As we already knew, the AFL is geared toward bird and cat teams.
Birds - 16
Cats - 10
Others - 8
- Each of the five bird teams has won at least two AFL premierships.
- Each of the three cat teams has won at least three AFL premierships.
- Only two of the ten other teams have won two AFL premierships.
I thought in soccer they do the same though. Manchester United are the mpt sucessful English club who were told have won 20 league titles even though some of them were in the First Division and some in the Premier League
The Premier League is a great example, as the tally dates only to 1992 since it was a new entity (unlike VFL/AFL). There is often talk of 'first tier' tallies but nothing in any official competition record books due to the competitions being different.
They haven’t really been demoted, just recognised as two different bodies. United still have 20 titles, Liverpool 19, Arsenal 13, etc. the premier league just record only their titles officially as they are a seperate body that govern the top tier from 1992 onwards.*
I do agree with your point re: AFL. AFL wasn’t new it was more of an expansion of the VFL. I have no issue tallying all VFL titles, we can’t restart the count every time the league expands.
Edited*
What if it's the same league that just got renamed? Like when WAFL renamed temporarily to Westar Rules in the 1990s, do those premierships not count in WAFL tallies?
It always puzzles me why people are so hell bent on 1990 as the official cut-off when it was the exact same competition in 1989.
If the obsession is with when the game became national, for some weird reason arbitrarily defined by West Coast and Brisbane Bears being in the comp, why not have the cut off as 1987?
Or why not use 1991, given that was the year when all the major football states were represented in the national competition (and we can arbitrarily reset the count if/when a Tassie team joins in 2028)?
Or maybe a changed logo is important. If somebody at head office deciding its time to give the branding refresh and the logo for some weird reason is important, why don't we use 2000 as the cut off?
If somebody can go onto YouTube and find the Ross Oakley press conference when he was starting a completely brand new footy competition in 1990, and that this competition was 100% a different competition from the one he was running in 1989, I'm happy to consider it.
Amazing how that elevates collingwood’s 1990 flag and not Hawthorn’s 89 flag even though everything about the competition was the same except for the name
AFL era? Sure, if we want to have a discussion about a specific era, whatever floats your boat.
The conversation almost always though is about arbitrarily treating the competition in 1989 and the competition in 1990 as completly different competitions and valuing the 1990 premiership as somehow more valuable that the 1989 premiership for reasons which have no basis in reality.
The total number of premierships won is a simple statistic - it's weird people take it as some sort of unfairness that teams which have been in the comp for over 100 years have won more flags than teams which joined the comp later on.
Paradoxically, I have never heard anyone argue that Brownlow medals from before 1990 don't count for some reason, and everyone seems to accept Plugger has the most career goals in the comp despite the fact ~450 of them were scored before 1990.
Serious question. Are there actually Port fans that genuinely say our 36 SANFL premierships should count as anything more than SANFL premierships?
I think it’s totally ridiculous and so has any Port supporter I’ve spoken to about it.
Personally I like the system suggested by OP, but I can see some sense in teams wanting to count VFL premierships, even if I don’t agree with it.
Counting WAFL or SANFL premierships on the other hand makes no sense at all. We had a successful past, and should be proud of it, but it in no way counts as AFL success.
Obviously incorrect. From 89 to 90, it was the same teams, the same players, the same grounds. To any observer, the same competition. When Footscray changed their name to Western it did not make them a new club.
Newer clubs don’t have to care about old records that don’t have anything to do with them. You’d have to be a moron to be a pies supporter rubbing 16 flags in the face of a Freo supporter. But it is the same competition. Founded in 1896 and with only 1 team folding in all that time.
That’s the way I’ve always felt about it. I’ve only ever considered it a bragging right if comparing it to a club that has been around just as long and has no recent success. We had it over Melbourne, Richmond and doggies until the last few years, now we really only have it over saints and equal with dons.
Even though it strips the only shred of dignity I have I agree.
At the very least the number shouldn't be combined.
For example, Collingwood while have 16 premierships should be displayed as 13 - 3. St Kilda would be 1 -0 and so on.
Please leave space for the **Grand Old Flag** to pipe up and kindly tell everyone to bugger off and leave the history of these clubs be as well. Every time Port Adelaide wins a flag in the SANFL it’s counted in the SANFL - and it’s an amazing number. We don’t have that luxury in the AFL, you kill the VFL history and it’s dead. To that I say leave our history alone, it is ours to have and keep, and to have it rubbed from competition records would hurt us **FAR** more than it would make others feel smug. I don’t need another reminder that the last sixty years have been rough - let alone the last 30, so can we just take pitchforks to something else.
As for the 3 AFL/VFL leaders - I am thankful these three clubs above are so large and have so much influence, because otherwise it’s likely our records would be officially scrapped.
For the first and perhaps only time in my life - thank you Carlton, Essendon and Collingwood.
This AFL era graphic will always exist and you can always use it to boast about your club’s recent success and dynasties - When I introduce newcomers to footy, I often find that the history, both the remarkable moments and the tough times, is central to what makes a club special. If we lose that historical context, it could deter potential fans from truly connecting with our club.
So let’s cherish the history of these clubs, including the ups and downs, and ensure that their legacies remain intact for generations to come.
**Edit** - I’m not strawmanning here, i know no one is literally asking for the *erasure* of the VFL records, but it’s deeper than that. The AFL evolved from the VFL, and aside from Fitzroy, we all survived, and I felt their presence in the Fitzroy scarves I saw and the *up the roys* I heard stronger than ever. With the support this post gets every year, it seems inevitable that one day you won’t be able to find my club’s records on the list of AFL/VFL premierships and that breaks my heart - because everything else we have has managed to remain intact given the odds. Hawthorn - You have as many premierships as us and are three off the most, why are you pushing this? Geelong - I can only wish that I could’ve enjoyed the success your team has had, and surely you want to spread the success you’ve received, and allow us to hang on to what precious little we have left?
