Don't Blame Neeld

[old dee 23,699]

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

DC you are one up on me.

The only thing I have confidence in is that the players are not up to it.

Can you please explain how you have confidence that they are better than they are playing.

For two years now we have been only able to beat teams in the bottom half dozen and get plastered by the top 8 remember 186.

This year we will struggle to win any games they do not look like good players to me

[rpfc 28,239]

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

I have no doubt they are fragile upstairs. Our senior players are too few and not good enough - in both talent and application.

The young leaders are struggling with the extra burden that their counterparts at other teams don't have to worry about and in the background is a new gameplan derived out of defence and discipline to structures.

It's a congruence of negatives creating this sh!tstorm.

They are not this bad.

No established side is this bad.

[old dee 23,699]

I have no doubt they are fragile upstairs. Our senior players are too few and not good enough - in both talent and application.

The young leaders are struggling with the extra burden that their counterparts at other teams don't have to worry about and in the background is a new gameplan derived out of defence and discipline to structures.

It's a congruence of negatives creating this sh!tstorm.

They are not this bad.

No established side is this bad.

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

[rpfc 28,239]

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

OD, we are a bad team. But right now we are travelling worse than GC and are rivalling GWS - we are not that bad.

[old dee 23,699]

OD, we are a bad team. But right now we are travelling worse than GC and are rivalling GWS - we are not that bad.

As I said a few weeks ago I would have agreed with you.

But how can we ignore the results

[dpositive 1,663]

I have no doubt they are fragile upstairs. Our senior players are too few and not good enough - in both talent and application.

The young leaders are struggling with the extra burden that their counterparts at other teams don't have to worry about and in the background is a new gameplan derived out of defence and discipline to structures.

It's a congruence of negatives creating this sh!tstorm.

They are not this bad.

No established side is this bad.

Its all between the ears after all

I think if you see the development of the widely criticised Jack Watts you can see a boy in the beginning taking big hits from bigger bodies now bulking up and using the skills he has to improve He is becoming more of a man on the field

Its not possible to leap forward all the time

Player and body type were recruited with some aim in mind. Neeld Knew roughly what we had and I still maintain he must use that with a game plan that uses those attributes. And maybe some of that is just exposing the boys to the mens game.

I do believe we do look bigger and fitter this year so maybe an impact of the new fitness regime but even that growth takes some time for developing bodies and minds to adjust to.

It has been pointed out that all teams need a mixture of attributes and I think our squad has that mix. Some Talls, some smalls, some fast, some slow, some insiders, some outside runners,some gifted, some genuine triers. Its a matter of getting the right mix Oh and getting the right techniques of the game

I guess thats why Im not a coach and I am still willing to give Neeld and Co a good chance to get it right

BUT

I would like to see more signs of improvement and it isnt really being reported here or any where else

Can we still get those helpful reports from training from the Dlanders and as I have said elesewhere the positive body and real language fr5om the coach and coaching group.

I thought GLyon last night was good Obvious disappointment and honesty but acknowledgement that there were still some positives.

Its just not my ID its also my attitude.

[PaulRB 6,328]

I think Ron's analysis and advice of patience is valid. It's also worth noting that with Moloney, Jurrah and Sylvia out, we are missing our No# 1 midfielder from last year, our No#1 goal kicker from last year and an quality hard bodied mid.

Their absences have robbed the team of experience, solid bodies and finish...

[old dee 23,699]

Its all between the ears after all

I think if you see the development of the widely criticised Jack Watts you can see a boy in the beginning taking big hits from bigger bodies now bulking up and using the skills he has to improve He is becoming more of a man on the field

Its not possible to leap forward all the time

Player and body type were recruited with some aim in mind. Neeld Knew roughly what we had and I still maintain he must use that with a game plan that uses those attributes. And maybe some of that is just exposing the boys to the mens game.

I do believe we do look bigger and fitter this year so maybe an impact of the new fitness regime but even that growth takes some time for developing bodies and minds to adjust to.

It has been pointed out that all teams need a mixture of attributes and I think our squad has that mix. Some Talls, some smalls, some fast, some slow, some insiders, some outside runners,some gifted, some genuine triers. Its a matter of getting the right mix Oh and getting the right techniques of the game

I guess thats why Im not a coach and I am still willing to give Neeld and Co a good chance to get it right

BUT

I would like to see more signs of improvement and it isnt really being reported here or any where else

Can we still get those helpful reports from training from the Dlanders and as I have said elesewhere the positive body and real language fr5om the coach and coaching group.

