The 90's Era

[gbatman]

Had this discussion the other day with a fellow Carlton supporter about whether the 90's was a successful era for us. Following us through this period it always felt like it was however looking back after this discussion I have to agree that while we won 1 premiership and were runners up in 2 that the 90's was an era of underachievement for Carlton and perhaps the beginning of the bad period we have experience the last 23 years.

1993 to 2000 we had a strong, moderately successful list and this was our moment to strike IMO. In 1993 we lost a grand final many felt we were favourites for. 1994 we finished second but were out in straight sets. 1995 we won the flag with what was then the most successful AFL team of all time. 1996 we slumped to 5th, smashed in both our finals and bundled out in straight sets. 1997 and 1998 were years of transition and rebuilding and we crashed. 1999 we had a quick rise, making the grand final but losing. 2000 we were a top side, Essendon had an exceptional side but we were firmly second, we lost to Melbourne in the first final, beat Brisbane in the next then smashed by Essendon in the Prelim.

We often talk about getting back to that, getting back to being successful and at the time the 90s felt like a successful period and our last successful period and it was but looking back it looks like we under achieved. 3 flags in the 70s, 3 in the 80's they were definitely our golden era.

In 1996 we had all of our premiership team, a team that was the most successful of all time the previous season. Sexton, Silvagni, Christou, Hogg, Dean, McKay, Hanna, Ratten, McKay, Koutoufides, Rice, Spalding, Clape, Williams, Kernahan, Pearce, Madden, Bradley, Brown, Camporeale, Whitehead, Manton.

Not only did we still have the members of one that team still there but our depth and upcoming youth was solid: Allen, Beaumont, DeLulio, Hamill, Murphy, Gleeson, Heaver, Mitchell and Hickmott came over from Geelong. Next Year Whitnall, Franchina, Hulme, Nelson, Porter would come onto the list. Recruitment after this however would prove to be quite poor apart from a few stars here and there.

Looking at some old games floating around on youtube of this era, we had a good side and at times we had a great list. But there was one game I was looking at and it was the 2000 final where we were bundled out by Melbourne and it was amazing to see them running all over us late in the game and how much fitter they looked. Essendon won the flag that season and a lot of the credit went to Andrew Russell and how next level fit they were. Coming off an era where we had players going to "fat farms" to get up to scratch, it's fair to say we were probably falling a long way behind despite our talent.

This got me wondering another question. The rot we have all been through over the last 20 years, we all see the starting point as the salary cap scandal but what if it happened before this? In the 90s we were making claims such as "best in the business". We were seen as a club made of full arrogance. Yet we were probably falling miles behind in high performance as well as recruiting.

Questions remain. Did we fall behind tactically? Was David Parkin still up to it for a lot of the time? In 2000 we had a great season, we surrounded him with Worsfold and Lyon who would prove to be tactically good coaches but we lost this as they would leave us. Did we fall behind in fitness? The better teams appeared to be embracing running and fitness a lot more, did we miss the boat here? We still had guys being shipped off because they were overweight. Did we fall behind in recruiting? Definitely yes. Recruiting went to hell in the late 90s. What about club culture. Had this already gone by the way side, were we not competitive and professional enough for how the game was changing? Could we have squeezed a few extra flags out of this list if these areas were better?

Was the salary cap scandal the straw that broke the camel's back rather than the reason for our fall? Since then we have failed to get all areas of all departments up to scratch and IMO the big reason has been reputation, a bad reputation that was starting to be created towards the latter stages of this era perhaps. I don't think the salary cap scandal would have broken us as badly if we were a stronger better run club at the time in a better position, I think we could have moved forward from that. But this is all theory

Seeing what the great sides do now and have been doing, us in the 70's and 80's. Hawthorn, Geelong, Richmond and Brisbane in the modern era. I can't help but feel we underachieved and that we missed out in this era.

I can't help but feel that the game was changing through this era, becoming more professional, becoming more about good recruiting, list management, development and player fitness and that we had our head stuck in the sand with our "best in the business" mentality. We know we were breaking the rules with player salaries in this era and perhaps that was glossing over our downfalls in these other areas. Perhaps if we weren't breaking the rules those cracks may have shown up sooner and we may have taken actions sooner to get better.

