Quickest premiership rebuild (1990 onwards)

Remove this Banner Ad

Wetdog

I really am Aker.
Jun 23, 2008
2,404
4,396
Williamstown
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Melbourne Victory
We often hear that a club's list is "rebuilding" towards a premiership. The best case in point at the moment is a Richmond, North Melbourne or Melbourne. Or if you look back only a year or two, Carlton. Every club, at some point or another, has been in premiership rebuild mode. The clubs tend to use this to manage supporters, sponsors and the media's expectation during the lean years. It takes the pressure off.

It got me thinking. After a team has won a premiership, what is the quickest period of time it has rebuilt its list to win the premiership again?

I have confined this post to the modern era of football, 1990 and onwards. The reasons are threefold: firstly, I started following football at around this time and, secondly, I couldn't be stuffed going through the history books back to 1897. Thirdly, the further we go back the less relevance it has to now. Before anyone complains about their club's quicker premiership rebuild in 1255, I'm not saying it is any less in important but I had to draw the line somewhere and 1990 is as good as any other year. It's purely arbitrary.

This is what I found:

1. Teams that have successfully rebuilt premiership lists in the modern era (1990 onwards)

1. North Melbourne: 1996 - 1999 - 3 years
2. Essendon: 1993 - 2000 - 7 years
3. West Coast: 1994 - 2006 - 12 years
4. Hawthorn: 1991 - 2008 - 17 years
5. Collingwood: 1990 - 2010 - 20 years

2. Teams that have won a premiership(s) in the modern era, but are yet to develop another premiership winning list

6. Geelong: 2007- 2009 (still pursuing premierships with current list)
7. Sydney: 2005 - 6 years
8. Port Adelaide: 2004 - 7 years
9. Brisbane: 2001 - 2003 - 8 years
10. Adelaide: 1997 - 1998 - 13 years
11.Carlton: 1995 - 16 years

3. Teams that are yet to win a premiership at all in the modern era

12. Fremantle
13. Gold Coast
14. Melbourne
15. Richmond
16. St Kilda
17. Western Bulldogs

Now, I did not includes WCE 1992 and 1994 (75% of the players played in both premierships), Adelaide 1997-1998 (back to back), Brisbane Lions 2001-2003 (back to back to back) or Geelong's 2007-2009 (81% of the players played in both premierships) in the first category as the lists were not rebuilt and the premierships were effectively part of the same dynasty.

Of course, it depends on what you define as a "rebuild" between premierships. I applied a simple 50% formula rule relating to the team fielded in the Grand Finals. If the team had 50% or more of the same players playing in the previous and next premiership, then it was apart of the same dynasty. If it was less than 50%, then it was considered a rebuild of the list. It is a simplistic approach and not perfect. The benefit, however, is it removes all subjective argument and relies purely on a statistical analysis.

I initially considered North Melbourne's premierships of 1996 and 1999 to be part of the same dynasty, but when I inspected their GF teams I found a big player turn over in that short three years. Only 10 players (47%) played in both premierships. The same core group was obviously present in both GF. I'm sure there are a million reasons why NM belong in category 2. It didn't feel like a true rebuild, i.e. they never bottomed out, they continued to compete in the finals in 1997/1998 and they had the same coach and key core playing group. They probably belong in category 2 and are only in category 1 due to the simplistic nature of my formula. In relation to Essendon, only 7 players (35%) played in both the 1993 and 2000 premierships. This feels much more like a truer rebuild than NM.

What does this all tell us? Maybe nothing! Or maybe it tells us:

1. When the club is telling us they are rebuilding to win a premiership, it probably won't eventuate in a premiership; or

2. If it does happen to eventuate, it will be a while!
 

McCrann

Premiership Player
Nov 1, 2007
3,882
822
Australia
AFL Club
St Kilda
North Melbourne 1996 - 1999 a rebuild?

Hardly.

1996 - Premiership
1997 - Preliminary Final
1998 - Grand Final Runners-Up
1999 - Premiership

Where's the rebuild? And how many dual Premiership players there?

Ok, read on in your post - I see your point, but with 10 core players (out of 18 on the ground, 21 in the team). That is most probably higher than 50% on the ground at any given time.
 

