Who is the best team in AFL history?

Wow realy good

Are the Hawks now the best given there recently two premierships?

Well said

3 IN A ROW

You should have written this into a full article, not a comment. Or you still could.

I agree with many of the comments made on this blog re the comparisons between Brisbane and Geelong, however it is interesting when people talk about Geelong's consistency over perhaps a 10 year period but only refer to the Lions of 2001-2004. What a lot of people don't realise is that Brisbane were consistently performing well from 1995 to 2004. 1998 was a massive blip on the radar, with massive injury issues, Voss broke his leg, coaching dramas and a hangover of some sorts after the Bears/Lions merger. Here is how Brisbane performed from 1995 onwards which is more fairer assessment of their consistency during this period in the lead up to their golden years of 2001-2004: 1995 - finished 8th - lost in first final when 1st played 8th and were the closest team to defeating Carlton (eventual premiers) when the lost by only 13 points. Roger Merritt's last game and Robert Wall's (who drafted a pile of young champions) las game as coach. 1996 -finished 3rd and lost prelim to eventual premiers Kangaroos 1997 - finished 8th (made finals) 1998 - finished last 1999 - (Matthews first year as coach), finished 3rd and lost Prelim again to eventual premiers the Kangaroos 2000 - finished 6thand bowed in 2nd semi final against Carlton 2001-2003 - Premiers 2004 - runners-up So with the exception and bizarre 1998, the Lions had made the finals 9 times in 10 years 3 x Premierships 1 x runner-up 2 Prelim finals Geelong's sustained effort commenced ironically in the year Brisbane bowed out - 2004 as prior to that, with the exception of 2000 had not made the finals for 3 years running (2001-2003) 2000 - finished 5th - went out in first final to Hawthorn 2001 - 12th 2002 - 9th 2003 - 12th 2004 - 4th lost Prelim final to Brisbane 2005 - 6th - lost to eventual Premiers in 2nd semi 2006 - 10th 2007 - 1st 2008 - runers up 2009 - 1st 2010 - finished 2nd, lost Prelim to Collingwood (premiers) 2011 - 1st 2012 - finished 6 and went out in first final to Fremantle 2013 - finished 2nd and lost Prelim to Hawks (premiers) If you take it that Geelong's golden run commenced in 2004 they have achieved the following in 10 years: 3 x Premierships 2007, 2009, 2011 1 x runners-up 3 x Prelim finals This record almost identically shadows Brisbane, however they have achieved 1 more prelim final however, they also like Brisbane, have the made the finals 9 times in 10 years. Does the fact that the Cats could not win back to back mean anything? Brisbane technically did it twice. Should they deserve more merit points for this on some imaginary scale. Given the fact the Lions have to travel at least twice (perhaps 3 times) as much during the course of one year as compared to Geelong, in my mind makes Brisbane the superior team based on the draw, the travel factor, being forced to play a prelim final in 2004 (against Geelong ironically) with less preparation time than the eventual premier (Port) when they earnt the right to host a home final, all adds weight to my perception that Brisbane's effort should be considered superior (by not a great margin) when assessed over a 10 year period. Who knows if the Cats make the finals this year, and again next year their efforts will probably surpass that of the Lions due to sustained effort over a dozen years. The gap between the two should not be assessed in numbers of total games won over a ten year period as the anomalies of the draw are too difficult to judge by this. One would have to look at the number of lower ranked teams that were played over the entire period and one may be swayed in favour of the other. My assessment is taken over two different 10 years periods (1995 to 2004 for Brisbane and 2004 to 2013 for Geelong) and the similarities are incredibly alike, although the way the game was played in 2004 is very different now. Don't just judge the Cat's efforts over a 10 year period and remark how consistent they were and only compare it with the Lions of 2001-2004. The bigger picture needs to be assessed.

Nigel Lappin, All Australian 2001-02-03-04...

The best team I have ever seen in the afl period was easily st kilda from round 1 2009 til round 19 2009. Too high a level to sustain for even a whole season. Damn!