I think considering the players we had through this period between 1993 and 2000 to only come away with 1 premiership was an underachievement. It took us to put together a team that was the greatest of all time to win that 1 premiership, without that the 90's would have been considered a failure, but considering this it's surprising we only came away with 1 flag. Perhaps we didn't get the most out of our team or perhaps we overachieved that one time and overrated us for the rest of it.

Interesting to see what other people's thought of this era are.

 

[gab213]

94 was the year that we totally blew the chance at winning a premiership and the performance in 95 came off the back of that, we were a very experienced team with a high number of over 30 year olds who carried us to the Premiership. It was very much the last hurrah for a number of our players, within 2 or 3 years a lot of them were retired and definitely not playing at the same level.

93 was a very even year, there were no stand-out teams. The reason we lost in 93 was that the bottom 5 or 6 players in that team just weren't up to it (Athorn and Sholl were two of them). By 95 we had improved that by picking up players like Clape, Rice and Pearce who we managed to get more of a contribution from. Earl Spalding played an important role too, he made it easier for players like Kernahan to keep performing at a high level .Add to that the rise of Kouta, Christou and Camporeale had a great first season .


In 99 we were lucky to have played in a GF at all, we weren't one of the top performed teams in the competition.

We had a great year in 2000, we could have played in a GF that year, but Essendon was the best team in the competition anyway, along the lines of what we were in 95.

If anything, Essendon was underperformed in that era, they should have won 99 and would have if not for the glorious result in that year's preliminary final.

With a bit of luck, we could have snagged one more Premiership in that time but I wouldn't say we were underperformed.

People often get it wrong when talking of our successful era, if you look at it closely, our greatest era was from 68-82.
We had a good period in the mid-80s where maybe we should have won another too, but in terms of ultimate success, premierships, it's been lean since 83, 41 years now for just 2 of them.

 

[Earls Smother]

Had this discussion the other day with a fellow Carlton supporter about whether the 90's was a successful era for us. Following us through this period it always felt like it was however looking back after this discussion I have to agree that while we won 1 premiership and were runners up in 2 that the 90's was an era of underachievement for Carlton and perhaps the beginning of the bad period we have experience the last 23 years.

1993 to 2000 we had a strong, moderately successful list and this was our moment to strike IMO. In 1993 we lost a grand final many felt we were favourites for. 1994 we finished second but were out in straight sets. 1995 we won the flag with what was then the most successful AFL team of all time. 1996 we slumped to 5th, smashed in both our finals and bundled out in straight sets. 1997 and 1998 were years of transition and rebuilding and we crashed. 1999 we had a quick rise, making the grand final but losing. 2000 we were a top side, Essendon had an exceptional side but we were firmly second, we lost to Melbourne in the first final, beat Brisbane in the next then smashed by Essendon in the Prelim.

We often talk about getting back to that, getting back to being successful and at the time the 90s felt like a successful period and our last successful period and it was but looking back it looks like we under achieved. 3 flags in the 70s, 3 in the 80's they were definitely our golden era.

In 1996 we had all of our premiership team, a team that was the most successful of all time the previous season. Sexton, Silvagni, Christou, Hogg, Dean, McKay, Hanna, Ratten, McKay, Koutoufides, Rice, Spalding, Clape, Williams, Kernahan, Pearce, Madden, Bradley, Brown, Camporeale, Whitehead, Manton.

Not only did we still have the members of one that team still there but our depth and upcoming youth was solid: Allen, Beaumont, DeLulio, Hamill, Murphy, Gleeson, Heaver, Mitchell and Hickmott came over from Geelong. Next Year Whitnall, Franchina, Hulme, Nelson, Porter would come onto the list. Recruitment after this however would prove to be quite poor apart from a few stars here and there.

Looking at some old games floating around on youtube of this era, we had a good side and at times we had a great list. But there was one game I was looking at and it was the 2000 final where we were bundled out by Melbourne and it was amazing to see them running all over us late in the game and how much fitter they looked. Essendon won the flag that season and a lot of the credit went to Andrew Russell and how next level fit they were. Coming off an era where we had players going to "fat farms" to get up to scratch, it's fair to say we were probably falling a long way behind despite our talent.

This got me wondering another question. The rot we have all been through over the last 20 years, we all see the starting point as the salary cap scandal but what if it happened before this? In the 90s we were making claims such as "best in the business". We were seen as a club made of full arrogance. Yet we were probably falling miles behind in high performance as well as recruiting.

