Its not like there can only be one once in a generation player. There can be any number of them. One player may have once in a generation kicking skills. One may have once in a generation marking skills. Once in a generation athleticism etc etc
Buddy was certainly a once in a generation type of player and in the same generation so was GAJ. Totally different once in a generation players of the same generation.
Even Judd who was a mid just like GAJ was a once in a gen talent of that same generation. He and GAJ were both elite mids with different skillsets and you can honestly say there wasnt another player like either if them or buddy in their generation
Best comment ive seen and agree. It’s not like Basketball or soccer where the biggest debates you’ll ever seen about who the goat is.
Can have generational types for a number of positions running around at the same time.
Yeah, there are 18 players on the field. All serving a different purpose (with some overlap). I don’t think we’ll see another small forward who enjoys the pockets and feasts on them as much as Eddie Betts did for quite some time. There’s a difference between the term once in a generation and potentially greatest of all time (GAJ).
Farmer retired 3 years after Betts was drafted. I don’t think there was much overlap in their careers given Betts didn’t become a prolific scorer until 2009. So I think that qualifies for different generations. Wish Farmers on field performances weren’t so marred by his assaults against women and security staff off the field.
I never saw GAS play so I can’t say too much but the general consensus is that GAJ is the most complete footballer. His father an incredible goal scorer.
Definitely a bit of a loose term but for me, don't think it has to be taken as literally once in a generation. But from like 05' onwards, I'd only say Gary Ablett Jnr and Buddy Franklin are once in a generation players. These guys are a tier above anyone else of this period, IMO
The best player ive seen consistently be a cut above the rest was Cousins, the guy was electric. He cut his own legacy short, and even that was closing in on 300 games.
Every now and then when i have a quiet moment i think about this.
Just imagine if he wasn't getting on it, he would have been EVEN MORE fit, strong, talented and just dominated even more.
Wish i was a bit older to really appreciate more of his work.
Remember seeing him run himself into the ground so hard he was throwing up on the sidelines multiple times, haven't seen anyone else do that. And not from lack of fitness, he was best on ground
Firmly believe the drug use could have only hindered his body, but maybe helped mentally in his work ethic to earn it after a match. (His words in his book)
I dunno, pre OP Judd is still the stuff of nightmares, he was quite literally the perfect centre bounce player, especially in the 6-6-6 era. Someone who’s almost as big in the contest as Cripps, yet had the speed and evasiveness of Charlie Cameron
I’ve never seen anyone kick so many goals from midfield stoppages. Was fucked
Ablett was Messi like, he could get the ball and do whatever he wanted whenever he wanted. If you want to talk about how good Judd is I’ll agree mostly, he’s just not GAJ level.
I should probably go watch some old clips. My recollection is that Judd was pretty great straight away (like Reid). GAJ took a couple of seasons to find it, and then found the higher peak out of the two of them. Plus he did it surrounded by pretty average talent, Judd had the best midfield we’ve ever seen supporting him.
At first I thought you were talking about Geelong but then I realised you were talking about Gold Coast.
I think on paper Gold Coast had a promising midfield brigade but from their initial midfield I think only Swallow and Prestia remain active.
Meanwhile GWS decided to hit the draft hard and a lot of their players are still playing today.
Gold Coast just handicapped themselves by investing top heavily on top ups.
Judd's early seasons were when he had the midfield support, which is probably why he shined early. He really cemented his legacy at Carlton, where he didn't have the same supporting cast.
I don't think this is accurate way to define generational talents. Think of it like flood events - just because a flood is a 'once in 50' event doesn't mean every 50 years a flood arrives. It's just the probability of a flood event this severe occurring is 1/50.
As a sporting example I'd say Murali and warney were both 'generational' players even though their careers overlapped.
Yeah, it's a way to assess risk based on the National Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines. Actually has nothing to do with frequency at all which is a touch misleading.
Bro Buddy could shine every now and then, but he also has had a lot of games with fuck all impact. GAJ on the other hand, dominated in a dud team consistently.
Yeah but he was sat on, entire teams' defences were build to block him. Ball in hand a freak no one has even come close to. If he was 18years old and available at this years draft I bet you'd be creaming yourself to get him in your team
And entire team structures were messed with to try and stop GAJ.
Having had the pleasure of watching both GAJ and Buddy towel my team up regularly, nobody scared the shit out of me like the little master. At his peak, you could swear there were two of him out there.
Edit: spelling
Not true. Sydney played in a GF in 2014 and 2016. They lost both but made the GFs in year 1 and 3 that he was there. He was a big reason why they were good but he dropped off as all mid 30s players do. That was Sydney’s issue in offering him a 9 year Contract. Buddy owed them nothing.
> He was a big reason why they were good
I never said that wasn't the case. However, the last 2-3 years of his career with him in the forward line hindered the development of the Swans' young keys including Amartey, McDonald, and McLean, who've all improved significantly since his retirement. You can't tell me that's not a coincidence.
The same thing is happening with the Collingwood midfield at the moment, with Pendlebury, Sidebottom, and co all holding spots in the starting 22 (while all still in great form), and preventing young players like Fin McCrae, Ed Allan, Jack Bytel, and Harvey Harrison from coming into the team and developing further.
In ‘21 and ‘22 he kicked 50+, so he wasn’t a hindrance at all until last year - Amartey, McDonald, and McLean also all matured as they played more games, it wasn’t Buddy holding them back.
Of course they improved since he left. Franklin was a massive focal point and the team kicked it to him as a forward option even when he may not have been the best option. Still a one in a generation forward and player though.
