Time to go Mark Neeld

[Binmans PA 26,512]

Further, 12.2 in a quarter is obviously fantastic conversion, but once again, we were top converters under Bailey too. We knew there'd be limited supply and thus had to take all our opportunities. I'm not applauding Bailey here, I'm simply highlighting that Neeld has so far brought nothing, except arguably fracturing the playing group.

He's now had to throw out his defensive inclination and encourage the players to play more instinctive, attacking and ultimately unaccountable football. It looks great when it comes off (say for example the last quarter against, it must be said, an extremely inexperienced GWS team), but appears soulless against half decent opposition (say West Coast of the week before).

I just can't see what he's brought.

[Chook 14,616]

Further, 12.2 in a quarter is obviously fantastic conversion, but once again, we were top converters under Bailey too. We knew there'd be limited supply and thus had to take all our opportunities. I'm not applauding Bailey here, I'm simply highlighting that Neeld has so far brought nothing, except arguably fracturing the playing group.

He's now had to throw out his defensive inclination and encourage the players to play more instinctive, attacking and ultimately unaccountable football. It looks great when it comes off (say for example the last quarter against, it must be said, an extremely inexperienced GWS team), but appears soulless against half decent opposition (say West Coast of the week before).

I just can't see what he's brought.

Watch the replay. Our defensive zone absolutely befuddled the GWS players in at least the first term. That's a Neeld initiative, and it really came in handy. Too bad our players couldn't keep it up in Q2 and Q3.

[stuie 7,374]

Watch the replay. Our defensive zone absolutely befuddled the GWS players in at least the first term. That's a Neeld initiative, and it really came in handy. Too bad our players couldn't keep it up in Q2 and Q3.

Too bad that defensive zone has befuddled the team trying to implement it the rest of the year...

[Chook 14,616]

Too bad that defensive zone has befuddled the team trying to implement it the rest of the year...

So let's just give it up then, huh?

[stuie 7,374]

So let's just give it up then, huh?

I hope they work it out, just seemed like it wasn't ready or they didn't understand it, the opposition uncontested possession count says that.

Also probably didn't help when Neeld came out and said we don't play a zone...

But yes, it worked for 2 quarters against GWS, the only 2 quarters we've won for the year, so hard to tell if it's worth it or not yet, but I guess it needs to be properly and consistently implemented before it can be fully judged.

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

Further, 12.2 in a quarter is obviously fantastic conversion, but once again, we were top converters under Bailey too. We knew there'd be limited supply and thus had to take all our opportunities. I'm not applauding Bailey here, I'm simply highlighting that Neeld has so far brought nothing, except arguably fracturing the playing group.

He's now had to throw out his defensive inclination and encourage the players to play more instinctive, attacking and ultimately unaccountable football. It looks great when it comes off (say for example the last quarter against, it must be said, an extremely inexperienced GWS team), but appears soulless against half decent opposition (say West Coast of the week before).

I just can't see what he's brought.

I agree Neeld has been too defensively minded in the past - but I am not going to lay all the blame on Neeld

It's widely known the the MFC is 'Unfit' - hard to play consistent footy with an unfit unit. Also if you look at how footy is played now 'no stoppages' you realise the gains under the new fitness regime may not see fruit yet as the game has gotten faster - you can debate that argument all you like but it is accepted in the AFL industry and by our club

I strongly believe that if Neeld can keep this team competitve for 2013 he can keep his job and he'll reap some rewards when 2 things happen

1/ Our young blokes who have played 0 -25 games get AFL conditioning and can run out a full game

2/ As a team as a whole we get fitter

So to answer your question AF I think Neeld has gone more offensive as well (which is against his coaching style) to keep this team competitive in 2013. And I'd reckon people in the know (AFL media) would applaud this move if they realised it. Al Clarkson and Mick are two coaches who constantly change their game style to suit their teams and are regarded as the best coaches in the league

Neelds not out of the woods (getting flogged is not acceptable) but if he can keep his job I reckon we'll see some hard work start to pay off... And I personally don't see this club playing his game style until at least 2014 - 15 when they can actually execute

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

Look, we're all happy to win, but it's measured against our ineptitude in large portions of the game. I was watching the match thinking how bad have we become. How has it come to this ? The last quarter was a reminder that things are never as bad as they seem. Confidence is an amazing intangible and I hope we can build on that last quarter.

Having been a regular training observer I've been impressed this preseason when compared to others, but you can't replicate the pressure of AFL footy and clearly our rank midfield puts us behind the 8 ball.

