Sitting through the first quarter of last Saturday's game was abysmal. The mistakes, the poor decisions, the time in Richmonds forward line amounted to what Matthew Lloyd declared on 3AW/693 that Melbourne's performance was the worst quarter of football by any team he had seen this year. I had sat there watching in total agreement. Some have taken solice from actually winning the following three quarters, 10g 12b 72p (22 scoring shots) to 9g 17b 71p (26 scoring shots). I believe such solice is head in the sand stuff. I did not detect a great improvement in the latter three quarters but did see Richmonds game deteriorate. One of the AW commentators called it the worst game of the year.

Four years under Bailey saw some positives but glaring inadequacies. I can hardly identify significant development across our young players from the man who saw himself as a development coach.

We started with so much hope under Neeld, with his plan to make us the hardest team to play against. Excuse me, we are our own worst enemy.

In the Bailey era we speak of the Cat drubbing as the moment the wheels fell off. But the nuts broke free far earlier in the pitiful eagles slaughter out the west. We saw how inadequate his game plan was, and new disaster awaited.

For me last Saturdays first quarter was a sign the nuts on the wheels are again loose. I wanted to call for Neelds head because I now believe his philosophical approach to the game is inadequate. Defense with little respect for attach has reversed the problem under Bailey. I have calmed down somewhat and believe that there are some redeemable features of Neeld. He has tried a number of things which I think is essential. (Unlike Bailey who was so stuck in his one way blinkered philosophy).

No! changing the coach is premature and brushes any idea of more deep seated problems under the carpet. I believe we do need a comprehensive Geelong style review of the whole club otherwise another 186 disaster awaits us. ...and 10 dry years of mediocrity

Edited July 9, 201213 yr by Harrisonrules

......... I believe we do need a comprehensive Geelong style review of the whole club otherwise another 186 disaster awaits us. ...and 10 dry years of mediocrity

We had one of those at the start of last year. Sank without trace as far as I know.

I still have faith that there is a much bigger picture at play here.

Cam Mooney stated a month or so ago that if MFC were to continue down the path of of the style they played last year and were being drafted to execute such a style, we would continue to win a handful of games and remain a team that always just doesn't cut it. A team that would not cope if we snuck into the top 8.

Some smart trading/drafting at the end of the year will straighten us up considerably.

This years not pretty. But I'm comfortable in taking solace from the above description.

I still have faith that there is a much bigger picture at play here.

Cam Mooney stated a month or so ago that if MFC were to continue down the path of of the style they played last year and were being drafted to execute such a style, we would continue to win a handful of games and remain a team that always just doesn't cut it. A team that would not cope if we snuck into the top 8.

Some smart trading/drafting at the end of the year will straighten us up considerably.

This years not pretty. But I'm comfortable in taking solace from the above description.

Well he goes McQueen You will think I am being Negative again but too bad.

I have been hearing about the big picture since the end on 2007.

What is the difference now we are still bottom, we still have a side that are the easy beats of the competition.

WE still have players that cannot kick straight, we are still taking about early draft picks fixing our problems.

The simple answer is that once again we have picked poorly / failed to develop players.

What big picture are you talking about?

Meh, just let it play out kids. Save your soapbox for if we're rubbish this time next year.

No! changing the coach is premature and brushes any idea of more deep seated problems under the carpet. I believe we do need a comprehensive Geelong style review of the whole club otherwise another 186 disaster awaits us. ...and 10 dry years of mediocrity

Thank you for your opinions. We'll be in touch. If necessary.

In the meantime, you might have a look at when the Geelong review you refer to took place. It was after Thompson had been at Geelong for SIX YEARS.

Under Bailey the team looked exciting when they were attacking, a lot of run and carry but what about the defensive part of the game?

In the pre-season all the players said it was the hardest they've ever had, dave mission came in and said there was only a handful of players up to the fitness and strength standards compared to most other AFL teams. How is Neeld going to take this team forward if the majority of the team are not able to run out a full game, don't have the skills and weren't able to win the contested ball? In this era of football contested football is one of the most important features of the game which we lacked under Bailey.

For Neeld to develop the team, he needed to strip them back to the basics such as contested ball, clearances, defensive pressure etc.. for the kids and players to become a strong team in the future they have to get the basics right before making our offensive ball movement better. When the defensive and contested aspects of the game get better i'm sure they will put more time into the structures to move the ball forward and attack.

Yep. Had one of those. The ANdrews review. Led to 186. Great idea.

