Tick tock tick tock... Neeld has 16 matches to improve

[hardtack 10,627]

Care to answer my question ?

Bandicoot has no answers...he is merely a product of the "I want it and I want it now" generation. Fortunately his [censored] and wind amount to nothing in the scheme of things.

[Hardnut 327]

Do we have to argue this every week? Can we wait until Neeld has the team he wants,the team that he can coach,the team that is capable of playing a elite brand of football?

Seriously do you rate our players that much? How many flags should we have under this list?

In over 50 years I can't recall a coach having all of 'the team he wants,the team that he can coach,the team that is capable of playing a(n) elite brand of football', before that coach attempts to achieve success. The real skill in coaching is getting the best out of what you have got (and you may be able to pick up a few extra players along the way). Flags have been won by teams that were far from perfect, or even the best in that particular year. (1964?)

[rpfc 28,779]

Neeld has cost us wins.

His changes have been at the short term detriment of the team that has meant we have lost games we should have won with the list we have.

We are more of a 4 and 13 team than a 2 and 15 team.

But if those two extra losses mean that the standards at the club are higher than it was and our best players learn how to run defensively, and our kids develop a culture of discipline and more demanding effort while the club properly develops their bodies then that is two welcome losses.

Don't care about beating up on interstate sides, I want to beat the best sides and that involves developing bigger bodies (Misson), being able to play defensively (Neeld), and having a strong culture (Craig).

It can be hard to watch but we are so behind the best teams a couple losses doesn't phase me when I can see the holy lands and we have three men who have been there before and know the way.

Edited July 28, 2012 by rpfc

[The Reverend 1,736]

How many more 10 goals losses will it take before Neeld is held responsible?

He has absolutely no idea how to stop this weekly mauling.

I will reiterate... If we are in the same pathetic situation next year then there no way that Neeld will be allowed to stay on for a third term.

15 more games Neeld... Tick To-ck Tick To-ck

Is this the only tune you know? It was boring at the start and it's gone downhill since. Try to get a grip on reality.

[Jack7 528]

Hardwick has turned over 30 players in 3 years and still hasn't got it right.

Neeld hasn't turned over any yet,he needs time at least or do you guys think we have a finals winning list?

Since round 12,we are the no. 1 tackling side,at least he's put some defence into our rabble of a list.In the last 5 years,our players had no interest in tackling.

When Bailey came in,he bought an offensive Geelong style gameplan with not much defence and in his first season the game changed into an ultra defensive game,ie. Pies/Saints and we were left behind.

Neeld comes in with the defensive gameplan of Pies and no offence (yet) and the game has changed into an offensive style of Hawks,Crows and we have been left behind again.

Had we kept Bailey,the wheel would have turned 360 and we would've kept our offensive side and added more defence.

Neeld has sucked all offensive flair out of Trengove & Beamer and turned them into defensive robots.

[Akum 2,660]

Neeld has cost us wins.

His changes have been at the short term detriment of the team that has meant we have lost games we should have won with the list we have.

We are more of a 4 and 13 team than a 2 and 15 team.

But if those two extra losses mean that the standards at the club are higher than it was and our best players learn how to run defensively, and our kids develop a culture of discipline and more demanding effort while the club properly develops their bodies then that is two welcome losses.

Don't care about beating up on interstate sides, I want to beat the best sides and that involves developing bigger bodies (Misson), being able to play defensively (Neeld), and having a strong culture (Craig).

It can be hard to watch but we are so behind the best teams a couple losses doesn't phase me when I can see the holy lands and we have three men who have been there before and know the way.

Apart from the part I've italicised, this post could have been written word-for-word about Bailey ca. 2008.

"I believe in Bailey" has become "I believe in Neeld". The names have changed but the song remains the same.

So far, both Bailey and Neeld both have a track record of being a good - maybe very good - assistant coach. And not every "very good" assistant coach can step up to be a successful head coach, as we found (though it took us the best part of 4 years, though there were ominous signs before that) about Bailey.

