# Collingwood v Brisbane Lions — AFL Round 24 2026 AI Prediction by Alphr

## Full Time: Collingwood 96 – 159 Brisbane Lions

_Brisbane Lions put Collingwood to the sword._

Half time: 41 – 63 · Alphr AI pre-game win probability: Collingwood 48% / Brisbane Lions 52% · MCG · Fri, 21 Aug, 07:40 pm AEST

**Goal Kickers** — Collingwood: Edward Allan (2' 1st), Angus Anderson (20' ×2), Nick Daicos (27'), Charlie West (54' ×3), Tim Membrey (63' ×2 Tipped ⚡), Dan Houston (81'), Jordan de Goey (77' ×2), Sam Swadling (85'), Harvey Harrison (87') · Brisbane Lions: Conor McKenna (10' ×4), Will Ashcroft (14'), Sam Draper (30'), Logan Morris (36' ×7 Tipped ⚡), Eric Hipwood (49' ×3), Oscar Allen (58' ×4 Tipped ⚡), Charlie Cameron (67' ×2 Tipped ⚡), Cam Rayner (92'), Zac Bailey (102' Tipped ⚡)

### Match Winner — AI Prediction Market (resolved)

| Team | Pre-game AI win probability | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Brisbane Lions | 52% | Won |
| Collingwood | 48% | Lost |

Model call: **Correct** · Margin: 2.1 predicted → 63 actual · Markets hit: 1/4

_AI win probability priced pre-game · Markets hit = core betting markets._

### Full-Time Report

**Collingwood vs Brisbane Lions Prediction and Tips - AFL Round 24, 2026**

_By Ben Dunlop · Published: 20 Aug 2026, 06:41 pm · Last updated: 21 Aug 2026, 10:30 pm_

Collingwood 96–159 Brisbane Lions in AFL Round 24 at MCG. Here's how the result stacked up against the model's call, with the win-probability story and where the value landed.

The Brisbane Lions took control in the third quarter at the MCG, leaving Collingwood with little chance of recovery. By the end of the third, Brisbane had turned a 22-point half-time lead into a 49-point advantage. They finished strong, securing a 159–96 victory.

Brisbane's dominance in clearances was key. They won 51 to Collingwood's 35, giving them first use of the ball and allowing them to push forward effectively. Despite a lower disposal efficiency of 71% compared to Collingwood's 73.5%, Brisbane's midfield was more effective in moving the ball and creating opportunities. Their forwards capitalised, marking inside 50 on 21 occasions, six more than the Magpies.

The Lions' ruck division also played a significant role, winning 49 hit-outs to Collingwood's 36. This advantage helped Brisbane control the game, keeping Collingwood on the defensive. Although Collingwood managed 58 intercepts, slightly more than Brisbane, they struggled to transition from defence to attack.

Collingwood's defence faced relentless pressure. They stayed competitive in the first half, trailing by only 22 points at the break. However, Brisbane's superior positional strength ratings in midfield, forwards and defence became evident as the game progressed. Collingwood's 65 tackles to Brisbane's 39 showed effort, but without converting turnovers into scoring opportunities, it wasn't enough.

The pre-match model predicted a close contest, with Brisbane expected to win by just 2.1 points. While it correctly picked Brisbane as the winner with a 52% probability, it underestimated the margin by 60.9 points. Collingwood's defensive issues, highlighted by their recent average of 86 points conceded per game, were exposed as Brisbane scored freely.

Brisbane's strength in the midfield and their ability to convert inside 50 chances were decisive. Averaging 103.4 points in their last five games, they demonstrated why they're considered one of the league's top teams. Collingwood, with three wins from their last five, will need to regroup and address their defensive lapses. Brisbane's victory marks their fourth win in five games, reinforcing their status as contenders.

While both teams had their moments, Brisbane's control in key areas made the difference. Collingwood must now focus on regaining form and closing the gaps that Brisbane exploited.

**Scoring by Quarter**

| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Collingwood | 21 | 20 | 13 | 42 | 96 |
| Brisbane Lions | 33 | 30 | 40 | 56 | 159 |

**Key Match Stats**

| Collingwood | Stat | Brisbane Lions |
|---|---|---|
| 355 | Disposals | **366** |
| 117 | Contested poss. | **131** |
| 35 | Clearances | **51** |
| 48 | Inside 50s | **59** |
| 79 | Marks | **107** |
| 15 | Marks inside 50 | **21** |
| **65** | Tackles | 39 |
| 36 | Hit-outs | **49** |
| **58** | Intercepts | 52 |
| **73.5%** | Disposal eff. | 71.0% |

**Model Report Card**

Our model correctly predicted Brisbane Lions to win at 52% probability. The margin model missed here, predicting 2.1 but the actual margin was 63 points. The game's 255 points came in 87 points higher than the predicted 168. Brisbane Lions led 41–63 at the break and pulled away in the second half to win by 63. The model went 1/4 on this match.

