Dean Bailey came from Port Adelaide with a reputation for nurturing young talent and turning them into legit league footballers.

In just his first 11 weeks at the MFC, I believe he has done more with our players development then Neale Daniher done over his entire 10 years. Danihers weakness was developing his youngsters, and it cost us big time.

Already in 2008 look what Bailey has done.

- Colin Garland has emerged as if from nowhere in a key back post. This is no co-incidence. If you think back to pre-season, Bailey was asked which MFC players had impressed him most at his new club, and Garland was the first name he mentioned. (Another was Simon Buckley, who has also improbed)

- Has turned Matthew Warnock into a very solid backman. Warnock has been on the list for ages, and quite simply did nothing under Daniher. In the last few weeks he has taken on and beaten some quality forwards (Roughead, Cloke etc..)

- Has unearthed Austin Woneaimirri, who has taken the league by storm.

- Has played number 4 pick Cale Morton from the very first round, and Morton has delivered the goods.

- Gave Brent Moloney a classic spray at quarter time of the Freo game about long kicks to no mans land. Straight away, Beamer changed his game, eradicated the low percentage long-kick and has been in great form ever since (shame he is injured now). Daniher had 4 years to change that part of Brents game, yet either didnt bother or failed miserably.

- Colin Sylvia has emerged under Dean Bailey. He is averaging about 18 touched and 6 marks a game, and had 6 shpots on goal vs the Pies. Now that Bailey knows he is best used up forward, Colin will get better and better.

Anyway, they are a few examples. Feel free to add more. I am glad we got Bailey, and glad Daniher went.

i agreed with this post.

I agree that it's been great to go to a game and see 3-5 young kids running around and showing a fair bit, ND gave us some but usually 1-2 a year, not sure if thats the coaches or the recruiting etc, don't forget Petterd, Rivers, Davey, Bartram, McLean, Jones are all ND products, but early on in his coaching careeer I think this was a big weakness, hence we have big gaps between the 22-26 and 28-30 brackets.

Pretty selective examples given. I will give some quick ones that show Danners did OK.

Rivers won the Rising Star under Danners and Davey was 2nd or 3rd in the same year.

Bruce and Green came from late in the draft and have been around for 8 years now, regardless of what you think about them now.

Neitz became a multi club record holder for all sorts of things under Danners.

The rise of players can go down to all sorts of things. Coach, self belfief, experience.....

Far too early to judge.

If DB can turn Weetra, CJ, Bode, Newton, and Buckley into 150 game players then he will have my vote though.

Who are you and what have you done with Y_M?

Some of mine that are less spectacular...

- Generally it seems he's playing young players more readily... happy to play 18 year-olds rather than blooding them in the VFL for 3 years. Not playing his love-children without form which is having a palpable effect on the team's work-ethic.

- Miller has gone a fair way to bridging the gap between his worst and best. His game on the weekend a good example. He was being beaten but kept working and in the end put together a tidy game.

- Green is playing just about his best ever year.

- PJ. Not spectacular, but is being given lots of ground time. This one was perhaps not a huge surprise.

- McLean, Jones and Moloney seems a bit one-paced but it's worked surprisingly well. Our clearances have been respectable.

- The biggest one for me is the startling difference between our early rounds and now with our skills... We have improved out of sight. It's a completely different side. Bailey said that's what they would focus on and it worked. Surprising how a bit of transparency goes a long way.

I think the cons will come out when the side settles in the second half of the year. If you look at new coaches in recent years... like at the Saints, the worst period is the first 12 rounds where everyone finds their homes. The second half will show a LOT, and next year will really be where we come to learn the MOST about him...

I will say though, Y_M, that he's not even halfway to putting together his side yet. So I'll judge him when he has his own 22 in there. If it's a good 22 for modern footy, then it's a pass mark. 12 players does not a premiership team make.

Lets just hope he gets the team playing Hard and tough on Consecutive weeks. Sunday's Game against Richmond is Vital. No use being Pumped up one week and weak as the next. Richmond are going to hit us hard. Bailey must be ready for this.

I wish him well. i want him to succeed.

- Generally it seems he's playing young players more readily... happy to play 18 year-olds rather than blooding them in the VFL for 3 years.

One of the myths about Daniher is he didn't play the kids. To suggest it was common practice to leave them in the VFL for 3 years is just rot.

These players played in their first year under Daniher:

Lamb, Simmonds,Green, Wheatley, Whelan, Bruce, Thompson, Armstrong, Miller, Smith, Rivers, Hunter, Ferguson, Sylvia, McLean, Davey, Jones, Bartram, Frawley, Petterd and Garland. I've left out drafted players who had prior AFL experience.

Players to miss: Speers (0), Taylor (0), Clarke (1), O'Brien (0), Breese (0), Craig (0), Gill (7), Molan (0), Rogers (2), Bell (45), C Johnson (21), Bate (33), Dunn (23), Newton (10), Buckley (5), Neville (0), Weetra (2). Games in brackets and correct at beginning 2008 other than Weetra.

Now the only players drafted not to get a go in their first year of any note are Bell, Bate, Dunn and arguably Newton and Buckley. Bell was injured for much of his first year, Bate, Dunn and Newton were very underage picks so the fact they didn't get a go was not surprising. They are all talls too.

All the rest are failures at AFL level. Not one has crafted a career elsewhere.

For the record I agree with YM, we have failed to develop our youth and that is a large reason why we don't have a "star" and Daniher may well have been part of that.

