Where do centrals rank

[Ian]

shouldn't woodville & west torrens (separately) & any other now defunct teams be counted as well ?

So Woodvilles amount of spoons and no premierships could lift Glenelg off the bottom?

It wouldn't change the fact that they are they bottom ranked remaining club

[bulldogproud2]

I have been playing around with the achievements of each team currently in the comp and have come up with a ranking based on Flags and Spoons versus Years in the Comp.

Firstly, the rankings in terms of Flags won:

1. PORT 36
2. NORWOOD 27
3. NORTH 13
3. STURT 13
5. SOUTH 11
6. CENTRALS 9
7. WEST 8
8. GLENELG 4
9. EAGLES 2

Well done on the work, Fish. There is one other statistic that needs to come into this equation though: number of teams in the competition when flag was won. It is twice as easy to win a flag in a four team competition than an eight team competition, for instance.
Cheers

[LBJ8]

I'd include years in finals and years out of finals as part of the ranking and also grand finals played but that's for obvious reasons haha.

[bayman]

shouldn't woodville & west torrens (separately) & any other now defunct teams be counted as well ?

So Woodvilles amount of spoons and no premierships could lift Glenelg off the bottom?

no, only because if you are counting 'stats' from all eras, i think it is only fair to count every team that played including the adelaide premiership of 18?? etc etc....or preface it by saying since ww2 or 1950 etc etc

[Apachebulldog]

Wrong fish you cannot compare Ports and Norwood flags over a 150 years with Centrals flags over 50 years so under your logic we triple Central 9 flags which then makes it 27 flags making them second one of the greatest ever.!!!

[Dutchy]

To do it accurately you would need to apply some credit to Finals appearances and GF appearances

[The Apostle]

SANFL history is over the place (eg clubs such as Norwood, South and North winning most of their premierships pre 1950) or clubs being in the league for a long period (Sturt/North) or short period (WWT/Centrals)...personally i'd put Centrals second behind Port Adelaide (the greatest SANFL club of all time by a mile) and equal with Norwood...

[CENTURION]

does it really matter?

[robranisgod]

SANFL history is over the place (eg clubs such as Norwood, South and North winning most of their premierships pre 1950) ..

I agree with Norwood and South winning most of their premierships pre 1950 - in fact pre 1900 definitely in South's case and a large percentage in Norwoods case, but North is pretty evenly spread pre and post 1950. I suppose you are right, North is 7 pre 1950 (including 1949) and 6 post 1950.

As an aside they are currently experiencing their worst ever drought, coming up 20 years this year, Port are experiencing their equal worst drought, coming up to 12 years, West are experiencing their worst drought, coming up 28 years and South are experiencing their worst drought coming up 47 years.

I often think how spoilt WAFL fans must be. Since 1954 every one of the established 8 clubs has won between 6 and 8 premierships. What a great competition. 1927 through to 1935 is the only time we have ever had anything like that at all.

[andyw]

I often think how spoilt WAFL fans must be. Since 1954 every one of the established 8 clubs has won between 6 and 8 premierships. What a great competition. 1927 through to 1935 is the only time we have ever had anything like that at all.'
'
Back to SANFL:

Between 2002 and 2010, 7 teams out of the 9 have played in the decider.

Pretty good comp I reckon

[fish]

Wrong fish you cannot compare Ports and Norwood flags over a 150 years with Centrals flags over 50 years so under your logic we triple Central 9 flags which then makes it 27 flags making them second one of the greatest ever.!!!

Norwood have a better strike rate for flags (years per flag) and also a better strike rate for spoons (years per spoon) than Centrals, so by my analysis they beat Centrals for second spot overall behind Port.

[fish]

Fair points made by others in terms of taking into account the number of teams in the comp and excluding years lost to WW1 and WW2, but I can't be bothered doing that at the moment - maybe next year!

[fish]

To do it accurately you would need to apply some credit to Finals appearances and GF appearances

No way then Glenelg wouldn't be bottom anymore!

[Dutchy]

To do it accurately you would need to apply some credit to Finals appearances and GF appearances

No way then Glenelg wouldn't be bottom anymore!

Rigged!

[Dog_ger]

I wonder what the official SANFL rankings are...?

Can we get them somehow...?

Interesting....

Only way really....

Someone of superior intelligence could find out....

[X Runna]

I rank Centrals right up there, second only to 2 eras at Alberton and one at Unley.

Reasons being
a) in all those 3 eras the competition was a LOT stronger, in some there were only 8 teams BUT in those days there was no AFL, we'd get between 30,000 and 40,000 each week to the SANFL. It was genuine footy, nearly tribal in some ways...there was a passion about it and many a fight over it. Now, apart from the dedicated few - there is not as much pain if your SANFL side loses, as long as your AFL team wins.

b) Central have proven themselves exceptional in many ways. Their business acumen, administration, marketing, self-promotion, playing, coaching and recruiting have been incredible. The latter the most important of all. Central have a very consistent team with most changes each week being through injury or form of their own. Recruiting players just half a yard away from being AFL players and having them stay for eons, has been superbly executed.They also have very little erratic movement with players between the AFL and their team, the AFL scraps that do get thrown their way are Central boys anyhow and usually short term. Nor do they have a great deal leaving for the AFL.

c) In the days of Port/Sturt rivalries in particular - there were 2 great clubs at each others' throats and then a bit of variety at times as others would come up and have a real crack for a year or two. These days the Doggies seem to have a mortgage on the thing, and again - congratulations, then we have a few sides who under finals type pressure just can't quite crack the combination. What I am getting at is there was more heat in the bygone tremendous eras.


