Why do a few posters continue to blindly accept Neeld's coaching methods when his contemporaries are successfully using different and more modern methods? (Please, no more using the players as excuses.)

The circumstances of his appointment have been questioned in other threads.

He certainly put his own PR machine to work on overtime before he got the job.

He has created amazing controversy in his first 8 or so months of coaching - a polarising character perhaps?

If his supporters want a fair go for him, it is only reasonable that they accept rational criticism of his methods by those who are not so easily or quickly convinced by 'the new messiah'.

This is beginning to become a pathetic attempt at character assassination...

Why do a few posters continue to blindly accept Neeld's coaching methods when his contemporaries are successfully using different and more modern methods? (Please, no more using the players as excuses.)

Why do you present this as fact, when it is anything but?

The circumstances of his appointment have been questioned in other threads.

That may be, but if he is the right man for the job, what is the difference?

He certainly put his own PR machine to work on overtime before he got the job.

Has he really? Are you kidding?

He has created amazing controversy in his first 8 or so months of coaching - a polarising character perhaps?

No, he has been a victim of poor form, the media machine, and snakes spreading untruths.

If his supporters want a fair go for him, it is only reasonable that they accept rational criticism of his methods by those who are not so easily or quickly convinced by 'the new messiah'.

I'm more than happy to accept rational criticism, but consistently you provide spurious examples...

Did he kick your dog or something?

So far, he gets the benefit of the doubt because the results have not come yet, but the processes and structures seem bang on.

Certainly not an attempt at character assassination - in fact the response illustrates what I was questioning.

The responses are opinion, just as were my comments.

Cam Mooney is just a shiny new voice.

As knowledgeable on the game as David Schwarz.

He's just out of the game and comes from a club that had to build from the bottom up so probably a little more knowledgeable than David.

Reasonable winning record no doubt, but If he knew what he was doing he would still be there and headed for a flag!

So one coach each year 'knows' what they are doing?

What kind of an opinion is that?

Why do a few posters continue to blindly accept Neeld's coaching methods when his contemporaries are successfully using different and more modern methods? (Please, no more using the players as excuses.)

The circumstances of his appointment have been questioned in other threads.

He certainly put his own PR machine to work on overtime before he got the job.

He has created amazing controversy in his first 8 or so months of coaching - a polarising character perhaps?

If his supporters want a fair go for him, it is only reasonable that they accept rational criticism of his methods by those who are not so easily or quickly convinced by 'the new messiah'.

You sound like you have an agenda.

You don't like Craig.

You don't like Neeld's gameplan.

You think the players shouldn't shoulder any blame (no excuses).

You are cynical of his appointment and his decision to come here.

You call into question his character - calling it polarising.

You dismiss those disagreeing with you as thinking of him as a 'messiah'.

And they way you write is very familiar...

I know Jackie is america de cali, who is hardnut?

Certainly not an attempt at character assassination - in fact the response illustrates what I was questioning.

The responses are opinion, just as were my comments.

Who would you have had coaching MFC and how would they be coaching us HN?

There was (is) a thread over on the Dee's forum on Bigfooty that tackled exactly that. When it was first put up, I thought, nah, no-one's going to want to emerge from behind the anonymity of their keyboards, but it really took off. And yes, intriguing what people do.

Wow, I'll have to check it out.

Now I'm wondering whether I lie and say I'm something more than a Primary School Teacher to seem impressive or just be honest and say that I am exactly that.

I mean whoops, I said nothing.

ReAlistically Hardnut how many games were you expecting us to win this year? Yes we were expected to beat Brisbane, Richmond, Bulldogs (maybe) but outside that we've had an horrendous draw also. Probably worse in the comp... So go get Rocky 3 at a store near you ( or download) who cares, and watch the scene where Apollo Creed trains Rocky to get speed during a training session in the gym with a skipping rope... In fact there should be a post 4 training movies or what the boys should watch for motivation.....Rudy, Rocky 1-10, Any given Sunday (sequel take any fuckin win) , Mean machine

Cinderella Man is a good Movie....only film i have watched, and when it finished pressed play and watched it again straight away.

Could not disagree more - this is a very negative approach which goes against every natural instinct of a young footballer. Far better to begin with the positives (which is why we recruit young talented players) and then fine-tune techniques, which means the players enjoy the game and learn at the same time (eg Adelaide this year).

Tell that to Brett Lovett.

Tell it to all the Swans players. Under Roos, & now under Horse.

Tell it to the Geelong players when under Bomba. They had a good defensive mindset.

He (Neeld) has been prepared to put self-satisfied noses out of joint,

He's even managed to reach out to the noses of the clap happy 8.5 wins-a-season brigade who wanted more of the same.

Why do a few posters continue to blindly accept Neeld's coaching methods when his contemporaries are successfully using different and more modern methods? (Please, no more using the players as excuses.)

That is a joke right????............

