Rank the runner ups of this century

[_Mike_]

Geelong in 08 is the obvious one but I think you are forgetting just how good the Sydney of 2014 team was. I mean the Grand Final was awful, but the team played some of the most dominant football I have ever seen from a Swans team in 2014. The match where the Swans dismantled Geelong by over 100 points was truly amazing to watch.

As runners up, I'd comfortably have Sydney ahead of Geelong

 

[adammania9]

i thought Collingwood 2011 were destined to go back to back and i used to watch them to enjoy the excellence until the last 3rd of the season when something happened and they dropped off.

It made it so hard to assess their status during the finals; based on the first half of the year i would rate them better than Geelong 2008.

I still feel it was destiny that we win 2011 as well, but that might just be my bias talking. Footy writes cruel narratives.

 

[GastevsBeard]

Geelong 08
Saints 09

Collectively won 45/50 games, and statistically the most dominant H&A seasons alongside Essendon 2000 in the games history

An utter travesty they couldn't get the job done. Worse still Geelong 08 really dominated the first half, leaving the door ajar with wayward kicking

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Geelong 08
Saints 09

Collectively won 45/50 games, and statistically the most dominant H&A seasons alongside Essendon 2000 in the games history

An utter travesty they couldn't get the job done. Worse still Geelong 08 really dominated the first half, leaving the door ajar with wayward kicking

Please explain to me how St Kilda 2009 was any more statistically dominant than Collingwood 2011?

 

[beta_condition]

Geelong 08
Saints 09

Collectively won 45/50 games, and statistically the most dominant H&A seasons alongside Essendon 2000 in the games history

An utter travesty they couldn't get the job done. Worse still Geelong 08 really dominated the first half, leaving the door ajar with wayward kicking

What a myth Geelong dominated the first half, Hawthorn controlled the majority of the first quarter until Geelong pulled some late goal out their arse.

 

[KeilorUnder9s]

Technically speaking, 1990 was the final year of the 9th decade in that century. So yes, as I said technically. It’s obviously never going to be referred to as the 80’s. However that was never really up for debate, it was about what the first year of this century/millennium was, which was 2001, as that was the first year after the completion of 2000 years. It’s really really simple stuff.

Are you joking?

0-9 = decade

 

[King_Tredrea]

Are you joking?

0-9 = decade

Technically speaking, no, it’s not. 0-9 being considered a decade exists simply for aesthetics. 2001-2010 is a decade *technically*. Once again, I’m not suggesting that this be used as the norm, because clearly that’s not gonna happen and would be confusing.

 

[Brett C]

Are you joking?

0-9 = decade

Let’s go back to to BC & AD to make it simple. The years went from 1 BC to 1 AD so it’s 1-10 is a decade. There was no year zero.

 

[GastevsBeard]

Please explain to me how St Kilda 2009 was any more statistically dominant than Collingwood 2011?

Well, statistically Pies 11 and St.K 09 were very similar

The difference was Collingwood could not beat Geelong in 2011... 3 games, 3 losses. St Kilda beat Geelong in H&A of that season in one of the great H&A games of the modern era

It is probably compounded further by the fact St Kilda were in it until the death of the 2009 GF. Collingwood looked shot 10 seconds into the granny when Varcoe went BANG

 

[nut]

Let’s go back to to BC & AD to make it simple. The years went from 1 BC to 1 AD so it’s 1-10 is a decade. There was no year zero.

Yer but who won?

 

[Collingwoodity]

Geelong in 08 is the obvious one but I think you are forgetting just how good the Sydney of 2014 team was. I mean the Grand Final was awful, but the team played some of the most dominant football I have ever seen from a Swans team in 2014. The match where the Swans dismantled Geelong by over 100 points was truly amazing to watch.

Collingwood in 2011 were clearly better than Sydney in 2014.

 

[Brett C]

Yer but who won?

Pretty sure if was Richmond with Judas Iscariot dominating the comp to win the Jesus Medal, God medal and ecclesiastic cup to be the greatest non neck tatt AFL of all time.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Well, statistically Pies 11 and St.K 09 were very similar

The difference was Collingwood could not beat Geelong in 2011... 3 games, 3 losses. St Kilda beat Geelong in H&A of that season in one of the great H&A games of the modern era

It is probably compounded further by the fact St Kilda were in it until the death of the 2009 GF. Collingwood looked shot 10 seconds into the granny when Varcoe went BANG

We were down by a goal at three quarter time, and led by around four goals at one stage.

We were one poor quarter away from the premiership.

 

[threesixpio]

As runners up, I'd comfortably have Sydney ahead of Geelong

Sure you would

 

[KeilorUnder9s]

Let’s go back to to BC & AD to make it simple. The years went from 1 BC to 1 AD so it’s 1-10 is a decade. There was no year zero.