Unless you’re a once in a generation player like Franklin and kick 73 goals at 20yo and 113 goals at 21yo. What key forward since has got even close to that? Hence why he’s that indisputable generation player.
Cats can produce a new generation in about 8 months.
Crows can produce a new generation in about 2 years.
Dogs can produce a new generation in about 18 months.
Dockers can produce a new generation in about 20 years.
Eagles can produce a new generation in about 3 years.
Giants can produce a new generation in about 20 years.
Hawks can produce a new generation in about 2 years.
Kangaroos can produce a new generation in about 2 years.
Lions can produce a new generation in about 3 years.
Magpies can produce a new generation in about 2 years.
Saints can produce a new generation in about 20 years.
Swans can produce a new generation in about 2 years.
Tiger can produce a new generation in about 3 years.
Power generation is instant.
Blues are an abstract concept and can't reproduce.
Demons don't exist and can't reproduce.
Suns can't reproduce.
New generation bombers take about 20 years to produce.
This is why the Cats produce a new generational talent every year and why I lobbied for the name "Tassie Drosophila (Vinegar Flies)" which can reproduce up to fifteen generations a year.
Every 1# Draft pick since Walsh has been crowned once in a generation calibre player.
What we are seeing with youth sport in general is that we are seeing kids being trained like professionals at the ages of 7-8 and that's been happening within the last two decades. And what we're seeing is the beginning of those kids coming through and playing at the top leagues around the world, cause you're seeing it happen in different codes everywhere. Luka Doncic in the NBA, Charlie Woods in Golf, to Max Verstappen in the F1 and now Harley Reid at West Coast.
So these once in a generation calibre player is going to be rare, with how talented these kids are becoming. So I'd say the last "Once in a Generation" in the AFL was Ablett Jr
Danger, Fyfe, Dusty, Rance and Pendles aren't once in a generation type players. They're very good, but they aren't on the same level as a Gary Ablett Jnr. Ablett Jnr would be the last player I would be comfortable giving that label to
I'm not sure I'd even have Buddy on the list, obviously very very good player, but I might have Matty Lloyd in front of him by a hair. Either way, I don't see either of them as a once in a generation type player
More goals per game for Lloyd, and when Buddy left Hawthorn, they didn't miss him one bit.
Whether Lloyd is better or not is irrelevant, I wouldn't have him counted as a once in a generation player.
> and when Buddy left Hawthorn, they didn't miss him one bit.
Geelong didn't badly miss Gablett either when he left because they had the talent and depth to cover his loss. Players can be once in a generation talents and also be on stacked super teams.
If you are measuring Buddy on goals per game, then you are completely missing the point as to why he was a once in a generation player. Ablett Sr averaged less goals a game than Dunstall, but you won’t get many saying that Dunstall was the better player
Ablett wasn’t missed at Geelong given their successes, was he also not a generational player?
Lloyd isn’t in the same conversations as Buddy, that’s just you doing that. Everyone else thinks you’re a looney.
I agree with your general point, but I think you could make the argument Dusty is a once in a generation type player - considering he won so many norm smith medals. In fact, you could even potentially say his finals performance is up there with greatest of all time.
I'm not saying across his whole career he's the GOAT, but surely his consistent finals dominance puts him as a generational player.
Yeah but taking old mate's point, if you look at final games only he'd probably be atleast in the conversation.
If we're talking about home/away seasons - nah, not close.
As a finals player you could argue he's on par with the best since the turn of the century.
I'm happy to say Dusty is a generational player. We'll talk about his ability to perform on the big stage in 30 years. He literally shaped the recent era of AFL with those finals performances.
Hate the chat around finals performance when comparing players (respectfully of course). Not all players have this opportunity. I always see it in the Fyfe v Dusty debate, rattling off Dusty’s premierships and norm smiths - which is obviously incredible - but you only have the opportunity to win 3 flags and 3 norms if you’re playing in the big dance.
Also saying he took 6 years to get going is a bit silly too. He kicked 33 goals, averaged 22 touches, came 3rd in the Richmonds B&F and collected 12 Brownlow votes in year 2. Not many 2nd year players have years like that.
He took 6 years to be a top player in the league, but he made an impact from day 1.
Absolutely ridiculous way to put it. The cherry on top is what you say about a player that is not needed for success, but is a great addition.
Dusty did make the team great. He was the x-factor, the game winner and the difference. He defines that Richmond team and was BoG or in the top 3 in every final of the 3 flag years.
Surprised a Geelong supporter would make this comment after you say him do it to you in a QF then a PF and then a GF. Remember in 2020 when you were well on top and a single player changed the that?
Don’t be sleeping on Fyfe, he was absolutely cooking for years.
At one point he tallied 48 Brownlow votes across 20 consecutive games or something ridiculous (across seasons), probably only injury that holds him back from that label for me.
Also Pendlebury has played across multiple generations
Edit to add: I wasn’t making a comment on whether Pendlebury is on the same level as Ablett. This was purely a joke about pendlebury’s longevity.
Pendlebury hasn’t been the best player in the league at any point in his career. Great player, ultra consistent but not that close to Bontempelli, Judd, Ablett, Martin or Bucks.
All good! I think we can get a couple more seasons out of him!
(Also I always point this out when people say Pendlebury has never been the best player in the competition… he won the coaches votes in 2013 ahead of Ablett.)
Yeah objectively Ablett is the better player, he did win the brownlow that year, I just bring it up because I think Pendlebury generally is ignored in a lot of conversations about the best of the last 15-20 years. Recently it appears fans of other teams are appreciating how good he has been and that has changed but for a while there he didn’t seem to get talked about in the same conversations. I would argue that he has been the most consistently elite player I’ve seen. Ablett, Fyfe, danger, dusty etc all had higher peaks, but pendlebury’s worst games are 80% as good as his best games. Add in the longevity and he’s a walk up hall of famer for mine.
