Don't Blame Neeld

[The Chazz 4,077]

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.

Where? When tugging on his jumper when his side is 15 goals up? When not handballing to a player in the goal square when he himself is only 15 metres out, and under his own performace pressure?

You can only comment about what you see onfield.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,129]

They over-corrected at times and overused of the ball but again this should be expected

I agree with most of the points you've raised, but how could we possibly have overused the ball and end up with 150 less possessions?

How can Howe be the only player over 20 possessions?

How can we have 8 players with 10 or less disposals and another 3 with only 11 disposals? That is half the team who had 11 or less disposals. WTF are they doing out there?

Edited April 16, 2012 by Dr. Gonzo

[Guest José Mourinho]

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.

The bold part is correct.

He tried and wanted so hard to be a good leader.

He's just not.

A real shame.

[Sir Why You Little 36,918]

The bold part is correct.

He tried and wanted so hard to be a good leader.

He's just not.

A real shame.

Full agreement there Jos'e.....it is why some people are bosses & some are workers...

[Guest José Mourinho]

Full agreement there Jos'e.....it is why some people are bosses & some are workers...

I've witnessed some abhorrent leadership from some bosses.

I had one tell me I needed to get better at glossing over and hiding mistakes so that he didn't know about them.

He didn't care the impact of them, as long as he didn't have to find out. (?!)

[Tricky 341]

I agree with most of the points you've raised, but how could we possibly have overused the ball and end up with 150 less possessions?

How can Howe be the only player over 20 possessions?

How can we have 8 players with 10 or less disposals and another 3 with only 11 disposals? That is half the team who had 11 or less disposals. WTF are they doing out there?

Because we didn't have a lot of it and when we did, we were trying to string together the handballs (usually to teammates under pressure) and ultimately turning it over quickly.

We were clearly trying to avoid blindly throwing it onto the boot (which is about all I had seen the previous 2 weeks).

Howe was the only player over 20 possessions because he was desperate and worked his ass off. If we could clone him we'd have very little to worry about.

They may be lacking confidence, but they will need to work a hell of a lot harder if any kind of "game plan" is going to come off for them.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,129]

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.

And what is the club doing about our recruiting department? Who is our head recruiter now that Prendergast is gone? It's not Viney he is just a fill in.

Will we ever learn from our mistakes? We need to get an A-grade head recruiter in the job yesterday so that we don't throw away another draft year.

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

I agree with most of the points you've raised, but how could we possibly have overused the ball and end up with 150 less possessions?

How can Howe be the only player over 20 possessions?

How can we have 8 players with 10 or less disposals and another 3 with only 11 disposals? That is half the team who had 11 or less disposals. WTF are they doing out there?

Dr., i'm questioning this as well.

So Neeld & co. are saying learning a new game style/plan from scratch is tough. Ok. I can see that....to a point. It's going to test any players who were under the previous coach for most of his tenure sure. It would take time to get things right and make the new directives/skills/drills/set ups 2nd nature. It would take time to implement a fitness program that brings the players to a level needed to pull off the new requirements effectively, on a consistent basis.

So lets say at the very least 2 to 3 years for some who are still young, inexperienced and learning the basics of the game, let alone a completely new style/structure. Maybe 3 to 4 yars to build a decent AFL tank. And for the seniors, possibly even more difficult using the "old dog" principle. For the new guys, like Magner, Clarke who are starting afresh with Neeld & Co., maybe a little easier. Of course this is pure speculation. Every individual's reponse and ability to cope with change is no doubt different as would be their likelihood of successful conversion/change and output/performance.

But then there's attitude, intensity at the ball and ball carrier when you don't have it. Personal pride. Pride in the jumper, passion and self motivation that comes from within, regardless of what might inspire some.

I just want to know where that's gone? Were the wins last year a fluke? The players must have gotten themselves up somehow in order to win, especially some of the thumpings we handed out where we put our foot on the neck of the opponent and didn't let up till the final siren (ok only a few occasions...but it WAS there).

So are we talking here about the ability of the coach/coaching staff to motivate, inspire....incentivise?

