Who would you rate as the strongest premiership side in the AFL era?

[st_trav_ofWA]

They were super enough to have 3 Brownlow medallists in the team at the one time. Aker, Voss and Black.

Surely that alone speaks volumes for the strength of the team

and dont forget Luke Power .... put him in any other team in the AFL and he would have been their B&F winner and without those three pinching votes off of him would have gone close to winning the brownlow on his own ....

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

They were a phenomenal side. While I don't think the Port 04 team was the strongest (why I and others haven't voted for them) it has the tough job of being viewed mostly in isolation from the years prior where they took it up to the Lions/competition during the minor rounds.

that Port team from the early 2000's was mighty strong though ... it just took Port a few years to get their mojo in the finals even when you guys did get to the flag in 2004 there were wobbly moments that almost stuffed up the run ... i remember in 03 and 04 in the season Port were near on impossible to beat but many clubs were not as fearful of them come finals time , had you not gotten through in 04 it would have been an almighty monkey on the back of Port

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

They were a phenomenal side. While I don't think the Port 04 team was the strongest (why I and others haven't voted for them) it has the tough job of being viewed mostly in isolation from the years prior where they took it up to the Lions/competition during the minor rounds.

that Port team from the early 2000's was mighty strong though ... it just took Port a few years to get their mojo in the finals even when you guys did get to the flag in 2004 there were wobbly moments that almost stuffed up the run ... i remember in 03 and 04 in the season Port were near on impossible to beat but many clubs were not as fearful of them come finals time , had you not gotten through in 04 it would have been an almighty monkey on the back of Port .. its a bit like GWS now days

 

[Engimal v3]

The 1999 Flag is a contentious one.

The Dons deserved the Flag: R1 def Carlton 39pts @ MCG
R2 def North 35pts @ MCG
R12def Lions 18pts @ Gabba
R16def Carlton 76pts @ MCG
R17def North 26pts @ MCG
QF def Swans 69pts @MCG
* Finished H&A on top 18/4 with a 125.98%(2nd best for the year)
* Ess had Hird for only 2 games that year due to a foot injury. No wonder they dominated 2000.
* Rubbish & abandoned Finals formula gave Carlton a chance to find form with 54pt win over Eagles in the Semi after being def by the Lions by 73pts in the Qual the week before.
* Ess were robbed of a double chance under the old Finals formula.


North stole it from the Lions: R11 def Carlton 16pts @ Princess Park
R14 lost to North 2pts @ MCG (Black BOG)
QF def Carlton 73pts @ Gabba (lost Voss early for the rest of the year in that game)
SF def Dogs 53pts @ Gabba
PF lost to North45pts @ MCG (Martin "fixed" Black very early in the game)
* Finished H&A 3rd 16/6 with a 144.9%
* No Black & 3 goals down @ 1/4 time Lions still hit back in the 2nd to lead by 4pts at HT. Fell away last 1/4
* If Black not imo assaulted, we win the game & then Flag v Carlton the next week.

Conclusion: Essendon deserved the Flag that year. Due to the old Finals system, they were probably robbed of it also. If we're talking about the 1999 Flag being stolen, North stole the Flag from the Lions by the imo gutless assault of Simon Black.

Congratulations to Essendon and Brisbane for the joint moral 1999 premiership!

 

[tigertigertiger]

what like the tigers having gastro against Collingwood this year in the prelim ?
credit to the tigers they took their chances and when everything fell into place made the most of it thecertainly didnt count on Geelong falling apart first up but when they did they took advantage of it ... they didnt plan for GWS to limp into the prelim but when it happened they took full advantage of it ... they didnt plan for the crows to not turn up on grand final day but when it became clear that they hadnt they took complete advantage of it ... as i said well done to them they still had to actually win the game but they were not forced to work as hard as the Bulldogs did the year before to get thier flag , they didnt need to dig as deep as WCE did to win theirs this year ... they didnt have to go through a epic battle like Geelong did in 09 nor did they have to back up a week later after an epic battle like Collingwood did in 10 .. so no the tigers finals series wasnt even close to the strongest ... and as for the dominance please dont compare the tigers with the lions its just embarassing

Pfft, they all turned up in 2017 we were just that bloody good! Get over it , just because you couldn’t win a grand final with a double chance, speaking of embarrassing

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Following our team as I do, the major change from 06 to 07 was the Mooney consolidation at CHF, a previous weak link in that team. That team had stars all over the ground, Mooney certainly was in 07. He is allowed to be a star for a season, and just good in others. That's what it was.

