Good to see. The less outside pressures the better. People always were critical of Clarksons re-appointment and look at what he has done. it just takes time. i remember people were saying they played the worst brand of football in 10years against St Kilda not long along.

Rome wasn't built in a day.

Yes but are they any good, that's the question that is yet to be answered. We have expectations and have had many times before, but will they be fulfilled this time?

Time will tell. That is what the list and FD need. I guess it won't be answered until the end of his tenure.

By the way, just out of interest, what are your expectations ?

Time will tell. That is what the list and FD need. I guess it won't be answered until the end of his tenure.

By the way, just out of interest, what are your expectations ?

Definite signs of continuing improvement in team performance over time.

Time will tell. That is what the list and FD need. I guess it won't be answered until the end of his tenure.

By the way, just out of interest, what are your expectations ?

My expectations? Well I'd like to see a competitive side that was able to at least get within a few goals of the other bottom sides. I'd like to see us win the occasional game and I'd like to see the players walk off the ground with their heads high. I never really expected us to be in the finals this year but I never expected them to serve up the tripe they did last Sunday. I'd like to see a game plan that will serve us in the coming years so we can progress up the ladder and unfortunately it isn't apparent at the moment.

Most of all I'd like to see the players show the same determination that players from other clubs do, you know the successful ones. I don't want to see them capitulate at the first sign of pressure as they have for the last God only knows how many years, you know get to the top with 6 games to go and then scrape in to the finals.

You?

Do the sums. This list is younger than any list we have had for two years. We have honest B/Cgraders in senior roles the rest are kids. We have not done a complete rebuilding like we have just done in that time period.

Agreed, we're a combination of tomorrow's footballers and yesterday's footballers with only a handful of today's footballers.

Agreed, we're a combination of tomorrow's footballers and yesterday's footballers with only a handful of today's footballers.

Correct, but that still does not excuse missing targets from 40 metres or handballing to someone in a worse position.

All players at AFL level should be able to do that, and after 5 months of training i was a little concerned.

3 more practise games to go.

Correct, but that still does not excuse missing targets from 40 metres or handballing to someone in a worse position.

All players at AFL level should be able to do that, and after 5 months of training i was a little concerned.

3 more practise games to go.

Well, some of us who actually gave the Shane Crawford article an ounce of creedence were probably prepared for a less than brilliant game skills wise and hence had more time to put things into perspective.

I agree it is still a concern but in context of our list and the players on the ground it is important to understand why we have skill errors. Yes, there were some genuine unforced errors (clangers) but the problem our youth will constantly face at AFL level is pressure and perceived pressure as a result of us not having enough top level senior players. Our over all game is slow and opposition teams dictate the play. Bailey knows exactly what is happening and he also realises that the senior players we have can only perform to a certain level which is on the whole inadequate. Our younger players will have to work harder under duress than their equivalents in nearly every other AFL team.

......................

It seems that the idea is to fill the team with high draft picks and the wins will follow. That's not coaching, that's list management. Very soon there will be two more clubs with better daft picks than we have recieved, and a bigger salary cap. We need to get more out of the current list.

I want to see average players become good, and good players great...................

With very few exceptions, you will only see "average players become good, and good players become great" when those average and good players are part of a good or great team. We needed the high draft picks, to develop into a good or great team.

When you have stars, the average player looks like a good player and the good player may even become great.

... and the reverse. Which is, for the most part, the present situation, and is one of the reasons why we fell apart on Sunday.

B

Well, some of us who actually gave the Shane Crawford article an ounce of creedence were probably prepared for a less than brilliant game skills wise and hence had more time to put things into perspective.

I agree it is still a concern but in context of our list and the players on the ground it is important to understand why we have skill errors. Yes, there were some genuine unforced errors (clangers) but the problem our youth will constantly face at AFL level is pressure and perceived pressure as a result of us not having enough top level senior players. Our over all game is slow and opposition teams dictate the play. Bailey knows exactly what is happening and he also realises that the senior players we have can only perform to a certain level which is on the whole inadequate. Our younger players will have to work harder under duress than their equivalents in nearly every other AFL team.

Good point, How good are our senior players and have they ever reached there potential?

If they have not reached their potential is it because of the inferior training facilities this club has had for years? or is it because they never quite pushed themselves through that extra barrier?