I know Neeld says our moral is fine. But really, apart from a fair effort in the first half against mediocre opposition in Brisbane and Richmond, i haven't seen any fight, spirit or ferocious attack on the ball in a "team" sense. Individual efforts sure, Clarke, Jonesy, Magner, Howe (this week) along with a few reasonable camios from others.

But to win Neeld needs the support and backing of the entire senior group. And to this point, at least on the surface viewing it as an outsider, i would have to say Neeld has possibly either lost them OR....a few are refusing (or unwilling to this point) to back him/his teams' direction either individually or collectively as a small group.

Maybe they have their noses out of joint from the "young captain" announcements? Again pure speculation. But the degree of sub standard performances from most within the senior group (at least those that have hit the park) is bewildering. Jonesy, Rivers the exceptions to this point.

I have no doubt our list is poor as it now stands, but there's been some pretty average lists over the years (in many a team) as judged by the pundits, but in some cases, they still manage to get themselves up for a match and at least make a fist of it. They might go down, but they go down fighting and never give in.

I haven't witnessed this fighting spirit in a team sense so far this year, in what should have been 2 very 'winnable' matches (at least prior to the season starting anyway).

Maybe Neeld IS on the right track and just needs plenty of time and clever recruiting/list changes.

But IMO one aspect or sign of solid coach is his ability to inspire and motivate the playing group and get them playing hard nosed, competitive, desperation football across all lines and play a game out right to the end, no matter where we might be on the scoreboard or what we're asking of them game plan/style wise.

So far i haven't witnessed this for more than maybe 1 half of footy, and that against mediocre opposition.

When i start seeing this from the "team" (not just a few individuals) for close to an entire 4 quarters against teams who sit outside the 8 (and the same but maybe with less effective results against the top 8), i'll start believing that Neeld & his team are at least moving this club in the right direction.

It's only my view, and nothing i say will make an ounce of difference to what happens at the MFC, Neeld or the players, but if you don't have motivation, inspiration, desperation and the team playing for EACH OTHER and the jumper....then i don't give a toss what game plans, styles, structures, fitness regimes (new rookies) etc you put in place. You'll still get a sub optimal result against quality opposition who find this extra "intangible" almost week in and week out even IF you are successful putting in the new regime and the players are generally able to stick to it.

Sure, top teams become top teams as a result of the best structures, fitness regimes, coaches, facilities, recruiting and development staff etc. But even with the best pre-match training and preparation. a coach still has to motivate them and make sure they (and he) find a way to win on match day.

It's my view that Neeld might have to water some "ideals" and expectations down a tad (time lines etc) that he started off with when starting his career in order to find some success with this group in his first year.

My challenge to Neeld (and the playing group) for what remains of the first half of this season...

FIND A WAY TO WIN

or at the very least, fight our matches out to the final siren and never say die!

Edited April 16, 2012 by Rusty Nails

[P-man 13,366]

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.

I don't think it's too early to tell that Grimes oozes leadership. He will be a long-term captain imo. Trengove, who knows.

[Batters 1]

Hi guys, this is my first post, so excuse the "rookie" moves!

I've been following the dees for 50 years now, went to the first game with my father in 1963 . All this time I've suffered the same as other dee supporters at the hands of an inconsistent MFC performance often to the point of only having a very vague sort of interest in the results because it hurt too much to be deflated yet again..

Played footy with only a handful of people I can remember who were Dees fans,went to teachers college and played footy in the late 70's under Parko @ Burwood,where there was no shortage of VFL(noA yet) players none of whom were Melbourne players or supporters. It just seemed even then if you were a Dee fan then you were an exception,and I'm hearing via this forum that it's more the norm than the exception as today.

In the last 10 years my kids have shown an interest in the spectacle rather than the game itself,they like the G and the atmosphere ,don't really understand why I follow this team of "never heard of him"s, that never seem to win...all their friends (and mine!) follow Geelong Carlton and Hawthorn.

But what they don't understand is there's something in you that was bred by inheritance to follow that red and blue . How I use to love the jumper when I was a kid!!!!

