Total Faith in the Neeld Way

[thaipantsman 180]

I've decided I'm never going to Thailand.

Yes you are Ben Hur! You can come and stay with me!!

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

But you're asking a question you already know the answer to. Which I suspect is your point.

I can understand why you would think this, but my question is genuine.

You're right in that my opinion of Neeld is informed by my inability to identify anything much that he has done to inspire my confidence in him. You're also correct in that this pretty much forms the basis of the "point" that I have made.

Nevertheless, I genuinely thought that maybe there are some positives about Neeld's performance that I have missed. I still think that there probably are (and I've pointed out a couple that I haven't missed actually) and that somewhere out there, there is a person reading this thread who has a better understanding of coaching than me and who has picked up on some of these things. For instance, there could be a subtle evolution in our centre bounce setup which is yet to yield results but which may be new or exciting or theoretically sound. I figured that, given that so many people profess such strong confidence in Neeld, I must be missing something.

Well this is what I was thinking right up until I saw this:

It was then that I remembered why I don't post very often. Clearly I am just giving everyone too much credit and I should save this kind of discussion for the pub.

Edited July 30, 2012 by Hazyshadeofgrinter

[Range Rover 1,935]

I can understand why you would think this, but my question is genuine.

You're right in that my opinion of Neeld is informed by my inability to identify anything much that he has done to inspire my confidence in him. You're also correct in that this pretty much forms the basis of the "point" that I have made.

Nevertheless, I genuinely thought that maybe there are some positives about Neeld's performance that I have missed. I still think that there probably are (and I've pointed out a couple that I haven't missed actually) and that somewhere out there, there is a person reading this thread who has a better understanding of coaching than me and who has picked up on some of these things. For instance, there could be a subtle evolution in our centre bounce setup which is yet to yield results but which may be new or exciting or theoretically sound. I figured that, given that so many people profess such strong confidence in Neeld, I must be missing something.

Well this is what I was thinking right up until I saw this:

It was then that I remembered why I don't post very often. Clearly I am just giving everyone too much credit and I should save this kind of discussion for the pub.

How would anyone on here be aware of these types of subtleties unless they were inner sanctum?

The finer points will become evident in time. Give the man credit for his broad brush strokes (see my previous points 1 - 6) first.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Five things stand out which should have you standing up and applauding ...

1. Has set about dismantling Bailey's useless free-wheeling game plan and instilling a heretofore non-existent defensive mindset in the players.

2. Willingness to drop players regardless of status and reputation.

3. Getting rid of a group of leaders who were anything but and boldly replacing them with fresh faces he believes can grow in the role and take us forward.

4. Enticing one of the game's most astute thinkers (Craig) and fitness gurus (Misson) to join him.

5. Convincing Mitch Clark to join us.

Small victories in the first year as he lays the groundwork for culture change and future success.

You should be inspired by this because it took brass balls to do it.

Thanks for this response Range Rover.

I actually see points 1 and 3 as negatives. Point 2 I agree with and I have pointed it out myself. I give Neeld some credit on points 4 and 5 but we have other people at the club who are supposed be able to deal with such matters. Neil Craig's appointment as the "conduit" between the board and the football department came about in part as a result of our previous dysfunction. Nevertheless, that is another conversation and shouldn't detract from the credit Neeld deserves.

On the whole, I see where you are coming from, but your examples fall well short of convincing me. The "brass balls" stuff sounds like hollow rhetoric to me. Points 4 and 5 are ok, but they don't really speak to the kind of coaching ability that I have in mind. Perhaps Neeld might one day make a good Director of Football Operations or some such.

[old dee 23,525]

I think you and others are looking too hard to find fault with the coach and his game-plan. Ultimately any game-plan is only as good as the players at your disposal. Neeld's game-plan is based on defence and accountability and we know through the reaches of time that flags have been won by teams with a strong defensive focus. When Cam Bruce was interviewed 12 months ago he was asked what's the main difference between Hawthorn and Melbourne and he answered that it was the intensity of the training. He said that there were a lot more mature bodies at Hawthorn which allowed the training loads to be far greater. Misson and Neeld were apparently surprised by how poor the overall fitness was at Melbourne when they arrived and clearly it takes a few years to change this adequately.