Wetdog

I really am Aker.
Jun 23, 2008
2,404
4,396
Williamstown
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Melbourne Victory
North Melbourne 1996 - 1999 a rebuild?

Hardly.

1996 - Premiership
1997 - Preliminary Final
1998 - Grand Final Runners-Up
1999 - Premiership

Where's the rebuild? And how many dual Premiership players there?

Ok, read on in your post - I see your point, but with 10 core players (out of 18 on the ground, 21 in the team). That is most probably higher than 50% on the ground at any given time.

Yeah. I know. I see the 1996 and 1999 premierships as the same dynasty as well. It's just when I applied my criteria they fell on the other side of the 50% line.

It's not a full rebuild of the list, but at the very least a partial rebuild. I was staggered to see that there was such a high turnover of players. I was expecting a similar % to WCE 1992/1994 and Geelong 2007/2009. It's a credit to D.Pagen and the football department that they could maintain such high quality with that type of turnover.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

wmvaux

All Australian
Jul 29, 2008
900
163
AFL Club
Collingwood
I don't think you can say a team has built a list unless it's under the same coach.
Sure some quality players may be picked up before a new coach, but the building of the list is usually done by the new coach.

Meaning Hawthorn 1991-2008 wasn't 17 years in the making, it was when Clarkson took over in 2005

Collingwood 1990-2010 should be 2000-2010 when Malthouse was in charge.
 

Wetdog

I really am Aker.
Jun 23, 2008
2,404
4,396
Williamstown
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Melbourne Victory
I don't think you can say a team has built a list unless it's under the same coach.
Sure some quality players may be picked up before a new coach, but the building of the list is usually done by the new coach.

Meaning Hawthorn 1991-2008 wasn't 17 years in the making, it was when Clarkson took over in 2005

Collingwood 1990-2010 should be 2000-2010 when Malthouse was in charge.

I disagree. The building and development of the list is not the exclusive domain of the coach, but involves recruiting managers, football manager, assistant coaches, development staff etc, some of which may pre-date the coach joining the club.

By your rationale if Geelong win on Saturday Brad Scott would have "built" a
premiership list in 1 year. But we already know he inherited a list in the middle of a dynasty, not built one.

I guess the purpose of this thread was to establish how long it has taken the clubs to develop a list to the point where it wins the premiership. So, with Hawthorn it took 17 years where there was no doubt multiple rebuilds of the list until A. Clarkson & co finally suceeded in 2008.
 

Teffy

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
May 6, 2011
5,694
38
Norf
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
The Crutchy Push
1. North Melbourne: 1996 - 1999 - 3 years

This still contained the core of the previous side from 96.

2. Essendon: 1993 - 2000 - 7 years

The "Baby Bombers" from 93. Again, not a true rebuild, more an indication of underachievement.

3. West Coast: 1994 - 2006 - 12 years

This is the only real example of a quick rebuild.

4. Hawthorn: 1991 - 2008 - 17 years

Statistically, a side should win a premiership evey 16 years. Hawthorn 2008 falls outside this range and then there is the obvious "fluke" arguments associated with the 2008 flag.

5. Collingwood: 1990 - 2010 - 20 years

A "rebuild" of sorts, but by a club with advantageous lopsided resources.



I can't see any club catching West Coasts record in the next decade.
 

Teffy

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
May 6, 2011
5,694
38
Norf
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
The Crutchy Push
I initially considered North Melbourne's premierships of 1996 and 1999 to be part of the same dynasty, but when I inspected their GF teams I found a big player turn over in that short three years. Only 10 players (47%) played in both premierships. The same core group was obviously present in both GF. I'm sure there are a million reasons why NM belong in category 2. It didn't feel like a true rebuild, i.e. they never bottomed out, they continued to compete in the finals in 1997/1998 and they had the same coach and key core playing group. They probably belong in category 2 and are only in category 1 due to the simplistic nature of my formula. In relation to Essendon, only 7 players (35%) played in both the 1993 and 2000 premierships. This feels much more like a truer rebuild than NM.

What does this all tell us?