But....................this year I can say after plucking up the courage 3 years ago to buy a membership,I'm going to these games half expecting the normal beatings and sometimes the disappointing close calls, to see a team thats different from every other MFC team I've ever seen.

A team that's absolutely devoid of heart or soul.

AH SO THAT'S WHY NOBODY BARRACKS FOR THE DEES!!!(except those forced to by inheritance or lack of transport/money My kids only get to go to Dee games!)

BUT.. something worse than before is definitely in the water at training, Neeld is the only major difference, apart from the other coaches but they all have to play his game anyway.

Don't get me wrong. I think his heart is in the right place, but he has definitely done something to :

1. Put the older players offside

2.Instill fear and fumble into players who were recently accomplished

3.Play a brand of football that defies logic,aesthetics,and the abilities of the few good players we have.

IF THE CLUB IS TO SURVIVE, stuff the new structures,game plans,etc and just start getting the ball and winning some contests and games.

IF we go thru a year of losing every game except maybe 2, there will be no supporters left out there to follow the team in 3,4,how ever many years it takes to get the players going on the new plan,(which was the plan in 2009 !!!)

If we do have to rebuild,-which I'm not absolutely convinced of-we should be playing a game that suits the players we have until we get the players we need.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,129]

BUT.. something worse than before is definitely in the water at training, Neeld is the only major difference, apart from the other coaches but they all have to play his game anyway.

Don't get me wrong. I think his heart is in the right place, but he has definitely done something to :

1. Put the older players offside

2.Instill fear and fumble into players who were recently accomplished

3.Play a brand of football that defies logic,aesthetics,and the abilities of the few good players we have.

Welcome aboard mate.

I'll just comment on these points you raised - apparently the senior players were also "lost" last year which was one of the reasons put forth for 186. It wasn't Bailey who lost them but Schwab. So has Neeld made a difference here or are the same issues festering among the playing group. Hell maybe it's still a hangover from 2007-09 when the club axed guys like White, Yze and Robbo when they all thought they had more time left in the game.

Is it fear? Well these players are serial under performers so they should be fearing for their careers. In elite sport more than any other job if you fail to perform you will pretty quickly find yourself looking for another job.

I'm not sold on the brand of football but Neeld needs to be given every opportunity to succeed and we shouldn't let a thing like under performing senior players get in the way.

[Biffen 12,940]

I agree with the above .

Our senior boys who got the flick were never gonna make it happen and they had to be flicked .

Any remaining seniors should feel nervous about their future .It's not like they have laurels to even rest on .

We have been supporting the Demons for years longer than they have underachieved .

I dont see Rivers and Green remaining on the list at this rate .I would like time put into Jetta ,Morton ,Bennell etc but they too are running out of chances (ie 2 years max)

[BangkokDemon 96]

Hi guys, this is my first post, so excuse the "rookie" moves!

I've been following the dees for 50 years now, went to the first game with my father in 1963 . All this time I've suffered the same as other dee supporters at the hands of an inconsistent MFC performance often to the point of only having a very vague sort of interest in the results because it hurt too much to be deflated yet again..

Played footy with only a handful of people I can remember who were Dees fans,went to teachers college and played footy in the late 70's under Parko @ Burwood,where there was no shortage of VFL(noA yet) players none of whom were Melbourne players or supporters. It just seemed even then if you were a Dee fan then you were an exception,and I'm hearing via this forum that it's more the norm than the exception as today.

In the last 10 years my kids have shown an interest in the spectacle rather than the game itself,they like the G and the atmosphere ,don't really understand why I follow this team of "never heard of him"s, that never seem to win...all their friends (and mine!) follow Geelong Carlton and Hawthorn.

But what they don't understand is there's something in you that was bred by inheritance to follow that red and blue . How I use to love the jumper when I was a kid!!!!

But....................this year I can say after plucking up the courage 3 years ago to buy a membership,I'm going to these games half expecting the normal beatings and sometimes the disappointing close calls, to see a team thats different from every other MFC team I've ever seen.

A team that's absolutely devoid of heart or soul.