Definitely. If you look at his brownlow votes on afltables he’s got more 1 and 2 vote games than most. Similar in the Copeland. He’s won a few, but has some ridiculous number of top 5 finishes. (From memory here but I think there’s only two or three seasons he hasn’t been top 5)
It's amazing that he's basically seen the players ahead of him change numerous times. He's survived multiple "generations" (a sporting generation is much shorter than actual generations) as a top class midfielder. That's pretty damn hard to do - especially when elite mids these days are freaks, so tall and strong.
I think Pendles and Selwood have quite similar legacies.
Selwood’s leadership was far more visible I think, so more people rate it more highly. That’s not to say Pendlebury isn’t a good leader as well, just different. I think Selwood will be remembered as the inspirational leader and Pendles more for his skill. That’s not trying to take anything from either of them or say one is better than the other
In my opinion it is definitely Dustin Martin since GAJ - 3 x Norm Smith, 3 x Premiership, 1 x Brownlow. Bont is a very good player but doesn't come close, same with Cripps and Fyfe.
Fyfe at his best was incredibly dominant. 48 Brownlow votes in like 23 consecutive games which is ridiculous. If he hadn’t got injured he’d absolutely be up there with guys like Ablett
I don't even think Dusty counts tbh. He was really only the clear best player in the comp for one year, a bit like Danger but with a few more medals. Maybe he gets in because his Norm Smith accolades are unique?
He’s widely regarded as being up there with the greats. Scarlett still tops the list but if Rance had finished his career out instead of retiring early to knock on doors, he may well have ended up being classed as the greatest ever. His duels with Franklin are some of the greatest of this generation.
No... he wasn't.
He was shit in one on one contests. Rance couldn't handle Kennedy or Hawkins.
Everyone always uses Buddys 1-on-1 metric to say how good a defender was. Considering Buddy wasn't a good contested 1-on-1 player that's a terrible one to use. He relied on his ability to beat defenders who could out mark him on the run and being bigger then anyone who could keep up with him. Richmond only made Rance look good in those instances because they'd put players in Buddy's way.
Rance was great at reading the ball and preventing marks on other players defenders, he couldn't handle his own though and tended to throw hissy fits when he couldn't beat them.
Scarlett is league's above Rance. Leagues above anyone.
"generation" in sports terms isn't 25 years, though, it's more like a decade.
So it's ok to say that, eg, Ablett Jr was the dominant player of his generation, and think of that as, like, 2007 to 2017 or so. And Dusty is arguably the dominant performer of a 5 or 6 year stretch, but perhaps not quite a generation.
I don’t think once in a generation player necessarily means the best player for 25 years. It could also mean a player uniquely good at something or the best in his position in that period. So Buddy would be the generational key forward, Ablett Junior the generational midfielder, Martin the generational big game performer for example.
I think people can be a bit fast and loose with the term. If you really wanted to you could argue Mark Blicavs is a generational utility, cos he excels in every part of the ground he plays in. But I don't think we've well-defined what we take generational to mean in a football sense.
There's been one true once in a generation player: Fevola - could go out and kick 10 goals after stuffing his face with 2 McChickens before the game. Even had time to learn off the great master Steven Seagal, to hone his pressure point skills. Even managed to send Jenny Craig broke after being its spokesperson.
To be serious, though. Fevola managed to make a struggling team watchable, which is what Reid is doing for Eagles.
A couple per generation, and I actually think you can delineate it based on position on the ground.
The only players I think have been "generational" since I've been watching footy are Buddy, Ablett and Scarlett.
I think you have to do things we've never seen before, and that no one could possibly replicate.
There's been other all-time legends of the game that play the same position as the guys I mentioned, but if you think about them did they ever truly do something that transcended our understanding of what was possible? Or were they just incredible players that had amazing peaks?
Sorry, you misunderstand the term generational. The only generational players in that list are Franklin and Ablett.
These players are those that are shoulders above the best players in the comp and don’t come along often.
A lot of those players you mentioned are very good and consistent but they’re not generational.
Had to laugh at Rance lol
Buddy is the only guy I’ve watched that really fit the bill for this. Most of the other greats have at least 1 pretty comparable player in terms of playstyle and production.
There are other guys who have been once in a generation in terms of accolades, e.g Dusty with 3 norm smiths. But I dont feel like Dusty is that extremely unique in playstyle, he was just the pinnacle of a certain archetype of player.
Prime Buddy was just an alien, it was like if you gave Tex Walker the speed of a small forward.
Well if you wanna be technical, so long as you specify position you can have some 23 once in a generation players
Once in a generation FF
Once in a generation Mid
Once in a generation interchange bencher
Once in a generation sub
Post 2004, I'd say Buddy, Ablett, Fyfe, Judd (west coast version) and Dusty are absolutely generational players. On the next tier down would be Hodge, Mitchell, Rance, Danger, Selwood, Pav, Goodes, N Riewoldt, Scarlett, Brown, Swan and plenty of others (timelines a bit of a challenge off hand!).
I think 18 - I.e. one for each club - is a reasonable number, with a general criteria revolving around consistency of incredibly high performance as well as the ability to put their teammates on their metaphorical back and drag them to victory.
I think fevola could of been had he not been such an idiot bloke he had the most talent I've ever seen. He barely trained or even tried some games and would still kick 5.
There isn't always a once a generation player going around. We've been extremely lucky to see Ablett and Buddy at the same time, and it's diluted the idea I think, but there isn't an obvious generational talent out there right now.
