On 16/04/2012 at 01:33, billy2803 said:

This is my issue Demoniac. Neeld is concentrating on a game plan that won a premiership 2 years ago, that we currently don't have the cattle (for what ever reason ie skill, fitness, development). By the time we address these issues, is the press going to be a factor? Is hugging the boundary the best way to win a game of footy? We don't know, but one thing we do know is that game styles change, and I just hope that the one Neeld has in mind is with a (twitching) eye on 2014, rather than what worked in 2010.

Sorry Deemort, but that's a cop-out. I'm quite sure if Malthouse was coach that he wouldn't be using that. I'm a firm believer that while changes have been made, that when you have spent the last 4 seasons rebuilding, that any change should be seen as a side step, not a step backwards. The teams that take backward steps in this day and age will find it very, very difficult to catch up.

So you dont think Moloney and Sylvia getting 25 plus touches in the mid and Jurruh up with Clarke would have been a massive difference against the Tigers? If our senior players were up and about our younger players would improve much quicker IMO.

  On 16/04/2012 at 01:38, Deemort said:

So you dont think Moloney and Sylvia getting 25 plus touches in the mid and Jurruh up with Clarke would have been a massive difference against the Tigers? If our senior players were up and about our younger players would improve much quicker IMO.

Depends on which Moloney, Sylvia and Jurrah turn up. If all 3 "Jekyll's" turn up, they may be a 6-8 goal difference, but too many times one or all of them turn up as "Hyde's".

  On 16/04/2012 at 01:37, Rhino Richards said:

D'land is a privately owned concern. Its not part of the Club. Whether Neeld is aware or not is irrelevant. If he is reading D'land then I would be concerned

Yes Rhino i know D'land is a privately owned venture. But it is part of the club fabric and a barometer of supporter feelings.

  On 16/04/2012 at 01:43, billy2803 said:

Depends on which Moloney, Sylvia and Jurrah turn up. If all 3 "Jekyll's" turn up, they may be a 6-8 goal difference, but too many times one or all of them turn up as "Hyde's".

So true.

  On 15/04/2012 at 02:12, Ben-Hur said:

Before the start of the game, as the players walked to their respective positions, I commented to my Brother, "If their body language is anything to go by we're in for a hiding". The players walked with their heads down and without any zest, or energy. I'm not a behavioral psychologist, but I've previously never felt the compunction to utter those words before a game.

I'm a Neeld fan and won't lose my head 3 games in, but there's no doubt that he has some accountability to the way they're playing. Fear has a paralysis effect and I have no doubt that our players are playing in a fearful mentality, which is why they're not spreading and taking the game on. They're not wanting to make mistakes, which means they're too reactive and are devoid of any flare, or risk taking. Paralysis by analysis.

Grant Thomas is a dolt, and he made a comment after round one that the coach may have already "lost the players". I don't think he has, but there is certainly a collective mentality that in part Neeld is responsible for. He has a lot of work to do, as does every member of the football department, to get some confidence back into this playing group. It won't be easy.

BH, I posted last week (can't remember what thread) about wanting to hear from someone at the game to comment about the body language of our 2 captains. I take it from your post it wasn't great?

I think that the past coaching team / administration has a lot to answer for, however given that we put next to no money into our coaching and fitness staff compared to what we are now putting in (or compared to what the top clubs have been doing for the past few years), they can't be entirely to blame either. Some things I do note:

1. We lack experience on the field.

Trengove and Grimes may be great leaders (I beleive they are, and worthy captains compared to anyone else on the list), and can lead by example. However given that they have played a handful of games it's impossible for them to pass on their experience to the younger players. Likewise, they have nobody really to pass on experience to them.

Green and Davey are the only 2 players who have more than 150 games experience on the list - and they both look like being great additions to Casey this year.

Moloney and Sylvia would be expected to be the players who would also pass this experience on, but they haven't managed to get onto the park this year (other than rd 1 for Moloney) either.

By contrast Geelong have 10 players on their list who have played over 150 games (7 of which are on 197 or more) - is it any wonder that their young kids are developing so fast.