AH SO THAT'S WHY NOBODY BARRACKS FOR THE DEES!!!(except those forced to by inheritance or lack of transport/money My kids only get to go to Dee games!)

BUT.. something worse than before is definitely in the water at training, Neeld is the only major difference, apart from the other coaches but they all have to play his game anyway.

Don't get me wrong. I think his heart is in the right place, but he has definitely done something to :

1. Put the older players offside

2.Instill fear and fumble into players who were recently accomplished

3.Play a brand of football that defies logic,aesthetics,and the abilities of the few good players we have.

IF THE CLUB IS TO SURVIVE, stuff the new structures,game plans,etc and just start getting the ball and winning some contests and games.

IF we go thru a year of losing every game except maybe 2, there will be no supporters left out there to follow the team in 3,4,how ever many years it takes to get the players going on the new plan,(which was the plan in 2009 !!!)

If we do have to rebuild,-which I'm not absolutely convinced of-we should be playing a game that suits the players we have until we get the players we need.

As a lifelong supporter - like you - I too am starting to feel a little concerned that rather than seeing Mark Neeld's "we won't die wondering" come to fruition, that I will instead rock off this mortal coil sometime in the next 30 years or so, with only the memory of being there in 1964.

But for now, I am prepared to accept what we are seeing is in fact a "revolution" - which nearly always means a lot of pain and suffering. But, more that in the end it will all have been worth it. For now, I suggest like me, you look at the big picture rather than focus on the week to week form of the current team.

Of course the 3rd qtr against an old foe like the Toigs was hard to take - the rest of game wasn't much better. But Mark Neeld is only 3 weeks into real game time.

If by this time next year, we are having the same issues - then we have a problem.

[Batters 1]

Thanx doc and Bankock ', good points you both make, and I agree strongly that something radical has to happen to change the MFC, but I'm just not sure the playing style or tactics are the answer. Neeldy taught with a close friend of mine,(also a dee man...) and has his highest recommendation in terms of integrity and personality, which will no doubt come out in his coaching if thats the way he feels about life in general, but the issue on my mind is still what you do with what you've got this year,and whether there is going to be massive damage done to an already precarious supporter base.

[rpfc 28,239]

Lots of good points in this thread if you look for them...

I think we have overcorrected from our attacking gameplan that failed and flailed so miserably last season against the better teams to the other extreme of a dour, structure-as-religion style under Neeld.

A saving grace might be that it's a needed correction as our players have had a history of being 'frontrunners'.

Hell, even our B+F last year who got 19 Brownlow votes averages 10 possessions less in losses than in wins...

With that said - we have been awful in contested possies the last two weeks and the clearances, so the structures are not holding up.

And our lack of uncontested possies says we are timid and/or lazy.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

agreed 100%

Neeld is far from the problem

Neeld is the solution. Of that, I am absolutely convinced. I'm just relieved we managed to land him before he realised how ordinary our list actually is.

My view about Neeld is based on his actions and insights thus far. In short, he has quickly identified the problems and has already taken steps to deal with them effectively.

Actions

(game plan) recognised Bailey's game plan, whilst attractive to some supporters (despite resulting in an incredibly poor win-loss ratio over 4 years), would not consistently win us games against good opposition, particularly in finals

- sought to implement a new, effective game plan that, once properly understood and executed by the players (which, clearly, it is not yet), should help us win big games

(recruiting) quickly worked out that our recruiting has not been very good, and that it has been at odds with developments/changes in the game - looking at the respective midfields over the first few rounds (Lions, Eagles, Tigers v MFC) has said it all

- he stepped in to demand mature, hard bodies in the 2011 national and rookie drafts (despite our recruiter saying he had identified various other players), he moved heaven and earth to land Mitch Clark, the club parted ways with Barry Prendergast, and he has seemingly tried to land Collingwood's national recruiter, Jason Taylor, in the meantime

(leadership) - identified a leadership vacuum at the club - embarked on a rigorous selection program for the leadership group - canned most of 2011's leadership group, and promoted young players who are the future of this club (whilst acknowledging they are indeed young and have a lot to learn). Brave decision - will pay dividends in the future

