Lions vs Cats vs Hawks - Which dynasty is the best?

Best dynasty???

  • Cats

    Votes: 234 21.2%
  • Hawks

    Votes: 524 47.5%
  • Lions

    Votes: 344 31.2%

  • Total voters
    1,102

Remove this Banner Ad

Flags are relative to the median skill in the competition at the time (excluding anomalies such as chokes/bradburys). Right now the median skill is vastly shitter than last decade. So that in effectiveness is what a flag represents.


Only you can't substantiate that, can you? It's a throwaway line that you can't prove in any way, shape or form.

Hence, whatever you say is ultimately bullshit.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Geelong were superior/better. But Hawks have more flags. Over time the only people who will know Geelong were the better team are those who were alive during their era. Hawks are a side that win when it matters. They'll never wow you but they'll get their flag lol.

I've seen them both at their best, I watched them both from the time they could't win, right up till the point they almost couldn't lose.

You need to run to an emergency room and have your head checked.

No-one will know Geelong were better, because they weren't. Put the two teams head to head on paper, and add Clarkson in the coach's box - while the other guy chows down on a sandwich and dreams of going back to bomberland, and you'll very quickly realise that despite the power of its midfield, and a truly star studded defence, only one team has a forward line.

You don't win without a forward line, name me Geelong's star forward line during their 'GOAT' era.

Ronnie Burns doesn't qualify btw, neither does Tim Hargreaves or Brett Sphinx.

Also look up the word glut, I'm pretty sure you've got it backwards.
 
While the other has several 4 time premiership players and the team as a whole can't take their game to the next level. The other 2 asserted that dominance without dispute, and established a mark.

Geelong had father sons like every club. Because being the only genuine home grown club in this poll is apparently a bad thing.


You've been smoking the old wacky-tobaccy.

First - Hawthorn not a home grown club... That's hard to comprehend on any level. Oh, you mean the players we brought in? Then...

Who was lining up for Gibson, Hale, Burgoyne (yes, even him - shot knees), Dew, Lake (lot of geniuses point out how good he was with us after the fact, NO-ONE wanted him prior). Oh wait, you mean guys that were practically discards I guess.

Or maybe you mean free-agent Frawley?

But wait, didn't you guys go out a recruit superstar BRAD friggin Ottens? Pretty sure you did.

Seriously, you're a borderline troll. Your Geelong Side was a wonderful home and away team - one of the best. Great in most finals, won 3 at the big dance.

That's an incredible run. But you have to engage your brain. When a side wins three on the trot - any side, it's an absolute freak of nature. To get one is amazing. To get multiples with a single team is very substantial. But three in a row? Talk to Cameron Ling about that, and see what he says. Not the on TV stuff, do it next time you bump into him in Geelong.
 
I don't really get the Hawk dynasty. We've just seen the club achieved something uniquely amazing, in the most casual and laid back way imaginable. The Brisbane team was full of enigma's and superstars, while this Hawks side is basically a team of solid roleplaying types who keep getting the job done. Even on a coaching level, Clarkson is still not really on the list of great coaches, despite outperforming most that are considered ahead of him. In fact, 90% of Hawks fans wouldn't even consider our current dynasty as the club's best, even though it as done something that those guys couldn't. I think it's the issue of a lack of out and out superstars that sort of makes what the Hawks have done seem not quite as impressive, even though that makes it more impressive.
 
I don't really get the Hawk dynasty. We've just seen the club achieved something uniquely amazing, in the most casual and laid back way imaginable. The Brisbane team was full of enigma's and superstars, while this Hawks side is basically a team of solid roleplaying types who keep getting the job done. Even on a coaching level, Clarkson is still not really on the list of great coaches, despite outperforming most that are considered ahead of him. In fact, 90% of Hawks fans wouldn't even consider our current dynasty as the club's best, even though it as done something that those guys couldn't. I think it's the issue of a lack of out and out superstars that sort of makes what the Hawks have done seem not quite as impressive, even though that makes it more impressive.

