When to count AFL premierships, and NOT AFL/VFL ones?

[crownie]

Not really.

It's all relative, depending on the standard of the league you are playing in.

A premiership won in the then named VFL was still just as hard to win (not taking into account that there are less teams of course), because, whilst the standard of the other teams was lower, so was the standard of your own team, so relatively speaking, they're still just as hard to win.

nah.

and as for the date i would consider any flag since the crows joined as AFL flag.

 

[paulige]

Not really.

It's all relative, depending on the standard of the league you are playing in.

A premiership won in the then named VFL was still just as hard to win (not taking into account that there are less teams of course), because, whilst the standard of the other teams was lower, so was the standard of your own team, so relatively speaking, they're still just as hard to win.

That's why Port's achievements are so great. So what if the SANFL wasn't quite as good as the VFL? Port were competing in a league of a certain standard, and they had to win their premierships relative to that standard. It doesn't matter how high or low the standard is, they are still just as hard to win.

The only thing that determines if premierships are counted as part of the same league are if they were won in the same league.

The VFA is a different league to the VFL-AFL, so VFA flags are counted seperately.

The VFL is the same league as the AFL. There was no new legaue formed. The competition was simply re-named to reflect that it was now a national competition, but it's the same league with the same history, so the premierships won from 1897 onwards all count as part of the same league.

This is one of the... strangest things I've read on bigfooty.

You can't be serious? You just... you can't just, ignore certain facts in order to make flags won in the VFL seem more 'worthwhile'. That's like saying "yeah IF Geelong weren't so good on Grand Final day, the Saints would have another flag! So technically the Saints won... who's with me!"

The flag Fitzroy won when there was 4 teams is not nearly worth as much as the flag Geelong won this year. While it's wonderful and all that they were... the best on GF day that year, you just can't... yeah.

VFL flags will always count for...something... for a lot of the old timers. But at some point, saying "my club is very successful because it's won 10 flags" with 9 of them VFL flags, will begin to lose merit (but not all merit, a flag is a flag).

 

[Valli]

I believe around the year 2050 onwards

 

[Pj.Rj.Hj]

VFL flags will always count for...something... for a lot of the old timers. But at some point, saying "my club is very successful because it's won 10 flags" with 9 of them VFL flags, will begin to lose merit (but not all merit, a flag is a flag).

True, look at the NFL. During the 60's there was no imediate change but a decade of change. Like the VFL in the late 80's/early 90's they added teams in the 60's to sure up their dominence of their Game. Dallas and Minnesota were added in 1960 while Atlanta and New Orleans were added in 1966. Then by the time of the merger in 1970 with the AFL, the old NFL championship had lost its meaning to the superbowl. More teams have been added since, some with Superbowl wins, I really doubt they care about prior SB era, NFL and AFL championships.

Today people only really measure Superbowls. Most forget that Green Bay won a 3-peat of the NFL championship the year of their second superbowl in superbowl 2, all people think of is 2 Superbowls. Pittsburgh were usless the whole history of the pre merger NFL but now are the most successful and one of the most storied franchises. Cleveland was awesome but have never made the Superbowl.

Another way to look at it is the NHL where the Toronto Maple Leafs and the Montreal Canadiens have been the most dominent teams. Toronto with 13 stanley cups, none in 40 years. The Canadiens (24 Stanley cups) haven't won since '92/'93 and only have won one other in the last 30 years.
Up until the late '60's the NHL only had 6 teams so ofcourse these teams are gonna have a lopsided number of championships. Out of the original 6, only Detroit has had any prolonged success in the last 2 decades in a largely expanded NHL which has seens a shift of power away from Canada.

The NHL stated expanding in the late '60's with the added of the Philadelphia Flyers and Pittsburgh Penguins, Minnesota North Stars, LA Kings and St Louis Blues. 4 of these teams have won one or more Stanley Cups. Then theres the merger with the WHA which added power teams like Edmonton who dominated the 80's with the NY Islanders who were founded in the 70's by the NHL to keep the WHA out of Long Island.

Again I repeat, neither NFL or NHL had immediate change like the VFL/AFL but different eras are well considered and valued accordingly. The Superbowl is what matters in the NFL and what fans outside of the "Original Six" of the NHL give a shit about what Montreal and Toronto did pre '67 (when expansion began) or pre meger with the WHA in the 70's. The league has grown by a factor of 5 to 30 teams. To win in a 30 team league is in another stratosphere of difficulty than one of yesteryear. So though the are legitimate, something to be honoured and proud of, the playing field has changed along with popular perception. Hell, Uruguay has won 2 FIFA world cups, the last 59 years ago. Good stuff but zero relevence today.