Wayne Carey was the greatest footballer to ever pull on a boot.
 

fogelhoon

Debutant
Mar 21, 2007
127
0
AFL Club
West Coast
INteresting topic.
I find it a bit hard though because it is between premierships. As stated the NM one wasn't really a rebuild, and Collingwood wer in the GF's in the early 90's. West Coast were still good in 96/97 bottomed out in 99/2000 and had a gradual rise back.
If it's between premieships i cant see it as a rebuild as teasm like the HAwks haven't really bottomed out they have been in the 4 for a few years now.
Also the turnover of players for NM would have been a slow process not just bang losing 50% over 1 year but would have been a few one year then a few more etc
 

Fevola99

Club Legend
Sep 16, 2008
1,901
2,129
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Cucamonga Cracker Killers
Not all rebuilds are successful. Hawthorn were not building their team for 17 years, they rebuilt the list two other times and failed to win a premiership. They started rebuilding again in 2005 and won a premiership after four years. What you've really listed is time between premierships with different teams.
If St Kilda give up on the current list and start over next year they will be in year one of a rebuild, not year 47.
 

wmvaux

All Australian
Jul 29, 2008
900
163
AFL Club
Collingwood
I disagree. The building and development of the list is not the exclusive domain of the coach, but involves recruiting managers, football manager, assistant coaches, development staff etc, some of which may pre-date the coach joining the club.

By your rationale if Geelong win on Saturday Brad Scott would have "built" a
premiership list in 1 year. But we already know he inherited a list in the middle of a dynasty, not built one.

I guess the purpose of this thread was to establish how long it has taken the clubs to develop a list to the point where it wins the premiership. So, with Hawthorn it took 17 years where there was no doubt multiple rebuilds of the list until A. Clarkson & co finally suceeded in 2008.

Yes the rebuilding involves the recruiting managers...etc and Geelong is a different situation as the coach left while the team was still a top team.

98% of the time a new coach takes over because the previous coach couldn't get the team to the ultimate success or has gotten success and is on the down slide, but it's the new coach who builds the team to what it can deliver.

Rebuilds vary depending on the list, but the basics are they need key players to build a team around, the key players are quality players.

The new coach has to work out the playing list and work out who will be playing in the future and what they need to add to the team to fill the weaknesses in the team.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The "Baby Bombers" from 93. Again, not a true rebuild, more an indication of underachievement.
Brand new HB and Centre line. Replaced the KPF.

7 blokes from 1993 played in 2000. 2 of which were Long and Bewick who were on their last legs with Wallis not far behind them.

So you could mount a case that Misiti, Mecuria, Hird and Fletcher were the only babies still in their prime.


:eek: No. It wasn't a rebuild at all.

Not to mention if WCE win one soon they would have most likely have 5 blokes from 2006 running around and yet your happy to call that a rebuild.
 
Obviously not a 'premiership' rebuild, but an impressive one nonetheless was the '02-'03 Pies, 2yrs of bottoming out and then 4 out of 5yrs made at least preliminary final '07-'11.

Sounds like a "Collingwood" rebuild then...
 

Glory Days

Club Legend
Oct 14, 2003
1,311
91
Spain
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Athletic Club de Bilbao
Obviously not a 'premiership' rebuild, but an impressive one nonetheless was the '02-'03 Pies, 2yrs of bottoming out and then 4 out of 5yrs made at least preliminary final '07-'11.

Would have to day the Pies have done it best, much as it hurts.

I think the definition should be changed from time between premierships to time between preparing a list to challenge for a flag. ie North have been building a list from 2006, are not likely to challenge for a flag until 2013/4...

The Pies obviously challenged the Lions in 02 and 03, then bottomed out by 'playing the kids', clearly for draft picks, and in the process, nabbed Pendles and Thomas - nice tanking.
 

gazzas army

Club Legend
Suspended
Jul 26, 2009
1,203
1
Down the Road from you
AFL Club
Geelong
Would have to day the Pies have done it best, much as it hurts.

I think the definition should be changed from time between premierships to time between preparing a list to challenge for a flag. ie North have been building a list from 2006, are not likely to challenge for a flag until 2013/4...

The Pies obviously challenged the Lions in 02 and 03, then bottomed out by 'playing the kids', clearly for draft picks, and in the process, nabbed Pendles and Thomas - nice tanking.
2 flags in 51 years.........................yeah good one!
 
Feb 22, 2009
19,598
19,461
LOL @ Norf
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
GeeLOL sucks, so does $hitney
You need to look closer at each clubs' list to gauge when a rebuild starts and ends I reckon.

