Dear Bailey Knockers,

[youami 53]

We’re not flying, nor are we strolling, perhaps dawdling, but we are moving. Our coach, despite the media scrutiny refuses to use youth as an excuse, he refuses to put blame on the previous list managers, and he refuses to lose faith in the team he has been putting together now for the last 2 years.

Let us look at the facts, when Bailey arrived we had 3,713 games of experience on our list, names such as Bizzell, Brown, Pickett, Ward, Godfrey, Neville, Ferguson and our only player with trade value Johnstone (who he we traded for a very reasonable pick 14 – Jack Grimes) were delisted/retired/traded. That’s 963 games of experience gone in one year. But wait, it gets better.

Push forward to 2008, again Bailey cuts hard, names such as Neitz, Holland, Yze, White, Carroll, Chris Johnson, Weetra, Bode were moved on, those departures lost us a further 1149 games of experience.

Two important things to note, not one of the players we have let go has gone on to be better players (look at Jolly, Simmonds, Bishop, not including Thompson and Bassett though as they were homesick), and all players have been replaced by rookies (not Moorcroft, not Pickett, not Ellis, the list goes on).

Every decision Bailey has made has been a tough decision, he could have kept Johnstone if he wanted immediate results, he could have picked Ashley Sampi as it was easier to sell to our members than Stef Martin at the time, we could have paid the dollar amount Brent Prismall demanded and traded a pick, but Bailey has decided to grow his own.

None of the players that we have let go (21 players) have done anything anywhere else, of which only one had trade value. When you take over a list with, for want of better words, 20 ‘worthless’ players, you aren’t starting with a good base. In fact you have to go a long way back to push forward.

Let’s give him time to the right the wrongs. The moment we rush this rebuild (Jordan McMahon at Richmond) is the moment we take 2 steps back.

Stick with Bail’s and the administration, we’re still many years away from any real success so let’s support the blokes now, the same blokes that will deliver us a premiership in the future, hopefully back to back to back.

[H_T 2,941]

Good post. But I must say there is one minor error in my opinion. Darren Jolly has kicked on in Sydney.

[youami 53]

Good post. But I must say there is one minor error in my opinion. Darren Jolly has kicked on in Sydney.

Maybe i didnt make it clear. I meant not one of the players let go by Bailey has been any good at another club, unlike players like Jolly, etc.

[Rogue 585]

Maybe i didnt make it clear. I meant not one of the players let go by Bailey has been any good at another club, unlike players like Jolly, etc.

That's how I read it initially with regards the 21 players, it doesn't make sense any other way.

However, this point could be somewhat confused:

Two important things to note, not one of the players we have let go has gone on to be better players (look at Jolly, Simmonds, Bishop, not including Thompson and Bassett though as they were homesick), and all players have been replaced by rookies (not Moorcroft, not Pickett, not Ellis, the list goes on).

H_T got it right when he said it was a good post though - it's why I haven't been too concerned or disappointed about our performance.

While guys like Brown, Ward, Bizz, Godfrey, TJ, Holland, Neitz, Yze, White, etc. had their faults (particularly late in their career for the better players), they were also mature bodies with an ability to be at least somewhat effective.

It was always going to be a huge ask to expect kids to consistently play up to a decent standard.

[H_T 2,941]

Two important things to note, not one of the players we have let go has gone on to be better players (look at Jolly, Simmonds, Bishop, not including Thompson and Bassett though as they were homesick), and all players have been replaced by rookies (not Moorcroft, not Pickett, not Ellis, the list goes on).

Yes, this part youami/Rogue. It is confusing.

[youami 53]

fair enough, i should have slotted Bailey's name in that sentence somewhere.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

FWIW, Bailey should be credited for make some hard strategic decisions following the collapse of the sides performances in 2007.

Many of the cuts Bailey made were obvious and necessary. The delists in 2007 and 2008 were hardly surprising as they werent part of the future. But for record Brown and Pickett announced their retirements prior to the end of 2007.

Bailey inherited contracts for fading stars like Neitz, White and Yze. He did the right thing and slowly and respectively removed them from the lists unless their bodies gave up before.