But to say he left 18 yo to rot in the VFL for 3 years is just utter rot.

Bailey has done well to get a number of players to take decisive steps forward in half a season.

Daniher was definately weak when it came to developing young kids. I would suggest that this is a level of micro-management which had to be sacrificed while Daniher was taking on so many other duties. It's worth noting that Bailey has the services of two quite reputable development coaches, Sandringham's former coach Mark Williams and it's Kelly O'donnell for number two (correct me if I'm wrong on O'donnell). This is on top of the Sandy coach, which was all Daniher had in that role during his time.

So it's not just Bailey, but the new coaching structure which would be working on this. Credit also to Connolly in this area.

But the absolute defining difference to my mind is what Dappa Dan described as transparency - the coach said 'we need to work on the following things and that is what we're going to work on', and then they did.

Unfamiliar, but very welcome.

These players played in their first year under Daniher:

Lamb, Simmonds,Green, Wheatley, Whelan, Bruce, Thompson, Armstrong, Miller, Smith, Rivers, Hunter, Ferguson, Sylvia, McLean, Davey, Jones, Bartram, Frawley, Petterd and Garland. I've left out drafted players who had prior AFL experience.

Players to miss: Speers (0), Taylor (0), Clarke (1), O'Brien (0), Breese (0), Craig (0), Gill (7), Molan (0), Rogers (2), Bell (45), C Johnson (21), Bate (33), Dunn (23), Newton (10), Buckley (5), Neville (0), Weetra (2). Games in brackets and correct at beginning 2008 other than Weetra.

To put that in to context, of players who were drafted straight on to our senior list we've had games from only Morton. No senior games out of Grimes, McNamara, Cheney, Martin or Maric. If you count the rookies as well then it doesn't really help the equation.

If senior games played as first years is the criterion for assessing youth development, then Bailey actually comes up worse. Of course, it's a pretty bad criterion to use.

Bruce and Green came from late in the draft and have been around for 8 years now, regardless of what you think about them now.

Bruce was a late pick, but Green from memory was a 1st round draft pick (pick 17 or 18?), one pick before Wheatley in the same draft.

If senior games played as first years is the criterion for assessing youth development, then Bailey actually comes up worse. Of course, it's a pretty bad criterion to use.

I tend to agree. However, Fan didn't assert that games in first year was the way to assess youth development - he just rebutted a point about ND blooding 18 year olds for 3 years, rather than play them.

on the radio today neita talked about how having the development coaches has been great this year, as it's allowed the club to develop the players much better...

However, Fan didn't assert that games in first year was the way to assess youth development - he just rebutted a point about ND blooding 18 year olds for 3 years, rather than play them.

I wasn't arguing against Fan, more so trying to reinforce his point. Guess I failed miserably.

ur wrong yze_magic regarding sylvia. you claim that Dean Bailey has developed col sylvia because he understands that he belongs as a forward and then you state that he averages 18touches a game. The truth is, his numbers are only that high because he was being played off the half back line.

Dean Bailey came from Port Adelaide with a reputation for nurturing young talent and turning them into legit league footballers.

In just his first 11 weeks at the MFC, I believe he has done more with our players development then Neale Daniher done over his entire 10 years. Danihers weakness was developing his youngsters, and it cost us big time.

Already in 2008 look what Bailey has done.

- Colin Garland has emerged as if from nowhere in a key back post. This is no co-incidence. If you think back to pre-season, Bailey was asked which MFC players had impressed him most at his new club, and Garland was the first name he mentioned. (Another was Simon Buckley, who has also improbed)

- Has turned Matthew Warnock into a very solid backman. Warnock has been on the list for ages, and quite simply did nothing under Daniher. In the last few weeks he has taken on and beaten some quality forwards (Roughead, Cloke etc..)

- Has unearthed Austin Woneaimirri, who has taken the league by storm.

- Has played number 4 pick Cale Morton from the very first round, and Morton has delivered the goods.

- Gave Brent Moloney a classic spray at quarter time of the Freo game about long kicks to no mans land. Straight away, Beamer changed his game, eradicated the low percentage long-kick and has been in great form ever since (shame he is injured now). Daniher had 4 years to change that part of Brents game, yet either didnt bother or failed miserably.

- Colin Sylvia has emerged under Dean Bailey. He is averaging about 18 touched and 6 marks a game, and had 6 shpots on goal vs the Pies. Now that Bailey knows he is best used up forward, Colin will get better and better.

Anyway, they are a few examples. Feel free to add more. I am glad we got Bailey, and glad Daniher went.

I don't agree 1 bit Garland has been one out of the box but he also mentioned Weetra who is a joke, so I think it's more luck than anything that he has improved so quickly(like Rivers in '04).

Warnock has been given a chance due to the woeful form of Carroll and has taken it so it was more about opportunity than anything.

Aussie (Davey in '04)

Morton has been OK nothing to rave on about though. I wonder if Bruce kicked the way Morton kicked on the weekend what you would say about him.

Moloney and Sylvia were never fully fit under Daniher. I still don't rate them Moloney still can't hit a target and Sylvia had the chance to turn the game and didn't with poor kicking not the only one mind you (Green and Yze come to mind) but until he can win us some games he will continue to be a disappointment. I still think he will be better off at half back.

Bruce was a late pick, but Green from memory was a 1st round draft pick (pick 17 or 18?), one pick before Wheatley in the same draft.

Incorrect. We were excluded from round one in the draft that year for salary cap breaches.

Green was 19 and Wheatley 20.