Watching the team this year clearly demonstrated how much Bailey was a unmitigated disaster for the MFC. Unless Neeld is a miracle worker, head overseas for a couple of years to think of other things other than footy.

The single biggest stuff up of the decade was employing Bailey.

And perhaps the next was appointing Neeld, am I allowed to say that?

Watching the team this year clearly demonstrated how much Bailey was a unmitigated disaster for the MFC. Unless Neeld is a miracle worker, head overseas for a couple of years to think of other things other than footy.

The single biggest stuff up of the decade was employing Bailey.

I sense another argument cycle beginning here....

ps- Bailey did win us 8 1/2 games, made us exciting to watch, and has done pretty well with Adelaide this year...

Too many use Bailey as an excuse. It's not that simple.

I'm sticking it out with Neeld, but it's silly to blame a coach who had a completely different recruiting and game strategy for the team being hopeless with a completely opposite strategy.

And please, let's try and keep the buzzwords to the minimum in this thread.

Not sure about Neeld as a coach but as a recruiter he is good getting mitch over the line, looking forward to what other cattle ge can get to melbourne.

I believe in Neeld.

belief or blind faith?

Shouldn't the thread be titled 5 years to go - thanks to Dean Bailey and cohorts?

purple monkey dishwasher?

true. but.I hope Neeld can get the best out of the list, that's the test of a good coach and I don't think he has done that in 2012

belief or blind faith?

The latter

I blame the junction oval and the previous shoestring FD mostly. Bailey had bugger all to work with.

I can't blame Dean. He was the scapegoat.

I blame the junction oval and the previous shoestring FD mostly. Bailey had bugger all to work with.

I can't blame Dean. He was the scapegoat.

Towards the end, Jimmy (in his book) doubted that Bailey had the skill, game plan or structure to turn this outfit into hardened AFL footballers.

He got 'too close' to the players.

Towards the end, Jimmy (in his book) doubted that Bailey had the skill, game plan or structure to turn this outfit into hardened AFL footballers.

He got 'too close' to the players.

Yes i know, but by then he was on a hiding to nothing.

The first 2 1/2 years he would have been flat out.

Yes i know, but by then he was on a hiding to nothing.

The first 2 1/2 years he would have been flat out.

WYL, sorry but I'm going to open that festering wound again. Bailey would have had a say in recruiting all of our 60 pound weaklings who have spent the last four years getting sand kicked in their collective faces.

DB had no idea what to do under any sort of pressure.

And perhaps the next was appointing Neeld, am I allowed to say that?

Wash your mouth out with sugar saltsQQ!

I sense another argument cycle beginning here....

ps- Bailey did win us 8 1/2 games, made us exciting to watch, and has done pretty well with Adelaide this year...

Too many use Bailey as an excuse. It's not that simple.

I'm sticking it out with Neeld, but it's silly to blame a coach who had a completely different recruiting and game strategy for the team being hopeless with a completely opposite strategy.

And please, let's try and keep the buzzwords to the minimum in this thread.

Ridiculous to blame the current predicament on Bailey. Neeld didn't get MC to Melbourne. $$$800, 000 a season did the job for him. Mitch would of played under a wombat for that sought of $.

WYL, sorry but I'm going to open that festering wound again. Bailey would have had a say in recruiting all of our 60 pound weaklings who have spent the last four years getting sand kicked in their collective faces.

DB had no idea what to do under any sort of pressure.

Bailey wasn't blameless i agree, but the club deserves the majority.

Bailey wasn't blameless i agree, but the club deserves the majority.

I reckon the coach IS the club.

Look at the monstrous presence of a Sheedy, or a Malthouse and now, the Scotts and a Buckley.

They alone set the tone, the culture, the respect and demand unity.

Bails came from a very low skills base.

I reckon the coach IS the club.

Look at the monstrous presence of a Sheedy, or a Malthouse and now, the Scotts and a Buckley.

They alone set the tone, the culture, the respect and demand unity.

Bails came from a very low skills base.

Yes you could be right. But not at Melbourne.....yet.

It is exactly why i do not blame Dean, he was thrown to the lions.

Watching the team this year clearly demonstrated how much Bailey was a unmitigated disaster for the MFC. Unless Neeld is a miracle worker, head overseas for a couple of years to think of other things other than footy.

The single biggest stuff up of the decade was employing Bailey.

While not defending Bailey, you can't blame it entirely on him. Our recruiting from 2000 to 2006 was terrible and Bailey inherited a horrible list from Daniher and Cameron. I'm really hoping Neeld cleans out atleast 6 from the senior list.

This all ties into the other thread. Daniher and Bailey's eras put us where we are.

And people expect it all to turn around on a sixpence. There's still pain ahead, but with it might just come some actual development of a team

I sense another argument cycle beginning here....

ps- Bailey did win us 8 1/2 games, made us exciting to watch, and has done pretty well with Adelaide this year...

.

How do we now what degree of credit Bailey gets for Adelaide's turn around this year?

As for making us exciting to watch I think that statements just a reflection of how bad we've been this year. Going to a match under Bailey filled me with dread from day one until 186.

I believe in the ladder

5 years minimum rebuild

3rd world footy team

reality

It wont take 5 years, but more than likely come th eend of the current contract for Neeld will see the team actually competitive, somethiing you could augment and step up from.

You just cant take 5 years. Neeld wont take that long, he knows he hasnt go that long..lol

We didnt not have any players, we just didnt have a team when he took over. There will be a serious influx of new faces for 2013 and that will be supplemented ( as a matter of course ) for 2014 The team that hits the decks in 2014 wil lbe al but unrecognisable from the one that finished 2011.

Were 40 games a man shy and a handful of decent players short of a reasonable team.

Two more years...not 5