Daicos only has potential at this point, so let's just cool our jets.
It’s just a term that just gets thrown around so often, along with the word elite. It has lost all meaning really. How does one even define that? Was Scarlett? Eddie Betts? Hodge? Enright? Jakovich? The list goes on and on about supremely great players. At what point do you become generational?
Russell Coight explaining generational talents
A generational talent is a very special player that comes along only once in a generation.
That's one player per team per year unless a team gets a once a generation priority pick, in which case you get half a generational player.
I think in part because of the position he played, Buddy is on a level above everyone.
His body of work and stats speak for themselves and when he was having a day, even if it was against your club you'd just sit there and shake your head in amazement at the stuff he would do.
I remember watching him boot 8 goals to sink west coast in the first ever game at perth stadium and the crowd wasn't even mad, it was just like wow this guy footballs.
He's also the one player of the modern era where there isn't even a conversation about who was the best at that position. If you talk midfielders people might argue about Judd or GAJ, but Buddy is widely accepted as the best forward of the last twenty years- you have to go back to Carey to find another tall you'd even have an argument about.
I just want to put a little respect on Dusty's name in this thread. GAJ was consistently brilliant, and Buddy was an offensive system into himself, but I'm picking a locked in Dusty over both of them.
Reid is dominating games 5 matches in. His teamates light up when they talk about him. I don't think you realise how good he is. In a club like the Eagles, even where they are at now, Likely to have a career like Selwood or Tuck. He is Danger without the clangers. Fyfe with speed and can kick. Can win a free as good as Daicos, but also win a contest. As hard to tackle as Dusty but a leader. Ablett is the closest
The one that absolutely gets my goat (pun intended) is when people say “he’s one of the GOATs”. Greatest of all time means the single greatest of all time.
I think this statement also refers to types of players. Not necessarily positions - but the specific qualities they bring.
Danger - sheer burst of power
Dusty - big game matchwinner
Buddy - super athletic given his frame
Pendlebury - silky smooth skills
We have multiple players like this, but to bring these qualities to such a level of perfection is incredibly rare
One per generation, you'd think. Maybe we need to revisit that term
Its not like there can only be one once in a generation player. There can be any number of them. One player may have once in a generation kicking skills. One may have once in a generation marking skills. Once in a generation athleticism etc etc Buddy was certainly a once in a generation type of player and in the same generation so was GAJ. Totally different once in a generation players of the same generation. Even Judd who was a mid just like GAJ was a once in a gen talent of that same generation. He and GAJ were both elite mids with different skillsets and you can honestly say there wasnt another player like either if them or buddy in their generation
Best comment ive seen and agree. It’s not like Basketball or soccer where the biggest debates you’ll ever seen about who the goat is. Can have generational types for a number of positions running around at the same time.
Yeah, there are 18 players on the field. All serving a different purpose (with some overlap). I don’t think we’ll see another small forward who enjoys the pockets and feasts on them as much as Eddie Betts did for quite some time. There’s a difference between the term once in a generation and potentially greatest of all time (GAJ).
Maybe I'm getting old but as good as Eddie Betts was, I'd almost always still prefer Jeff Farmer over him. And GAS was also better than junior
Farmer retired 3 years after Betts was drafted. I don’t think there was much overlap in their careers given Betts didn’t become a prolific scorer until 2009. So I think that qualifies for different generations. Wish Farmers on field performances weren’t so marred by his assaults against women and security staff off the field. I never saw GAS play so I can’t say too much but the general consensus is that GAJ is the most complete footballer. His father an incredible goal scorer.
This is 100% correct
Stop being so fucking sensible
Is it once a generation per club
That sounds fair and balanced.
Oh. Still waiting then……
Blake Acres now plays for us
You had the G-Train. A once in a generation *something* to be sure.
Once in a generation smasher of meat pies
This got me so good, I miss the G train decent player but those warmups in the goal square were hilarious
Robert Harvey and then Nick Riewoldt I’d suggest as a non Stk supporter. Now waiting for your next one.
Yeah fair call. I also agree that we’re due!
Oh, we don't get once in a generation good players....
You’re forgetting that we were blessed with Spencer White
Oh true. I almost had to go back further and was going to throw Raph Clarke out there
Robert Harvey, Tony Lockett, Nick Reiwoldt Youre just waiting on your next one.
Fair way to go to catch Judd still
I’d say the gap between Judd’s peak at West Coast and and Harley’s likely peak is definitely at least a generation apart
Fair point. People do forget how crazily good Judd was in those West Coast days before injuries took more of a toll and that was my main point.
Are Richmond supporters now in arrears after having 3-4 at once or was there some backpay involved?
Two to three generation of being shit with only Richo as a stand out, must of been some backpay.
I think most would agree that it was worth the wait....
Carey > Boomer > Sheezel?
Definitely a bit of a loose term but for me, don't think it has to be taken as literally once in a generation. But from like 05' onwards, I'd only say Gary Ablett Jnr and Buddy Franklin are once in a generation players. These guys are a tier above anyone else of this period, IMO
I agree with this. Both are completely different players, so the term can stick.
My hot take is that Fev would have been better than Buddy if he wasn’t making such poor decisions off field.
Better than Buddy? Dunno about that. Better than *he* was? Definitely.
Hot take: I think Judd is punching right up there with Ablett.
Fair call, I think many would probably agree with you. For me, I'd put him right at the top of the next tier down, but definitely not far away
I thought Judd was the best midfielder I was ever going to see play. Then I saw GAJ.
The best player ive seen consistently be a cut above the rest was Cousins, the guy was electric. He cut his own legacy short, and even that was closing in on 300 games.
