Essendon 2000 vs 2014

Watching the 99 game against North now and confirms that 2000 team would smash the current day squad. We ■■■■ bricks when bottom 4 sides put pressure on us, imagine Wallis, Hardwick, Jason Johnson, Mark Johnson, Solomon, Moorcroft... Reckon the 2014 model might retire at half time!

 

Except Carlisle. He'd kick 15. 

2000 team was just so skillful, tough & exciting to watch. I would like to hear people's thoughts on an Essendon 84/85 side vs the 2000 side.

I’ve always thought The 84/84 side was regarded as the best of the sheedy era.

Madden, Watson, Daniher, and Merrett were stars of the game. I was watching a DVD of 85 the other day and the commentators were saying Roger was the best player in the league. That and we had the best ruck man of the modern era. Watson and Terry- right up there with the best.

That’s before You mention Vanders, Fish, Baker, Harvs, Bomber, duckworth, daisy… What a side.

Essendon 2000 would destroy Essendon 2014 by about 12 goals

Yep.

Teams require fitness so much more these days cos there isn't as much talented footballers floating around.

 

Best example is our game on the weekend, you cut out about 10 instances where the team made just stupid mistakes with skill or decision making and you don't have to run an extra 2-4 k's to make up for it, and you win by 4 goals plus, instead of 8 points.

 

Mercuri

Hird

Misiti

Long

Bewick

 

We'd dominate teams in this era with those players at their age and influence of 2000 in todays game, even with 2000 fitness.

Agree with those above who say the 2000 side would win by 10+ goals.

 

I started a similar thread here about 12 years ago comparing the  84-5 sides against the 2000 side. The consensus on Blitz then was, based on talent, the 85 side would thrash them.

 

That was just how good that team was. Best ever.

 

fletch should be in both teams.

 

Play him at FF in 2014 and FB in 2000, then watch the entire universe disappear into a vortex as he attempts to play on himself.

 

 

I was watching a DVD of 85 the other day and the commentators were saying Roger was the best player in the league. That and we had the best ruck man of the modern era.

 

The 1984 Grand Final Record has a piece naming Roger as the best ruck/big man in the league, ahead of  Steve Taubert and Simon Madden. The latter two, plus David Cloke, polled highly in the Brownlow behind winner Peter Moore.

 

Harvey was elsewhere named ‘Find of the Year‘.

The side with J Hird would win.

Agree with those above who say the 2000 side would win by 10+ goals.

 

I started a similar thread here about 12 years ago comparing the  84-5 sides against the 2000 side. The consensus on Blitz then was, based on talent, the 85 side would thrash them.

 

That was just how good that team was. Best ever.

 

I've always thought The 84/84 side was regarded as the best of the sheedy era.
Madden, Watson, Daniher, and Merrett were stars of the game. I was watching a DVD of 85 the other day and the commentators were saying Roger was the best player in the league. That and we had the best ruck man of the modern era. Watson and Terry- right up there with the best.
That's before You mention Vanders, Fish, Baker, Harvs, Bomber, duckworth, daisy.. What a side.

I forget that some of the younger posters wouldn't have seen the 84/85 sides live. I'm am luckily old enough that I did and I was a kid just old enough to understand and appreciate it. Basically I was born into footy the year Sheedy took over. The year my dad started taking me each week (as a 7 year old) was the year Sheeds started. So I was 10 and 11 for the 84/85 flags.

 

My memory of the players - likening them to players of this era would be:

 

Salmon - basically Carlisle for the last 2 weeks but EVERY week. The first year (his second) that Sheedy chose to play him in the 1sts (1984) he was 63 goals from 12 games before doing his knee.

Van Der Haar- Tex Walker before his knee injury 

Terry Daniher - No one quite like him. He used to mark the footy at those moments when you were praying for someone too. Good for 8 to 10 one grabs a game and 3 or 4 goals. Would float forward or back like Hird. Better than Hird in the air but not as good as Hird at ground level.

Watson - Dangerfield but EVERY week and better. Watch the Neil Daniher comeback at Princes Park last quarter on YouTube vs Carlton and watch him Dangerfield power through the mud deep into the last quarter. He was such a powerful machine.

Neagle - Hibbo but maybe faster. Similar to Watson but on a wing.'

Madden - An original. He used to kick a lot of goals. Take a lot of marks forward.  Imagine a slower but more consistent Ryder at his best in the ruck and up forward, taking marks, kicking goals, floating back. Consistently dominating his role. Like Ryder, he never missed.

Harvey - Watters for West Coast at his best. But could go forward and kick goals. Just insane courage. I've never seen a crazier footballer. Maybe J Brown but Harves was 15 kilos lighter and so it was more insane to go into the packs he used to. That Reiwoldt mark. Harves regularly did that.

Leon Baker - Darren Jarman or Mercuri. Baker is nearly the most skillful player I've seen. Top 5.

Bomber Thompson - Bags but better at ground level. Plus Bartels aerial ability and ability to go forward and kick a goal.

