The difference between a "Bailey Team" and a "Daniher Team"

[praha 11,275]

Under Daniher, the seasons of 1999, 2001, 2003 and 2007 were shockers. Of those seasons, Melbourne became easy beats half-way through the season and they lost all respect. Even with a talented line-up that would turn things around the following year (except in reference to 2007), they lost confidence as a team and were blown out in every game.

Under Bailey, it's been one season, and while the club languishes in last place with only 2 wins, they are hardly "easy beats". They've lost consistently since the start of the year, yet, they've gone from bad to good, considering the inexperience of the cattle on the field.

In other words, Daniher couldn't (from my own recollection) lift the team up when they were down. Bailey has done so in a matter of weeks and has created a team of confident youngsters. Instead of getting blown away each week, we've put in solid efforts a majority of the time since round 3.

Today was a perfect example. A Daniher team, having lost to an average NM team last week, would have fallen into the Essendon's trap after Lloyd's mark of the year and gone down by 10-11 goals. What we saw was a Bailey team that said, "No...you might be better than us, but we can better you". They almost did. Kudos.

[Yencks 8]

exactly

after that lloyd mark, they could have easily lost the plot but they came within 9 points in the last qtr

not a bad effort

we have to win three out of four to lose a prioirity pick

cant see than happening

we are in goood shape