10 steps to a broken club...

[Pitchy 196]

10 steps to a broken club:

1) Post 2010 season - Club does expensive trust exercise with Leading Teams. Players are told to be honest. They say Schwab and Connolly are unworkable, they love Bailey.

2) Schwab gets results sent to him. He looks over them, realises he will not get his own contract renewed if he publishes. Decides to not show anyone.

3) Player trust gets eroded in the administration cos they spoke up and it was hidden and nothing changed.

4) Eventually, players push case with McClardy and Stynes. They listen, give word Bailey is safe and Schwab is gone.

5) 186 loss to Cats. (though top team Collingwood lose to the Cats by 100 points a few weeks later)

6) Schwab works it to the board and stays, Bailey goes, Neeld is appointed.

7) 2012 - club leaders who spoke up against Schwab are all sacked from their leadership positions, publicly humiliated.

8) Neeld comes in a little naively. Tells everyone they are below professional standard and implements boundary stoppage based game plan.

9) We don't win many stoppages, lose games badly, senior players disenfranchised and/or dropped.

10) We have an unresolvable fracture between playing group and administration. Neeld has the poison chalice and has lost the players before he really began.

In another world;

1) Schwab tables the report.

2) Schwab goes, Bailey stays for one more year to finish his plan.

3) Players focus on job at hand.

3) No distractions means we lose to the Cats only as badly as the Pies did.

3) We win the Port Rnd 22 game and show 10-11 wins for the year and are on track.

4) We start this year that little bit more progressed and the club is united. We thrash Lions and go from there towards a 7-10th finish.

Thoughts:

We beat Adelaide by 96 point this time last year. Both teams have largely the same personell as last year and Adelaide (who have Bailey while we have Neil Craig) are flying now. The club can't unite until Schwab is gone. Poor Neeld is in a catch 22.

Personally (and this can't be defended but is just what I'd like to see):

Schwab goes, Neeld goes if winless by round 15. Casey coach and former awesome player Brett Lovett becomes caretaker coach for rest of year as we work toward get our collective club spirit back with a clean slate. The senior players who haven't stood up by seasons end are delisted.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,682]

I cannot comprehend how anyone thinks Neeld should be sacked this year let alone believes it might happen. I know we have all been kicked in the guts but get a grip on reality.

[bing181 8,300]

.... and they all lived happily ever after.

[deestar 159]

The tail shouldn't wag the dog !! For goodness sake !! Do you do a bad job at work because you don't like someone .... Wake up people what the fark has the CEO got to do with anything. 0% of an idea who ever entertains this

[rjay 24,099]

The tail shouldn't wag the dog !! For goodness sake !! Do you do a bad job at work because you don't like someone .... Wake up people what the fark has the CEO got to do with anything. 0% of an idea who ever entertains this

He makes decisions and in your workplace analogy the wrong decisions can send the place broke and everyone ends up out on the street unemployed. At its best many workplaces under perform because of poor management, staff morale is low etc. I'm happy for you that you have never had to work in such an environment.

[daisycutter 28,709]

10 steps to a broken club:

1) Post 2010 season - Club does expensive trust exercise with Leading Teams. Players are told to be honest. They say Schwab and Connolly are unworkable, they love Bailey.

Your whole argument revolves around "They say Schwab and Connolly are unworkable, they love Bailey"

Many other posters have also claimed the admin or CS or CC interfered with the players.

Now I can understand they did so with Bailey, but the players? How?

I have asked before for DETAILS of just how they did this but all I get is silence

Help me out here, I'm open-minded and I want to understand, but I want details and examples

I've always been strong on players not get involved in club politics and focussing on football, but I can understand (to a point) if they have been dragged into it by senior mgmt.

I don't want generalisations like "micro-management", "interfering" etc I want something I can hang my hat on

Comments?

[pantaloons 2,019]

11) After a round 10 defeat to Essendon drops the Demons to 0-10, the club holds a colouring competition open to the members whereby the winner gains a spot on the playing list. Plucked from obscurity, a random poster from Demonland named pantaloons wins the competition and surprisingly gains selection for the Queen's Birthday clash, where he kicks 10 goals on debut and leads the club to victory. More heroics ensue, and the Demons rattle off an improbable 12 straight wins and an unlikely finals berth on the back of young pantaloons' 103 goals and Coleman Medal from the forward pocket. More zany action ensues in the finals, where the club reaches the Grand Final after three straight wins by less than a kick, including a goal after the siren against Hawthorn in the prelim. The club then defeats West Coast in the Grand Final by 120 points and followed that up by using pick 22 on Jack Viney. The end.