It was great to see Mitch Clark at one point run up the ground, get the ball over to Jones, then point up the ground and just yell at him to kick it to the 2-on-2 contest in our forward line, and Martin takes a good contested mark 25 meters out (and delivers a well needed point ) . I really don't see many other players helping instruct others what to do on the field.

Wouldn't it be nice to have Junior or even Miller running around just to be able to provide guidance to our youth on field. Perhaps our list management in the last 4-5 years were a bit too fast to jump the gun thinking that our kids could suddenly fill the void of losing them and Bruce, Yze, Robbo etc etc - while most of the old crew wouldn't be playing now, perhaps in hindsight keeping them on for an extra year at the to pass on their experience to the youngsters wouldn't have been a bad thing.

2. The players haven't really had a game plan for the past few years (other than run it up the middle as fast as you can). They were allowed to play with flair and, at their best, were able to smash the lower teams. While it was great to be able to say last year that we were thumping these lower teams, and that we were more developed than them, it was quite apparent any time we had to take on the better teams that flair counted for little - we needed a better game plan. It's little co-incidence that we had something like (from memory) the 3rd biggest average winning margin (behind Geelong and Collingwood), as well as the 3rd biggest average losing margin.

I do notice a massive difference this year - the players no longer play with flair - they are focused on trying to make sure that they're in the correct position (which quite often they're not), rather than using their own initiative. It is a huge learning curve, and I'm not surprised that our more experienced players are the ones struggling the most to adapt. But I think we need to give the players some time to adapt - sure we're getting smashed on almost every statistic, but the players look like they're giving everything that they have, which is also probably why they die in the arse physically.

3. I don't think it's any secret that when the new coaching and fitness staff arrived on day 1 they were pretty shocked at the level of fitness of the players compared to the elite clubs. I'm sure that they would have been hammered like they have never been before. You can't build that fitness in one pre season.

I'll reserve my judgement on Neeld until the end of the year. I think he's trying to instill a new culture in the club, something that's been lacking for years (i.e. what we define as success, compared to what other teams define as success) and while he's been given more resources financially than any other past Melbourne coach which should pay dividends in the medium to long term, he has been provided with little in the way of on field leadership and experience to work with in the short term. It's a fight for him and he needs to break the wills of some players to get them playing to the standard that he expects. I don't think we need to re-build our list, but we do need which would take years, but we do need to re-build the mindset of a lot of players which should hopefully become more and more apparent as the year goes on.

I will blame Neeld for 2 things.

1. His open comments about it being a blank canvas when he arrived at the club. If I were a new coach, taking over a team that had suffered a 186 point loss in 2011 (which someone indicated at being just 8 games ago, or 5 games before he took over), I'd want to know what happened on that day. Who was responsible, what players led the onfield non-performance. Regardless of who or how many, I would've delisted them. I would not want that/those player/s in my team going forward, and I would address that issue at the AGM in front of members/supporters. I'm sure they (us supporters) would've appreciated the honesty, and in a lot of ways, would've been more accommodating of poor performances in 2012 (if it meant we had to get rid of certain senior players). Regardless of what the issues were/are, players should never ever make a statement in such a fashion.

2. Appointing the co-captains earlier than first intended (from memory, wasn't it planned for before Round 1 of the season proper?). While NAB Cup is just that, it would've given Neeld more of an idea of what certain players onfield leadership is like. Based on what I saw in the NAB Cup games, it was evident that Jones would've thrived on being given the role for 12 months, and as we've seen after 3 games this year, he's probably the only one that could stand up in front of his team at 3/4 time and give the rest of the players a good old fashioned spray. There has been nothing to date from our co-captains that would inspire the rest of the playing group. I'm sorry, but we bloody need this. When the chips are down, I want to see both Grimes and Trengove go in to a centre bounce and make a statement. I think Neeld has them so focused on structures and game plans that they don't have the confidence to do the "captain thing" and stop the rot. Where were our captains on Saturday when we needed them? Trengove had been moved to the forward line, and Grimes was playing in the back line.

