The rankings (from best to worst) of the 128 VFL/AFL premiership teams.

[Fadge]

Yes of course they are the precise things one with no affiliations would think of when trying to work out the best Premiership team ever, lol.

OK, let's try this angle.

Dan is using biased metrics to land Essendon 2000 in the #1 spot.

Conversely, he is using biased metrics to keep Richmond out of the top 34 spots.

Are you able to make a case for any Richmond team to be comparable with the Essendon 2000 team, in terms of 'the best AFL/VFL Premiership teams', based on your own metrics?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Here are your only 9 posts on this thread listd below. Not one of them is an attampt to add anything meaningful to the thread subject. All your posts are about me. Like, every single one of them.

Why are you here?

Meteoric Rise another disrespecting those all time great Tigers.

I don't think we've actually seen where you'd put the '17, '19 and '20 teams before. Are we talking top 50? Top 20? Do we even get one of them top 5?

So you're not sure where you'd place the '17, '19 or '20 teams? Just going for more of a general sook about them not being high on anyone else's list?

Good stuff old boy.

Another question for you: where would you rank the '17, '19 and '20 teams?

Stop deflecting.

Where would you rank the Richmond 2017, 19 and 20 teams?

So it looks like you can't even name where you'd rank the '17, '19 and '20 Richmond sides. Therefore you have no right to criticise their placement.

When this changes let me know and then all of your hard work won't have to go in the bin.

Yet they can't even be ranked by their most die hard advocate. That says a lot.

If you simply cut out 10 of your daily sooky rants, you'd free up a lot of time to perform such an exercise.

You're whinging and moaning, without having any idea where you would actually rank the various Richmond premiership teams.

It's therefore impossible to know how the list would change based on your supposed ideal criteria. At the end of the day, it's just one guy making some criteria to form a list. It shouldn't cause this much despair.

Triggered reactions = showing you how moronic your tear-soaked rants about anything "diminishing" Richmond are. If someone made a list of the most intelligent/well constructed posts on BigFooty and somehow had yours in the top 10, at the very least I would be able to say where I thought they belonged. You can't even do that with the Richmond premiership sides, hence the whinging ramblings are irrelevant to the thread.

 

[PhatBoy]

Your premise is irrelevant. The thread is purporting to locate the best premiership team ever, not the team to play the most dominant whole season. By extension that means which Grand Final winning combination would beat all others. The best evidence of that is how well the team played on Grand Final day. Other evidence is of course relevant but not nearly as relevant.

It is correct that how well a team plays on any given day is influenced by something no team can fully control, ie how well the opponent plays. There are other factors as well, injury, umpiring, conditions and so on.

So you are wrong to think I am suggesting the GF score should be the only arbiter. But it is clearly the best starting point.

A finals game isn’t worth 5-8 home & away games, you can’t calculate it that way. The finals are the prism through which all teams must be judged as they are the narrow end of the funnel through which all premiers must pass to emerge premier. Those who play best in finals are the best teams, it is as simple as that. The trick is working out how well a team has played in finals. But that calculation must commence from the best evidence available, which is the final score, and also must include how well the team has stood up in finals over multiple seasons.

By that logic if you were rating the best boxer of all time you’d just look for the one who threw the biggest ever knockout punch in a title fight.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

OK, let's try this angle.

Dan is using biased metrics to land Essendon 2000 in the #1 spot.

Conversely, he is using biased metrics to keep Richmond out of the top 34 spots.

Are you able to make a case for any Richmond team to be comparable with the Essendon 2000 team, in terms of 'the best AFL/VFL Premiership teams', based on your own metrics?

Essendon 2000 are imo not even the best Essendon premiership team I have seen, much less the best Essendon Premiership team ever, much less the best premiership team of all time.

Their "amazing" 21-1 h&a + 3-0 finals record becomes just a little less amazing when you consider their dream schedule included 21 of 25 games at their 2 home grounds. Of the remaining 4 interstate games, 3 were v non-finalists, the other was against a team who lost 11 games for the season, including a semi-final V Carlton by 82 points.

