Time to go Mark Neeld

[DeeMfc 621]

Interesting. In the past couple of weeks I've come across, on separate occasions, 2 people involved with Western Jets. Neeld's current situation is no surprise to them whatsoever.

Did they elaborate?

[DemonWA 3,931]

I cannot see how anyone on this forum who is not closely connected to the club would have any idea of Neeld's relationship with the players. Examining the entrails of post-match press conferences and player's performance is just so much guesswork. I'm constantly amazed by the bold assertions people make.

Lack of skills compounded by lack of confidence seems far more likely to be the problem than whether player like or respect the coach.

Sue, im a believer that whenever there is smoke there is generally fire, and the following issues have raised my concerns;

• Public slagging of Davey & Watts before he knew them
• Davey / Misfud allegations
• incumbent leadership group being relieved of their duties
• Reigning B&F winner and VC being stripped of his leadership duties and spending 1/2 the season sulking in the 2's
• radical changes to playing list in off season (Moloney, Rivers, Green, Martin, Petterd, Bate etc etc etc)

None of these are clear evidence, but combined i believe it tends to paint a picture of a coach/playing group that have had, or are having 'issues'

[Dee Fan 3,247]

If we keep Mark Neeld on there's a good chance we will continue to get smashed. If that happens then ...

Crowds will continue to drop off.

Membership will be negatively affected.

Sponsors will drop off and our ability to attract them will diminish.

Our financial 'bottom line' has to be affected negatively.

Players will want out (whether they're contracted or not)

Our ability to attract talent will dissipate.

Prime time games on TV - forget about it.

Confidence within the club will get worse.

Confidence within the supporter base will diminish.

It will take longer to recover and heal.

This following could be said about Mark Neeld ...

Talks tough but can't deliver.

Continually makes excuses.

Never talks about winning games (it's all about the process)

Has tried to implement an outdated game plan (hugging the boundary)

Has let 2 senior players go who shouldn't have been let go.

Plays certain players out of position when it's obviously poorly thought out.

Has poor overall coaching skills (otherwise the team would be adhering to the fundamentals of the game - which we don't)

He continually makes comments which are hard to substantiate ...

"We will be the hardest team to play against"

"I will give you a game plan"

"The players will need 3 or 4 years to learn the game plan"

"The players will need 3 full pre-seasons to get fit"

"We didn't see that coming"

"Any of you people in the media got any ideas?"

"We are at GWS level" ...

It also should be noted that we don't have a great list. But it is a list that is under performing to very large degree.

Many of our players are nowhere their potential and there are too many under performing for it to be a coincidence.

The coach's primary role is to get the best out of his players. That isn't happening.

I agree with that, we don't have a great list but we have one which has the basics of a good one. We have a lot of holes, which Neeld tried to patch up with NQR players, but it's not without some talent and shouldn't be anywhere near as bad as it's been.

Our Forward line should be ok next year when we have Mitch, Dawes, Watts and Hogan there, our Backline is not too bad with Frawley, Garland, Tommy Mc and Dunn; it's our midfield where we have a problem and everyone knows that. We have some younger kids coming through and if we can give Jones, Sylvia, Trenners and Evans some help we might be ok.

Were not great, but there is something to work with and the list isn't 100 points worse than most of the top 8 sides. Richmond were in diabolical trouble a few years ago but a bit of trading and a bit of luck with the draft and they are they are looking solid.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Yes, I have noticed that Neeld now says some nice things publically. He has obviuosly been told that this is part of his problem and he is attempting to change............. but is too late. He has lost the group, we are destined to fall further into the abyss. We are destined to lose more tallented players, we are destined to remain the laughing stock of the competition.

Again I am not against the approach, I am not against changing the culture. Simply we have hired the wrong person, who does not have the skill set to do it.

Neeld must be fired. I am expecting another 15 goal hartless loss this week. I pray (and I am not religious) that the board use this upcoming loss to boot this dud squarly out of our club.

so you want to play the part of Grant Thomas, sack 'Blight' before he barely starts, & then take over and coach, as Thomas did.. great we'll all play 'Thomas the Tank Engine with you, for the next 5 years...