Foulds - 300 games of constantly racking up 20 kicks on a wing. Maybe Stants with a nicer kick.

Merrett - (Dodga!) Maybe Petrie but a bit scarier He was hard and went in a straight line for the ball. He was to be feared. But would take the ball at the highest point when in the air. (Although Dodga is my handle, my memories of him were more my dad laughing at how much opposition players would sh*t themselves when he was coming at them).

Ezard - when young was one of the most lightening players I've seen. Top 5. Maybe that little Mitchell guy for West Coast who kicked goal and took mark of the year would compare. These days I guess Garlett but with the ability to fly like Wingard.

Daisy Williams - tough like Daniel Kerr for his size but without Kerrs run and carry.

 

That's how the memories and impressions sit in my head. 84/85 would have beaten 2000 I reckon.

 

Interested hearing others peoples likenesses to modern day players.

 

Fyfe is James Hird as an example but Hird was a more skilful kick and less panic ridden and more consistent.

Great topic. Was actually thinking the same thing the other day,

 

Hardwick on Zaharakis? Love Zaka but he would be in tears by half time. That 2000 backline would just beat the sh*t out of our 2014 forward line. Wish we had that sort of mongrel now.

2000 team was the best I have ever seen.

Tough, skillful, determined.

I would like to think Bombers in 2015 and 2016 will get up to this level.

2000 was a vastly superior team to 2014. The player by player analysis tells part of the story (Hird, Lloyd, Lucas, Fletcher all out and out champions in their absolute prime), but not all of it. The 2000 side played the most intense, relentless football of any side I’ve ever seen. We were first to almost every ball and outnumbered the opposition at almost every contest, as well as having multiple players running to make leads and receive all over the ground. We won every game but one. Our average winning margin was about 8 goals and we were usually that far ahead by half time.

The current team is nowhere near that. They can and do play some great football, but they are nowhere near matching the machine-like nature of the 2000 team.

2000. That forward line.

 

As a mid sized backman on the Thursday at training, you're thinking "am I going to get Hird, Mercuri, Barnard, Long, Caracella, Bewick or someone else Sheeds throws down there.

 

You would leave the track early, head for the trainers rooms and complain about a minor hamstring strain. 

2000 side played their best EVERY game and won consistently.

This 2014 side is still far from that.

Mark Johnson would smash chapman. Chapman wouldn’t stand a chance.

Lloyd would kick 6 on hooker, on the lead would be way to quick.

If the 2000 team had the fitness levels of the players of today’s era they would crush the 2014 team by at least 100 points, maybe even more.

The 2000 team were as tough as nails, they would smash this current team to bits physically.

We would struggle to kick more than 5 goals.

fletch should be in both teams.


Play him at FF in 2014 and FB in 2000, then watch the entire universe disappear into a vortex as he attempts to play on himself.

Which Fletch would win if we invited 3 team football and the current team played off against the 1993 and 2000 premiership teams?

 

 

 

fletch should be in both teams.


Play him at FF in 2014 and FB in 2000, then watch the entire universe disappear into a vortex as he attempts to play on himself.

Which Fletch would win if we invited 3 team football and the current team played off against the 1993 and 2000 premiership teams?

 

it would look something like this

 

 

and all physicists' minds would explode

Sheeds vs. Thompson.

Oh for sure - JJ was a star, but 2000 Johnson was a good player, not a great player. (1 30+ possession game, and 8 Brownlow Votes) 2001 was when he really started to dominate games. (4 30+ possession games, and 16 Brownlow votes) Either way - he dominates Hocking in this match up. But Hocking would go to Misiti anyway IMO.

 

 

 

See, I loved Jason Johnson, he was probably my favourite 'not-Hird' player of the era, but I don't think this is true. It's only the quicker, more evasive guys that trouble Hocking, and those weren't exactly two of JJ's best qualities. Plus there is the fact that JJ didn't get tagged week in week out, but when he did, he didn't cope well.  I reckon Hocking would totally blanket him. 

 

Also:

 

- I reckon Hurley would beat Lucas fairly convincingly. The strong bodied guys usually did. 

- Neither Blumfield or Heffernan could go with Jobe, and Misiti was WAY too unaccountable to go head to head with him.

- If you threw Myers into a run with role on Misiti, that could be interesting.

- Ryder would kill Barnes

- I think Wellman would be moved onto Joe by quarter time. 

 

You could find 5 to 10 match ups that were either favorable or at least break even for the current squad. But it's the depth of 2000 that makes this no contest. As the current team slips away a little when you hit players 18-19, the 2000 team uses players like Bewick, Long and Barnard off the bench.   

 

The modern game plan and fitness levels would even the whole thing up, but just based on head to head, it would be a smashing.        

 

P.S

 

I just thought of two match ups; one funny, one awesome.

 

- Imagine Jackson Merrett trying to play a defensive role on Hardwick.

 

- Goddard head to head with Hird.    

To me the only question is whether the eleventy billion free kicks the 2014 team would get would be enough to cover them being down to 14 men by half time.