_Official AFL match stats · Generated by Alphr's model_

### Edge Analysis — the model's pre-game markets

- **Head to Head:** Brisbane Lions to win @ $1.31 (edge -24.0%) — model probability 52.3% — result: WON
- **Line / Spread:** Collingwood +23.5 @ $1.89 (edge +21.4%) — result: LOST
- **Margin Band:** Brisbane Lions 1-39 @ $3.30 (edge +0.0%) — result: LOST
- **Total (Over/Under):** Under 182.5 @ $1.88 (edge +1.8%) — result: LOST
- Predicted margin: Brisbane Lions by 2 · Predicted total: 168

### Match Preview (pre-match read)

Line ball between Collingwood and Brisbane Lions. The model can't split them, landing on Brisbane Lions at 52%. The heaviest factor is the ratings gap: Brisbane Lions sit 95 ELO points clear, 1720 to 1625. Form leans Brisbane Lions' way: 4 from their last 5, against 3 for Collingwood.

Brisbane Lions own the matchup too, leading 4 of 7 factors including ELO Rating, Recent Form and Lineup Strength. The margin model has Brisbane Lions by 2.1, with the two sides combining for about 168. Coin-flip on the win, so the value is where this one gets settled.

_Pre-match read · Alphr model_

### Recent Form (Last 5)

| Collingwood | Stat | Brisbane Lions |
|---|---|---|
| 3.0 | Wins (Last 5) | 4.0 |
| 95.8pts | Avg Score | 103.4pts |
| 86.0pts | Avg Conceded | 80.2pts |
| 9.8pts | Avg Margin | 23.2pts |
| 373.4 | Disposals | 392.6 |
| 50.0 | Inside 50s | 50.0 |
| 73.2 | Tackles | 47.2 |
| 39.2 | Clearances | 36.8 |

### Form & History

_Last 5 games, oldest → newest._

| Team | Last 5 | Avg Pts |
|---|---|---|
| Collingwood | R19 W · R20 W · R21 L · R22 W · R23 D | 95.8 |
| Brisbane Lions | R19 W · R20 W · R21 L · R22 W · R23 W | 103.4 |

### Positional Matchup

_Season-to-date production per game with league-wide attack/defence tiers (18 teams)._

**Forwards** (Key Forwards · Med/Mid Forwards)

|  | Collingwood | Brisbane Lions |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 10th | 1st (strong) |
| Defence rank | 6th (strong) | 13th (weak) |
| Goals scored · conceded | 201 · 186 | 254 · 204 |
| Goal Assists | 5.4/g | 5.4/g |
| Disposals | 126/g | 94/g |
| Inside 50s | 22.1/g | 19.8/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 10/g | 10/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 69.9% | 65.4% |

**Midfield & Ruck** (Midfielders · Rucks)

|  | Collingwood | Brisbane Lions |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 9th | 6th (strong) |
| Defence rank | 6th (strong) | 8th |
| Goals scored · conceded | 68 · 61 | 75 · 64 |
| Goal Assists | 2.7/g | 4.5/g |
| Disposals | 134/g | 166/g |
| Inside 50s | 19.6/g | 26.2/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 1.8/g | 3.4/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 71.1% | 68.9% |

**Defenders** (Key & Medium Defenders)

|  | Collingwood | Brisbane Lions |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 16th (weak) | 11th |
| Defence rank | 2nd (strong) | 6th (strong) |
| Goals scored · conceded | 8 · 9 | 12 · 15 |
| Goal Assists | 1.2/g | 1.3/g |
| Disposals | 120/g | 114/g |
| Inside 50s | 11/g | 11.5/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 0.5/g | 0.4/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 80.8% | 81.6% |

**Who scores on Brisbane Lions** — Key Forwards 3.84/g (lg 3.88) -1% · Rucks 0.5/g (lg 0.52) -4% · Forwards 4.24/g (lg 4.49) -6%
**Who scores on Collingwood** — Rucks 0.54/g (lg 0.52) +4% · Midfielders 2.37/g (lg 2.47) -4% · Defenders 1/g (lg 1.06) -6%

_Goals conceded by position, last 3 seasons; positive = concedes above league average to that position._