The differences was that a bunch of your mids went from talented kids to genuinely elite players. Not saying Mooney wasn’t good in patches, there is just a significantly difference between being good in a great team and being an elite individual.

 

[carnaroys08]

Congratulations to Essendon and Brisbane for the joint moral 1999 premiership!

Fair call. Winners are grinners & losers can please themselves.

Pagan rang Black & thanked him for protecting Martyn during Grand Final week. Martyn apologised to Black 10 years later. Source:Simon Black on Open Mike.

 

[Roddy]

Obviously it depends on whether it's an individual season or over a period of time. The options suggest the latter so, while we probably didn't have the greatest individual season during our run, the same core of team and the same coach won 4 premierships from 5 GF appearances in 8 seasons, which leaves every other team eating our dust. Absolutely untouchable.

 

[carnaroys08]

I can’t be the only one

Yes you can lol

 

[adammania9]

Yes you can lol

Well I’m not

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Obviously it depends on whether it's an individual season or over a period of time. The options suggest the latter so, while we probably didn't have the greatest individual season during our run, the same core of team and the same coach won 4 premierships from 5 GF appearances in 8 seasons, which leaves every other team eating our dust. Absolutely untouchable.

Na, you missed the finals in between that run.

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

Pfft, they all turned up in 2017 we were just that bloody good! Get over it , just because you couldn’t win a grand final with a double chance, speaking of embarrassing

see heres the differance i am realistic about my team ... i know my team had two perfect opportunities to win our second flag the first time we went to war with geelong and in the end it took a heart breaking (for saints fans) toe poke in the midle of the ground to spoil the party other than that all game it was anyones to win .. thats what happens when you have two stand out teams going all out for the entire game had geelong played anyone but St Kilda in 09 they would have romped it in like they did in 2007 , had St Kilda played anyone but Geelong in that grand final they would have romped it in .... moving to 2010 my team were totally outplayed early and Collingwood who were the strongest team of the year looked to make short work of the saints until the saints dug in and pushed themselves beyond their ability in the end it was a poor bounce that force a draw and with that Collingwood learnt a valuble lesson and responded by smacking St Kilda the week later ... the replay grand final was like your grand final win one team turned up the other didnt ... you won well done but it wasnt a dominant crushing display nor was it a epic battle of greatness ... you beat an average team having an average day after dominating a pretty average season... the strength of the 2017 finals teams vs the strength of 2009 and 2010 finals teams 2017 would lose :
1. Richmond 2017 vs Geelong 2009 vs Collingwood 2010 = Richmond least likely Geelong most likely
2. Crows 2017 vs St Kilda 2009 vs St Kilda 2010 = Crows least likely Saints 2009 most likely
3. Geelong 2017 vs Bulldogs 2009 vs Geelong 2010 = Geelong 17 least likely Geelong 2010 easily
4. GWS 2017 vs Collingwood 2009 vs Bulldogs 2010 = GWS least likely Bulldogs most likely

 

[HTT]

see heres the differance i am realistic about my team ... i know my team had two perfect opportunities to win our second flag the first time we went to war with geelong and in the end it took a heart breaking (for saints fans) toe poke in the midle of the ground to spoil the party other than that all game it was anyones to win .. thats what happens when you have two stand out teams going all out for the entire game had geelong played anyone but St Kilda in 09 they would have romped it in like they did in 2007 , had St Kilda played anyone but Geelong in that grand final they would have romped it in .... moving to 2010 my team were totally outplayed early and Collingwood who were the strongest team of the year looked to make short work of the saints until the saints dug in and pushed themselves beyond their ability in the end it was a poor bounce that force a draw and with that Collingwood learnt a valuble lesson and responded by smacking St Kilda the week later ... the replay grand final was like your grand final win one team turned up the other didnt ... you won well done but it wasnt a dominant crushing display nor was it a epic battle of greatness ... you beat an average team having an average day after dominating a pretty average season... the strength of the 2017 finals teams vs the strength of 2009 and 2010 finals teams 2017 would lose :
1. Richmond 2017 vs Geelong 2009 vs Collingwood 2010 = Richmond least likely Geelong most likely
2. Crows 2017 vs St Kilda 2009 vs St Kilda 2010 = Crows least likely Saints 2009 most likely
3. Geelong 2017 vs Bulldogs 2009 vs Geelong 2010 = Geelong 17 least likely Geelong 2010 easily
4. GWS 2017 vs Collingwood 2009 vs Bulldogs 2010 = GWS least likely Bulldogs most likely

