Neeld needs to go and speak to each player individually, and ask them "will you play to my game plan". Watch their eyes, and if they equivocate even slightly, give them a map to Berwick-Cranbourne Road and tell them not to come back until they are prepared to do so without question.

One weak link will bring the whole team down.

They mightn't like it, we mightn't like it, but HE is the coach. Like it or lump it.

Insubordination cannot be tolerated - bring in the firing squad!!

MFC has been too soft for too long.

Really? You think that will achieve something?

FFS

Everyone on here should go and have a look at the 'Behind the scenes' video on the club website.

It shows a revealing moment between a coach, who has had an enormous amount of nonsense thrown his way, and his family - relieved for each other after a great win.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/tabid/8667/contentid/456262/default.aspx

Edited June 5, 201213 yr by rpfc

100% regarding the enormous amount of nonsense thrown his way...

Everyone on here should go and have a look at the 'Behind the scenes' video on the club website.

It shows a revealing moment between a coach, who has had an enormous amount of nonsense thrown his way, and his family - relieved for each other after a great win.

http://www.melbourne...62/default.aspx

Yeah, I noticed that too.

Made me like him even more.

Everyone who posted comments regarding players' negative feelings towards the Neeld should have a look at the last few minutes coverage of the Essendon game. Is that a coach who isn't respected by his players? I don't think so, some how. Neeld's passion for his players and vice versa was on view for all to see.

Everyone who posted comments regarding players' negative feelings towards the Neeld should have a look at the last few minutes coverage of the Essendon game. Is that a coach who isn't respected by his players? I don't think so, some how. Neeld's passion for his players and vice versa was on view for all to see.

Yep.

The ground was bloody hard but the seeds have been sewn. I firmly believe the first sign of tangible growth was seen on Saturday night.

Forgive the metaphors.

Mark my words. If Melbourne doesn't become one of the most successful teams in the competition during Mark Neeld's tenure, it will mean there is something seriously wrong with the basic fabric of the club - something that no coach can fix. I have the ultimate faith in Neeld, and have done for a long time. I was absolutely pumped when I heard we'd picked him up.

Jesus bloody Christ! I hope I'm wrong about this one. What a thread this was.

isnt this depressing

It's a bit like having your life replayed on Judgement Day, isn't it?

Occasionally less than flattering

I think some people thought just because neeld came from collingpoo that he would be a good coach.

Yep, let's back neeld blindly for another 4 years. Yep, it's always the players fault.

Neeld hasn't got what it takes. His face squirms under pressure. He is a spiritual lightweight.

Viney as caretaker.

We need a proven premiership coach.

Let's go for malthouse or Roos.

Neeld is a bitter pill.

I saw it coming from a mile away.

Yep.

The ground was bloody hard but the seeds have been sewn. I firmly believe the first sign of tangible growth was seen on Saturday night.

Forgive the metaphors.

Mate, you seriously have NFI.

The moment i knew he wasnt gonna last 18 months was when he publicly sprayed out players.

The moment i knew he wasnt gonna last 18 months was when he publicly sprayed out players.

Not a bad rule of thumb, maybe, to write off anyone who is comfortable with "spraying out" the players? Or would you just apply it to coaches?

I'm curious as to your reasoning at the time - did you see an inevitable alienation of those players and consequent fracturing of club unity? Or was it "the vibe" - an infectious defeatedness/negativity being put out from Day one? Or a character defect put on display, with Neeld rejecting any teaching role, and being nothing but a front-runner? Were you thinking about the negative effect on marketing of the club - so that he must eventually fall foul of management? Or what? I'd really like to know what struck you so clearly in that first moment?

(Apologies to those sick of all this, but some of us are still trying to understand and learn.)

Neeld did the right thing bagging out the said players.

Trouble was he didn't have the experience as a coach to do it.

If Roos did the same or Lethal we would all be rapt.

Neeld did the right thing bagging out the said players.

Trouble was he didn't have the experience as a coach to do it.

If Roos did the same or Lethal we would all be rapt.

Coaching is about man management more than anything else. AFL isn't like sports like soccer where you can ship in & out players by transfer all in one, you have to work with what you have. When there is a problem with performance it's a lot easier to get rid of one coach than 20 players. If you can't man manage the majority of your playing list to get the best out of them the coach is the one to go usually not the players. If Roos or Lethal came in & did the same thing as what Mark Neeld did then we would have the same result, the thing is Roos or Lethal wouldn't be that stupid.

Grant Thomas wrote an article on Neeld before his first game against Brisbane last year, in it he stated Mark Neeld may be the first & only coach to have ever lost his playing group before they've even played a game. At the time I thought typical Thomas dribble, but on reflection he was right. I don't think Roos or Lethal could or would ever do that.

Too many people had absolute blind faith in Neeld for far too long. He did not have the personnel skills or motivational skills to be head coach. His lack of personal skill was painfully obvious from almost his first press conference; this should have been picked up in the interview period. He made some horrible errors, pushed a game plan that was out dated, was easily defeated and completely inappropriate for the list we had. Neeld lost the players big time, oversaw the walkout of 2 of our best players (Moloney and Rivers), failed to develop any players. He took our club back 5 years. Statistically the worst coach in AFL/VFL history. I believe these statistics tell the horrible truth. A monumental mistake that has put the MFC on it knees. I don't think Graig is that good, I think its Neeld was that bad.

