Mark Neeld in the media

[old55 23,854]

TBH I think he made a mistake and he knows it. Not a big one, not a hanging offence, just a small error and he's learning on the job.

Most likely explanation.

[old dee 24,072]

I am bemused by this thread.

For the last three years we have been a poor team.

We have been coached by a group that bought very little success culminating in a 30 goal loss.

We now have a very different coaching panel for the next few years.

I am happy to give the new chief the benefit of the doubt in many areas for at least the next year.

I find it hard to believe he could be worse than the last mob.

Time will tell but lets forget the coaching panel until they have a min 10 games behind them.

[Demonsterative 3,021]

In case others can't see what the inconsistency is I'll explain my view. Neeld names Watts and Davey in the media and, depending on your interpretation, challenges them or criticizes them. This was reported on or about 10th November. He had been appointed coach on 17th September. The players are on their preseason break and he speaks to them for the first time early in October (the day of the B&F). The players then return for PS training some weeks later. So he's make his Watts and Davey comments with very little chance for them to demonstrate to him their attitude or approach and I, along with others, thought this odd.

On 11 January, some two months later he states he doesn't want to individualize. But he already has in November.

I think it's an inconsistency, nothing more. It's not a hanging offence, it doesn't mean he's no good as a coach, it doesn't mean I don't support him or have confidence in him and it doesn't mean the players involved responded badly to it. It was just "odd" and I'm interested to see if I can work out why he did it. No logical explanation has been offered here that I'm happy with. TBH I think he made a mistake and he knows it. Not a big one, not a hanging offence, just a small error and he's learning on the job.

For clarification, I fully expect him to make these statements privately and if Bailey had made them I'd accept them because Bailey had a history with these players. Neeld didn't. And I tdon't buy this rot about making public statements for the supporters, if he wants to do that he shouldn't and wouldn't individualize.

Again, very good post. At the end of the day MN is still very much respected regardless of pointing out an aspect that some may have disagreed with. Im of the opinion that his media performance is improving. No BIG tough guy comments.

I love the changes he has made. It feels like he has bought the FD into this century. I hope (and believe) he is the 'messiah' until he proves otherwise.

[Sir Why You Little 37,407]

In case others can't see what the inconsistency is I'll explain my view. Neeld names Watts and Davey in the media and, depending on your interpretation, challenges them or criticizes them. This was reported on or about 10th November. He had been appointed coach on 17th September. The players are on their preseason break and he speaks to them for the first time early in October (the day of the B&F). The players then return for PS training some weeks later. So he's make his Watts and Davey comments with very little chance for them to demonstrate to him their attitude or approach and I, along with others, thought this odd.

On 11 January, some two months later he states he doesn't want to individualize. But he already has in November.

I think it's an inconsistency, nothing more. It's not a hanging offence, it doesn't mean he's no good as a coach, it doesn't mean I don't support him or have confidence in him and it doesn't mean the players involved responded badly to it. It was just "odd" and I'm interested to see if I can work out why he did it. No logical explanation has been offered here that I'm happy with. TBH I think he made a mistake and he knows it. Not a big one, not a hanging offence, just a small error and he's learning on the job.

For clarification, I fully expect him to make these statements privately and if Bailey had made them I'd accept them because Bailey had a history with these players. Neeld didn't. And I don't buy this rot about making public statements for the supporters, if he wants to do that he shouldn't and wouldn't individualize.

Are you frightened of a straight shooter attitude? There was nothing odd about what our coach did at all. What was more odd was Jack Watts "odd" attitude to winning or losing quoted in the press 2 years earlier.

[Lutz 76]

In case others can't see what the inconsistency is I'll explain my view. Neeld names Watts and Davey in the media and, depending on your interpretation, challenges them or criticizes them. This was reported on or about 10th November. He had been appointed coach on 17th September. The players are on their preseason break and he speaks to them for the first time early in October (the day of the B&F). The players then return for PS training some weeks later. So he's make his Watts and Davey comments with very little chance for them to demonstrate to him their attitude or approach and I, along with others, thought this odd.

On 11 January, some two months later he states he doesn't want to individualize. But he already has in November.

I think it's an inconsistency, nothing more. It's not a hanging offence, it doesn't mean he's no good as a coach, it doesn't mean I don't support him or have confidence in him and it doesn't mean the players involved responded badly to it. It was just "odd" and I'm interested to see if I can work out why he did it. No logical explanation has been offered here that I'm happy with. TBH I think he made a mistake and he knows it. Not a big one, not a hanging offence, just a small error and he's learning on the job.

For clarification, I fully expect him to make these statements privately and if Bailey had made them I'd accept them because Bailey had a history with these players. Neeld didn't. And I don't buy this rot about making public statements for the supporters, if he wants to do that he shouldn't and wouldn't individualize.

Yeah, I get that, but saying he doesn't want to individualise doesn't mean he can't ever in the future, and can't have ever done it before in the past.

He just doesn't want to in this instance. And I have no issue with that.

Just as I have no issue with him publicly naming Davey and Watts as players he has challenged.

