make an immediate impact, but they’re few and far between.

Most players - even high draft picks - take maybe two seasons to establish themselves, and 4-5 seasons until they’re having a major impact on games. A footballers’ peak years are generally between, roughly speaking, 23 and 28, although increasingly players are performing at a high level into their 30s.

With this context in mind, I think the compromised drafts of 2010-12 had a bigger impact on the comp in 2016-19, when those elite players who the non- expansion clubs missed out on started hitting their prime years. Maybe 2015-19, given most of the players Gold Coast drafted in 2010 turned 23 in 2015.

Of course, I’m sure there was some on-field impact in 2013-14. Jeremy Cameron, for instance, would have been a handy addition to any side from the get go. But my point is that he and his contemporaries were playing better football at 25 than at 20.

This isn’t intended to diminish the merits of the recent Richmond dynasty, either. If anything, Richmond would have been even better without the compromised drafts, given the early picks they missed out on in 2010 and 2011. But I think it’s also fair to assume that some other teams would have benefitted from having a couple of extra high draft picks coming into their prime years.

Secondly, if we are to assume the compromised drafts had a major impact in 2013-15 - which I am personally sceptical about - to what extent did Hawthorn benefit?

Let’s go back to 2010, at the dawn of the compromised draft era. If there is/was a causal link between those drafts and teams staying at the top for longer, than why didn’t this happen for all of the six teams who finished above Hawthorn that year?

I’m being a bit disingenuous, of course - Geelong, St Kilda and the Bulldogs all had pretty old lists by 2010, so were due a dip at some point (not that the Cats experienced much of one). Sydney and Freo had similar list profiles to Hawthorn at that time, and duly got better in the following years.

Then there’s Collingwood. And if there was ever a team that should have cashed in on the compromised drafts, it was them. They won the flag in 2010 with a young side and looked set to dominate the comp for years.

That they didn’t appears due to a few factors, which I’m sure a Pies fan can explain better than me. But from afar, it looked to be a combination of: the coaching succession plan happening at a bad time for a list that was in its prime; the usual challenges of staying on top, including keeping players motivated; and improvement from teams below them. The three sides they lost to in finals in Buckley’s first two seasons - 2012-13 - were Hawthorn, Sydney and Port, who all improved a lot during that period. Especially Port.

But anyway, Collingwood’s gradual decline from 2011-14 is, to me, a pretty good counterpoint to the argument that the compromised drafts helped teams stay at the top - at least at that early stage.

As for Hawthorn, there’s no doubt they weren’t disadvantaged by the compromised drafts as much as some teams, as they had some high-end talent in their prime and weren’t needing to do a rebuild. But they still had deficiencies, and their progress from scraping into the 8 in 2010 to premiers in 2013 was due partly to natural improvement from players already on the list, but more importantly, trading for players to fill specific needs.

The net result was Hawthorn got a lot better during the compromised draft era, rather than it being a case of them standing still while everyone tried to catch up. And I’m sure they were, at that time, an attractive option to players because they were contenders - or more accurately in 2010, had clear potential to get back into contention. But they were far from the only club in that category.

This post is way too long already, so it’s time I shut the hell up. And it’s all a matter of opinion, isn’t it? Clearly a number of BigFooty posters think the compromised drafts helped Hawthorn’s threepeat era, and good luck to them. For me, though, it’s an argument that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Whilst is true that average (middle of the road, solid to fringe players) players can take anywhere from 3 to 5 years to reach their best form, Top 10 (or even Top 20) talent can usually make a significant impact to a team's success almost immediately, especially in contender teams, even if they're still developing and not playing at their full potential. And this is exactly what was denied to up and coming contenders for many years that coincided with the Hawthorn flags between 2013 and 2015 as all the best young talent in the land went to just 2 teams in a 4 year period.

Not to mention the fact that high draft picks could have been used by up and coming young contenders to entice other older proven quality talent (around the 22 and 28 age range) from other clubs to improve their list to make an immediate impact in that time frame.