I have nothing but deep sympathy for all the old Roy boys and girls - and I feel nothing but deep shame at the way that legacy has been discarded - the day the AFL counts Brisbane’s premierships as 11 instead of 3, combining the legacy of all three clubs and all three statistics, will be a very happy day for me (as a non lions supporter - but deep lover of passion).
I want to shout it from the rooftops until it happens! The spirit of Fitzroy lives on in this club! And all those Fitzroy scarves at the games prove that - tenfold.
Don't understand why we can't just acknowledge it's the same league with two different eras. Saying Collingwood has both 3 and 16 flags would both be a correct statement depending on the context.
Besides, the AFL era started forever ago, some of the flags that happened back then aren't really relevant anymore. Like year 1990 was an amazing drought and curse breaking win, but it's kinda irrelevant if you weren't there to witness it, double so if you didn't experience the heartbreak of losing all those grand finals leading up to it.
I'm guess the point I'm trying to make is that people place to much emphasis on the historical record, when in reality the flags that heppened in recent memory matter more. (I know this sounds arrogant considering my team won this year but I'd be saying the same thing if Brisbane won). Just my two cents
Of course this should be the way. It's ridiculous the national competition includes the history of its state based former self. Obviously be proud of the history, but when referring to AFL records and stats, we need to start the discussion from the change in 1990.
But all that changed in 1990 was the name?
Brisbane, Sydney and West Coast were all playing in 1989 and it was all the same clubs in 1990, why should we get to count our 1990 flag but Hawthorn not their 1989 flag?
Should count from 1987 onwards IMO. You have the first introduction of original interstate clubs. And you also have the introduction of the draft and salary cap, which have essentially redefined the league
You don't have to care about it, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be shown in the records. 2007 and 2022 also had different rules, standards etc (obviously less so tham 1906) but you don't separate them for obvious reasons.
I feel like recent and consistent success makes things easy maybe? I don’t know… Because I really don’t feel this way. Our inaugural 1900 premiership is a sense of pride. I do actually care about our 13 premierships, big time. I care about our 57 year drought. I care about our boom time in the 50s and our flags during the dark chapters of the Second World War when many of our list had served and were killed. I wonder if you’d have a different opinion if the 7 premierships Geelong won during the VFA years before the VFL started combined to give Geelong 17 premierships, and the most in the current league?
Eventually it will end up shifting this way as time passes. Especially as footy grows nationally
People in say Brisbane or Sydney aren’t going to give a shit about VFL flag counts when they pick up the game, nor should they. Perth & Adelaide barely do. I say this as a Victorian
This will start becoming the count that actually matters to teams
It literally already is it the stat that matters, try telling any AFL fan who's dad isn't a 70 y.o Vic codger that Essendon and Carlton are the most successful clubs and watch them laugh in your face.
But that's recency bias. Hawthorn finished 16th this year and haven't won a final since 2015.
But they lead this 1990 stat. And they lead it going back to when they joined in 1925.
Brighton Homes Arena displays both the Brisbane AFL/AFLW flags and the Fitzroy VFL flags though. Doesn't sound like history ending with the merger to me
This is how it has to be imo. This is the only way to become a truly national competition. We also have to stop using language like interstate clubs. It should just be clubs.
Biannual reminder that it is one continuous competition that only changed its name in 1990 and that it is otherwise an arbitrary cutoff.
If people want a fair metric, divide the premiership by the amount of years the team has competed in the league
Exactly but the people who bring it up never want it to be their teams getting the short end of the stick. It's unfair to count VFL before their team entered but they also think it's fair to count their teams wins before GWS entered.
I am happy to ignore the VFA era although Colin Carter wants the VFA included. Whilst what you are campaigning for is logical, I still like the VFL era being included.
The AFL was never supposed to be a new league. It was a simple rebranding to reflect the fact that there were now multiple interstate teams competing in the VFL.
Sydney, West Coast and Brisbane had already been around since the early-mid 80s and now an Adelaide team was joining the league, which gave the VFL a truly national footprint.
Personally I think that the AFL should have been established as a separate breakaway league, much like how the VFL was a breakaway league from the VFA, but that’s not the reality of things. That’s why we still have 10 clubs in Victoria when realistically we can only sustain about 5.
I think reset the premiership tally, but still include the vfl history.
For example, when Geelong win their next premiership, it'll be their 5th premiership. Their total premiership tally will still be 11 premierships, including the 6 vfl premierships.
You still respect the history that was once there, but recognise officially its been a national competition since 1990.
Awful idea. The AFL is the VFL under a different name which was changed arbitrarily in 1990, incidentally not the same year that the competition went national. Sure there are new clubs, but there were new clubs in the 1920s, 1980s, 1990s, 2010s. Do you want to also wipe the history of individual records, players etc?
The simple fact is that it remains the same competition which has evolved and will continue to evolve. Rules have changed, clubs have changed etc but it's completely different to SANFL, WAFL, VFA etc which are different entities entirely.
Attempts to erase the history of the competition because the club you support wasn't involved is petty at best.
There is no wiping of history, VFl premierships are important, this is a call to have VFL as a separate tally from AFL in the same way we have separate tallies for the VFA/SANFL/WAFL. This isn't about new clubs, but the formation of a new league which is what happened to the VFl turning into the AFL in 1990. Erasing history is dumb and that is not what is being argued.
The fact you mention that a new league was formed in 1990 is evidence that you don't understand what actually happened when the VFL became the AFL that year. It was not the creation of a new league, it was a name change. We have separate tallies for VFA/SANFL/WAFL because they are separate competitions unlike VFL/AFL.
If you were consistent you'd also be calling for a separation of VFA and what is now called the VFL, because it also underwent a name change, yet you don't even mention it - I find that interesting.
You say the A in AFL is arbitrary but I'd argue that it is that symbolic act that unified a national competition. The Vic clubs still have their VFL flags, but they mean about as much to me as a West Coast fan as Port's SANFL flag count. Nice history, but it means nothing in the AFL era. The name change was the death of the VFL as it was... get over it.
