Analysis IF Geelong had won in 08, would they have won in 09?

[Down at K Park]

Imo it helped. The determination to not lose another gf helped push them over the line i reckon. You could see it in the 100% effort that day. St Kilda were a fierce opponent. Probably the better team in 2009.

 

[Sttew]

Yes. We’d have done a 3peat, but maybe not won in 2011

 

[Biggy_Boy]

If the team had been able to win in 2008, then I think they would have been able to win in 2009.

But I don't think the team that lost in 2008 could have won in 2008 and then won in 2009.

 

[TEDDY24INC]

No.. it took every extra amount of motivation to get over the 09 saints team imho

 

[TEDDY24INC]

No.. it took every extra amount of motivation to get over the 09 saints team imho

And would much prefer beating the hawks in 08 and having back to back

 

[King_Steele]

Sigh..

09 Cats/Saints its ridiculous how much talent both teams had. You could say both teams would dominate today's footy, says more about the talent in todays game IMO

 

[Feline]

I wouldn't have begrudged St Kilda a premiership if I could have still been enjoying watching the replay of us beating Hawthorn.

 

[Landgraft]

Finally, a relevant discussion for the year of our lord 2020

 

[Jimmy Yamazaki]

Yes I think we would have.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Yes I think we would have.

Yes. We would have. But...

If we had stolen it in 2005, we would have had the 2006-7 hangover, and won 2008-9-10.

Alistar Clarkson is one of the great coaches. Leigh Matthews, Player of the Century, and premiership coach. Both had won premierships as coaches years prior to their three peat.

With Geelong and Bomber Thompson 2007 was all new. First time for Thompson as a coach, and a 44 years drought for Geelong. Come 2008 Geelong's focus was not in the right place. We were all smash 'n crash during the 2008 H&A and had run out of form by the finals. We were smart enough to not have the hangover, but not smart enough to get the timing right.

 

[dazbroncos]

Funny you mention 2008 as your first thread..

Go Catters

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Sigh..

09 Cats/Saints its ridiculous how much talent both teams had. You could say both teams would dominate today's footy, says more about the talent in todays game IMO

Agreed. Take out either one of those sides from 2009, and the league would have resembled 2000 with Essendon. The two most dominant sides in one year I can remember.

I'm looking at the amount of new players we have got in lately, and although good, they are not much good both sides of their body! At elite level I find that amazing. No idea what they are coaching them in juniors.

 

[Partridge]

If the team had been able to win in 2008, then I think they would have been able to win in 2009.

But I don't think the team that lost in 2008 could have won in 2008 and then won in 2009.

Absolutely no way to know. The team was certainly strong enough to win three straight flags.

I do love the 2009 win as they exploded so many prevalent football myths - present and past:

1. Having a late finish to the season (shouldn't that be the aim?). Grand Final day 2008, won the flag in 2009.
2. Delayed pre-season. Won the pre-season competition easily and murdered Collingwood in the Grand Final.
3. Not peaking too early. They probably did that - we won our first 13 games (plus the 4 pre-season games).

It was a great team.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Absolutely no way to know. The team was certainly strong enough to win three straight flags.

I do love the 2009 win as they exploded so many prevalent football myths - present and past:

1. Having a late finish to the season (shouldn't that be the aim?). Grand Final day 2008, won the flag in 2009.
2. Delayed pre-season. Won the pre-season competition easily and murdered Collingwood in the Grand Final.
3. Not peaking too early. They probably did that - we won our first 13 games (plus the 4 pre-season games).

It was a great team.

All of those myths had been debunked many times before though.
It's like the MCG thing now. It's a myth or an excuse if you like. The best team has never had a problem winning there.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Agreed. Take out either one of those sides from 2009, and the league would have resembled 2000 with Essendon. The two most dominant sides in one year I can remember.

I'm looking at the amount of new players we have got in lately, and although good, they are not much good both sides of their body! At elite level I find that amazing. No idea what they are coaching them in juniors.

Running, running , running then some more running!
Apart from the $ and the chicks, actually wouldn't be that much fun being a footy player anymore.

 

[Max Milburn]

If Geelong had won in 2008, Obama wouldn't have become President and Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs would have won best Oscar.

 

[Pollywaffle]

No.. it took every extra amount of motivation to get over the 09 saints team imho

Yeah.
That loss really burned and kept a few heads from getting too big. We know how that often turns out.
motivation is underrated..