I hope Neeld doesn't coach this team in 2014, because he's fractured a playing group and clearly doesn't get the most from his players, but I will readily acknowledge that the disciplines he's put in place will hold the club in good stead into the future. I suspect we'll look back on Neeld's tenure and approve the professionalism, but lament his relationships.

It's an interesting discussion point BH

Are you accepting mediocrity BH?? I am not having a go at you mate - but for a long this club has needed someone to come in and lead. Because some haven't brought in (which is hard to argue after the GWS game) should we pack in all the hard work and just accept this club will always be mediocre?

You point out Neeld has been good at changing the culture - is it just a matter of time before the wheel turns? If we pack it in now and go with a new coach are we just confirming this club is weak minded and mediorcity is acceptable?

Is scaraficing a few players (a lot of them you could pin them as being long term under acheivers) for long term success?

I don't think success under Neeld is a given - but if you refer to my post 581 is it all Neelds fault? The MFC for a long time (supporters and club) have just assumed this club will get better naturally i reckon. The rest of the AFL isn't going to donate us wins I am hoping short term pain for long term gaain while the likes of Gawn, Viney, Toumpas, Jetta, Evans, Blease, Bail, Tom Mac, Hogan etc all develop

Edited April 22, 2013 by Unleash Hell

[pitmaster 3,112]

Success when it comes will come quickly.

The point about his switch from defence to offence is misunderstood by some. It's not an all or nothing thing but our blokes have had to learn, and are still learning how to defend all over the ground. We haven't got it yet and our skills don't allow us to do it either.

But it comes in stages. Our offensive game has been neglected precisely because it's building blocks. Defence is the foundation and we have started on that, but every time we play there has to be a mix of styles. It's a matter of shifting emphasis from game to game.

Neeld is introducing modern concepts to our club. We have to give him time. End of story.

[demondays 19]

I have never put this on a forum as I really don't know of its relevance. But it irks me nonetheless. I have baracked for the demons my entire life born in 64. Previously I have met two players from Melbourne that have created an impression. The great Robbie Flower and the interesting (if nothing else Jacko). I found myself doing security at skilled stadium up until last year. Prior to the game I was posted at the entrance where the opposition players came in, during the game in the opposition players race and game end I would mind the dressing room door and then exit when they loaded the team bus. Of the three years I did this it saddens me to say that the most arrogant team in their demeanour by far was Melbourne. Admittedly the powerhouse sides didn't often go to Geelong so it may be a little unfair. Apart from Steve Johnson, I never had a single incident where a Geelong player didn't give you a nod, a g'day mate when they went past and this was when they were at their top. Apart from the helpers around the demon clubroom who were awesome, the players quite different. Said g'day to Brad Green once as he went past, not even a grunt. It just really makes me wonder about the culture of this club sometimes.

[Longsufferingnomore 1,489]

I have never put this on a forum as I really don't know of its relevance. But it irks me nonetheless. I have baracked for the demons my entire life born in 64. Previously I have met two players from Melbourne that have created an impression. The great Robbie Flower and the interesting (if nothing else Jacko). I found myself doing security at skilled stadium up until last year. Prior to the game I was posted at the entrance where the opposition players came in, during the game in the opposition players race and game end I would mind the dressing room door and then exit when they loaded the team bus. Of the three years I did this it saddens me to say that the most arrogant team in their demeanour by far was Melbourne. Admittedly the powerhouse sides didn't often go to Geelong so it may be a little unfair. Apart from Steve Johnson, I never had a single incident where a Geelong player didn't give you a nod, a g'day mate when they went past and this was when they were at their top. Apart from the helpers around the demon clubroom who were awesome, the players quite different. Said g'day to Brad Green once as he went past, not even a grunt. It just really makes me wonder about the culture of this club sometimes.

Unbelievable

[Tricky 337]

I have never put this on a forum as I really don't know of its relevance. But it irks me nonetheless. I have baracked for the demons my entire life born in 64. Previously I have met two players from Melbourne that have created an impression. The great Robbie Flower and the interesting (if nothing else Jacko). I found myself doing security at skilled stadium up until last year. Prior to the game I was posted at the entrance where the opposition players came in, during the game in the opposition players race and game end I would mind the dressing room door and then exit when they loaded the team bus. Of the three years I did this it saddens me to say that the most arrogant team in their demeanour by far was Melbourne. Admittedly the powerhouse sides didn't often go to Geelong so it may be a little unfair. Apart from Steve Johnson, I never had a single incident where a Geelong player didn't give you a nod, a g'day mate when they went past and this was when they were at their top. Apart from the helpers around the demon clubroom who were awesome, the players quite different. Said g'day to Brad Green once as he went past, not even a grunt. It just really makes me wonder about the culture of this club sometimes.