FWIW, Central are fantastic BUT to gain 'best ever' status they will need to either keep going in the current mode for another 5 or 6 years OR have a quiet patch and then come back for another successful few in a row.

FWIW 2, even though I am not a fan by any stretch of the imagination, imagine if WWT's side was consistent with all their AFL players - their weekly changeover rate is huge.

[bulldogproud2]

X Runna, you make a number of good points in your post. However, I can't see the logic in downgrading Central's performance simply because there are less fans who attend the competition these days (as you have done in Point a). This has nothing to do with the performance of the actual sides and should not be a factor in looking at how strong Central's performance has been.
Additionally, the point you make in (c) strengthens Central's claim rather than detracts from it as you state. The fact that no other team has successfully maintained a 'second ranking' shows how difficult it is continually perform year after year in the current system.
It must also be taken into account that whilst Central's strong performance these 11 years has been achieved under a salary cap and a more level playing field, previous 'dynasties' have occurred when clubs were able to encourage players to play for them through various incentives. For instance, Port Adelaide were successfully able to gain their greatest family, the Williams', from West Adelaide.
Cheers

[bulldogproud2]

Having said that, I don't think that there is any way that we can be compared with Port Adelaide as a club yet.
To be honest, I hate even trying to rank people or things from one era to another. It is too difficult. I would prefer to just enjoy the period we have been going through.
Cheers

[X Runna]

X Runna, you make a number of good points in your post. However, I can't see the logic in downgrading Central's performance simply because there are less fans who attend the competition these days (as you have done in Point a). This has nothing to do with the performance of the actual sides and should not be a factor in looking at how strong Central's performance has been.
Additionally, the point you make in (c) strengthens Central's claim rather than detracts from it as you state. The fact that no other team has successfully maintained a 'second ranking' shows how difficult it is continually perform year after year in the current system.
It must also be taken into account that whilst Central's strong performance these 11 years has been achieved under a salary cap and a more level playing field, previous 'dynasties' have occurred when clubs were able to encourage players to play for them through various incentives. For instance, Port Adelaide were successfully able to gain their greatest family, the Williams', from West Adelaide.
Cheers

Good reply, but just to clarify
What I was getting at in point "a)" is the passion in which the SANFL was played, I guess the "vibe", the importance of it as most football supporters' choice as sport to watch & most of those were passionate about the way their team went about it. Consequently, the clubs were I think more competitive overall to what they are now. "c)" Having followed the SANFL since the mid 1960's, I have seen a bit of it - and really do think apart from the Doggies, nobody else has that consistent desperation they had pre 1991. Full credit to the boys at Elizabeth, in my younger days I had not a minute for them, but now I hold nothing but the deepest respect for them...

Your last comment is valid, but I think there is a tad more to it. Yes, the salary cap has had an effect, but there is also something else which shows up to me, and that is loyalty. Now I could be really wrong here, but even though they have the money, I would bet that Central do not spend the most of any club on player payments. There is a loyalty and a sense of community at Elizabeth, very similar to the way most clubs were before the AFL expansion.

The incentives you mention, in those days I don't think it was the money so much as to why people moved (there were actually very few compared to today's standards), ie the Williams family - I really think it was that sense of 'family/community' which drew Fos there. The fact his kids were very good, and their intention to move as family to Alberton had been part of a deal with Westies, turned out to be great luck, but may well have been nothing if the kids were no good. Luck I guess, just like the Gowans brothers to a degree.

The end of my rant...........most SANFL supporters have been saying for a few years now that the Dog's Dynasty will close soon as they are too old - but they keep holding up. Genuinely, the big test will be when some of your older champs move on, can they hang on? If so, for just a few more years they would lay valid claim to "best ever", if they do drop back for a year or two, and then come back to where they are now - that too would qualify.

[Dogmatic]

Good reply, but just to clarify
What I was getting at in point "a)" is the passion in which the SANFL was played, I guess the "vibe", the importance of it as most football supporters' choice as sport to watch & most of those were passionate about the way their team went about it. Consequently, the clubs were I think more competitive overall to what they are now. "c)" Having followed the SANFL since the mid 1960's, I have seen a bit of it - and really do think apart from the Doggies, nobody else has that consistent desperation they had pre 1991. Full credit to the boys at Elizabeth, in my younger days I had not a minute for them, but now I hold nothing but the deepest respect for them...

I don't think it is fair to compare using the above scenario, times have changed compared to back then and there are competing alternatives to going to the football that weren't around then.
To name a few; live AFL, extended trading hours, part time work, television.