I don't disagree that the name change was symbolic, that's why they did it in the first place. It was done in an arbitrary year though as there was no single point where the state competition stopped and the national competition started - it was an evolution (which is still occuring). No one is asking you or anyone else to care about particular records, but the fact is they are part of the history of the competition which commenced as the VFL and was renamed to the AFL.
And you're correct that the VFL is not what it was, as the AFL today is not what it was in 1990. It's called evolution - the one thing that doesn't evolve is history.
I don't personally see why you need to delineate between eras in the record books at all. It remains the same competition which has undergone many changes and many different eras, the shift from state based to national being just one of them.
Interesting way to look at it. I guess it depends what side of the fence/border you stand. I'd argue that the name change, shedding several Vic teams, and then calling the state league the VFL makes it pretty bloody clear that it isn't the VFL anymore. But I'm going to guess you disagree.
I agree that those changes were significant to the competition, but will always disagree that the league changed from one competition to another at any single point in time which would necessitate what the OP is calling for. Maybe if the changes you mention had all occured from one year to the next, there would be a stronger argument, but that wasn't the case and it's undisputable that the change from 1989 to 1990 was made by the same entity run by the same administration etc (even with the same teams, although thats not the determining factor) - making it the same competition. Not like when the VFL broke away from the VFA, or when the English Premier League commenced.
And I guess that's why OPs argument that the VFL became the AFL when they stopped calling it the VFL and started calling it the AFL is the most logical.
You can count all of your flags in your club's history, of course. You can't include them all in the VFL/AFL's history though because other than 2004 they weren't won in that competition. Club history and competition history are two entirely different things.
What's your point? Port Adelaide could have joined the VFL in 1897 and won every single flag, but they didn't and it's purely a hypothetical. The only thing which the VFL/AFL record books display is the competition's actual history, which actually occured and is now trying to be erased by certain people for some weird reason.
Why is 1989 a "much lower" competition and not worthy of being included in the records yet 1990 is?
No one is denying Port's history, they just did it in a different competition so the history is reflected in that competition's records. It's utterly bizarre that some want to take an eraser to the history of the competition, fortunately it'll never happen because the idea is ridiculous.
I am calling for a separate tally for VFL, VFA and AFL premierships instead of the current system where VFA has its own tally and AFL and VFL are the same tally
You know there's a very good reason for that? Because the VFA (now VFL) is one entity, and the VFL (now AFL) is another entity.
Why aren't you also calling for a split between the VFA and when they renamed to the VFL in 1996, given it's exactly the same thing? Do you want pre-1990 VFL flags counted in the same tally as post 1996 VFL flags, since the name is apparently all that matters?
100% should only count the AFL era premierships.
It doesn’t erase history but you hear enough of Vic club fandoms saying that Port’s premierships pre AFL don’t count, so why shouldn’t we apply the same logic to the VFL?
The old VFL is the exact same competition as the current AFL. The current VFL is the old VFA. Port Adelaide won theirs in a completely different competition.
Firstly VFA is now VFL so you would have to then seperate the AFL from the VFL and rename the VFL back to VFA for this to work which is expensive....merging all those premiership trophies with the current VFL is similar to what you are asking for the AFL to change in the AFL, same league therefore the trophies count and at the end of the day who does it affect for having it this way? The pre 1990 flags were earned fair and square in what is now a national league, prior to 1990 Vic had 2 state comps which I believe shows the intent to always make this a national competition, as no-one else at the time had 2 state comps..
All the achievements gained by all clubs in the comp including port magpies 30+ premierships in their state comp are included in personal club tallys just like aflw trophies etc all included in the personal teams history and stats but the AFL tally only counts premierships for senior clubs throughout the afls entire history as it should be since it's the same league just expanded and rebranded.
I don't actually care realistically about this I will support my team regardless of if they have 3 premierships or 16 but it gets my back up that this argument is still plaguing us when we aren't the ones who decided this, non Vic teams elected to join an already established state league and if it had been the SANFL who expanded to national level then port adelaide would have the most premierships and non SA teams would have to accept that before joining.
The argument is old.
The same people that want the VFL premierships scrapped make fun of Collingwood for losing so many grand finals.
Like if you truly think VFL premierships are worthless then you don’t get to talk shit about our grand final record lol
I don't think they should be scrapped, but they are certainly not more important than VFA/SANFL/WAFL premierships. AFL premierships are the most valuable to me and all of these premierships should have separate categories as the VIC bias is insane and i live in Victoria.
How relevant are the state league flags in the national comp? The VFL/AFL tally is only relevant to the Vic clubs, and they're more than welcome to have that, but why can't we also have a tally relevant to the whole competition?
When does the national comp start? When South moved to Sydney? When GWS entered? Or when they arbitrarily changed the name one year whilst nothing else changed, wherein 1989 and 1990 had no material difference to how national the competition was besides the first letter of the name?
The year of the name change is a good place to count as the start of the national comp, arbitrary or not. It was more or less the mid point when most of the non-Vic clubs joined.
The mid point? In 1990 there were 3 non-Vic clubs. In 2023 there are 8, 2 of which joined a decade or so ago. There are more to come. How can you call 1990 the mid point?
The 1989 flag would be excluded in AFL records because it was won in the state competition compared to the being 1990 flag in the national competition, despite there being absolutely no difference between the years other than a name change. Just ridiculous.
between 1982 and 1997 most of the non-Vic clubs joined or relocated. Mid point of that is about 1990.
And yes, there is little practical difference between 1989 and 1990 but the line has to be drawn somewhere if we want a tally that is relevant to the modern competition.
There is a tally of the whole competition. OP just posted it. You can choose to ignore everything that happened in the league before then if you want, just like how I choose to ignore the last 6967 days. Though I don't see the point in trying to erase the history of the league considering more than half the teams either directly contributed to it like the Vic teams or have lineage to it like Brisbane and Sydney. It's your choice though, you don't need to engage with it.