"I'm realistic about my own team"

Goes on to explain why his team that didn't win any flags is better than a team that won one convincingly

 

[adammania9]

St Kilda 2009-10 would strangle every team in the current AFL. I don’t think I’ve seen a side unluckier to not win a flag, every time they came to town there was a side who was just slightly better.

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

"I'm realistic about my own team"

Goes on to explain why his team that didn't win any flags is better than a team that won one convincingly

yes because the opponent has no factor in that .... the tigers of 2017 would be destroyed by the saints of 09 ... heck the Bulldogs of 09 would have spanked the tigers of 17 , Collingwood of 09 would have beaten the tigers 17 .... the tigers of 17 wouldnt have made the finals playing against the 2009 AFL season

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

St Kilda 2009-10 would strangle every team in the current AFL. I don’t think I’ve seen a side unluckier to not win a flag, every time they came to town there was a side who was just slightly better.

cuts deep for every Saints supporter that the time we finally get it all together and firing our run coincides with that of might of Geelong and the Collingwood ....
bit like Collingwood and Essendon in the early 2000's we unfortunate to come good in the era of the juggernaught in Brisbane ... Geelong also suffered that fate with WCE in the early 90's ..

to rub salt into the wounds of St Kilda our 09 G/f a goal was paid when it hit the post - the next year score review comes in ... we draw a g//f in 10 the next year they do away with the replay and play extra time ...
that footy god is a sick sadistic bastard to St Kilda fans ....

 

[tigertigertiger]

see heres the differance i am realistic about my team ... i know my team had two perfect opportunities to win our second flag the first time we went to war with geelong and in the end it took a heart breaking (for saints fans) toe poke in the midle of the ground to spoil the party other than that all game it was anyones to win .. thats what happens when you have two stand out teams going all out for the entire game had geelong played anyone but St Kilda in 09 they would have romped it in like they did in 2007 , had St Kilda played anyone but Geelong in that grand final they would have romped it in .... moving to 2010 my team were totally outplayed early and Collingwood who were the strongest team of the year looked to make short work of the saints until the saints dug in and pushed themselves beyond their ability in the end it was a poor bounce that force a draw and with that Collingwood learnt a valuble lesson and responded by smacking St Kilda the week later ... the replay grand final was like your grand final win one team turned up the other didnt ... you won well done but it wasnt a dominant crushing display nor was it a epic battle of greatness ... you beat an average team having an average day after dominating a pretty average season... the strength of the 2017 finals teams vs the strength of 2009 and 2010 finals teams 2017 would lose :
1. Richmond 2017 vs Geelong 2009 vs Collingwood 2010 = Richmond least likely Geelong most likely
2. Crows 2017 vs St Kilda 2009 vs St Kilda 2010 = Crows least likely Saints 2009 most likely
3. Geelong 2017 vs Bulldogs 2009 vs Geelong 2010 = Geelong 17 least likely Geelong 2010 easily
4. GWS 2017 vs Collingwood 2009 vs Bulldogs 2010 = GWS least likely Bulldogs most likely

3, not 2

 

[HTT]

yes because the opponent has no factor in that .... the tigers of 2017 would be destroyed by the saints of 09 ... heck the Bulldogs of 09 would have spanked the tigers of 17 , Collingwood of 09 would have beaten the tigers 17 .... the tigers of 17 wouldnt have made the finals playing against the 2009 AFL season

Again this whole imagining an actual game thing - it doesn't help at all. If St Kilda 09 were transported to the future and played Richmond 2017, Richmond 2017 would win in a canter. Middle of the road sides in 2017 would probably beat St Kilda 09. The game evolves, the talent pool remains roughly the same, but tactics and preparations evolve. St Kilda's game plan simply wouldn't stand up. When people throw around about how the premier has to improve in order to win next year, that's why.