### Goal Scorer History — Who Kicks The Goals

_Last 10 games, career record vs the opponent and at MCG. ⚡ = our AI backs them to score; 🎯 = our AI's first-goal pick. 🏉 = scored in this game. Goal % = share of games with a goal, last 10 weighted double vs the 30 prior — historical frequency, not a market price._

**Collingwood** (team sheet)

| # | Player | Pos | 2026 | Last 10 | vs opp | Venue | Goal % | Alphr play | This game |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | Daniel McStay | KF | 43 in 22g | 23/10g (2·1·0·3·3·2·2·5·3·2) | 12/6g | 66/52g | 78% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.12 AI 82% ✗ No goal | — |
| – | Tim Membrey | KF | 30 in 18g | 18/10g (0·3·2·3·2·3·2·0·3·0) | 20/13g | 68/40g | 76% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.18 AI 79% ✓ Scored | 🏉 63' 89' |
| – | Lachie Schultz | FWD | 24 in 20g | 14/10g (1·2·0·2·4·1·1·0·3·0) | 8/11g | 50/43g | 68% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.45 AI 68% ✗ No goal | — |
| – | Nick Daicos | MID | 23 in 21g | 11/10g (2·1·3·1·1·0·1·0·1·1) | 7/8g | 47/72g | 72% | — | 🏉 27' |
| – | Jordan De Goey | FWD | 18 in 20g | 9/10g (1·2·3·1·0·0·1·1·0·0) | 26/16g | 136/126g | 58% | — | 🏉 77' 93' |
| – | Angus Anderson | FWD | 15 in 15g | 10/10g (1·2·1·2·0·1·1·1·0·1) | 0/0g | 8/8g | 80% | — | 🏉 20' 81' |
| – | Roan Steele | MID | 15 in 17g | 9/10g (0·0·1·2·1·1·0·0·2·2) | 1/2g | 10/14g | 50% | — | — |
| – | Beau McCreery | FWD | 13 in 21g | 6/10g (0·0·0·0·0·2·1·2·0·1) | 5/10g | 51/69g | 36% | — | — |
| – | William Hayes | FWD | 8 in 8g | 9/10g (0·1·0·1·1·2·1·0·1·2) | 0/1g | 7/6g | 70% | — | — |
| – | Ned Long | FWD | 6 in 20g | 3/10g (0·0·0·0·0·2·1·0·0·0) | 1/5g | 8/34g | 26% | — | — |
| – | Charlie West | KF | 5 in 7g | 6/8g (1·1·0·1·0·1·0·2) | 0/0g | 4/4g | 63% | — | 🏉 54' 94' 78' |
| – | Dan Houston | DEF | 5 in 22g | 4/10g (0·0·1·0·0·1·0·0·1·1) | 3/13g | 11/43g | 30% | — | 🏉 81' |
| – | Edward Allan | MID | 5 in 17g | 4/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·2·0·1·1) | 0/2g | 4/16g | 21% | — | 🏉 2' |
| – | Jack Crisp | MID | 5 in 22g | 2/10g (0·0·0·1·1·0·0·0·0·0) | 5/19g | 53/167g | 28% | — | — |
| – | Sam Swadling | MID | 5 in 7g | 5/7g (1·0·1·1·1·1·0) | 0/0g | 2/4g | 71% | — | 🏉 85' |
| – | Scott Pendlebury | MID | 5 in 16g | 3/10g (1·0·0·0·0·1·0·1·0·0) | 3/19g | 83/195g | 20% | — | — |
| – | Steele Sidebottom | MID | 4 in 19g | 2/10g (0·0·0·0·1·0·0·1·0·0) | 9/20g | 107/192g | 28% | — | — |
| – | Harvey Harrison | FWD | 3 in 10g | 3/10g (0·0·0·0·1·0·1·1·0·0) | 0/0g | 10/15g | 42% | — | 🏉 87' |
| – | Darcy Cameron | RUC | 2 in 21g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0) | 4/10g | 39/83g | 18% | — | — |
| – | Jeremy Howe | DEF | 1 in 16g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·0) | 9/19g | 56/172g | 4% | — | — |
| – | Josh Daicos | DEF | 1 in 22g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 5/13g | 31/100g | 4% | — | — |
| – | Billy Frampton | DEF | 0 in 22g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 2/10g | 4/41g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Liam Puncher | DEF | 0 in 7g | 0/7g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/0g | 0/3g | 0% | — | — |

