How many wins as a minimum in 2013?

[Face Your Demons 175]

Big jump next year 12 or 13.

[Jonesbag 487]

We cant afford to not win games, simple as that. I think Neeld will be the coach to take us to our next flag, he looks to be putting all the pieces in place.

[stuie 7,374]

Who's being apologetic? The team is coming off a very very low base and has been putting in what could best be termed "insipid" performances for the last few seasons. Yes winning does matter and we would all love to see them winning games and we all no doubt expect them to win games, but more important than simply winning, is the attitude they carry into games and the effort that they put in. So, it is reasonable to say that we would like to see an end to the fade-outs and that we would like to see the opposition going away knowing they had been in a hard contest regardless of the result; and yes, I am using the "royal we" in this instance.

What I get tired of are people who call the realists apologists and this expectation that we can suddenly turn things around in the blink of an eye... it just 'aint going to happen.

I'm not saying we should win X amount of games, but surely if we are doing things like stopping the fade outs and being more competitive then surely that would mean winning more than 4 games next year? I'd take 11 wins and a couple of blow out losses over 22 close losses.

[Guest José Mourinho]

I read it mate. It just really bugs me that people are already bracing themselves with apologetic posts about "being competitive" or "winning quarters"... who does that remind you of?

Just because it reminds you of DB doesn't mean it was incorrect.

He may not have been a great head coach at AFL level, but just to get that sort of gig, you need a requisite level of talent, skill and knowledge to get where he did.

Don't also forget that he is now an assistant coach at a club that went deeper into the finals than we have in a decade.

It's not so absolute or black & white.

Cumulatively, it didn't work, but you can't just throw a blanket over every principle Bailey stood for and say the opposite is correct.

[Guest José Mourinho]

I'm not saying we should win X amount of games, but surely if we are doing things like stopping the fade outs and being more competitive then surely that would mean winning more than 4 games next year? I'd take 11 wins and a couple of blow out losses over 22 close losses.

Not necessarily.

That's exactly the point of putting weight in other, more precise KPIs.

If by some freak of the fixture, we played GWS and GCS five times each in 2013, would you be happy with 11 wins?

[monoccular 17,345]

You all "underdesire". Assuming it is a 23 round season, anything under 26 would be a disappointment!!

[Guest José Mourinho]

As another analogy, it's probably fair to say Bailey would've had a lot of the ingredients correct, but there was some flaw or steps missing in the recipe.

[Sir Why You Little 36,737]

Liking WYL's posts says enough for me!

why thankyou. You are always 100% correct of course.

[Dr. Mubutu 784]

I'd be happy with a %of above 85, NO 10-goal losses, and players that look like they're giving their all.

As for wins? Less important.

[Guest Hulkamania]

You want to be relevant? Win. Simple.

[H_T 3,038]

Whilst I acknowledge winning can be important, I acknowledge that there are indeed other targets or kpi's that ultimately can be used as a measurement of improvement. And because we're coming from so far back for reasons discussed many times on these boards (ie. midfield, quality, experience, age, development), other measurements come into play, not just a gauge of wins.

That said, for the sake of the exercise I'll use as my own personal benchmark of a minimum of 7 wins. Also a percentage of >80%.

[Roost It 1,434]

Whilst I acknowledge winning can be important, I acknowledge that there are indeed other targets or kpi's that ultimately can be used as a measurement of improvement. And because we're coming from so far back for reasons discussed many times on these boards (ie. midfield, quality, experience, age, development), other measurements come into play, not just a gauge of wins.

That said, for the sake of the exercise I'll use as my own personal benchmark of a minimum of 7 wins. Also a percentage of >80%.

If we play GWS, Dogs, GC and PA twice and only win 7 games then likely the season will be a shambles. i've had 5 years of KPI's, Competitive quarters, and other measurements. In that time I've watched the club lose deliberately, squander draft picks on ping pong players, fail to develop barely any of the talent, lose by 186 points thanks to a player revolt, watched a good bloke in Dean Bailey being undermined by his own employers, seen The Footy Show host called in again to try and fix the problem. On top of all this the club puts the team in pink jumpers, school boy blazers, fancy logos, continues to shuffle incompetent employees around to cover their mistakes and spins more corporate crap than I can handle, all the while wanting my money.

They can stick it all up their asswholes. Let's stop the excuses and demand 11 wins. With the draw we're going to get its not that hard.

7 my ass

Note: I believed the hype, not again.

[Sir Why You Little 36,737]

If we play GWS, Dogs, GC and PA twice and only win 7 games then likely the season will be a shambles. i've had 5 years of KPI's, Competitive quarters, and other measurements. In that time I've watched the club lose deliberately, squander draft picks on ping pong players, fail to develop barely any of the talent, lose by 186 points thanks to a player revolt, watched a good bloke in Dean Bailey being undermined by his own employers, seen The Footy Show host called in again to try and fix the problem. On top of all this the club puts the team in pink jumpers, school boy blazers, fancy logos, continues to shuffle incompetent employees around to cover their mistakes and spins more corporate crap than I can handle, all the while wanting my money.

They can stick it all up their asswholes. Let's stop the excuses and demand 11 wins. With the draw we're going to get its not that hard.

7 my ass

Note: I believed the hype, not again.

It is time we got more of this attitude....We have all put good $$$ into this under performing organization.

Excuses would not cut it anywhere else...So why here?

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,664]

So you're happy with 4 wins next year if our clearance count goes up? Give me a break, I'm with Dennis Commetti on this, alternative scoreboards are used too much by weak coaches and apologetic supporters to defend poor teams.