(list development) - recognised that we needed to be elite in the fitness department - convinced Dave Misson to join us - obviously had a hand in convincing Neil Craig to join us too. We now have an elite fitness and development staff and program - this will take time to bear fruit though - more than three AFL games, in fact more than one season

Common misconceptions IMO

- some here are saying Neeld should modify his game plan to suit the skills of the current player group, even though every expert seems to suggest that the old game plan could not consistently win big games (despite, at times, being pretty to watch)

- these same posters have stated previously that, unlike the Swans and North who refuse to bottom out so as to maintain an underlying competitiveness every season, in being patient and selecting talented kids over recycled players we will be able to compile a premiership list rather than a list that, whilst competitive, will only ever be a top 6 list (ie, pick an 18 year old at pick 39 instead of trading pick 39 for Josh Kennedy, pick Luke Tapscott with pick 18 rather than Luke Ball, etc)

Here's the rub though.

1. A good list involves a blend of older and younger players, not just plugging 50 games into kids only. Lists are a continuum - there's never an end point, unless of course the club folds.

2. Simply implementing a defective game plan just to suit a weak player group won't win us a flag - it will only superficially make us more competitive in the very short term.

My take out

Neeld needs time to implement proper structures, identify and recruit better players, and introduce an elite fitness program. He's doing all of these things. But it will take TIME.

It's not his fault we've had to endure a terribly long, horribly bad, rebuild over many years which hasn't got us to where it should have.

It is the players who need to adapt to a modern, effective game plan - if they can't, they'll be playing elsewhere next year. There's absolutely no use in doing it the other way around - why try and nail a game plan that won't take us deep into the finals even if it will win us the odd game during the year against a bottom 4 side?!

In short, I'm glad Neeld's recognised this and is not burying his head in the sand, like some others here. He's taking steps to fix it. Actively. And he needs our support.

He's got mine. Give him yours.

[Fitz Fitzpatrick 886]

" It is the players who need to adapt to a modern, effective game plan - if they can't, they'll be playing elsewhere next year. There's absolutely no use in doing it the other way around - why try and nail a game plan that won't take us deep into the finals even if it will win us the odd game during the year against a bottom 4 side?! "

Probaly the key point in this whole discussion. This paragraph justifies exactly why neeld and co are following the path they are. Great post.

[Fitz Fitzpatrick 886]

Neeld is the solution. Of that, I am absolutely convinced. I'm just relieved we managed to land him before he realised how ordinary our list actually is.

My view about Neeld is based on his actions and insights thus far. In short, he has quickly identified the problems and has already taken steps to deal with them effectively.

Actions

(game plan) recognised Bailey's game plan, whilst attractive to some supporters (despite resulting in an incredibly poor win-loss ratio over 4 years), would not consistently win us games against good opposition, particularly in finals

- sought to implement a new, effective game plan that, once properly understood and executed by the players (which, clearly, it is not yet), should help us win big games

(recruiting) quickly worked out that our recruiting has not been very good, and that it has been at odds with developments/changes in the game - looking at the respective midfields over the first few rounds (Lions, Eagles, Tigers v MFC) has said it all

- he stepped in to demand mature, hard bodies in the 2011 national and rookie drafts (despite our recruiter saying he had identified various other players), he moved heaven and earth to land Mitch Clark, the club parted ways with Barry Prendergast, and he has seemingly tried to land Collingwood's national recruiter, Jason Taylor, in the meantime

(leadership) - identified a leadership vacuum at the club - embarked on a rigorous selection program for the leadership group - canned most of 2011's leadership group, and promoted young players who are the future of this club (whilst acknowledging they are indeed young and have a lot to learn). Brave decision - will pay dividends in the future

(list development) - recognised that we needed to be elite in the fitness department - convinced Dave Misson to join us - obviously had a hand in convincing Neil Craig to join us too. We now have an elite fitness and development staff and program - this will take time to bear fruit though - more than three AFL games, in fact more than one season

Common misconceptions IMO

- some here are saying Neeld should modify his game plan to suit the skills of the current player group, even though every expert seems to suggest that the old game plan could not consistently win big games (despite, at times, being pretty to watch)

- these same posters have stated previously that, unlike the Swans and North who refuse to bottom out so as to maintain an underlying competitiveness every season, in being patient and selecting talented kids over recycled players we will be able to compile a premiership list rather than a list that, whilst competitive, will only ever be a top 6 list (ie, pick an 18 year old at pick 39 instead of trading pick 39 for Josh Kennedy, pick Luke Tapscott with pick 18 rather than Luke Ball, etc)

Here's the rub though.