Questions remain. Did we fall behind tactically? Was David Parkin still up to it for a lot of the time? In 2000 we had a great season, we surrounded him with Worsfold and Lyon who would prove to be tactically good coaches but we lost this as they would leave us. Did we fall behind in fitness? The better teams appeared to be embracing running and fitness a lot more, did we miss the boat here? We still had guys being shipped off because they were overweight. Did we fall behind in recruiting? Definitely yes. Recruiting went to hell in the late 90s. What about club culture. Had this already gone by the way side, were we not competitive and professional enough for how the game was changing? Could we have squeezed a few extra flags out of this list if these areas were better?

Was the salary cap scandal the straw that broke the camel's back rather than the reason for our fall? Since then we have failed to get all areas of all departments up to scratch and IMO the big reason has been reputation, a bad reputation that was starting to be created towards the latter stages of this era perhaps. I don't think the salary cap scandal would have broken us as badly if we were a stronger better run club at the time in a better position, I think we could have moved forward from that. But this is all theory

Seeing what the great sides do now and have been doing, us in the 70's and 80's. Hawthorn, Geelong, Richmond and Brisbane in the modern era. I can't help but feel we underachieved and that we missed out in this era.

I can't help but feel that the game was changing through this era, becoming more professional, becoming more about good recruiting, list management, development and player fitness and that we had our head stuck in the sand with our "best in the business" mentality. We know we were breaking the rules with player salaries in this era and perhaps that was glossing over our downfalls in these other areas. Perhaps if we weren't breaking the rules those cracks may have shown up sooner and we may have taken actions sooner to get better.

I think considering the players we had through this period between 1993 and 2000 to only come away with 1 premiership was an underachievement. It took us to put together a team that was the greatest of all time to win that 1 premiership, without that the 90's would have been considered a failure, but considering this it's surprising we only came away with 1 flag. Perhaps we didn't get the most out of our team or perhaps we overachieved that one time and overrated us for the rest of it.

Interesting to see what other people's thought of this era are.

1993 both sides came from outside the 8 and it was anyone's year. We only beat them by 2 points in the second semi when they had a few missing, who were back for the GF. Our bottom end in Powell, Athorn and Sholl were real battlers.

1994 was a disaster and by far the most disappointing in that decade (actually ever in my history of watching). No excuses, we stuffed that year up at the end.

1995 driven by the previous 2 year's failures, we were unstoppable, but ageing and wrung everything out of ourselves.

1996 a year older and injuries hit in the latter part of the year. Disappointing but not overly surprising. Bit similiar to Geelong this year.

1999 we again came from outside the 8 and realistically overachieved to reach the granny. There were 2 standout sides that year and we at least knocked one of them in the arch enemy out.

2000 late injuries determined we couldn't have a fair dinkum crack at the Bombers. We lost Kouta for the year, Bradley and Sos for/during key finals. We needed everything to go right and it didn't.

In summary from my perspective, we coulda/shoulda won one more in 1994 to atone for the year before. If we had, would we have had the drive in our ageing list to produce '95 though?

 

[Earls Smother]

94 was the year that we totally blew the chance at winning a premiership and the performance in 95 came off the back of that, we were a very experienced team with a high number of over 30 year olds who carried us to the Premiership. It was very much the last hurrah for a number of our players, within 2 or 3 years a lot of them were retired and definitely not playing at the same level.

93 was a very even year, there were no stand-out teams. The reason we lost in 93 was that the bottom 5 or 6 players in that team just weren't up to it (Athorn and Sholl were two of them). By 95 we had improved that by picking up players like Clape, Rice and Pearce who we managed to get more of a contribution from. Earl Spalding played an important role too, he made it easier for players like Kernahan to keep performing at a high level .Add to that the rise of Kouta, Christou and Camporeale had a great first season .


In 99 we were lucky to have played in a GF at all, we weren't one of the top performed teams in the competition.

We had a great year in 2000, we could have played in a GF that year, but Essendon was the best team in the competition anyway, along the lines of what we were in 95.

If anything, Essendon was underperformed in that era, they should have won 99 and would have if not for the glorious result in that year's preliminary final.

With a bit of luck, we could have snagged one more Premiership in that time but I wouldn't say we were underperformed.