I'm not sure how you get to that conclusion. But as much as I get enjoyment from watching us win I desire a far bigger prize. I want that elusive premiership and I'd be happy to forego wins in the short term if it was the way to get a premiership a little later. I'm sick of seeing us being described as "brave" and "performing above expectations" when we win enough games to play finals but have no realistic chance of winning a premiership. We have not had a team strong enough or skilled enough to challenge for a premiership since 1964. In both our Grand Final appearances since then we were never considered likely to win.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

After 4 wins last year, 3 of which were against development junior sides and another against a side that took their bye week early, I would think Neeld would want to get the number of wins up next year regardless of whatever other KPIs he wishes to also use. But those KPIs are going to be hollow achievements if they are not reflected in wins on the board in 2012.

Given the heavy recruitment of experienced players over the summer and the discard of a number of perennial NQRs, MFC supporters would have every right to ignore KPI achievements if we turn in another shocker like 2012.

[stuie 7,374]

I'm not sure how you get to that conclusion. But as much as I get enjoyment from watching us win I desire a far bigger prize. I want that elusive premiership and I'd be happy to forego wins in the short term if it was the way to get a premiership a little later. I'm sick of seeing us being described as "brave" and "performing above expectations" when we win enough games to play finals but have no realistic chance of winning a premiership. We have not had a team strong enough or skilled enough to challenge for a premiership since 1964. In both our Grand Final appearances since then we were never considered likely to win.

It just seems really strange to me that people are treating better performances and more wins as mutually exclusive. If we perform better we should win more games. Simple.

[DEMON FROM WITHIN 46]

This is my first post on Demonland which I discovered a couple of weeks ago and have found to be a great read with some insightful and amusing information from some truly diehard supporters

In relationship to how many wins we should get next year to make my 3 children still believe it is worthwhile to follow the Demons the following needs to occur

A clear game plan needs to be developed which doesn't overly involve boring football being played around the boundary line

We need to win 30% or around 8 games

A win against Essendon must continue (hate the rotters)

We need to beat a genuine top 6 club such as Collingwood, Hawthorn or Geelong to really show the footy world we are on the right path

We need a new hero which kids can aspire to be (Viney or Hogan maybe it)

We need some bloody passion

[H_T 3,038]

If we play GWS, Dogs, GC and PA twice and only win 7 games then likely the season will be a shambles. i've had 5 years of KPI's, Competitive quarters, and other measurements. In that time I've watched the club lose deliberately, squander draft picks on ping pong players, fail to develop barely any of the talent, lose by 186 points thanks to a player revolt, watched a good bloke in Dean Bailey being undermined by his own employers, seen The Footy Show host called in again to try and fix the problem. On top of all this the club puts the team in pink jumpers, school boy blazers, fancy logos, continues to shuffle incompetent employees around to cover their mistakes and spins more corporate crap than I can handle, all the while wanting my money.

They can stick it all up their asswholes. Let's stop the excuses and demand 11 wins. With the draw we're going to get its not that hard.

7 my ass

Note: I believed the hype, not again.

I think you and others overlooked the word "minimum"

[PJ_12345 1,098]

Results still don't worry me.

"If winning isn't everything, then why do they keep a score?" - Vince Lombardi

Not trying to have a go at you or devalue KPIs, but food for thought.

Clearly Neeld recognizes his tenure might be over before it really begins if he doesn't appease the masses and get the boys singing the club song a bit more throughout 2013. With the arrival of Dawes, Viney, pick 4, Byrnes and in all probability Pederson and Ray, along with the hoped-for improvement in the players already at his disposal, you'd like to think we'll be in the hunt in far more contests than was the case this year.

I expect us to win a minimum of 8 games next year. 10 and I reckon Neeld may even get an early contract extension.

All I want us to win is a premiership, and I don't care how little or how many games it takes us to win one.

Until then we will be one of the 17 others who didn't win - Just go ask Hawthorn.

Edited October 24, 2012 by PJ_12345

[PJ_12345 1,098]

This is my first post on Demonland which I discovered a couple of weeks ago and have found to be a great read with some insightful and amusing information from some truly diehard supporters

In relationship to how many wins we should get next year to make my 3 children still believe it is worthwhile to follow the Demons the following needs to occur

A clear game plan needs to be developed which doesn't overly involve boring football being played around the boundary line

We need to win 30% or around 8 games

A win against Essendon must continue (hate the rotters)

We need to beat a genuine top 6 club such as Collingwood, Hawthorn or Geelong to really show the footy world we are on the right path

We need a new hero which kids can aspire to be (Viney or Hogan maybe it)

We need some bloody passion

AH I SEE YOUR COMPUTER WAS STUCK ON CAPS LOCK TOO WHEN YOU MADE YOUR ACCOUNT

[dee-luded 2,959]

8 wins including 2 against top 8 sides is what I want. And no 100 point losses

I agree, around 8 would be a nice start, but Not essential.

I'd like more than 8 wins, but to me it's much more important, than just a specific number of wins, rather the way we play & the effectiveness of our game & cohesion of the team onfield & off.

I think we'll be around 11th or 10th?

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

We need a new hero which kids can aspire to be (Viney or Hogan maybe it)

Viney might give us a small something to cheer about as an 18 year old, Hogan cannot even play until '14. In all likelihood he is 3-4 years away at least of having a real impact. If you are looking at the types to puts bums on seats this year it is Clark, Jones, Grimes, Trengove, Sylvia, McDonald, Blease, Watts, Frawley, McKenzie and Howe. 11 bloody good players if you ask me.

[baysidedave 246]

8 wins including 2 against top 8 sides is what I want. And no 100 point losses

l would like between 6-8 but that would be lucky l reckon, l just don't want them to throw the towell in when we get 3-4 goals behind.

[baysidedave 246]

Big jump next year 12 or 13.

l like your optimism but l'm afraid NO WAY Jose

[Guest José Mourinho]

Leave me out of this.