So Many Demons Elsewhere.....

[Deecisive 1,658]

Neeld moved on players who did not match his team ethics, style and skill level so would not fit our team. Most of those who we let go had sufficient interest from other clubs to take them as ROOKIES or backup players who will probably play most of their games in the reserves, if they do get a seniors game its because their style fits their new teams style or need. Rivers and Baloney probably being the two exceptions who would normally get regular games. I am more than pleased with all of the trades and pickups.

[Mgdee 319]

I think Fan is making a very valid point - if a significant proprtion of the players that Neeld cut make it at a successful club then he's ditched talent that could be developed - it's that simple. There's always a risk that one or two will out of so many and that's not conclusive, but if a number do then that's cause for concern. On the other hand if they don't make a mark then kudos to him. That's simple logic to me.

IMO the only "agenda" going on in this thread is anti-Fan agenda.

That would be true if the players that have gone actually wanted to play for Neeld.

Look at all their performances from last year.

If they had stayed we could have expected more of the same.

If they succeed at other clubs it only will prove to me that their endeavours last year were not sincere.

A culture change was necessary, those who were against this were always going to be the sacrifices.

Neeld success or not should be determined by who he brings into the club not who he gets rid of.

Time will tell if he is success or not, we will all have to stick around and find out.

[Demonsterative 2,030]

Matthews or Voss did not get the same out put from Mitch Clark and Mitch went on to prove many wrong in 2012. Leigh doubted Mitch's qualities as a forwad regardless of the fact that Mitch was recruited as a forward but played mainly as a Ruckman at the Lions. Does this mean Matthews was a dud coach? The answer is obvious.

Even legends of the game get it wrong sometimes.

[Pink Freud 325]

Laurie Fowler was dumped by Richmond coach Tom Hafey at the end of 1974 and went to Melbourne where he won the Keith "Bluey" Truscott Medal in 1975, 1979 and 1980 and represented Victoria at interstate level on a number of occasions. Whilst at Melbourne he was retained as a player by Dennis Jones who coached for one year for a wooden spoon.

Does that make Jones the dud a better coach than the great Tommy Hafey?

[Hannibal 5,814]

There seems to be a view that Neeld is recruiting for the now and that there's a theme with the "type". To an extent that's true, but it doesn't paint the whole picture. There's definitely a character assessment that needs to be ticked and he likes contested ball winners, but he also chose Hogan for the future and addressed our need for outside pace by bringing in Barry.

Viney and Toumpas picked them selves - and both have pace, Kent is hard at it with pace, Jones and Terlich are also mooted to have pace in their armoury.

I like the balance. They've brought in good characters, some with experience, and players that have pace and put their head over the ball. And most have good endurance. I think they'd be pleased with their gains during this period.

[Je Roos Salem 661]

I'm interested to see who'll actually get a game out of all of them. It's highly unlikely Morton and Bennell would see any games unless there are massive injuries or a form slump. Rivers will go in and play immediately. Moloney, Martin, Gysberts and Petterd will probably all be on the fringe of selection

[deejammin' 2,076]

I would also add to what I said above that some other clubs are in a position to take a punt on project players. Bennell and Morton have some serious competition in the WC side, if they break their way in thats great for WC, if they don't its actually no great loss, they have a strong list that has played finals two years in a row, they have time to let players like Morton and Bennell give it a crack.

Our club does not have the luxury of picking up project players, we have enough of them as it is, what we need is consistant contributors where we know what we are getting. We hit rock bottom this year and everyone at the club knows we must improve, for the good of the players, we need to start contesting games to the final minutes and winning. If we keep waiting for potential players to develop whilst performing like we have the last 6 years, we may forget how to win entirely!

[old55 21,407]

12 senior listed players left.

2 retired - Green and Bartram Jurrah is a special case and let's be generous and say that we wanted to keep Rivers.

That leaves 8 players. Gysberts, Bate, Bennell, Morton, Petterd, Cook, Moloney and Martin.

As I posted (and Fan posted) if 1 or 2 "make it" no big deal. Make it means be regular players in a finals team - I couldn't care less if Moloney wins the next 3 Brisbane B&Fs if they continue to finish in the bottom half of the ladder - see Fowler above.

if a quarter or less make it then kudos to Neeld - if none of them make it then he's a genius. If more than a quarter of that 8 make it then there's cause for concern 2 aren't on any list and 3 are at bottom half clubs so that's a good start for Neeld.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

if a quarter or less make it then kudos to Neeld - if none of them make it then he's a genius. If more than a quarter of that 8 make it then there's cause for concern 2 aren't on any list and 3 are at bottom half clubs so that's a good start for Neeld.

So you criteria doesn't include what occurs at the club that Neeld actually coaches?

[H_T 2,941]

12 senior listed players left.