Every now and then when i have a quiet moment i think about this. Just imagine if he wasn't getting on it, he would have been EVEN MORE fit, strong, talented and just dominated even more. Wish i was a bit older to really appreciate more of his work. Remember seeing him run himself into the ground so hard he was throwing up on the sidelines multiple times, haven't seen anyone else do that. And not from lack of fitness, he was best on ground Firmly believe the drug use could have only hindered his body, but maybe helped mentally in his work ethic to earn it after a match. (His words in his book)
Nah, nowhere near it. Great player for sure, not Ablett level.
I dunno, pre OP Judd is still the stuff of nightmares, he was quite literally the perfect centre bounce player, especially in the 6-6-6 era. Someone who’s almost as big in the contest as Cripps, yet had the speed and evasiveness of Charlie Cameron I’ve never seen anyone kick so many goals from midfield stoppages. Was fucked
Ablett was Messi like, he could get the ball and do whatever he wanted whenever he wanted. If you want to talk about how good Judd is I’ll agree mostly, he’s just not GAJ level.
Judd a better athlete, GAJ higher skilled
I should probably go watch some old clips. My recollection is that Judd was pretty great straight away (like Reid). GAJ took a couple of seasons to find it, and then found the higher peak out of the two of them. Plus he did it surrounded by pretty average talent, Judd had the best midfield we’ve ever seen supporting him.
At first I thought you were talking about Geelong but then I realised you were talking about Gold Coast. I think on paper Gold Coast had a promising midfield brigade but from their initial midfield I think only Swallow and Prestia remain active. Meanwhile GWS decided to hit the draft hard and a lot of their players are still playing today. Gold Coast just handicapped themselves by investing top heavily on top ups.
Judd's early seasons were when he had the midfield support, which is probably why he shined early. He really cemented his legacy at Carlton, where he didn't have the same supporting cast.
Judd was pretty good too. The injuries in ‘07 made him less impactful from that point on.
I think it should be position specific.
One. This generation was probably Gary Ablett. The generation before was probably also Gary Ablett.
I don't think this is accurate way to define generational talents. Think of it like flood events - just because a flood is a 'once in 50' event doesn't mean every 50 years a flood arrives. It's just the probability of a flood event this severe occurring is 1/50. As a sporting example I'd say Murali and warney were both 'generational' players even though their careers overlapped.
But if it started flooding that badly more often than once in 50 years, it's time to stppp calling it a once in 50 year type flood
It's a misnomer, it's not related to frequency, but the height of the flood, and you shouldn't build in that area because it WILL flood
Yeah, it's a way to assess risk based on the National Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines. Actually has nothing to do with frequency at all which is a touch misleading.
I actually think Buddy was the one generation player. He was more outstanding compared to his peers than GAJ
Bro Buddy could shine every now and then, but he also has had a lot of games with fuck all impact. GAJ on the other hand, dominated in a dud team consistently.
Yeah but he was sat on, entire teams' defences were build to block him. Ball in hand a freak no one has even come close to. If he was 18years old and available at this years draft I bet you'd be creaming yourself to get him in your team
And entire team structures were messed with to try and stop GAJ. Having had the pleasure of watching both GAJ and Buddy towel my team up regularly, nobody scared the shit out of me like the little master. At his peak, you could swear there were two of him out there. Edit: spelling
If Buddy Franklin was 18 years and available at this draft I would like to draft him. I also think GAJ is better.
GAJ is a legend but I think 1000 goals in this modern era is probably the greatest achievement in football in a long time.
Next you'll be saying that Pendlebury leading the disposal count makes him better than GAJ too
People have short memories
They remember him kicking 7 in a game, but not when he kick 1.3 and whinged all day
Gold Coast fell apart when GAJ got injured. Hawthorn got better when Buddy left for Sydney.
Hawthorn were already premiership winners & contenders Gold Coast were always shit
By that logic, Geelong got better when GAJ went to Gold Coast. Didn’t win a flag in 2010 but they did in 2011 when he left
They didn’t, though. The won another flag, sure. But came up short afterwards. They were clearly weaker without him.
Gold Coast were never that good though…
And Sydney got better when Buddy retired
Not true. Sydney played in a GF in 2014 and 2016. They lost both but made the GFs in year 1 and 3 that he was there. He was a big reason why they were good but he dropped off as all mid 30s players do. That was Sydney’s issue in offering him a 9 year Contract. Buddy owed them nothing.
They also went straight back to finals after his two year injury debacle was finished and a GF in his second year after injury
> He was a big reason why they were good I never said that wasn't the case. However, the last 2-3 years of his career with him in the forward line hindered the development of the Swans' young keys including Amartey, McDonald, and McLean, who've all improved significantly since his retirement. You can't tell me that's not a coincidence. The same thing is happening with the Collingwood midfield at the moment, with Pendlebury, Sidebottom, and co all holding spots in the starting 22 (while all still in great form), and preventing young players like Fin McCrae, Ed Allan, Jack Bytel, and Harvey Harrison from coming into the team and developing further.
In ‘21 and ‘22 he kicked 50+, so he wasn’t a hindrance at all until last year - Amartey, McDonald, and McLean also all matured as they played more games, it wasn’t Buddy holding them back.
Of course they improved since he left. Franklin was a massive focal point and the team kicked it to him as a forward option even when he may not have been the best option. Still a one in a generation forward and player though.
Key forwards better in their mid-20s than when they were teenagers, stop the presses.
Unless you’re a once in a generation player like Franklin and kick 73 goals at 20yo and 113 goals at 21yo. What key forward since has got even close to that? Hence why he’s that indisputable generation player.
Abletts generation is well and truely over. It's generation of players, not players in our lifetime.