I'm neither for nor against Neeld. I'm neither an evangelist nor an iconoclast. The club has no option but to continue to support Neeld at this stage, but if we're 0 & 9 again next year, if Neeld has managed to turn over the 10-12 players he wants and it still makes no difference, and if we're struggling to reach 30,000 members, who knows?

But I am concerned that Year 1 of Neeld is looking like Year 1 of Bailey. We're in a "double-dip" rebuild. Which is high-risk for a club in our position. And it may or may not come off.

[Biffen 12,947]

SHEEDS IS DOING GREAT STUFF AT THE MOMENT ISN'T HE.

Guy McKenna is really bringing all that Meth coast success too.

[timD 994]

Apart from the part I've italicised, this post could have been written word-for-word about Bailey ca. 2008.

"I believe in Bailey" has become "I believe in Neeld". The names have changed but the song remains the same.

So far, both Bailey and Neeld both have a track record of being a good - maybe very good - assistant coach. And not every "very good" assistant coach can step up to be a successful head coach, as we found (though it took us the best part of 4 years, though there were ominous signs before that) about Bailey.

I'm neither for nor against Neeld. I'm neither an evangelist nor an iconoclast. The club has no option but to continue to support Neeld at this stage, but if we're 0 & 9 again next year, if Neeld has managed to turn over the 10-12 players he wants and it still makes no difference, and if we're struggling to reach 30,000 members, who knows?

But I am concerned that Year 1 of Neeld is looking like Year 1 of Bailey. We're in a "double-dip" rebuild. Which is high-risk for a club in our position. And it may or may not come off.

We are in a double-dip rebuild...like richmond. The problem is that we have no A grade talent (or it is too unfit or iffy in its development) and we have no midfield. Without a midfield nothing else matters. Bailey and Prendergast failed to get us one. CAC failed to get us one. Take Mitchell, Hodge and Lewis out of hawthorn, stick them in our side and we go close to making finals.

IMO that is why we fail.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Apart from the part I've italicised, this post could have been written word-for-word about Bailey ca. 2008.

"I believe in Bailey" has become "I believe in Neeld". The names have changed but the song remains the same.

So far, both Bailey and Neeld both have a track record of being a good - maybe very good - assistant coach. And not every "very good" assistant coach can step up to be a successful head coach, as we found (though it took us the best part of 4 years, though there were ominous signs before that) about Bailey.

I'm neither for nor against Neeld. I'm neither an evangelist nor an iconoclast. The club has no option but to continue to support Neeld at this stage, but if we're 0 & 9 again next year, if Neeld has managed to turn over the 10-12 players he wants and it still makes no difference, and if we're struggling to reach 30,000 members, who knows?

But I am concerned that Year 1 of Neeld is looking like Year 1 of Bailey. We're in a "double-dip" rebuild. Which is high-risk for a club in our position. And it may or may not come off.

Hit. Nail. Head.

[bandicoot 1,395]

Is this the only tune you know? It was boring at the start and it's gone downhill since. Try to get a grip on reality.

Reality??? The reality is that this football club is on the verge of folding if we don't improve... Soon

We don't have 'time'. We need to see improvement week in week out otherwise supporters will leave followed by sponsors.

This club is on the brink... That is the reality

[Range Rover 1,935]

Reality??? The reality is that this football club is on the verge of folding if we don't improve... Soon

We don't have 'time'. We need to see improvement week in week out otherwise supporters will leave followed by sponsors.

This club is on the brink... That is the reality

What a drama queen you are.

You want the baby without the labour pains. Sorry, it don't work like that.

[rpfc 28,779]

Apart from the part I've italicised, this post could have been written word-for-word about Bailey ca. 2008.

That, to me, is a pretty large addendum.

We have never had a sports science development team. Never.

Misson brought you the strong Sydney teams of the mid '00s and the strong St Kilda teams of the previous 5 years. Craig's history in this area is well documented.

A strong assistant coach is all that Neeld is at the moment. But that is all one starts out as in a head coach role, is it not?

I have always, since the new team arrived, been more impressed with the sports science investment that we have made.

