MFC INSIGHT

[2014-Flag 0]

Terrific post, and a great initiative by the club. The framework is very impressive, but as we all know 60-70% of success is in implementation. My guess is the club itself would agree they are slightly behind on expectations of the plan so far this year, but im sure they would be confident of eventual progress once our injuries work their way through the system.

To me though my biggest concern is the coaching at the club. I'm still not confident they have a winning gameplan, at least to my mind they have not revealed it on the field yet.

I guess though that like anything in business, or sport, you have to trust the professionalism of the Board and the senior managment. They have appointed the Football staff and if they are not satisfied with progress they will take action. We are a long way from that though, but without progress this year I certainly think questions should be asked and if necessary action taken. This is not necessarily on DB himself as he is contracted to the end of 2011, but just like we need to continually renew and improve our list, so we need to in our coaching staff as well.

[Choko 493]

I think most fair minded supporters would agree that it is almost impossible to say whether Dean Bailey is a good or bad coach yet. He cannot be blamed for poor execution, and in terms of list management, he has been fairly ruthless in pursuing our next premiership. On the other hand, at 12% winning record, we have definitely not shown the ability to beat sides that perhaps we could, and our improvement has been slow at best.

I think the comment around patience is the best we can do. If Dean Bailey is a good coach, that will be obvious as he grows the list around him. If he is not, we will in my opinion have a list that someone else can work with towards a premiership.

[Oliver Hill 0]

How do you rate a 'star' tho? Every persons view might be different.

I rate Dav, Green and Bruce as 'stars' - Slyvia close.. throw in Moloney, Jones, Capt mac, Jamar -add Riv, Warnock, Frawls down back (and all these players having been playing together for years now) ..

I rate 'stars' as champions of the game, not just champions of their club - think Carey, Lockett, Dunstall, Hird, Voss, Ablett, Judd, Scarlett, Diesel, Harvey, Buckley, ...

Then there are elite, or those one might grade as A+ - think Lynch, Crawford, Hall, Fevola, Cox, Richo, West, Aker, Neitz, Tredrea, Fletcher. I think Adam Cooney will end up in this category by the end of his career.

The Melb players you list aren't 'stars' and they're not A+. Getting the idea ?

The last 'star' or true champion the MFC had was Robert Flower.

And if you think I'm being harsh maybe you can list the flags we've won in the last 40 years. Stars have a higher liklihood of playing in a premiership team. Lord knows we desperately need to unearth a couple. It's been a long time between drinks.

It's little wonder we're presently at the far reaches of the ladder and it's little wonder some supporters have no real clue as to why we're there.

My Brother asked Ron Barassi at a function recently "who was the last champoin at the club ?". Rightly, his response was "we haven't had one since Flower, have we ?".

No Ron, we haven't. Glad you get it. Oh, for a friggin 'star'.

Edited March 17, 2010 by Oliver Hill

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

I rate 'stars' as champions of the game, not just champions of their club - think Carey, Lockett, Dunstall, Hird, Voss, Ablett, Judd, Scarlett, Diesel, Harvey, Buckley, ...

Then there are elite, or those one might grade as A+ - think Lynch, Crawford, Hall, Fevola, Cox, Richo, West, Aker, Neitz, Tredrea, Fletcher. I think Adam Cooney will end up in this category by the end of his career.

The Melb players you list aren't 'stars' and they're not A+. Getting the idea ?

The last 'star' or true champion the MFC had was Robert Flower.

And if you think I'm being harsh maybe you can list the flags we've won in the last 40 years. Stars have a higher liklihood of playing in a premiership team. Lord knows we desperately need to unearth a couple. It's been a long time between drinks.

It's little wonder we're presently at the far reaches of the ladder and it's little wonder some supporters have no real clue as to why we're there.

My Brother asked Ron Barassi at a function recently "who was the last champoin at the club ?". Rightly, his response was "we haven't had one since Flower, have we ?".

No Ron, we haven't. Glad you get it. Oh, for a friggin 'star'.

Jim Stynes being the dominant ruckman of the comp for many years and winning a brownlow and four Blueys deserves a mention I would have thought

[Oliver Hill 0]

Jim Stynes being the dominant ruckman of the comp for many years and winning a brownlow and four Blueys deserves a mention I would have thought

Close and possibly the most deserving after Flower, but no cigar.