1. A good list involves a blend of older and younger players, not just plugging 50 games into kids only. Lists are a continuum - there's never an end point, unless of course the club folds.

2. Simply implementing a defective game plan just to suit a weak player group won't win us a flag - it will only superficially make us more competitive in the very short term.

My take out

Neeld needs time to implement proper structures, identify and recruit better players, and introduce an elite fitness program. He's doing all of these things. But it will take TIME.

It's not his fault we've had to endure a terribly long, horribly bad, rebuild over many years which hasn't got us to where it should have.

It is the players who need to adapt to a modern, effective game plan - if they can't, they'll be playing elsewhere next year. There's absolutely no use in doing it the other way around - why try and nail a game plan that won't take us deep into the finals even if it will win us the odd game during the year against a bottom 4 side?!

In short, I'm glad Neeld's recognised this and is not burying his head in the sand, like some others here. He's taking steps to fix it. Actively. And he needs our support.

He's got mine. Give him yours.

Ron Burgundy, this is the first post ive seen written since "the sky fell down" after rd 1 that hits the nail on the head as far as my point of view goes.

A lot of supporters cant see the wood for the trees but i feel nothing but confidence that MFC is heading in the right direction. it will take time, probaly quite a bit of time but we have some of the best in the business developing this list now and WHEN it all comes together we are in for one enjoyable ride. Instead of jumping at shadows every time one of the kids has a bad game or we cop a hiding we should keep our eye on the big picture.

i stated an analogy in another thread. i see this like the marinnes. the recruits must be broken down first, before they can be remoulded in to an effective fighting force. same with this list. at the moment they can not play AFL football effectively. they are in the AFL but they do not know HOW to play AFL. neeld is stripping things back to the basics. I am as optimistic as i was in October and am determined to enjoy the ride cause when success does come to this club it will taste Oh so *&$#ing sweet mate

[McQueen 17,864]

Neeld is the solution. Of that, I am absolutely convinced. I'm just relieved we managed to land him before he realised how ordinary our list actually is.

My view about Neeld is based on his actions and insights thus far. In short, he has quickly identified the problems and has already taken steps to deal with them effectively.

Actions

(game plan) recognised Bailey's game plan, whilst attractive to some supporters (despite resulting in an incredibly poor win-loss ratio over 4 years), would not consistently win us games against good opposition, particularly in finals

- sought to implement a new, effective game plan that, once properly understood and executed by the players (which, clearly, it is not yet), should help us win big games

(recruiting) quickly worked out that our recruiting has not been very good, and that it has been at odds with developments/changes in the game - looking at the respective midfields over the first few rounds (Lions, Eagles, Tigers v MFC) has said it all

- he stepped in to demand mature, hard bodies in the 2011 national and rookie drafts (despite our recruiter saying he had identified various other players), he moved heaven and earth to land Mitch Clark, the club parted ways with Barry Prendergast, and he has seemingly tried to land Collingwood's national recruiter, Jason Taylor, in the meantime

(leadership) - identified a leadership vacuum at the club - embarked on a rigorous selection program for the leadership group - canned most of 2011's leadership group, and promoted young players who are the future of this club (whilst acknowledging they are indeed young and have a lot to learn). Brave decision - will pay dividends in the future

(list development) - recognised that we needed to be elite in the fitness department - convinced Dave Misson to join us - obviously had a hand in convincing Neil Craig to join us too. We now have an elite fitness and development staff and program - this will take time to bear fruit though - more than three AFL games, in fact more than one season

Common misconceptions IMO

- some here are saying Neeld should modify his game plan to suit the skills of the current player group, even though every expert seems to suggest that the old game plan could not consistently win big games (despite, at times, being pretty to watch)

- these same posters have stated previously that, unlike the Swans and North who refuse to bottom out so as to maintain an underlying competitiveness every season, in being patient and selecting talented kids over recycled players we will be able to compile a premiership list rather than a list that, whilst competitive, will only ever be a top 6 list (ie, pick an 18 year old at pick 39 instead of trading pick 39 for Josh Kennedy, pick Luke Tapscott with pick 18 rather than Luke Ball, etc)

Here's the rub though.