People often get it wrong when talking of our successful era, if you look at it closely, our greatest era was from 68-82.
We had a good period in the mid-80s where maybe we should have won another too, but in terms of ultimate success, premierships, it's been lean since 83, 41 years now for just 2 of them.

That's quite funny. We simultaneously posted almost identically.

 

[gab213]

That's quite funny. We simultaneously posted almost identically.

Yep, good to see that somebody saw it the same way.

 

[gbatman]

1999 was a funny one because everyone said at the time we shouldn't have been there but I think the following season we proved that we did indeed belong.

We had a core of really good older players and the previous couple of seasons we had recruited well and had been out of the top 8. we were up and down in 1999, we weren't that good but we made finals. I went to an Essendon v Carlton game that season and we got pumped by them.

I think what happened was that those younger players were maturing as the season came on and by finals time we were a far better team than we had been during the majority of the home and away season. We ended up in the finals series with some good experienced players playing well and some young players who had hit their straps.

I think we proved that with a strong finish in 2nd the following season. Unfortunately Koutoufides was everything to us and losing him with some other injuries really took us down.

North and Essendon were the two best sides that season but I think we did genuinely catch up to them however in the grand final we did prove to be a little too raw for the occasion and North were just too good.

 

[BlueBlood15]

Given how the 21st century has played out for this club, I still see the 90s as successful. We won a flag and played on two other grand finals.

The only slight level of disappointment is that we didn’t snag one of 1993 or 1994. 1994 I felt we were the best team in it but failed badly in the finals. The 1993 GF was a toss of the coin going in and just weren’t good enough on the day.

While the 1999 prelim was one of my favourites games (if not, the favourite game), Essendon and North were the best two teams that year so beating them both consecutively was always highly unlikely. Funnily enough we were better in 2000 than in 1999.

 

[gab213]

Given how the 21st century has played out for this club, I still see the 90s as successful. We won a flag and played on two other grand finals.

The only slight level of disappointment is that we didn’t snag one of 1993 or 1994. 1994 I felt we were the best team in it but failed badly in the finals. The 1993 GF was a toss of the coin going in and just weren’t good enough on the day.

While the 1999 prelim was one of my favourites games (if not, the favourite game), Essendon and North were the best two teams that year so beating them both consecutively was always highly unlikely. Funnily enough we were better in 2000 than in 1999.

Playing Finals regularly certainly makes it a successful period but winning only one didn't make us underperformed IMO.

 

[gab213]

1999 was a funny one because everyone said at the time we shouldn't have been there but I think the following season we proved that we did indeed belong.

We had a core of really good older players and the previous couple of seasons we had recruited well and had been out of the top 8. we were up and down in 1999, we weren't that good but we made finals. I went to an Essendon v Carlton game that season and we got pumped by them.

I think what happened was that those younger players were maturing as the season came on and by finals time we were a far better team than we had been during the majority of the home and away season. We ended up in the finals series with some good experienced players playing well and some young players who had hit their straps.

I think we proved that with a strong finish in 2nd the following season. Unfortunately Koutoufides was everything to us and losing him with some other injuries really took us down.

North and Essendon were the two best sides that season but I think we did genuinely catch up to them however in the grand final we did prove to be a little too raw for the occasion and North were just too good.

Teams worthy of a Grand Final spot don't get pumped by 73 points in an earlier final, the quirk in the Final 8 system at the time made it possible for us to play in the Grand Final, the current Final 8 system wouldn't allow it.

 

[gbatman]

Teams worthy of a Grand Final spot don't get pumped by 73 points in an earlier final, the quirk in the Final 8 system at the time made it possible for us to play in the Grand Final, the current Final 8 system wouldn't allow it.

That is true, it was still under the old system.

 

[Ezayyak]

The end to 94 was a disaster. Thumped the Eagles by ten goals, went to the top of the ladder.

Then lost to the bombers in the last round and beaten by an undermanned Geelong, if I recall correctly.

Lost complete form in 2 weeks. It was strange.

 

[tarczonandjane]

You have provided a top notch post GBatman.

I would throw a different thought in to what has been offered, though I agree with all that has been said.

I think the 1990 draft was pivotal to a lot of our downfall. It was the first time we looked like we wanted to embrace the draft. We traded up to get James Cook (a toss of the coin with Jason McCartney

Jason Mccartney

Age

50

Ht

191cm

Wt

95kg

Pos.