So I think eloquence has been mistaken for evangelism - the 'holy lands' remark was poetic licence and not deifying Neeld and co.

[beelzebub 23,383]

What a drama queen you are.

You want the baby without the labour pains. Sorry, it don't work like that.

thats a very good way of putting it actually. The pain before the joy ( and for the argument we'll asign joy to babies..lol )

[Guest bluey]

A great man once said, "son you've cost me my job" that's how big a blue Neeld made by appointing JT as captain, lucky to even hold a spot in the worst team in the history of the game.

He also hand picked Magner and Couch which doesn't instill much confidence for future picks.

As for his AFL coaching record, well two wins.

Going forward, well let's wait two years to get fit.

Sure and see Greeny, Jamar, Davey Moloney and others hang it up, plus the sackings will leave us with a more youthful and inexperienced side than today, nope sorry can't believe any of it anymore.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

Apart from the part I've italicised, this post could have been written word-for-word about Bailey ca. 2008.

"I believe in Bailey" has become "I believe in Neeld". The names have changed but the song remains the same.

So far, both Bailey and Neeld both have a track record of being a good - maybe very good - assistant coach. And not every "very good" assistant coach can step up to be a successful head coach, as we found (though it took us the best part of 4 years, though there were ominous signs before that) about Bailey.

I'm neither for nor against Neeld. I'm neither an evangelist nor an iconoclast. The club has no option but to continue to support Neeld at this stage, but if we're 0 & 9 again next year, if Neeld has managed to turn over the 10-12 players he wants and it still makes no difference, and if we're struggling to reach 30,000 members, who knows?

But I am concerned that Year 1 of Neeld is looking like Year 1 of Bailey. We're in a "double-dip" rebuild. Which is high-risk for a club in our position. And it may or may not come off.

I think this is a very good post Akum. However, I think the situation is actually very different now to what we saw in 2008.

The one thing that gives me confidence in the new regime (Neeld) is that there is now a very deliberate and strong focus on the fundamentals: fitness, discipline, defensive integrity, set up, recruiting for specific roles etc.

In short, the boring stuff that, if executed well, will ultimately translate into winning important games. Under Bailey it seemed to be all about getting high draft picks, getting 'game time' into kids, and hey presto - here's a decade of dominance. In retrospect, that approach seems naive in the extreme - but, in fairness, we weren't the only club to fall victim to this thinking. I think the Suns and GWS perhaps fell into the same category of thinking (as did many industry 'experts' at the time).

Neeld is from a disciplined culture. He is trying to muscle a disciplined, professional focus onto a club which, in my time at least, has never had that culture. And that's a challenge. A very big one.

He may not ultimately be good enough to bring about this change. But I'm bloody glad/relieved he's having a crack at it. The alternative is just too horrendous to think about.

The incredible naivety I read from some posters about this on these threads is just frustrating in the extreme. Just because we had some 'paper over the cracks', pretty wins against ordinary opposition in recent years, doesn't mean we were working towards sustainable success deep into September each year. The reality is we were getting BELTED by the good teams under Bailey. Consistently.

The AFL is a seriously elite competition. No coach can simply turn an unfit, inexperienced, bottom four list into a top 8 team in the space of one season. Surely everyone knows that.

It will take time to turn this list around. Ironically, I think it will take more time than some posters here have patience for, but less time than the so-called industry experts think.

Keep the discipline.

[Akum 2,660]

That, to me, is a pretty large addendum.

We have never had a sports science development team. Never.

Misson brought you the strong Sydney teams of the mid '00s and the strong St Kilda teams of the previous 5 years. Craig's history in this area is well documented.

A strong assistant coach is all that Neeld is at the moment. But that is all one starts out as in a head coach role, is it not?

I have always, since the new team arrived, been more impressed with the sports science investment that we have made.

So I think eloquence has been mistaken for evangelism - the 'holy lands' remark was poetic licence and not deifying Neeld and co.

Pretty sure you're aware that what I mean (about the similarities to 2008) is the exhortation to "keep the faith". Because we have no evidence that the changes have improved performance - so far.

