Don't Blame Neeld

[beelzebub 23,312]

The solace and to a degree semblance of conmfort I sit from all of this is that if one looks back to where the likes of the Cats, The Hawks, Pies were when they started on their respective journeys to Premierships ( in recent times ) they were absolute rubbish. They were deplorable, all but laughable ....and then eventually they turned...turned into decent teams.

I can only hope this is our journey also...and a similar start.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

The solace and to a degree semblance of conmfort I sit from all of this is that if one looks back to where the likes of the Cats, The Hawks, Pies were when they started on their respective journeys to Premierships ( in recent times ) they were absolute rubbish. They were deplorable, all but laughable ....and then eventually they turned...turned into decent teams.

I can only hope this is our journey also...and a similar start.

We're on the right track then, first part of the journey completed with honours.

[Harrisonrules 273]

He's been handed a poo sandwich.

We may or may not ever recover from the post-Daniher/Bailey/Cameron/Prendergast armaggedon ... but it's not his fault.

At least give him a couple of years to see if he can do something, ANYTHING, with this bunch of hacks.

Its got nothing to do with fault. It's about the capacity of the coaching panel to improve the performance of team and players. I'm not overly fussed about the win loss ratio. At the beginning of the year I spoke to friends about my interest being in rounds 5 to 15. I believed early games with new coaching panel was going to be tough. Probably by the end of the year injuries and tiredness for young bodies would be taking its toll.

Edited April 17, 2012 by Harrisonrules

[old dee 23,704]

Its got nothing to do with fault. It's about the capacity of the coaching panel to improve the performance of team and players. I'm not overly fussed about the win loss ratio. At the beginning of the year I spoke to friends about my interest being in rounds 5 to 15. I believed early games with new coaching panel was going to be tough. Probably by the end of the year injuries and tiredness for young bodies would be taking its toll.

So far HR you are right on the money.

Look forward to your thoughts after round15

[old dee 23,704]

The solace and to a degree semblance of conmfort I sit from all of this is that if one looks back to where the likes of the Cats, The Hawks, Pies were when they started on their respective journeys to Premierships ( in recent times ) they were absolute rubbish. They were deplorable, all but laughable ....and then eventually they turned...turned into decent teams.

I can only hope this is our journey also...and a similar start.

Well we have got the start perfect BB

Hope the rest is correct and works as well.

[The Chazz 4,077]

And I would agree there is no excuse for insipid football.

\Put pressure on some of these players and they just go to water - not good enough.

I think Mark Neeld said much the same.

"Insipid football" is one of the cultural issues which has to be banished from the club, but it won't happen overnight.

Previously we have bounced back the week after such a terrible showing, but then in a couple of weeks we're back to same old, same old, again.

Neeld's challenge is to break that pathetic cycle.

The most frustrating thing now is, this was the 3rd week in row it has occurred.

But, unlike before there was a lot going on around it.

Players were being tested - unfortunately several of them showed they are not up to the task.

I would rather know this now as we approach round 4, than wall papering over the cracks (as we did before) up until round 18 or so as we have done so many times, in the hope of just making the finals with what is in reality an "insipid team".

This should mean, come the end of the year, some players will have proven themselves worthy, others will be let go rather than staying on in the hope they can get us "there".

If we are still witnessing "insipid football" regularly, by this time next year, then the blow torch can enter the coach's box.

Until then, I am prepared to let it be aimed at the players and to give the new structures, game plan(s) etc., time to settle.

He has ticked that box. In previous years we have been on a rollercoaster, and when we've played poor and the media turn the blow torch on, we've come out and won. We have been a lot more consistent this year, especially when the media turn its attention on to us.

[thaipantsman 180]

OK Range Rover!

What do Demon Punters think of these comments/view of Neeld made clear today? To put in perspective the comments were made after critique of MFC culture by Malthouse.

After a series of tough pre season talks our Coach seems to have softened his approach considerably. These comments are worrying for the average Melbourne Punter. If Neeld is indeed of this opinion why did we move from Bailey who at least had us pushing the 8 last year.

"The culture of the Melbourne footy club is pretty strong, the core of the player list are working really hard, their morale is good, the way they train is pretty good and we are expecting higher standards," Neeld said on Monday.

Asked about how the club was working when he arrived late last year, Neeld replied: "I didn't notice any problems at all."

As much as I want Neeld to succeed and earlier agreed it's much too early to bag him these comments are a worry. If he really has this opinion why did we sack Bailey? (by the way I agreed Bailey should go on the condition we got someone with senior coaching experience)

I now agree you are right we should not blame Neeld but we should direct blame at the team who selected him and Bailey before him.