While I don't completely disagree, I think you'd be surprised after giving the team sheet of this era a decent going over. Names like Birchall, Hodge, Mitchell, Franklin, Rioli, Lake, Crawford etc. sit very comfortably with Langford, Brereton, Platten, Dunstall etc.

There are superstars on every line with this current group (2008-15), and multiples on most. The skill level in 2/3 of the team is very, very high.
 
While I don't completely disagree, I think you'd be surprised after giving the team sheet of this era a decent going over. Names like Birchall, Hodge, Mitchell, Franklin, Rioli, Lake, Crawford etc. sit very comfortably with Langford, Brereton, Platten, Dunstall etc.

There are superstars on every line with this current group (2008-15), and multiples on most. The skill level in 2/3 of the team is very, very high.

They would, and should, but will always be a little bit below them somehow. 8 out of 10 Hawks fans (that are old enough) would select Platten over Mitchell... and the others would be undecided.
 
You've been smoking the old wacky-tobaccy.

First - Hawthorn not a home grown club... That's hard to comprehend on any level. Oh, you mean the players we brought in? Then...

Who was lining up for Gibson, Hale, Burgoyne (yes, even him - shot knees), Dew, Lake (lot of geniuses point out how good he was with us after the fact, NO-ONE wanted him prior). Oh wait, you mean guys that were practically discards I guess.

Or maybe you mean free-agent Frawley?

But wait, didn't you guys go out a recruit superstar BRAD friggin Ottens? Pretty sure you did.

Seriously, you're a borderline troll. Your Geelong Side was a wonderful home and away team - one of the best. Great in most finals, won 3 at the big dance.

That's an incredible run. But you have to engage your brain. When a side wins three on the trot - any side, it's an absolute freak of nature. To get one is amazing. To get multiples with a single team is very substantial. But three in a row? Talk to Cameron Ling about that, and see what he says. Not the on TV stuff, do it next time you bump into him in Geelong.

The next one will be if Jack Fitzpatrick becomes a good player for the Hawks. The story will become Hawks stole player from poor Melbourne, don't let the truth get in the way that he couldn't get a game there and was delisted.
So many of the Hawks recruits over the years were a gamble and they paid off and now that somehow can be manipulated by the warped of mind as been unfair.
Hale: On the outer at North playing VFL
Lake: happily pushed out the door, injuries, thought past his best and a bad attitude.
Gibson: An average player the Hawks were ridiculed for paying overs for
McEvoy: pushed out the door by the Saints and traded without his knowledge while overseas on Holiday
Burgoyne: looked to be nearing the end, Injuries again accused of paying overs.
Geelong recruited about half the number of players in 1 off season that the Hawks recruited over a 6 year period.
Also none of these teams came close to the number of Free Agents the Hawks lost.
Tall poppy syndrome is rife on BF.
 
They would, and should, but will always be a little bit below them somehow. 8 out of 10 Hawks fans (that are old enough) would select Platten over Mitchell... and the others would be undecided.

The Hawks fans of that vintage have been absolutely spoilt for success

Screen Shot 2015-10-25 at 8.00.34 am.png

At just about every other club an equivalent era would be ranked as the clubs GOAT.

Couple that with the boredom from opposition fans (no fairytale drought breaking premiership unlike Brisbane and Geelong) and the current sides achievements are definitely under appreciated
 
They would, and should, but will always be a little bit below them somehow. 8 out of 10 Hawks fans (that are old enough) would select Platten over Mitchell... and the others would be undecided.

I think the rose coloured glasses effect kicks in pretty decently after 20+ odd years. I've seen both eras win flags, the problem with the current crop is that you see both their best and worst on a regular basis. No-one goes back to watch the worst Hawks efforts between 83 and 93. You'd be surprised how angry you'd be with say even Dunstall, that day Fitzroy kept him goaless at Waverly. Mitchell and Platten very different types of players to my mind. The Rat would hit the contest at top speed and glide away, Mitchell dances his way through traffic.
 
The Hawks fans of that vintage have been absolutely spoilt for success

View attachment 188169

At just about every other club an equivalent era would be ranked as the clubs GOAT.