Neeld has inherited a problem which has been created over decades. Sydney has turned over 33 players out of 44 in the past 3 years. Probably as many as us but still have great onfield leaders in Goodes and Bolton who were drafted around the time of Travis Johnstone, remember him. Plus they have another 8 or so senior players providing leadership for the rest of the young list. You can't blame Neeld for the appalling list management over the past 15 yrs. It's not his fault the whole list has to be turned over and there is no spread of experience. Where are the 26+ yr old elite players to guide and lead our young list. That's not his fault. Moloney has only given 1-2 good years mainly through Osteo which appears to be striking again and could be the end of his career. Over trained in the pre season perhaps. But at his best last year, he seemed incapable of being the type of player that can hall a team back from a losing position to a winning position. None of our senior players are that type of player and our junior players are too junior for this. That's not Neeld's fault. That is him inheriting shocking list mismanagement over many years.

When you learn something new you have to think about it a lot until you have repeated it enough that you can do it without having to think about it. I would say that's where the team is at with the game plan. It is only when they have done it long enough that they can do it without thinking that they will move on to start to get their instinct and flair back. You can get an idea of how long it takes from St Kilda when Lyon arrived. They were a very senior list and it virtually took them a season. Again not Neeld's fault. Should he through in the towel because it is going to take a while. Worsfold said it took the Weagles 3 years to learn to execute their game plan. Neeld has had 3 weeks, without the senior players that Worsfold had through the rebuild. I suspect the dropping away in performance by so many players is caused by them thinking all the time and double guessing rather than just using their instinct. But they have to go through that to learn how to execute a thorough game plan. They can't go forward without getting on top of this.

The poor recruiting over the past 15 years, starting with Travis as a no. 1 pick in '97 just breaks my heart. Continues through Scully at no.1, Sylvia 3, Morton 4, McLean 5, Bate 9 (?), Dunn, Lucas Cook 12, (looks to have been recruited for a style of play that doesn't exist anymore). Did we expect more of Blease and Strauss by now, will they ever step up. Bennell, Jetta. Who would have thought Davey would have flamed out so early. Pending legal proceedings Jurrah's career could be over. And on and on. Not Neeld's fault all these picks that should have been significant players by now, have never lived up to their potential but does give some idea of the scale of the job ahead of him. The way we are going picks 2 & 3, or 3 & 4, & 11 & Viney at around 26 beckon at the end of the year. Lets hope the recruiting sets us up from that group, but again it's going to be 3 yrs of development. You can be guaranteed they will be looking to recruit some developed players out of those picks. Dangerfield perhaps. Just reward from that team for losing Thompson.

  On 16/04/2012 at 01:55, billy2803 said:

BH, I posted last week (can't remember what thread) about wanting to hear from someone at the game to comment about the body language of our 2 captains. I take it from your post it wasn't great?

I didn't specifically note the demeanor of the captains, but more so the entire group.

Billy, you didn't agree with the captain choices and I supported them. You were right and I was wrong. I love Grimes and Trengove as young players, as I'm sure you do, but the burden of leading the club when they're still feeling their way at AFL level and developing their own games is too much. Trengove is going to be a gun, but he's a shadow of even the player he was last year. It's really an indictment on the senior group that these young players have been put in these positions before their time. I see no choice but to stick with them, support them and see it through.

  On 16/04/2012 at 02:50, Ben-Hur said:

I didn't specifically note the demeanor of the captains, but more so the entire group.

Billy, you didn't agree with the captain choices and I supported them. You were right and I was wrong. I love Grimes and Trengove as young players, as I'm sure you do, but the burden of leading the club when they're still feeling their way at AFL level and developing their own games is too much. Trengove is going to be a gun, but he's a shadow of even the player he was last year. It's really an indictment on the senior group that these young players have been put in these positions before their time. I see no choice but to stick with them, support them and see it through.

It's not about me being right and you being wrong BH, it's the fact that our coach made an error that has the potential to hinder Trengove's development.

The main point about observing their body language more than any other players was for the fact that we can't expect guys like Rivers to show improvement in this area, especially if our new captains aren't, and even moreso given that Rivers was dumped from the leadership group. I was more about highlighting those players that aren't toeing the line so that Jack and Jack could deal with them individually, and start making inroads in to this culture change that they are going to be responsible for.

