Arguments for, arguments against, and what difference anyway?

[Choko 493]

So, it's only round 1. Yes, it was disgraceful, but I was at Etihad on Saturday, and you would have thought that Voss, into I think his 5th year as coach, was going backwards at a great rate.

A few things are swimming through my head about accountability at the MFC and whether things have to be shaken up, but I will hold fire today.

What's left for me is an analysis of what we are trying to do (the plan), whether we think that what we are trying to do is sensible and correct, and being executed properly and ruthlessly, and what difference any of it would make with the list we have.

Arguments for

So, Neeld clearly came in with a view that the place is amateur, with amateur work ethic and a bad leadership culture. He has savaged the list over the 2 opportunities he has had, and made life very difficult for those players who he perceived fell into the category of poor examples and sub-standard leaders.

In fairness to Neeld, who could disagree? This is exactly what most supporters were thinking under Bailey. With one or two exceptions, it's pretty hard to argue with almost all the players culled by Neeld. And one suspects he has a 3rd year of culling to go, and on the chopping block will be at least Sellar, Dunn, Joel Mac, Tapscott, Davey.

On the leadership front, Neeld took the only real decision available to him given that his view is that the place was devoid of leaders - youth.

The consequence of Neeld's approach to the list he inherited is that there are a whole lot of (a now diminishing list of) disenfranchised senior players, and young players who are being required to learn whilst being battered from pillar to post.

So, because Neeld has recognised this, he has tried to recruit senior and big bodies, and in particular, blokes with good character, so as to try to protect and teach the kids for the future. No fair minded person thinks that Rodan or really any of the tried players are the solution to winning a premiership. They are clearly an attempt at a step toward building the foundation players.

Therefore, the most generous reading is that Neeld is ruthlessly pursuing the only angle he can - which is to discard the dead wood and empower the youth. On that reading, the pain is inevitable.

Against

Going against Neeld is the lack of improvement in the players who are absolutely required under his plan. I speak of Frawley, Grimes, Trengove, Tapscott, Watts, Garland. Other than Howe, who was improving anyway, there has been little improvement, except maybe to fitness metrics.

Further, there is no discernible game plan under Neeld. What are we trying to do? Are we trying to be accountable and defensive? How are we trying to move the ball? When we do win a clearance in the middle, what are we actually trying to do? When we have 15 players behind the ball, what is the plan to move the ball and score? If there is a plan, then the players cannot execute at all. Under Bailey, there was a plan, it was an outdated attack plan, but at least we knew what it was and when it worked, you could see where success might come. It seems the only discernible change in plan this year is Dunn kicking out. Almost all supporters know that Dunn has zero footy nous. The worst option for kicking out.

Another potential problem with Neeld is that coming in with all guns blazing and being ruthless is great if the club is ready for it, but in a club with as little backbone and leadership as ours (and I am referring to Board, administration and players here), there is not the ticker for the approach. With a coach in his first gig, it could well mean he lacks the support or loses confidence in his approach. That would create a clear lack of morale. Anyone who speaks to current or recently departed players would see evidence of this. Further, by taking the club further backwards, there is the chance we will never survive it - especially with free agency.

I also wonder whether Neeld misses the point. We have the worst midfield in the comp. Yet, I know that last year we felt it was the forward line letting us down, and that's why we tried so hard to pick up a power forward. Maybe Neeld and his crew are far superior to most supporters in their analysis, but I just reckon it is obvious that it's the midfield. You need elite midfielders and you need 8 - 9 rotating blokes. Who on our current list is becoming a midfielder? Tapscott? No. Howe? No. Grimes? No. Watts? No. Gysberts? Gone. Sylvia - sometimes.

Another concern is the number of guys we are bringing into the club who cannot kick, where the game clearly is moving in the direction of elite kicks only. Pedersen, Gillies, Sellar, McKenzie, Nicholson, Bail, McDonald, MacDonald, Jamar all cannot kick. Our backline yesterday had no elite kicks in it, and we have not brought in blokes that can kick (of course I leave out high draft picks).

What difference anyway?

With all that said, one wonders what difference anyone or anything would make at this point. Would an elite experienced coach even be interested in us? Sheedy, who is past it, said he would have given us the heave ho if he had a chance (maybe true, maybe face-saving). No-one else was knocking down the door - and we will never know about Ross Lyon because we never asked him.

Surely, not even Norm Smith can turn turd to gold. Our midfield is disgracefully bad. Our list management and drafting has been bottom of the ladder.

At least Neeld (and Craig) are from the outside looking in, both having come from good cultures. Are they fighting together with our admin and culture or despite it? Are they getting the mandate they require? I heard Craig speak recently, and we do not want for footy resources.

I think one of the problems for supporters is we are unclear what is acceptable and unacceptable performance from the club's perspective. We get vagaries like "improvement". If it is the case that what we need is patience, and maybe it is because maybe we are re-building from scratch again, then tell us, own it, and those who were responsible for the last rebuild should fall or be removed - again Board down.

That's it from me. Happy for contributions!