On 10/08/2012 at 00:47, Rhino Richards said:

Where do we sign? Beamer is a 25-40 pick at best IMO.

I agree, we need to hightlight to the AFL past B&F, VC, 3-4 years to play, we are [censored] please give us pick 21 for him, on the open market we would get pick 30+ for him. This then leaves us with 5 picks inside 25, one to be used on Viney the rest either trade for players or introduce another 4 kids.

I hate what the AFL has become, unfortunately both players and clubs need to be selfish and do what is best for them. It will leave members asking why, some clubs will win some will lose, some supporters will not understand some will. Moloney will be a big example of this, to improve our team if we can get a pick inside 25 for him the club should take it, on the flip side if Moloney gets a chance to go to a top 6 team and to finish of his AFL life playing finals he should go. I hope Green does play next year and play finals, it will be sad to see him in another clubs jumper but finals are what they play for and what we as supporters want to watch so both parties club and player have to do what they can to play in finals.

feel like i'm watching Moneyball a bit....lets see how this pans out

  On 10/08/2012 at 01:53, SloonieMcFloonieloone said:

Topic of discussion- Mooney recons we should trade Sylvia. It has some merit, although on initial thoughts I'm against it.

Discuss.

Once again trade him for what, say we only get pick 16 for Colin, do you take this, you only trade a player if it will benefit the club.

We have won 30 odd games out of the last 120-most of them inside the MCC Womb.

None of our list is safe and why should it be?

Until our list gives the same effort as Nathan Jones & Mitch Clark each week they are all tradeable.

Players will go this year. For the sake of the next MFC flag.

I'm going to try and simplify things.

After a season at the club Neeld knows what we lack and where we lack it. And he's going to do the best he can to get as much of it as possible over the trade/draft period. Btw, Mitch Clark has it.

Talent.

  On 10/08/2012 at 01:25, jnrmac said:

Who says we are following the "moneyball plan"?? God I am sick of this reference. Most people have no idea what it means and the club has never articulated that is what they are doing.

We don't have a shortage of money ATM which is why the Oakland A's couldn't compete with the Yankees. if you believe what you read we are chasing Cloke on big bucks, we are raising funds to have ago at some free agents and we got Clark on big bickies last year. We have plenty of room in our salary cap. That is the opposite of the Moneyball strategy.

The Oakland A's 'Moneyball' or sabermetric strategy never precluded big name signings. It merely placed an emphasis on finding value in undervalued players. But they still signed some stars during Billy Bean's reign.

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:31, why you little said:

We have won 30 odd games out of the last 120-most of them inside the MCC Womb.

None of our list is safe and why should it be?

Until our list gives the same effort as Nathan Jones & Mitch Clark each week they are all tradeable.

Players will go this year. For the sake of the next MFC flag.

As Kevin Sheedy said, 'Too much analysis leads to paralysis', and to recall my football days, I usually played best when I was simply hungry for the footy.

Maybe, just maybe, it is not the players that are at fault, it is the coach that is derailing their hunger with an over-emphasised priority on structure, which is preventing the players to simply be hungry for the footy. in time, maybe the structures will become second nature and the players can focus on the footy again, but then again, maybe Neeld is a dud.

Do we really want to get rid of a 1/4 of our list.

Players like Petterd, Bennell, Gysberts and Blease will go to Sydney and absolutely dominate. You watch.

Players lke Moloney, Rivers and Bartram will end up at Geelong or Essendon or Carlton and be fixed members of their team.

I hope Neeld knows what he is doing, because like Prendergast, they can just leave and we get stuck with the mess.

We must hold them accountable and consistently check their decisions. They are employed by us, the members.

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:50, tonatopia said:

As Kevin Sheedy said, 'Too much analysis leads to paralysis', and to recall my football days, I usually played best when I was simply hungry for the footy.

Maybe, just maybe, it is not the players that are at fault, it is the coach that is derailing their hunger with an over-emphasised priority on structure, which is preventing the players to simply be hungry for the footy. in time, maybe the structures will become second nature and the players can focus on the footy again, but then again, maybe Neeld is a dud.