Edited May 21, 2012 by pantaloons

[bing181 8,300]

I don't want generalisations like "micro-management", "interfering" etc I want something I can hang my hat on

Comments?

Don't hold your breath.

[Tatu 416]

Second post hmmm........

10 steps to a broken club:

1) Post 2010 season - Club does expensive trust exercise with Leading Teams. Players are told to be honest. They say Schwab and Connolly are unworkable, they love Bailey.

2) Schwab gets results sent to him. He looks over them, realises he will not get his own contract renewed if he publishes. Decides to not show anyone.

3) Player trust gets eroded in the administration cos they spoke up and it was hidden and nothing changed.

4) Eventually, players push case with McClardy and Stynes. They listen, give word Bailey is safe and Schwab is gone.

5) 186 loss to Cats. (though top team Collingwood lose to the Cats by 100 points a few weeks later)

6) Schwab works it to the board and stays, Bailey goes, Neeld is appointed.

7) 2012 - club leaders who spoke up against Schwab are all sacked from their leadership positions, publicly humiliated.

8) Neeld comes in a little naively. Tells everyone they are below professional standard and implements boundary stoppage based game plan.

9) We don't win many stoppages, lose games badly, senior players disenfranchised and/or dropped.

10) We have an unresolvable fracture between playing group and administration. Neeld has the poison chalice and has lost the players before he really began.

In another world;

1) Schwab tables the report.

2) Schwab goes, Bailey stays for one more year to finish his plan.

3) Players focus on job at hand.

3) No distractions means we lose to the Cats only as badly as the Pies did.

3) We win the Port Rnd 22 game and show 10-11 wins for the year and are on track.

4) We start this year that little bit more progressed and the club is united. We thrash Lions and go from there towards a 7-10th finish.

Thoughts:

We beat Adelaide by 96 point this time last year. Both teams have largely the same personell as last year and Adelaide (who have Bailey while we have Neil Craig) are flying now. The club can't unite until Schwab is gone. Poor Neeld is in a catch 22.

Personally (and this can't be defended but is just what I'd like to see):

Schwab goes, Neeld goes if winless by round 15. Casey coach and former awesome player Brett Lovett becomes caretaker coach for rest of year as we work toward get our collective club spirit back with a clean slate. The senior players who haven't stood up by seasons end are delisted.

[tonatopia 278]

You could be right, demonstrative. You just may be right. The fish does indeed rot at the head. If schwab betrayed the boys, why should the boys give their heart and soul if a traitor is in charge. Very interesting line of thought demonstrative. Very interesting.

Maybe schwab is the the rotten apple?

[Guest Jackie]

Good summary. This is how it is. Sadly the club has been torn apart. I hope there is a new beginning.

Edited May 21, 2012 by Jackie

[Red&BlueBlood 61]

Had me until started saying sack Neeld.

You want to sack the coach because the players are not pputting in???

Doesn't make sense, drop the lot and play the kids and give couch a game.

Bailey was a doosh.

[Carrot Top 947]

The rot was already there. Don't you remember the West Coast game? The one where the I-50 count sat at 22-3 at one point? There was rot to be seen with McLean and Bruce walking. This goes way back. Back to before 2008 and Bailey.

All this 186, players sulking and admin playing games is just a symptom of a disease that has been in this club for many years.

Edited May 21, 2012 by Carrot Top

[Sir Why You Little 35,143]

Neeld must mould these players...The players are paid to play for the club.

If these players do not want to or cannot cut it under elite circumstances, they must leave...

To win a Grand Final this club needs to get better, not pander to certain player groups.

Norm Smith would sort this out in a couple of days.

[Range Rover 1,935]

You could be right, demonstrative. You just may be right. The fish does indeed rot at the head. If schwab betrayed the boys, why should the boys give their heart and soul if a traitor is in charge. Very interesting line of thought demonstrative. Very interesting.

Maybe schwab is the the rotten apple?

The 'boys' should give their 'heart and soul' because they have been bestowed with the honour of representing the Melbourne Football Club.

Then there's the small matter of the $400k/year they're getting to lace up their frickin boots.