I am not sure if i understand your post correctly but Neelds game plan is (all be it a different version) of team playing contested foory who have a defensive edge

eg: Pies, Cats, Crows, Swan, etc contested, defensively minded foooty (note I do realise the Crows are very offensive but contested footy is a big part of their mantra)

So your completely off the mark if your arguing that..... The style he wants to introduce to the MFC is a proven way to play conistant winning football and finals footy winning finals footy

If you are saying his methods are wrong surely this is only speculation???? It takes time to implement these new mantra's the MFC has lacked under Bailey and Daniher....

I'm with Neeld 100% - But you are right he needs to be judged to be kept accountable - players need to jump on of f'off

Edited May 29, 201213 yr by Unleash Hell

the last bit was meant to say - players need to accept the new mantra or f'off

stupid I phone I cbf haha

Why do a few posters continue to blindly accept Neeld's coaching methods when his contemporaries are successfully using different and more modern methods? (Please, no more using the players as excuses.)

If his supporters want a fair go for him, it is only reasonable that they accept rational criticism of his methods by those who are not so easily or quickly convinced by 'the new messiah'.

Of course rational criticism is reasonable. But how can you judge the man before he has even had the chance to put his "game plan" into effect? He is not merely a new coach taking over an under-performing squad. He is trying to revolutionise a mindset that has existed within the club since Norm was sacked. The last two coaches had a very "open" and free-flowing style of play which looked great but had little to no accountability. Get a copy of the 2002 Semi Final for everything that was great and horrible about that style of play. The best way I can describe it is he is trying to mould a champion team rather than a team of champions. A lot of MFC players over the last decade would not survive in a Neeld team and I think that's a good thing because after all where did that get us anyway?

So far, he gets the benefit of the doubt because the results have not come yet, but the processes and structures seem bang on.

Exactly.

Good medicine doesn't need to taste 'yucky' - this is the 21st century!

The 'hairy cat' knows football, but he is learning a new game - commentating - which is very different from coaching.

So he 'knows his football' yet makes a poor ally? Beginning to trip over your own feet here Hardnut.

Why do a few posters continue to blindly accept Neeld's coaching methods when his contemporaries are successfully using different and more modern methods? (Please, no more using the players as excuses.)

The circumstances of his appointment have been questioned in other threads.

He certainly put his own PR machine to work on overtime before he got the job.

He has created amazing controversy in his first 8 or so months of coaching - a polarising character perhaps?

If his supporters want a fair go for him, it is only reasonable that they accept rational criticism of his methods by those who are not so easily or quickly convinced by 'the new messiah'.

This is a ridiculous post. Let's face it ... you are on a mission to pot Mark Neeld at every opportunity and have given him zero chance to let his plan take shape.

What's 'rational' about that? Nothing, that's what.

Did anyone read the dean cox article on the afl site?

He basically said in 2010 when they introduced a defensive game plan the team and in particular himself as an older player struggled to undo bad habbits and learn the new style. We know how they went in 2010. But he said that it laid the foundations for what they are doing now.

I think there is a school of thought that they just decided to do this in 2011 and it clicked for them but in reality it took a year of pain to get there.

Did anyone read the dean cox article on the afl site?

He basically said in 2010 when they introduced a defensive game plan the team and in particular himself as an older player struggled to undo bad habbits and learn the new style. We know how they went in 2010. But he said that it laid the foundations for what they are doing now.

I think there is a school of thought that they just decided to do this in 2011 and it clicked for them but in reality it took a year of pain to get there.

I get the feeling I've heard elsewhere it took longer - 2009 was when the Eagles started it IIRC.

B) seeing that guys do want to be part of a well oiled machine off the field and with the wealth of experience that will carry them forwards. That's my take , I'm sticking fat with Neeld and believe the words of thie Moooon. I just want to know why Harf didn't rephrase the initial question like, " so what do you think of the Suns? being a Mooooon

Mighty Boosh?

I have full faith that Neeld & co will lift the club.

My beef is the fact that the list was allowed to become so unfit, so far behind other AFL sides (Sh!t we train next to the Filth now!!) & in such disrepair...

I'm sticking fat with Neeld

I hate this expression, Can someone please explain what it means and where it comes from. Its a nonsense to me.

Seaman is sticking fat.

"Staying true" and worse if read backwards.

Well obviously that's due to not spending the money to hire one of the best in the business, as we have done now since eliminating our debt.

Really, I'd expect Bailey and Hocking to have a fair idea of what is an acceptable standard in AFL, but at the same time, I think they WERE fit enough for Bailey's "low-calorie" gameplan, where you relied on defenders eventually causing a turnover, and it was all about running one way.

With a full fat gameplan like Neeld's where you need to run hard on defense, as well as attack, we don't have the legs.

Schwab should probably have had some idea too, but I think in his role he is relying on feedback from the football dept.

Yep, agree, have to stand by Neeld now and believe this pain is going to be worth it

I really like Mooney in the media. Articulate and insightful. The exact opposite of what I expected.

Seaman is sticking fat.

"Staying true" and worse if read backwards.

Ok it maybe been the wrong choice of words given I am the SEA MAN! I'm sticking firm...no that's not good... Sticking solid...even worse .....