Denis Pagan was considered a great coach by the North players and he won flags. He had terrible cattle at Carlton and the results showed. Barassi was a great coach at North and Carlton, but had terrible cattle at the Dees and the results showed. Alan Joyce took Hawthorn to a flag in the year that Allan Jeans was sick then went to Footscray where he had poor cattle and the results showed. In Malthouse's first year at Collingwood the list contained names such as Patterson, Baynes, Oborne, Smith, McKee, Jacotine, Kinnear, Wasley, Tuckey, Lane, Ukovic, Orchard, Adkins, and Dimmatina. There'd be plenty of players in that list of 14 that people have never heard of. Not surprisingly Collingwood came second last in Malthouse's first year as coach. David Parkin was twice sacked at Carlton, but in 1995 he coached a team to a flag that he has subsequently said virtually coached itself. Could he coach when he was sacked twice, or only when he had the talent at his disposal ? Alistair Clarkson won only 5 games in his first year and many supporters at the time were calling for his head. They're pretty quiet now.

Some supporters on here think that we've got a list that is choc full of talent, but where games of footy are won, i.e. the midfield, we don't. I think the bare bones of the list are OK and can be quickly improved with some good drafting and trading, but right now our run and spread is virtually non-existent. People get sick of hearing it, but our recruiting over the last 5 years has hurt us terribly. Neeld and Co have an opportunity to make significant changes at the end of the year and I think they will. I know Neeld thinks the demands of the game are too great on young players, but I hope he holds his nerve and doesn't lose our opportunity to draft some exciting talent with picks 3 and 4. I'll understand if he sacrifices pick 12 for an older player, but not the first two.

I think you get my message. It's hard to judge Neeld with the quality of the list at his disposal. Rather than focusing so much on the game-plan it's the list that needs dissecting. You can't make chicken salad out of chicken [censored]. You can't pull your socks up if you haven't got any. Coaches have known for 100 years that you need talented players and despite the denials of some supporters, we don't have nearly enough.

Can Neeld coach ? I don't know. Is the list great ? Hell no.

I think you have got it spot on Ben-Hur

The list is crap

Like you I have no idea if Neeld is good or not.

But it is not hard to see that we have a large number of average players with Average skill.

And in my view they are not all the older guys.

A number of our early draft picks look average to me

[Range Rover 1,935]

Thanks for this response Range Rover.

I actually see points 1 and 3 as negatives. Point 2 I agree with and I have pointed it out myself. I give Neeld some credit on points 4 and 5 but we have other people at the club who are supposed be able to deal with such matters. Neil Craig's appointment as the "conduit" between the board and the football department came about in part as a result of our previous dysfunction. Nevertheless, that is another conversation and shouldn't detract from the credit Neeld deserves.

On the whole, I see where you are coming from, but your examples fall well short of convincing me. The "brass balls" stuff sounds like hollow rhetoric to me. Points 4 and 5 are ok, but they don't really speak to the kind of coaching ability that I have in mind. Perhaps Neeld might one day make a good Director of Football Operations or some such.

Give the man a chance to re-vamp the list and cast your judgment after 40 games.

This time next year you will know a lot more about whether Mark Neeld can coach or not.

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

I think you have got it spot on Ben-Hur

The list is crap

Like you I have no idea if Neeld is good or not.

But it is not hard to see that we have a large number of average players with Average skill.

And in my view they are not all the older guys.

A number of our early draft picks look average to me

Agree which is why I previously asked what has the list done to inspire the neeld haters/doubters that Neeld can't coach.

[beelzebub 23,241]

I think you have got it spot on Ben-Hur

The list is crap

Like you I have no idea if Neeld is good or not.

But it is not hard to see that we have a large number of average players with Average skill.

And in my view they are not all the older guys.

A number of our early draft picks look average to me

No No No Old.. The list is fabulous, we ought to be contesting finals this year

[beelzebub 23,241]

Give the man a chance to re-vamp the list and cast your judgment after 40 games.

This time next year you will know a lot more about whether Mark Neeld can coach or not.

Just too much common sense in those words. Please desist.

[old dee 23,525]

No No No Old.. The list is fabulous, we ought to be contesting finals this year

Sorry BB I got caught up in the fervour of the moment.

( why is it we cannot win again?)

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

belzebub, I hope this doesn't sound too harsh, but I found it easier to respond to you point by point.

Neeld is himself only the face of a football dept and the Board that arranged them. He carries the bucket,of things good and bad.

Neeld being the face of our football club strikes me as more of a sign of weakness in our broader administration than a sign of strength in Neeld.

I have faith in Neeld , as a representative of the change thats occured at the MFC. The change not only embodies the personnel it is representative of a shift in methodology as well as assessment and accountability.

This just sounds like fluff to me. Like you have got a bunch of buzz words and put them in a sentence without providing any explanation or justification.

With respect to accountability, Bailey was pretty accountable back in July last year. I think the club as a whole has a huge issue with accountability. Your attitude toward Neeld is no exception.

For far too many years talk from the club was in generalisations and non specific rhetoric. i.e We have a vision , we have great people...and such. It's what the members wanted to hear but it wasnt backed up with any structure or resources.