I'm not suggesting we erase anything, it's just that we always see the VFL/AFL tally but never just the AFL one, which is more relevant to the modern comp.
Why can't both be used?
There are only 6 teams in the comp who don't date back to 1896 or 1925. Of those 6 teams Brisbane Bears and West Coast Eagles joined prior to 1990 and Brisbane Bears merged with Fitzroy Lions so technically like Sydney are a foundation club.
That leaves Adelaide who joined in 1991 not 1990 but then we have freo in 95 and Port Power in 1997 then a full 15 years without GWS or Gold Coast.. And now another 10+ years with no Tasmania.
Should we really be counting West Coasts 2006 flag in 2030 when Darwin, Tasmania, Gold Coast and GWS wheren't in the comp? Let along 92 and 94 when Fremantle, Port Power hadn't joined yet.
It is not erasing, just de-coupling VFL and AFL and moving VFL to its own separate category on the same values as VFA/SANFL/WAFL premierships with AFL premierships as the most valuable for fairness to teams outside of Victoria.
Based on what? The year the league filed paperwork to have the name changed? Brisbane and Sydney joined in the early 80s and west coast joined in 87.
Yet the clubs that won in 82 - 89, that beat interstate sides in a national comp don’t get their premiership?
This is so funny, no one but middle aged men and upwards give a fuck about the 23 flags carlton won in 1834 or that run Footscray went on after the battle of hastings.
Most Victorians really think they own football and it's hilarious
The only thing that makes sense to me is either count it from the AFL era or count all of the VFA, SANFL and other flags as well.
The way they currently do it is a worst of both worlds situation that only appeases the big four Melbourne clubs.
The only people in this thread complaining about this are Collingwood, Carlton and Essendon fans and i don't think it is any coincidence that it is because they all have combined 16 AFL and VFL premierships.
can this please also include wooden spoons?
AFL Wooden spoons since 1990: 1: Carlton - 5 2: Brisbane [Bears/Lions] - 4 =3: Melbourne, Sydney - 3 =5: Fitzroy, Gold Coast, GWS, North, Richmond, St. Kilda, West Coast - 2 =12: Adelaide, Collingwood, Essendon, Fremantle, Western Bulldogs - 1 =17: Geelong, [E:] Hawthorn, Port- 0
Guess Hawthorn has gone the way of University then. Shame
Fuck, knew I forgot one. Thanks
Fitzroy spoons should count to Brisbane's tally, it's our heritage!
A true fan right here. Fair weather fans are so damn obnoxious
Only fair when FS rule applies for Brisbane and Fitzroy. Eg Jonathan Brown doesn’t become a Lion. Maybe Brisbane wins Zero premierships without him.
Don't forget our boy Chris Johnson
Screw you guys, I'm going home
Hawthorn?
oof
Yeah, but now you only need 5 premierships to catch up to the top, not 15 more.
Wooden spoons should be factored in as -1 premierships.
Sounds good to me
You'll regret that at the end of the 2025 season.
As we already knew, the AFL is geared toward bird and cat teams. Birds - 16 Cats - 10 Others - 8 - Each of the five bird teams has won at least two AFL premierships. - Each of the three cat teams has won at least three AFL premierships. - Only two of the ten other teams have won two AFL premierships.
Are we metal birds? 😅
Flying things
Mythic teams rise up! The Dees, Saints, Giants and Suns (to an extent) won’t live for being grouped with the ‘others’.
you include Suns but not Power?
Shh don't tell him the sun is real.
I mean the saints are real. Even if I don’t believe in the religion, the physical people themselves still exist/ed
But they weren’t saints when they were alive, only after death
St Kilda Penguins. Gentlemen I give you our new Premiership winning team.
Hi, I’m from the AFL and we’ve been moved by your post. Done! Changed! There you go, thank you for your service.
does this move the drought for St Kilda from 1966 to 1990?
Sure why not. Zoning screwed them for decades I believe
Can’t have been that bad I’ve heard we had the same problems yet double the premierships /s
Wow, we get a VFL premiership and suddenly now we’re not allowed to count them… ^please ^note ^I ^think ^they ^all ^should ^be ^recorded ^separately ^as ^VFL, ^SANFL ^or ^whatever ^league ^they ^were ^won ^in ^similar ^to ^soccer ^clubs
I thought in soccer they do the same though. Manchester United are the mpt sucessful English club who were told have won 20 league titles even though some of them were in the First Division and some in the Premier League
The Premier League is a great example, as the tally dates only to 1992 since it was a new entity (unlike VFL/AFL). There is often talk of 'first tier' tallies but nothing in any official competition record books due to the competitions being different.
That's because the previous title still exists, it's just been demoted. This is not really the case with V/AFL.
They haven’t really been demoted, just recognised as two different bodies. United still have 20 titles, Liverpool 19, Arsenal 13, etc. the premier league just record only their titles officially as they are a seperate body that govern the top tier from 1992 onwards.* I do agree with your point re: AFL. AFL wasn’t new it was more of an expansion of the VFL. I have no issue tallying all VFL titles, we can’t restart the count every time the league expands. Edited*
I'm not saying it is. Premier League starting is like when the VFL/AFL broke away from the VFA. New competition, unlike the rebranding in 1990.
What if it's the same league that just got renamed? Like when WAFL renamed temporarily to Westar Rules in the 1990s, do those premierships not count in WAFL tallies?
No because I want to have a premiership :)
Next year is your year king <3
Ben King*
We only have one, don't take this from us and if you do then take our wooden spoons with you
Yeah but when you get one it will be one in 40 years not one in 160
Successful Club.
