What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Top 8 modern history

Bowzy

Juniors
Messages
486
haha, what a load of shit.

How so?

Who in comparison since the beginning of the modern day era is more successful? Brisbane and manly of course are up there in the conversation too.

Who do you think are mate?

Like I said the arguement against Easts would be that they have had years amongst them when they havnt been successful unlike some of the other clubs who have been consistent.
 

Hutty1986

Immortal
Messages
34,034
How so?

Who in comparison since the beginning of the modern day era is more successful? Brisbane and manly of course are up there in the conversation too.

Who do you think are mate?

Like I said the arguement against Easts would be that they have had years amongst them when they havnt been successful unlike some of the other clubs who have been consistent.

Melbourne aren't the most 'winningest' side (I should have highlighted the part I was referring to). They have one premiership and a grand final since 2002, whatever they did from 2006-2010 has now been wiped from the record books.

Manly (premierships in 2008/2011 and grand finals in 2007/2013, and from memory at least 1 other prelim final in that time?) have probably been the most successful side, while the Chooks probably come closest in that time (Premiers 2013, runners-up 2010, three minor premierships). Obviously Brisbane haven't lived up to its insanely high standards of the 90's during the past 15 years, but also have a premiership and a grand final during this period too.
 

Stormwarrior82

Juniors
Messages
1,036
I don't need stupid stats to work out successful clubs since 2000. Roosters, Broncs, Manly and Storm. Pretty simple. Use whatever stats you like but this is just common sense.
 

adamkungl

Immortal
Messages
42,971
Ranked in gold-silver-bronze style

1998-2016
Premiers / Runners-up / Prelims
broncos 3 1 4*
roosters 2 4 3
seaeagles 2 2* 1
storm 4** 3** 2
bulldogs 1 3 3
dragons 1 1 2*
cowboys 1 1 3
sharks 1 0 4*
knights 1 0 2
panthers 1 0 2
rabbitohs 1 0 2
tigers 1 0 1
eels 0 2* 5*
warriors 0 2 2
titans 0 0 1
raiders 0 0 1

* on Storm means -1 for cheating
* on other teams means they were prevented from reaching a higher position by finals defeat to cheating Storm
 

H.H

Juniors
Messages
1,289
Reckon the chooks have royally f**ked a couple of those GF losses.

This should be a moot conversation.
 

POPEYE

Coach
Messages
11,397
Melbourne aren't the most 'winningest' side (I should have highlighted the part I was referring to). They have one premiership and a grand final since 2002, whatever they did from 2006-2010 has now been wiped from the record books.

Manly (premierships in 2008/2011 and grand finals in 2007/2013, and from memory at least 1 other prelim final in that time?) have probably been the most successful side, while the Chooks probably come closest in that time (Premiers 2013, runners-up 2010, three minor premierships). Obviously Brisbane haven't lived up to its insanely high standards of the 90's during the past 15 years, but also have a premiership and a grand final during this period too.
Bullshit
 

POPEYE

Coach
Messages
11,397
Bullshit's in the eye of the beholder, ol' mate
Don't shoot me ol' mate I'm just the messenger, even with what has been officially taken from Melbourne they still have on record won more NRL games than Manly . . . hence the 'winningest,' regardless of how I feel about the finals lottery

But hey, I haven't added up the Roosters, Broncos or even the Dragon wins . . . it's a simple matter of typing in each year and add'em up

Hang on, I didn't take away draws . . . wonder if that matters
 
Last edited:

adamkungl

Immortal
Messages
42,971
Shame on you.

I started this thread to boost discussion and so we could all slam the Eels.

Good day sir.

I guess it depends how you define success..

Who's more successful?
a) the team who won 1 comp but finished last every other year
b) the team who finished 2nd every year

By the olympic medal method, it's team A.
Overall win total it's obviously team B.

Everyone says Brian Smith's a failure because he never sealed the deal.
But his win rate (and GF appearances) are almost certainly among the better coaches of the last 30 years.
 

POPEYE

Coach
Messages
11,397
I guess it depends how you define success..

Who's more successful?
a) the team who won 1 comp but finished last every other year
b) the team who finished 2nd every year

By the olympic medal method, it's team A.
Overall win total it's obviously team B.

Everyone says Brian Smith's a failure because he never sealed the deal.
But his win rate (and GF appearances) are almost certainly among the better coaches of the last 30 years.
If you're a sponsor you want your name in lights all year every year, especially one who doesn't worry about RL in general. . . . a flash at the end now and again won't win corporate friends
 

adamkungl

Immortal
Messages
42,971
If you're a sponsor you want your name in lights all year every year, especially one who doesn't worry about RL in general. . . . a flash at the end now and again won't win corporate friends

What about fans? Players? Coaches?

Would you rather be..
Brian Smith (0 from 4 Grand Finals) or Mick Hagan (plodder, 1 premiership)
Mitchell Pearce (15 Origin caps) or Trent Hodkinson (1 Origin win)
 

POPEYE

Coach
Messages
11,397
There is hope for the others, I said Melbourne/Manly had 622/543 NRL 'wins' . . . I should have said 'points'. Surprised you missed that Hut
 
Top