Do we really want to get rid of a 1/4 of our list.

Players like Petterd, Bennell, Gysberts and Blease will go to Sydney and absolutely dominate. You watch.

Players lke Moloney, Rivers and Bartram will end up at Geelong or Essendon or Carlton and be fixed members of their team.

I hope Neeld knows what he is doing, because like Prendergast, they can just leave and we get stuck with the mess.

We must hold them accountable and consistently check their decisions. They are employed by us, the members.

You still haven't answered my question from the other thread, so I'll ask it again here.

Do you want our senior coach Mark Neeld to succeed? Yes or no.

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:41, Range Rover said:

The Oakland A's 'Moneyball' or sabermetric strategy never precluded big name signings. It merely placed an emphasis on finding value in undervalued players. But they still signed some stars during Billy Bean's reign.

Spot on RR

The A's would have paid more for players - they couldn't afford too the MFC can.

We need competiors at the Dees we have a lot of good honest players and hardly any mongrel and raw talent who want to win at all costs - Apart from Blease, none of the names on the list in the age concern me if they left.

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:50, tonatopia said:

As Kevin Sheedy said, 'Too much analysis leads to paralysis', and to recall my football days, I usually played best when I was simply hungry for the footy.

Maybe, just maybe, it is not the players that are at fault, it is the coach that is derailing their hunger with an over-emphasised priority on structure, which is preventing the players to simply be hungry for the footy. in time, maybe the structures will become second nature and the players can focus on the footy again, but then again, maybe Neeld is a dud.

Do we really want to get rid of a 1/4 of our list.

Players like Petterd, Bennell, Gysberts and Blease will go to Sydney and absolutely dominate. You watch.

Players lke Moloney, Rivers and Bartram will end up at Geelong or Essendon or Carlton and be fixed members of their team.

I hope Neeld knows what he is doing, because like Prendergast, they can just leave and we get stuck with the mess.

We must hold them accountable and consistently check their decisions. They are employed by us, the members.

Must you connect my statement with your hatred of Neeld?

This club has spent over $50 million on player wages in the last 6 years.

For very little return.

QED.

surely jurrah should be given atleast one year considering the injuries he has had to battle this year?

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:17, Range Rover said:

This is the problem with you in a nutshell. Fear.

I fear being led by you. My god, just imagine. having to take orders from a butt plug. No thanks.

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:57, tonatopia said:

I fear being led by you. My god, just imagine. having to take orders from a butt plug. No thanks.

Putting your fear and juvenile insults aside, answer the question.

Do you want Neeld to succeed? Yes or no.

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:55, why you little said:

Must you connect my statement with your hatred of Neeld?

This club has spent over $50 million on player wages in the last 6 years.

For very little return.

QED.

George W Bush spent $4 trillion on his troops that resulted in a disaster.

Don't blame the soldiers, blame the boss.

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:50, tonatopia said:

As Kevin Sheedy said, 'Too much analysis leads to paralysis', and to recall my football days, I usually played best when I was simply hungry for the footy.

Maybe, just maybe, it is not the players that are at fault, it is the coach that is derailing their hunger with an over-emphasised priority on structure, which is preventing the players to simply be hungry for the footy. in time, maybe the structures will become second nature and the players can focus on the footy again, but then again, maybe Neeld is a dud.

Do we really want to get rid of a 1/4 of our list.

Players like Petterd, Bennell, Gysberts and Blease will go to Sydney and absolutely dominate. You watch.

Players lke Moloney, Rivers and Bartram will end up at Geelong or Essendon or Carlton and be fixed members of their team.

I hope Neeld knows what he is doing, because like Prendergast, they can just leave and we get stuck with the mess.

We must hold them accountable and consistently check their decisions. They are employed by us, the members.