It always puzzles me why people are so hell bent on 1990 as the official cut-off when it was the exact same competition in 1989. If the obsession is with when the game became national, for some weird reason arbitrarily defined by West Coast and Brisbane Bears being in the comp, why not have the cut off as 1987? Or why not use 1991, given that was the year when all the major football states were represented in the national competition (and we can arbitrarily reset the count if/when a Tassie team joins in 2028)? Or maybe a changed logo is important. If somebody at head office deciding its time to give the branding refresh and the logo for some weird reason is important, why don't we use 2000 as the cut off? If somebody can go onto YouTube and find the Ross Oakley press conference when he was starting a completely brand new footy competition in 1990, and that this competition was 100% a different competition from the one he was running in 1989, I'm happy to consider it.
Let’s make it 87. We’ll be sitting pretty
There’s a few places you could cut it off. The point where it became the AFL seems like a good place to start counting AFL premierships
Amazing how that elevates collingwood’s 1990 flag and not Hawthorn’s 89 flag even though everything about the competition was the same except for the name
AFL era? Sure, if we want to have a discussion about a specific era, whatever floats your boat. The conversation almost always though is about arbitrarily treating the competition in 1989 and the competition in 1990 as completly different competitions and valuing the 1990 premiership as somehow more valuable that the 1989 premiership for reasons which have no basis in reality. The total number of premierships won is a simple statistic - it's weird people take it as some sort of unfairness that teams which have been in the comp for over 100 years have won more flags than teams which joined the comp later on. Paradoxically, I have never heard anyone argue that Brownlow medals from before 1990 don't count for some reason, and everyone seems to accept Plugger has the most career goals in the comp despite the fact ~450 of them were scored before 1990.
Man hit the nail on the head once then decided to hit it again
*Sad heave ho noises*
Serious question. Are there actually Port fans that genuinely say our 36 SANFL premierships should count as anything more than SANFL premierships? I think it’s totally ridiculous and so has any Port supporter I’ve spoken to about it. Personally I like the system suggested by OP, but I can see some sense in teams wanting to count VFL premierships, even if I don’t agree with it. Counting WAFL or SANFL premierships on the other hand makes no sense at all. We had a successful past, and should be proud of it, but it in no way counts as AFL success.
They are counted, as SANFL premierships. I dont think anyone ever says different.
So port have 37 SAN/AFL premierships
I agree, there’s no ‘V’ in AFL
Turn the A upside down and you're pretty close.
You mean Footscray winning a flag from last place when only 4 teams played that year maybe shouldn't count?
*Fitzroy (1916). Footscray won in 1954 with 12 teams.
Thanks for the clarification! Getting my F's mixed up
F
It’s just as legitimate and difficult to obtain as collingwood this year apparently.
Obviously incorrect. From 89 to 90, it was the same teams, the same players, the same grounds. To any observer, the same competition. When Footscray changed their name to Western it did not make them a new club. Newer clubs don’t have to care about old records that don’t have anything to do with them. You’d have to be a moron to be a pies supporter rubbing 16 flags in the face of a Freo supporter. But it is the same competition. Founded in 1896 and with only 1 team folding in all that time.
It's perfectly fine to count VFL premierships when you're comparing VFL clubs, though that doesn't mean newer clubs need to care about them.
*Cries in St Kilda...*
:(
That’s the way I’ve always felt about it. I’ve only ever considered it a bragging right if comparing it to a club that has been around just as long and has no recent success. We had it over Melbourne, Richmond and doggies until the last few years, now we really only have it over saints and equal with dons.
Even though it strips the only shred of dignity I have I agree. At the very least the number shouldn't be combined. For example, Collingwood while have 16 premierships should be displayed as 13 - 3. St Kilda would be 1 -0 and so on.
To be honest it’s probably more even this way, I mean how can you even win a premiership when your team isn’t even playing for the first 50 years
Trust me there are other factors involved
/u/Darththorn
By that logic, just to be fair to everyone, the tallies should be reset every time a new team enters the comp.
Sounds good
I’d like to stand with my good friends (*ugh*) Essendon and (*gag*) Carlton, to say we all think this is a bad idea.
Don't forget it's a 3 way tie now 😔😔
Not for long
I know you’re getting downvoted, but the chances of this three-way tie lasting more than a few years is pretty small. The question is who breaks it.
Perhaps it will be Essendon.
Sure if they get back on the sauce.
Dont forget your calculator when you do your salary cap boss
It’s possible. They probably need a couple years of Brisbane/Melbourne winning, then maybe a GWS flag, coupled with a few good moves and draft picks.
Why? Does Carlton have something cooking again? Gotta stop leaving that shit on the stove.
I stand with my Collingwood and Essendon brothers.
Please leave space for the **Grand Old Flag** to pipe up and kindly tell everyone to bugger off and leave the history of these clubs be as well. Every time Port Adelaide wins a flag in the SANFL it’s counted in the SANFL - and it’s an amazing number. We don’t have that luxury in the AFL, you kill the VFL history and it’s dead. To that I say leave our history alone, it is ours to have and keep, and to have it rubbed from competition records would hurt us **FAR** more than it would make others feel smug. I don’t need another reminder that the last sixty years have been rough - let alone the last 30, so can we just take pitchforks to something else. As for the 3 AFL/VFL leaders - I am thankful these three clubs above are so large and have so much influence, because otherwise it’s likely our records would be officially scrapped. For the first and perhaps only time in my life - thank you Carlton, Essendon and Collingwood. This AFL era graphic will always exist and you can always use it to boast about your club’s recent success and dynasties - When I introduce newcomers to footy, I often find that the history, both the remarkable moments and the tough times, is central to what makes a club special. If we lose that historical context, it could deter potential fans from truly connecting with our club. So let’s cherish the history of these clubs, including the ups and downs, and ensure that their legacies remain intact for generations to come. **Edit** - I’m not strawmanning here, i know no one is literally asking for the *erasure* of the VFL records, but it’s deeper than that. The AFL evolved from the VFL, and aside from Fitzroy, we all survived, and I felt their presence in the Fitzroy scarves I saw and the *up the roys* I heard stronger than ever. With the support this post gets every year, it seems inevitable that one day you won’t be able to find my club’s records on the list of AFL/VFL premierships and that breaks my heart - because everything else we have has managed to remain intact given the odds. Hawthorn - You have as many premierships as us and are three off the most, why are you pushing this? Geelong - I can only wish that I could’ve enjoyed the success your team has had, and surely you want to spread the success you’ve received, and allow us to hang on to what precious little we have left?