Like all good reports that are unfavourable to the incumbents it was buried without a trace........

Meh, just let it play out kids. Save your soapbox for if we're rubbish this time next year.

This.

For Neeld to develop the team, he needed to strip them back to the basics such as contested ball, clearances, defensive pressure etc.. for the kids and players to become a strong team in the future they have to get the basics right before making our offensive ball movement better. When the defensive and contested aspects of the game get better i'm sure they will put more time into the structures to move the ball forward and attack.

My issue is: why has it taken professional footballers so long to grasp these BASICS?

If someone can come up with a reason, I'll be willing to back this list in. As it is, I think these 'players' are simply masquerading.

Well he goes McQueen You will think I am being Negative again but too bad.

I have been hearing about the big picture since the end on 2007.

What is the difference now we are still bottom, we still have a side that are the easy beats of the competition.

WE still have players that cannot kick straight, we are still taking about early draft picks fixing our problems.

The simple answer is that once again we have picked poorly / failed to develop players.

What big picture are you talking about?

There's so many facets of the game our list do not understand due to poor coaching and poor development as you've stated.

The bigger picture I'm talking about is that I believe there is at last a systematic set of playing strategies that are being played out before us. Win, lose or draw, Neeld will stick by these and let his vision play out. There are too many wise heads at the club now for this to not be the case. If he had NFI what he was doing, the alarm bells would be ringing much louder than they currently are. In all of the grim aftermath, there is still a sense of calm in my opinion.

Yep, our playing list is a majority shizen but I consider this next draft will define the core of our next premiership team.

I'm hoping that this time around with the current coaching group we will taste success.

Yep. Had one of those. The ANdrews review. Led to 186. Great idea.

Like all good reports that are unfavourable to the incumbents it was buried without a trace........

Typical Demonland post these days:

You can't have it both ways. Either it was NOT implemented, therefore, had nothing to do with 186, or it WAS implemented ... which goes against your "buried without a trace".

My understanding is that many of the changes in the club and FD that we saw over the off-season were instigated by Lyon and co. and drew on the Andrews report. If you have any (solid) information to the contrary, be interested to see it.

Yep. Had one of those. The ANdrews review. Led to 186. Great idea.

Like all good reports that are unfavourable to the incumbents it was buried without a trace........

Mindless propaganda.

The Andrews Report was not buried, as Caro would have us believe because it makes a good headline.

It actually precipitated a lot of the tension between Schwab & Bailey, recommended the shifting of roles for Mahoney and Connolly, recommended the recruitment of someone like Craig for the newly created role that he now fills, gave a scathing report of the fitness and development setups, leading to an overhaul and the new structure we see now, amongst other things.

It did not LEAD to 186, but recommended changes that simply were too drastic to make mid-season.

So they had to wait. Possibly certain factions noticing the winds of change led to an environment that fostered that result, but it was an inevitability.

But feel free to stick your head in the sand and believe it was ignored jnr, if that helps you deal with the losses...

The simple fact is, teams & clubs just can't be turned around that quickly.

A club like Adelaide is reaping the benefit of having an already strong club, and having Neil Craig put the necessary work in through tough times, then nobly step aside knowing someone else would get the kudos.

The crows are seeing the benefits of doing things the right way 3+ years ago, when Tex Walker was tearing up the 2s but not getting games in the firsts because he needed to learn to play the game the right way first.

Mindless propaganda.

The Andrews Report was not buried, as Caro would have us believe because it makes a good headline.

It actually precipitated a lot of the tension between Schwab & Bailey, recommended the shifting of roles for Mahoney and Connolly, recommended the recruitment of someone like Craig for the newly created role that he now fills, gave a scathing report of the fitness and development setups, leading to an overhaul and the new structure we see now, amongst other things.

It did not LEAD to 186, but recommended changes that simply were too drastic to make mid-season.

So they had to wait. Possibly certain factions noticing the winds of change led to an environment that fostered that result, but it was an inevitability.

But feel free to stick your head in the sand and believe it was ignored jnr, if that helps you deal with the losses...

The simple fact is, teams & clubs just can't be turned around that quickly.

A club like Adelaide is reaping the benefit of having an already strong club, and having Neil Craig put the necessary work in through tough times, then nobly step aside knowing someone else would get the kudos.

The crows are seeing the benefits of doing things the right way 3+ years ago, when Tex Walker was tearing up the 2s but not getting games in the firsts because he needed to learn to play the game the right way first.

You haven't a clue,