  On 16/04/2012 at 02:50, Ben-Hur said:

I didn't specifically note the demeanor of the captains, but more so the entire group.

Billy, you didn't agree with the captain choices and I supported them. You were right and I was wrong. I love Grimes and Trengove as young players, as I'm sure you do, but the burden of leading the club when they're still feeling their way at AFL level and developing their own games is too much. Trengove is going to be a gun, but he's a shadow of even the player he was last year. It's really an indictment on the senior group that these young players have been put in these positions before their time. I see no choice but to stick with them, support them and see it through.

I don't think the captaincy has made an ounce of difference to our co-captains performances so far this season.

  On 16/04/2012 at 03:09, José Mourinho said:

I don't think the captaincy has made an ounce of difference to our co-captains performances so far this season.

Could the same be said about Green in 2011?

  On 16/04/2012 at 03:11, billy2803 said:

Could the same be said about Green in 2011?

Yeah, definitely.

I think he's just past it.

He was also a bad leader though, so losing the captaincy was deserved.

  On 16/04/2012 at 03:14, José Mourinho said:

Yeah, definitely.

I think he's just past it.

He was also a bad leader though, so losing the captaincy was deserved.

So in Green's case, poor form = bad leader, but in Grimes/Trengove's case, poor form = good leaders not playing well?

As we are all part of the outer sanctum, and do not get to experience the true inner sanctum, in particular regarding the leadership of players, I can't help but be disappointed with the way some players get special treatment on here.

  On 15/04/2012 at 23:06, Ned said:

Melbourne are bloody shocking. When James Hird came to Essendon they underwent dramatic change over a pre-season. It wasn't too much for them to ingest a new game plan.

What gets up my nose about Neeld is all the chest-beating and bravado. If he understood we were in major trouble you start trying to manage expectations. It looks to me as though he had no idea that was the case until we were pounded on the field.

I wish the guy well. But I'm a bit concerned about his judgement.

Most people outside the club have this impression that we have a good list when the reality is it's a shocker; I'd say it is the worst in the competition.

Just having a look through our list I can find 12 players that I'd delist at the end of the year and that's without really getting brutal, we have nothing. All the talk and development in the World won't make bad players, good players and we can try to paper over the cracks but we really need to start from scratch and try to build a football team that has a chance of participating in Finals. This current crop of players, with a few exceptions is simply not up to AFL standard.

Our recruiting has been dreadful and others can argue till the cows come home but that's how it is.

We will possibly finish last this year and that would probably be the best thing that could happen to us, provided that is, we get a recruiter that has a clue.

  On 16/04/2012 at 03:08, billy2803 said:

It's not about me being right and you being wrong BH, it's the fact that our coach made an error that has the potential to hinder Trengove's development.

The main point about observing their body language more than any other players was for the fact that we can't expect guys like Rivers to show improvement in this area, especially if our new captains aren't, and even moreso given that Rivers was dumped from the leadership group. I was more about highlighting those players that aren't toeing the line so that Jack and Jack could deal with them individually, and start making inroads in to this culture change that they are going to be responsible for.

Don't forget. This list of players are growing at the same time as playing AFL matches.

Which may well be a reason they are hitting the wall by the 3rd.

I said last week that it would be better for the club to just train this year. But of course that is not an option.

Some people on here are now doubting Neeld. No. Blame the club for not being set up correctly.

Lets hope this is what the Andrews Report was centered on.

  On 16/04/2012 at 03:24, RobbieF said:

Most people outside the club have this impression that we have a good list when the reality is it's a shocker; I'd say it is the worst in the competition.

Just having a look through our list I can find 12 players that I'd delist at the end of the year and that's without really getting brutal, we have nothing. All the talk and development in the World won't make bad players, good players and we can try to paper over the cracks but we really need to start from scratch and try to build a football team that has a chance of participating in Finals. This current crop of players, with a few exceptions is simply not up to AFL standard.

Our recruiting has been dreadful and others can argue till the cows come home but that's how it is.

We will possibly finish last this year and that would probably be the best thing that could happen to us, provided that is, we get a recruiter that has a clue.