Yet that 1999-2000-2001 Essendon team was clearly very good, their 56-10 h & a record plus and 6-2 finals record shows that. History will fairly relegate them below every dynasty team in history because:

• they only won 1 Premiership
• only made 2 GF's
• never verified their dominance of the competition outside of 1 single finals series - though in 1999 you could fairly say they came close & probably should have.

In their best 4 season stretch that Essendon team went 68-1-19 h&a and 7-3 finals. That is a much more true reflection of how good they were than the events of a single season. Remember also they were competing against some clubs not as well funded in the football dept as them, ie weaker opposition.

The recent Richmond dynasty team competed against 17 full funded football departments, ie stronger opposition(it is no coincidence the 19-20+ win seasons have dried right up in this period of all clubs footy depts being fully funded.) Richmond's h & a record in those 4 seasons was 61-1-21. However the finals record was 10-2.

These longer records & big game records do not lie.

Overall matches

Essendon 1999-2002 75-1-22
v
Richmond 2017-2020 71-1-23

Finals

Ess 7-3
v
Rich 10-2

Premierships

Ess 1
v
Rich 3

Even by your measure of a final win being worth 5-8 h&a wins that Richmond team clearly proved themselves better than that Essendon team over time.

Further, over those 4 seasons Essendon played 78 games at their 2 home grounds & only 20 games at other venues.

By comparison, during its dynasty Richmond played 49 of their 95 games at their home ground the MCG & 46 games at other venues.

The Richmond team achieved more over a longer period against more & better equipped opponents, with an immensely less favourable draw. History will say Richmond(& every other multiple flag team) is better than that Essendon team and that is completely fair.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

By that logic if you were rating the best boxer of all time you’d just look for the one who threw the biggest ever knockout punch in a title fight.

3 title fights my friend. All by KO. Teams that have done it more are entitled to say they are better. Teams that have done it less are not. Teams that also have 3 titles by KO we can debate. Please note toe poke GF wins are not knock outs.

 

[Fadge]

Essendon 2000 are imo not even the best Essendon premiership team I have seen, much less the best Essendon Premiership team ever, much less the best premiership team of all time.

Their "amazing" 21-1 h&a + 3-0 finals record becomes just a little less amazing when you consider their dream schedule included 21 of 25 games at their 2 home grounds. Of the remaining 4 interstate games, 3 were v non-finalists, the other was against a team who lost 11 games for the season, including a semi-final V Carlton by 82 points.

Yet that 1999-2000-2001 Essendon team was clearly very good, their 56-10 h & a record plus and 6-2 finals record shows that. History will fairly relegate them below every dynasty team in history because:

• they only won 1 Premiership
• only made 2 GF's
• never verified their dominance of the competition outside of 1 single finals series - though in 1999 you could fairly say they came close & probably should have.

In their best 4 season stretch that Essendon team went 68-1-19 h&a and 7-3 finals. That is a much more true reflection of how good they were than the events of a single season. Remember also they were competing against some clubs not as well funded in the football dept as them, ie weaker opposition.

The recent Richmond dynasty team competed against 17 full funded football departments, ie stronger opposition(it is no coincidence the 19-20+ win seasons have dried right up in this period of all clubs footy depts being fully funded.) Richmond's h & a record in those 4 seasons was 61-1-21. However the finals record was 10-2.

These longer records & big game records do not lie.

Overall matches

Essendon 1999-2002 75-1-22
v
Richmond 2017-2020 71-1-23

Finals

Ess 7-3
v
Rich 10-2

Premierships

Ess 1
v
Rich 3

Even by your measure of a final win being worth 5-8 h&a wins that Richmond team clearly proved themselves better than that Essendon team over time.

Further, over those 4 seasons Essendon played 78 games at their 2 home grounds & only 20 games at other venues.

By comparison, during its dynasty Richmond played 49 of their 95 games at their home ground the MCG & 46 games at other venues.

The Richmond team achieved more over a longer period against more & better equipped opponents, with an immensely less favourable draw. History will say Richmond(& every other multiple flag team) is better than that Essendon team and that is completely fair.