 

[Wally Carter]

No, its quite correct.

How many VFA flags did you win before the split? The best clubs left, then your club prospered.

The relative qualities of the VFL/VFA sides around this period is highly debatable because, as I stated earlier, Footscray and North beat VFL teams whilst they were still in the VFA.

The failed North/Essendon merger of 1921/22 lead to Essendon taking off with most of Norths legendary 1914-1918 side which won 3 consecutive VFA flags on the trot and a had record 58 consecutive wins. North champion Syd Barker captain coached Essendon to their 1923 - 1924 back to back VFL premierships. IMO, there is a strong argument that the North VFA side of 1914-1918 would have won a VFL flag, especially when considering the 1916 Fitzroy anomoly.

 

[Gydafud]

I believe around the year 2050 onwards

I'll make sure to come back and bump this quote

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

I've been around since the 60s and am generally loathe to kill of traditions but this is one I'm happy to let go.

As far as I'm concerned Geelong has won 7 VFA premierships, 6 VFL premierships and 2 AFL premierships. If people are happy to combine VFL/AFL premierships then the VFA ones should be included.

When the then VFL was formed, yes it was a new competition but it was 8 teams that are still in this current competition.

The only problem I have is that it wasn't officially recognised as the AFL until 1990 even though West Coast and Brisbane had both started in 1987. But since West Coast and Brisbane joined anyone who says that a VFL premiership is equal to an AFL one is just plain wrong. AFL ones with drafting, salary caps, travelling and ground rationalisation, dodgy finals fixturing for non-Victorian teams is infinitely more difficult.

Saying that Collingwood winning 4 in a row when they did is better than Brisbane winning 3 in a row when they did is silly. It's better in a number on paper only.

They should all be recognised and celebrated, but it should be done separately IMO.

 

[Papa G]

I think it will go the other way. AFL flags won't count, the competition, after the next TV deal, will revert back to being called the VFL and certain years from the 1990's and 2000's will dissappear from the pages of history.

 

[jim boy]

I think its interesting that when statistics are quoted in the English Premier League (which was born from the old Division One, and has the same clubs, same relegation and promotion, etc), they only quote 1992 onwards. ie When Tottenham beat Wigan 9-1 a couple of weeks ago, they didn't quote it against anything from 1936 or 1902, but only 1992 onwards

The EPL is a completely different competition from the old division 1. Just like the VFL was a break-away from the VFA, and for exactly the same reasons (richer clubs wanting a bigger slice of the revenue pie). The fact that they have relegation and promotion was a compromise between the EPL and the FA.

 

[Hoops]

All that's important is who won the most recent premiership

 

[Sttew]

The AFL = VFL rebranded. You CANNOT dismiss VFL premierships

 

[Papa G]

The AFL = VFL rebranded. You CANNOT dismiss VFL premierships

St Kilda, Richmond, Melbourne and Footscray certainly can't - without them they = Fremantle

 

[galindez]

no they don't count. furthermore current ones don't really either (sorry cats) cause once GWS and GC come in we'll have to start from scratch again

 

[Monkey King]

Never! The AFL will always want to maintain their status one of the oldest football leagues in the world... and rightly so too. Therefore, premiership winners will be recorded from the founding of the league (1897) to present day.

For those talking about how much a flag means from earlier eras, there is no difference from then to now other than relevance to yourself. I'll ask a question... does anyone consider the value of the 1921 and 1941 vastly different? Despite the addition of new teams?

Sixty years from now it will be much the same. People won't rate the flags we win in our era either way, but when it comes to the official ledgers, the records will show them to be as eligible of recognition as 1980's flags.

 

[mattys123]

I honestly think it is time to separate the 2.

All the "new" teams never had a chance to win a VFL flag, and with 2 more teams being added soon, the number is getting close to the point where as many AFL created teams exist as VFL ones.

VFL premierships can still count, but I believe it is time to start the count for AFL premierships as of 1990.(obviously).

A similar situation happened in the USA once the competition know known as the NFL was formed, and the 2 conferences or championships became one, and the SuperBowl was formed for the first time.