 

[Turbocat]

Would we have had the motive to win in 2009 against one of the best St Kilda sides in history if we had actually defeated Hawthorn in 2008? And would you have rather beaten Hawthorn that year and lose to St Kilda the next or keep history as it is?

Is the pope a catholic type question . Trade 09 for 08 ... every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Get us two in a row, one against Haw and Stk then win one.


But life is not like that... just how much the win 2011 had to do with 08... a lot of players learn some hard lessons in 08 , lessons a lot of the supporter knew better than the players.

 

[Max Milburn]

We gave 2008 to Hawthorn.
We are a very generous club.
In return, Hawthorn gave us the mental key to winning more GF's, along with Kennett's curse.
Hawthorn is also a very generous club.

 

[Seeds]

We gave 2008 to Hawthorn.
We are a very generous club.
In return, Hawthorn gave us the mental key to winning more GF's, along with Kennett's curse.
Hawthorn is also a very generous club.

What a load of rubbish.

Losing to hawthorn in 2008 gave us nothing. Zilch.

Did losing any of our past 4 prelims five us the mentals keys to win the next? Nope. Did losing any of othe 4 grand finals in the 80s or 90s give us the mental keys to win the next one? Nope.

This is a story you use to console yourself about the 2008 gf. Your brain is searching for answers and finding soothing fiction. Like religious people who find jesus face in toast as proof of christ.

 

[Seeds]

Yeah.
That loss really burned and kept a few heads from getting too big. We know how that often turns out.
motivation is underrated..

How come hawthorn and brisbane a decade before didnt need a loss to keep heads cool and went on to 3 peats?

Also wouldnt a 3 peat be motivation enough if we had won 2008. Last two sides who have been going for a 3 peat have both won them.

 

[Pollywaffle]

How come hawthorn and brisbane a decade before didnt need a loss to keep heads cool and went on to 3 peats?

Also wouldnt a 3 peat be motivation enough if we had won 2008. Last two sides who have been going for a 3 peat have both won them.

Dunno. I know a few of the players have said that 2008 loss really spurred them on the next year. Saints were a great team and took some beating.
I guess it depends on the group dynamics and extant opposition. Certainly the Brisbane side was just a scary superteam that probably could have skipped training, gone to the pub and still won a few. Hawthorn arguably got lucky, probably with the exception of the swans game their opponents were lacklustre. Still they had to get there I suppose..

 

[Gee Class Loco]

If shmiffs what tifs .... silly debates conversations and bbq drunken arguments best left for those who don't live in reality.
Get over it... The Hawks were the BETTER team. Thus the touch up they gave us that made us look like down right clowns.
May the season start soon is all i have to say...
Cheers

 

[Landgraft]

Dunno. I know a few of the players have said that 2008 loss really spurred them on the next year. Saints were a great team and took some beating.
I guess it depends on the group dynamics and extant opposition. Certainly the Brisbane side was just a scary superteam that probably could have skipped training, gone to the pub and still won a few. Hawthorn arguably got lucky, probably with the exception of the swans game their opponents were lacklustre. Still they had to get there I suppose..

No doubt that's how the Geelong players feel, because it's what lines up with their lived experience.

But the truth is you can't be confident in any hypothetical answer to this. You could argue that premierships were possible from 2004 through 2014, given the right confluence of events. But with the sheer amount of variance in AFL football peaking at the level that team did and achieving three is a monumental achievement. Nothing else really matters.

 

[Partridge]

Dunno. I know a few of the players have said that 2008 loss really spurred them on the next year. Saints were a great team and took some beating.
I guess it depends on the group dynamics and extant opposition. Certainly the Brisbane side was just a scary superteam that probably could have skipped training, gone to the pub and still won a few. Hawthorn arguably got lucky, probably with the exception of the swans game their opponents were lacklustre. Still they had to get there I suppose..

Once upon a time I might have agreed with this, now I'm far less inclined.

First they had to get there. Which they did. The 2015 win was incredible - not just one but two trips to Perth, and because they lost the Qualifying Final (in Perth), they didn't get a week off either. That's as meritorious as it gets. If people want to argue that the opposition didn't turn up, well, tough s**t. That's why it's always better to make the Grand Final in the first place. You never know what might happen (a salient rejoinder to the nonsense that we were spent in 2013 even if we'd won).