D/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.7

3star

K

7.1

3star

HB

3.5

3star

M

3.6

4star

T

0.8

3star

No current season stats available

D

10.0

3star

K

5.8

3star

HB

4.2

4star

M

3.8

4star

T

0.6

3star

), and then took Damien Hampson at pick 7.

Neither player really worked out, and I always felt it made us gun shy on the draft. Cook was always second fiddle up forward, and Hampson never looked like making it.

Meanwhile, new clubs were entering the comp and the AFL was experimenting with how to make drafts and trading a more entertaining affair. A good example was when Freo entered and were given access to players and draft picks. Desperate for ways of trading up and securing established talent, trading with them just required a bit of creativity.. Essendon got this, and leveraged their trades to secure Matthew Lloyd. Lloyd is a player we never should have let go to a rival, but we weren’t playing the draft game.

We were linked to Tredrea when Port entered, and Waterhouse when Freo entered, but we never had the courage of our convictions to actually put up reasonable trade offers.

Meanwhile, we had found short term success with guys like Clape, Manton, Hogg, and Rice. For many years, we kept trading good picks for established players. We’ve had success with some of them (e.g Scotland) but I always felt the approach meant that we didn’t invest in either talent identification or development. To a large degree, I still think these are our main issues today.

I do therefore trace our decline back to the 1990s. We never embraced the draft, and it means we’ve never had the talent identification or development to be successful.

 

[passmark]

Hard to say.
I look at our ‘95 side and it had quite a few recycled players that would not have got a game with the WCE, who were the benchmark for list quality in that era IMO .
‘93 was terrible .
Probably could have snagged another.

 

[Manhattanite]

I watched the 93 Prelim between Adelaide and * with a friend who was a * fan - and I remember feeling very confident at half time that a Crows lead of 42 points made a Blues premiership almost guaranteed.

Had the Crows hung on to win I do think we would have won 93, been more driven to repeat in 94 and had a shot at a 3-peat in 95. But I also appreciate that had we won in 93 we may not have played as many of the younger players who helped us win in 95.




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[tarczonandjane]

I watched the 93 Prelim between Adelaide and * with a friend who was a * fan - and I remember feeling very confident at half time that a Crows lead of 42 points made a Blues premiership almost guaranteed.

Had the Crows hung on to win I do think we would have won 93, been more driven to repeat in 94 and had a shot at a 3-peat in 95. But I also appreciate that had we won in 93 we may not have played as many of the younger players who helped us win in 95.




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I have never watched the 93 grand final since the day it was played. I would be amazed if I ever watch it again.

But it was one of those days where nothing went right. I remember we used to have a play that season where Harry Madden would stand for a kick out on about fifty after the opposition had scored a behind, and tap it over his head for a runner to swoop on.

We had used this strategy successfully many times during the season, and we tried it during (I reckon) the third quarter of the Grand Final.

Anyway, the ball went to Harry, he flicked it on and we had runners out the back, but the ball bounced funny and went into the arms of whichever Essendon player was on the tail of our runners.

That play summed up the day for me. Nothing went right.

 

[tarczonandjane]

Hard to say.
I look at our ‘95 side and it had quite a few recycled players that would not have got a game with the WCE, who were the benchmark for list quality in that era IMO .
‘93 was terrible .
Probably could have snagged another.

If we were to have won another flag, 93 and 94 were the options. 99 was fortunate. I also think we could have done some damage if we could have snuck into the finals in 92. But I don’t think we’d have beaten West Coast that year.

I dunno… I always felt like Essendon had our measure in 93. Even when we beat them in the first week of finals, they were missing a fair few players.

We were a chance in 94, but fell over in the finals. I still think West Coast were better though. That Princes Park game where we beat them was one of those days where everything went right (a bit like the Crows against us this year). It was a glorious day, but was it repeatable? I don’t know.

One which people don’t mention is 96. We were probably the best side that year, but injuries caught us up.

To be honest, I think one flag for the decade is about right.

 

[DangerousD]

Had this discussion the other day with a fellow Carlton supporter about whether the 90's was a successful era for us. Following us through this period it always felt like it was however looking back after this discussion I have to agree that while we won 1 premiership and were runners up in 2 that the 90's was an era of underachievement for Carlton and perhaps the beginning of the bad period we have experience the last 23 years.