It is time to start counting only AFL premierships, but also to remember and count up the amount of VFL flags teams have won, that should never be forgotten.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I can't fathom people measuring the quality of one era against another as a basis for separating history.

But the quality was not as good

Every single sport in the world has origins in district/regional competition. Some of these competitions died off, some expanded. The quality always improved. If this was still a VFL competition with Victorian clubs only, are we suggesting that players of the ilk of Judd/Ablett Jr would not be as good as they are now? I mean the VFL had out of the box superstars too, who utilised the best of what facilities were available to them. Are we suggesting that modern technology would have been hampered by the fact there wasn't a higher quality national competition to inspire ideas?

Every sport has gone through this to some degree. If I was a current day VFL side and there was no AFL, I'm not sure that I would be thrilled to be compared to a side from the late 19th century. However this seldom happens. It's insecurity that drives those who are more successful now or who weren't around then, to not want to be compared with what went before them. Who changes history in order to have bragging rights?

I have said before and I will say again, and in fact I now have two teams to use as my models. The NSWRL expanded and changed name to the ARL, had a split for a season and rejoined as the NRL with one season recorded as having two premiers (ARL and Super League). They have more reason to be considered a new competition than the AFL do as they had two bodies merging back together. They still record the deeds of South Sydney and St George who haven't won flags in eons. Do fans of the Brisbane Broncos or Melbourne Storm, the two most dominant teams of the past 10-20 years, call for their deeds not to be compared to the 11 flags in a row won by St George in a tin pot NSW suburban competition? Of course not. They are proud to now be winning flags in a competition steeped in history, and more importantly are viewed as competition powerhouses by all and sundry. Everyone knows they weren't around to challenge St George and Souths so they are not considered inferior to them.

Superbowl argument

Pretty much an irrelevance unless the AFL find a culmination to their season to surpass the Grand Final. As a spectacle there is plenty to like about Grand Finals with a 'V' instead of an 'A' before them. It's not as though we went from crowds of 5,000 to crowds of 100,000 with the national competition.

But they got beaten by teams from other competitions from time to time

Yes they did. The Champions of Australia tournaments are an old favourite on BigFooty. Does this mean that the SANFL or WAFL were better than or on a par with the VFL at a given moment or over history? Maybe a given moment this is true although it is fair to say the VFL depth would have been stronger even if the other competitions had a stronger team at the head of the table from time to time.

To those who use this to downplay the strength of the VFL, can I remind you that 11 of the 17 World Club Challenge winners are from the English Super League? Their premiers have beaten the NRL premiers 2/3rds of the time they have played. The NRL is vastly superior to the English Super League, of that there can be no doubt. Differing motivations can affect these games (as well as timing and location of course) but there is a possibility that the best team in England could match the best team in Australia, but the worst team in the NRL is probably going to be flogging all but the top few in England. Depth is the key to competition quality, not the best of the best.

This of course brings about a reverse argument that the VFL's best might be compared with the AFL's best but the the AFL's worse would flog most other VFL sides.

This of course can't be measured as you are not jumping continents to make that assertion as in rugby league, but time travelling, whereby you have to factor in natural progression as well.

Then we have the FA cup in England whereby football minnows from 4th divisions sometimes upset EPL sides. Every do has its day.

 

[Constructionist]

Distinctions are already made in the media more and more, once the old generation of VFL victards become the minority in the media, making VFL flags equal AFL flags will quickly die out.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

Never! The AFL will always want to maintain their status one of the oldest football leagues in the world... and rightly so too. Therefore, premiership winners will be recorded from the founding of the league (1897) to present day.

For those talking about how much a flag means from earlier eras, there is no difference from then to now other than relevance to yourself. I'll ask a question... does anyone consider the value of the 1921 and 1941 vastly different? Despite the addition of new teams?

Sixty years from now it will be much the same. People won't rate the flags we win in our era either way, but when it comes to the official ledgers, the records will show them to be as eligible of recognition as 1980's flags.

In reference to the first point. Why would the value change from '21 to '41? New teams from Hawthorn, Footscray and North Melbourne, whoopey, they had to stay on the tram or train an extra few minutes to get to the ground.

On the second point, the only way that premierships in 60 years time won't be rated as highly as they are now is if the league goes truly international and I don't think that will be happening. There will still be sides spread across at least the mainland states. In the days of the VFL, apart from a 4 year period, there were 11 suburbs plus Geelong down the road an hour.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

no they don't count. furthermore current ones don't really either (sorry cats) cause once GWS and GC come in we'll have to start from scratch again

And a few years after that you'll have to start again after North fold or Melbourne relocate..