North Melbourne seem to always punched above their weight for many years (Having W.C up forward certainly helped that cause i know, but even after he left when a lot of people said "that's it for the kangas" they pushed on.

Are we lacking that collective belief that we as a club can be the best? That old x factor i call it.

I find some of the reactions pretty funny, particularly given the discussions that have been going on over the past year regarding a potential contract extension!

First, the majority view has been that we couldn't or wouldn't give DB a one-year contract extension, as we would have to (or be very likely to) sign him up for more than that. I disagreed emphatically with this view, and am glad that the Club has not decided we needed to give a two (or three!) year contract extension!

Second, the majority view has been that DB deserved a contract extension and/or that we must extend his contract. However, following Mike Sheehan's article, in which he states the obvious regarding DB - he ain't going anywhere - some are suddenly swayed by this argument when they've disregarded it before...perhaps I should change my username to Mike

Anyway, this is a molehill made out to be a mountain. AFL coaching contracts aren't worth the paper they're written on (in terms of a guarantee that you'll hold the job for the duration of the contract).

PS. It'd also be interesting to see how the views of user's have changed following NAB Cup Round 1. The mood on Demonland certainly seems to have changed.

You sound dissapointed that no one listens to you Rogue

Good point, How good are our senior players and have they ever reached there potential?

As individuals constantly performing under pressure, they probably have. As a collective group probably not and this is what has hurt us.

If they have not reached their potential is it because of the inferior training facilities this club has had for years? or is it because they never quite pushed themselves through that extra barrier?

North Melbourne seem to always punched above their weight for many years (Having W.C up forward certainly helped that cause i know, but even after he left when a lot of people said "that's it for the kangas" they pushed on.

Are we lacking that collective belief that we as a club can be the best? That old x factor i call it.

North Melbourne is an interesting revelation since probably 2008 when the game took it's first major spike in elite pace - I don't just mean running but ball use, decision making, reading the play etc. For some reason North simply perform and I can't put my finger on it apart from to say that they keep it simple. (The Carey era is was a completely different style of footy). On top of that, collectively they look sharper, better drilled and most importantly up to a base level of conditioning to be competitive with the best. They play tempo football and apart from when Laidley was on the outer they seem to still get the simple things right. I tend to think that our training is not as advanced as it could/should be and I don't know if that is because of the coach, the players or our overall set up as a club. My POV is that Olympic Park will make a profound effect on our whole regime and outlook - "belief" as you say. Perhaps we are training well by our standards but not AFL standards. Bailey came from Port Adelaide who are very good at training IMO so there has to be more to it. I do think that we will at some stage this season perform in some games where we are polar opposites to what we were on Sunday.

Good point, How good are our senior players and have they ever reached there potential?

If they have not reached their potential is it because of the inferior training facilities this club has had for years? or is it because they never quite pushed themselves through that extra barrier?

North Melbourne seem to always punched above their weight for many years (Having W.C up forward certainly helped that cause i know, but even after he left when a lot of people said "that's it for the kangas" they pushed on.

Are we lacking that collective belief that we as a club can be the best? That old x factor i call it.

Aside from Davey most of our players are honest B at best, but regularly C graders.

North had one of the top teams of the 1990s lead by Wayne Carey. However, this should not underplay that they had some really great players like Archer, Longmire, Blakey, Simpson and Bell during that period. Harvey is the last of the proud vintage which has served them well in the 00's.

I think if anything there is greater belief in the future than I have seen at the Club in the past 20 years. There is greater focus on the targets on and off the ground. I think the Club has the belief. They are prepared to look long term rather than some poster entrenched in the now.

As individuals constantly performing under pressure, they probably have. As a collective group probably not and this is what has hurt us.

North Melbourne is an interesting revelation since probably 2008 when the game took it's first major spike in elite pace - I don't just mean running but ball use, decision making, reading the play etc. For some reason North simply perform and I can't put my finger on it apart from to say that they keep it simple. (The Carey era is was a completely different style of footy). On top of that, collectively they look sharper, better drilled and most importantly up to a base level of conditioning to be competitive with the best. They play tempo football and apart from when Laidley was on the outer they seem to still get the simple things right. I tend to think that our training is not as advanced as it could/should be and I don't know if that is because of the coach, the players or our overall set up as a club. My POV is that Olympic Park will make a profound effect on our whole regime and outlook - "belief" as you say. Perhaps we are training well by our standards but not AFL standards. Bailey came from Port Adelaide who are very good at training IMO so there has to be more to it. I do think that we will at some stage this season perform in some games where we are polar opposites to what we were on Sunday.

