Most of us have been involved with these boards for years. Some of us have got it right on occasions; while many have got it wrong. Unfortunately for all of us, the club has got it wrong time and time again.

It is an indictment on most of us who have put certain types of footballers up on a pedestal. How many of us have put up a 'Jude Bolton' as a target or example? It is only after a Sydney flag, or his stats that show no other player has tackled more, that we suddenly acknowledge him as an elite player that we underrated for too long.

A Tom Harley quote (courtesy of the Demonology carcus) suggested "offence sells memberships; defence wins premierships". A decade ago, a spine was supposed to win you one. Then it was a list of stars. Maybe it is just a group of competitive hungry animals that don't tolerate failure.

The MFC is in the midst of the deepest malaise in my lifetime. In the 70s, twelfth was as low as we could go. This year we were in a battle for 18th. Players can only be tempted here if we pay well above the odds. I cannot recollect a player who wanted to come here; and yet we are still scratching our heads about the value of one that desperately wants to. Several have been quoted as saying like Sheedy, "Lucky, because I could have ended up at Melbourne" instead of Richmond. We have been the poisoned challace of the AFL for 50 years. Now, most would rather die of thirst than take a sip.

The plus on Neeld is that he obviously recognises this. The minus on him is that he is willing to throw the baby and the bathroom out with the bathwater.

The MFC has been too ready to follow-the-leader in the past decade. Whoever won the flag, was invariably the all-in-style we wanted to follow, despite our playing personnel's capability to pull it off. Team-defence, followed by run'n'carry, followed by the-press, ending up in our fascination in all things Collingwood one year ago. What is different this time is that the reigning premiers really represent everything we haven't been. For a decade they have been respected. For a decade they have refused to bottom-out. For a decade they have not had the luxury of our plethora of early draft picks. All this in spite of the so-called appalling game-style they played for 90% of this time. Many of us have whinged like children watching Sydney play in the past decade. In reality, they have played September football all year round; and we didn't know it.

So how do you build a brotherhood? After all, the title of this thread could be seen as quite rhetorical. Have a read of the Jack Viney-Ollie Wines article in The Age this morning. Mates-for-life and competitive beasts. The types that can pull this club out of this deepest malaise. Types that would play for each other and the jumper. Types that would make a supporter proud irrespective of the scoreboard. Types that could get us through the longest rebuild in AFL history. Types that would hang around for the long haul.

At draft time, clubs often battle with the notion of picking the best available player against the player-type that they most need. Our plight is so severe, we must also consider the fraternity of the future list.

Warning: This thread will self-destruct when it reaches 38 pages.

Good post. I think the relationship between the two as well as Wines' sheer footy ability and output as an inside mid would be taken into consideration. Building relationships or a brotherhood is important given our recent upheaval.

I think that at pick 4, Wines is likely to fit into all three categories.

He will be the best available (or the surest thing available-- depends on your definition of the "best available")

He's what we need.

He has a good relationship with Viney and is keen to play for the Dees.

Most of us have been involved with these boards for years.

I am not sure your 3 posts qualifies you to make that statement

The plus on Neeld is that he obviously recognises this. The minus on him is that he is willing to throw the baby and the bathroom out with the bathwater.

Instead of seeing what Neeld has done with the baby as a minus, i'll give you this quote.

W. L. Bateman - If you keep on doing what you've always done, you'll keep on getting what you've always got.

No baby, no bathwater just a recognition that we needed big change to what we have previously accepted and done.

The only caveat i see with all of this is the agreement that the desire is to building a winning team.

This then goes to the idea that its a winning team and not a team of winners which then could go to that old chest nut a Champion team and not a team of champions.

I think the concept of always "best available " dismisses to quickly at times the reality of what is it you need to maintain a Champion team. Granted we havent either description truly yet but id always look to build a Champion team. Sometimes they employ less than glamourous types but they do the job.

Look at a fantastic house.. its great, marvellous to live in but you only see the 'surfaces" . What binds it and often holds it up is hidden. Does that detract from its appeal ?

Interesting title. MOre interested in discussing "building a brotherhood" the other two elements have been done to death...

The coaches job is to recruit a group of men who can successfully implement his game plan. If he gets the ingredients right the players build trust and confidence in each other as they learn their respective roles and play those roles as they should. The result is an increase in "brotherhood".

Over time and with success this process builds into the type of bonds that win flags.

I am not sure your 3 posts qualifies you to make that statement

You'd be surprised.

How about you offer an opinion instead of judgmental qualification nonsense?

You'd be surprised.

How about you offer an opinion instead of judgmental qualification nonsense?

I was an ology poster and it took me about 2 years before I posted here for the first but was an avid reader.