Modern Era the best teams I have seen in Brisbane 2001-3 and Geelong....in my nearly 50years of watching best teams pf that period I think was Carlton in the 70's and Hawthorn in the 80;s...and I dont support any of those clubs...

Teams change over years. Geelong 2007, essendon 2000 or GWS 2018 ^_^

I would like to see the same thing applied to the Coaches. There is always much debate about who is the best coach, I would like to see who has the most GF appearances as coach.

nsfwafl18531 24 years does not make best in history. Of the modern day era, or many others have said, since nationalsied then yes the premise for the article makes sense. Best team in AFL history - there can never be an answer due to not all teams playing as early days where teams like Collingwood, Fitzroy and Essnedon won premiership the teams were decided by people with large pockets and buying players - no salary cap. Best team of the modern era? Would probably line it up as follows: 1. Geelong - For the number of Premierships and sheer consistency 2. West Coast - Have been a strong club for a number of years with a lot of Premierships. 3. Sydney - Reaching the finals consistently and also being being part of 4 grand finals during that time with 50% win rate. 4. Brisbane/Collingwood - Brisbane have the Premierships and wood had a damn strong team. However, little has happened apart from that. Collingwood have reached a fair few GFs while also being very successful in H&A. 5. Essendon/Hawthorn - The 2000 team was one of the best we will ever see. Also, they have been a proud club and hard to beat for a number of years. Hawthorn have 3 premierships and have delighted us with one of the most potent attacks in years.

Well that's that sorted then.

So you're serious? Wow. Can't believe I'm having this conversation. This was one of the best run clubs in history. Their recruiting was extraordinary. I can sort of understand why people would assume that the current bunch of players leaving is due to the shambolic organisation (although some of them went to other shambolic organisations) but it makes no sense to transpose that logic to the club from ten to fifteen years ago. I think your argument is that they somehow should've known that these players were going to want to go back home soon enough, although that frankly seems ridiculous. I've said this many times: most young men would rather be in their home city, with their friends and family, all things being equal. Brisbane could not possibly restricting themselves to drafting only players who had little chance of getting homesick: that's an impossibly small group. What it comes down to is that ever since a team was set up in Brisbane, young players have wanted to be elsewhere, from Nathan Buckley to Shane O'Bree to Des Headland to Mitch Clark to Jared Polec. And that's been the case across multiple eras, multiple recruiting departments, and greatly varying standards of management. The common factor is the city, not the way the club is run. And that seems incredibly obvious. It certainly seems like there's a lot more logic to that view than 'somehow the club is to blame'.

And you do realise as the author of the article he/she can choose whatever criteria they want for the article. If I wanted to write an article about who was the best team between 1940 and 1960 are you gonna tell me 'but thats not the entire VFL history?

Well who drafted the 'whiney go home baby' types then? These players were not assigned to Brisbane, they chose them, something obviously went wrong from 5 to want to leave at the same time. It all comes down to recruitment and development, and somehow, someway Brisbane failed, there is no one else to blame.

The author does realise that the change in name from VFL to AFL was a change in name only. Hence why accolades like awards and stats refer to AFL/VFL ... hence most games played is Michael Tuck - who holds the record, best GF player - Norm Smith, Brownlow etc....

Wayne Bennett - you say Geelong "are" chokers and point to 92 etc. No, Geelong "were" chokers. You may have been on a spaceship to a far off galaxy in 2006/7 when a club culture renaissance came, otherwise you'd not use the word chokers for Geelong since then. As for Brisbane, they were a constructed team, artificial but they did do well in their era, like West Coast. The only other club in the timeframe of this article to really stand up are Hawthorn. Like Geelong, even if off the boil, they're still "premiership capable" at all times. I'd say what we all should be looking at is Freo now - they look ominous but without Sandilands are brittle.

And what exactly has Brisbane accomplished since those premiership years ... we're talking about a period of 23 years not hand picking one or two out of the lot.

they've always had supporters, even when they were winning wooden spoons each year.