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.

Whilst I agree with a lot of what you say here BH, if we can improve our midfield, I think we'll see a drastic climb up the ladder. Naturally if it were to be this season, we'd have to uncover a few unexpected gems. Matt Jones would have to begin to get clearances like Nathan Jones. Viney would have to join in and Sylvia would have to become consistent. IF the midfield is playing accountable footy and winning its fair share of clearances, we will look like a much better side. Our defence will suddenly look like the great wall again, as confidence will flow through the entire team. It all starts in the midfield though. Your midfield makes your other players look better or worse than they are.

EDIT. There was no inappropriate language used in the post. I edited it for its grammar.

Edited April 23, 201312 yr by AdamFarr
Inappropriate language removed from post.

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.

Agreed. I've essentially paraphrased this.

I'd question whether Chip has bought in. Of course this could be a confidence thing or simply fed up from years of defeats. Though, when the team ran out on the ground the other day, he was the one revving the team up. So I could be wrong.

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.

Thats where we (Neeld/FD) chose poorly IMO placing Couch/Magner on the Rookie list. Not our mid field saviors by any means but to have the extra AFL "like" bods and a little maturity/experience plus 2 extra rotations might have meant staying in games against quality opposition a little longer and reduced the blow outs somewhat.

Difference might have been marginal, maybe 3 or 4 goals but an improvement's an improvement until we find decent mid field additions and develop Viney over a few pre seasons.

Need a decent outside classy/quick mid as well. Might be Evans or Kent but too early to say.

Edited April 23, 201312 yr by Rusty Nails

Whilst I agree with a lot of what you say here BH, if we can improve our midfield, I think we'll see a drastic climb up the ladder. Naturally if it were to be this season, we'd have to uncover a few unexpected gems. Matt Jones would have to begin to get clearances like Nathan Jones. Viney would have to join in and Sylvia would have to become consistent. IF the midfield is playing accountable footy and winning its fair share of clearances, we will look like a much better side. Our defence will suddenly look like the great wall again, as confidence will flow through the entire team. It all starts in the midfield though. Your midfield makes your other players look better or worse than they are.

EDIT. There was no inappropriate language used in the post. I edited it for its grammar.

Re Sylvia, I think Neeld will be champing at the bit to get Dawesy into the foward line. Allows Sylvia to rotate through the mid more often versus up forward. Will provide another dangerous option up forward and stretch the opponents defence a tad more too. But yes, mid field is the key and needs more talent unfusion regardless of Dawes injection.

Dawes injection will bolster things a little though.

I know next to nothing, but I've followed Melbourne since the 50's. Recently I had lost my nerve, and was convinced that Neeld was not getting the players firing, and he had to go.

But an in-the-end great win on Sunday finds me seeing it all differently, suddenly seeing the value in the good off-field stuff Neeld is putting in place, all that unseen stuff, and thinking maybe the players actually do want to play under him, no matter what personality issues anybody may say he has. So that I am backing off, admitting I haven't got a clue. Sit down and shuttup - how could any spectator really know?

The confidence we had against Sydney a couple of years ago was wonderful. Fitness etc were non-issues that day. I'm not convinced that any of the truths we tell each other on Demonland are really so clear-cut and certain. Confidence broke out on Sunday - even though it was against a team that had entirely run out of puff - and it was wonderful and showed that we have got a lot going for us (even without Clark, Viney, Dawes, Hogan and just about Watts). Who knows what next?

What a ride! I have typed out my opinions, in ignorance, rattled and disappointed, but I don't want to any more. Back to the pre-web-forum days for me, when you took it all in and had nowhere to be shooting your mouth off. (Because shooting your mouth off doesn't make it feel any better anyway...) Back to the engrossing heart-in-your-mouth thing of being a Melbourne supporter! Shout yourself stupid at the game, and then batten down to wait for the next chance - that's supporting, it seems to me.

How much more we get out of our wins that the poor sods who are so used to it they are blase! How unpredictable the whole thing is, how intense the stress! Go, boys, go Neeldy, carna Dees!

Dawes injection will bolster things a little though.

oh dear. Please don't go there

So I could be wrong.

Now there's a phrase you don't see round here all that often.

Now there's a phrase you don't see round here all that often.

That's because it goes without saying.

EDIT. There was no inappropriate language used in the post. I edited it for its grammar.

Wasn't your post, was in the post you quoted.

Thats where we (Neeld/FD) chose poorly IMO placing Couch/Magner on the Rookie list. Not our mid field saviors by any means but to have the extra AFL "like" bods and a little maturity/experience plus 2 extra rotations might have meant staying in games against quality opposition a little longer and reduced the blow outs somewhat.

Difference might have been marginal, maybe 3 or 4 goals but an improvement's an improvement until we find decent mid field additions and develop Viney over a few pre seasons.

Need a decent outside classy/quick mid as well. Might be Evans or Kent but too early to say.

Disagree - slow and slower.

Unearthed Evans, now one or two more.

Wasn't your post, was in the post you quoted.

Ah, gotcha. Thanks HT.

Re Sylvia, I think Neeld will be champing at the bit to get Dawesy into the foward line. Allows Sylvia to rotate through the mid more often versus up forward. Will provide another dangerous option up forward and stretch the opponents defence a tad more too. But yes, mid field is the key and needs more talent unfusion regardless of Dawes injection.

Dawes injection will bolster things a little though.

Very interesting theory, which i agree with.

Col plays his best footy in the mids when running with the footy

Disagree - slow and slower.

Unearthed Evans, now one or two more.