So which Richmond team/s should be ranked higher than the Essendon 2000 team?

Are you suggesting ALL of them?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

So which Richmond team/s should be ranked higher than the Essendon 2000 team?

Are you suggesting ALL of them?

I don't find it easy to distinguish between the 3 Tiger flag teams. Overall they proved better than the Blessendon team that effectively got fixtured 21 home games & 4 soft away games for the season and only faced 1 finalist with >14 h&a wins.

Richmond's dynasty team had a run of 22 consecutive home ground wins themselves.

I thought you were a degree of difficulty man Fadge?

And a (self)noted analyst? You should be all over this stuff, I shouldn't have to spoon-feed it to you.

 

[tiger_tough]

Oh goodie. Yet another thread with Fadge and the same handful of Geelong posters obsessing over Richmond.

 

[Fadge]

I don't find it easy to distinguish between the 3 Tiger flag teams. Overall they proved better than the Blessendon team that effectively got fixtured 21 home games & 4 soft away games for the season and only faced 1 finalist with >14 h&a wins.

Richmond's dynasty team had a run of 22 consecutive home ground wins themselves.

I thought you were a degree of difficulty man Fadge?

And a (self)noted analyst? You should be all over this stuff, I shouldn't have to spoon-feed it to you.

So for the record, you're saying the Richmond 2017, 2019 and 2020 premiership teams were ALL better than the Essendon 2000 Premiership team?

Have I stated that correctly?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

So for the record, you're saying the Richmond 2017, 2019 and 2020 premiership teams were ALL better than the Essendon 2000 Premiership team?

Have I stated that correctly?

It is difficult to say any individual flag team is certainly better than another.

The trouble with the Essendon 2000 team is it did not live in a vacuum, the way the o/p and you are trying to make it. That team did other work, essentially 1999-2002. The other work it did casts enormous doubt on how good that 2000 team actually was. Because it never came near a similar level of performance during any other season, especially finals.

It is therefore improbable that this was a better team than any dominant triple flag winning team, not just the Richmond dynasty team.

1999-2002 Essendon team in finals v teams who went 15 wins or better during the h & a season:

1999 nil, but beaten by 12-10 103% Carlton

2000 beat 16 win 135% Blues by 45 pts

2001 beat 15 win, 108% Tigers by 70 pts, then lost to 17 win Lions by 26 pts

2002 lost to 18 win Port Adelaide by 24 points

1998 they also lost to 16 win Roos by 24 points.


So over this 4 year period 1999-2002 where they faced 4 teams who had 15+ win h&a seasons, they won 2, lost 2.

What did the Richmond dynasty team do against that level of team?

2017 Beat 15 win 115% GWS by 36, beat 15.5 win 117% Cats by 51, 15.5 win 136% Crows by 48

2018 Beat 15 win, 120% Hawks by 31, LOST to 15 win, 120% Pies by 39

2019 Beat 16 win 118% Lions by 47, beat 16 win 136% Cats by 19

2020 Beat 15.5 win 137% Cats by 39, Beat 18 win 136% Power by 8, LOST to 18 win 125% Lions by 19.

In the Tigers 4 year period they played 10 teams who met this threshold in finals and went 8-2.


The Essendon team had 1 single finals win v a team over 14 wins & 110%. Ever. The Richmond team had 3, 2 & 3 of those wins in their 3 flag seasons. One team had a good run for a season where everything was in their favour - historically weak finals opponents, incredibly favourable draw venue wise, and nowt outside that to confirm how good they were. The other team had a dominant body of work spread over 4 seasons with one poor finals series within that period.

That Richmond team is better, of course it is. It achieved way more while facing far greater hurdles and being accorded far fewer benefits. You could equally do the same process with other multiple flag winners and see they are also better.

 

[Fadge]

It is difficult to say any individual flag team is certainly better than another.

The trouble with the Essendon 2000 team is it did not live in a vacuum, the way the o/p and you are trying to make it. That team did other work, essentially 1999-2002. The other work it did casts enormous doubt on how good that 2000 team actually was. Because it ever came near a similar level of performance during any other season, especially finals.