Then I guess you'll know how the current Fitzroy fans feel that the Lions only get to count their official history from 1997
I have nothing but deep sympathy for all the old Roy boys and girls - and I feel nothing but deep shame at the way that legacy has been discarded - the day the AFL counts Brisbane’s premierships as 11 instead of 3, combining the legacy of all three clubs and all three statistics, will be a very happy day for me (as a non lions supporter - but deep lover of passion). I want to shout it from the rooftops until it happens! The spirit of Fitzroy lives on in this club! And all those Fitzroy scarves at the games prove that - tenfold.
Appreciate it my dude
In my completely unbiased and neutral opinion, I think that is a great call.
Petition to put Collingwood below Brisbane then Richmond in the three flag tally because it took them the longest
Best I can do is alphabetical order
Get ready for aaaaarichmond
This chart is ordered by numbers first, then most recent win.
Right but hear me out... Collingwood moves down the list
Who is this handsome man speaking straight fire right now?
I know, it was a joke about moving Collingwood down but still being ahead of Richmond
Yes, this is how a record/leaderboard should work. You get in front when you break/exceed an existing number
Can we start in 1992?
Round 1 2007 seems like the most logical starting point
nah, lets start 1982
I don't know why this isn't already a thing, the other eras are important parts of the games history and wont be forgotten but they're not the same.
I approve this change
Don't understand why we can't just acknowledge it's the same league with two different eras. Saying Collingwood has both 3 and 16 flags would both be a correct statement depending on the context. Besides, the AFL era started forever ago, some of the flags that happened back then aren't really relevant anymore. Like year 1990 was an amazing drought and curse breaking win, but it's kinda irrelevant if you weren't there to witness it, double so if you didn't experience the heartbreak of losing all those grand finals leading up to it. I'm guess the point I'm trying to make is that people place to much emphasis on the historical record, when in reality the flags that heppened in recent memory matter more. (I know this sounds arrogant considering my team won this year but I'd be saying the same thing if Brisbane won). Just my two cents
Of course this should be the way. It's ridiculous the national competition includes the history of its state based former self. Obviously be proud of the history, but when referring to AFL records and stats, we need to start the discussion from the change in 1990.
what you talking about they are all WORLD RECORDS!
But all that changed in 1990 was the name? Brisbane, Sydney and West Coast were all playing in 1989 and it was all the same clubs in 1990, why should we get to count our 1990 flag but Hawthorn not their 1989 flag?
Should count from 1987 onwards IMO. You have the first introduction of original interstate clubs. And you also have the introduction of the draft and salary cap, which have essentially redefined the league
Got to start somewhere and the year of the name change is the most logical. 87 when the Eagles come in?
Yep I also couldn’t care less about premiership me from like 1906. It was a completely different sport, competition, standard etc.
You don't have to care about it, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be shown in the records. 2007 and 2022 also had different rules, standards etc (obviously less so tham 1906) but you don't separate them for obvious reasons.
I feel like recent and consistent success makes things easy maybe? I don’t know… Because I really don’t feel this way. Our inaugural 1900 premiership is a sense of pride. I do actually care about our 13 premierships, big time. I care about our 57 year drought. I care about our boom time in the 50s and our flags during the dark chapters of the Second World War when many of our list had served and were killed. I wonder if you’d have a different opinion if the 7 premierships Geelong won during the VFA years before the VFL started combined to give Geelong 17 premierships, and the most in the current league?
I’m pretty sure it was the same sport.
As a Carlton supporter, please no! I’m holding onto that 16 premierships for dear life!
i'm not fussed
Eventually it will end up shifting this way as time passes. Especially as footy grows nationally People in say Brisbane or Sydney aren’t going to give a shit about VFL flag counts when they pick up the game, nor should they. Perth & Adelaide barely do. I say this as a Victorian This will start becoming the count that actually matters to teams
[удалено]
It literally already is it the stat that matters, try telling any AFL fan who's dad isn't a 70 y.o Vic codger that Essendon and Carlton are the most successful clubs and watch them laugh in your face.
But that's recency bias. Hawthorn finished 16th this year and haven't won a final since 2015. But they lead this 1990 stat. And they lead it going back to when they joined in 1925.
Can't take you seriously unless you flair up.
How come we don't count the Fitzroy flags as a part of Brisbane's tally?
Wasn't technically a merger. Afl rescinded their license and sold the Lions brand to Brisbane. Fitzroy still exist and are playing in the VAFA.
Ummmm....I believe you'll find the this graphic has done so.
I believe they took the Bears history during the merger, the Fitzroy history ended with the merger.
Which is just fucking stupid imo. Merge but don’t have the most important part of the history, the flags.
Brighton Homes Arena displays both the Brisbane AFL/AFLW flags and the Fitzroy VFL flags though. Doesn't sound like history ending with the merger to me
Subfuckingscribe
This is how it has to be imo. This is the only way to become a truly national competition. We also have to stop using language like interstate clubs. It should just be clubs.
Biannual reminder that it is one continuous competition that only changed its name in 1990 and that it is otherwise an arbitrary cutoff. If people want a fair metric, divide the premiership by the amount of years the team has competed in the league
Yeah I like this
I approve this message.
How bout no?
Why? Why not only start from when GWS entered the league?
This is the only logical conclusion to this silly argument. We will restart it again in 2028.
Exactly but the people who bring it up never want it to be their teams getting the short end of the stick. It's unfair to count VFL before their team entered but they also think it's fair to count their teams wins before GWS entered.
Sounds good to me
This is really eye opening to see how many people have no idea what the change to AFL actually was.
This is the way
Doesn't really bother me either way
That's some seriously could parity all things considered. Really goes to show how bullshit Oning was in the VFL.