1993 to 2000 we had a strong, moderately successful list and this was our moment to strike IMO. In 1993 we lost a grand final many felt we were favourites for. 1994 we finished second but were out in straight sets. 1995 we won the flag with what was then the most successful AFL team of all time. 1996 we slumped to 5th, smashed in both our finals and bundled out in straight sets. 1997 and 1998 were years of transition and rebuilding and we crashed. 1999 we had a quick rise, making the grand final but losing. 2000 we were a top side, Essendon had an exceptional side but we were firmly second, we lost to Melbourne in the first final, beat Brisbane in the next then smashed by Essendon in the Prelim.

We often talk about getting back to that, getting back to being successful and at the time the 90s felt like a successful period and our last successful period and it was but looking back it looks like we under achieved. 3 flags in the 70s, 3 in the 80's they were definitely our golden era.

In 1996 we had all of our premiership team, a team that was the most successful of all time the previous season. Sexton, Silvagni, Christou, Hogg, Dean, McKay, Hanna, Ratten, McKay, Koutoufides, Rice, Spalding, Clape, Williams, Kernahan, Pearce, Madden, Bradley, Brown, Camporeale, Whitehead, Manton.

Not only did we still have the members of one that team still there but our depth and upcoming youth was solid: Allen, Beaumont, DeLulio, Hamill, Murphy, Gleeson, Heaver, Mitchell and Hickmott came over from Geelong. Next Year Whitnall, Franchina, Hulme, Nelson, Porter would come onto the list. Recruitment after this however would prove to be quite poor apart from a few stars here and there.

Looking at some old games floating around on youtube of this era, we had a good side and at times we had a great list. But there was one game I was looking at and it was the 2000 final where we were bundled out by Melbourne and it was amazing to see them running all over us late in the game and how much fitter they looked. Essendon won the flag that season and a lot of the credit went to Andrew Russell and how next level fit they were. Coming off an era where we had players going to "fat farms" to get up to scratch, it's fair to say we were probably falling a long way behind despite our talent.

This got me wondering another question. The rot we have all been through over the last 20 years, we all see the starting point as the salary cap scandal but what if it happened before this? In the 90s we were making claims such as "best in the business". We were seen as a club made of full arrogance. Yet we were probably falling miles behind in high performance as well as recruiting.

Questions remain. Did we fall behind tactically? Was David Parkin still up to it for a lot of the time? In 2000 we had a great season, we surrounded him with Worsfold and Lyon who would prove to be tactically good coaches but we lost this as they would leave us. Did we fall behind in fitness? The better teams appeared to be embracing running and fitness a lot more, did we miss the boat here? We still had guys being shipped off because they were overweight. Did we fall behind in recruiting? Definitely yes. Recruiting went to hell in the late 90s. What about club culture. Had this already gone by the way side, were we not competitive and professional enough for how the game was changing? Could we have squeezed a few extra flags out of this list if these areas were better?

Was the salary cap scandal the straw that broke the camel's back rather than the reason for our fall? Since then we have failed to get all areas of all departments up to scratch and IMO the big reason has been reputation, a bad reputation that was starting to be created towards the latter stages of this era perhaps. I don't think the salary cap scandal would have broken us as badly if we were a stronger better run club at the time in a better position, I think we could have moved forward from that. But this is all theory

Seeing what the great sides do now and have been doing, us in the 70's and 80's. Hawthorn, Geelong, Richmond and Brisbane in the modern era. I can't help but feel we underachieved and that we missed out in this era.

I can't help but feel that the game was changing through this era, becoming more professional, becoming more about good recruiting, list management, development and player fitness and that we had our head stuck in the sand with our "best in the business" mentality. We know we were breaking the rules with player salaries in this era and perhaps that was glossing over our downfalls in these other areas. Perhaps if we weren't breaking the rules those cracks may have shown up sooner and we may have taken actions sooner to get better.

I think considering the players we had through this period between 1993 and 2000 to only come away with 1 premiership was an underachievement. It took us to put together a team that was the greatest of all time to win that 1 premiership, without that the 90's would have been considered a failure, but considering this it's surprising we only came away with 1 flag. Perhaps we didn't get the most out of our team or perhaps we overachieved that one time and overrated us for the rest of it.

Interesting to see what other people's thought of this era are.