& then we'll all be back again, on this same 40 Yr Old Movie set...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt4JXKUv5MQ

.

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

so you want to play the part of Grant Thomas, sack 'Blight' before he barely starts, & then take over and coach, as Thomas did.. great we'll all play 'Thomas the Tank Engine with you, for the next 5 years...

& then we'll all be back again, on this same 40 Yr Old Movie set...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt4JXKUv5MQ

.

Out and out rubbish. Just dribble.

Edited May 1, 2013 by Grand New Flag

[sue 9,096]

Sue, im a believer that whenever there is smoke there is generally fire, and the following issues have raised my concerns;

• Public slagging of Davey & Watts before he knew them
• Davey / Misfud allegations
• incumbent leadership group being relieved of their duties
• Reigning B&F winner and VC being stripped of his leadership duties and spending 1/2 the season sulking in the 2's
• radical changes to playing list in off season (Moloney, Rivers, Green, Martin, Petterd, Bate etc etc etc)

None of these are clear evidence, but combined i believe it tends to paint a picture of a coach/playing group that have had, or are having 'issues'

D-WA, most of your points are what you do if you need to change the list. It doesn't imply the relationship with those who remain is bad. And clearly our list needed some changes!! even if one disagrees with individual one.

[dee-luded 2,959]

For those who ask who should

Out and out rubbish. Just dribble.

sorry but, I was taught a saying back in the hard days of psycology, it went something like, "pearls before swine"... I was so naive & shutdown back then, I didn't understand it, nor had ever really heard it before...

25 Yrs later, I had really started to grasp it & many other ideas & concepts... because you don't truly understand about these things, & the big "C",,, I can't tell you any more than you are trying to do here thru fear... except I've gone thru a lifetime of understanding IT ever since... once the eyes are opened, they can never shut it out.

if the Eyes are blissfully closed, we will continue to play wide along the wings, hopeful of some space, to flash in & out of.

Edited May 1, 2013 by dee-luded

[Akum 2,660]

Did they elaborate?

Only things like "he was no good when he coached the Western Jets" and "he's just not a good coach". They're both from separate youth organisations in the western suburbs, it's not a big thing, and I didn't ask them for details, it was just said in passing.

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

For those who are asking who we should bring in to replace Neeld after round 5:

The answer: It does not matter as long as they are qualified with the right experience etc. as long as it is a person who can install confidence, self-belief and inspire the players to play for the gurnsey, for their club for the supporters and for their careers. Again I go back to the example of Roos. Roos was brought in as a temporary coach with limited coaching experiance. He inspired his team in such a manner that the team begged the board to keep him, the board had to renege on a contract to Wallace (I think)?. Several years later they repaid the board with a Premiership.

Roos changed the culture of the Swans but he also installed self belief, self confidence. The team quickly went from a soft, defenceless team (not that much worse than us) to a tough, hard defensive masters. Improved results were seen almost immediately. Roos took over before mid-season.

Fellow members: We have chosen the wrong man in Neeld. It is in my opinion Neeld is the greatest mistake this club has made since sacking Norm Smith. Are board must recognise their mistake and must be strong and decisive.

Sack Neeld after the club disgraces itself and the AFL again this Sunday.

[BrisbaneDemon 1,572]

Come on guys, seriously lets all just relax, in 3-4 rounds we will all be singing

“Na Na Na Na
Na Na Na Na
Hey Hey Hey
Goodbye”

No coach has survived the beltings that Neeld has overseen. It’s only a matter of weeks before the press conference is held. He simply has no case to answer for. He simply came in for to hot when he got the job. The scary thought is who are they going to hire next?!?.

