101 vs Sydney worse than 186 vs Cats?

[The Chazz 4,077]

The lack of self belief and confidence surely comes from being told that the way they've been playing isn't working - or even from being there on that fateful 186 day? Change, especially change at a fundamental level, takes time. According to what Misson is saying (and others it seems), the players don't even know how to train properly, they've had such an easy ride.

Agree that it's really serious though, and that indeed, perhaps the worse is yet to come.

This part frustrates the hell out of me. Sure, the players have been made well aware of what they need to change and do in order to become a better football team. Why the hell aren't they all taking it on board, and wanting to become better? This carp about not liking change, etc is just rubbish, a % of the playing group do not crave success, and are bringing those down that do. The sooner we remove them from the playing list, the better we will be. If I were Neeld, I would ensure those players are made aware of where the Club rates them, and ensure that they play a majority of the remaining season at Casey. Give them time to "test the waters" of other Clubs, so that if they leave via Free Agency, we get something for it in forms of compensation. Otherwise, we will end up in a Bruce-like situation, where these players are out of contract at the end of the year, and will most likely walk and leave us with nothing in return. Bruce will never be forgiven for that, and I continue to hope he plays VFL for the remainder of his career.

I attending a luncheon recently where John Eales was the guest speaker. When he was Captain of the Wallabies, prior to a game in the pre-match huddle, he looked at all of his players and realised that certain players were not the best players going around, but he would not swap them for anyone in the world. He had belief and trust is these players, knowing that they all will play their role. Eales also said that the Wallabies sides he Captained were often not the best in the world, they weren't the niggest/fastest/strongest, so instead of pretending to be, they decided that they would be the smartest. They soon become the best in the world.

Perhaps Neeld is thinking that dropping all of Moloney/Sylvia/Davey/Green, given the next 2 games we are in for some hurt (may have been thinking that 4 weeks ago). Instead of sending a team full of kids out there to get slaughtered, he may have hoped that leaving the "experienced bodies" might have restricted the flogging. With Carlton, Essendon and Collingwood coming up, I wouldn't be surprised if most of those named players will continue to play, but the week after the bye, when we have our so called "easier" run, perhaps that might be the end for those players.

The other thing that Eales said that I think is quite interesting, and shows the attitude of professional, elite teams. When the Wallabies were ranked 6th or so in the worl in the late 80's early 90's, they never wanted to be as good as the Kiwi's, they wanted to be far greater than them. It meant that their work was never done. At the moment, there is a lot of talk about our fitness needing to improve to be competitive against the top 4 teams. F**k that, I want us to be the team that all other teams want to be like, not us being like them. It's part of the reason why Geelong have been so good for such a long time, they never got to the top and rested, they continually wanted to be better than what they were.

I apologise for this post not being in reply to the OP. In anser to the opening question, 186 and 101 were totally different games with diffferent purposes. Their was a player revolt in 186, which is totally unacceptable at any level of sport or employment for that matter. 101 was just a pathetic performance from a team that has absolutely no belief in themselves. They weren't the deliberate witches hats like they were last year.

[Retrospective 104]

...and now it seems 101 (and 0-8) is revealing the issues that were papered over after 186 with a quick coach sacking.

Dysfunction and/ or denial across almost all aspects of the club.

[jimcor 212]

This part frustrates the hell out of me. Sure, the players have been made well aware of what they need to change and do in order to become a better football team. Why the hell aren't they all taking it on board, and wanting to become better? This carp about not liking change, etc is just rubbish, a % of the playing group do not crave success, and are bringing those down that do. The sooner we remove them from the playing list, the better we will be. If I were Neeld, I would ensure those players are made aware of where the Club rates them, and ensure that they play a majority of the remaining season at Casey. Give them time to "test the waters" of other Clubs, so that if they leave via Free Agency, we get something for it in forms of compensation. Otherwise, we will end up in a Bruce-like situation, where these players are out of contract at the end of the year, and will most likely walk and leave us with nothing in return. Bruce will never be forgiven for that, and I continue to hope he plays VFL for the remainder of his career.

I attending a luncheon recently where John Eales was the guest speaker. When he was Captain of the Wallabies, prior to a game in the pre-match huddle, he looked at all of his players and realised that certain players were not the best players going around, but he would not swap them for anyone in the world. He had belief and trust is these players, knowing that they all will play their role. Eales also said that the Wallabies sides he Captained were often not the best in the world, they weren't the niggest/fastest/strongest, so instead of pretending to be, they decided that they would be the smartest. They soon become the best in the world.

Perhaps Neeld is thinking that dropping all of Moloney/Sylvia/Davey/Green, given the next 2 games we are in for some hurt (may have been thinking that 4 weeks ago). Instead of sending a team full of kids out there to get slaughtered, he may have hoped that leaving the "experienced bodies" might have restricted the flogging. With Carlton, Essendon and Collingwood coming up, I wouldn't be surprised if most of those named players will continue to play, but the week after the bye, when we have our so called "easier" run, perhaps that might be the end for those players.

The other thing that Eales said that I think is quite interesting, and shows the attitude of professional, elite teams. When the Wallabies were ranked 6th or so in the worl in the late 80's early 90's, they never wanted to be as good as the Kiwi's, they wanted to be far greater than them. It meant that their work was never done. At the moment, there is a lot of talk about our fitness needing to improve to be competitive against the top 4 teams. F**k that, I want us to be the team that all other teams want to be like, not us being like them. It's part of the reason why Geelong have been so good for such a long time, they never got to the top and rested, they continually wanted to be better than what they were.

I apologise for this post not being in reply to the OP. In anser to the opening question, 186 and 101 were totally different games with diffferent purposes. Their was a player revolt in 186, which is totally unacceptable at any level of sport or employment for that matter. 101 was just a pathetic performance from a team that has absolutely no belief in themselves. They weren't the deliberate witches hats like they were last year.

Agree with all that. The reckoning has to wait until after the VFL bye as another slaughter would be counter-productive and there needs to be given a last chance for some like Sylvia ( not Moloney!).