Since you brought up the issue of "assistant coach" ...

The problem with an assistant coach who makes a contribution to a successful team is that they can over-rate their particular approach, and under-rate the contribution of others in the coaching team.

Bailey probably contributed to Port's attacking ball movement (as he may be contributing to Adelaide's). But others in the coaching team contributed to their contested ball, their defensive structures, their set plays etc etc. It's the total contribution that makes success.

But it's tempting for the assistant coach to believe that it's their contribution that made the difference. And unless they've spent some of their time as an assistant coach learning aspects of the game that the other coaches contributed, they'll only have one string to their bow.

We learned that about Bailey, but it took nearly 4 years. We spent maybe 2 years waiting for him to bring a defensive and contested-ball dimension to the attacking game, until it became blatantly obvious that he was not able to. He has one string to his bow, and it may be that he's again making a solid contribution as an assistant coach with that one string.

My concern about Neeld is that he has just about total emphasis on contested ball and absorbing pressure. But the club he comes from are far more than that. Their ball movement allows them to hurt teams the other way, and they have a number of successful set plays. Their contested ball is just one element of what makes them successful, but on it's own, it's not enough.

Do we have any evidence so far that Neeld has more than one string? Haven't seen it - so far. Can he learn to play the other strings? Don't know, but obviously he deserves to get a reasonable chance to show us whether he can (and if he can't, I hope it takes less than 4 years to find out). Is he reflective & self-critical enough to understand & remedy his deficiencies? That's the big question, and quite frankly, that's what concerns me about the "my-way-or-the-highway" approach.

The trick for an assistant coach is to learn the other aspects of the game that they have no expertise in. A head coach has to develop a well-rounded knowledge of the game, and it's reasonable to assume that a previously successful head coach (whether they're a head case or not) will have done that.

So what I'm saying is that it's a risk to pick another assistant coach from a successful team, given the recent experience with the previous coach. I hope it comes of this time, but I have a lot of concerns.

[The Reverend 1,736]

Reality??? The reality is that this football club is on the verge of folding if we don't improve... Soon

We don't have 'time'. We need to see improvement week in week out otherwise supporters will leave followed by sponsors.

This club is on the brink... That is the reality

Off you go then. The true believers will reap the glory.

[picket fence 17,502]

Do we have to argue this every week? Can we wait until Neeld has the team he wants,the team that he can coach,the team that is capable of playing a elite brand of football?

Seriously do you rate our players that much? How many flags should we have under this list?

And how many times have we had the chance to get the coaching appointment right??

Edited July 29, 2012 by picket fence

[Akum 2,660]

...

Great thoughtful post RB. You (and rpfc in his previous post) have set out some good reasons for maintaining the faith, and certainly the new off-field elements weren't there the last time.

My concern is, given where the club is, how long can we afford to hang on until we start to see some sort of pay-off in on-field performance?

[thaipantsman 180]

Only to someone with an agenda against the first-year coach of the Melbourne Football Club, it does.

To everyone else it's just a show of support based on the logic of wanting his plan to succeed.

Not everyone RR.

I read your posts re the politics in MFC right now. Do you think these types of issues are unique to Melbourne? Question is pure and simple. Can he coach or is it all HOT AIR? The game yesterday was a disgrace. I see Neeld in charge. All teams have issues, injuries and tend to blame this however it's the actual decisions from team strategy -trying to clone Melbourne's game to Collingwoods, appointment of 2 kids as Captains, leaving Rivers at FF, general lack of media savvy and seemingly poor eye contact along with other stuff that worries me. Above all this he doesn't seem to be a motivator.

Having said all that RR let me say this. I am truly buoyed by your unrelenting support of Neeld. I would love him to succeed as Coach of MFC though my main concern is not the current humiliations on the field. My concern is enticing the best kids and free agents to come and play under him. My fear is they won't come.