Whereas Hawthorn had the innate advantage of luring talent based on their potential to win flags backed by their recent success. To Hawthorn's credit though they were astute in poaching quality talent without having to pay too much for them in trades with other clubs; highway robbery in some cases (see how Hawthorn got Gunston).

Of course what happened at Collingwood is evidence that success wasn't guaranteed for proven contenders from 2011 onwards, but they were (okay, it was mostly McGuire's pigheaded fault with his creepy infatuation with Buckley) obviously responsible for their own demise with a self inflicted implosion caused by being determined to gift a Premiership team to a favourite son in Buckely.

 

[Connoisseur]

Relatively young? There’s any number of posts from hawks fans fearing Hodges best was behind him in 2011-12 due to injury. 2015. Was the oldest premiership team up till then (also the hottest day for the grand final)

Hodge has always played up his injuries by walking around in his tippy toes after collisions with other players, he looked like a ballerina every time he did that.

The average age of the team is not that important, it's the average age of your best 8 to 12 players (your core elite that carry the side) in the team that matters. All other fringe players can be easily replaced with suitable younger ones from other clubs.

Once the elite core gets old their potential to contend is pretty much over and that's what happened to Geelong past 2012 whereas Hawthorn had a relatively (although not in their early 20s they were not yet in their 30s) young elite core and therefore able to win more flags in the subsequent seasons.

 

[Pessimistic]

Hodge has always played up his injuries by walking around in his tippy toes after collisions with other players, he looked like a ballerina every time he did that.

The average age of the team is not that important, it's the average age of your best 8 to 12 players (your core elite that carry the side) in the team that matters. All other fringe players can be easily replaced with suitable younger ones from other clubs.

Once the core elite gets old their potential to contend is pretty much over and that's what happened to Geelong past 2012 whereas Hawthorn had a relatively (although not in their early 20s they were not yet in their 30s) young elite core and therefore able to win more flags in the subsequent seasons.

again, trying to define the OP to suit one club more than others

 

[Pessimistic]

Whilst is true that average (middle of the road, solid to fringe players) players can take anywhere from 3 to 5 years to reach their best form, Top 10 (or even Top 20) talent can usually make a significant impact to a team's success almost immediately, especially in contender teams, even if they're still developing and not playing at their full potential. And this is exactly what was denied to up and coming contenders for many years that coincided with the Hawthorn flags between 2013 and 2015 as all the best young talent in the land went to just 2 teams in a 4 year period.

Not to mention the fact that high draft picks could have been used by up and coming young contenders to entice other older proven quality talent (around the 22 and 28 age range) from other clubs to improve their list to make an immediate impact in that time frame.

Whereas Hawthorn had the innate advantage of luring talent based on their potential to win flags backed by their recent success. To Hawthorn's credit though they were astute in poaching quality talent without having to pay too much for them in trades with other clubs; highway robbery in some cases (see how Hawthorn got Gunston).

Of course what happened at Collingwood is evidence that success wasn't guaranteed for proven contenders from 2011 onwards, but they were (okay, it was mostly McGuire's pigheaded fault with his creepy infatuation with Buckley) obviously responsible for their own demise with a self inflicted implosion caused by being determined to gift a Premiership team to a favourite son in Buckely.

buckley seemed intent on culling the ‘rat pack’. Although the new crop are more aptly termed ‘rat bags’

 

[Big Ben]

It's hard to argue against Hawthorn.

- Four flags in eight years, it's funny how 2008 is excluded by the OP and in the poll.

- Four consecutive grand final appearances from 2012-2015, and came within a bee's diaphragm of five grand final appearances in 2011.

- Three consecutive premierships from 2013-2015, and came within a bee's diaphragm of four consecutive premierships in 2012.

That's it in a nutshell, and there is no possible way anyone can argue Richmond's 'dynasty' was better than ours.

Richmond 2017-2020 are more comparable to Adelaide 1997-1998, a good but not great team which got it done when it mattered thanks to individual brilliance from Dusty/McLeod on the big stage.