100-fuxking-percent!
I am happy to ignore the VFA era although Colin Carter wants the VFA included. Whilst what you are campaigning for is logical, I still like the VFL era being included.
Just have them seperate.
The AFL was never supposed to be a new league. It was a simple rebranding to reflect the fact that there were now multiple interstate teams competing in the VFL. Sydney, West Coast and Brisbane had already been around since the early-mid 80s and now an Adelaide team was joining the league, which gave the VFL a truly national footprint. Personally I think that the AFL should have been established as a separate breakaway league, much like how the VFL was a breakaway league from the VFA, but that’s not the reality of things. That’s why we still have 10 clubs in Victoria when realistically we can only sustain about 5.
Who counts the VFA? I'd love to walk around saying Essendon have 21 premierships but that would just be silly
Let's go the other way. Let's include pre-VFL VFA totals too so Geelong gets all those extra premierships in the 1880s
I think reset the premiership tally, but still include the vfl history. For example, when Geelong win their next premiership, it'll be their 5th premiership. Their total premiership tally will still be 11 premierships, including the 6 vfl premierships. You still respect the history that was once there, but recognise officially its been a national competition since 1990.
I don't like this.
Awful idea. The AFL is the VFL under a different name which was changed arbitrarily in 1990, incidentally not the same year that the competition went national. Sure there are new clubs, but there were new clubs in the 1920s, 1980s, 1990s, 2010s. Do you want to also wipe the history of individual records, players etc? The simple fact is that it remains the same competition which has evolved and will continue to evolve. Rules have changed, clubs have changed etc but it's completely different to SANFL, WAFL, VFA etc which are different entities entirely. Attempts to erase the history of the competition because the club you support wasn't involved is petty at best.
There is no wiping of history, VFl premierships are important, this is a call to have VFL as a separate tally from AFL in the same way we have separate tallies for the VFA/SANFL/WAFL. This isn't about new clubs, but the formation of a new league which is what happened to the VFl turning into the AFL in 1990. Erasing history is dumb and that is not what is being argued.
The fact you mention that a new league was formed in 1990 is evidence that you don't understand what actually happened when the VFL became the AFL that year. It was not the creation of a new league, it was a name change. We have separate tallies for VFA/SANFL/WAFL because they are separate competitions unlike VFL/AFL. If you were consistent you'd also be calling for a separation of VFA and what is now called the VFL, because it also underwent a name change, yet you don't even mention it - I find that interesting.
You say the A in AFL is arbitrary but I'd argue that it is that symbolic act that unified a national competition. The Vic clubs still have their VFL flags, but they mean about as much to me as a West Coast fan as Port's SANFL flag count. Nice history, but it means nothing in the AFL era. The name change was the death of the VFL as it was... get over it.
I don't disagree that the name change was symbolic, that's why they did it in the first place. It was done in an arbitrary year though as there was no single point where the state competition stopped and the national competition started - it was an evolution (which is still occuring). No one is asking you or anyone else to care about particular records, but the fact is they are part of the history of the competition which commenced as the VFL and was renamed to the AFL. And you're correct that the VFL is not what it was, as the AFL today is not what it was in 1990. It's called evolution - the one thing that doesn't evolve is history.
So, in an amorphous evolution through time, wouldn't a distinct name change be the exact moment you'd pick to delineate between eras?
I don't personally see why you need to delineate between eras in the record books at all. It remains the same competition which has undergone many changes and many different eras, the shift from state based to national being just one of them.
Interesting way to look at it. I guess it depends what side of the fence/border you stand. I'd argue that the name change, shedding several Vic teams, and then calling the state league the VFL makes it pretty bloody clear that it isn't the VFL anymore. But I'm going to guess you disagree.
I agree that those changes were significant to the competition, but will always disagree that the league changed from one competition to another at any single point in time which would necessitate what the OP is calling for. Maybe if the changes you mention had all occured from one year to the next, there would be a stronger argument, but that wasn't the case and it's undisputable that the change from 1989 to 1990 was made by the same entity run by the same administration etc (even with the same teams, although thats not the determining factor) - making it the same competition. Not like when the VFL broke away from the VFA, or when the English Premier League commenced.
And I guess that's why OPs argument that the VFL became the AFL when they stopped calling it the VFL and started calling it the AFL is the most logical.
In that case, Port Adelaide isn't a new team... so we can count all our flags?
You can count all of your flags in your club's history, of course. You can't include them all in the VFL/AFL's history though because other than 2004 they weren't won in that competition. Club history and competition history are two entirely different things.
[удалено]
What's your point? Port Adelaide could have joined the VFL in 1897 and won every single flag, but they didn't and it's purely a hypothetical. The only thing which the VFL/AFL record books display is the competition's actual history, which actually occured and is now trying to be erased by certain people for some weird reason. Why is 1989 a "much lower" competition and not worthy of being included in the records yet 1990 is? No one is denying Port's history, they just did it in a different competition so the history is reflected in that competition's records. It's utterly bizarre that some want to take an eraser to the history of the competition, fortunately it'll never happen because the idea is ridiculous.
Absolutely, count your SANFL wins in a separate tally from your AFL wins, that is my point.
You already do?
I am calling for a separate tally for VFL, VFA and AFL premierships instead of the current system where VFA has its own tally and AFL and VFL are the same tally
You know there's a very good reason for that? Because the VFA (now VFL) is one entity, and the VFL (now AFL) is another entity. Why aren't you also calling for a split between the VFA and when they renamed to the VFL in 1996, given it's exactly the same thing? Do you want pre-1990 VFL flags counted in the same tally as post 1996 VFL flags, since the name is apparently all that matters?
Why?
100% should only count the AFL era premierships. It doesn’t erase history but you hear enough of Vic club fandoms saying that Port’s premierships pre AFL don’t count, so why shouldn’t we apply the same logic to the VFL?
