to stamp his imprimatur on the football

Three-year contract or otherwise, it is clear as day that Neeld will start 2013 under pressure. (And fair enough too given our pathetic performances so far.) No matter what the board and administration say, another very poor start to the year next year and the media pressure will be intense. The club and the Neeld evangelists can only point to intangible improvements for so long.

By halfway through 2013 Mark Neeld should rightly begin to feel some heat if genuine signs of improvement are not evident. No-one is arguing against that. In fact, I would suggest even he would expect that.

But to suggest that someone is a 'Neeld evangelist' because they want to give the man at least a chance to succeed, to stamp his own imprimatur on the football club, is a ridiculous notion.

It's not evangelism. It's just sanity.

18 rounds of footy and a pre-season with all the resources in the world, I think that an ample opportunity to show something. He has shown nothing. Now he is cooked.

Please.

Time to move on before we really do damage.

Well here we go, again don't we.

I can argue that extension saved us two years of Bailey if you want me to - even have a thread pining for that extension so that at the end of 2010 we didn't give him an extra 3 years. And does anyone here want to wonder what contract he would have got at the end of 2010?

Coming off an improving year with THAT Sydney game and THOSE Collingwood games?

He would have got three years.

The extension was hardly an endorsement. It was a 'thanks for doing that crap in 08 and 09, here is another year to see if you can coach.'

It was a prudent step and one that I applaud to this day.

Here is that thread - http://demonland.com...-for-the-coach/

You know, last year I spent what seemed like an eternity in trying to find that thread ! It's amazing those who identify those in positions at the time as being responsible for Bailey's one year extension were perhaps those who supported the extension at the time too. Some may have even been of the opinion of extending him for two ! But I can't seem to find that thread !

Rome wasnt built in a day

Elephants take 22 months

Vines about three years

You might see a trend here. Its simple. Some things take a while and a lot of effort

Why does anyone think the ressurection and the recreation of a team is going to happen inside a year let alone overnight as some seem to be disappointed in it not eventuating ?

Were not talking about 2 min noodles here ffs !!

to stamp his imprimatur on the football

By halfway through 2013 Mark Neeld should rightly begin to feel some heat if genuine signs of improvement are not evident. No-one is arguing against that. In fact, I would suggest even he would expect that.

But to suggest that someone is a 'Neeld evangelist' because they want to give the man at least a chance to succeed, to stamp his own imprimatur on the football club, is a ridiculous notion.

It's not evangelism. It's just sanity.

Having a signature saying “I believe in Neeld.” at a time when we are 2-14 smacks of evangelism.

You know, last year I spent what seemed like an eternity in trying to find that thread ! It's amazing those who identify those in positions at the time as being responsible for Bailey's one year extension were perhaps those who supported the extension at the time too. Some may have even been of the opinion of extending him for two ! But I can't seem to find that thread !

I'm very active in that thread advocating a one-year extension for Bailey at the start of 2010 to the end of 2011 and I'm fine with that. The argument then and now was that after requiring Bailey to tank for 2 years in 2008-9 it was going to be hard to tell whether he could coach in the first half of 2010, but we'd probably have a fair idea by the end of 2011. The Board and CEO seemed to think the same way. Sometime in that period the CEO came to the firm conclusion that he wasn't up to it and that was the basis of the fractured relations at the club at the time - pro-Bailey vs anti-Bailey. The Board was unable to get on top of this issue primarily because Jimmy took on a job he was unable to complete because of his health. Eventually after 186 almost everyone had come to the same conclusion Schwab had somewhat earlier.

I reckon on a similar timeline - by the end of 2013 we'll have a fair idea whether Neeld is on the right track.

So we aren't a 2 and 13 side?

Are we a 4 and 11 side?

5 and 10?

What crappy wins would make you feel more comfortable about life and the fact that Neeld is getting 'the most' out of the boys?

Spoken like the stereotype Melbourne supporter so often mocked by the general football public.

Having a signature saying “I believe in Neeld.” at a time when we are 2-14 smacks of evangelism.

hahahhahahhahahah, well said

I recall at the time speaking to someone with close connections to the board.

I thought Bailey deserved an extension, and when it came I was told that the board didn't think he was the man to take us forward, but a decision was made that stability was more important for our young list at that stage.

DB was highly regarded for his ability to develop young players, and was telling the board he was on track in that respect, and they would stick with him until he had the opportunity to prove that he was or wasn't up to it.

I'm very active in that thread advocating a one-year extension for Bailey at the start of 2010 to the end of 2011 and I'm fine with that. The argument then and now was that after requiring Bailey to tank for 2 years in 2008-9 it was going to be hard to tell whether he could coach in the first half of 2010, but we'd probably have a fair idea by the end of 2011. The Board and CEO seemed to think the same way. Sometime in that period the CEO came to the firm conclusion that he wasn't up to it and that was the basis of the fractured relations at the club at the time - pro-MBailey vs anti-Bailey. The Board was unable to get on top of this issue primarily because Jimmy took on a job he was unable to complete because of his health. Eventually after 186 almost everyone had come to the same conclusion Schwab had somewhat earlier.

I reckon on a similar timeline - by the end of 2013 we'll have a fair idea whether Neeld is on the right track.

Agree with that. In that thread I wasn't initially keen (sept 2009), but by Jan 2010 I wanted a one year ext. before the season 2010 commenced.

