That's a hard one. Geelong 2008 I thought was the peak for Geelong. Comparing to Essendon, for H/A Geelong's percentage was 161.8 vs Essendon 159.1. Both only lost one H/A game, and Geelong's (bizarrely) was an 86 point loss while Essendons was 11. But then there's the grand final of course, where Geelong stuffs up the comparison, and makes it difficult to choose them over Essendon. That GF loss bugs me more than it probably shouldHere is another question....
Essendon 2000 team v Geelong 2007 （or 2008, 2009 if you rate them more） Which team was better ？
I agree with every aspect of this statement.Not an insignificant point when it comes to talking about the overall strength of the competition.
Geelong 07-11 clearly the better team, I think, but it's a different era thanks to the expansion of the comp.
Without wanting to deny how good Geelong were, I've never been so impressed by a team as I was with the Brisbane three-peat team of 01-03. They seemed to have a switch they could flick and when they did they just crushed whoever were before them. They were awesome.
So I'd be putting Brisbane ahead of Geelong with Richmond quite a bit behind.
I won't loose sleep over the question of whether teams from another era are better or worse. I'm enjoying this era too much to care!
The only era that would challenge Richmond is the hawthorn 3 peat. Rest would be too slow and unfit to keep up with us.You'd roll them by 12-15 goals - so far better than them it's not funny.
Don't let any muppet tell you your 2007-2011 is inferior to Richmond. Along with Brisbane and Hawthorn Threepeats, Hawks 88-89 and Essendon 84-85, your era is right up there.
That's a hard one. Geelong 2008 I thought was the peak for Geelong. Comparing to Essendon, for H/A Geelong's percentage was 161.8 vs Essendon 159.1. Both only lost one H/A game, and Geelong's (bizarrely) was an 86 point loss while Essendons was 11. But then there's the grand final of course, where Geelong stuffs up the comparison, and makes it difficult to choose them over Essendon. That GF loss bugs me more than it probably should
Geelong 2011 had a percentage of 157.4 and lost 3 games (by 4, 8 and 13 points - average of 8.3 points). If I recall, it's statistically the best season by any premier after 2000. They weren't far behind Essendon, and perhaps worthy of comparison too.
I'm a usually stats man, so would have to choose Bombers - based solely on Win/Loss, Percentage, and winning the GF. But by eye, and considering the surrounding years, all the records they broke, and quality of opposition, I think Geelong where the better team, and I'd 2008 was their peak. That said, I also consider 2011 their best season (having won the GF). So I'll sit on the fence and so both, depending how you look at it. Essendon by stats, Geelong by eye.
I acknowledge that obviously I would have a bias, no matter how hard I try to avoid it, so it's probably for others to judge. FWIW, Essendon are my second team, and I've watched most of their games, so I have nothing against them.
Towelled up by Brisbane twice eh?They’ve been towelled up by Brisbane twice, once by Port and have lost others such as the Saints game. Far from the best side this year and it’ll be another arsey flag if they pull it off. Port or Geelong definitely deserve it more.
this is spot on, people easily forget that small fact, its harder to dominate now than it ever was.I'd say the competition is greater and more even now, which is why Richmond don't look as dominant as the Cats did in that era.
The Brisbane side of that era PLAYED the Geelong team when that team was starting its surge. They won a preliminary final by 9 points.Geelong of that era was a more talented team. Would probably trouble this Richmond side, but who knows. The Brisbane 3peat team would thrash either side though.