A better choice would have been to wait a year with Viney (as Carlton persisted with Ratten) and then go for a Malthouse if Viney didn't come up?

What ya reckon?

Edited April 18, 2012 by thaipantsman

[Weedster 174]

Two weeks ago I would have agreed with you but Now i just think they are not good enough, senior,middle level or junior.

We have half a dozen good players and the rest are either average or below average.

And sadly not one game breaker anywhere

There is truth in what you say..we have not had a game-breaker in recent memory.

I do though believe that the coaching team we have assembled has a wealth of talent, experience and nous.

We've not only got line coaches, but also assistants in every facet of the game.

It is therefore not unreasonable to expect them to be able to fashion a plan with the talent at hand.

We remain seriously fragile on evidence to date which to me is a real worry. I just don't buy that it is all about learning a new plan.Sometimes it is simply about wanting to beat your opponent. Haven't seem enough of that attitude in games to date.

For all that, I'll stick fat as always. I believe Neeld's appointment will prove to be the correct one.

[The Chazz 4,077]

OK Range Rover!

What do Demon Punters think of these comments/view of Neeld made clear today? To put in perspective the comments were made after critique of MFC culture by Malthouse.

After a series of tough pre season talks our Coach seems to have softened his approach considerably. These comments are worrying for the average Melbourne Punter. If Neeld is indeed of this opinion why did we move from Bailey who at least had us pushing the 8 last year.

"The culture of the Melbourne footy club is pretty strong, the core of the player list are working really hard, their morale is good, the way they train is pretty good and we are expecting higher standards," Neeld said on Monday.

Asked about how the club was working when he arrived late last year, Neeld replied: "I didn't notice any problems at all."

As much as I want Neeld to succeed and earlier agreed it's much too early to bag him these comments are a worry. If he really has this opinion why did we sack Bailey? (by the way I agreed Bailey should go on the condition we got someone with senior coaching experience)

I now agree you are right we should not blame Neeld but we should direct blame at the team who selected him and Bailey before him.

A better choice would have been to wait a year with Viney (as Carlton persisted with Ratten) and then go for a Malthouse if Viney didn't come up?

What ya reckon?

This is a seriously good post.

[Guest José Mourinho]

OK Range Rover!

What do Demon Punters think of these comments/view of Neeld made clear today? To put in perspective the comments were made after critique of MFC culture by Malthouse.

After a series of tough pre season talks our Coach seems to have softened his approach considerably. These comments are worrying for the average Melbourne Punter. If Neeld is indeed of this opinion why did we move from Bailey who at least had us pushing the 8 last year.

"The culture of the Melbourne footy club is pretty strong, the core of the player list are working really hard, their morale is good, the way they train is pretty good and we are expecting higher standards," Neeld said on Monday.

Asked about how the club was working when he arrived late last year, Neeld replied: "I didn't notice any problems at all."

As much as I want Neeld to succeed and earlier agreed it's much too early to bag him these comments are a worry. If he really has this opinion why did we sack Bailey? (by the way I agreed Bailey should go on the condition we got someone with senior coaching experience)

I now agree you are right we should not blame Neeld but we should direct blame at the team who selected him and Bailey before him.

A better choice would have been to wait a year with Viney (as Carlton persisted with Ratten) and then go for a Malthouse if Viney didn't come up?

What ya reckon?

I think this is absurd.

Of course that's not exactly what Neeld thinks - it's a bloody press conference.

His M.O. is to placate the supporters whilst keeping all the grimy details in-house.

It's all pointless conjecture, but I think we'd be much worse off with Viney in charge for a year in a caretaker role.

The sooner the real work could begin, the better.

And Malthouse would never take the bloody job - it's pure fantasy.

I'm satisfied Neeld was the best candidate.

[The Chazz 4,077]

I think this is absurd.

Of course that's not exactly what Neeld thinks - it's a bloody press conference.

His M.O. is to placate the supporters whilst keeping all the grimy details in-house.

It's all pointless conjecture, but I think we'd be much worse off with Viney in charge for a year in a caretaker role.

The sooner the real work could begin, the better.

And Malthouse would never take the bloody job - it's pure fantasy.

I'm satisfied Neeld was the best candidate.

My only issue Jose, is that throughout the last part of Bailey's career, it was often mentioned with great disappointemnt that Bailey didn't say certain things in a presser, that he didn't show enough emotion, that he didn't appear to get angry, etc, etc. People were using this as ammunition when stating their opinion that Bailey should be sacked.