I thought GLyon last night was good Obvious disappointment and honesty but acknowledgement that there were still some positives.

Its just not my ID its also my attitude.

Mate I think we have all stopped going.

It gets difficult to say we look good at training and a certain player is getting bigger and stronger

And then have them perform like they have over last half dozen weeks.

It all sounds a little hollow.

[dpositive 1,663]

Mate I think we have all stopped going.

It gets difficult to say we look good at training and a certain player is getting bigger and stronger

And then have them perform like they have over last half dozen weeks.

It all sounds a little hollow.

Like the rest of the threads nothing sounds hollow to me

All comments are the real and genuine thoughts of posters so I do think they carry some weight.

Looking at the thread on "culture" has really made me think

i havent commented as I am not sure what I can contribute

AT this stage I would just say that the culture is all stakeholders

I do not see the current coach making the culture, It is all the coaches , players, administrators,members and supporters who make the culture. It is the past, the present and the future. It is strong.

It is not our current performance on the field and I think all recognise that.

It is not about accepting defeat easily despite our long history with that. As I said earlier there may be some value in many dlanders contributing in relaying that message to players with the message that we also see value in effort

I think Ive gone beyond my original statemnt and said more than I wanted with little thought

Our culture is deep and needs to be very seriously considered, identified, communicated, reinforced in word and action

Go Dees

[daisycutter 29,600]

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

OD no-one is saying they are a good side, just that they are playing below what they are capable of and what they have shown at times in the past. Currently they have gone backwards as a team.

What I thought we are discussing here is the question of why (and hopefully how to turn i around).

Morale? Lazy? Unfit? Constraints of Game Plan? Leadership? Youth? Coaching? Etc etc

I don't know. Probably some combination of the above.

But I do know they are playing below their capability individually and as a team

They just cannot be as bad as what we are seeing

[Weedster 174]

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.

Would agree with this post in all but one point - our over-correction has killed our forward strategy. I'm all for embracing a stronger defensive structure - lord knows nobody leaked goals like us under DB - but we are like rabbits in the spotlight once we get past centre - no flair, no imagination, no risk takers, no-one presenting except poor old Clark - I am a massive supporter of Neeld, but surely it's not too much to expect a coaching team which includes not only himself, but also Brown, Rawlings, Royal & Craig to come up with something which resembles attack as well.

[BangkokDemon 96]

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

RR I do most certainly count myself as a "lucky one",.

But it would give me greater pleasure to enjoy a few more more and to know that many will also enjoy the delights of Flag #13, 14, 15 and more.

So, as frustrating as things are right now, we all need to look at the bigger picture, rather than a game here or there.

I believe what is happening is nothing short of a "revolution" in its truest sense.

Jimmy started the battle and won the first few rounds off the field.

Now our focus is on an even more important battle - how we play the game.

For too long we have settled for winning a couple of bits and pieces here and there.

And, when it came to winning the biggest prize of all - we had 2 chances and blew them both...badly.

I believe we now have a club with a coach and supporters who are no longer willing to just say "we tried"...and failed.

I hope the players (several who will likely not be there when the moment comes) get this message.

From the 2 games I have seen, some are beginning to want the same; others are trying and bewildered by the change and others are just not good enough.

But unlike when we had a real tilt in the late 1980s and around 2000, this time we seem to have a vastly different club who is prepared to back the team and their coaches.

Of course there will be bickering, back stabbing and in-fighting (look at the current Maggie stoush) - that's football and all club sports.

in times gone by 186 might have put us in a coffin by now. Instead, the club united, made some changes and got on with it.

Part of getting on with it was contracting a coach who didn't think like us and who was not prepared to let things just go on as they had.

This has meant a lot of pain.

But, Mark Neeld and most of those in his group know what success means and I believe now have the right fundamentals (and support mechanisms) to put those things in place.

As he said "at least we won't die, not knowing"...

One way or another, that is what is being put in place.

[Fat Tony 5,216]

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.

Trying to predict the 2015 premiership winning game plan is futile given how quickly the game evolves and how much the rules can change.

I admire your optimism in the tough talking Neeld despite three consecutive hidings (including two to ordinary sides at home). However, I don’t. His short term goal is to get the team playing at its optimal every week. IMO he is failing badly on this score at the moment, in significant part because his game plan is obsolete, his team selection is unbalanced and the team is lacking the confidence to attack.