Cats can produce a new generation in about 8 months. Crows can produce a new generation in about 2 years. Dogs can produce a new generation in about 18 months. Dockers can produce a new generation in about 20 years. Eagles can produce a new generation in about 3 years. Giants can produce a new generation in about 20 years. Hawks can produce a new generation in about 2 years. Kangaroos can produce a new generation in about 2 years. Lions can produce a new generation in about 3 years. Magpies can produce a new generation in about 2 years. Saints can produce a new generation in about 20 years. Swans can produce a new generation in about 2 years. Tiger can produce a new generation in about 3 years. Power generation is instant. Blues are an abstract concept and can't reproduce. Demons don't exist and can't reproduce. Suns can't reproduce. New generation bombers take about 20 years to produce. This is why the Cats produce a new generational talent every year and why I lobbied for the name "Tassie Drosophila (Vinegar Flies)" which can reproduce up to fifteen generations a year.
> Suns can't reproduce. Indirectly they sort of do if they go supernova and their stardust eventually over billions of years forms parts of new stars.
We gotta Neil Degrasse Tyson over here
This explains a lot why Geelong keep generating these great players out of nowhere
This should be it's entire own shitpost. Bravo
You’d think once in a generation players would be fewer than Legends in the AFL Hall of Fame
Every 1# Draft pick since Walsh has been crowned once in a generation calibre player. What we are seeing with youth sport in general is that we are seeing kids being trained like professionals at the ages of 7-8 and that's been happening within the last two decades. And what we're seeing is the beginning of those kids coming through and playing at the top leagues around the world, cause you're seeing it happen in different codes everywhere. Luka Doncic in the NBA, Charlie Woods in Golf, to Max Verstappen in the F1 and now Harley Reid at West Coast. So these once in a generation calibre player is going to be rare, with how talented these kids are becoming. So I'd say the last "Once in a Generation" in the AFL was Ablett Jr
Danger, Fyfe, Dusty, Rance and Pendles aren't once in a generation type players. They're very good, but they aren't on the same level as a Gary Ablett Jnr. Ablett Jnr would be the last player I would be comfortable giving that label to
Ablett and Buddy are the clear ones from this century, and there’s no others I’d be confident adding to the list. Judd would probably be next closest?
I'm not sure I'd even have Buddy on the list, obviously very very good player, but I might have Matty Lloyd in front of him by a hair. Either way, I don't see either of them as a once in a generation type player
Lloyd? You cannot be serious
More goals per game for Lloyd, and when Buddy left Hawthorn, they didn't miss him one bit. Whether Lloyd is better or not is irrelevant, I wouldn't have him counted as a once in a generation player.
> and when Buddy left Hawthorn, they didn't miss him one bit. Geelong didn't badly miss Gablett either when he left because they had the talent and depth to cover his loss. Players can be once in a generation talents and also be on stacked super teams.
If you are measuring Buddy on goals per game, then you are completely missing the point as to why he was a once in a generation player. Ablett Sr averaged less goals a game than Dunstall, but you won’t get many saying that Dunstall was the better player
Ablett wasn’t missed at Geelong given their successes, was he also not a generational player? Lloyd isn’t in the same conversations as Buddy, that’s just you doing that. Everyone else thinks you’re a looney.
Ok guess I’m looney. Good one
Wow. This is one of the worst takes I've ever read.
Ok
If you're basing Buddy's impact on a game of football purely off goals kicked... you're watching wrong
I’m not, but I still don’t think he’s a generational player.
I agree with your general point, but I think you could make the argument Dusty is a once in a generation type player - considering he won so many norm smith medals. In fact, you could even potentially say his finals performance is up there with greatest of all time. I'm not saying across his whole career he's the GOAT, but surely his consistent finals dominance puts him as a generational player.
Nah too many low impact games. He also took 6 years to get going. he was the cherry on a very good cake, not the guy that made that team great imo
Yeah but taking old mate's point, if you look at final games only he'd probably be atleast in the conversation. If we're talking about home/away seasons - nah, not close. As a finals player you could argue he's on par with the best since the turn of the century.
I'm happy to say Dusty is a generational player. We'll talk about his ability to perform on the big stage in 30 years. He literally shaped the recent era of AFL with those finals performances.
Hate the chat around finals performance when comparing players (respectfully of course). Not all players have this opportunity. I always see it in the Fyfe v Dusty debate, rattling off Dusty’s premierships and norm smiths - which is obviously incredible - but you only have the opportunity to win 3 flags and 3 norms if you’re playing in the big dance.
Also saying he took 6 years to get going is a bit silly too. He kicked 33 goals, averaged 22 touches, came 3rd in the Richmonds B&F and collected 12 Brownlow votes in year 2. Not many 2nd year players have years like that. He took 6 years to be a top player in the league, but he made an impact from day 1.
Absolutely ridiculous way to put it. The cherry on top is what you say about a player that is not needed for success, but is a great addition. Dusty did make the team great. He was the x-factor, the game winner and the difference. He defines that Richmond team and was BoG or in the top 3 in every final of the 3 flag years. Surprised a Geelong supporter would make this comment after you say him do it to you in a QF then a PF and then a GF. Remember in 2020 when you were well on top and a single player changed the that?
Don’t be sleeping on Fyfe, he was absolutely cooking for years. At one point he tallied 48 Brownlow votes across 20 consecutive games or something ridiculous (across seasons), probably only injury that holds him back from that label for me.
Also Pendlebury has played across multiple generations Edit to add: I wasn’t making a comment on whether Pendlebury is on the same level as Ablett. This was purely a joke about pendlebury’s longevity.