Neeld should have been fired at the end of last season, perhaps if the board had fired him when they should have they would not be now tendering their resignations.

Mixed feelings.

Hard nosed approach didn't work with everyone.

Some players improved, some hated his guts.

Recruiting has been very good, barring Gillies and jury's still out on Pedo.

I just hope that the team doesn't fall back into its free fall, unaccountable slippery slope.

Now for a midfield.

GNF - outside of your statement that Neeld was a terrible coach. All of the rest I am not about to swallow.

He was here for 18 months, so list management and player development are irrelevant judgements. His game style involved us being the team that played on the most from marks in the league - so that hardly falls into this around the boundary nonsense that he got tarred with.

And, again, he was here for 18 months, you can barely justify firing a coach after one season.

And as for the board, if they did fire a coach they had installed a year earlier I dare say we would be talking about them in the past tense regardless.

As for the 5 years setback - what a crock. Neeld is a failure but we are paying for past failures right now. We will see whether the tiny legacy of Neeld can be salvage in the next few years.

But he wasn't the destructive force you imply. The players didn't respond to the coach. The club responded with his firing. It happens.

The club continues on.

Coaching is about man management more than anything else. AFL isn't like sports like soccer where you can ship in & out players by transfer all in one, you have to work with what you have. When there is a problem with performance it's a lot easier to get rid of one coach than 20 players. If you can't man manage the majority of your playing list to get the best out of them the coach is the one to go usually not the players. If Roos or Lethal came in & did the same thing as what Mark Neeld did then we would have the same result, the thing is Roos or Lethal wouldn't be that stupid.

Grant Thomas wrote an article on Neeld before his first game against Brisbane last year, in it he stated Mark Neeld may be the first & only coach to have ever lost his playing group before they've even played a game. At the time I thought typical Thomas dribble, but on reflection he was right. I don't think Roos or Lethal could or would ever do that.

i understand your point but you miss one fact.

Neeld was bought in after the player mutiny of 186. Now that is not to say he was the right man to do the job, but he was certainly given the green light to sort out the playing list.

The board picked the wrong man to do the right job.

The same board that re appointed the CEO.

GNF - outside of your statement that Neeld was a terrible coach. All of the rest I am not about to swallow.

He was here for 18 months, so list management and player development are irrelevant judgements. His game style involved us being the team that played on the most from marks in the league - so that hardly falls into this around the boundary nonsense that he got tarred with.

And, again, he was here for 18 months, you can barely justify firing a coach after one season.

And as for the board, if they did fire a coach they had installed a year earlier I dare say we would be talking about them in the past tense regardless.

As for the 5 years setback - what a crock. Neeld is a failure but we are paying for past failures right now. We will see whether the tiny legacy of Neeld can be salvage in the next few years.

But he wasn't the destructive force you imply. The players didn't respond to the coach. The club responded with his firing. It happens.

The club continues on.

The play-on game style was only seen in the dying last weeks of Neeld tenure. It was a desperate attempt to save his job. Neeld attempted to install the 2010 Collingwood game plan. Good coaches look at the list a develop a game plan that plays to the strengths or the natural ability of the list. Neelds copied an old game plan, that teams knew how to defeat, which played to our weaknesses. Defending this is defending the indefensible for a senior coach.

Mixed feelings.

Hard nosed approach didn't work with everyone.

Some players improved, some hated his guts.

Recruiting has been very good, barring Gillies and jury's still out on Pedo.

I just hope that the team doesn't fall back into its free fall, unaccountable slippery slope.

Now for a midfield.

I think our midfield has improved the past couple of weeks.

It's an area we need to work on, but let's not forget, we have Viney to add to our midfield.

Another high draft pick along with hopefully the improvement on Trengove, we should be ok.

No.

a draft pick will not do it. To think that bringing viney in will make this a competitive midfield is so far off the mark.

some of the key pieces to the team that will make this a good side are in their mid 20s. Melbourne must be competitive next year. a high draft pick wont do that. I can not understand why people dont want the club to get a PP??!! take it and trade it for an established mid. we cant afford to wait another 3 years for toumpas, viney and another draft pick to develop.

And trengove is not a midfielder

Edited July 7, 201312 yr by Munga

The play-on game style was only seen in the dying last weeks of Neeld tenure.

No it wasn't. When he left we were leading, or choose to leading, the competition in play ons after marks.

If it was a last few weeks thing we couldn't have suddenly surged to the top overall.

I think our midfield has improved the past couple of weeks.

It's an area we need to work on, but let's not forget, we have Viney to add to our midfield.

Another high draft pick along with hopefully the improvement on Trengove, we should be ok.

One Viney is not enough. We need to develop more quick thinking and hard bodied inside mids from within, and pick up another couple.

We have Jones and Viney...

M Jones is a nice player but is best suited to a wing/flank role, Grimes has a tendency to cough it up close in..that could change. Trengove is currently serviceable and tidy but not explosive/quick thinking in close.

We need to have a look at Taggert ASAP, and I think Kent is tracking ok and may end up up a mid given time/commitment.

I also think Toumpas has a build that could develop and he may well do a lot of work on the inside as well.

Edited July 7, 201312 yr by dandeeman