Moreover, the success of any new training methods, leadership appointments and recruiting programmes can only be measured over the long term. We have no idea if they will eventually prove successful and strong confidence on this is just blind faith.

Edited April 17, 2012 by Fat Tony

[BangkokDemon 96]

Trying to predict the 2015 premiership winning game plan is a futile given how quickly the game evolves and how much the rules can change.

I admire your optimism in the tough talking Neeld despite three consecutive hidings (including two to ordinary sides at home). However, I don’t. His short term goal is to get the team playing at its optimal every week. IMO he is failing badly on this score at the moment, in significant part because his game plan is obsolete, his team selection is unbalanced and the team is lacking the confidence to attack.

Moreover, the success of any new training methods, leadership appointments and recruiting programmes can only be measured over the long term. We have no idea if they will eventually prove successful and strong confidence on this is just blind faith.

You contradict yourself a bit.

First you want immediate on field success (as we all do, I guess)

Then you want things to happen in the long term without any building program (which is what is happening right now).

For most of the last 50 years, we have worked this way and look where we are.

I don't like seeing such a pathetic display as last weekend against the Tigers.

But I am more fed up with not winning a premiership...aren't you ?

[Vipercrunch 2,820]

• Neeld is a rookie coach and like all new coaches (and old for that matter), he will make mistakes on every level including game plan and player management.
  
• He is working with poorly developed players, players who have often been universally seen as the best talent in the country on draft day, but have not turned into AFL standard players.
  
• The players are damaged and shell shocked. Whatever confidence they might have before a game will dissapate when the going gets tough.
  
• It will take time to change all that around - experience will reduce coach error, time and better coaching will help development and most (but not all) of the players will regain their feet (confidence).
  

The pre-season training reports mislead us to some degree about where the team was at, but I think it showed where we are going. The journey is just going to take longer than we hoped.

[Fat Tony 5,216]

You contradict yourself a bit.

First you want immediate on field success (as we all do, I guess)

Then you want things to happen in the long term without any building program (which is what is happening right now).

For most of the last 50 years, we have worked this way and look where we are.

I don't like seeing such a pathetic display as last weekend against the Tigers.

But I am more fed up with not winning a premiership...aren't you ?

Building a long-term program need not come at the expense of insipid football.

[Tricky 341]

Building a long-term program need not come at the expense of insipid football.

A bit simplistic.

This is the same club that gave us 186, 6 rounds ago.

We were already insipid.

[old dee 23,699]

A bit simplistic.

This is the same club that gave us 186, 6 rounds ago.

We were already insipid.

All through the summer I kept tempering people's expectations with the line

"but they are the same basic cattle as 2011"

Unfortunately you are correct.

On present form another 186 is as close as 5th May

[BangkokDemon 96]

Building a long-term program need not come at the expense of insipid football.

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.

[bing181 9,193]

All through the summer I kept tempering people's expectations with the line

"but they are the same basic cattle as 2011"

But we don't even have the same cattle as 2011 - Sylvia, Jurrah, Moloney out, that's not nothing. Nor is the loss of Scully. OK, he didn't do much last year, but he showed a lot in 2010 (runner up RS etc. etc.), and if ever we could use some fast, run-all-day, it's now. Add to that (from the mids) Gysberts, who it would have been reasonable to assume would have come on, and once again, could have brought some useful ball-getting and ball-disposing to the mids. Finally, Trengove and McKenzie, also two of our solid mids, have had interrupted pre-seasons and are not quite the same cattle they were in 2010.

That's 1/3 of last year's regular/best 22 (and regular/best from 2010 for that matter) either missing or under-performing with fitness issues. If we COULD get the same cattle on the field, then perhaps we wouldn't be as far back as we are.

[old dee 23,699]

But we don't even have the same cattle as 2011 - Sylvia, Jurrah, Moloney out, that's not nothing. Nor is the loss of Scully. OK, he didn't do much last year, but he showed a lot in 2010 (runner up RS etc. etc.), and if ever we could use some fast, run-all-day, it's now. Add to that (from the mids) Gysberts, who it would have been reasonable to assume would have come on, and once again, could have brought some useful ball-getting and ball-disposing to the mids. Finally, Trengove and McKenzie, also two of our solid mids, have had interrupted pre-seasons and are not quite the same cattle they were in 2010.