I was an ology poster and it took me about 2 years before I posted here for the first but was an avid reader.

Indeed nutbean. It could be a similar journey for the OP'er too... Back to the topic of building a brotherhood v need v best..

The only caveat i see with all of this is the agreement that the desire is to building a winning team.

This then goes to the idea that its a winning team and not a team of winners which then could go to that old chest nut a Champion team and not a team of champions.

I think the concept of always "best available " dismisses to quickly at times the reality of what is it you need to maintain a Champion team. Granted we havent either description truly yet but id always look to build a Champion team. Sometimes they employ less than glamourous types but they do the job.

Look at a fantastic house.. its great, marvellous to live in but you only see the 'surfaces" . What binds it and often holds it up is hidden. Does that detract from its appeal ?

And your reference to "best available" begs the question : what parameters does one use for best available.

Over many years it has obviously eluded not only our (often rightly) maligned recruiters but many at other clubs as well.

There is just so much that "scientific" analysis can achieve; one man's meat is another man's poison. Some "fit in" at one club when they may not at another.

I am not sure your 3 posts qualifies you to make that statement

It's TGR from demonology... a veteran of 10,000 posts.

He's also contributed here over the years too (under a different name, obviously).

Reckon that qualifies him.

A Tom Harley quote (courtesy of the Demonology carcus) suggested "offence sells memberships; defence wins premierships".

I'm pretty sure that quote well pre-dates Tom Harley. A bit overrated as an analyser of the game that guy, I reckon.

Most of us have been involved with these boards for years. Some of us have got it right on occasions; while many have got it wrong. Unfortunately for all of us, the club has got it wrong time and time again.

It is an indictment on most of us who have put certain types of footballers up on a pedestal. How many of us have put up a 'Jude Bolton' as a target or example? It is only after a Sydney flag, or his stats that show no other player has tackled more, that we suddenly acknowledge him as an elite player that we underrated for too long.

A Tom Harley quote (courtesy of the Demonology carcus) suggested "offence sells memberships; defence wins premierships". A decade ago, a spine was supposed to win you one. Then it was a list of stars. Maybe it is just a group of competitive hungry animals that don't tolerate failure.

The MFC is in the midst of the deepest malaise in my lifetime. In the 70s, twelfth was as low as we could go. This year we were in a battle for 18th. Players can only be tempted here if we pay well above the odds. I cannot recollect a player who wanted to come here; and yet we are still scratching our heads about the value of one that desperately wants to. Several have been quoted as saying like Sheedy, "Lucky, because I could have ended up at Melbourne" instead of Richmond. We have been the poisoned challace of the AFL for 50 years. Now, most would rather die of thirst than take a sip.

The plus on Neeld is that he obviously recognises this. The minus on him is that he is willing to throw the baby and the bathroom out with the bathwater.

The MFC has been too ready to follow-the-leader in the past decade. Whoever won the flag, was invariably the all-in-style we wanted to follow, despite our playing personnel's capability to pull it off. Team-defence, followed by run'n'carry, followed by the-press, ending up in our fascination in all things Collingwood one year ago. What is different this time is that the reigning premiers really represent everything we haven't been. For a decade they have been respected. For a decade they have refused to bottom-out. For a decade they have not had the luxury of our plethora of early draft picks. All this in spite of the so-called appalling game-style they played for 90% of this time. Many of us have whinged like children watching Sydney play in the past decade. In reality, they have played September football all year round; and we didn't know it.

So how do you build a brotherhood? After all, the title of this thread could be seen as quite rhetorical. Have a read of the Jack Viney-Ollie Wines article in The Age this morning. Mates-for-life and competitive beasts. The types that can pull this club out of this deepest malaise. Types that would play for each other and the jumper. Types that would make a supporter proud irrespective of the scoreboard. Types that could get us through the longest rebuild in AFL history. Types that would hang around for the long haul.

At draft time, clubs often battle with the notion of picking the best available player against the player-type that they most need. Our plight is so severe, we must also consider the fraternity of the future list.

Good post OM. Whilst supporters can be sold spin and past UBD game plans's, you can't sell the same crap to the players. If they don't believe in a coach's message then it is not going to happen. Another thing we lack is a four letter word that sums up what we need and never used here except from me is "Elan" and that wont come without belief from the players. Been lacking since the moderately successful Northey days. A player that comes to mind from that era was Rodney Grinter. Before Northey was a loose ill disciplined selfish goal hungry wannabe speccie taker. Then he became one of the backbones of our team. Hard and sometimes ruthless, he and a few unsung others epitomised what Elan is all about and helped us lift out of the quagmire simillar to where we are now. Can Neeld do a Northey or better. Can he inspire lesser players to be a Grinter? We will see.