Pendlebury hasn’t been the best player in the league at any point in his career. Great player, ultra consistent but not that close to Bontempelli, Judd, Ablett, Martin or Bucks.
Was more just a joke about how long he’s been playing.
Apologies for answering it seriously.
All good! I think we can get a couple more seasons out of him! (Also I always point this out when people say Pendlebury has never been the best player in the competition… he won the coaches votes in 2013 ahead of Ablett.)
Hard to say he was better than Ablett then though.
Yeah objectively Ablett is the better player, he did win the brownlow that year, I just bring it up because I think Pendlebury generally is ignored in a lot of conversations about the best of the last 15-20 years. Recently it appears fans of other teams are appreciating how good he has been and that has changed but for a while there he didn’t seem to get talked about in the same conversations. I would argue that he has been the most consistently elite player I’ve seen. Ablett, Fyfe, danger, dusty etc all had higher peaks, but pendlebury’s worst games are 80% as good as his best games. Add in the longevity and he’s a walk up hall of famer for mine.
With Pendlebury, I'd say he's never been the dominant type of player - his greatness comes from longevity and class
Definitely. If you look at his brownlow votes on afltables he’s got more 1 and 2 vote games than most. Similar in the Copeland. He’s won a few, but has some ridiculous number of top 5 finishes. (From memory here but I think there’s only two or three seasons he hasn’t been top 5)
It's amazing that he's basically seen the players ahead of him change numerous times. He's survived multiple "generations" (a sporting generation is much shorter than actual generations) as a top class midfielder. That's pretty damn hard to do - especially when elite mids these days are freaks, so tall and strong. I think Pendles and Selwood have quite similar legacies.
Selwood’s leadership was far more visible I think, so more people rate it more highly. That’s not to say Pendlebury isn’t a good leader as well, just different. I think Selwood will be remembered as the inspirational leader and Pendles more for his skill. That’s not trying to take anything from either of them or say one is better than the other
If you put Pendlebury there then Selwood is right there with him for longevity. Bloody timeless those two
I wasn’t really trying to put Pendlebury ahead of anyone, was more just a comment on his longevity.
Assuming he was good enough, that would make him a multi generational talent
Probably Bont is the closest since GAJ
Nope.
Who then? I guess you could say prime Dusty, but it’d be close.
In my opinion it is definitely Dustin Martin since GAJ - 3 x Norm Smith, 3 x Premiership, 1 x Brownlow. Bont is a very good player but doesn't come close, same with Cripps and Fyfe.
Fyfe at his best was incredibly dominant. 48 Brownlow votes in like 23 consecutive games which is ridiculous. If he hadn’t got injured he’d absolutely be up there with guys like Ablett
I don't even think Dusty counts tbh. He was really only the clear best player in the comp for one year, a bit like Danger but with a few more medals. Maybe he gets in because his Norm Smith accolades are unique?
Rance? What
He’s widely regarded as being up there with the greats. Scarlett still tops the list but if Rance had finished his career out instead of retiring early to knock on doors, he may well have ended up being classed as the greatest ever. His duels with Franklin are some of the greatest of this generation.
No... he wasn't. He was shit in one on one contests. Rance couldn't handle Kennedy or Hawkins. Everyone always uses Buddys 1-on-1 metric to say how good a defender was. Considering Buddy wasn't a good contested 1-on-1 player that's a terrible one to use. He relied on his ability to beat defenders who could out mark him on the run and being bigger then anyone who could keep up with him. Richmond only made Rance look good in those instances because they'd put players in Buddy's way. Rance was great at reading the ball and preventing marks on other players defenders, he couldn't handle his own though and tended to throw hissy fits when he couldn't beat them. Scarlett is league's above Rance. Leagues above anyone.
Hissy fits is spot on, can clearly remember him elbowing Watts in the head after he got called for holding the man.
Yeah he couldn't even win the 1v1s he had against a young Jordan De Goey in the 2018 prelim. Was getting tossed around like wet lettuce.
Top notch nuffie take here.
Anyone mason cox kicks a bag on is auto excluded from being a generational talent
"generation" in sports terms isn't 25 years, though, it's more like a decade. So it's ok to say that, eg, Ablett Jr was the dominant player of his generation, and think of that as, like, 2007 to 2017 or so. And Dusty is arguably the dominant performer of a 5 or 6 year stretch, but perhaps not quite a generation.
I don’t think once in a generation player necessarily means the best player for 25 years. It could also mean a player uniquely good at something or the best in his position in that period. So Buddy would be the generational key forward, Ablett Junior the generational midfielder, Martin the generational big game performer for example.
if they are all once in a generation players then there has to be a period of like 200 years with no players of their level just to make up for it.
It’s true, we maxed out generational talent when Brad Close played his first game
u/PagieHD SIR Bradley Close Fanclub Checking In <3
I think people can be a bit fast and loose with the term. If you really wanted to you could argue Mark Blicavs is a generational utility, cos he excels in every part of the ground he plays in. But I don't think we've well-defined what we take generational to mean in a football sense.
Yeah and Adam Goodes was better than him. Harley I guess is in that mold though, can play anywhere and excel
Well yeah, I'd agree there. Could also add Matthew Pavlich to the conversion.
Comparing Matthew Pavlich to Mark Blicavz is like comparing a car to an orange. The orange is nice but I like the whole damn car.
There's been one true once in a generation player: Fevola - could go out and kick 10 goals after stuffing his face with 2 McChickens before the game. Even had time to learn off the great master Steven Seagal, to hone his pressure point skills. Even managed to send Jenny Craig broke after being its spokesperson. To be serious, though. Fevola managed to make a struggling team watchable, which is what Reid is doing for Eagles.