1900-1909 = 10 Years = ‘dec’ade

 

[Catsnlakers]

Please explain to me how St Kilda 2009 was any more statistically dominant than Collingwood 2011?

St Kilda of 09 didn't get pumped by 96 points in the last round like you guys did, from walking out of the ground that night I knew we'd be premiers, can't say I ever thought that in 09 until the actual final siren on GF day.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

St Kilda of 09 didn't get pumped by 96 points in the last round like you guys did, from walking out of the ground that night I knew we'd be premiers, can't say I ever thought that in 09 until the actual final siren on GF day.

Meaningless match after we’d stitched up the minor premiership.

It’s like reading into our final round loss to the Hawks in Round 22 the year before. Still went on to win the premiership with three 7 goal thumping from that point.

 

[Final Siren]

The only knock on Collingwood 2011 is how they faded. Until the last round of the regular season, they were one of the most dominant teams in history. But they struggled through the finals to the point where I don't even think they were favourites heading into the GF.

Then again, St Kilda 2009 didn't exactly steamroll their way through finals, either.

 

[Final Siren]

Technically speaking, no, it’s not. 0-9 being considered a decade exists simply for aesthetics. 2001-2010 is a decade *technically*. Once again, I’m not suggesting that this be used as the norm, because clearly that’s not gonna happen and would be confusing.

Ooh, a grammar debate! You are wrong:

It isn't like "century," which begins with year 1 / 1001 / 2001.

 

[King_Tredrea]

Ooh, a grammar debate! You are wrong:

It isn't like "century," which begins with year 1 / 1001 / 2001.

I don’t disagree. As I said, decades the way we know and analyze them (“the 80’s” etc etc) exists for aesthetical reasons. It’s easy to understand. I’m perfectly aware that a decade is any block of 10 years.

 

[Final Siren]

I don’t disagree. As I said, decades the way we know and analyze them (“the 80’s” etc etc) exists for aesthetical reasons. It’s easy to understand. I’m perfectly aware that a decade is any block of 10 years.

You tried to tell KeilorUnder9s that he was technically wrong to say a decade is a block of years x0-x9. In fact, he is correct according to all three common definitions!

 

[Requiem]

Yeah any objective supporter would have to say that. I prayed hard for a miracle for nearly a week before that game and by half time I was pretty much numb.
We were lucky to make the grand final and I suspect any other team would have had a similar result if they made it. Might not have been as much because some teams would have shut up shop and put 4 behind the ball.

Yeah, Geelong were a beast in 2007, head and shoulders above the next best.

Personally, I thought that after the round 21 victory over the cats, Port could have mounted as a respectable opponent in the finals.

Both Port and Geelong had a similar vein of form in the finals pre Grand Final.

Pity the Eagles fell apart after their defeat at The Cattery, if fully fit and cohesive, they could have given Geelong an almighty shake that season.

 

[King_Tredrea]

You tried to tell KeilorUnder9s that he was technically wrong to say a decade is a block of years x0-x9. In fact, he is correct according to all three common definitions!

That’s fair enough. I think the discussion just ended up being something it wasn’t as a result of people not understanding when this century began tbh

 

[Go_Dogs]

Adelaide 2017 - 15-6-1 @ 136%
Sydney 2016 - 17-5 @ 151%
West coast 2015 - 16-5-1 @ 148%
Sydney 2014 - 17-5 @ 143%
Freo 2013 - 16-5-1 @ 134%
Hawks 2012 - 17-5 @ 155%
Collingwood 2011 - 20-2 @ 168%
St Kilda 2010 - 15-6-1 @ 122%
St Kilda 2009 - 20-2 @ 156%
Geelong 2008 - 21-1 @162%
Port 2007 - 15-7 @ 113%
Sydney 2006 - 14-8 @ 129%
West Coast 2005 - 17-5 @ 124%
Brisbane 2004 - 16-6 @ 137%
Collingwood 2003 - 15-7 @ 121%
Collingwood 2002 - 13-9 @ 110%
Essendon 2001 - 17-5 @ 134%
Melbourne 2000 - 14-7 @ 118%

Based on wins and losses over the H&A, along with % hard to go past the sides bolded above. Collingwood, Saints and Geelong clear standouts.

 

[hk89]

1. Sydney (2014)
2. Fremantle (2013)
3. West Coast (2015)
4. Geelong (2008)
5. Hawthorn (2012)
6. Brisbane (2004)
7. Essendon (2001)
8. St Kilda (2010)
9. Collingwood (2003)
10. Collingwood (2002)
11. Sydney (2006)
12 Adelaide (2017)
13. Sydney (2016)
14. West Coast (2005)
15. St Kilda (2009)
16. Collingwood (2011)
17. Port Adelaide (2007)