Once again, this just sounds like fluff to me. Your comments re: "generalisations and non specific rhetoric" are a little ironic.

The current setup; FD and associated staff now have a much better and more specific outline of who and what they are and where they are supposed to get to. Mor eimportanlty they are now being given the tools and people to make this happen. It wont happen overninght. Nothing does. It wont happen in a year. it would be foolhardy and ignorant to presume it could.

Ok, now once again the stuff about "a more specific outline" sounds good in theory but is there any substance to what you are saying or are you simply mouthing platitudes? If you have something of substance to say about where Neeld is trying to get and how he is trying to get there, then spell it out. Otherwise, don't pretend to know.

I am mostly impressed by the actuality of the club conceding that a lot that has gone before was simply wrong and that it had to change.. We can see the foundations of change in place. I am prepared to wait a reeasonable time to see something built out of all this. If we are treading water in 2 seasons time then it wil have come to nought.

Every administration does this. Bailey did it. Baillieu does it. You can typically keep it up for around a year before it wears thin.

What are the foundations of change that you see that give you confidence? Are you talking about kicking it along the boundary or what?

It's not 2 years hence, it's now. Not enough of a process has transpired to make a categorical call . Until it is. Im prepared to beleive the current FD and such are on the right path.

Even if it is too early to make a categorical call, it is not too early to form opinions in the interim. I disagree with the assertion that we will not be able to pass informed judgment for another two years.

Perhaps I'm being obstinate, but I still haven't read any meaningful explanation from you explaining why you believe Neeld is "on the right path".

Does it just come down to hope?

[Hardnut 327]

Thanks for this response Range Rover.

I actually see points 1 and 3 as negatives. Point 2 I agree with and I have pointed it out myself. I give Neeld some credit on points 4 and 5 but we have other people at the club who are supposed be able to deal with such matters. Neil Craig's appointment as the "conduit" between the board and the football department came about in part as a result of our previous dysfunction. Nevertheless, that is another conversation and shouldn't detract from the credit Neeld deserves.

On the whole, I see where you are coming from, but your examples fall well short of convincing me. The "brass balls" stuff sounds like hollow rhetoric to me. Points 4 and 5 are ok, but they don't really speak to the kind of coaching ability that I have in mind. Perhaps Neeld might one day make a good Director of Football Operations or some such.

Thank you for a very thoughtful set of comments Hazy.

I don't know if you are part of the 'inner sanctum', but in my humble opinion at least some of your comments can be reinforced by simple observation of the play at a game or at training. Some other comments are a matter of judgement of actions and the psychology behind them. Either way, a very thoughtful contribution - please don't go away.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

How would anyone on here be aware of these types of subtleties unless they were inner sanctum?

Well they could be members of the inner sanctum. Or they could even just be accomplished students of football. Either way, I'm just trying to work out what people are basing their "faith" on. I figured someone must have had some ideas. You have since given me some. I can't say that I found them convincing but at least I understand where you are coming form a little better.

[Range Rover 1,935]

Does it just come down to hope?

No it just comes down to 17 games being nowhere near enough time for a rational person to pass judgment.

Give him time. It's not that hard FFS.

[tonatopia 278]

Agree which is why I previously asked what has the list done to inspire the neeld haters/doubters that Neeld can't coach.

1. Turn the number 1 clearance duo in jamar and moloney into spuds

2. Ruin trengove

3. Have no faith in our list

4. Implement a stale game plan

5. Squirm when he is under pressure

6. Turn a quick team into slow

7. Refuse to use the corridor at all

8. Refuse to be flexible in game style

9. kill natural player instinct

10. Get smashed by every other team

11. Be the easiest team to play against

12. Turn us into a laughing stock

13. Ruin tapscott

14. Refuse to play Gysberts

15. Only have mild support for Jurrah

16. Persist with seller when we have plenty of tall backs

17. Consider drafting cloke

18. Only win 1 game against a pathetic bombers

19. Divide the club and supporters

20. Being relatively pleased with our progress

21. Using kpi's to justify the teams development

22. Start games pathetically

23. Not being able to inspire the club

24. Not being able to communicate with the media in a satisfactory manner

25. Blaming the list and not himself

26. destroying our attacking flair

27. Turn us into robots

28. Destroy our basic skills

29. Arouse no confidence whatsoever

30. Has no emotional intelligence

31. Keeping Brian royal

32. Recruiting plodders, couch, seller, magner

33. Not even being competitive

34. Reactionary positional changes

35. General lack of player development

36. Negative attitude towards football

I can keep going on about all the players he has made look second rate bar about 6.

Rr really only mentioned 2 positives, sacking prendergast and recruiting Clark.