1. A good list involves a blend of older and younger players, not just plugging 50 games into kids only. Lists are a continuum - there's never an end point, unless of course the club folds.

2. Simply implementing a defective game plan just to suit a weak player group won't win us a flag - it will only superficially make us more competitive in the very short term.

My take out

Neeld needs time to implement proper structures, identify and recruit better players, and introduce an elite fitness program. He's doing all of these things. But it will take TIME.

It's not his fault we've had to endure a terribly long, horribly bad, rebuild over many years which hasn't got us to where it should have.

It is the players who need to adapt to a modern, effective game plan - if they can't, they'll be playing elsewhere next year. There's absolutely no use in doing it the other way around - why try and nail a game plan that won't take us deep into the finals even if it will win us the odd game during the year against a bottom 4 side?!

In short, I'm glad Neeld's recognised this and is not burying his head in the sand, like some others here. He's taking steps to fix it. Actively. And he needs our support.

He's got mine. Give him yours.

Agree with most of what you've said Ron. Thanks for your detailed analysis.

Neeld will pull this list apart to find out what's wrong with it and then put it back together in a way that sees it performing consistently. The reasons for past years of fluctuations need to be isolated and rectified.

[angrydee 842]

Neeld is the solution. Of that, I am absolutely convinced. I'm just relieved we managed to land him before he realised how ordinary our list actually is.

My view about Neeld is based on his actions and insights thus far. In short, he has quickly identified the problems and has already taken steps to deal with them effectively.

Actions

(game plan) recognised Bailey's game plan, whilst attractive to some supporters (despite resulting in an incredibly poor win-loss ratio over 4 years), would not consistently win us games against good opposition, particularly in finals

- sought to implement a new, effective game plan that, once properly understood and executed by the players (which, clearly, it is not yet), should help us win big games

(recruiting) quickly worked out that our recruiting has not been very good, and that it has been at odds with developments/changes in the game - looking at the respective midfields over the first few rounds (Lions, Eagles, Tigers v MFC) has said it all

- he stepped in to demand mature, hard bodies in the 2011 national and rookie drafts (despite our recruiter saying he had identified various other players), he moved heaven and earth to land Mitch Clark, the club parted ways with Barry Prendergast, and he has seemingly tried to land Collingwood's national recruiter, Jason Taylor, in the meantime

(leadership) - identified a leadership vacuum at the club - embarked on a rigorous selection program for the leadership group - canned most of 2011's leadership group, and promoted young players who are the future of this club (whilst acknowledging they are indeed young and have a lot to learn). Brave decision - will pay dividends in the future

(list development) - recognised that we needed to be elite in the fitness department - convinced Dave Misson to join us - obviously had a hand in convincing Neil Craig to join us too. We now have an elite fitness and development staff and program - this will take time to bear fruit though - more than three AFL games, in fact more than one season

Common misconceptions IMO

- some here are saying Neeld should modify his game plan to suit the skills of the current player group, even though every expert seems to suggest that the old game plan could not consistently win big games (despite, at times, being pretty to watch)

- these same posters have stated previously that, unlike the Swans and North who refuse to bottom out so as to maintain an underlying competitiveness every season, in being patient and selecting talented kids over recycled players we will be able to compile a premiership list rather than a list that, whilst competitive, will only ever be a top 6 list (ie, pick an 18 year old at pick 39 instead of trading pick 39 for Josh Kennedy, pick Luke Tapscott with pick 18 rather than Luke Ball, etc)

Here's the rub though.

