Rate the best performing clubs of the AFL era (1990-). Looking beyond number of premierships and at overall performance

[WCE Wizard]

My team is s**t. I have no gratification rights in this thread

Hawks
Brisbane
Geelong
Pies
North

West Coast were mostly drug cheating in this era*

*fu** oath they were.

Wow very salty, i guess you still have nightmares of that 66 point flogging we handed your so called AFL team

 

[Randall Stevens]

The problem with a lot of peoples blind logic here is Geelong were 1 quarter off having 4 premierships (and thus Hawthorn having 4 premierships). The rule that resulted in that win was changed swiftly the following year. Geelong, Hawthorn and WC would've each had 4 premierships and Geelongs records in almost every other aspect would've trumped them all

As others have pointed out, Geelong were much closer to losing ‘09 than to winning ‘08. And, Hawthorn were closer to winning ‘12 than Geelong were to winning ‘08. So if you want to play hypotheticals, Hawthorn 6- Geelong 2 was closer to materialising than 4-4.

But the reality is that however you spin ‘could have been’ premierships, it is a pointless exercise. Nobody celebrates lost grand finals, at the time or later, and only premierships actually won matter.

 

[WCE Wizard]

As others have pointed out, Geelong were much closer to losing ‘09 than to winning ‘08. And, Hawthorn were closer to winning ‘12 than Geelong were to winning ‘08. So if you want to play hypotheticals, Hawthorn 6- Geelong 2 was closer to materialising than 4-4.

But the reality is that however you spin ‘could have been’ premierships, it is a pointless exercise. Nobody celebrates lost grand finals, at the time or later, and only premierships actually won matter.

Finally someone talking some sense

 

[Farang83150]

.

Lol...richmond supporter trying for relevance in thread that actually points out how irrelevant his club's been for so many years..
Lol...Another 1 gets the ignore button.

 

[Farang83150]

I actually got back on board in 2010 when I could see we were on the right track.

Don't imagine anyone will find that comment in the least bit surprising.

 

[Toump Ass]

Obviously Richmond.

And don't forget Marlion Pickett won a premiership and he only played three quarters of football. At that rate if he plays 100 more games Richmond will end up with another 125 flags.

It's hard to argue against statistics like that.

Richmond are the best! Richmond are the best!

 

[HardcoreGeelongFan]

Would put Richmond above sydney but otherwise spot on

Adelaide went B2B

 

[beema limapep]

I didn’t think this thread could get worse, but Tiger fans have emphatically proved me wrong.

A Geelong fan complaining. Im suprised.

 

[beema limapep]

Adelaide went B2B

Double Bradbury if ive ever seen one. Stkilda 1flag in a gazillion year and North. Enough said really.

 

[HairyO]

Well played to the OP in keeping this out of The Bay.

"Look beyond the most important measure of success, so that my club can lay claim to being the best".

 

[Yojimbo]

Is there such a thing as a pure premiership ? Minor Premier and Eventual Premier.

2013: Hawthorn 19-3, Hawthorn Premier.
2010: Collingwood 17-4-1, Collingwood Premier.
2007: Geelong 18-4, Geelong Premier.
2006: West Coast 17-5, West Coast Premier.
2004: Port Adelaide 17-5, Port Adelaide Premier.
2000: Essendon 21-1, Essendon Premier.
1995: Carlton 20-2, Carlton Premier.
1994: West Coast 16-6, West Coast Premier.
1993: Essendon 13-6-1 (20), Essendon Premier.

So in thirty seasons we had Nine pure premiers, teams that finished second saluted on eleven occasions,
teams that finished third saluted on six occasions, teams that finished fourth saluted on two occasions,
teams that finished fifth saluted on one occasion, teams that finished seventh saluted on one occasion.
In every one of the abnormal years the abnormal premier defeated the minor premier in the grand
final or big dance to use a term that the traditionalists despise.

Only two teams went back to back to back for minor premierships the glorious Essendon teams of 1999 to
2001 with their amazing 56-10 record and the Port Adelaide teams of 2002 to 2004 with their amazing
record of 53-13.

Finals appearances can help determine consistent greatness and over the thirty seasons West Coast made
finals (23) times, Geelong on (21) occasions, Sydney on (20) and Hawthorn on (18) occasions, but most
people remember who gets the cheese at the end of most seasons. In a way I wish attacking teams won
the grand final every year so other teams would copy attacking teams, but points conceded is every bit
as important as points scored and it's sound to build a team from defence and easier and cheaper.

 

[WCE Wizard]

The more I read this thread surely bay 13 next we will say narrow grandfinal losses count as success

 

[BBC1967]

The more I read this thread surely bay 13 next we will say narrow grandfinal losses count as success

Ask a Pies supporter - narrow GF losses and PF wins count as moral victories in their clubs history books. Hell they make a doco after PF win?