It is therefore improbable that this was a better team than any dominant triple flag winning team, not just the Richmond dynasty team.

1999-2002 Essendon team in finals v teams who went 15 wins or better during the h & a season:

1999 nil, but beaten by 12-10 103% Carlton

2000 beat 16 win 135% Blues by 45 pts

2001 beat 15 win, 108% Tigers by 70 pts, then lost to 17 win Lions by 26 pts

2002 lost to 18 win Port Adelaide by 24 points

1998 they also lost to 16 win Roos by 24 points.


So over this 4 year period 1999-2002 where they faced 4 teams who had 15+ win h&a seasons, they won 2, lost 2.

What did the Richmond dynasty team do against that level of team?

2017 Beat 15 win 115% GWS by 36, beat 15.5 win 117% Cats by 51, 15.5 win 136% Crows by 48

2018 Beat 15 win, 120% Hawks by 31, LOST to 15 win, 120% Pies by 39

2019 Beat 16 win 118% Lions by 47, beat 16 win 136% Cats by 19

2020 Beat 15.5 win 137% Cats by 39, Beat 18 win 136% Power by 8, LOST to 18 win 125% Lions by 19.

In the Tigers 4 year period they played 10 teams who met this threshold in finals and went 8-2.


The Essendon team had 1 single finals win v a team over 14 wins & 110%. Ever. The Richmond team had 3, 2 & 3 of those wins in their 3 flag seasons. One team had a good run for a season where everything was in their favour - historically weak finals opponents, incredibly favourable draw venue wise, and nowt outside that to confirm how good they were. The other team had a dominant body of work spread over 4 seasons with one poor finals series within that period.

That Richmond team is better, of course it is. It achieved way more while facing far greater hurdles and being accorded far fewer benefits. You could equally do the same process with other multiple flag winners and see they are also better.

The worst part about all this tripe is that it appears you honestly believe what you've written...

Mentioning records over a 4 year period to debate who the strongest single season team is.

OMFG.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

The worst part about all this tripe is that it appears you honestly believe what you've written...

You were bound to run out of questions & answers given several of the things you have staked your woeful reputation on in other threads do not translate well for the Bombers 2000 credentials here.

But I suppose Essedon's lack of strong finals opponents, their 21 home venue games for the season & their failure to frank their performance in any other season is somehow magically irrelevant to how good a premiership team they were to you Fadge....after you have famously boasted you "consider all factors" on other threads.

We all know you need them to be all time good because otherwise St Kilda 2009-10 have even less to hang their hat on, as would the 2 teams who beat them by a toe poke in 1 GF & drew them in another. And if you ever had to ackowledge that you would melt like a choc wedge in the Simpson Desert.

 

[Fadge]

You were bound to run out of questions & answers given several of the things you have staked your woeful reputation on in other threads do not translate well for the Bombers 2000 credentials here.

But I suppose Essedon's lack of strong finals opponents, their 21 home venue games for the season & their failure to frank their performance in any other season is somehow magically irrelevant to how good a premiership team they were to you Fadge....after you have famously boasted you "consider all factors" on other threads.

We all know you need them to be all time good because otherwise St Kilda 2009-10 have even less to hang their hat on, as would the 2 teams who beat them by a toe poke in 1 GF & drew them in another. And if you ever had to ackowledge that you would melt like a choc wedge in the Simpson Desert.

Quite ironic that the four teams you mention or allude to in this post - Essendon 2000, Geelong 2009, St. Kilda 2009 and Collingwood 2010 - are all far superior to all 3 Richmond premiership teams.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Quite ironic that the four teams you mention or allude to in this post - Essendon 2000, Geelong 2009, St. Kilda 2009 and Collingwood 2010 - are all far superior to all 3 Richmond premiership teams.

Yes because 3 teams with 2 flags between them are all separately better than 1 team with 3 flags on their own.

 

[PhatBoy]

Yes because 3 teams with 2 flags between them are all separately better than 1 team with 3 flags on their own.