But now that it's a new coach, we accept it? How long will this last? He'll probably get a way with it for the first season, but if this time next year we are 0-3, the masses will be starting to roll in and we go through this process again.

That's why I made the comment, as did thai, that if those words were coming from a Malthouse, or any other proven AFL coach, you could put up with it. The fact that our last untried coach (Bailey) said virtually the same words as our current untired coach, doesn't give some, me included, a great deal of confidence that things have in fact changed within the club.

[Sir Why You Little 36,939]

OK Range Rover!

What do Demon Punters think of these comments/view of Neeld made clear today? To put in perspective the comments were made after critique of MFC culture by Malthouse.

After a series of tough pre season talks our Coach seems to have softened his approach considerably. These comments are worrying for the average Melbourne Punter. If Neeld is indeed of this opinion why did we move from Bailey who at least had us pushing the 8 last year.

"The culture of the Melbourne footy club is pretty strong, the core of the player list are working really hard, their morale is good, the way they train is pretty good and we are expecting higher standards," Neeld said on Monday.

Asked about how the club was working when he arrived late last year, Neeld replied: "I didn't notice any problems at all."

As much as I want Neeld to succeed and earlier agreed it's much too early to bag him these comments are a worry. If he really has this opinion why did we sack Bailey? (by the way I agreed Bailey should go on the condition we got someone with senior coaching experience)

I now agree you are right we should not blame Neeld but we should direct blame at the team who selected him and Bailey before him.

A better choice would have been to wait a year with Viney (as Carlton persisted with Ratten) and then go for a Malthouse if Viney didn't come up?

What ya reckon?

The truth is that Mark Neeld will not bag or take pot shots at the list in a press conference. He cannot do it. He may want to, as he almost did after round one. But his job is to coach.

And he may believe in these guys and genuinely realize how badly they have been managed without a proper FD set up.

Mark Neeld may need 10 years to turn the "Titanic" MFC around.

Getting yet another coach would just hide the old wounds. We need to actually improve as a club all over. That takes time.

[jimcor 212]

I agree, WYL. What's to be gained (apart from some short-term supporters self-gratification) from publicly humiliating players? It would destroy trust and simply make them more unlikely to perform honestly. Much better to deal with poor performance privately.

As I've said on occasion, it will be a little while before I feel that a judgement can be made about whether what's being tried is working or not and whether further changes need to be made. I think the FD should be congratulated for trying to add some pace to the mids by playing Watts & Howe higher up the field. They are both quick and they are both smart. They are also both inexperienced so I think it's unlikely they'll be immediate game changers but it'll be a good learning experience for both of them so it might pay off big-time down the track. Patience!

[jnrmac 20,053]

This would be coaching I think:

Part way through 3rd qtr, after a goal, mfc had only 3 players in the centre square for the ball up. Bail was on a wing with Delidio; Bail was called in to make 4.

Ball up, ball cleared by tiges out to Delidio on the wing.

Commentators made a comment about Delidio's man leaving him on his own!

This was not the only time this happened, but the one I remember the clearest.

This is coaching surely? Maybe the players don't know what's going on?

Ed: I forgot to mention that when Bail went into the centre, no one covered Delidio.

I saw something similar but it was with Daniel Jackson. We had three in the centre and a Melbourne player (forget who) raced into the middle and left Jackson free on the wing. Before you know it Jackson had it and was streaming fwd.

Rabble on field organisation.

[Bossdog 2,002]

Is there anyone else we can blame????

I reckon there is a boot studder somewhere who has caused all the strife we are in

We need to find him and sack him as well as the coaches,players,Admin ect ect ect

[Fat Tony 5,216]

Is there anyone else we can blame????

I reckon there is a boot studder somewhere who has caused all the strife we are in

We need to find him and sack him as well as the coaches,players,Admin ect ect ect

Well Jack Grimes did go to ground and cost us a goal on Saturday!

[Bossdog 2,002]

Well Jack Grimes did go to ground and cost us a goal on Saturday!

Sack him.

[old dee 23,704]

Sack him.

Plus he got knocked out and suspended

Top of the trade list I reckon!!!!

[old dee 23,704]

The truth is that Mark Neeld will not bag or take pot shots at the list in a press conference. He cannot do it. He may want to, as he almost did after round one. But his job is to coach.

And he may believe in these guys and genuinely realize how badly they have been managed without a proper FD set up.

Mark Neeld may need 10 years to turn the "Titanic" MFC around.