Rome wasnt built in a day

Elephants take 22 months

Vines about three years

You might see a trend here. Its simple. Some things take a while and a lot of effort

Why does anyone think the ressurection and the recreation of a team is going to happen inside a year let alone overnight as some seem to be disappointed in it not eventuating ?

Were not talking about 2 min noodles here ffs !!

And 48 years is overdue for a midlife crisis.

18 rounds of footy and a pre-season with all the resources in the world, I think that an ample opportunity to show something. He has shown nothing. Now he is cooked.

Please.

Time to move on before we really do damage.

Surely your joking? Either that or you have never played the game or been inside a footy club. You cant just snap your fingers and expect things to change. The club has just gone through a massive overhaul of its entire FD. What did you expect?

Or returned from the dead??

Alias poor Yorik, for twasn't the deed, did he?

We recruited a coach - not a magician. He inherited a woefully unskilled, inexperienced and unfit list. There's probably 15+ players who aren't up to standard and need to go - it will be cleaned out but it can't be done in one year!

It's pretty clear that some players just won't play for him - they'll go. Others are just woefully out of form - but the players that are running around now are giving their all for him - some just aren't AFL players but that's not his fault - he didn't recruit them but he's stuck with them for now. Further, his predecessors discarded any experienced players that we had way too early - it's not just coaches who teach players - the senior players need to teach them as well - of which we have next to none.

Let's see how we're looking when his contracts up - rediculous saying that we should look at sacking him after 1 1/2 seasons because we were better last year - I don't care how many games we won against the lower teams, we lost by 31 GOALS 1 year ago this weekend...

Far too much sense there Snomed.

Hogwarts is having a sale; perhaps some might like to chip in for a Wand as some seem to feel this is the way forward !

Manwhile Dorothy and the rest of us know this isnt Kansas .

I wonder who in a years time Will still be calling for his head; who'll have changed their view and who will have simply shut up lol.

I wonder who and how many, given Neelds job to do wouldnt be shaking their head with disbelief right now if they were reading much of the uninformed judgements ?

18 rounds of footy and a pre-season with all the resources in the world, I think that an ample opportunity to show something. He has shown nothing. Now he is cooked.

Please.

Time to move on before we really do damage.

Natopian culture is characterized by a general sense of aloofness, immaturity, and irreverence... possibly impatience as well?

I wonder what Todd viney thinks?

He is the only one I trust.

Why? Why do you trust Todd Viney and no-one else? What has he done that gives you that confidence?

I don't know whether he's been good or not.

We recruited a coach - not a magician. He inherited a woefully unskilled, inexperienced and unfit list. There's probably 15+ players who aren't up to standard and need to go - it will be cleaned out but it can't be done in one year!

It's pretty clear that some players just won't play for him - they'll go. Others are just woefully out of form - but the players that are running around now are giving their all for him - some just aren't AFL players but that's not his fault - he didn't recruit them but he's stuck with them for now. Further, his predecessors discarded any experienced players that we had way too early - it's not just coaches who teach players - the senior players need to teach them as well - of which we have next to none.

Let's see how we're looking when his contracts up - rediculous saying that we should look at sacking him after 1 1/2 seasons because we were better last year - I don't care how many games we won against the lower teams, we lost by 31 GOALS 1 year ago this weekend...

Easy snomed, you'll cop a pasting from those who squeal "How about we hold the coach accountable, not the players; the playing list is actually ok"

Why? Why do you trust Todd Viney and no-one else? What has he done that gives you that confidence?

I don't know whether he's been good or not.

Gets shuffled around filling in odd jobs and was a very morose disinterested interim coach. One of the old boys who's role is not quite clear at the club but makes a good salary. Is only around because we want his son. Deserves to be moved on.

Is only around because we want his son. Deserves to be moved on.

So easy to post rubbish isn't it

So easy to post rubbish isn't it

Sorry, he was such a great assistant coach for us that he did not deserve the fate of the rest of the then FD. And we would not want young Viney going to GWS do we.

Sorry, he was such a great assistant coach for us that he did not deserve the fate of the rest of the then FD. And we would not want young Viney going to GWS do we.

He was an assistant coach for us now was he, Jackie ???

Neeld will not be going anywere soon.

He must be given time to build his list come round 16 2013 if there is still no improvement then we will ask questions.

I must say im still to see any great coaching from Mark but i will give him time.

After all he did bring us Mitch Clark so lets see what he does after trying all the VFL listed MFC players.

I still think 8 to 12 will go.

B.Royal must go from the coaching group.

18 rounds of footy and a pre-season with all the resources in the world, I think that an ample opportunity to show something. He has shown nothing. Now he is cooked.

Please.

Time to move on before we really do damage.

You seem to have some sort of agenda against Neeld. Every post I see from you is calling from his head. I take it your a Bailey supporter? Because if you arn't then you just may like seeing a new coach for the team every 9 months and expect a major turn around.

You seem to have some sort of agenda against Neeld. Every post I see from you is calling from his head. I take it your a Bailey supporter? Because if you arn't then you just may like seeing a new coach for the team every 9 months and expect a major turn around.

I'm pretty certain that our natopian friend wanted Malthouse of Roos in the coaches box... however, I sincerely doubt that even under their tutilage our fortunes would be any better than they presently are. The thing that I have trouble comprehending with these kinds of posters is that they seem to believe that only established coaches can bring success... is this telling us that the Malthouses and Roos of the world were never first time coaches; that they have always tasted nothing but success?