2 retired - Green and Bartram Jurrah is a special case and let's be generous and say that we wanted to keep Rivers.

That leaves 8 players. Gysberts, Bate, Bennell, Morton, Petterd, Cook, Moloney and Martin.

As I posted (and Fan posted) if 1 or 2 "make it" no big deal. Make it means be regular players in a finals team - I couldn't care less if Moloney wins the next 3 Brisbane B&Fs if they continue to finish in the bottom half of the ladder - see Fowler above.

if a quarter or less make it then kudos to Neeld - if none of them make it then he's a genius. If more than a quarter of that 8 make it then there's cause for concern 2 aren't on any list and 3 are at bottom half clubs so that's a good start for Neeld.

Why would Neeld be a genius if none of them 'make it?' (Devil's advocate)

I find this criteria a little bewildering. If Martin and Moloney are regular players and the Lions make the finals and Morton and Bennell play finals for West Coast - which could be more than likely to occur, does this mean Neeld is a clutz (4 'make it')and should be held to account? I don't think so, for reasons I've previously mentioned.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

I would also add to what I said above that some other clubs are in a position to take a punt on project players. Bennell and Morton have some serious competition in the WC side, if they break their way in thats great for WC, if they don't its actually no great loss, they have a strong list that has played finals two years in a row, they have time to let players like Morton and Bennell give it a crack.

Our club does not have the luxury of picking up project players, we have enough of them as it is, what we need is consistant contributors where we know what we are getting. We hit rock bottom this year and everyone at the club knows we must improve, for the good of the players, we need to start contesting games to the final minutes and winning. If we keep waiting for potential players to develop whilst performing like we have the last 6 years, we may forget how to win entirely!

Good post.

Everything Neeld has done is about improving the fundamentals and playing the percentages. Building the list with well rounded, physically strong, capable footballers with decent to very good skills is just another example of this philosophy.

Edited December 13, 2012 by dandeeman

[binman 38,765]

Why would Neeld be a genius if none of them 'make it?' (Devil's advocate)

I find this criteria a little bewildering. If Martin and Moloney are regular players and the Lions make the finals and Morton and Bennell play finals for West Coast - which could be more than likely to occur, does this mean Neeld is a clutz (4 'make it')and should be held to account? I don't think so, for reasons I've previously mentioned.

Exactly, this is my point also.

As i have said previously in this thread if all or most of the players rejected don't make it at other clubs that doesn't make Neeld a genius any more than if a slew of them do super well make him a clutz. What if 3 play reasonable footy but struggle to cement a regular game? Does that make Neeld a partial clutz, or perhaps 48% on the clutzometer.

Or if all bar one player disappear without a trace and one becomes a star (and realistically only Gysberts or perhaps at a stretch Martin has the potential for that) does that put him at 83% on the geniusmeter?

What we can measure him on is how he develops the list he has now and ultimately how many games we win.

[jnrmac 19,174]

Matthews or Voss did not get the same out put from Mitch Clark and Mitch went on to prove many wrong in 2012. Leigh doubted Mitch's qualities as a forwad regardless of the fact that Mitch was recruited as a forward but played mainly as a Ruckman at the Lions. Does this mean Matthews was a dud coach? The answer is obvious.

Even legends of the game get it wrong sometimes.

How is your selective memory? Clark was nominated for the AA team in 2009. To say we have got a better output in 2012 (given he played half a season in fact) than his time at the Lions is laughable.

[daisycutter 28,635]

As Norm Smith would say, it is more important how you play as a team than individually. The individual must sacrifice his game (and development) to the betterment of the team as a whole

I think Neeld is more interested in this. The whole is greater than its components

How discarded individuals may perform individually at their new clubs is irrelevant to the success of Neeld's building of a "team"

The only valid measurement is how successfully he builds his team with the cattle he has now had the opportunity to demand

That's what I will be looking to judge at the end of next year

P.S. I heartily agree with the depth and type of cuts he has made. I like the look of the replacements but it is still early days

[old55 21,407]

We're trying to develop good players in a good team - if we let go a significant number of players who go on to fulfill this criterion then we've made errors. Yes, one or two can make it because they got a wake up call we were unable to give them or we got better value our of their direct replacement (Pedersen v Gysberts) or we made a single mistake out of a number of sound decisions. On the other hand if none of the players we let go make it, despite a large number of them getting a further chance (the premise of Fan's thread) then Neeld has shown excellent judgement.

Yes if Moloney, Martin, Morton and Bennell go on to play regular finals for Brisbane and West Coast we made an error of judgement.

[H_T 2,941]

Yes if Moloney, Martin, Morton and Bennell go on to play regular finals for Brisbane and West Coast we made an error of judgement.

You're entitled to your opinion here.