That's not to mention Shane Ellen kicking 5 goals in 1997 from a forward pocket, Jack Graham

34

Jack Graham

Age

26

Ht

181cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.7

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

6.8

4star

M

2.1

2star

T

6.3

5star

G

0.4

3star

D

11.8

3star

K

5.3

2star

HB

6.5

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

4.2

5star

G

0.0

1star

D

14.0

4star

K

6.0

3star

HB

8.0

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

7.0

5star

G

1.0

4star

kicking 3 goals in 2017 while tagging Sloane in the midfield, and some individual brilliance from Houli/Jarman on the biggest stage.

Adelaide's 1999 season and Richmond's 2021 season were both quite similar to each other as well. Adelaide getting flogged twice by North Melbourne in 1999 after beating them in the 1998 grand final and Richmond getting flogged by Geelong twice in 2021 after beating them in the 2020 grand final is the main similarity worth pointing out, along with both premiership defences being neck and neck with one another for the worst premiership defence in recent memory.

Yes, before anyone says it, Hawthorn 2009 and Bulldogs 2017 were both poor premiership defences, but neither were as poor as Adelaide 1999 and Richmond 2021.

 

[RichLeMonde]

It's hard to argue against Hawthorn.

- Four flags in eight years, it's funny how 2008 is excluded by the OP and in the poll.

- Four consecutive grand final appearances from 2012-2015, and came within a bee's diaphragm of five grand final appearances in 2011.

- Three consecutive premierships from 2013-2015, and came within a bee's diaphragm of four consecutive premierships in 2012.

That's it in a nutshell, and there is no possible way anyone can argue Richmond's 'dynasty' was better than ours.

Richmond 2017-2020 are more comparable to Adelaide 1997-1998, a good but not great team which got it done when it mattered thanks to individual brilliance from Dusty/McLeod on the big stage.

That's not to mention Shane Ellen kicking 5 goals in 1997 from a forward pocket, Jack Graham kicking 3 goals in 2017 while tagging Sloane in the midfield, and some individual brilliance from Houli/Jarman on the biggest stage.

Adelaide's 1999 season and Richmond's 2021 season were both quite similar to each other as well. Adelaide getting flogged twice by North Melbourne in 1999 after beating them in the 1998 grand final and Richmond getting flogged by Geelong twice in 2021 after beating them in the 2020 grand final is the main similarity worth pointing out, along with both premiership defences being neck and neck with one another for the worst premiership defence in recent memory.

Yes, before anyone says it, Hawthorn 2009 and Bulldogs 2017 were both poor premiership defences, but neither were as poor as Adelaide 1999 and Richmond 2021.

I can’t believe you went to that much trouble to type out something so stupid.

Obviously Hawthorn’s achievement greater than Richmond’s, but calling a team that won 3 flags in 4 years good not great is pathetic. Why would that effort be comparable to Adelaide’s when won 50% more premierships?

Why is Richmond’s 2021 premiership defence worse than Hawthorn’s in 09? We won the same number of games, and lost 1 game less than Hawthorn (ie had a draw), and had a higher %.

Richmond’s % over 2017 and 2019 finals campaigns are 2 of the highest in VFL/AFL history, but the team was only ‘good’ because it lost to Geelong in H&A during a crazy covid season?

try again, peanut

 

[CarnTheScray]

Richmond 2017-2020 are more comparable to Adelaide 1997-1998, a good but not great team which got it done when it mattered thanks to individual brilliance from Dusty/McLeod on the big stage.

Hahaha what? This Richmond dynasty team would s**t on Adelaides. Even prior to the 2017 win Richmond had multiple All-Australians in their team. Alex Rance, Trent Cotchin, Dustin Martin, Jack Reiwoldt and players like Shane Edwards with BnF awards. Then they had very good players like Grimes and Houli become AA's during the flag years, then they added a leading goalkicker and previous AA in Lynch.

I agree if you take out Martin they don't win as many...but that goes for every star team. How many do Brisbane and Geelong win if you take out Voss and Ablett.

 

[Sqotty from office works]

Lions v Hawks.