If culture was a be a big issue with Bailey then TJ was an obvious casualty but the Club did well getting a first round pick in Grimes. I probably got more out of the fact that the Club were quick to remove Carroll from the list. It showed what would and would not be tolerated. And TJ was never going to deliver immediate results as the No 1 midfielder heavily tagged and overweight and sloppy attitude of Sampi would not have sold a membership. There was nothing tempting there.

With the exception of TJ all the retirements and delists were obvious and none of them had any trade or AFL value.

And next year will be a litmus test Bailey and some of the players. There are a few who have to deliver but who wont. And if Bailey is here for an extended time then he will have to make some hard decisions on some of the talented youth who dont fit the picture at MFC.

Then there can be a rightful comparison with the trades for Jolly, Simmonds etc. Mind you we traded Simmonds because we had Jolly come through. Jolly cracked the sads because he could not get game time against White the then AA ruckman. Jolly was ready to walk on the Club. The Club took the sensible decision at the time. Its easy in hindsight to be critical without understanding the facts and issues at the time.

And I am sure Bailey if he survives will have trades/delists that potentially bite him back. Its the nature of AFL.

However I hope Bailey holds his nerve and makes the hard decisions that are necessary. There are more to come.

[beelzebub 22,760]

At some point in time Bailey will need to trade a similar quality for similar.. I was going to say like for like but some may get confused. What might need to happen is deals involving players of similar calibre but different types ( positions etc ) may need to be done. Some no doubt will cry foul or bey for blood but this too will be a chance to see his smarts in action.

Edited July 22, 2009 by belzebub59

[Jaded No More 60,192]

Good summary Rhino.

Bailey made the obvious cuts, but also put his balls on the line when he traded a fan-favourite in TJ. That trade has paid off BIG, and is exactly the sort of stuff I expect Bailey to keep on doing.

Ladder position means nothing at the moment, in fact, the lower we are, the better off we are.

What interests me is the development of our young players, and IMO there has been a huge improvement in our list overall. Players have come on, they have shown new found versatility, they have been challenged and they have shown glimpses of an ability to carry through DB's game plan.

I'm also happy that Bailey is not afraid to drop under performing senior players, or giving young kids big tasks (e.g.- Grimes on Chapman).

So far, Bailey has done an excellent job given the state of our list and where we are in the rebuilding process. He has stuck to his guns, he has put a lot of time and energy into our kids, and it's slowly but surely paying off.

Whether he can bring us what we all ultimately want, is another question altogether, but I'm positive that Bailey's work over the last 2 years will help us significantly in any future flag challenges.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

Just a thought, would being a tanking advocate preclude that person from criticising Bailey's coaching in the current circumstances?

Edited July 22, 2009 by dandeeman

[Sir Why You Little 35,356]

I predict this years Draft weeks will be full on. Many Trades by Many Clubs, This year is it for a long time.

I have faith in Bails & our recruiting staff will get it right. Look at how much Potential Talent we have seen in the last 18 months.

We have recruited really well, but the job is not done. Later this year on those Draft Days. It is critical.

I Got Faith Man-Just Do it.

[CarnTheDees 52]

I am not a Bailey knocker, although since I also do not yet have blind faith then I am probably seen as one by some.

The only difficult decisions he has made with regard to the list have been TJ and to a slightly lesser extent axing Carroll. The rest were obvious and came no sooner or later than anyone with any sense would have done.

Credit goes to him because he has utterly refused to pick up 'used' players so far, especially since he only has a 3 year contract. I feel though that this was probably part of the deal - he gets the job on an initial 3 year period with the aim of a total rebuild, heading towards finals football in 2010+. And if he's shown he's on the right path then he'll get an extra 2 or 3 at the end of the first 3.

So in terms of list management so far I am entirely satisfied.

The area of possible concern lies in what the players are doing on the field. From the games I have seen in the Bailey era (live and on TV) I haven't seen much to provide a lot of encouragement that he is a good coach (as opposed to manager). I'm not overly concerned with the actual results, but the ball movement, accountability and overall structure seem to be an attempted imitation of Geelong's ball carry with Hawthorn's zoning and Sydney's flooding. But in an ugly, ineffective way and with a mostly vacant forward line.