**Brisbane Lions** (team sheet)

| # | Player | Pos | 2026 | Last 10 | vs opp | Venue | Goal % | Alphr play | This game |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | Logan Morris | KF | 55 in 21g | 30/10g (7·3·3·3·2·1·3·0·4·4) | 10/5g | 20/10g | 88% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.05 AI 91% ✓ Scored; 🎯 First Goal $10.00 AI 8% ✗ Not first | 🏉 36' 38' 42' 67' 90' 92' 95' |
| – | Charlie Cameron | FWD | 48 in 22g | 21/10g (2·1·2·2·2·2·3·2·3·2) | 30/19g | 49/32g | 84% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.10 AI 84% ✓ Scored; 🎯 First Goal $12.00 AI 6% ✗ Not first | 🏉 67' 98' |
| – | Kai Lohmann | FWD | 46 in 22g | 25/10g (0·1·2·5·3·4·3·2·5·0) | 8/5g | 14/9g | 74% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.11 AI 85% ✗ No goal; 🎯 First Goal $13.00 AI 7% ✗ Not first | — |
| – | Zac Bailey | FWD | 30 in 21g | 14/10g (0·2·2·3·2·1·3·1·0·0) | 18/14g | 23/20g | 74% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.16 AI 70% ✓ Scored | 🏉 102' |
| – | Cam Rayner | FWD | 24 in 22g | 10/10g (0·0·3·1·0·1·2·1·1·1) | 18/14g | 21/22g | 76% | — | 🏉 92' |
| – | Conor McKenna | FWD | 17 in 16g | 10/10g (1·2·2·2·2·1·0·0·0·0) | 1/9g | 6/30g | 36% | — | 🏉 10' 16' 75' 83' |
| – | Oscar Allen | KF | 15 in 10g | 15/10g (1·1·2·3·3·1·1·1·0·2) | 18/8g | 11/9g | 74% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.24 AI 75% ✓ Scored | 🏉 58' 87' 66' 69' |
| – | Will Ashcroft | MID | 15 in 22g | 10/10g (0·2·0·0·3·0·2·2·0·1) | 3/6g | 10/12g | 44% | — | 🏉 14' |
| – | Sam Draper | RUC | 14 in 21g | 7/10g (1·0·1·0·2·0·1·1·1·0) | 4/7g | 16/25g | 60% | — | 🏉 30' |
| – | Levi Ashcroft | MID | 11 in 22g | 6/10g (0·0·1·1·2·1·0·0·0·1) | 0/4g | 3/7g | 42% | — | — |
| – | Eric Hipwood | KF | 10 in 9g | 10/10g (0·2·1·0·2·1·1·0·2·1) | 15/13g | 32/21g | 68% | — | 🏉 49' 73' 72' |
| – | Darcy Fort | RUC | 8 in 21g | 5/10g (1·1·1·1·0·0·0·0·0·1) | 1/6g | 2/9g | 32% | — | — |
| – | Lachie Neale | MID | 5 in 22g | 2/10g (0·1·0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0) | 11/20g | 12/34g | 24% | — | — |
| – | Dayne Zorko | DEF | 3 in 12g | 2/10g (0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1) | 16/22g | 16/27g | 16% | — | — |
| – | Jarrod Berry | MID | 3 in 17g | 2/10g (1·0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 5/16g | 6/22g | 26% | — | — |
| – | Jaspa Fletcher | DEF | 3 in 22g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 2/8g | 5/13g | 16% | — | — |
| – | Josh Dunkley | MID | 3 in 22g | 3/10g (0·1·0·1·1·0·0·0·0·0) | 8/16g | 9/23g | 22% | — | — |
| – | Darcy Wilmot | DEF | 1 in 22g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 2/9g | 1/16g | 10% | — | — |
| – | Ryan Lester | DEF | 1 in 18g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·0) | 1/15g | 2/21g | 6% | — | — |
| – | Ty Gallop | DEF | 1 in 17g | 1/10g (0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 3/2g | 3/4g | 12% | — | — |
| – | Darcy Gardiner | DEF | 0 in 11g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 1/12g | 2/20g | 10% | — | — |
| – | Harris Andrews | DEF | 0 in 19g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/16g | 1/26g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Noah Answerth | DEF | 0 in 14g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/4g | 0/12g | 2% | — | — |

### Player Props — Disposal Counts

_Bookmaker disposal lines vs our model's read. ⚡ = the validated under signal (model ≥10 points past the price) — everything else is market intel, not a tip. The ⚡ under signal's verified record: 57.7% of 1,278 flags in 2025._