Couple that with the boredom from opposition fans (no fairytale drought breaking premiership unlike Brisbane and Geelong) and the current sides achievements are definitely under appreciated
What I took away from that graphic is that people no longer know how to use apostrophes, not even professional media outlets. Misused in every single instance.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Time for the why cant we have both graphic. Mitchell has had to deal with taggers whereas the rat just got dermie to smash them for him.

Matthews tuck platten mitchell plus random ruckman plus random winger

The Hawks fans of that vintage have been absolutely spoilt for success

View attachment 188169

At just about every other club an equivalent era would be ranked as the clubs GOAT.

Couple that with the boredom from opposition fans (no fairytale drought breaking premiership unlike Brisbane and Geelong) and the current sides achievements are definitely under appreciated

1978 to 1983 is the same as 2008 to 2013. So why is one era seperate ?
 
They would, and should, but will always be a little bit below them somehow. 8 out of 10 Hawks fans (that are old enough) would select Platten over Mitchell... and the others would be undecided.


No they would not. That is a fallacy.

We all love the Rat but the guys who I go to the footy with, all of whom lived through both eras would take Mitchell every day of the week.

Hodge, Mitchell, Roughead, Gibson, Birchall, Rioli, Crawford and Franklin would walk into any Hawthorn side in any era. There are a couple of others who would also mount a very strong case.
 
No they would not. That is a fallacy.

We all love the Rat but the guys who I go to the footy with, all of whom lived through both eras would take Mitchell every day of the week.

Hodge, Mitchell, Roughead, Gibson, Birchall, Rioli, Crawford and Franklin would walk into any Hawthorn side in any era. There are a couple of others who would also mount a very strong case.
Yep, Mitch over Platten for me now.
 
Ok. A long post and it doesn't include anything about Geelong (I do regard the achievement... but no 3peat).

Here are the teams from the 2002 and 2013 GF—which I regard as the strongest grand final teams from the two eras:

Screen Shot 2015-10-25 at 10.59.22.png Screen Shot 2015-10-25 at 10.50.59.png

If I was to combine the teams teams with who I regard as the better players across their lines (I didn't put them in the exact position they lined up in but a position they would have played):

B: Chris Johnson, Brian Lake, Justin Leppitsch
HB: Josh Gibson, Darryl White, Luke Hodge
C: Jordan Lewis, Sam Mitchell, Nigel Lappin
HF: Jason Akermanis, Lance Franklin, Jarryd Roughead
F: Johnathan Brown, Alastair Lynch, Cyril Rioli
Fol: Clark Keating, Simon Black, Michael Voss
Int: Shaun Burgoyne, Shaun Hart, Chris Scott, David Hale

Of course there is much to argue here, my memories of the Lions team has faded somewhat, but looking at it this way, It's pretty much like for like. But like I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, the probably Lions had one or two more superstars. However, I would put the Hawks players, like Birchall, Gunston, Guerra, Smith, Breust... in ahead of guys like, Brad Scott, Luke Power, Mal Michael... Hawthorn's team accross the board is stronger. Having said all that, nothing much seperates the two Dynasties. I just prefer the Hawk's one.




For the Hawks only argument, here is the 1989 GF team.

Screen Shot 2015-10-25 at 10.43.14.png

The same exercise for these teams:

B: Collins, Langford, Ayres
HB: Gibson, Mew, Lake
C: Prichard, Mitchell, DiPierdomenico
HF: Buckenara, Brereton, Franklin
F: Roughead, Dunstall, Rioli
Fol: Dear, Tuck, Platten
Int: Burgoyne, Kennedy, Hodge, Birchall

The 89ers come out on top here. But again, when you consider who missed out from the two sides, it is the 13ers that would have far more 'second rung' players.
 
No they would not. That is a fallacy.

We all love the Rat but the guys who I go to the footy with, all of whom lived through both eras would take Mitchell every day of the week.

Hodge, Mitchell, Roughead, Gibson, Birchall, Rioli, Crawford and Franklin would walk into any Hawthorn side in any era. There are a couple of others who would also mount a very strong case.
Every day of the week, over a Brownlow and Magarey medallist? I think I'll take the player with the much superior record.
 