You need to take into account the important aspects I've previously mentioned regarding "net" benefit, which is what the FD and list management is all about and has been their focus this trade draft period. TH has explained it well.

The above four may play anywhere between 12-20 games for their respective clubs plus a final or two, but you need to weigh that up against what they have achieved for us (in the past) and what our list has achieved individually and collectively ahead.

It won't be conclusive after one season either.

[old55 21,407]

You're entitled to your opinion here.

You need to take into account the important aspects I've previously mentioned regarding "net" benefit, which is what the FD and list management is all about and has been their focus this trade draft period. TH has explained it well.

The above four may play anywhere between 12-20 games for their respective clubs plus a final or two, but you need to weigh that up against what they have achieved for us (in the past) and what our list has achieved individually and collectively ahead.

It won't be conclusive after one season either.

You'll note I said regular finals.

I'm strongly in favour of the experienced players we recruited and I'm strongly in favour of Neeld's list management strategy - some players have to go to make space. But we want to have our cake and eat it too as far as possible - retain quality players and add quality players - that's what I hope we've done.

[H_T 2,941]

You'll note I said regular finals.

I'm strongly in favour of the experienced players we recruited and I'm strongly in favour of Neeld's list management strategy - some players have to go to make space. But we want to have our cake and eat it too as far as possible - retain quality players and add quality players - that's what I hope we've done.

Agree with this.

[Ouch! 2,041]

How is your selective memory? Clark was nominated for the AA team in 2009. To say we have got a better output in 2012 (given he played half a season in fact) than his time at the Lions is laughable.

I am not so certain this is clear cut here Jnrmac.

True that Clark was nominated for the AA, as a ruckman, but with the way Clark was travelling for us in 2012 I have no doubt he would have been pushing towards the top end of the coleman. and I think a lot of people actually took note of him more for his efforts for MFC in an ordinary team, than they did in that 2009 season.

I get a feeling that Dawes is capable of doing a very similar thing in 2013... given his goal output isn't huge at CFC, but I get the feeling he is capable of more, especially if he, Clark and Byrnes can get a good understanding going.

[old dee 22,946]

In 2012 the MFC had one genuine win.

We lost multipule games by large margins, in at least 14 games we were not competitve.

This comes at the end of five years that we have been hopeless.

I can find nothing to complain about when I look at the players that have been let go.

For me it is a simple equation, We had a poor list to improve it you have add new players which means a large number have to be replaced.

This will happen again next year.

We will be able to judge at the end of 2014 how well the replacements have performed.

To be honest the X players I don't care about they were not doing the job at the MFC

[Dee Fan 3,247]

In 2012 the MFC had one genuine win.

We lost multipule games by large margins, in at least 14 games we were not competitve.

This comes at the end of five years that we have been hopeless.

I can find nothing to complain about when I look at the players that have been let go.

For me it is a simple equation, We had a poor list to improve it you have add new players which means a large number have to be replaced.

This will happen again next year.

We will be able to judge at the end of 2014 how well the replacements have performed.

To be honest the X players I don't care about they were not doing the job at the MFC

Yes but what about the "Stars" we've let go, there's.... and there's..... that's right there's no one and I doubt that Neeld would have agreed to the selection of any of the players we no longer have, in the first place.

I'm still trying to work out why we finished near last last year and I've narrowed it down to the players.

[Slartibartfast 15,875]

In 2012 the MFC had one genuine win.

We lost multipule games by large margins, in at least 14 games we were not competitve.

This comes at the end of five years that we have been hopeless.

I can find nothing to complain about when I look at the players that have been let go.

For me it is a simple equation, We had a poor list to improve it you have add new players which means a large number have to be replaced.

This will happen again next year.

We will be able to judge at the end of 2014 how well the replacements have performed.

To be honest the X players I don't care about they were not doing the job at the MFC

If we were this hopeless how do you explain Bailey's winning percentage of about 40% in his last 39 last games with only one against a development team?

Before everyone says "agenda" it's a genuine question that nobody has ever really been able to explain.

I understand the "change of culture" "get rid of the bad apples" stuff, but if we were that terrible how did we win 4 out of every 10 games?

[jabberwocky 2,301]

If we were this hopeless how do you explain Bailey's winning percentage of about 40% in his last 39 last games with only one against a development team?

Before everyone says "agenda" it's a genuine question that nobody has ever really been able to explain.

I understand the "change of culture" "get rid of the bad apples" stuff, but if we were that terrible how did we win 4 out of every 10 games?

Thread will run right off track.

It has been addressed before, probably needs own thread.

[Slartibartfast 15,875]

All that could be said has already been said in this thread I reckon.

[beelzebub 22,255]

All that could be said has already been said in this thread I reckon.

and most of it a long time before this one started !!