Not disagreeing with you. But these are options for us until we find the right mix. Dont need to be super fast to play it smart in the mid field. Watson, Hodge, Mitchell some examples present day. Greg Williams a classic example of a past great. Players can be perceived as slow by foot and may well be, but if they learn to use and move the ball around smartly and quickly and also learn to baulk/fake etc laterally, it can make up for a lack of leg speed when trying to clear the centre contest, but only to a point.

You certainly wouldn't want your ideal mid field to consist entirely of solid but relatively slow by foot types. That's why I added that we definity need leg speed outside, but u appear to only see what you want to see.

Edited April 23, 201312 yr by Rusty Nails

Why does he have to go????

Then why aren't you absolutely stoked about a 12.2 final quarter, come from behind, win?!

A little thing called reality tempers my pleasure with the win!

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.

Perhaps after constantly hearing they're not good or fit enough they started to believe it?

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.

Wouldn't this be reason to give Neeld MORE time, not sack him now?

I believe the issue of 'fitness' was dealt with in another post where stats clearly showed the players were fitter under Bailey and went backwards under Neeld - it was also indicated that training under Neeld was not helping 'game' fitness. (No, I am not inferring Bailey should still be at MFC, so don't waste posts on that line.) Reality check is that we had a welcome win, but I'm not convinced Neeld had much to do with it.

Not disagreeing with you. But these are options for us until we find the right mix. Dont need to be super fast to play it smart in the mid field. Watson, Hodge, Mitchell some examples present day. Greg Williams a classic example of a past great. Players can be perceived as slow by foot and may well be, but if they learn to use and move the ball around smartly and quickly and also learn to baulk/fake etc laterally, it can make up for a lack of leg speed when trying to clear the centre contest, but only to a point.

You certainly wouldn't want your ideal mid field to consist entirely of solid but relatively slow by foot types. That's why I added that we definity need leg speed outside, but u appear to only see what you want to see.

RN - didn't read your last bit.....sorry.

Only saw the bits on Couch/Magner.

I don't think that there'll be room for Jordy/Couch/Magner on the list in 2014.

I believe the issue of 'fitness' was dealt with in another post where stats clearly showed the players were fitter under Bailey and went backwards under Neeld - it was also indicated that training under Neeld was not helping 'game' fitness. (No, I am not inferring Bailey should still be at MFC, so don't waste posts on that line.) Reality check is that we had a welcome win, but I'm not convinced Neeld had much to do with it.

It's an old saying but a goodie Hardnut -'It's easy to run forward with the ball - it's a lot harder to run the other way.'. So I don't like your arguement at all Hardnut

Under Bailey 2 things didn't happen - Tacking pressure and running the other way

Although the Tigers are playing really good footy (Bailey esq) at the moment I'd rather play like the Pies then the Tigers - At the MCG saturday is a prime example. Another lame saying for you flair wins games - defence wins titles, and that can be applied to a lot of sports

Edited April 23, 201312 yr by Unleash Hell

It's an old saying but a goodie Hardnut -'It's easy to run forward with the ball - it's a lot harder to run the other way.'. So I don't like your arguement at all Hardnut

Under Bailey 2 things didn't happen - Tacking pressure and running the other way

Although the Tigers are playing really good footy (Bailey esq) at the moment I'd rather play like the Pies then the Tigers - At the MCG saturday is a prime example. Another lame saying for you flair wins games - defence wins titles, and that can be applied to a lot of sports

I did say don't waste posts on bring back Bailey lines!

As for 'playing like' - I'll back Geelong any day. The Pies have a terrible 'win to opportunity' ratio. Geelong are genuinely 'the greatest team of all' over the entire football history, and they have always played with 'flair'. I, for one, would be rapt if we could play like Geelong - keep the ball moving forward. Sure, they do defend, but it's always an attacking defence!

The game has moved on - get with it - we can only hope MFC will also do so!

Edited April 23, 201312 yr by Hardnut

I did say don't waste posts on bring back Bailey lines!

As for 'playing like' - I'll back Geelong any day. The Pies have a terrible 'win to opportunity' ratio. Geelong are genuinely 'the greatest team of all' over the entire football history, and they have always played with 'flair'. I, for one, would be rapt if we could play like Geelong - keep the ball moving forward. Sure, they do defend, but it's always an attacking defence!

The game has moved on - get with it - we can only hope MFC will also do so!

Haha yes the past is well and truley gone - wright or wrong Bailey and his game style is gone, no point rehashing

Indeed lets hope we dont fall behind again - Personally I think the fundemantal to all game plans is winning the ball - that is one thing the MFC has lacked a lot recently

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.

Ben - we keep hearing that some players "don't warm to Neeld", but do we really know that? Please name names.

Do you think all Collingwood players "warmed to Malthouse" or all the Cats "warmed to Thompson"??

Coaches aren't there to be nice guys or best mates, they are there to get results. Parkin, Pagan???

Re Sylvia, I think Neeld will be champing at the bit to get Dawesy into the foward line. Allows Sylvia to rotate through the mid more often versus up forward. Will provide another dangerous option up forward and stretch the opponents defence a tad more too. But yes, mid field is the key and needs more talent unfusion regardless of Dawes injection.

Dawes injection will bolster things a little though.

Dawes injection - probably an unfortunate turn of phrase in the current environment ;-)

Ben - we keep hearing that some players "don't warm to Neeld", but do we really know that? Please name names.

Do you think all Collingwood players "warmed to Malthouse" or all the Cats "warmed to Thompson"??

Coaches aren't there to be nice guys or best mates, they are there to get results. Parkin, Pagan???

Dawes injection - probably an unfortunate turn of phrase in the current environment ;-)

It is obviously not working

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.

A spine of

Clark

Hogan

Viney

Macdonald

Frawley

With Gawn, Trengove and Toumpas in the centre

Add 2 A grade mids, Howe, Jones, Tapscott, Garland, Evans and we aren't as far away as you think