When a club is playing an average X number of players with < 50 games each week then they're rebuilding. (10+ seem about right?)
When that number drops to 1-4 per week then they're in premiership mode.

Maybe the most interesting stat would be to find the team which has experimented with the LEAST amount of < 50 game players before being able to win their next flag, indicating they were able to find the right "mix" soonest to challenge again.

Even so, it doesn't prove much. Only that a particular club got lucky with the draft, father/sons, injuries or lack thereof and so on.
There's no magic formula for building a premiership list and winning one usually requires a huge slice of luck.
 

Ron The Bear

Up yer arse, AFL
30k Posts 10k Posts
Jul 4, 2006
35,845
36,723
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
The following teams won a premiership with a relatively old team, then rebounded to win their next flag inside a decade with a significantly younger team (averages are average age for all the club's teams throughout the season):

Code:
Cb Pr 1 Avg 1 Pr 2 Avg 2 Period Ply
-----------------------------------
Ca 1982 25.96 1987 24.21 5 years  5
Ca 1938 26.22 1945 25.35 7 years  8
Me 1948 25.35 1955 22.86 7 years  3
Co 1919 26.81 1927 24.08 8 years  1
Es 1985 25.65 1993 24.42 8 years  5

Ply = number of players who played senior footy in both seasons
 

Ron The Bear

Up yer arse, AFL
30k Posts 10k Posts
Jul 4, 2006
35,845
36,723
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Contiguous premiership years without any player common to both:

Code:
11 years Ri 1921,1932
11 years Ge 1952,1963
12 years Es 1950,1962
13 years Me 1926,1939
14 years Ge 1937,1951
15 years Sy 1918,1933
17 years Co 1936,1953
17 years Ha 1991,2008
18 years Es 1924,1942
19 years Es 1965,1984
19 years NM 1977,1996
20 years Co 1990,2010
21 years Ca 1947,1968
22 years Fi 1922,1944
23 years Ca 1915,1938
24 years Ri 1943,1967
26 years Me 1900,1926
32 years Co 1958,1990
44 years Ge 1963,2007
72 years Sy 1933,2005


Shortest period between contiguous flags with x players common to both seasons:

Code:
 0 players 11 years Ri 1921,1932 Ge 1952,1963
 1 player   8 years Fi 1905,1913 Co 1919,1927
 2 players  9 years Sy 1909,1918
 3 players  7 years Me 1948,1955
 4 players  6 years Ca 1908,1914
 5 players  5 years Fi 1899,1904 Ca 1982,1987
 6 players  6 years Ri 1974,1980
 7 players  6 years Fi 1916,1922 Ge 1931,1937
 8 players  7 years Ca 1938,1945 Me 1941,1948
 9 players  5 years Co 1930,1935 Co 1953,1958
10 players  4 years Ri 1969,1973
 

Ron The Bear

Up yer arse, AFL
30k Posts 10k Posts
Jul 4, 2006
35,845
36,723
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Since 1990:

Code:
Co 1990 2010 20 years  0 players
Ha 1991 2008 17 years  0 players
WC 1992 1994  2 years 26 players
Es 1993 2000  7 years  9 players
WC 1994 2006 12 years  1 player
NM 1996 1999  3 years 17 players
Ad 1997 1998  1 year  28 players
Br 2001 2002  1 year  28 players
Br 2002 2003  1 year  27 players
Ge 2007 2009  2 years 24 players
Ge 2009 2011  2 years 23 players
 

Ron The Bear

Up yer arse, AFL
30k Posts 10k Posts
Jul 4, 2006
35,845
36,723
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Number of players used by each premiership team who also played senior games at the club in the previous 12 seasons:

Code:
     Cb -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 -7 -8 -9-10-11-12
-------------------------------------------
1898 Fi 21           
1899 Fi 22 17          
1900 Me 17 16 11         
1901 Es 19 17 14 14        
1902 Co 20 13 13 11 10       
1903 Co 19 11 10 10  8  6      
1904 Fi 17 14 11  7  5  4  3     
1905 Fi 19 14 12 10  6  4  2  2    
1906 Ca 17 11  8  2  1  1      
1907 Ca 23 15  9  7  2  1  1     
1908 Ca 22 18 13  8  7  2  2  2    
1909 Sy 19 13 10  4  1  1      
1910 Co 20 16 10  7  5  4  4  3  2   
1911 Es 20 11 10  8  6  5  3  2  1  1  1  1
1912 Es 21 16  9  9  7  5  4  2  1  1  1  1
1913 Fi 16 13  9  7  5  4  1  1  1  1   
1914 Ca 17 14  9  7  5  4  4  3  3  1  1  1
1915 Ca 22 13 11  8  5  5  3  3  2  2  
1916 Fi 22 16 17 10 10  6  5  3  2   
1917 Co 22 14 13 10 11 10  6  5  4  2  2  1
1918 Sy 17    12  8  5  4  4  3  2  1  1 
1919 Co 20 19 17 11 10  7  7  6  4  3  2  1
1920 Ri 21 10 12  9 10 10  5  5  4  4  3  1
1921 Ri 20 16  9 10  7  7  7  3  4  4  4  3
1922 Fi 22 18 14 11 10  7  6  5  5  3  2  2
1923 Es 22 15  9  7  4        3  3  3  1  1
1924 Es 26 20 14  8  6  4        3  3  3  1
1925 Ge 22 17 14  7  6  4  2  2     2  
1926 Me 20 14 11  8  6  3  1     
1927 Co 19 15 12  9  6  3  3  1    
1928 Co 21 18 15 11  8  6  3  3  1   
1929 Co 19 17 14 11  7  5  4  1  1   
1930 Co 21 17 14 12  9  6  4  3  1  1  
1931 Ge 24 18 11  9  7  6  4  3  2   
1932 Ri 22 18 14 11  8  6  4     
1933 Sy 21 14 11  9  7  6  3  1    
1934 Ri 21 19 17 15 11  9  7  5  4   
1935 Co 22 17 10  9  9  7  7  5  4  3  2  1
1936 Co 25 19 15  8  7  7  5  5  3  3  2  1
1937 Ge 23 17 13 11  8  7  6  4  2  2  1 
1938 Ca 22 19 14 10  8  6  4  3  2  1  1  1
1939 Me 23 19 15 10  6  3  1  1    
1940 Me 27 19 17 14 10  6  3  1  1   
1941 Me 25 22 14 12 11  9  6  3  1  1  
1942 Es 22 20 15 10 10 10  8  6  4   
1943 Ri 23 18 15 11  7  5  5  5  5  2  2  2
1944 Fi 26 19 22 21 12  7  3  4  1  2  1 
1945 Ca 19 16 15 13 13 10  8  4  3  2  1  1
1946 Es 16 15 16 13 10 10  6  2  2  3  1  1
1947 Ca 23 16 16 11 10  8  4  2  2   
1948 Me 27 19 10  9 10  6  8  7  4  3  3  3
1949 Es 27 24 16  9  8 10  8  6  6  3  1  1
1950 Es 26 21 19 11  6  6  6  4  3  3  2  1
1951 Ge 21 21 14  9  5  1      
1952 Ge 25 17 14  9  5  4      
1953 Co 23 20 17 11  9  6  4  3  1  1  1  1
1954 WB 29 16 12  8  5  3  3  2     1
1955 Me 25 20 11 10  5  3  3  1  1     1
1956 Me 24 22 16  8  7  4  2  2  1  1  
1957 Me 21 19 16 10  3  2      
1958 Co 26 20 15 11  9  6  6  5  2  1  1  1
1959 Me 24 23 16 15 13  7  2  2    
1960 Me 22 20 19 13 12 11  6  2  2   
1961 Ha 21 13 10  8  6  3  2  1  1  1  1 
1962 Es 25 18 14  9  6  3  3  3  3  2  2 
1963 Ge 25 22 15  9  4  3  2     
1964 Me 24 18 14 11  9  6  6  4  4  4  3 
1965 Es 23 23 19 17 15 11  6  4  2  2  2  2
1966 St 27 18 16 12  7  5  4  3  1   