RobbieF, let these guys train to full potential before you throw them out. Kyle cheney played a good one for Hawthorn yesterday. Hawthorn know how to train.

That said we do need to recruit a top line mid fielder to set the standard.

  On 16/04/2012 at 03:28, why you little said:

RobbieF, let these guys train to full potential before you throw them out. Kyle cheney played a good one for Hawthorn yesterday. Hawthorn know how to train.

That said we do need to recruit a top line mid fielder to set the standard.

Kyle Cheney was a goer that wasn't given a chance by Bailey so that doesn't surprise me.

Bartram - Gone Bate - Gone Bennell - Gone Morton - Gone Dunn - Gone Green - Gone Jurrah - Gone (Don't think he will still be there at the end of the year.) Rivers - Gone MacDonald - Gone Martin - Gone Davey - Gone Jetta - Gone.

Couple lucky to hang on Bail - Hasn't given a yelp this year Gawn - will his knees hold up Fitzpatrick - Not convinced Petterd - Needs to show consistency Sellar - Haven't seen enoughStrauss - See how he comes back Blease - Is he up to it

  On 16/04/2012 at 03:28, why you little said:

RobbieF, let these guys train to full potential before you throw them out. Kyle cheney played a good one for Hawthorn yesterday. Hawthorn know how to train.

That said we do need to recruit a top line mid fielder to set the standard.

RE: Cheney – It is easy to play reasonable footy in a top side. He will never be a world beater and it was no mistake to let him go.

Our main long-term issue has been recruiting. Nevertheless, Neeld is chiefly responsible for our recent underperformance. We are playing without system or confidence and our team selection has sought to over correct our deficiencies from last year. (i.e. winning the contested ball and contested marking). This has come at the expense of speed and skill and we are a 10 goal side worse as a result.

  On 16/04/2012 at 00:54, why you little said:

We are the "real" supporters here mate,

!!!! Ok then. Not sure what that makes the other 35K or so members, plus non-members etc. etc.

What we have on Demonland is a self-selected group who choose to manifest their support for a football club on an internet forum, nothing more.

And people talk about the players having big heads.

  On 16/04/2012 at 04:32, bing181 said:

!!!! Ok then. Not sure what that makes the other 35K or so members, plus non-members etc. etc.

What we have on Demonland is a self-selected group who choose to manifest their support for a football club on an internet forum, nothing more.

And people talk about the players having big heads.

So don't comment on here Bing...Rain Hail or shine...win or lose D'land keeps talking about the Demons 365 days a year..

  On 16/04/2012 at 03:20, billy2803 said:

So in Green's case, poor form = bad leader, but in Grimes/Trengove's case, poor form = good leaders not playing well?

As we are all part of the outer sanctum, and do not get to experience the true inner sanctum, in particular regarding the leadership of players, I can't help but be disappointed with the way some players get special treatment on here.

No, poor form had nothing to do with him being a horrible leader.

And he didn't have any excuses of youth or inexperience either, not that Grimes & Trengove are using them.

  On 16/04/2012 at 04:59, José Mourinho said:

No, poor form had nothing to do with him being a horrible leader.

And he didn't have any excuses of youth or inexperience either, not that Grimes & Trengove are using them.

I just don't see how you can comment on Green being such a poor leader, when you admit is form was an issue in 2011. What are Trengove and Grimes doing this year, differently to Green last year? I can't see it.

Nb. That's not saying any of them are poor leaders.

It's simple.

In 2011:

- Brad Green displayed very poor form throughout the season.

- Brad Green showed clear displays of abhorrent leadership for an AFL captain.

  On 16/04/2012 at 05:03, billy2803 said:

I just don't see how you can comment on Green being such a poor leader, when you admit is form was an issue in 2011. What are Trengove and Grimes doing this year, differently to Green last year? I can't see it.

Nb. That's not saying any of them are poor leaders.

Brad Green never had Leadership in his veins....That is not too say he didn't try to be a good leader....But that was his problem he had to try...Leadership is a natural part of DNA..

Are Grimes & Trengove Good Captains? Too early to tell from the Grandstand.