Firstly, Kudos for supporting the Dees for 49 years...

I feel it only fair to say that on the few occasions that I have met Brad Green he was a great bloke - several of these were not "club related" events so he needn't have been on his best behaviour.

[Hannibal 5,814]

Sorry, what are the disciplines he's put in place? I find this a somewhat baffling statement.

The training standards and off-field coaching structures are light years ahead of what we've had.

Neeld is a nutty Professor that the players don't warm to, but he has brought a multitude of disciplines off the field that measure up well against other clubs.

[PaulRB 6,042]

The training standards and off-field coaching structures are light years ahead of what we've had.

Neeld is a nutty Professor that the players don't warm to, but he has brought a multitude of disciplines off the field that measure up well against other clubs.

Watch out BH with your almost acknowledging that he's doing some things right angle, another win and you'll be back on the Neeld's Reality Bus!

Toot Toot

Edited April 22, 2013 by PaulRB

[Bay Riffin 1,427]

The training standards and off-field coaching structures are light years ahead of what we've had.

Neeld is a nutty Professor that the players don't warm to, but he has brought a multitude of disciplines off the field that measure up well against other clubs.

Could you elaborate on this ?

I have always been intrigued when a new coach comes in and says we are unfit. Were players like Moloney, Rivers, Jones unfit when they came to the club?

Under Bailey when we at least got 8 wins, were we grossly unfit? 30% behind the rest of the competition? What weren't they going under Bailey, that supposedly put our fitness behind the rest of the comp?

I just wondered back then if that was the real reason we were down the bottom, and now after two preseasons under the new regime we look less fit to me.Less capable of running out a game. even on Sunday they were getting more of the ball, but we were more direct.

Bailey could get a forward press going for a half of footy, we seem to maintain it for 10-15 minutes at most.

I am really getting sick of hearing about the fitness excuse.

[The Reverend 1,718]

Look, we're all happy to win, but it's measured against our ineptitude in large portions of the game. I was watching the match thinking how bad have we become. How has it come to this ? The last quarter was a reminder that things are never as bad as they seem. Confidence is an amazing intangible and I hope we can build on that last quarter.

Having been a regular training observer I've been impressed this preseason when compared to others, but you can't replicate the pressure of AFL footy and clearly our rank midfield puts us behind the 8 ball.

I hope Neeld doesn't coach this team in 2014, because he's fractured a playing group and clearly doesn't get the most from his players, but I will readily acknowledge that the disciplines he's put in place will hold the club in good stead into the future. I suspect we'll look back on Neeld's tenure and approve the professionalism, but lament his relationships.

How do you know this? Do you have inside information? Is it reliable? Or is this your perception dressed up as fact?

[Binmans PA 26,512]

Success when it comes will come quickly.

The point about his switch from defence to offence is misunderstood by some. It's not an all or nothing thing but our blokes have had to learn, and are still learning how to defend all over the ground. We haven't got it yet and our skills don't allow us to do it either.

But it comes in stages. Our offensive game has been neglected precisely because it's building blocks. Defence is the foundation and we have started on that, but every time we play there has to be a mix of styles. It's a matter of shifting emphasis from game to game.

Neeld is introducing modern concepts to our club. We have to give him time. End of story.

I agree things turn around quickly in footy. It's a cliche, but for a reason.

When I see us get beaten by practically 80, 150 and 100 three weeks in a row, that's more than merely fitness. Yes, confidence is a big thing there, but half the team didn't give a yelp. They didn't attack the footy. They jogged or walked. That's at the feet of Neeld.

All I'm asking for is a little bit of perspective. We beat GWS. We didn't get it done until in the final term. Maybe it's simply cynicism, but we've seen this far too often in the past. I was on the Neeld reality bus before Round 1, but until we dish up a good showing against half decent opposition, he's still on tenterhooks. Beating Brisbane this Sunday will be a start. I want him to prove that he can coach before I blindly follow.

For me, he's shown very little. I hope he proves me wrong, but we'll have to do more than beat GWS at the 'G before I revert to giving him more time.

