Sydney have the most talented list according to Champion Data

Which team has the most talented list?


  • Total voters
    290

Remove this Banner Ad

I know right?! Imagine thinking the team that won the premiership with the best W/L record is the most talented.

What a bunch of dickheads.

Best team is clearly the one that finished 5th and got belted in the finals.
We can only beat who are put in front of us.

And if Richmond were the worst premier ever, what does that say about the other 17 teams we ragdolled?
 
Champion data is great, it gets a hard rap here. You have to know its limitations though.

It is a collection of statistics with which a user can turn into useful information. This ladder is exactly the type of useless information it should not be used for and makes it a joke.
Exactly.

Lets not forget last year it rates Collingwoods midfield number 1
 
Exactly.

Lets not forget last year it rates Collingwoods midfield number 1

I dont believe the Swans have the most raw talent. They are in the top three best drilled and coached side.

Look at the top five of Parker, Kennedy, Franklin, Hanebury and Heeney after that there is a reasonable group of above average players then a larger group of good fole players.

Good coaching and the size of the SCG certainly helps get more out of the collectice unit than many other sides.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Geelong can't get by on the three midfielders alone. After those two it's an old Harry Taylor and a struggling Tom Hawkins, they have such poor depth.
Hawthorn myth:

Dangerfield
Ablett
Selwood

Duncan, Taylor, Stewart, Henderson, Hawkins (in such "poor form" but still managed 50 goals), Menzel (40 goals in 2017), Tuohy, Smith, S Selwood, Blicavs, C Guthrie, Menegola, Cockatoo, Kolodjashnij, Bews, Thurlow, Stanley

Then there's the following all with seniors experience:

Murdoch, Z Guthrie, Parsons, Parfitt, McCarthy, Crameri, Black, Henry, Gregson, Simpson & Buzza

Frankly, depth won't be an issue in 2018
 
I think it may be in both but the mailing address is Brunton Ave. Richmond.
I saw that when I Googled MCG. I'm not going to argue the point. It feels more like Richmond than Melbourne
 
the OP just set this up so the Richmond supporters could come one and say we're the best because we have a premiership... bit pathetic.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

To my Richmond "friends", congrats on the flag but a genuine question sort of related to this "talent v premierships" debate.
Why did your club choose Matthew Richardson to present the cup last year ahead of all of those VFL premiership greats you have? (I could look the reason up I guess but that's not a supporters view)
Don't premierships put you above talent?
 
To my Richmond "friends", congrats on the flag but a genuine question sort of related to this "talent v premierships" debate.
Why did your club choose Matthew Richardson to present the cup last year ahead of all of those VFL premiership greats you have? (I could look the reason up I guess but that's not a supporters view)
Don't premierships put you above talent?
I’d say because all our other legends such as Bourke Bartlett hart etc have been involved in numerous premierships.. Richo is probably our standout ‘favourite son’ that wasn’t involved with any real team success. Was a nice touch to have him a part of it IMO
 
I’d say because all our other legends such as Bourke Bartlett hart etc have been involved in numerous premierships.. Richo is probably our standout ‘favourite son’ that wasn’t involved with any real team success. Was a nice touch to have him a part of it IMO
I couldn't have thought of a better "favourite son" to involve. There is no rule that the person handing over the cup must be a premiership player. If that was the case Melbourne FC is in trouble!
 
Well most players, Treloar chose "better list", Im sure he and his highly paid GF are happy polishing that best list medal.
I'm "Broad" minded but I haven't seen a pic of Treloars GF with a Premiership medal on her chest :) Unlikely to either because I doubt he'll win one to display!
 
The player ratings run over the 2 years so this might be similar. Would explain why the Tigers are low.
The rankings are just using the player ratings.

To be fair to CD, it is the journalist that pens the article and infers things like talent etc

All CD would do is provide a table with each 2018 list ranked based on a consolidated count of those players 2016-17 ratings. Y they think that is of any relevance is baffling?

The fact that people then run with that without understanding it properly isn’t really CDs problem.
 
Back
Top