St Kilda 09 were considerably more dominant than we were in either of the last two years. Purely from stats they won more games, scored similarly to how we did, and defended better. We aren't even relevant in this discussion. There's at least 4 teams clearly above the rest - Geelong, Hawthorn, Brisbane, Essendon (in no particular order), probably a couple more from earlier. The use of a hypothetical game shits me though. I guarantee Hawthorn 2015 would thrash Essendon 00, doesn't really change the argument though.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Again this whole imagining an actual game thing - it doesn't help at all. If St Kilda 09 were transported to the future and played Richmond 2017, Richmond 2017 would win in a canter. Middle of the road sides in 2017 would probably beat St Kilda 09. The game evolves, the talent pool remains roughly the same, but tactics and preparations evolve. St Kilda's game plan simply wouldn't stand up. When people throw around about how the premier has to improve in order to win next year, that's why.

St Kilda 09 were considerably more dominant than we were in either of the last two years. Purely from stats they won more games, scored similarly to how we did, and defended better. We aren't even relevant in this discussion. There's at least 4 teams clearly above the rest - Geelong, Hawthorn, Brisbane, Essendon (in no particular order), probably a couple more from earlier. The use of a hypothetical game shits me though. I guarantee Hawthorn 2015 would thrash Essendon 00, doesn't really change the argument though.

Richmond wouldn't get near that St.kilda side.

 

[_Mike_]

to rub salt into the wounds of St Kilda our 09 G/f a goal was paid when it hit the post - the next year score review comes in ... we draw a g//f in 10 the next year they do away with the replay and play extra time ...
that footy god is a sick sadistic bastard to St Kilda fans ....

There’s a fair share of clubs that have struggled over the last 50 years to get close to winning a flag on numerous occasions but fall short. Saints and Demons could have had another 2-3 flags each had a bit of luck gone their way. Unfortunately getting close isn’t something that’s celebrated, rather serving a cruel reminder of how harsh the game’s fortunes can be. Whilst the Saints were much closer than Melbourne were in their GF losses, it’s a bitter pill nonetheless.

 

[HTT]

Richmond wouldn't get near that St.kilda side.

Richmond 09? Well, we didn't get near St Kilda 09. We lost by 56 points.
But Richmond 17? We'll never know but I'd love to hear you explain how St Kilda's game plan wouldn't be significantly outdated when even elements of Richmond 17's gameplan were outdated by the end of 2018.

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

Richmond 09? Well, we didn't get near St Kilda 09. We lost by 56 points.
But Richmond 17? We'll never know but I'd love to hear you explain how St Kilda's game plan wouldn't be significantly outdated when even elements of Richmond 17's gameplan were outdated by the end of 2018.

game plan accounts for 20% of the result the strength of the team is the biggest factor yes the game evolves but the evolution of the game is not always in the positive some times the trends of footy that change the game style are developed in a way for weaker teams to cover flaws ... 2017 the talant pool of players was a lower standard than that of 2009 so the game style of 2017 was adapted to cover that with Richmond getting it right the most on their way to winning the flag , but that game style differance that Richmond used to win is not that dissimilar to the game plan St Kilda adopted in 2009 ... the whole team defence , the manic pressure on the ball to make the opponent turn the ball over and hurt them on the rebound thats very much the 2009 St Kilda model that Richmond adapted to win in 2017 ...
the St Kilda 09 teams midfield would have the Richmond midfield covered easily , the 2009 St Kilda Rucks would have dominated Richmonds rucks , the Richmond back line could not afford to play loose off any of the St Kilda Forwards and the sanints backline would have strangled the life out of your small forward line ...
yeah you had a game plan to win 2017 but the talant on the oval if you were facing the 2009 Saints would mean you would have struggled to implement your game plan the Saints by weight of numbers would have imposed their game style on the game ...
remember it wasnt a case of other teams figuring out how to stop the saints game style that saw us fall down the ladder it was losing the players with the ability to implement it that ended it