Not writing him off or calling for his head, just taking my time before I jump headlong onto the bandwagon.

The big question that will start being asked in the media in the next month or so will be about his contract. Previous discussion on here has had some people saying we should re-sign him this season for an extra 1 or 2 because the media attention will be so intense next year that it will detract from his concentration. I'm not sold on this argument, and think that a full review should be conducted either very late, or at the end of next season. If the board are convinced that his first 3 years have shown enough, then they should give him another 2.

[rpfc 27,692]

Just a thought, would being a tanking advocate preclude that person from criticising Bailey's coaching in the current circumstances?

To a certain extent it would.

2008 and 2009 have been nothing years in terms of win/loss, it has been 'list management' since Rd 1 2008 - when Isaac Weetra and Colin Garland played ahead of more seasoned players. One developed into a beauty, the other...err, did not.

My advice would be that people can criticise the gameplan, development of players, and selection if you want to, but don't come back on here and say half way through next year "This bloke won only 7 of his first 44 games."

I've posted this a few times, and got the ire of DWNo25 I believe; we have been 'tanking' since halfway through 2007, and stepped it up when Bailey came to the club. The players we tried, the players we retired, the season ending surgeries, etc.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Credit goes to him because he has utterly refused to pick up 'used' players so far, especially since he only has a 3 year contract. I feel though that this was probably part of the deal - he gets the job on an initial 3 year period with the aim of a total rebuild, heading towards finals football in 2010+. And if he's shown he's on the right path then he'll get an extra 2 or 3 at the end of the first 3.

Possibly some merit in that.

Not writing him off or calling for his head, just taking my time before I jump headlong onto the bandwagon.

I think there are many in that position.

The big question that will start being asked in the media in the next month or so will be about his contract. Previous discussion on here has had some people saying we should re-sign him this season for an extra 1 or 2 because the media attention will be so intense next year that it will detract from his concentration. I'm not sold on this argument, and think that a full review should be conducted either very late, or at the end of next season. If the board are convinced that his first 3 years have shown enough, then they should give him another 2.

I dont think that is the thrust of the argument. I think it harks back to your paragraph about the LT outlook. If the footy club believe he is doing the right thing and they understand that the given the extent of the clean out and re build that has been done then they should extend his contract by another year to ensure that he is making coaching decisions for the LT future of the list rather than battling a week to week survival proposition. Its important that he coaches with LT perspective and not for the short term and compromise the Clubs interests. I think you can add the media effect on the longer it takes to re sign or sack Bailey. It does have a distabilising impact on the Club on the field and off the field as well.

[rpfc 27,692]

I dont think that is the thrust of the argument. I think it harks back to your paragraph about the LT outlook. If the footy club believe he is doing the right thing and they understand that the given the extent of the clean out and re build that has been done then they should extend his contract by another year to ensure that he is making coaching decisions for the LT future of the list rather than battling a week to week survival proposition. Its important that he coaches with LT perspective and not for the short term and compromise the Clubs interests. I think you can add the media effect on the longer it takes to re sign or sack Bailey. It does have a distabilising impact on the Club on the field and off the field as well.

It sure does.

And we are at the bottom point of the J curve here (or in Novemember we will be).

The coach of the MFC will need time to get us back into the finals, if the club still has faith in Bailey give him another year this October.

I, personally, don't see Bailey as the sort of bloke to try and save his job at the expense of the LT future. But for the sake of his hair follicles - give him another year.

[deeflog 679]

I predict this years Draft weeks will be full on. Many Trades by Many Clubs, This year is it for a long time.

Those trades will not include any high draft picks though, they are going to be locked away for safe keeping by the clubs holding them come trade week

[Rogue 585]

The only difficult decisions he has made with regard to the list have been TJ and to a slightly lesser extent axing Carroll. The rest were obvious and came no sooner or later than anyone with any sense would have done.

I agree. I don't think the TJ trade was outlandish at all.