1. A good list involves a blend of older and younger players, not just plugging 50 games into kids only. Lists are a continuum - there's never an end point, unless of course the club folds.

2. Simply implementing a defective game plan just to suit a weak player group won't win us a flag - it will only superficially make us more competitive in the very short term.

My take out

Neeld needs time to implement proper structures, identify and recruit better players, and introduce an elite fitness program. He's doing all of these things. But it will take TIME.

It's not his fault we've had to endure a terribly long, horribly bad, rebuild over many years which hasn't got us to where it should have.

It is the players who need to adapt to a modern, effective game plan - if they can't, they'll be playing elsewhere next year. There's absolutely no use in doing it the other way around - why try and nail a game plan that won't take us deep into the finals even if it will win us the odd game during the year against a bottom 4 side?!

In short, I'm glad Neeld's recognised this and is not burying his head in the sand, like some others here. He's taking steps to fix it. Actively. And he needs our support.

He's got mine. Give him yours.

At last, commonsense and an understanding of the realities that confront us. Neeld has my total support atm.

I hope and fervently pray he still has it in 3 years time.

[Range Rover 1,935]

As a lifelong supporter - like you - I too am starting to feel a little concerned that rather than seeing Mark Neeld's "we won't die wondering" come to fruition, that I will instead rock off this mortal coil sometime in the next 30 years or so, with only the memory of being there in 1964.

Bangkok D ... count yourself lucky that you at least have that. Most of the rest of us have bubkus.

[AzzKikA 2,371]

Does anyone on this board know what confidence is?

[beelzebub 23,312]

I really cant see how much can change wholesale from week to week. Something as perillous as the Titaninc takes time to turn.

For all intents and purposes this season is gone from the perspective of thinking we will play much constructive and competitive football, at least in teh first half of the year, let alone finals .

Strike a line through 2012, its wrtitten off , already. Where we can only reasonably expcet to measure any progress will be at seasons end and after we see our revised list after draft, trade and cullings.

Neeld obviously hasnt got sufficient cattle not the spread of quality therin to make any substantial gains in the short term. Its a damining testiminy to the failure of the last 5 years of opportunities.

My only interest now for 2012 is to see how the WALk of Neeld impacts ( if at all, and hopefully does) on this team. I reiterate my previous comment... all talk out of this club presently is worth nada.

Go Dees, Go Neeld, you certainly have your work cut out for you.

How many times do we have to go through this crap before we actually wind up with a team who CAN play football ??

[The Chazz 4,077]

I really cant see how much can change wholesale from week to week. Something as perillous as the Titaninc takes time to turn.

For all intents and purposes this season is gone from the perspective of thinking we will play much constructive and competitive football, at least in teh first half of the year, let alone finals .

Strike a line through 2012, its wrtitten off , already. Where we can only reasonably expcet to measure any progress will be at seasons end and after we see our revised list after draft, trade and cullings.

Neeld obviously hasnt got sufficient cattle not the spread of quality therin to make any substantial gains in the short term. Its a damining testiminy to the failure of the last 5 years of opportunities.

My only interest now for 2012 is to see how the WALk of Neeld impacts ( if at all, and hopefully does) on this team. I reiterate my previous comment... all talk out of this club presently is worth nada.

Go Dees, Go Neeld, you certainly have your work cut out for you.

How many times do we have to go through this crap before we actually wind up with a team who CAN play football ??

Good post. I think your last sentence explains how the majority on here are feeling.

The new coach comes out stating that "we will be the hardest team to play against" and "we won't die wondering", well, at this early stage, he has had 3 games to give us some confidence that he is the man, and so far, we have been uncompetitive in all those outings. Don't forget - 2 of those games are against teams that aren't much good.

[daisycutter 29,600]

And our lack of uncontested possies says we are timid and/or lazy.

or too constrained by rigidly following game plan instructions?

Maybe all 3 factors.....I just don't know, but I do know that the players are better than what we are seeing

I suspect the game plan is being implemented as the "great leap forward" rather than being implemented incrementally

It's a bit hackneyed but "crawl before you walk" comes to mind

Mind you these players as a group do seem pretty fragile mentally