A+

[jayceebee31 761]

Back on the topic- I thought the insight was superb- showed how intricate every thing is as well as how every component works in tandem

[DemonDan... 77]

The Melb players you list aren't 'stars' and they're not A+. Getting the idea ?

Actually I think its you thats missed the boat on this one OH.

My point was, its open to interpretation - theres no right or wrong answer. You've just given me your opinion, its not right or wrong or an idea I have to 'get'.

Imo and maybe others, the dees players I listed are Stars of the game - but not Champions (yet).. some may think they are already Champions!

On the other hand, the players you listed as Champions I would agree with..

Theres no recognised, or scientific grading system for players - so its all just opinion.

Jim Stynes being the dominant ruckman of the comp for many years and winning a brownlow and four Blueys deserves a mention I would have thought

Jim Stynes / G. Lyon were both Champions of the game IMO, to play for us since Flower.

Jimmy revolutionised the game.

Davey did too in 04', and now just needs to consolidate it for the rest of his career and he too, will be a Champion IMO.

Close and possibly the most deserving after Flower, but no cigar.

A+

See this is what I mean.

Who made you the the person that decides how everyone should think of.. or 'class' our players and other Afl players??

[Oliver Hill 0]

My point was, its open to interpretation - theres no right or wrong answer. You've just given me your opinion, its not right or wrong or an idea I have to 'get'.

You're right. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

I have a filing system for opinions.

Edited March 18, 2010 by Oliver Hill

[Sir Why You Little 37,039]

How do you rate a 'star' tho? Every persons view might be different.

I rate Dav, Green and Bruce as 'stars' - Slyvia close.. throw in Moloney, Jones, Capt mac, Jamar -add Riv, Warnock, Frawls down back (and all these players having been playing together for years now) and you've the makings of a decent team, one that Should be good enough to get us over the line more than 4 or 5 times imo, stars or no stars..

I guess thats where we disagree..

The players you rate as STARS are not stars, this includes all the other names you listed as well-The Reason being none of them have played in a Premiership or even got close.

They are Good players but far from stars. They may be stars within the club supporters but not in the wider AFL Fraternity.

We need to raise our expectations, i understand after 46 years of starvation this is not easy.

[Little Goffy 14,546]

We have had 3 years to progress- time to show something.

LOL.

That's a bit like timing the ambulance response to a car crash, starting from when the driver started drinking.

2007-2008 we were still in the downward slide.

We've had one year of coming back up, so far. ONE.

[e25 5]

I LIKE that analogy.

Nice work.

[jayceebee31 761]

LOL.

That's a bit like timing the ambulance response to a car crash, starting from when the driver started drinking.

2007-2008 we were still in the downward slide.

We've had one year of coming back up, so far. ONE.

Respect your point- but hungry for turnaround.Hiope it does not take 3 years with your explanation.

[jnrmac 20,065]

Says who?

The club has already talked about what they're looking to get out of this year. But either it's not getting through to you, or you don't/can't accept it.

B

So are you suggesting 4-5 wins is an 'improvement' on last year when we didn't want to win games????

Hmmm???

[e25 5]

So are you suggesting 4-5 wins is an 'improvement' on last year when we didn't want to win games????

Hmmm???

Tell yourself that if it makes you feel better, but had we been "trying to win" how many more games do you really think we'd have won?

To be of the view that we were trying to lose at all times is wrong.

There were occasions, and very few of them, when we tried to contain the number of wins we had.

Nothing more.

We were not a good side in 2009.

[jayceebee31 761]

Tell yourself that if it makes you feel better, but had we been "trying to win" how many more games do you really think we'd have won?

To be of the view that we were trying to lose at all times is wrong.

There were occasions, and very few of them, when we tried to contain the number of wins we had.

Nothing more.

We were not a good side in 2009.

Fact- results are as follows:

Won 4 games.

RD5 beaten by Adelaide by 17 points

RD7 beaten by West Coast in Perth by 8 points

RD 8 " " bulldogs by 7 points

RD 9 Hawks by 22 points

RD 17 " " SWANS BY 18 POINTS- WHILST TANKING.

RD 18 " " RICHMOND BY 4 POINTS " "

Bailley says we need to reduce our loosing margins by at least 15 points therefore:

So the above shows we could have easily WON 7 games .Therefore NOT TO WIN AT LEAST 7 this year would have to be deemed as a regression.Especially when we had several injuries last year as well. Jamar, Garland, Wonaemirri,Buckley etc.. could not be considered for virtually the whole year and when Jamar returned Meeson crashed. Therefore I say we need to win at least 7 games especially with our draw & development. Your thoughts?