[Sir Why You Little 35,356]

Those trades will not include any high draft picks though, they are going to be locked away for safe keeping by the clubs holding them come trade week

Nobody will be getting rid of High Draft Picks, i didn't say that.

That's why there will be a lot more trading second Tier. I don't think the extent of the GC 17 Situation is going to hit us all until it has happened on draft day. They are getting everything.

Which is why Cheap late season wins are of little use to us.

[Binmans PA 26,749]

we have been 'tanking' since halfway through 2007, and stepped it up when Bailey came to the club.

I disgaree. If we've 'tanked' at all so far, it would have been playing the kids from the start of last year. We wouldn't have allowed someone like TJ to run around and gather 40-odd touches and win by 40-odd points.

[Binmans PA 26,749]

I dont think that is the thrust of the argument. I think it harks back to your paragraph about the LT outlook. If the footy club believe he is doing the right thing and they understand that the given the extent of the clean out and re build that has been done then they should extend his contract by another year to ensure that he is making coaching decisions for the LT future of the list rather than battling a week to week survival proposition. Its important that he coaches with LT perspective and not for the short term and compromise the Clubs interests. I think you can add the media effect on the longer it takes to re sign or sack Bailey. It does have a distabilising impact on the Club on the field and off the field as well.

Good post, Rhino. I agree, completely.

Edited July 22, 2009 by AdamFarr

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,667]

we could have paid the dollar amount Brent Prismall demanded and traded a pick, but Bailey has decided to grow his own.

This is the one I disagree with. We should've gone harder for Prismall. This guy is A-Grade material who is ready to kick on with the Bombers in a big way. He is exactly the midfielder that we've been crying out for.

Essendon offered a pick in the 30's for him. I would've traded pick 19 for Prismall - a likely 8-10 year player that was a proven quantity at Geelong.

Edited July 22, 2009 by Bring-Back-Powell

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

This is the one I disagree with. We should've gone harder for Prismall. This guy is A-Grade material who is ready to kick on with the Bombers in a big way. He is exactly the midfielder that we've been crying out for.

Essendon offered a pick in the 30's for him. I would've traded pick 19 for Prismall - a likely 8-10 year player that was a proven quantity at Geelong.

Prisnall is neither proven quality at Essendon or Geelong. At this point, he is a capable player in the AFL but no star.

Prisnall did not want to come to Melbourne.

We got either Blease or Strauss. Get over it.

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,667]

Prisnall is neither proven quality at Essendon or Geelong. At this point, he is a capable player in the AFL but no star.

Prisnall did not want to come to Melbourne.

We got either Blease or Strauss. Get over it.

Prismall would've played the 2008 GF for a team that has depth the length of the Flemington Straight. He's been fantastic in his 6 games back from a knee reco. You're selling him way too short by calling him just 'capable'.

I'm countering the OP's assertion that we would've made a mistake by trading for Prismall. He would've been worth the bucks and the high draft pick.

Edited July 22, 2009 by Bring-Back-Powell

[youami 53]

Prismall would've played the 2008 GF for a team that has depth the length of the Flemington Straight. He's been fantastic in his 6 games back from a knee reco. You're selling him way too short by calling him just 'capable'.

I'm countering the OP's assertion that we would've made a mistake by trading for Prismall. He would've been worth the bucks and the high draft pick.

my understanding from a decent source was it was all about money. Prismall just wanted an opportunity to play and the money (which is totally fine by me, if he can get better money at essedon good luck to him, he owes us nothing). I've got no idea the amount he was after, however the Dees were not willing to pay it. At this stage Prismall looks good at Essendon, and maybe we should have paid the price. However, our list is nowhere near good enough to carry players coming back from knee injuries.

Even at the draft, Dees overlooked Jackson Trengrove and Tom Swift, both were highly rated, and it could be argued 'slipt'. As it turns out we got Blease who broke his leg, and strauss who has just undergone a shoulder reconstruction, but both of those are after the event.

We could have pipped the bombers with our 35th pick though, as bombers gave them pick 39. We got Bennell as it turned out.

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,667]

my understanding from a decent source was it was all about money.

Fair enough. There's not much you can do about it when you're competing with the big boys.