If they want to protest ... fine go and and have a whinge and protest. But first hand your jumper back and your match payments.

[Pitchy 196]

Your whole argument revolves around "They say Schwab and Connolly are unworkable, they love Bailey"

Many other posters have also claimed the admin or CS or CC interfered with the players.

Now I can understand they did so with Bailey, but the players? How?

I have asked before for DETAILS of just how they did this but all I get is silence

Help me out here, I'm open-minded and I want to understand, but I want details and examples

I've always been strong on players not get involved in club politics and focussing on football, but I can understand (to a point) if they have been dragged into it by senior mgmt.

I don't want generalisations like "micro-management", "interfering" etc I want something I can hang my hat on

Comments?

Nah Daisycutter, my argument revolves a trust exercise which was corrupted. I understand that you want to know if the players had a point to begin with to be upset with Schwab but his action to shelve the report speaks for itself as a supremely divisive act.

Put simply, the club's administration (Schwab) paid for a external process which asked for complete honesty. Leading Teams was famous for unifying Geelong pre-2007 flag. Schwab took the results and sat on them. Months later, Green and co. eventually put themselves on the line by bringing it up with Stynes and McClardy. Schwab was sacked then saved at the last minute by 186, and then went and knifed anyone critical of him. Simple as that.

To the victor goes the spoils.... we have a secure CEO free of the critical voices which emerged in the report. But we also have a trail of sackings, public humiliations, a demoralised ex-leadership group and a 0-8 start to the season.

[bing181 8,300]

Nah Daisycutter, my argument revolves a trust exercise which was corrupted. I understand that you want to know if the players had a point to begin with to be upset with Schwab but his action to shelve the report speaks for itself as a supremely divisive act.

Put simply, the club's administration (Schwab) paid for a external process which asked for complete honesty. Leading Teams was famous for unifying Geelong pre-2007 flag. Schwab took the results and sat on them. Months later, Green and co. eventually put themselves on the line by bringing it up with Stynes and McClardy. Schwab was sacked then saved at the last minute by 186, and then went and knifed anyone critical of him. Simple as that.

To the victor goes the spoils.... we have a secure CEO free of the critical voices which emerged in the report. But we also have a trail of sackings, public humiliations, a demoralised ex-leadership group and a 0-8 start to the season.

Nice scenario. You make this up all by yourself?

That report was acted upon - which is why we've had the complete revamp of the FD. And the CEO is answerable to the board.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

I cannot comprehend how anyone thinks Neeld should be sacked this year let alone believes it might happen. I know we have all been kicked in the guts but get a grip on reality.

Nice avatar Daaaaaaaaave...

The reality is after we lose to GWS and GC he will be under severe risk to lose his job. It's you that's missing the point. "Should" doesn't come into it in the context that you used it. Someone's head has to roll, even if it's not the right one, and you can't fire 50% of a list in one off season.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,682]

Well if Neeld gets the sack before the end of next season I will seriously question whether it is worth continiuing in my support of the MFC. I cannot comprehend how this might happen even if we go 0-22 this year. I would sooner see Schwab, Connolly & Royal shown the door and perhaps even as spill of the board before Neeld got the chop.

You don't turn around a 40 year old rotten culture overnight. You either back Neeld to do it (and wear the crap that goes with it along the way) or you second-guess yourself and continue to wallow in the medicority of near-enough is good enough.

[Choko 493]

Well if Neeld gets the sack before the end of next season I will seriously question whether it is worth continiuing in my support of the MFC. I cannot comprehend how this might happen even if we go 0-22 this year. I would sooner see Schwab, Connolly & Royal shown the door and perhaps even as spill of the board before Neeld got the chop.

You don't turn around a 40 year old rotten culture overnight. You either back Neeld to do it (and wear the crap that goes with it along the way) or you second-guess yourself and continue to wallow in the medicority of near-enough is good enough.

Agree. If Neeld goes, the Board goes.

[Nasher 33,187]

Agree. If Neeld goes, the Board goes.

Agreed. There's already enough doubt over this board's ability to make responsible decisions; that would be categorical proof that they cannot.

[diesel 420]

10 steps to a broken club:

1) Post 2010 season - Club does expensive trust exercise with Leading Teams. Players are told to be honest. They say Schwab and Connolly are unworkable, they love Bailey.

2) Schwab gets results sent to him. He looks over them, realises he will not get his own contract renewed if he publishes. Decides to not show anyone.