We will probably lose against gc and he will be a goner.

[tonatopia 278]

Agree which is why I previously asked what has the list done to inspire the neeld haters/doubters that Neeld can't coach.

1. Turn the number 1 clearance duo in jamar and moloney into spuds

2. Ruin trengove

3. Have no faith in our list

4. Implement a stale game plan

5. Squirm when he is under pressure

6. Turn a quick team into slow

7. Refuse to use the corridor at all

8. Refuse to be flexible in game style

9. kill natural player instinct

10. Get smashed by every other team

11. Be the easiest team to play against

12. Turn us into a laughing stock

13. Ruin tapscott

14. Refuse to play Gysberts

15. Only have mild support for Jurrah

16. Persist with seller when we have plenty of tall backs

17. Consider drafting cloke

18. Only win 1 game against a pathetic bombers

19. Divide the club and supporters

20. Being relatively pleased with our progress

21. Using kpi's to justify the teams development

22. Start games pathetically

23. Not being able to inspire the club

24. Not being able to communicate with the media in a satisfactory manner

25. Blaming the list and not himself

26. destroying our attacking flair

27. Turn us into robots

28. Destroy our basic skills

29. Arouse no confidence whatsoever

30. Has no emotional intelligence

31. Keeping Brian royal

32. Recruiting plodders, couch, seller, magner

33. Not even being competitive

34. Reactionary positional changes

35. General lack of player development

36. Negative attitude towards football

I can keep going on about all the players he has made look second rate bar about 6.

Rr really only mentioned 2 positives, sacking prendergast and recruiting Clark.

We will probably lose against gc and he will be a goner.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Give the man a chance to re-vamp the list and cast your judgment after 40 games.

This time next year you will know a lot more about whether Mark Neeld can coach or not.

I'm sure I will but this thread is about what people think now, so I am posting within those parameters (and the constraints of space/time/Higgs field).

[old dee 23,525]

So you do not like him then toni?

Edited July 30, 2012 by old dee

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

No it just comes down to 17 games being nowhere near enough time for a rational person to pass judgment.

Give him time. It's not that hard FFS.

You seem to have formed an opinion after only 17 games. Isn't anyone else allowed to?

[Range Rover 1,935]

You seem to have formed an opinion after only 17 games. Isn't anyone else allowed to?

I have formed an opinion that the MFC is in drastic need of fundamental change and so far Mark Neeld has made all the right noises about changing it. I believe in him because so far he has taken measures to do what he said he's going to do.

An opinion of this nature can quite reasonably be made by now.

As to weather he is a good coach no-one can know this definitively until he has a list of players he's comfortable working with. So yes, you are 'allowed' to form an anti-Neeld opinion. But to do so at this early stage is folly and smacks of hidden agenda.

[tonatopia 278]

So you do not like him then toni?

I don't even reckon he is a good bloke, let alone his coaching.

[beelzebub 23,241]

that which you wrote

If you cant see that things are different then there's simply no way of informing you in any amount of words or fashion that you will accept.

Players are not selected in the same fashion, nor are they necessarily played in the same positions. Some of this is simple necessity as injuries have caused shortages in some areas of the ground. In other instances players are being tested. This in itself is a difference. Players are beiig made to run the gamut of accountability. They are being told to be defensive where as under prior charge they were left to run amock. problem being that some of these guys were never picked/drafted for these abilities. Im actually not sure what or why some were indeed picked ; that a benefit of hindsight as none too many questioned some of the selections at the time. Some of the acceptance was the assumption that all in charge knew what they were doing. I think history casts a pall upon such notions.

The list the current FD are having to wrestle with are predomianntly not of their making, but they are damned by their ( players ) performances when put to the test.

Interesting that many are happy to excuse the tested but not the testers. Its only by such scrutiny that decision can be made about who is cut of the right stuff ( according to the pattern as determined by the new FD , not the old ) .

The desired and acceptable levels of fitness are obviously a point of difference from the FD of now as compared the 'then'.. The 'ownership' of defence is now fairly upon all, not just the back players.

There are glaring differences between regimes, but ht elist remains essentially the same some names that in the main havent took to the grass yet. A couple of exceptions have had impact, just not for a long enough time.

This is a three act play and already some of the audience want to make the call on whos guilty. The whole purpose of 3 acts is theres a bigger story to unfold and tell. Its a bit obvious to some and totally invisible to others.

[beelzebub 23,241]

I don't even reckon he is a good bloke, let alone his coaching.

I'm sure he loses sleep about this

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

If you cant see that things are different then there's simply no way of informing you in any amount of words or fashion that you will accept.

I agree that I am wasting my time with you.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

1 - 36

ouch