Edited April 23, 2013 by AdamFarr

[Binmans PA 26,512]

I agree Neeld has been too defensively minded in the past - but I am not going to lay all the blame on Neeld

It's widely known the the MFC is 'Unfit' - hard to play consistent footy with an unfit unit. Also if you look at how footy is played now 'no stoppages' you realise the gains under the new fitness regime may not see fruit yet as the game has gotten faster - you can debate that argument all you like but it is accepted in the AFL industry and by our club

I strongly believe that if Neeld can keep this team competitve for 2013 he can keep his job and he'll reap some rewards when 2 things happen

1/ Our young blokes who have played 0 -25 games get AFL conditioning and can run out a full game

2/ As a team as a whole we get fitter

So to answer your question AF I think Neeld has gone more offensive as well (which is against his coaching style) to keep this team competitive in 2013. And I'd reckon people in the know (AFL media) would applaud this move if they realised it. Al Clarkson and Mick are two coaches who constantly change their game style to suit their teams and are regarded as the best coaches in the league

Neelds not out of the woods (getting flogged is not acceptable) but if he can keep his job I reckon we'll see some hard work start to pay off... And I personally don't see this club playing his game style until at least 2014 - 15 when they can actually execute

I agree. To be successful as an AFL coach you must be reflexible.

At the same time, he surely has to have identified the glaring issue with stoppage set ups. Particularly centre square stoppages. We still haven't rectified this. Our set ups will get us thrashed by any other team in the AFL. GWS had one, two and sometimes three players loose on the defensive side of ball ups the other day. They didn't utilise them or spread as they should have, but every other club would have punished us for this.

[Binmans PA 26,512]

The training standards and off-field coaching structures are light years ahead of what we've had.

Neeld is a nutty Professor that the players don't warm to, but he has brought a multitude of disciplines off the field that measure up well against other clubs.

I guess I'd like to see some semblance of this transferred to gameday. I saw nothing in the first three rounds. As for the GWS game, it's impossible to tell, because they're barely AFL standard.

[Binmans PA 26,512]

Could you elaborate on this ?

I have always been intrigued when a new coach comes in and says we are unfit. Were players like Moloney, Rivers, Jones unfit when they came to the club?

Under Bailey when we at least got 8 wins, were we grossly unfit? 30% behind the rest of the competition? What weren't they going under Bailey, that supposedly put our fitness behind the rest of the comp?

I just wondered back then if that was the real reason we were down the bottom, and now after two preseasons under the new regime we look less fit to me.Less capable of running out a game. even on Sunday they were getting more of the ball, but we were more direct.

Bailey could get a forward press going for a half of footy, we seem to maintain it for 10-15 minutes at most.

I am really getting sick of hearing about the fitness excuse.

Jones didn't appear to lack fitness last season. At least it didn't impinge upon his ability to get the footy. That said, I think Jones has been one of Neeld's success stories. How much can you attribute to Neeld is an unknown, but he's certainly improve under Neeld's reign.

[rpfc 27,646]

I don't whether he has fractured relationships but I have never seen so many players bereft of any confidence.

Forget Watts.

Frawley is nowhere of late. Jamar aswell. Nicholson.

Outside of Jones, Viney, Grimes, Garland (at times), Clark, and the first half against WCE and THAT last quarter - there has been next to zero confidence shown in themselves and others.

[Tricky 337]

The training standards and off-field coaching structures are light years ahead of what we've had.

Neeld is a nutty Professor that the players don't warm to, but he has brought a multitude of disciplines off the field that measure up well against other clubs.

You responded to the question "what are the disciplines put in place" with "a multitude of disciplines off the field that measure up well against other clubs".

I'd love to understand exactly what these are...

Is the "nutty professor that the players don't warm to" merely perception derived from lack of development of certain players and the overall "tone" of what we see on-field, or do we have insiders on record saying as much?

I don't get to training so I'll take your word that the standards are light years ahead of what we had.

Incidentally I'm not disputing any of this - I am very much on the fence regarding Neeld at this stage.

[Hannibal 5,814]

You'll forgive me if I don't respond to everyone as I'm rearranging my sock drawer, but Emma Quay's article gives a good insight into our off-field programs.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/demons-days-from-go-to-doze-20121207-2b1ij.html

I think the standards being set are good, but you can't make chicken salad from chicken [censored]. The midfield is so off the pace and our senior players so ordinary that it's going to take years to become formidable. Two, or three really good strong bodied mids would transform the group pretty quickly, but how do you get your hands on them ? It will take Toumpas and Viney a few years before they're playing A grade footy and they won't be enough.