 

[Stabby McGee]

3 or more flags in 5 years, bookended by flags

Essendon 1946, 1948, 1950
Melbourne 1955, 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960 (you can make two separate 4-in-5s out of this)
Carlton 1968, 1970, 1972
Geelong 2007, 2009, 2011

Additional runs showing more longevity
Richmond 1967, 1969, 1973, 1974 (4 in 8)
Hawthorn 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991 (5 in 9)

Ummm we won 1948

 

[Sqotty from office works]

3 or more flags in 5 years, bookended by flags

Essendon 1946, 1948, 1950
Melbourne 1955, 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960 (you can make two separate 4-in-5s out of this)
Carlton 1968, 1970, 1972
Geelong 2007, 2009, 2011

Additional runs showing more longevity
Richmond 1967, 1969, 1973, 1974 (4 in 8)
Hawthorn 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991 (5 in 9)

1979
1981
1982.

 

[HTT]

Ummm we won 1948

My bad, Essendon were 1949

 

[nickcat0]

This is so hard to choose ......

Brisbane had to overcome the travelling, and beat teams led by Jimmy Hird and Nathan Buckley. They were packed with stars like Voss, Black, Akermanis etc etc. However, they didn't win a Minor Premiership, and in 2003 went 14-1-7 during the Home & Away season; which would indicate that maybe they only turned it on for the Finals.

Hawthorn, were far more consistent throughout their "run", claiming a Minor Premiership whilst only losing 3 games in 2013 (they also had won the Minor in 2012). On paper they didn't have as star studded and deep team as the others, but they were a well balanced side.

Geelong, as well as their 3 Flags, also boast a year where they won 21 H&A games, and over a 5 year period were clearly the best team on a weekly basis. They were also packed with stars, and indeed won their 3rd Flag after the Ablett Jnr had left. The downside to them is that they didn't go back-to-back.

Richmond, despite my obvious bias, are probably the weakest of the 4. Our H & A record isn't great, and arguably in our best year, we blew it in the Prelim against Collingwood.

If I had to choose, I'd give Brisbane the edge over Hawthorn, just because I think if they played a one-off game, with everyone at their peak, then the Lions' physicality would just edge it. Geelong would get my vote as a close 3rd, with Richmond coming in 4th.

 

[Pessimistic]

Was just thinking it seems like a big fat fail for equalisation. Four such teams in a 20 year period?. All you cam say is it’s four dominating teams not two.

policies copied from US sports. NFL has just two such dynasties, both the one team, patriots

 

[beema limapep]

If dynasties are measured off premierships with mostly the same group and not failing, for mine its probably Brisbane, then Hawthorn, then Richmond.

Brisbane 3 in 3
Hawthorn 3 in 3
Richmond 3 in 4
Geelong 3 in 5

Geelong have too many asterisks and question marks. For mine its a soft dynasty.

Dank is a massive question mark.

So was the advantages they gained over father son which the afl had to change the rules over. Scarlett Ablett Hawkins all picks in the 40s where they could top up the easy way. Compare that to Darcy pick 2, Daicos pick 4, Moore pick 9.

Then theres not even a back to back and the mental weakness of losing so many finals.

Brisbane, Hawthorn and Richmond did it from scratch, got no assistance and delivered off their own backs.

Geelong intermittently won flags but did less with kinder circumstances and failed way too often.

 

[Pessimistic]

If dynasties are measured off premierships with mostly the same group and not failing, for mine its probably Brisbane, then Hawthorn, then Richmond.

Brisbane 3 in 3
Hawthorn 3 in 3
Richmond 3 in 4
Geelong 3 in 5

Geelong have too many asterisks and question marks. For mine its a soft dynasty.

Dank is a massive question mark.

So was the advantages they gained over father son which the afl had to change the rules over. Scarlett Ablett Hawkins all picks in the 40s where they could top up the easy way. Compare that to Darcy pick 2, Daicos pick 4, Moore pick 9.

Then theres not even a back to back and the mental weakness of losing so many finals.

Brisbane, Hawthorn and Richmond did it from scratch, got no assistance and delivered off their own backs.

