Just to put some of this in context, article on the HUN site about us trying to pinch Collingwood's number two in recruiting, Jason Taylor. Still with one year left on his contract apparently.

Not sure if it's to become number one at Melbourne, or to bring in support for Viney.

http://www.heraldsun...f-1226279995438

LOVE THIS

We are so bad ass atm

Doing what we want, when we want for our own benefit, move over

The Dees have made no apologies for their aggressive administrative play as they continue to bolster the football department.

Edited February 23, 201213 yr by Jordie_tackles

We have been trampled on for too long.

Jim Stynes must see this club play in september..deep not just making up rubbish numbers. Neeld understands what we need. He has been in the middle of it.

Action starts this weekend.

Why?

BP was effectively told who to recruit last year from the senior coach all within the space of a couple of months of Neeld arriving.

I believe Viney would be very competent at such a role. Surrounded by the FD as it stands right now, Viney will have ample support to facilitate the functions involved in recruiting. There is no reason to think it's a weird appointment. Interesting, but hardly weird.

No. Thats not true. BP had three picks in the draft 36, 52 and 54. Picks 36 and 52 were typical BP picks and we punted pick 54 on Sellars. Not unusual. And your allegation provides no logical reason why the role was not replaced. i think from the Hun we are trying to poach another Clubs recruiting manager. Nasher is right. It would be surprising if we merger an important function in the FD permanently with another function.

LOVE THIS

We are so bad ass atm

Doing what we want, when we want for our own benefit, move over

Chill. Its a piece of Hun media fluff. MFC are doing what you would expect to do. Find another recruiting manager. We have done nothing yet.

What part was spin Rhino? I stated the situation as it is.

You are the one who is making baseless assumptions, fearmongering and trying to convince everyone the sky is falling in.

What is it exactly that you expected in this situation Rhino?

There is always problems and issues coming up- it is how the problem is handled that governs the success of the business.

So tell me again what exactly you expected in this situation especially when you consider every other club had their head recruiters locked up for the year. Make a rushed decision and get stuck in a contract with someone you are realistically looking to replace in 10 months or appoint an interim head and conduct a wide ranging recruitment process to get the best available?

So instead of sitting there potting the decision made, come up with a better solution....

Or perhaps you should just take a moment to really reflect.

We have lost a Recruiting Manager. We have been unable to recruit a replacement at this stage. We are trying to do it (Refer Hun). It is not a 10 month appointment. It is not a rushed decision. Its simple situation that does not require concocted versions of events. I'll let you reflect on that.

Just to put some of this in context, article on the HUN site about us trying to pinch Collingwood's number two in recruiting, Jason Taylor. Still with one year left on his contract apparently.

Not sure if it's to become number one at Melbourne, or to bring in support for Viney.

http://www.heraldsun...f-1226279995438

That puts a bit of context to it; if we are after him we may not be able to secure him until his current contract expires hence the temporary appointment.

Having Todd Viney in the recruiter's driving seat will give us the opportunity to do a Phil Scully in reverse. Since young Jack's involvement in football will be somewhat limited in 2012 and he's played with and against many of the players in the talent pool that's going to form the basis for the most selections, it will be the son who will have all of the direct inside knowledge on the ability and character of the players. Don't forget that Jack played in SA in 2010 (Under 16 national champs) and TAC Cup and the Vic Metro team in 2011. Todd would have seen a fair bit of the action and what he's missed would have been seen by Barry Prendergast's able assistants who remain as support staff.

If they missed anything they can always revert to this thread which I started whilst warming the chair for the next appointment -

An aid to recruiting.

Today's story about poaching the Collingwood recruiting bloke shows that we're active in filling the breach and gives me much more confidence that we're far more active in improving the club than some might have us think.

I'm quite bemused by the assertions that TV is somehow an inadequate appointment in this position.

As the club says, I would've thought there was a natural progression into this role from the one he was originally doing.

And the role he was originally in would now have been superceded by the 3 line development coaches.

The opposite of TV now being too stretched because he has to perform both roles.

Quite logical, really.

I don't think the appointment is ideal, but clearly they couldn't attract a candidate they deemed worthy of the appointment. If this is the case than I respect that they didn't make an appointment for the sake of it. The club has numerous spotters and talent identification experts, as evidenced by the hordes of numbers that sit in on strategic pre-draft meetings.

As I said, not ideal, but not necessarily worthy of the misery that it will no doubt cause some on here.

Ben, you should be consistent and decide that this is ideal as it is the decision of the board and they are beyond question.

