How long until we see a top-heavy period like the late 2000's/early 2010's again?

[Gysberts2Bate]

Sydney between 2012 and 2017 where an extremely good side who could have easily won three flags, even leaving aside their GF losses. I thought they were going to storm home in 2017, and were just one win off top spot and a home qualifying final (ended up in fourth) in 2015 against Hawthorn. Would have been three minor premierships and probably three GFs in a row. As good as any other side this century IMO, or at least the ones to not win multiple flags.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

That’s sort of my point though. Murray’s just another guy who has won a slam or two. Rates with Hewitt and Wawrinka. Yes, great tennis players compared to you and I and even most other tennis players, but not GREAT iykwim. Sometimes it’s just about hearing who is in front of you. Unfortunately for Murray that was the big 3.

Murray rates a fair bit higher then Hewitt.

 

[PhatBoy]

That’s sort of my point though. Murray’s just another guy who has won a slam or two. Rates with Hewitt and Wawrinka. Yes, great tennis players compared to you and I and even most other tennis players, but not GREAT iykwim. Sometimes it’s just about hearing who is in front of you. Unfortunately for Murray that was the big 3.

That’s what I mean though, he doesn’t. Not to most tennis fans anyway. He rates higher than other 2-3 slam players

I guess when I say this there will be accusations of ‘you just want to big-up st kilda because it makes your 2009 flag look better.’ That isn’t why I’m saying it at all.

by any measure the cats of 07-11 were an almighty team and to me they don’t need embellishing. I simply think the saints of that 2-3 season run were an absolutely fantastic side who in many eras would be a two flag team and no one would bat an eyelid. Compare them to say the Adelaide of 97-98 for example

 

[H00t]

I think it will be a while. The AFL is still feeling the effects from the addition of GCS and GWS.

Not only has the talent been diluted now to 18 teams but the sheer number of picks both teams have had and especially wasted.

Gold Coast have had issues galore since inception and only look to be turning it around under Dew but even as soon as 2018. They had 3 of the top 6 in a super draft thats a lot talent going to one club. Especially one that’s wasted talent with drug problems, fitness staff issues and generally poor talent development.

GWS have had better talent development than GCS but they still have had plenty of injury woes limiting players. The drain that GWS has had is that they get so many draft picks and then auction a lot of for way more than they were drafted for to teams (Treloar, Shiel etc.) Means they continue to pull a heap of talent away from the rest of the comp. Plus they can waste plenty of talent as there is more coming in.

All up it’s lead to a drain of talent from the comp from 2016 onwards when those initial suns and giants would be hitting their straps having been in the AFL system for a number of years.

It’s slowly evening out. But I still feel it’s at least 3-4 years from really equalising again.

 

[Dr Tigris]

To some extent the OP is stating that for a period of time a few teams were that much better than the rest. Does that mean they are all time great teams? Or that the competition was all time disjointed and so they had it easy?

Right now there are a lot of very good teams on their day. Talent is more diluted and game systems are much better. Does that even it out or open it up?

I find it very hard to truly compare teams in different eras.

Also on the win loss record note that the great Lions team (my all time favourite so far) and this current Richmond team have the same attitude to the HA season - get into the top 4 and then play the real season in September. Winning pretty much meaningless HA games does not equal greatness in the terms of winning premierships. A minority of teams finishing on top of the ladder after 22 games have won the premiership - and not the last 5 at least.

 

[ioppolo]

Sydney between 2012 and 2017 where an extremely good side who could have easily won three flags, even leaving aside their GF losses. I thought they were going to storm home in 2017, and were just one win off top spot and a home qualifying final (ended up in fourth) in 2015 against Hawthorn. Would have been three minor premierships and probably three GFs in a row. As good as any other side this century IMO, or at least the ones to not win multiple flags.

Sydney were cooked at the end of 2015. There's a reason an even more cooked Freo and eighth placed North knocked them out in straight sets.