In fact, it's pretty obvious he has challenged every player on the list - he has just shared the content publicly in regards to those 2.

And none of the players should be concerned about hiding the content of their own challenges.

If they are, they've missed the point and are being petty.

[rumpole 539]

Most likely explanation.

Why do you say that?

It's one of a number of explanations but I don't see it as anywhere near the most likely.

Closer to the least likely in my opinion but what the hell, there's a lot of nit picking going on here lately about what people say and mean and what they don't say and mean.

[old dee 24,072]

Are you frightened of a straight shooter attitude? There was nothing odd about what our coach did at all. What was more odd was Jack Watts "odd" attitude to winning or losing quoted in the press 2 years earlier.

Spot on Mate.

Just what the MFC needed a little straight shooting.

[Sir Why You Little 37,407]

Most likely explanation.

So you and Fan seriously believe our Coach made a mistake?

Haha! Post of the day....I don't think so. He probably spent the last few years watching our club over the fence remember.

Time to toughen up a bit boys.

[Sir Why You Little 37,407]

Spot on Mate.

Just what the MFC needed a little straight shooting.

Fcuk yes. I don't want to be "nice" anymore. It gets no results. Fair yes but not nice.

[Whispering_Jack 31,341]

I too can't believe what some people are reading into Mark Neeld's comments.

I think he's been very straight forward, logical and consistent in how he's dealt with the issue of giving a few of his star players a rev at the start of pre season. That he compliments them two months later for responding the way he wanted them to suggests that he's happy with what he's achieved so far. There are no Martians or Seagulls in Neeld's world - thank god for that!

I have no problem with Neeld's approach and it doesn't appear that any of the players have either.

[old dee 24,072]

Fcuk yes. I don't want to be "nice" anymore. It gets no results. Fair yes but not nice.

To take that a stage further

I want the Dees to be hated for being a relentless mean and narsty team who win constantly

Every week

I want to hated by Collingwood, Essendon, Hawthorn and Carlton.

Not pitied like the last 5 years.

[Footynut 302]

In case others can't see what the inconsistency is I'll explain my view. Neeld names Watts and Davey in the media and, depending on your interpretation, challenges them or criticizes them. This was reported on or about 10th November. He had been appointed coach on 17th September. The players are on their preseason break and he speaks to them for the first time early in October (the day of the B&F). The players then return for PS training some weeks later. So he's make his Watts and Davey comments with very little chance for them to demonstrate to him their attitude or approach and I, along with others, thought this odd.

On 11 January, some two months later he states he doesn't want to individualize. But he already has in November.

I think it's an inconsistency, nothing more. It's not a hanging offence, it doesn't mean he's no good as a coach, it doesn't mean I don't support him or have confidence in him and it doesn't mean the players involved responded badly to it. It was just "odd" and I'm interested to see if I can work out why he did it. No logical explanation has been offered here that I'm happy with. TBH I think he made a mistake and he knows it. Not a big one, not a hanging offence, just a small error and he's learning on the job.

For clarification, I fully expect him to make these statements privately and if Bailey had made them I'd accept them because Bailey had a history with these players. Neeld didn't. And I don't buy this rot about making public statements for the supporters, if he wants to do that he shouldn't and wouldn't individualize.

In my personal opinion Neeld had to pitch for the job, which meant list analysis from albeit from afar. He had an intimate knowledge of what makes good teams and saw these two as those with greatest potential. He then put together his first impression of them with what he had observed from outside and made public statements after already issuing them the challenge personally.

Although he says he is not looking to individualise I think that is in terms of talking up the team aspect of things rather than individuals. Reality is when it comes to training every single player is different and has a different program.

[Rocky Racoon 7]

My first time in posting on Demonland. I support the direct approach taken by Neeld - I don't think that Norm Smith would be pussyfooting around given the club's recent years' history.

[monoccular 17,719]

( perhaps similar thoughts expressed in Mark 9:24 )

For Denis' relatives, (the Pagans), who don't know how to look up the good book: Immediately the boy’s father exclaimed, “I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!”

So it is that Mark we recruited to coach us out of the wilderness - looks far too young, but he does offer very pertinent thoughts for the long-suffering Demon supporters, who must surely be totally overwhelmed by disbelief.

Good pick up, Crompton's the man

[monoccular 17,719]

In my personal opinion Neeld had to pitch for the job, which meant list analysis from albeit from afar. He had an intimate knowledge of what makes good teams and saw these two as those with greatest potential. He then put together his first impression of them with what he had observed from outside and made public statements after already issuing them the challenge personally.

Although he says he is not looking to individualise I think that is in terms of talking up the team aspect of things rather than individuals. Reality is when it comes to training every single player is different and has a different program.

Good observation: I would certainly add Colin Sylvia to the "greatest potential" group, but for various reasons he has been handled differently.

[monoccular 17,719]

My first time in posting on Demonland. I support the direct approach taken by Neeld - I don't think that Norm Smith would be pussyfooting around given the club's recent years' history.