3) Player trust gets eroded in the administration cos they spoke up and it was hidden and nothing changed.

4) Eventually, players push case with McClardy and Stynes. They listen, give word Bailey is safe and Schwab is gone.

5) 186 loss to Cats. (though top team Collingwood lose to the Cats by 100 points a few weeks later)

6) Schwab works it to the board and stays, Bailey goes, Neeld is appointed.

7) 2012 - club leaders who spoke up against Schwab are all sacked from their leadership positions, publicly humiliated.

8) Neeld comes in a little naively. Tells everyone they are below professional standard and implements boundary stoppage based game plan.

9) We don't win many stoppages, lose games badly, senior players disenfranchised and/or dropped.

10) We have an unresolvable fracture between playing group and administration. Neeld has the poison chalice and has lost the players before he really began.

In another world;

1) Schwab tables the report.

2) Schwab goes, Bailey stays for one more year to finish his plan.

3) Players focus on job at hand.

3) No distractions means we lose to the Cats only as badly as the Pies did.

3) We win the Port Rnd 22 game and show 10-11 wins for the year and are on track.

4) We start this year that little bit more progressed and the club is united. We thrash Lions and go from there towards a 7-10th finish.

Thoughts:

We beat Adelaide by 96 point this time last year. Both teams have largely the same personell as last year and Adelaide (who have Bailey while we have Neil Craig) are flying now. The club can't unite until Schwab is gone. Poor Neeld is in a catch 22.

Personally (and this can't be defended but is just what I'd like to see):

Schwab goes, Neeld goes if winless by round 15. Casey coach and former awesome player Brett Lovett becomes caretaker coach for rest of year as we work toward get our collective club spirit back with a clean slate. The senior players who haven't stood up by seasons end are delisted.

You have mixed well known facts with a large slice of fiction. Do you know as fact what is in the Andrews report.

The last part of your post is a good laugh though. We were going up and down on the spot under Bailey, our fitness, hardness and game plan were exposed as probabaly the worst in the league, face the truth. Don't fall this Robert Walls line that we were making progress.

[The Reverend 1,718]

You could be right, demonstrative. You just may be right. The fish does indeed rot at the head. If schwab betrayed the boys, why should the boys give their heart and soul if a traitor is in charge. Very interesting line of thought demonstrative. Very interesting.

Maybe schwab is the the rotten apple?

Even if this was the case, the players are still being paid to do a job. They need to either stand up and be counted = resign and walk away, or do the job they're being paid to do. These are professional footballers earning the sort of money most of us can only dream about. If the players don't care enough about the supporrters to give their all I don't want them at the club. I'm tired of this stuff. Get on and do the job or leave.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Months later, Green and co. eventually put themselves on the line by bringing it up with Stynes and McClardy. Schwab was sacked then saved at the last minute by 186, and then went and knifed anyone critical of him. Simple as that.

The dream time round has finished.

It was McLardy that went directly to the players behind Schwab and Connollys back. The players are footballers and not diplomats were put into a political bumfight which they should not have been by McLardy.

Nice of you to overlook the failure of the Board to replace Leoncelli's role at the Club. The Board seemed to be asleep to what was happening in the build up to this disaster. It was not assisted by terminal ill man being allowed to take charge of a fractious FD when he clearly had no capacity to operate effectively.

[daisycutter 28,709]

Nah Daisycutter, my argument revolves a trust exercise which was corrupted. I understand that you want to know if the players had a point to begin with to be upset with Schwab but his action to shelve the report speaks for itself as a supremely divisive act.

Put simply, the club's administration (Schwab) paid for a external process which asked for complete honesty. Leading Teams was famous for unifying Geelong pre-2007 flag. Schwab took the results and sat on them. Months later, Green and co. eventually put themselves on the line by bringing it up with Stynes and McClardy. Schwab was sacked then saved at the last minute by 186, and then went and knifed anyone critical of him. Simple as that.

To the victor goes the spoils.... we have a secure CEO free of the critical voices which emerged in the report. But we also have a trail of sackings, public humiliations, a demoralised ex-leadership group and a 0-8 start to the season.

I understand what you are saying but it is still a generalisation and I still want specifics about what the players "gripes" were in the Andrews report that supposedly weren't "addressed" by admin

If you know the specifics then please enlighten us otherwise you are just asking us to accept your judgement