**Collingwood**

| Player | Line | Under | AI Under | Actual |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nick Daicos ⚡ Under | 35.5 | $1.87 | 69% | 26 ✓ |
| Josh Daicos ⚡ Under | 27.5 | $1.86 | 69% | 27 ✓ |
| Jordan De Goey | 21.5 | $1.95 | 61% | 32 ✗ |
| Scott Pendlebury | 21.5 | $1.87 | 49% | 8 ✓ |
| Dan Houston ⚡ Under | 20.5 | $1.87 | 70% | 20 ✓ |
| Jack Crisp ⚡ Under | 19.5 | $1.87 | 68% | 13 ✓ |
| Sam Swadling ⚡ Under | 18.5 | $1.87 | 81% | 32 ✗ |
| Darcy Cameron ⚡ Under | 18.5 | $1.87 | 70% | 15 ✓ |
| Edward Allan | 18.5 | $1.87 | 61% | 23 ✗ |
| Jeremy Howe ⚡ Under | 18.5 | $1.87 | 73% | 9 ✓ |
| Ned Long ⚡ Under | 17.5 | $1.87 | 73% | 15 ✓ |
| Cameron Rayner | 16.5 | $1.87 | — | — |
| Steele Sidebottom | 16.5 | — | 43% | 16 ✓ |
| Beau McCreery | 15.5 | — | 84% | 17 ✗ |

**Brisbane Lions**

| Player | Line | Under | AI Under | Actual |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Will Ashcroft | 30.5 | $1.95 | 57% | 25 ✓ |
| Lachie Neale | 28.5 | $1.87 | 51% | 35 ✗ |
| Dayne Zorko ⚡ Under | 27.5 | $1.87 | 72% | 21 ✓ |
| Zac Bailey ⚡ Under | 23.5 | $1.87 | 71% | 24 ✗ |
| Josh Dunkley | 22.5 | $1.87 | 53% | 27 ✗ |
| Levi Ashcroft | 21.5 | $1.87 | 62% | 17 ✓ |
| Darcy Wilmot | 20.5 | $1.87 | 56% | 15 ✓ |
| Jaspa Fletcher | 19.5 | $1.87 | 51% | 22 ✗ |
| Jarrod Berry | 19.5 | $1.87 | 62% | 17 ✓ |
| Ryan Lester | 15.5 | — | 59% | 8 ✓ |
| Harris Andrews | 14.5 | — | 48% | 7 ✓ |
| Kai Lohmann | 13.5 | — | 61% | 17 ✗ |
| Ty Gallop | 13.5 | — | 65% | 8 ✓ |
| Charlie Cameron | 13.5 | — | 72% | 11 ✓ |

### Prediction Breakdown — Pure Alpha Model

**Team ELO Ratings** — Collingwood 1625 · Brisbane Lions 1720 · ELO difference: 95 in favour of Brisbane Lions

**Positional Matchups** — lineup ELO by unit

| Unit | Collingwood | Brisbane Lions | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Midfield | 1286 (best 1422) | 1323 (best 1344) | Brisbane Lions +37 |
| Forwards | 1199 (best 1481) | 1218 (best 1437) | Brisbane Lions +19 |
| Defence | 1095 (best 1152) | 1175 (best 1385) | Brisbane Lions +80 |
| Ruck | 1000 (best 1000) | 1057 (best 1114) | Brisbane Lions +57 |

**Key Prediction Factors** — what the model weighted most

| # | Factor | Weight | Favours |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ELO Rating | 21.2% | Brisbane Lions |
| 2 | Recent Form | 12.9% | Collingwood |
| 3 | Lineup Strength | 12.8% | Brisbane Lions |
| 4 | Ruck | 10.8% | Brisbane Lions |
| 5 | Weather | 10.0% | Collingwood |
| 6 | Stat Profile | 8.7% | Collingwood |
| 7 | Venue | 7.8% | Collingwood |

**Model Confidence: 52%** — Brisbane Lions predicted to win by 2 points · Predicted total: 168 pts

**Record:** 1/4 predictions correct

**Prediction by Alphr** (https://alphr.com.au) — free AI predictions for every AFL, NRL & Super League match, published before kick-off and never edited. Verified track record: https://alphr.com.au/accuracy

---
Canonical URL: https://alphr.com.au/afl/match/2026-r24-collingwood-v-brisbane-lions
RSS feed: https://alphr.com.au/feed.xml
Prediction JSON API: today https://alphr.com.au/api/predictions/today · this week https://alphr.com.au/api/predictions/weekly
Markdown view for AI agents. Machine-readable index: https://alphr.com.au/llms.txt · full reference: https://alphr.com.au/llms-full.txt
All predictions are published before kick-off and verified after full time. Free, no login. 18+ gamble responsibly (AU).
Last updated: 2026-08-21 12:30 UTC (latest tip update)