I'd have to agree that our substandard training facilities haven't helped. The Junction Oval is a joke and the sooner we are into our home at Olympic Park the better. We've been amateurs playing in a professional comp for as long as I can remember. In saying this facilities don't excuse lack of effort. Collingwood seem to get every last drop out of a pedestrian bunch of players. Is it their facilities, I think it helps. Of course it's by no means the whole reason.

I'd have to agree that our substandard training facilities haven't helped. The Junction Oval is a joke and the sooner we are into our home at Olympic Park the better. We've been amateurs playing in a professional comp for as long as I can remember. In saying this facilities don't excuse lack of effort. Collingwood seem to get every last drop out of a pedestrian bunch of players. Is it their facilities, I think it helps. Of course it's by no means the whole reason.

Lack of effort can't be tolerated under any circumstances I absolutely agree mate but I think there was more too it than that on Sunday. I think we genuinely were shown what AFL in 2010 is about and many of the players who were putting in (lets say a "reasonable" effort) got a bit of a wake up call. Also our problem was that we spent too much effort on inefficient football due to the way our lack of speed was putting us in hot water. No doubt we were fatigued at the end of the game. I think our preparation was more the factor than simply just the effort but sure some players didn't dig in like they should have.

As individuals constantly performing under pressure, they probably have. As a collective group probably not and this is what has hurt us.

North Melbourne is an interesting revelation since probably 2008 when the game took it's first major spike in elite pace - I don't just mean running but ball use, decision making, reading the play etc. For some reason North simply perform and I can't put my finger on it apart from to say that they keep it simple. (The Carey era is was a completely different style of footy). On top of that, collectively they look sharper, better drilled and most importantly up to a base level of conditioning to be competitive with the best. They play tempo football and apart from when Laidley was on the outer they seem to still get the simple things right. I tend to think that our training is not as advanced as it could/should be and I don't know if that is because of the coach, the players or our overall set up as a club. My POV is that Olympic Park will make a profound effect on our whole regime and outlook - "belief" as you say. Perhaps we are training well by our standards but not AFL standards. Bailey came from Port Adelaide who are very good at training IMO so there has to be more to it. I do think that we will at some stage this season perform in some games where we are polar opposites to what we were on Sunday.

I agree with that. And i am hoping that the new Training facilities give our entire club the feeling that we can beat the Best the AFL has to offer.

The crux of it is that the standards the MFC has set are just that little bit under the Top AFL standards, regardless of age or experience.

Yes we have a young list with a lack of experience, but so did the Kangaroos last sunday.

NAB Cup or not, after that game those players would have looked at each other and said"We can do this"

Whereas our team are still not sure.

Somebody on here mentioned Timidity yesterday-That is a word i bought up about 5 years ago on here.

I honestly hope the Guts shown by our President over the last 6 months or so gets rid of that stinking word from this club forever...because it has existed at Melbourne.

Between 1971-1991 Hawthorn were always up there regardless of who played. There system was superb. Some of their players racked up around 100 games plus in the reserves before a senior game-Yes the system has changed, but all clubs exist under the same base rules.

Maybe Television has something to do with it-The Hawks can watch all those finals, show the new recruits & say this is our standard.

A lot of our glory years are on scratchy news reels which make them look more from another world.

John Kennedy got Hawthorn going by playing against Melbourne in the 50's He had had enough of being thrashed yearly.

I really hope this sort of thinking is behind the current Board and Dean Bailey, because if it isn't we will never make it.

In saying this facilities don't excuse lack of effort.

Agree. However the issue goes beyond just sub standard facilities. It includes medical personnel, fitness and development personnel and all off ground support. For example about 12-24 months ago MFC had a staff of about 50. WCE had a staff of nearly 200 fulfilling the same or greater functions. Some support upside there

Agree. However the issue goes beyond just sub standard facilities. It includes medical personnel, fitness and development personnel and all off ground support. For example about 12-24 months ago MFC had a staff of about 50. WCE had a staff of nearly 200 fulfilling the same or greater functions. Some support upside there

Absolutely spot on.