Interesting topic, 1993-1995 was our window, won one, lost one, it happens, the Bombers won one flag with an amazing list, it happens to lots of teams.

Just yesterday I saw an interview with Whitnall talking about the 99 finals series and saying they all couldn’t believe the run they had, spoke of going out with other players after the prelim and getting trolleyed well in to the next day.

Made me wonder if we had string leaders here to pull this stuff up or if it was the norm.

I went and saw us beat Melb by 98 points in 2000, then they beat us in the qualifying final, I remember at the time Melb were well served by recent draftees and we had recruited Mansfield and O”Reilly, maybe we just went too old and the long season caught up with us.

 

[Franc de Borges]

First 'really' getting into football as an obsession in 1989 gives me a unique perspective. The first four years of my fandom, we missed the finals.

It felt as though order was restored from 1993-95, despite the two massive disappointments, but our fall off a cliff from halfway through 1996 was really the beginning of the end for this Club.

1997 was mediocre, and missing the finals on the last day against Richmond at PP was as painful a H&A loss as last year. First half of 1998 looked like being our first wooden spoon, but we turned it around and carried that upswing in form into a half decent 1999, where despite making the finals we were not a very good side. The fact that the preliminary final that year is our last great win speaks volumes.

I'm 41 this year and I don't think I've ever really followed us when we were great. Yes, it's amazing to have seen us win a premiership in the flesh (might not see another one), but it was very much a one-off, and no better than any other club that's won a flag since the 90s.

The fact is that we are a poor Club, and have been for a long time.

 

[sparkybagger]

'93 still hurts. I had a scum supporting colleague who was in my face for weeks after. I've murdered for less.

 

[Magruder]

I've murdered for less.

remind me to play nice with you…

 

[BigFrizz36]

As stated previously I think that we would have beaten the Crows in '93 even with the gaps at the bottom of our list. You'd reckon that with sticks kicking 7 in the G.F. we'd be good things but we were never in it.

1994 we should have at least beaten Geelong with all of their outs. It did at least spur us on to 1995.

1996 we started great. From memory the wind swung around at quarter time in the final against the dees and we had to kick against the gale for the first half.

We fluked our way in to the granny in 1999, didn't deserve to be there but how much fun was the preliminary.

We had a good team in 2000, it was probably the last throw at the stumps for our older list. We belted the lions in Brisbane as they were becoming a power. Injuries cruelled us towards the finals.

So there was a brief period where we were tge best team and other periods when we were thereabouts. One flag was about right, two were possible but would have been a stretch. We could just as easily won none.

 

[Ezayyak]

As stated previously I think that we would have beaten the Crows in '93 even with the gaps at the bottom of our list. You'd reckon that with sticks kicking 7 in the G.F. we'd be good things but we were never in it.

1994 we should have at least beaten Geelong with all of their outs. It did at least spur us on to 1995.

1996 we started great. From memory the wind swung around at quarter time in the final against the dees and we had to kick against the gale for the first half.

We fluked our way in to the granny in 1999, didn't deserve to be there but how much fun was the preliminary.

We had a good team in 2000, it was probably the last throw at the stumps for our older list. We belted the lions in Brisbane as they were becoming a power. Injuries cruelled us towards the finals.

So there was a brief period where we were tge best team and other periods when we were thereabouts. One flag was about right, two were possible but would have been a stretch. We could just as easily won none.

That first half against the Lions in 2000 at the Gabba where we found ourselves 71 points up at half time, was as good a football I can remember.

 

[Monty1978]

Any premiership and making 3
Grannies and playing most years in the final series is a success … could it have been better Ofcourse but between 93-95 were probably the only years we could have won another . 99 was a fluke and 2000 Essendon reminded me of Carlton 95. Us losing 94 the way we did was like Essendon losing prelim 1999

 

[BigFrizz36]

That first half against the Lions in 2000 at the Gabba where we found ourselves 71 points up at half time, was as good a football I can remember.

Yep. One of those teams went on to win 3 flags in the next 4 years and the other won a wooden spoon in that time. You'd never guess which was which on that day.

 

[tarczonandjane]

It’s fair to say we had a few freak injuries to players in that period who we had probably hoped would really cement themselves as leaders of the club. I am particularly thinking of the Ang Christou and Adrian Whitehead injuries. We would have expected both players to play much more footy for us than they did.