I haven't got the time to go through evey line of your post so I will answer/reply/argue this line

Have a look at the replay of the GC v Melb game last week and tell me what you think of Rivers and Moloney's contributoins agains kids???? Then reply to me if you think they would slot in to Carlton, Essendon etc

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:50, tonatopia said:

As Kevin Sheedy said, 'Too much analysis leads to paralysis', and to recall my football days, I usually played best when I was simply hungry for the footy.

Maybe, just maybe, it is not the players that are at fault, it is the coach that is derailing their hunger with an over-emphasised priority on structure, which is preventing the players to simply be hungry for the footy. in time, maybe the structures will become second nature and the players can focus on the footy again, but then again, maybe Neeld is a dud.

Do we really want to get rid of a 1/4 of our list.

Players like Petterd, Bennell, Gysberts and Blease will go to Sydney and absolutely dominate. You watch.

Players lke Moloney, Rivers and Bartram will end up at Geelong or Essendon or Carlton and be fixed members of their team.

I hope Neeld knows what he is doing, because like Prendergast, they can just leave and we get stuck with the mess.

We must hold them accountable and consistently check their decisions. They are employed by us, the members.

You worry too much.

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:59, tonatopia said:

George W Bush spent $4 trillion on his troops that resulted in a disaster.

Don't blame the soldiers, blame the boss.

Everyone is on notice in my world. But i want our new Hard assed coach to succeed. Whether he does is up to him.

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:58, Range Rover said:

Putting your fear and juvenile insults aside, answer the question.

Do you want Neeld to succeed? Yes or no.

I want to see Melbourne win. Neeld has given me nothing to suggest that he ever will do anything more than be mediocre.

Now he wants to sack 1/4 of the team.

Jesus Christ.

  On 10/08/2012 at 02:59, tonatopia said:

George W Bush spent $4 trillion on his troops that resulted in a disaster.

Don't blame the soldiers, blame the boss.

I agree with some of what you say - where I think your arguments are faling down is you give too much credit to this playing group..... They aren't any good. A lot of the talented players are too young to make a solid contribution week in week out at AFL level.

And the player who are old enough to do it are not good enough.... simple as that

We got smashed at the clearences against GC - says it all. You can't blame coaching for that..... (and 1 G Ablett)

  On 10/08/2012 at 03:00, tonatopia said:

I want to see Melbourne win. Neeld has given me nothing to suggest that he ever will do anything more than be mediocre.

Now he wants to sack 1/4 of the team.

Jesus Christ.

A bit of a reality check Tona

Players on that list have been put on notice. The club culture is finally changing - f*&$ helleluja

not all of that list will go at seasons end - some will get re-contracted, some will be delisted and some will be traded. Lets not get carried away

  On 10/08/2012 at 03:00, tonatopia said:

I want to see Melbourne win. Neeld has given me nothing to suggest that he ever will do anything more than be mediocre.

Now he wants to sack 1/4 of the team.

Jesus Christ.

You mean he wants to sack 1/4 of the team that's won something like 14 out of the last 60 games?

What a barstard!..

Heard the term,

'throwing the baby out with the bathwater'

look it up.

  On 10/08/2012 at 03:00, tonatopia said:

I want to see Melbourne win. Neeld has given me nothing to suggest that he ever will do anything more than be mediocre.

Now he wants to sack 1/4 of the team.

Jesus Christ.

Melbourne winning requires the coach to succeed. Same thing.

Simple yes or no question and all you can do is dodge it. Some 'supporter' you are.

  On 10/08/2012 at 03:09, Range Rover said:

Melbourne winning requires the coach to succeed. Same thing.

Simple yes or no question and all you can do is dodge it. Some 'supporter' you are.

yes,

but enough is enough. I can see what 2013 will bring. indirect football, defensive structures and constant second guessing due to an over-complicated game plan. Players being dulled down so they can implement a style of football that I think is already out-of-date.

RangeRover, spare me with you questions, I think your a [censored].

  On 10/08/2012 at 03:04, SloonieMcFloonieloone said:

You mean he wants to sack 1/4 of the team that's won something like 14 out of the last 60 games?

What a barstard!..

Try 30 odd out of the past 120!