 

[WCE Wizard]

Ask a Pies supporter - narrow GF losses and PF wins count as moral victories in their clubs history books. Hell they make a doco after PF win?
[/QUOTE
Haha Ssssshh man don’t get them started. Then you get Freo fans talking about their glorious. 2013 season when they almost won the flag.

 

[Raineman]

2006 you couldnt of done much more. Barry Hall was the difference maker in both those 2005-6 grand finals in both a good and bad way.

2005: Swans kick 8.10.58. Hall kicks 2 goals. Swans win by 4 points.
2006: Kick 12.12.84. Hall kicks 2 behinds. Swans lose by a point

Freomaniac, I’d say Quinten Lynch was the difference;
2006: Lynch kicks 3 goals, Eagles win by a point.
2005: Lynch plays 23 games that season but Woosha chooses to play Michael Gairdner at Full Forward. Gairdner kicks 2 points. Eagles lose by 4 points.

 

[Freomaniac]

Freomaniac, I’d say Quinten Lynch was the difference;
2006: Lynch kicks 3 goals, Eagles win by a point.
2005: Lynch plays 23 games that season but Woosha chooses to play Michael Gairdner at Full Forward. Gairdner kicks 2 points. Eagles lose by 4 points.

Quentin Lynch goal tally of 2005-7 reads like this.

2005: 31 goals from 22 games
2006: 65 goals from 25 games
2007: 52 goals from 24 games.

Shows how important he was in that period

 

[Freomaniac]

Any success measuring system that can allow a premiership winner to sit below a non-premiership winner just doesn't seem to sit right for me. I'm sure there's plenty of St Kilda supporters who would gladly trade in their 1997, 2009 and 2010 seasons in for the Bulldogs 2016 season in a heart beat.

That's just me, so I'd be interested to know if there are any St Kilda fans who do feel like they've been more successful than the Bulldogs over the last three decades. I wouldn't consider them far below the Bulldogs. They got very close multiple times. Arguably as close as you can possibly get without getting there.

had the dogs lost the 2016 grand final, Saints would be above the dogs

 

[Toump Ass]

Is there such a thing as a pure premiership?

No their isn't. There's a premiership and you win it by winning the grand final.

And if there was such a thing as a "pure" premiership, you'd surely need to discount clubs that cheated the salary cap (Carlton and Essendon)

 

[Mikevk123]

1. Hawthorn
2. Geelong
3. West Coast

 

[juss]

All teams play to get a flag

Best performing team has to be the one with most flags. Dumb/hilarious to say otherwise

All teams play to get flags true, but there are different measures and goals for teams, based on where they are at. It's not realistic for every club to win the flag every year, and for some seeing improvement to say make finals after a long period without them, or for example in GC's case the first time, is still a successful year.

Fans too, enjoy much more than just premierships. I didn't see one until 2017, but I still loved and enjoyed the ride with every win we had, every finals we made and so forth. Flags aren't won often, but there's a lot more to success than just that.


In terms of overall performance and not just the ultimate success, it would be a better measure to look at all of the following, and obviously weight flags more heavily, for example:

1. Premierships (most points)
2. Grand Finals
3. Finals wins
4. Finals made
5. Home and away games won (least points)

To look at premierships alone is far too dismissive of overall strong performance. There is a difference between success, and overall performance. A club can still perform well for a long period without just being measured on flags.

Using the above points system, I would imagine Hawthorn, Geelong, West Coast, and possibly Sydney, Collingwood and Brisbane would shape the first 6 teams?

 

[Yojimbo]

No their isn't. There's a premiership and you win it by winning the grand final.

And if there was such a thing as a "pure" premiership, you'd surely need to discount clubs that cheated the salary cap (Carlton and Essendon)

Obviously I meant number one in the home and away, still number one after the finals as being a pure
premiership, but you don't get a bigger cup larger banner or shinier medals as a result. Lots of clubs
and individuals did a lot worse things than cheating the salary cap during the nineties.

 

[FrustratedTiger]

Would put Richmond above sydney but otherwise spot on

I wouldn't. I'd drop us a few. We've had a good last 3 years but a diabolical previous 24 in the AFL era.

 

[Coaster2012]

My team is s**t. I have no gratification rights in this thread

Hawks
Brisbane
Geelong
Pies
North

West Coast were mostly drug cheating in this era*

*fu** oath they were.

Drug cheats? Quote me the sources where they took PEDS.

If you are referring to recreational drugs, they aren't performance enhancing, and there were a ton of players for many clubs engaging in the same s**t.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Interesting how some value GF appearances as a measure of success.

Question then, how would the same view multiple appearances like Coll (6) and Syd (6) for 2 flags as a success to say richmond who have played 2 but won 2. Which scenario is more successful then?

 

[cryptor]

had the dogs lost the 2016 grand final, Saints would be above the dogs

I agree. But they didn't. Hence why I think Bulldogs have to be rated above them, even if only marginally so due to how very close the Saints have got to a flag on multiple occasions.