 

[SuperVolley11]

Also on the win loss record note that the great Lions team (my all time favourite so far) and this current Richmond team have the same attitude to the HA season - get into the top 4 and then play the real season in September. Winning pretty much meaningless HA games does not equal greatness in the terms of winning premierships. A minority of teams finishing on top of the ladder after 22 games have won the premiership - and not the last 5 at least.

I’d say the fact Richmond has only won one minor premiership has to do with missing personal during the middle stages of 2019 and 2020 not a only trying to reach top 4 mentality.

 

[Cotchins Hair Piece]

Well… if we’re talking premierships it’s definitely not about Melbourne.

I’ll pay that

 

[Dr Tigris]

I’d say the fact Richmond has only won one minor premiership has to do with missing personal during the middle stages of 2019 and 2020 not a only trying to reach top 4 mentality.

To some extent. But they publicly say that they are focussing on building through the year and not necessarily winning every game. The training load early in the season is quite high, so that the players are a bit flat on match day. It is a deliberate tactic of working into teh season, and coming home hard.

 

[SuperVolley11]

To some extent. But they publicly say that they are focussing on building through the year and not necessarily winning every game. The training load early in the season is quite high, so that the players are a bit flat on match day. It is a deliberate tactic of working into teh season, and coming home hard.

Yeh nah. 18-4 in 2018 says different. The losses in 2019 and 2020 were mainly from injuries. How many near full strength games did Richmond lose in H and A?

 

[living_in_syd]

I’d extend the period from 2007-2015 when it truly felt like there was a contest for whose style of footy would be supreme, not just whose team. Each of Geelong, St Kilda, Collingwood and Hawthorn offered differing coaching methods, all ultimately based around countering one another in finals.

We started that period with Geelong’s high hand ball style, went through forward presses and full field zones, finishing with Hawthorn’s precision kicking through defences. We haven’t had anything near that level of innovation across the league since.

well, from 2015 onwards there hasn't been any time for innovation considering all the rule changes each year.

 

[Outback Footy]

We're talking about 3 separate teams that all had near-perfect home and away seasons.

• Geelong 2008 (21-1)
• Saint Kilda 2009 (20-2)
• Collingwood 2011 (20-2)

These are teams that had sustained success over multiple seasons. Their win-loss records over this period are exceptional, GOAT-tier... and yet, they each made multiple grand finals over this period. They each got the better of each other at one point or another during these few years.

There's really only two ways you can look at this:

• They're all overrated teams, which is why they beat each other
• They're all extremely great all-time teams, which is why they beat each other

You can't say one was great without saying the other two were as well. Because they all at one point lost to one another — within a short window of time. Teams don't fall off that fast.

I think the simple answer is that they were all really damn good. I think this period of time sticks out, like a "golden era" of talented teams at the top in the AFL. Like the boxing heavyweight division in the 60's and 70's. Or the "Four Kings" Hagler, Hearns, Leonard, and Duran era.

Let me put it to you like this... I don't think Floyd Mayweather would be looked at as perfect as he is/was, if he fought in that era with those 4 guys. Richmond wouldn't nearly look as good if they went up against that kind of competition.

What about Essendon of 2000? Lost one game all season (including finals) and kicked the AFL record finals score on their way through. You could say they underperformed in 99 and 01 and then fell off the perch. How do they fit into your theory?

 

[BF Tiger]

I’ll pay that

At least bookmark it and get back to me (maybe) in October.

 

[living_in_syd]

We're talking about 3 separate teams that all had near-perfect home and away seasons.

• Geelong 2008 (21-1)
• Saint Kilda 2009 (20-2)
• Collingwood 2011 (20-2)

These are teams that had sustained success over multiple seasons. Their win-loss records over this period are exceptional, GOAT-tier... and yet, they each made multiple grand finals over this period. They each got the better of each other at one point or another during these few years.

There's really only two ways you can look at this:

• They're all overrated teams, which is why they beat each other
• They're all extremely great all-time teams, which is why they beat each other

You can't say one was great without saying the other two were as well. Because they all at one point lost to one another — within a short window of time. Teams don't fall off that fast.