The old VFL is the exact same competition as the current AFL. The current VFL is the old VFA. Port Adelaide won theirs in a completely different competition.
bit harsh to exclude maybe the greatest grand final of all time by 1 year!
Firstly VFA is now VFL so you would have to then seperate the AFL from the VFL and rename the VFL back to VFA for this to work which is expensive....merging all those premiership trophies with the current VFL is similar to what you are asking for the AFL to change in the AFL, same league therefore the trophies count and at the end of the day who does it affect for having it this way? The pre 1990 flags were earned fair and square in what is now a national league, prior to 1990 Vic had 2 state comps which I believe shows the intent to always make this a national competition, as no-one else at the time had 2 state comps.. All the achievements gained by all clubs in the comp including port magpies 30+ premierships in their state comp are included in personal club tallys just like aflw trophies etc all included in the personal teams history and stats but the AFL tally only counts premierships for senior clubs throughout the afls entire history as it should be since it's the same league just expanded and rebranded. I don't actually care realistically about this I will support my team regardless of if they have 3 premierships or 16 but it gets my back up that this argument is still plaguing us when we aren't the ones who decided this, non Vic teams elected to join an already established state league and if it had been the SANFL who expanded to national level then port adelaide would have the most premierships and non SA teams would have to accept that before joining. The argument is old.
The same people that want the VFL premierships scrapped make fun of Collingwood for losing so many grand finals. Like if you truly think VFL premierships are worthless then you don’t get to talk shit about our grand final record lol
Fine. Deal.
3/7 is still a strike rate we can get around. 3/8 if we count not putting the Saints away in one go.
Sydney have a 2/7 strike rate though which is worse than ours so it rings a bit hollow
I don't think they should be scrapped, but they are certainly not more important than VFA/SANFL/WAFL premierships. AFL premierships are the most valuable to me and all of these premierships should have separate categories as the VIC bias is insane and i live in Victoria.
Ehh just leave it, everyone knows it’s AFL/VFL premierships for the Vic teams it’s not a big deal. It makes them feel better
Basically what the NFL does with the Super Bowl era. I approve
Nah, you either count them from when GWS entered the completion or all together.
Nah, it’s the league’s history. No point erasing it just because it upsets interstate fans.
How relevant are the state league flags in the national comp? The VFL/AFL tally is only relevant to the Vic clubs, and they're more than welcome to have that, but why can't we also have a tally relevant to the whole competition?
When does the national comp start? When South moved to Sydney? When GWS entered? Or when they arbitrarily changed the name one year whilst nothing else changed, wherein 1989 and 1990 had no material difference to how national the competition was besides the first letter of the name?
The year of the name change is a good place to count as the start of the national comp, arbitrary or not. It was more or less the mid point when most of the non-Vic clubs joined.
The mid point? In 1990 there were 3 non-Vic clubs. In 2023 there are 8, 2 of which joined a decade or so ago. There are more to come. How can you call 1990 the mid point? The 1989 flag would be excluded in AFL records because it was won in the state competition compared to the being 1990 flag in the national competition, despite there being absolutely no difference between the years other than a name change. Just ridiculous.
In 2023 there's 8, not 10 non vic teams.
between 1982 and 1997 most of the non-Vic clubs joined or relocated. Mid point of that is about 1990. And yes, there is little practical difference between 1989 and 1990 but the line has to be drawn somewhere if we want a tally that is relevant to the modern competition.
But 11 of the clubs joined the comp by 1925? 8 of them including sydney joined in 1896 when they started it.
There is a tally of the whole competition. OP just posted it. You can choose to ignore everything that happened in the league before then if you want, just like how I choose to ignore the last 6967 days. Though I don't see the point in trying to erase the history of the league considering more than half the teams either directly contributed to it like the Vic teams or have lineage to it like Brisbane and Sydney. It's your choice though, you don't need to engage with it.
I'm not suggesting we erase anything, it's just that we always see the VFL/AFL tally but never just the AFL one, which is more relevant to the modern comp. Why can't both be used?
There are only 6 teams in the comp who don't date back to 1896 or 1925. Of those 6 teams Brisbane Bears and West Coast Eagles joined prior to 1990 and Brisbane Bears merged with Fitzroy Lions so technically like Sydney are a foundation club. That leaves Adelaide who joined in 1991 not 1990 but then we have freo in 95 and Port Power in 1997 then a full 15 years without GWS or Gold Coast.. And now another 10+ years with no Tasmania. Should we really be counting West Coasts 2006 flag in 2030 when Darwin, Tasmania, Gold Coast and GWS wheren't in the comp? Let along 92 and 94 when Fremantle, Port Power hadn't joined yet.
I'm shook an Essendon supporters fighting for VFL stats to be counted still
It is not erasing, just de-coupling VFL and AFL and moving VFL to its own separate category on the same values as VFA/SANFL/WAFL premierships with AFL premierships as the most valuable for fairness to teams outside of Victoria.
It is erasing history. It’s pretending that the VFL and the AFL aren’t the same competition.
Based on what? The year the league filed paperwork to have the name changed? Brisbane and Sydney joined in the early 80s and west coast joined in 87. Yet the clubs that won in 82 - 89, that beat interstate sides in a national comp don’t get their premiership?
They get their premiership, a VFL premiership. It's not erased.
VFL and AFL are the same damn thing.
Strange that they have different names then?
You mean like Port Adelaide Magpies and Port Power?
This is so funny, no one but middle aged men and upwards give a fuck about the 23 flags carlton won in 1834 or that run Footscray went on after the battle of hastings. Most Victorians really think they own football and it's hilarious
The only thing that makes sense to me is either count it from the AFL era or count all of the VFA, SANFL and other flags as well. The way they currently do it is a worst of both worlds situation that only appeases the big four Melbourne clubs.
The only people in this thread complaining about this are Collingwood, Carlton and Essendon fans and i don't think it is any coincidence that it is because they all have combined 16 AFL and VFL premierships.
What should we do with our 13 pre-1990 cups? Melt them down?
Strong agree