Agree. However the issue goes beyond just sub standard facilities. It includes medical personnel, fitness and development personnel and all off ground support. For example about 12-24 months ago MFC had a staff of about 50. WCE had a staff of nearly 200 fulfilling the same or greater functions. Some support upside there

yes...and in that time North have probably had a First Aider with a box of bandaids.... yet they still do it...when we dont !!...something in their water perhaps

Yes we have a young list with a lack of experience, but so did the Kangaroos last sunday.

NAB Cup or not, after that game those players would have looked at each other and said"We can do this"

Some food for thought......

I have pulled this off another site where there was a game experience comparison of MFC with Freo on Sunday and North

Here is MFC vs Freo

I've just done a quick calculation but our (MFC) 26 players had 1354 senior games of experience against 22 of theirs (I can't remember who the other 4 were) having 1798. And Davey only played half the game. We had 17 players with under 50 games, 7 with under 10 and only 4 with more than 100. It was an extraordinarily inexperienced list and just the reason why you can't play too many young players at once. Freo had 10 players with more than 100 games and 6 with more than 150.

And now the Kangas....

The Kanga's, who did really well, had 18 players who had played 1877 games (for comparison our entire primary and rookie list of 46 only has an additional 141 games on it, or put another way 7 rounds). I can't remember who the other 8 Kanga's players were but it wouldn't make much difference as only 3 players on their list who have played 30 or more games DIDN'T play - Wells (130), Edwards (40) and Lower (34) (although he might have played, I can't remember). They were at full strength effectively. The average age of that 18 was over 25. They had 13 players with more than 50 games and 8 with more than 100.

Some telling information there about where MFC is at. It should correct some chronic misconceptions around here.

Well in some respects I am bouyed by one particular example. A certain one James Frawley. Many wondered as to his potential and value when drafted in 06. A raw gangley tripping over his own feet sort. far too light to do any damage to a wet rag bu the has grown ( literally ) and morphed into quite a handy backman who's real straps have yet to be hit.

This is the sort of time frame we will have to get used to in terms of it all coming together.

Having said this... still no excuse for the poor execution of basic footy.

Agree. However the issue goes beyond just sub standard facilities. It includes medical personnel, fitness and development personnel and all off ground support. For example about 12-24 months ago MFC had a staff of about 50. WCE had a staff of nearly 200 fulfilling the same or greater functions. Some support upside there

Absolutely. I didn't realise we were that far behind in terms of staff. What are the current numbers.

Some food for thought......

I have pulled this off another site where there was a game experience comparison of MFC with Freo on Sunday and North

Here is MFC vs Freo

I've just done a quick calculation but our (MFC) 26 players had 1354 senior games of experience against 22 of theirs (I can't remember who the other 4 were) having 1798. And Davey only played half the game. We had 17 players with under 50 games, 7 with under 10 and only 4 with more than 100. It was an extraordinarily inexperienced list and just the reason why you can't play too many young players at once. Freo had 10 players with more than 100 games and 6 with more than 150.

And now the Kangas....

The Kanga's, who did really well, had 18 players who had played 1877 games (for comparison our entire primary and rookie list of 46 only has an additional 141 games on it, or put another way 7 rounds). I can't remember who the other 8 Kanga's players were but it wouldn't make much difference as only 3 players on their list who have played 30 or more games DIDN'T play - Wells (130), Edwards (40) and Lower (34) (although he might have played, I can't remember). They were at full strength effectively. The average age of that 18 was over 25. They had 13 players with more than 50 games and 8 with more than 100.

Some telling information there about where MFC is at. It should correct some chronic misconceptions around here.

That is interesting Reading-thanks Rhino- i still beleive the kangas punch above their perceived weight, which is where we have to get to in time.

Could we have played a more experienced side last week to maybe grab a win & then played more kids kids this weekend? or was that the best side available (casey is too far for me to watch any training sadly)

I know we have to give the kids game time, but a win would have done so much for that group.

There are pros and cons both ways. If DB is just sticking to his guns regardless and playing kids i can live with that. I just hope the young guys don't get shell shocked too early.

Some telling information there about where MFC is at. It should correct some chronic misconceptions around here.

Good analysis and not only were Freo and North significantly more experienced, they were also playing at their home grounds which can't be underestimated.