Every day of the week, over a Brownlow and Magarey medallist? I think I'll take the player with the much superior record.
Much superior record?
Aren't you glad deluded, uneducated opposition supporters don't get to decide who a club's best players are?
Mitchell has double the number of PCMs that Platts has, 3 years more as Hawthorn captain, and 100% more premierships as captain.
Brownlows and Margery's? Hip hip hooray. Those things are way less value to a club.
And I love the Rat....
 
Much superior record?
Aren't you glad deluded, uneducated opposition supporters don't get to decide who a club's best players are?
Mitchell has double the number of PCMs that Platts has, 3 years more as Hawthorn captain, and 100% more premierships as captain.
Brownlows and Margery's? Hip hip hooray. Those things are way less value to a club.
And I love the Rat....
Are you kidding? As a player, his record is far superior. More Brownlows, more Magareys, more AAs. What value does captain of a premiership team offer to the team, a little star next to his name?

I watched Platten play. Mitchell is great too, but the suggestion he is clearly superior is utter tosh.
 
Are you kidding? As a player, his record is far superior. More Brownlows, more Magareys, more AAs. What value does captain of a premiership team offer to the team, a little star next to his name?

I watched Platten play. Mitchell is great too, but the suggestion he is clearly superior is utter tosh.
Wow, it's like talking to a dead tree stump...
 
Are you kidding? As a player, his record is far superior. More Brownlows, more Magareys, more AAs. What value does captain of a premiership team offer to the team, a little star next to his name?

I watched Platten play. Mitchell is great too, but the suggestion he is clearly superior is utter tosh.
Mitchell is probably the best pure centreman in Hawthorn history :eek:

...he is also easily the best Hawthorn player in this era (an era that has netted 4 flags)

If I had to pick one player out of Platten, Mitchell and Crawford I think my head would just explode before I was able to make the decision. Crawford was insanely good in a very shit team compared to Mitchell and Platten who both shone in excellent teams. You could argue that this may have made them look better than they would have been without that support. Those 3 are easily the best 3 on-ballers I have seen play for the Hawthorn Football Club (since ~1984).
 
I think, talent vs talent on paper they were.
And somewhat comfortably..

I definitely appreciate your right to an opinion, but I couldn't disagree more strongly. I'd love to see your team on paper, it's not the one I watched in Geelong between 2004-13.

Sure the likes of Selwood, Scarlett, Bartel, Ablett, and Johnson - maybe Chapman and Kelly at their best are going to glide in against whomever. But those last two are no certainties.

Are you really going to take Harry T. over Lake? You could argue the merits of Enright, Milburn and co. over Birchall, and Corey over I. Smith, but I know who I'd take in both instances.

The considerably higher skill level and decision making of Hawthorn's ball users is massively overlooked by most people, particularly when judging talent on paper.

Then there's Crawford, Hodge, Mitchell, Gibson, Burgoyne and more than a few others as well. Gibson is an all time great Hawk, that seemingly no opposition supporter understands. Torches his direct opponent, smothers teammate's opponents with his fist, rebounds with a lethal left foot, and plays tall and medium. Apparently you have to be brown and gold to see this.

Which brings us to the forward line (no plural, Geelong never had one).

Here it's a white wash, Hawkins over either of Franklin or Roughhead? Absolutely not, no chance - see him play against the Hawk's era Lake and you can see why. Name me one Geelong forward after that who can even hope to be above Rioli, Bruest, Gunston, Williams and co.. ?

Sure, you could say Johnson and Chapman, but I think only the former holds his place against that lot. Chapman absolutely super for grunt and smarts, but Breust every day for me (I've seen them both play, A LOT). Chapman a quality goal kicking mid, but Bruest is a bloody wizard, Mark Williams an absolute freak with marking, pace and smooth ball use to burn - key forward quality at his best, with a midfielder's agility. Rioli is valued only by Hawks, but not even a question mark. Gunston able to play tall and small, and get back to defend - better at all of them than any Geelong forward.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Lions vs Cats vs Hawks - Which dynasty is the best?

Back
Top