[PaulRB 6,042]

You'll forgive me if I don't respond to everyone as I'm rearranging my sock drawer, but Emma Quay's article gives a good insight into our off-field programs.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/demons-days-from-go-to-doze-20121207-2b1ij.html

I think the standards being set are good, but you can't make chicken salad from chicken [censored]. The midfield is so off the pace and our senior players so ordinary that it's going to take years to become formidable. Two, or three really good strong bodied mids would transform the group pretty quickly, but how do you get your hands on them ? It will take Toumpas and Viney a few years before they're playing A grade footy and they won't be enough.

Given our paucity of quality experienced mids and senior players was a condition Neeld inherited and is trying to rectify (as you've acknowledged above), what more can a coach (any coach do) to "make chicken salad from chicken [censored]"?

Surely Neeld (or any coach) would require time to address this issue?

[Hannibal 5,814]

Given our paucity of quality experienced mids and senior players was a condition Neeld inherited and is trying to rectify (as you've acknowledged above), what more can a coach (any coach do) to "make chicken salad from chicken [censored]"?

Surely Neeld (or any coach) would require time to address this issue?

I don't really care if he's the coach, or not. I'm a bit beyond caring. Through a combination of terrible recruiting and poor development through the Bailey years the list is [censored]. There's a core to work with, but every club has a core. We're now years away from finals. I knew we needed to get those first round draft picks right years ago, and said so, and we didn't.

That said, I don't reckon anyone could get less out of a playing group. Players didn't buy in, which is sheeted back to the coach. The efforts are terrible, which is sheeted back to the coach. They pick and choose when to tackle and you don't need to be a star to tackle.

I'll not bother discussing the coach much from here on, because the topic bores me. The club bores me. It is what it is.

Edited April 23, 2013 by H_T
Inappropriate language removed from post; suspended.

[leehow 285]

You'll forgive me if I don't respond to everyone as I'm rearranging my sock drawer, but Emma Quay's article gives a good insight into our off-field programs.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/demons-days-from-go-to-doze-20121207-2b1ij.html

I think the standards being set are good, but you can't make chicken salad from chicken [censored]. The midfield is so off the pace and our senior players so ordinary that it's going to take years to become formidable. Two, or three really good strong bodied mids would transform the group pretty quickly, but how do you get your hands on them ? It will take Toumpas and Viney a few years before they're playing A grade footy and they won't be enough.

Ben-Hur, you have said for a long time now, as you have here, that our midfield is substandard. I think everyone understands that, and to me, is the main reason why we're in this position. An average midfield makes forwards look average because of lack of supply and quality of supply, and the same with our defence.

You say that we need more quality midfielders, and to give Toumpas and Viney time to develop which again i think everyone understands. What i don't understand is why you would not be prepared to give Neeld that time.

He came to the club and straight away told us that we are nowhere near fit enough, which he, along with Misson, are working to rectify. If we are 30% down on AFL standard fitness, you cannot make that up in one, or two preseasons, especially with young players. Players take years for their bodies to adjust to the demands of AFL, and the club are doing the right thing by increasing loads slowly. Yes, it's a frustrating process, but it is one that will hold us in good stead for the future.

The lack of quality midfielders is also a problem he inherited. I'm not sure what else he could have done since he arrived to fix this. We now have Viney and Toumpas, two extremely highly rated juniors, and if i remember correctly, the exact two players that you wanted. People questioned why we used a high pick on Hogan instead of a midfielder, and i think that is fairly obvious now. Again, Hogan was a player you pushed for. We got rid of Gysberts, who i don't think you rated, and rightly so. Moloney is the other one, and while he has had a couple of decent games at Brisbane, I think it was the correct decision to get rid of him. We brought in Rodan, who so far hasn't really done anything on the field, but it's very early in the season, and if he increases the competition and makes a kid have to work harder to get a game, then i think it was worth pick 88 or whatever we gave up for him. Matt Jones and Shannon Byrnes are two others who Neeld brought in to spend time in the midfield. Jones has been a success. Byrnes spends limited time there, but again, increases standards on the track and increases competition for a spot.

Which players would you say haven't bought in? Or has Neeld "lost"? Personally, I think the majority of players like him and understand what he is working towards and putting in place. I think sacking him destabilises the place even more than it is, and will see the players confidence sink even further. If he was to be sacked, who would you replace him with? And do you think that person would have done a better job over the last year and a bit?

I think it's very easy just to say 'sack the coach', and people will disagree and that's fine, but i think a viable alternative needs to be offered, and also for people to understand that what Neeld, Craig, Misson, etc are working towards isn't going to be fixed overnight, or even in the very immediate future. We will have more lows this year, and hopefully some more highs like Sunday's last quarter. At the very least, I think Neeld needs to be given the rest of the year to show us that he is on the right track.