 

[HTT]

game plan accounts for 20% of the result the strength of the team is the biggest factor yes the game evolves but the evolution of the game is not always in the positive some times the trends of footy that change the game style are developed in a way for weaker teams to cover flaws ... 2017 the talant pool of players was a lower standard than that of 2009 so the game style of 2017 was adapted to cover that with Richmond getting it right the most on their way to winning the flag , but that game style differance that Richmond used to win is not that dissimilar to the game plan St Kilda adopted in 2009 ... the whole team defence , the manic pressure on the ball to make the opponent turn the ball over and hurt them on the rebound thats very much the 2009 St Kilda model that Richmond adapted to win in 2017 ...
the St Kilda 09 teams midfield would have the Richmond midfield covered easily , the 2009 St Kilda Rucks would have dominated Richmonds rucks , the Richmond back line could not afford to play loose off any of the St Kilda Forwards and the sanints backline would have strangled the life out of your small forward line ...
yeah you had a game plan to win 2017 but the talant on the oval if you were facing the 2009 Saints would mean you would have struggled to implement your game plan the Saints by weight of numbers would have imposed their game style on the game ...
remember it wasnt a case of other teams figuring out how to stop the saints game style that saw us fall down the ladder it was losing the players with the ability to implement it that ended it

Gameplan accounts for 20% lol what a joke. In 2016 we were putrid, overachieved to finish in 13th - we've got essentially the same list now, overhauled game plan, and over the last two years (cumulative) we've been the best team in the league. That's a big 20%. There's no valid way to compare the talent pool, but it doesn't make sense that it would weaken over time, and even if it did, its hardly in the club's control.

I believe you are confusing the competition becoming more equal, for it becoming weaker. The top teams are less dominant now than ever - that's why I insist we aren't relevant in this discussion. But look down the ladder and you'll see Adelaide finished 12th. I know for a fact that they are significantly better, both materially and relative to the rest of their competition, than Richmond in 2011 and 2012, when we finished 12th. From that I could deduce that the talent pool has gotten stronger - I mean, look at the players on that list. Walker, Betts, Sloane, Crouch x 2... Richmond 11-12 had Riewoldt, Cotchin... Martin was pretty good I guess but still a bit raw, and that's it. Really its because they've got those players instead of the top teams.
The best way to look at it is level of dominance, so you look at win/loss counts, finals results etc. Not a hypothetical game.

 

[Captain_Bender]

game plan accounts for 20% of the result the strength of the team is the biggest factor yes the game evolves but the evolution of the game is not always in the positive some times the trends of footy that change the game style are developed in a way for weaker teams to cover flaws ... 2017 the talant pool of players was a lower standard than that of 2009 so the game style of 2017 was adapted to cover that with Richmond getting it right the most on their way to winning the flag , but that game style differance that Richmond used to win is not that dissimilar to the game plan St Kilda adopted in 2009 ... the whole team defence , the manic pressure on the ball to make the opponent turn the ball over and hurt them on the rebound thats very much the 2009 St Kilda model that Richmond adapted to win in 2017 ...
the St Kilda 09 teams midfield would have the Richmond midfield covered easily , the 2009 St Kilda Rucks would have dominated Richmonds rucks , the Richmond back line could not afford to play loose off any of the St Kilda Forwards and the sanints backline would have strangled the life out of your small forward line ...
yeah you had a game plan to win 2017 but the talant on the oval if you were facing the 2009 Saints would mean you would have struggled to implement your game plan the Saints by weight of numbers would have imposed their game style on the game ...
remember it wasnt a case of other teams figuring out how to stop the saints game style that saw us fall down the ladder it was losing the players with the ability to implement it that ended it

Richmond's midfield has multiple Brownlow Medallist in it easily has St Kilda's covered, Richmond's backline has beaten better forward lines than St Kilda's would have no problem accounting for them, and Jack Riewoldt use to kick bags against St Kilda's no name backline in 09-10 Richmond's forward line would have no problem

 

[FlyHigh18]

Can't see why anyone would vote for a team that wasn't "strong" enough to follow up their flag with another and then a third.

Brisbane 01-03 will be the benchmark for decades to come. Proven strength over 3 years.