I'd hope that this decision remains a gap-fill for 8 months and that the reason it was made was to address a gap that could not be better filled or that a desired candidate is not available until next year. 'Jobs for the boys' is a legitimate concern...and we just need to check on this as things develop. No panic, but don't abandon scrutiny just to tow the party line.

We have lost a Recruiting Manager. We have been unable to recruit a replacement at this stage. We are trying to do it (Refer Hun). It is not a 10 month appointment. It is not a rushed decision. Its simple situation that does not require concocted versions of events. I'll let you reflect on that.

Wow Rhino. Now you've done a complete 180 and are approving of the clubs decision on this.

Obviously you slept on it and some common sense has prevailed in the morning. Good work.

Well, I guess Phil $cully isn't available or affordable now.............so.............next best.

Does Phat Phil have a brother? Just a thought

That puts a bit of context to it; if we are after him we may not be able to secure him until his current contract expires hence the temporary appointment.

Yes, that article gives the move some sense.

It's been quite funny reading poster's contortions to make this into a logical move.

He's a knowledgeable temp while we are luring who we want. It's still not ideal to have him move sideways and down, however.

Ben, you should be consistent and decide that this is ideal as it is the decision of the board and they are beyond question.

Why ? Where have I said that the Board is beyond question ? Are you usually disingenuous ?

I try to judge decisions and circumstances on their merits. If I'm not in a position to judge, because I'm not fully armed with the disclosure of all facts, I may give an organisation the benefit of the doubt, especially if I feel that all things considered they're deserving of such generosity. Others prefer to guess.

A life lesson for you, Tim. Some people will happily criticize certain posters, but wouldn't dare criticize others under the exact same circumstances. They'll look at the poster's name before they decide to respond. That's not how I roll. If I want to congratulate the Board I will, if I want to criticize the Board I will. I'll publicly agree with someone that I may have typically been at loggerheads with and vehemently disagree with others that I tend to instinctively favour on most issues. Many people aren't comfortable with such plain speak. Oh well.

It's called not playing favourites. Try it some time.

Edited February 24, 201213 yr by Ben-Hur

Wow Rhino. Now you've done a complete 180 and are approving of the clubs decision on this.

Obviously you slept on it and some common sense has prevailed in the morning. Good work.

"Because Bex is Better"

No. Thats not true. BP had three picks in the draft 36, 52 and 54. Picks 36 and 52 were typical BP picks and we punted pick 54 on Sellars. Not unusual. And your allegation provides no logical reason why the role was not replaced. i think from the Hun we are trying to poach another Clubs recruiting manager. Nasher is right. It would be surprising if we merger an important function in the FD permanently with another function.

Picks 36, 52 and 54 were hardly typical of BP. Neeld wanted bigger bodies and they were drafted last year in both the ND and RD, and not forgetting Clark during trade week. Sellar was chosen with input from Craig and possibly Viney - hardly a punt as you put it.

Wow Rhino. Now you've done a complete 180 and are approving of the clubs decision on this.

Obviously you slept on it and some common sense has prevailed in the morning. Good work.

I am not approving of it. You dont get it twice now. Keep reflecting. Maybe you should indulge in some of your own message. Have a sleep in as well.

Picks 36, 52 and 54 were hardly typical of BP. Neeld wanted bigger bodies and they were drafted last year in both the ND and RD, and not forgetting Clark during trade week. Sellar was chosen with input from Craig and possibly Viney - hardly a punt as you put it.

For starters where does it suggest BP is anti bigger bodies given he recruited Tappy and Gawn last season.

And for the record Josh Tynan at 185/76 is hardly a "bigger body".

And Sellar is a 4 yr AFL player who has platyed 21 games and underwhelmed. We fretted pick 54 and 1 yr contract on him.....Its a punt, a relatively low risk one but its a punt nevertheless.

Clark was a trade and specific decision to target a player. We also chased Hale last year in the same manner. Its hardly a Neeld taking over on that basis. And the efforts on Clark start way before Neelds appointment.

What's with the re writing history to suit an argument! It's not 'Revionist' as Marxism and Communism has nothing to do with the MFC and AFL!! Just a stupid word some like to use to try and make themselves look intelligent

When was Clark ever going to come to the Dees in DB's time. It's been well document Neeld and co took advantage of a stalemate between the Dockers and Lions.