1967 Ri 27 23 15 10  7  7  6  6  4  2  
1968 Ca 27 21 15 11  8  6  5  3  2  2  1 
1969 Ri 28 23 18 15  9  6  4  4  3  3  1  1
1970 Ca 28 21 17 12  9  8  5  3  3  3  2  2
1971 Ha 28 22 13 12  7  3  2  2  2  1  
1972 Ca 29 24 18 13 11  9  6  5  2  1  1  1
1973 Ri 26 20 13 10 11  9  5  3  1  1  1  1
1974 Ri 29 21 16 10  8  9  7  4  2   
1975 NM 30 23 16 13 10  6  5  2    
1976 Ha 26 19 19 15 10  9  6  3  3  1  
1977 NM 27 20 16 13 10  8  4  2  1   
1978 Ha 21 20 17 12 12 10  7  6  3  1  1 
1979 Ca 26 21 20 16 13 11  9  8  7  6  2  2
1980 Ri 27 21 17 11  6  5  4  4  2  2  2  2
1981 Ca 24 18 15 12 11 10  9  7  6  5  4  3
1982 Ca 28 19 14 11  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
1983 Ha 26 23 20 16 14  9  9  7  5  5  5  4
1984 Es 26 19 15 13 12 10  7  2  2  2  
1985 Es 28 24 16 15 13 13 10  7  2  2  2 
1986 Ha 25 22 20 16 13 12  8  7  2  2  2  1
1987 Ca 27 19 13  8  5  4  2  2  1  1  1 
1988 Ha 25 20 17 16 13 11  8  8  5  4  1  1
1989 Ha 27 22 17 14 13 11  9  6  6  4  3  1
1990 Co 29 25 21 11  9  7  4  3  3  3  3  1
1991 Ha 28 24 22 18 13 10 10  8  7  6  6  4
1992 WC 30 22 18 14 10       
1993 Es 29 20 17 15 12 10  6  5  5  4  1  1
1994 WC 29 26 22 16 12  9  6     
1995 Ca 27 18 18 12 11  9  8  7  7  3  2  1
1996 NM 27 20 17 13 11 11 10  7  5  3  3  2
1997 Ad 25 17 12 12  9  6      
1998 Ad 28 21 14 10 11  9  6     
1999 NM 27 21 17 14 12 10  8  7  6  6  3  2
2000 Es 28 23 21 17 14 10  9  8  3  3  4  3
2001 Br 26 21 21 15 14 11  9  6  5  3  3  1
2002 Br 28 20 18 18 13 12 10  8  5  4  2  2
2003 Br 27 27 18 17 18 13 12 10  8  5  4  2
2004 PA 25 20 17 15 12  9  9     
2005 Sy 26 23 19 17 15 11  6  5  4  2  
2006 WC 30 26 19 17 13 11  9  7  6  3  1  1
2007 Ge 28 26 22 19 18 11  9  5  3  2  1 
2008 Ha 25 23 19 12 10  9  5  3  2  2  1  1
2009 Ge 29 24 23 21 18 15 15  9  8  4  2  1
2010 Co 30 24 19 14 12  9  8  7  7  6  2  1
2011 Ge 29 23 22 19 17 16 14 12 12  9  7  3


Number of players currently at each club who played senior games at the club 2000-2011 (includes rookies):

Code:
Cb 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 00
--------------------------------------
Ad 30 21 20 15 10 10  7  4  4  3  1  1
Br 34 24 17 12  9  8  6  4  3  3  3  2
Ca 34 27 20 17 13 10  8  6  3  1  
Co 28 22 20 17 13  9  7  4  3  2  2  1
Es 34 31 24 21 17 13 10  8  5  3  3  2
Fr 33 27 20 11  9  8  7  4  4  4  3  2
Ge 31 25 19 18 15 13 12 11  9  9  6  4
GC 40           
Ha 30 22 21 15 14 14 10  5  4  4  2  1
Me 34 27 23 16 13 10  6  5  3  1  1  1
NM 35 27 22 14 12  6  5  4  4  2  2  1
PA 32 25 18 16 14 10  7  6  3  2  1 
Ri 30 25 19 13 13  8  6  4  1  1  
St 30 23 21 19 15 13 12 11  8  7  5  2
St 31 27 18 14 10  9  7  5  4  3  3  3
WC 33 30 21 18 15 13 10  9  5  5  4  2
WB 33 21 17 14 14 13 11  9  7  6  3  1
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back