Edited March 18, 2010 by jayceebee31

[Hobbits's 17]

Therefore I say we need to win at least 7 games especially with our draw & development. Your thoughts?

and if we win 6 instead of 7, what then ?

[e25 5]

Fact- results are as follows:

Won 4 games.

RD5 beaten by Adelaide by 17 points

RD7 beaten by West Coast in Perth by 8 points

RD 8 " " bulldogs by 7 points

RD 9 Hawks by 22 points

RD 17 " " SWANS BY 18 POINTS- WHILST TANKING.

RD 18 " " RICHMOND BY 4 POINTS " "

Bailley says we need to reduce our loosing margins by at least 15 points therefore:

So the above shows we could have easily WON 7 games .Therefore NOT TO WIN AT LEAST 7 this year would have to be deemed as a regression.Especially when we had several injuries last year as well. Jamar, Garland, Wonaemirri,Buckley etc.. could not be considered for virtually the whole year and when Jamar returned Meeson crashed. Therefore I say we need to win at least 7 games especially with our draw & development. Your thoughts?

I'd aim for at least 7 wins but to see less as a failure would be to ignore the fact we are now a younger side with less experience.

At times this will lead to losses that should have been wins.

This year, for me, is about development. That is where I will measure MFC's success for 2010.

[jayceebee31 761]

and if we win 6 instead of 7, what then ?

We have not reached our goal set by Bailey

[jayceebee31 761]

I'd aim for at least 7 wins but to see less as a failure would be to ignore the fact we are now a younger side with less experience.

At times this will lead to losses that should have been wins.

This year, for me, is about development. That is where I will measure MFC's success for 2010.

I don't know what last years was if it wasn't development.I feel every year is development-continuous improvement.But we should be striving for success- and that means 7 wins based on Bailey's statement of improvement of at least 15 points from last year.

[e25 5]

I don't know what last years was if it wasn't development.I feel every year is development-continuous improvement.But we should be striving for success- and that means 7 wins based on Bailey's statement of improvement of at least 15 points from last year.

ok, I believe to judge the team's success based on a number of wins would not give a true representation of the team's progress.

At this stage. Going forward you'll be right, but not yet.

But i guess we don't see eye to eye on this matter.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

We have not reached our goal set by Bailey

No by you it seems.

I don't know what last years was if it wasn't development.I feel every year is development-continuous improvement.But we should be striving for success- and that means 7 wins based on Bailey's statement of improvement of at least 15 points from last year.

This list is younger than MFC lists of the past three years. Its far younger than any other list in the competition.

Bailey has said continuously its about getting at least 50 games into young players.

Your expectation that this year is not about development is naive. We would all like more wins on the board. But it may, may not be the case. And if injuries mount like they are to key players then MFC are going have a set back.

Its not about "Righto boys you have had your year of development, now go out and win some games".

You say you understand the issue of PATIENCE but your point of view does not reflect it.

[Rogue 585]

What the hell are you talking about?????????????

I think he's suggesting that the 'value' of the year won't be measured in wins.

IMO, if you want a simplistic measure of progress, percentage is more helpful than wins at this stage.

I think percentage gives you a better idea of how competitive we've been over the course of the season.

[H_T 3,047]

No by you it seems.

This list is younger than MFC lists of the past three years. Its far younger than any other list in the competition.

Bailey has said continuously its about getting at least 50 games into young players.

Your expectation that this year is not about development is naive. We would all like more wins on the board. But it may, may not be the case. And if injuries mount like they are to key players then MFC are going have a set back.

Its not about "Righto boys you have had your year of development, now go out and win some games".

You say you understand the issue of PATIENCE but your point of view does not reflect it.

Where 'o where is the flashing neon lights quote button when you need it !!??

[Roost It 1,434]

The parameters for a successful year are different year to year, This year I'd say Bailey has several indicators he and the club will be using to judge the "success" of the year.

Quarters won

Average Points for

Average Points against

Individual player development - games into young players

Team plan development - are we beginning to execute the team plan?

I'd say Bailey would be happier to see improvement in all these areas over and above winning games.

I'm sorry to say but winning is not that important this year.

[demon3165 2,718]

When are some people going to understand that this year is not all about wins, Christ, the club from the Prez, CEO, the football department have flagged this late last year and all of this year, but some still don't get it, what does it take for them to understand this?.

Edited March 19, 2010 by demon3165