And the recruitment on Sellar was an informed choice, as are all drafts and trades. Information provided by employees of a club. Just goes to show some information is just not right or worthy. Just like on this thread

Always having to have the last word does not make one right, or being argumentative for the sake of serving ones self need to let out anger or stroke ones own ego

For starters where does it suggest BP is anti bigger bodies given he recruited Tappy and Gawn last season. And for the record Josh Tynan at 185/76 is hardly a "bigger body". And Sellar is a 4 yr AFL player who has platyed 21 games and underwhelmed. We fretted pick 54 and 1 yr contract on him.....Its a punt, a relatively low risk one but its a punt nevertheless. Clark was a trade and specific decision to target a player. We also chased Hale last year in the same manner. Its hardly a Neeld taking over on that basis. And the efforts on Clark start way before Neelds appointment.

The conspiracy thread is chock full of these suggestions! Did you not bother to read any of it?

Tynan is 186/77 from the club website. Where do your stats come from? He'll be a strong lad.

Clark was secured only after Neeld gave the club a hurry up and boarded a plane to Brisbane. Neeld and co are to be credited with that deal getting done.

Tynan played as a KPB in the TAC cup. He showed form and strength against bigger opponents. Strength at that level was not an issue

I am not approving of it. You dont get it twice now. Keep reflecting. Maybe you should indulge in some of your own message. Have a sleep in as well.

For starters where does it suggest BP is anti bigger bodies given he recruited Tappy and Gawn last season.

And for the record Josh Tynan at 185/76 is hardly a "bigger body".

And Sellar is a 4 yr AFL player who has platyed 21 games and underwhelmed. We fretted pick 54 and 1 yr contract on him.....Its a punt, a relatively low risk one but its a punt nevertheless.

Clark was a trade and specific decision to target a player. We also chased Hale last year in the same manner. Its hardly a Neeld taking over on that basis. And the efforts on Clark start way before Neelds appointment.

You are kidding yourself Rhino....Neeld And Schwab went up to Brisbane on a mission, stayed in a crappy motel room..& met Clark for Breakfast in a 5 star Dining room...That was according to Mark Neeld...But i am sure sure you would know more than the coach & CEO....RKB.

Edited February 24, 201213 yr by why you little

You are kidding yourself Rhino....Neeld And Schwab went up to Brisbane on a mission, stayed in a crappy motel room..& met Clark for Breakfast in a 5 star Dining room...That was according to Mark Neeld...But i am sure sure you would know more than the coach & CEO....RKB.

I missed that gem.

Yes, Neeld was a strong factor in securing Clark. Only a smidgen behind money.

I missed that gem.

Yes, Neeld was a strong factor in securing Clark. Only a smidgen behind money.

I am pretty sure they had to find suits on the saturday Morning before Breakfast...(great Movie Sequence) Lets go to Brisvegas...like now.!

No. Thats not true. BP had three picks in the draft 36, 52 and 54. Picks 36 and 52 were typical BP picks and we punted pick 54 on Sellars.

It seems pretty clear to me that Neeld had massive input in picking Taggert at 36.

From media articles written when he was first appointed Mark Neeld got advice from Malthouse to be involved with everything in the first 12 months at the club.

Neelds speech at the AGM reflects that he had a big say in picking Taggert.

I missed that gem.

Yes, Neeld was a strong factor in securing Clark. Only a smidgen behind money.

Let's hope his performances reflect on his pay packet.

Regardless, for some to discount Neelds influence in securing Clark is just ignorant.

Chill. Its a piece of Hun media fluff. MFC are doing what you would expect to do. Find another recruiting manager. We have done nothing yet.

What planet have you been living on?

We have been unbelievably proactive in trying to add the highest quality personnel to our football club, and that has been the philosophy since Neeld arrived.

We have every right to be excited about future appointments.

When was the last time Melbourne FC have been so aggressive?

I am not approving of it. You dont get it twice now. Keep reflecting. Maybe you should indulge in some of your own message. Have a sleep in as well.

For starters where does it suggest BP is anti bigger bodies given he recruited Tappy and Gawn last season.

And for the record Josh Tynan at 185/76 is hardly a "bigger body".

And Sellar is a 4 yr AFL player who has platyed 21 games and underwhelmed. We fretted pick 54 and 1 yr contract on him.....Its a punt, a relatively low risk one but its a punt nevertheless.

Clark was a trade and specific decision to target a player. We also chased Hale last year in the same manner. Its hardly a Neeld taking over on that basis. And the efforts on Clark start way before Neelds appointment.

Wowsa.

Wake up big guy.

Viney is clearly warming the seat until we get the guy we want, (looks like Collingwood's recruiter as the hun alludes to).

Nobody should be worried. We are still trying to acquire the best in the business for every vacancy at our club.

Best offseason feeling I have ever had!