I think the simple answer is that they were all really damn good. I think this period of time sticks out, like a "golden era" of talented teams at the top in the AFL. Like the boxing heavyweight division in the 60's and 70's. Or the "Four Kings" Hagler, Hearns, Leonard, and Duran era.

Let me put it to you like this... I don't think Floyd Mayweather would be looked at as perfect as he is/was, if he fought in that era with those 4 guys. Richmond wouldn't nearly look as good if they went up against that kind of competition.

To be fair, around that time was a lot of cannon fodder teams. Regular +100point bashings. So hard to tell if it was even or stacked teams.
The two new teams and dilution of the comp hasnt helped either. It would be hard to keep stacked teams together these days with the salary cap. Look at collingwoods fire sale. I suspect it might have been easier to get away with a lot more dodgy stuff back then.

 

[SuperVolley11]

What about Essendon of 2000? Lost one game all season (including finals) and kicked the AFL record finals score on their way through. You could say they underperformed in 99 and 01 and then fell off the perch. How do they fit into your theory?

To be fair norf of the late 90s and the lions of the early 00s are both pretty handy. (I know essendon lost to the blues in that preliminary) Also essendon had to cut players from salary cap issues.

 

[BF Tiger]

What about Essendon of 2000? Lost one game all season (including finals) and kicked the AFL record finals score on their way through. You could say they underperformed in 99 and 01 and then fell off the perch. How do they fit into your theory?

They don’t according to the OP, because no-one else was heavy hitting.

 

[HeavyPop]

Sydney were cooked at the end of 2015. There's a reason an even more cooked Freo and eighth placed North knocked them out in straight sets.

They made a GF the next year.

 

[gotterdamerung]

well, from 2015 onwards there hasn't been any time for innovation considering all the rule changes each year.

There were heaps of rule changes between 2007-2015

 

[HTT]

Sydney were cooked at the end of 2015. There's a reason an even more cooked Freo and eighth placed North knocked them out in straight sets.

Was spewing we lost that EF to North that year. Whoever won that was always going to be a huge show the next week.

 

[HTT]

There were heaps of rule changes between 2007-2015

More with the intent of fairness and safety rather than changing the way the game is played
2008 interchange gate overhaul
2009 free kick for misconduct, scoreline now back of padding, reset of play if umpire impedes while setting mark, free kick location if infringed upon at a kick out changed
2011 sub introduced, players decide on advantage instead of umpire, player electing to bump liable for injury
2012 score review
2013 contact below knees introduced, separation of rucks at throw ins

Compare that to the suite of changes introduced in 2019 and this year.

 

[ioppolo]

They made a GF the next year.

I meant that year specifically. They had injuries galore and limped into fourth.

 

[Dr Tigris]

Yeh nah. 18-4 in 2018 says different. The losses in 2019 and 2020 were mainly from injuries. How many near full strength games did Richmond lose in H and A?

2018 was the year that the club decided to change from trying to win every game as first priority, to aiming to come home very hard. So 2019, 20 and 21 the club has followed a process of working into the season.

 

[SuperVolley11]

2018 was the year that the club decided to change from trying to win every game as first priority, to aiming to come home very hard. So 2019, 20 and 21 the club has followed a process of working into the season.

Based on what? You got a club statement or anything. Or are you “in the know”

 

[Baird]

2020 and 2021

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

The funny thing about the era mentioned in the OP is the Bulldogs are an afterthought/not even mentioned. They didn't have the same peak, but I'd argue that despite not making a grand final, they were consistently better for longer than St Kilda over practically the same era. Utterly loaded around 2009 and then added Barry Hall in 2010 (but dropped off a bit due to other players starting to decline).

Picking your favourite flag is like picking your favourite child, but removing the emotion, I think 2009 has a very strong case. That's as stacked a top four as I've ever seen. Just three kick arse teams in their absolute prime and one team just about to hit one of the most dominant 18 month stretches we've seen in the last 30 years.