Getting yet another coach would just hide the old wounds. We need to actually improve as a club all over. That takes time.

Oh no wyl

Looks like I will not see no.13

Better than average chance I will be dead by 2022

[Fat Tony 5,216]

Sack him.

I was referring to the boot studder.

[old dee 23,704]

I was referring to the boot studder.

Should have not replied FT

I thought it was a good joke

[Guest José Mourinho]

My only issue Jose, is that throughout the last part of Bailey's career, it was often mentioned with great disappointemnt that Bailey didn't say certain things in a presser, that he didn't show enough emotion, that he didn't appear to get angry, etc, etc. People were using this as ammunition when stating their opinion that Bailey should be sacked.

But now that it's a new coach, we accept it? How long will this last? He'll probably get a way with it for the first season, but if this time next year we are 0-3, the masses will be starting to roll in and we go through this process again.

That's why I made the comment, as did thai, that if those words were coming from a Malthouse, or any other proven AFL coach, you could put up with it. The fact that our last untried coach (Bailey) said virtually the same words as our current untired coach, doesn't give some, me included, a great deal of confidence that things have in fact changed within the club.

We? What do you mean "we"?

Please don't include me with the fools who criticised Bailey for something as insignificant as the content of his post-game pressers.

The problems were much more than that.

But in the end, I don't think Bailey was a bad coach.

His gameplan or development process may have been a bit misguided, or it didn't suit the club and/or list.

But I think MFC is an especially difficult challenge that only certain coaches would be properly equipped for.

Fortunately I see Neeld as being one of them.

Bailey did have the handicap of not having resources in place, as they would have been recommended by the Andrews Report.

Unfortunately for him, things had deteriorated between DB and the administration to the point where making those adjustments was not enough.

There was a divisive atmosphere and it needed to be cleared.

Good thing too, cos I think in the end he wouldn't have been up to it - the culture became worse under Bailey.

Possibly a good coach, but fixing a bad culture was too big a challenge.

Edited April 18, 2012 by José Mourinho

[Pennant St Dee 13,054]

Oh no wyl

Looks like I will not see no.13

Better than average chance I will be dead by 2022

Keep your chin up old dee and if that is the case sure what better way to celebrate number 13 then having a drink with Jim and the red fox, always look at the positives mate. And WYL I agree with your post on this just need to be patient. It's like earning brownie points off the misses when you know you have a big night ahead planned out with the lads, hard yards for reward

[old dee 23,704]

Keep your chin up old dee and if that is the case sure what better way to celebrate number 13 then having a drink with Jim and the red fox, always look at the positives mate. And WYL I agree with your post on this just need to be patient. It's like earning brownie points off the misses when you know you have a big night ahead planned out with the lads, hard yards for reward

I have had time for a little more consideration on this PSD.

Perhaps it might be better if I live longer and the Dees dont win one till 2032

You know I have given up on winning one in my life time.

I would now be happy to have a side that can finish from 8 to 10Th and does not get belted every other week.

Is that asking too much?

[The Chazz 4,077]

We? What do you mean "we"?

Please don't include me with the fools who criticised Bailey for something as insignificant as the content of his post-game pressers.

The problems were much more than that.

But in the end, I don't think Bailey was a bad coach.

His gameplan or development process may have been a bit misguided, or it didn't suit the club and/or list.

But I think MFC is an especially difficult challenge that only certain coaches would be properly equipped for.

Fortunately I see Neeld as being one of them.

Bailey did have the handicap of not having resources in place, as they would have been recommended by the Andrews Report.

Unfortunately for him, things had deteriorated between DB and the administration to the point where making those adjustments was not enough.

There was a divisive atmosphere and it needed to be cleared.

Good thing too, cos I think in the end he wouldn't have been up to it - the culture became worse under Bailey.

Possibly a good coach, but fixing a bad culture was too big a challenge.

It's easy to say that about Bailey now (well, probably by this time last year), but in his first couple of seasons he was going to be "that" coach that took us to a premiership.

Time will tell how Neeld goes. He has been in the job for 3 official games, and my word it is very early to make any bold statements about his ability/inability to steer us straight. But so far, and having been one of those who put faith in Bailey for probably 3 and a half years, I'm going to sit on the fence on this one. However, to date, the only positive I have seen that Neeld could put his name to would be, well, I'm buggered if I know to be honest. I will give him some credit for the new look Football Department as well as getting Mitch on board. I was happy with his no BS presser after Round 1, but as always, the Club put an end to that type of talk.