That's 1/3 of last year's regular/best 22 (and regular/best from 2010 for that matter) either missing or under-performing with fitness issues. If we COULD get the same cattle on the field, then perhaps we wouldn't be as far back as we are.

bing I think you are looking for excuses.

We had injuries in 2010 and 2011 That I remember we seldom if ever had all our best players on the field.

If you were to take a survey of all comentators at present the popular opinion would be that we have a poor list.

We finished 12th in 2010, same in 2011 and god knows were this year 16 - 18 looks possible.

For the last three years we have been in the bottom third of the ladder.

Similar cattle similar results for mine.

Time to admit it mate we have a poor playing group

[McQueen 17,864]

Trying to predict the 2015 premiership winning game plan is futile given how quickly the game evolves and how much the rules can change.

I admire your optimism in the tough talking Neeld despite three consecutive hidings (including two to ordinary sides at home). However, I don’t. His short term goal is to get the team playing at its optimal every week. IMO he is failing badly on this score at the moment, in significant part because his game plan is obsolete, his team selection is unbalanced and the team is lacking the confidence to attack.

Moreover, the success of any new training methods, leadership appointments and recruiting programmes can only be measured over the long term. We have no idea if they will eventually prove successful and strong confidence on this is just blind faith.

Futile response.

With respect Tony, almost every comment you make in regard to what Neeld and co are doing after only 3 rounds is the main problem with supporters and club culture. You don't want to see change and when it's forced upon the club and the outcomes are shitty then there's the problem. New coach knows nothing! We are insipid. Back to the good old days of doing the same stuff and expecting a better result!!

Give the bloke a chance. FFS.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

bing I think you are looking for excuses.

We had injuries in 2010 and 2011 That I remember we seldom if ever had all our best players on the field.

If you were to take a survey of all comentators at present the popular opinion would be that we have a poor list.

We finished 12th in 2010, same in 2011 and god knows were this year 16 - 18 looks possible.

For the last three years we have been in the bottom third of the ladder.

Similar cattle similar results for mine.

Time to admit it mate we have a poor playing group

Best way to measure out team is to see how many would get a game at another club; I don't think there would be many.

Of our 22 best players I'd say Frawley, Clark, Sylvia, Howe, Trengove, Watts (maybe), and possibles (fringe) being Jones, Jamar, Moloney, Rivers, Garland, Grimes and Jurrah (?)

Of those mentioned they wouldn't get a game at every club but more likely at a club that needed a particular type of player where that club had a gap.

Not real exciting is it?

[bing181 9,193]

bing I think you are looking for excuses. We had injuries in 2010 and 2011 That I remember we seldom if ever had all our best players on the field. Time to admit it mate we have a poor playing group

Sure we had injuries last year, but if you look at the games we won, and won well, the likes of Sylvia, Jurrah, Moloney, Gysberts, Scully and McKenzie all featured. All are missing (or coming back from injury- McKenzie).

I'm not looking for excuses, because I'm not looking for a problem to make excuses for. We have a young list (yes, still ...), an absence of A-grade senior players, plus some key injuries, and to turn this around is a process that will take time. I don't have a problem either with the process or the time it'll take. Amongst the players who will take us forward, I don't see we have a poor playing group at all - though we do have a playing group that's a bit lost for the moment, which is understandable given recent upheavals.

This is a discussion to have at the end of the season, not after 3 games.

[Guest gidon]

I think Neeld has under performed in his 3 games. I'm not saying he is no good, I'm just saying Neeld and the players have not reached the level most were expecting. The Media talking about our 'horror start' is testiment to our under performance. I expected competitive performances and at least 1 win over the Lions.

The most concerning aspect to our performance is that we have lost everything that we did well in previous years. I've read articles over pre season about Neelds tough style of coaching, the need to be elite in sport science and performance, and Neeld recognizing the players ability to be offensive, but lack of defensive ability.

It's obvious that the club has lost it's ability to be offensive in the first 3 weeks. Our fitness is still poor. We can't create enough run and spread. Our top talent is out of form. Defensively we are terrible. Etc etc.

To me it's simple. Build on the strengths. Create a defensive Collingwood style of game to compliment the offensive flair we had. Don't coach one side of the game to take away what the club did well. A poor start from a coach with massive ability. Neeld is a reflection of the playing goup.