Welcome, Rocky. Enjoy your time here, and I hope you don't have to suffer frustration for nearly as long as many of us here have had to.

And I agree with your reference to the great Norm - involved in some way in all but a handful of our flags. Time for a no nonsense approach, which Neeld has shown every indication of implementing.

[The Great Pretender 480]

I too can't believe what some people are reading into Mark Neeld's comments.

I think he's been very straight forward, logical and consistent in how he's dealt with the issue of giving a few of his star players a rev at the start of pre season. That he compliments them two months later for responding the way he wanted them to suggests that he's happy with what he's achieved so far. There are no Martians or Seagulls in Neeld's world - thank god for that!

I have no problem with Neeld's approach and it doesn't appear that any of the players have either.

A voice of reason.

Thanks

[Freddy Fuschia 773]

In case others can't see what the inconsistency is I'll explain my view. Neeld names Watts and Davey in the media and, depending on your interpretation, challenges them or criticizes them. This was reported on or about 10th November. He had been appointed coach on 17th September. The players are on their preseason break and he speaks to them for the first time early in October (the day of the B&F). The players then return for PS training some weeks later. So he's make his Watts and Davey comments with very little chance for them to demonstrate to him their attitude or approach and I, along with others, thought this odd.

On 11 January, some two months later he states he doesn't want to individualize. But he already has in November.

I think it's an inconsistency, nothing more. It's not a hanging offence, it doesn't mean he's no good as a coach, it doesn't mean I don't support him or have confidence in him and it doesn't mean the players involved responded badly to it. It was just "odd" and I'm interested to see if I can work out why he did it. No logical explanation has been offered here that I'm happy with. TBH I think he made a mistake and he knows it. Not a big one, not a hanging offence, just a small error and he's learning on the job.

For clarification, I fully expect him to make these statements privately and if Bailey had made them I'd accept them because Bailey had a history with these players. Neeld didn't. And I don't buy this rot about making public statements for the supporters, if he wants to do that he shouldn't and wouldn't individualize.

You miss the point - he made a statement to the playing group as well as the individuals, not the supporters.

The irony is that a small group of supporters have freaked out for no good reason whatever.

[Lutz 76]

You miss the point - he made a statement to the playing group as well as the individuals, not the supporters.

The irony is that a small group of supporters have freaked out for no good reason whatever.

That's an overstatement.

I'd say they are being critical of his perceived contradictory actions.

I don't have a problem with trying to hold the coach accountable... I just don't think there is anything to be held accountable to in this case.

[bing181 9,447]

In case others can't see what the inconsistency is I'll explain my view.

You don't need to. If others can't see what the inconsistency is, it's maybe (probably?) because there is no inconsistency.

[Harcourt 146]

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/tabid/8667/contentid/414627/default.aspx

I've got no problem with Neeld naming players previously then not wanting to single anyone out for praise now. It's too early for praise. I didn't really see his Davey/Watts comments as a bad thing though, more just laying down a challenge to two players with tremendous upside compared to their output last year. Davey because he was basically horrible and Watts because he showed a lot before fading out a little bit in the end.

[Sir Why You Little 37,407]

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/tabid/8667/contentid/414627/default.aspx

I've got no problem with Neeld naming players previously then not wanting to single anyone out for praise now. It's too early for praise. I didn't really see his Davey/Watts comments as a bad thing though, more just laying down a challenge to two players with tremendous upside compared to their output last year. Davey because he was basically horrible and Watts because he showed a lot before fading out a little bit in the end.

Well said.

[Pink Freud 378]

I agree, it seems strange. A contradiction possibly

Possibly but only if you make the mistake of misinterpreting Neeld's original comments and their purpose.

Some here suggested that Neeld humiliated the players he targeted but, as maurie and some others explained, this was simply not justified on closer examination.

And as footynut has gone to great lengths to explain in this thread, Neeld is smart enough to know how to handle his list and the individuals who comprise it.

His opening gambit (together with Misson) was to point out how far the group was behind that which is standard at the top clubs and then to point out what was necessary to emulate them. Now, after a couple of months' hard work, he is building his players up by telling them that he's pleased with their attitude and how they're working hard to achieve their goals but there's more hard work to come.

He's working to a plan and I can see no contradictions in that at all.

[rolly 149]

if neeld had the boys doin pre-season in a submarine in the antarctic i would trust that this was a good move.

i have faith in Gary Lyon and the board that hired Neeld in the first place.

i have faith in Dave Misson, Neil Craig and co.

these people were brought on because they are leaders in their fields, people who know what they're talking about.

if name and shame works for some people he will name and shame them. if witholding praise until a later date works then thats what he's going to do.

can't see why there should be any doubters 71days away from our first real game.

[s-t-i-n-g-a 439]

You don't need to. If others can't see what the inconsistency is, it's maybe (probably?) because there is no inconsistency.

Yep spot on.

And it seems Jack has responded well to the challenge. Just like he did when made the sub last year. MN might over his time in the caper have developed an understanding of how different players are best motivated...