The tigers were never given 3 flags for any of their premierships, and none of Essendon, Geelong or Collingwood WERENT given a flag. This makes no sense.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

The tigers were never given 3 flags for any of their premierships, and none of Essendon, Geelong or Collingwood WERENT given a flag. This makes no sense.

I agree, if that is how you understand it, then it won't make much sense to you PB.

 

[danster168]

This is the issue with following the numbers too closely. No one would take Geelong 2022 over Lions 01-03 yet you've rated Geelong 22 as one of the best teams of all-time and put the golden era Lions in the trash heap.

I think the recent Lions win just shows that any granny over Sydney can't be considered that good. they simply haven't showed up to play in both granny's.

 

[boncer34]

Yes because 3 teams with 2 flags between them are all separately better than 1 team with 3 flags on their own.

As the reigning Essendon Board Poster of the Year I'd like to know which of the 4 teams you're dropping off to suit your narrative?

 

[Fadge]

I recall Fadge when going over Richmond's 3 flags in 4 years attacking the weakness of our opponents, if we do this with that Essendon team in 2000, we can see a very weak season, which culminated in them playing Melbourne in the GF, a Melbourne that didn't even make the 8 in '99 or 2001.


1. Richmond 1980 (smashed a team that played 3 GF's in a row)


For anyone else who would like to have a go at ranking GF winners, see my top 4 as your starting point if you want to be taken seriously, otherwise don't waste the peoples time with pulling names out of a hat.

Hard to argue with that Top 4...

 

[Meteoric Rise]

As the reigning Essendon Board Poster of the Year I'd like to know which of the 4 teams you're dropping off to suit your narrative?

Didn't think it would be that tough to figure out it was the 3 teams who won 2 flags between them that I was referring to when I metioned 3 teams with 2 flags between them, reigning Essendon Board Poster of the Year.

 

[TheUnicorn]

Is "The Feared One" old mate on his 100th account?
did he get banned again lmao?

 

[jannissary]

I recall Fadge when going over Richmond's 3 flags in 4 years attacking the weakness of our opponents, if we do this with that Essendon team in 2000, we can see a very weak season, which culminated in them playing Melbourne in the GF, a Melbourne that didn't even make the 8 in '99 or 2001.


1. Richmond 1980 (smashed a team that played 3 GF's in a row)


For anyone else who would like to have a go at ranking GF winners, see my top 4 as your starting point if you want to be taken seriously, otherwise don't waste the peoples time with pulling names out of a hat.

i don’t really care for CFL lies. grow up

 

[Hot Dogma]

Is there an official IQ test you need to fail to become a Richmond supporter?

 

[boncer34]

Didn't think it would be that tough to figure out it was the 3 teams who won 2 flags between them that I was referring to when I metioned 3 teams with 2 flags between them, reigning Essendon Board Poster of the Year.

As the reigning Essendon Board Poster of the Year I'd like to point of the post you quoted named 4 sides with 3 flags between them. So which premiership team did you drop off?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

As the reigning Essendon Board Poster of the Year I'd like to point of the post you quoted named 4 sides with 3 flags between them. So which premiership team did you drop off?

Ok I am starting to fear for the Essendon Board.

That Geelong team won 3 flags on their own. They are the ones I left out.

Those Collingwood & Essendon teams won 1 flag each. And the Simon Templars, well, they didn't win any.

All these teams were playing against about 8-10 mature fully funded footy department clubs max, 3 of them at least were dealing with a stacked deck in terms of footy dept spending. Of those, Bombers 2000 team played precisely 84% of its matches at its home venues. The Richmond dynasty team played barely 50% of its matches at its home venue. Yet beat more better opponents in finals in all of its flag years than that Bombers team ever managed....

Anyway, congrats to the Bombers for winning 20 of 21 games at it home venues in 2000. The Tiger dynasty team managed 22 straight at its home venue.

And Essendon 2000 being the best Premiership team ever is about as likely as Patience Hodgson declaring she finds me very addictive. If they were, they simply would have won more finals against better teams.