Geelong intermittently won flags but did less with kinder circumstances and failed way too often.

‘you really can’t go past the ‘names’ of Brisbane, the only knock on them being the spoon they won (at a similar stage the hawks won a surprise flag)

 

[William Wonka]

Brisbane
Hawthorn
Daylight
Richmond


How is Geelong even in the conversation I do not know.
Coach convicted of supplying PEDs let alone Dank involvement would wipe their flags from the record books in any other sport.

 

[Blackas87]

Winning 2 in a row, then 3 in a row is an achievement far more rare.

I'm not so sure it even needs explanation.

is it? There are more 3 peats throughout history than teams winning 3 premierships in an era that spread 5 years.

3 Peats
-Carlton 1906, 07, 08
-Collingwood 1927, 28, 29, 30 (4 peat)
-Melbourne 1939, 40, 41
-Melbourne 1955, 56, 57
-Brisbane 2001, 02, 03
-Hawthorn 2013, 14, 15


3 over 5 year span
-Essendon 1946, 49, 50
-Melbourne 1955, 56, 57, 59, 60 (5 in 6 years or 4 from 55-59 and 4 from 56-60)
-Carlton 1968, 70, 72
-Geelong 2007, 09, 11

maybe it’s easier to peak over a 3 year period than it is to be the best 3 times over 5 year spread.

 

[beema limapep]

Brisbane
Hawthorn
Daylight
Richmond


How is Geelong even in the conversation I do not know.
Coach convicted of supplying PEDs let alone Dank involvement would wipe their flags from the record books in any other sport.

With the benefit of hindsight that the opening post touched upon, those Geelong years are certainly looked upon as very dubious times by a growing majority.

 

[beema limapep]

‘you really can’t go past the ‘names’ of Brisbane, the only knock on them being the spoon they won (at a similar stage the hawks won a surprise flag)

Fair call in every respect.

 

[Whisper in the Wind]

Geelong have too many asterisks and question marks. For mine its a soft dynasty.

People regard Essendon 2000 as the best team of all time.
Home and Away Record: 21-1 / 159.1%.

Take Geelong out of 2009 - 2011

2009 - St Kilda win the flag
Home and Away Record: 19-2 / 158.82%
(Losses come in the last two rounds by 2pts and 5pts)

2010 - St Kilda v Collingwood draw

2011 - Collingwood win the flag, back-to-back & undefeated
Home and Away Record: 20-0 / 185.96%
(Geelong beat them 3 times, once by 96 points)


Geelong had to go through two of the greatest teams of all time to win two of their flags. In their 3rd they won by a record margin and also had their own 21-1 / 161.8% Home and Away season in 2008. Far from "soft".

 

[Pessimistic]

People regard Essendon 2000 as the best team of all time.
Home and Away Record: 21-1 / 159.1%.

Take Geelong out of 2009 - 2011

2009 - St Kilda win the flag
Home and Away Record: 19-2 / 158.82%
(Losses come in the last two rounds by 2pts and 5pts)

2010 - St Kilda v Collingwood draw

2011 - Collingwood win the flag, back-to-back & undefeated
Home and Away Record: 20-0 / 185.96%
(Geelong beat them 3 times, once by 96 points)


Geelong had to go through two of the greatest teams of all time to win two of their flags. In their 3rd they won by a record margin and also had their own 21-1 / 161.8% Home and Away season in 2008. Far from "soft".

so what does that make the 2008 premiers?

 

[Blackas87]

Geelong the only one to win all their premierships without losing a final needing a 2nd chance, the others all lost to higher ranked teams.

2003 Brisbane finished 3rd, lost 2nd placed Collingwood in the qualifying final, got to rematch Collingwood in the Grand Final.

2015 Hawthorn finished 3rd lost to 2nd place West Coast at Subiaco, got to rematch West Coast in the grand final, this time on Hawthorns home ground.

2020 Richmond finished 3rd and lost to 2nd Place Brisbane needing the 2nd chance to get their 3rd premiership.