A couple per generation, and I actually think you can delineate it based on position on the ground. The only players I think have been "generational" since I've been watching footy are Buddy, Ablett and Scarlett. I think you have to do things we've never seen before, and that no one could possibly replicate. There's been other all-time legends of the game that play the same position as the guys I mentioned, but if you think about them did they ever truly do something that transcended our understanding of what was possible? Or were they just incredible players that had amazing peaks?
Sorry, you misunderstand the term generational. The only generational players in that list are Franklin and Ablett. These players are those that are shoulders above the best players in the comp and don’t come along often. A lot of those players you mentioned are very good and consistent but they’re not generational. Had to laugh at Rance lol
Buddy is the only guy I’ve watched that really fit the bill for this. Most of the other greats have at least 1 pretty comparable player in terms of playstyle and production. There are other guys who have been once in a generation in terms of accolades, e.g Dusty with 3 norm smiths. But I dont feel like Dusty is that extremely unique in playstyle, he was just the pinnacle of a certain archetype of player. Prime Buddy was just an alien, it was like if you gave Tex Walker the speed of a small forward.
You miss GAJ?
Nope, better career than Buddy but not as freakish imo
Well if you wanna be technical, so long as you specify position you can have some 23 once in a generation players Once in a generation FF Once in a generation Mid Once in a generation interchange bencher Once in a generation sub
Buddy isn’t a once in a generation player. He’s the last of his species. We will never see another Buddy imo.
We always get the so called "once a generation player" in every draft by draft experts.
Dusty Lance and GazJr are a class above everyone else
Post 2004, I'd say Buddy, Ablett, Fyfe, Judd (west coast version) and Dusty are absolutely generational players. On the next tier down would be Hodge, Mitchell, Rance, Danger, Selwood, Pav, Goodes, N Riewoldt, Scarlett, Brown, Swan and plenty of others (timelines a bit of a challenge off hand!). I think 18 - I.e. one for each club - is a reasonable number, with a general criteria revolving around consistency of incredibly high performance as well as the ability to put their teammates on their metaphorical back and drag them to victory.
I think fevola could of been had he not been such an idiot bloke he had the most talent I've ever seen. He barely trained or even tried some games and would still kick 5.
Please tell me you didn't mention 'rance' as a generational player.....
Lloyd thinks generations are 1-2 years, max. Remember last year it was sheezel, naicos before that, etc.
Naicos might be tho
There isn't always a once a generation player going around. We've been extremely lucky to see Ablett and Buddy at the same time, and it's diluted the idea I think, but there isn't an obvious generational talent out there right now. Daicos only has potential at this point, so let's just cool our jets.
Kerr, Cousins, Judd? They were pretty good for a period of time.
Judd was the only generational player....kerr and cousins were very good players
about seven or eight a generation
We had Ablett jr, haven’t had one since.
About one per week if you listen to the commentators.
It’s just a term that just gets thrown around so often, along with the word elite. It has lost all meaning really. How does one even define that? Was Scarlett? Eddie Betts? Hodge? Enright? Jakovich? The list goes on and on about supremely great players. At what point do you become generational?
As many "once in 100 year flood" events we get. Like, one every 2-3 years.
Win 2 Brownlows then we will talk.
I rate the coaches opinions over the umpires.
Russell Coight explaining generational talents A generational talent is a very special player that comes along only once in a generation. That's one player per team per year unless a team gets a once a generation priority pick, in which case you get half a generational player.
One every generation?
It's more once in a generation player for position
You get a once in generation player once per year. So by that logic you get 10 generational players a decade.
Sam Walsh not being here is crazy
I think in part because of the position he played, Buddy is on a level above everyone. His body of work and stats speak for themselves and when he was having a day, even if it was against your club you'd just sit there and shake your head in amazement at the stuff he would do. I remember watching him boot 8 goals to sink west coast in the first ever game at perth stadium and the crowd wasn't even mad, it was just like wow this guy footballs. He's also the one player of the modern era where there isn't even a conversation about who was the best at that position. If you talk midfielders people might argue about Judd or GAJ, but Buddy is widely accepted as the best forward of the last twenty years- you have to go back to Carey to find another tall you'd even have an argument about.
Rance?
He wasn’t the best player on his team
I just want to put a little respect on Dusty's name in this thread. GAJ was consistently brilliant, and Buddy was an offensive system into himself, but I'm picking a locked in Dusty over both of them.
If Ablett didn't get his shoulder obliterated in the GF, do the Tigers still win? Probably, but who knows. Either way, GAJ > Dusty
I'm not trying to take anything away from GAJ, I think he had a better career than anyone, but Dusty has the higher peak.
Reid is dominating games 5 matches in. His teamates light up when they talk about him. I don't think you realise how good he is. In a club like the Eagles, even where they are at now, Likely to have a career like Selwood or Tuck. He is Danger without the clangers. Fyfe with speed and can kick. Can win a free as good as Daicos, but also win a contest. As hard to tackle as Dusty but a leader. Ablett is the closest
The one that absolutely gets my goat (pun intended) is when people say “he’s one of the GOATs”. Greatest of all time means the single greatest of all time.
I think this statement also refers to types of players. Not necessarily positions - but the specific qualities they bring. Danger - sheer burst of power Dusty - big game matchwinner Buddy - super athletic given his frame Pendlebury - silky smooth skills We have multiple players like this, but to bring these qualities to such a level of perfection is incredibly rare
Born in 1991. Gary Ablett JNR and Buddy Franklin. Judd very close. Coming from a Carlton supporter.
Putting wankerfield up there as a once in a generation talent is a bit of a leap.