Edited November 14, 201213 yr by america de cali

actually find myself agreeing with ADC wtf !!

it probably wont happen often lol

Elan..hmm.. a classic car...eh Mr Matsuda !!

yep we need Elan

Good post OM. Whilst supporters can be sold spin and past UBD game plans's, you can't sell the same crap to the players. If they don't believe in a coach's message then it is not going to happen. Another thing we lack is a four letter word that sums up what we need and never used here except from me is "Elan" and that wont come without belief from the players. Been lacking since the moderately successful Northey days. A player that comes to mind from that era was Rodney Grinter. Before Northey was a loose ill disciplined selfish goal hungry wannabe speccie taker. Then he became one of the backbones of our team. Hard and sometimes ruthless, he and a few unsung others epitomised what Elan is all about and helped us lift out of the quagmire simillar to where we are now. Can Neeld do a Northey or better. Can he inspire lesser players to be a Grinter? We will see.

How long did you want to wait for morts and Cook to become the' backbone'???

I personally like a soild spine over just a solid back bone!

Instead of seeing what Neeld has done with the baby as a minus, i'll give you this quote.

W. L. Bateman - If you keep on doing what you've always done, you'll keep on getting what you've always got.

No baby, no bathwater just a recognition that we needed big change to what we have previously accepted and done.

Precisely, Neeld is not just trying to rebuild a team he's trying to rebuild a club and all the other parts that go with it. The Club fell in to a hole 40 odd years ago and he is, along with the new Board, trying to drag us out of it.

There’s no sense in just assembling a good group of players that are capable of winning a flag if the structure of the club allows it to fall apart if one key participant leaves. All the successful clubs have strong Boards and strong leaders who demand that the players perform and even the supporters have an expectation and put pressure on the club to succeed.

I don’t want the club to have one shot at the flag and then drop back in to the abyss; I want the club to be there each year with an ethic that ensures they will continue on even if the coach leaves and the Board changes. Neeld has a chance to be a modern hero of the MFC and that’s why this draft is only the start and I expect he will build on it in future drafts to fill gaps in the side; I don't expect great things next year but I expect a big improvement and I'm sure we'll see it.

I think he is trying to give the club some much needed credibility and ensure that other clubs know they’ve been in a hard contest when they play us; so it would surprise me if they overlooked Wines, I think he’s going for tough, not skill and class at the moment.

You can add polish later but credibility is needed right now.

It's TGR from demonology... a veteran of 10,000 posts.

He's also contributed here over the years too (under a different name, obviously).

Reckon that qualifies him.

He can't come over here with his actual user name?

I guess he doesn't want to lose any credibility over there.

You know, 'ruin the brand' and all that...

He can't come over here with his actual user name?

I guess he doesn't want to lose any credibility over there.

You know, 'ruin the brand' and all that...

Bwa hahahahah; I like that ruin the Brand (more uncontrolled laughter)

I think it's actually because he's been banned a couple of times before from here, TGR doesn't take kindly to rejection.

He can't come over here with his actual user name?

I guess he doesn't want to lose any credibility over there.

You know, 'ruin the brand' and all that...

Bwa hahahahah; I like that ruin the Brand (more uncontrolled laughter)

I think it's actually because he's been banned a couple of times before from here, TGR doesn't take kindly to rejection.

He was struck with the ban-hammer here under his original name.

He finally bit the bullet and joined under a new name about a week before 'ology came back online. Now that his fiefdom has been reformed I doubt we'll see him back here for a while.

Still enjoy his posts, wherever they appear.

W. L. Bateman - If you keep on doing what you've always done, you'll keep on getting what you've always got.

Any relation?

Enjoyable OP with a familiar ring to it - and then I read who it may be.

I harp back to the two best ingredients to look for when recruiting - talent and leadership. Clearly you won't always get both, but it's the optimum result. So for me your first and third categories are inextricably linked. If you acquire a player with talent and leadership you'll most likely be going for "best available" and in doing so you'll be "building a Brotherhood". Where you'll go for "needs" is later picks/rookie draft and trades. Even then you'll still be careful as to who you're bringing into the group.

You're not going to solve all of your ills in one draft, but I'm delighted that Neeld has cut a swathe through the list and terminated those that weren't of the right mould to take this club forward. You need a dominant core of roughly 15 players that you can rely on to set the tone of the club and surround them with the best group of interchangeable players you can. Keep turning the list over and don't stagnate, but keep the core for as long as you can and add to it as often as you can.

Nice to see Ben Hur and Messala back on the same page(s). Might be interesting, again.