In fact perhaps we should restrospectively hand premierships to the runners-up in the years that Fitzroy won flags? After all that club is dead and buried now so its premierships dont count any more and should be handed to the next best side.

You could take the argument to ridiculous extremes in perpetuity.

The competition evolves. The VFL evolved. Its still the same competition, new teams and new name notwithstanding.. The fact that Essendon has 12 or 13 more flags than Adelaide is nothing more than a statistical fact. Doesnt make them any better or worse than the Crows - its just a number.

As much as people would like to think otherwise, there is no league ladder for premierships won.

 

[Constructionist]

As much as people would like to think otherwise, there is no league ladder for premierships won.

Good, so we can count adelaides fictional flags from the teams which comprised it from SANFL. That gives it about 60 flags, same with Fremantle and West Coast. Looks like on the coveted premiership ladder its :-

1) Adelaide
2) West Coast
3) Fremantle
4) Port Adelaide
__daylight__
5) Collingwood?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Good, so we can count adelaides fictional flags from the teams which comprised it from SANFL. That gives it about 60 flags, same with Fremantle and West Coast. Looks like on the coveted premiership ladder its :-

1) Adelaide
2) West Coast
3) Fremantle
4) Port Adelaide
__daylight__
5) Collingwood?

SANFL was always a seperate competition. It evolved differently

There IS NO premiership ladder.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

And a few years after that you'll have to start again after North fold or Melbourne relocate..

In fact perhaps we should restrospectively hand premierships to the runners-up in the years that Fitzroy won flags? After all that club is dead and buried now so its premierships dont count any more and should be handed to the next best side.

You could take the argument to ridiculous extremes in perpetuity.

The competition evolves. The VFL evolved. Its still the same competition. The fact that Essendon has 12 or 13 more flags than Adelaide is nothing more than a statistical fact. Doesnt make them any better or worse than the Crows - its just a number.

As much as people would like to think otherwise, there is no league ladder for premierships won.[/quote]

lol, I bet no self respecting Collingwood supporter would be using this line if they weren't 'behind' Carlton and Essendon.

My argument isn't about the competition getting more professional/better, my argument is that it's a fundamentally different competition now. It's gone from a local, tribal, suburban league (excepting Geelong) based across a small area of a city to a national powerhouse.

 

[Constructionist]

There IS NO premiership ladder.

Exactly so the VFL teams won't care if the other non VFL teams add their flags to their list either. Can't have it both ways, either you can add your local flags and they can, or you both can't.

 

[Monkey King]

In reference to the first point. Why would the value change from '21 to '41? New teams from Hawthorn, Footscray and North Melbourne, whoopey, they had to stay on the tram or train an extra few minutes to get to the ground.

It is fair to say that in 60-70 years traveling interstate won't be anything like it is today. Having to taking a tram to the ground may even be viewed as the more cumbersome means of transport.

The point is that 60-70 years down the track barely anyone makes a distinction between the 21' and 41' flags that relates to the addition of new teams. I doubt that the 1990 and 2009 flags (3 new teams) will be viewed any differently by future generations.

As I said, the AFL is never going to give up its status as such an old football league, so one day they'll all just be old records viewed dimly from a distant future.

On the second point, the only way that premierships in 60 years time won't be rated as highly as they are now is if the league goes truly international and I don't think that will be happening.

Do you really think the Geelong flag of last season won't be considered as meaningfully in the future as this thread is classing 60 year old premierships today. Let's not get stuck in our era here. Time will leave us behind as it has those who came before us.

Game innovations and rule changes will lead future generations to claim their permierships are the most valuable and difficult to win in history, just as they have led this generation to the same assumption.

 

[Daniel_Rich]

Just in case anyone was wondering, I thought i'd make a list of flags won since 1990 just so people can see what it would look like:

AFL Flags (since 1990)
Adelaide - 2
Brisbane - 3
Carlton - 1
Collingwood - 1
Essendon - 2
Fremantle - 0
Geelong - 2
Hawthorn - 2
North Melbourne - 2
Melbourne - 0
Port Adelaide - 1
Richmond - 0
St Kilda - 0
Sydney - 1
West Coast - 3
Western Bulldogs - 0