How many more meek performances will it take to remove your Neeld banner? The mere fact you display it suggests Neeld is in crisis. Fact is he is not in crisis and will be given well into his 3rd year to get us up the ladder. It's an embarrassment for Neeld to think supporters need to display this type of message in a Coaches first year. It's desperation when in reality all he needs to do is cease the hot air statements and show us something. DO DO DO DO SOMETHING!!!!

Have you ever read or seen a Banner "I believe in Malthouse" "I believe in Sheedy" I believe in Barassi" " I believe in Lyon" "I believe in Hardwick" "I believe in Brad Scott"...think you get the message. Not necessary because we do believe in these Guys.

[Range Rover 1,935]

Not everyone RR.

I read your posts re the politics in MFC right now. Do you think these types of issues are unique to Melbourne? Question is pure and simple. Can he coach or is it all HOT AIR? The game yesterday was a disgrace. I see Neeld in charge. All teams have issues, injuries and tend to blame this however it's the actual decisions from team strategy -trying to clone Melbourne's game to Collingwoods, appointment of 2 kids as Captains, leaving Rivers at FF, general lack of media savvy and seemingly poor eye contact along with other stuff that worries me. Above all this he doesn't seem to be a motivator.

Having said all that RR let me say this. I am truly buoyed by your unrelenting support of Neeld. I would love him to succeed as Coach of MFC though my main concern is not the current humiliations on the field. My concern is enticing the best kids and free agents to come and play under him. My fear is they won't come.

How many more meek performances will it take to remove your Neeld banner? The mere fact you display it suggests Neeld is in crisis. Fact is he is not in crisis and will be given well into his 3rd year to get us up the ladder. It's an embarrassment for Neeld to think supporters need to display this type of message in a Coaches first year. It's desperation when in reality all he needs to do is cease the hot air statements and show us something. DO DO DO DO SOMETHING!!!!

Have you ever read or seen a Banner "I believe in Malthouse" "I believe in Sheedy" I believe in Barassi" " I believe in Lyon" "I believe in Hardwick" "I believe in Brad Scott"...think you get the message. Not necessary because we do believe in these Guys.

After four years of sh1te under Bailey, I was just over the moon that we finally brought in a bloke who wanted to instil a hard, disciplined, defensive mindset into our club.

That's it TPM. Nothing more to read into it. Just an expression of relief.

Give him time. These things don't happen overnight.

If we're still having this same discussion by this time next year I will be open to a re-think. But that's a year away.

[thaipantsman 180]

The mere fact someone finds a need to display a banner "I believe in Neeld" suggests his tenure is on the skids. Fact is Neeld is safe as houses. "I believe in Malthouse, Sheedy, Mathews, Scott, Hardwick, Barassi, Lyon, "... not necessary because they are all proven and competent coaches. Scott and Hardwick are motivators and do the media well which is vital for the Club. Neeld is considerably ordinary at both.

Lets hope he does warm to it, forgets about Cloning/copying Collingwood and generally learns with the job.

[thaipantsman 180]

After four years of sh1te under Bailey, I was just over the moon that we finally brought in a bloke who wanted to instil a hard, disciplined, defensive mindset into our club.

That's it TPM. Nothing more to read into it. Just an expression of relief.

Give him time. These things don't happen overnight.

If we're still having this same discussion by this time next year I will be open to a re-think. But that's a year away.

Agreed! Was it really 4 years under Bailey?

[Range Rover 1,935]

The mere fact someone finds a need to display a banner "I believe in Neeld" suggests his tenure is on the skids. Fact is Neeld is safe as houses. "I believe in Malthouse, Sheedy, Mathews, Scott, Hardwick, Barassi, Lyon, "... not necessary because they are all proven and competent coaches. Scott and Hardwick are motivators and do the media well which is vital for the Club. Neeld is considerably ordinary at both.

Lets hope he does warm to it, forgets about Cloning/copying Collingwood and generally learns with the job.

You haven't been on this site long enough to understand the layered nuance of my "I believe" signature. You're reading something into that's not there.

I agree though Neeld is safe as houses.

[Range Rover 1,935]

Agreed! Was it really 4 years under Bailey?

88 long games. 8800 long minutes of game time.