[Macca 16,923]

Sue, im a believer that whenever there is smoke there is generally fire, and the following issues have raised my concerns;

• Public slagging of Davey & Watts before he knew them
• Davey / Misfud allegations
• incumbent leadership group being relieved of their duties
• Reigning B&F winner and VC being stripped of his leadership duties and spending 1/2 the season sulking in the 2's
• radical changes to playing list in off season (Moloney, Rivers, Green, Martin, Petterd, Bate etc etc etc)

None of these are clear evidence, but combined i believe it tends to paint a picture of a coach/playing group that have had, or are having 'issues'

The other one absolutely damning bit of information is what we come up with when we critique all our established players or players who haven't come on. As a general rule, many of our players are playing well below their potential. There are too many for it all to be a coincidence.

Any coach needs to get the best out his players. Apart from a few players that is not happening. In a lot of ways the reverse has happened and many of our players have gone backwards or just haven't come on. To say otherwise is ignoring the truth. Critiquing our established players and/or our players who haven't come on is largely an academic exercise but I'll at least list them.

Frawley

Garland

Sylvia

Trengove

Howe

Tapscott

Watts

McKenzie

Strauss

Blease

Nicholson

Davey

Jamar

Jetta

Bail

Davis

Spencer

Fitzpatrick

All the above have the capacity to play better footy or much better footy than their actual output (including last years form) In some cases, it's a lack of opportunity at senior level, but it's not like they're dominating at Casey.

Edited May 1, 2013 by Macca

[pitmaster 3,513]

How is it obvious that he hates all the well educated private schoo l boys?

It is only posters on here (probably Labor voters) who keep trying to instigate a class war

Class war the past 10 years in this country has been the preserve of the conservatives...they're just smart enough to throw the label at the other side whenever anything is mentioned that might address the middle class and corporate handouts they have been so effective with.

As for the principal topic here, we need to stay staunch. Nothing is achieved with revisiting this every week. Neeld has to be given his chance. You won't attract a decent replacement - if that's where this is going - if we turn ourselves into a modern day Richmond.

I agree he may well have come on too strong but the players have to be big boys and cop it oh so sweetly now and then. If not, they'll never have the grunt we need in any case.

[Akum 2,660]

For those who are asking who we should bring in to replace Neeld after round 5:

The answer: It does not matter as long as they are qualified with the right experience etc. as long as it is a person who can install confidence, self-belief and inspire the players to play for the gurnsey, for their club for the supporters and for their careers. Again I go back to the example of Roos. Roos was brought in as a temporary coach with limited coaching experiance. He inspired his team in such a manner that the team begged the board to keep him, the board had to renege on a contract to Wallace (I think)?. Several years later they repaid the board with a Premiership.

Roos changed the culture of the Swans but he also installed self belief, self confidence. The team quickly went from a soft, defenceless team (not that much worse than us) to a tough, hard defensive masters. Improved results were seen almost immediately. Roos took over before mid-season.

Fellow members: We have chosen the wrong man in Neeld. It is in my opinion Neeld is the greatest mistake this club has made since sacking Norm Smith. Are board must recognise their mistake and must be strong and decisive.

Sack Neeld after the club disgraces itself and the AFL again this Sunday.

I'm concerned that most of the things GNF has posted are not far off the mark. There must be players wanting to see positive change of some kind before the end of the season for them to decide not to look elsewhere. Let's face it, if you were a player manager and one of your players came to you asking for advice about whether or not to stay at Melbourne, what would you tell them if you had their interests at heart? And clearly, from certain incidents this year, some players are still in touch with Petterd & Rivers, and still on good terms with Moloney and even Scully, to know what life is like elsewhere.

I also get the feeling that there's actually quite a lot of concern around the AFL fraternity about MFC's future. Nobody wants to see us fold, not even our greatest critics. But there is concern about whether the club has it within itself to start making a few good decisions, because it's clear that the current situation can't continue for much longer.

So I don't think it can wait until the end of the year to find a new coach, but I don't think we need to act in haste. I think we have a bit of time to let Peter Jackson find his way around and try to find an appropriate senior coach, but we can't leave it too long, because as I said, we need to see evidence of change for the better before the season ends or we could lose some players. That's what happened at Port at the end of last season, though it hasn't turned out badly for them.

[stueyspencer no12 73]

The other one absolutely damning bit of information is what we come up with when we critique all our established players or players who haven't come on. As a general rule, many of our players are playing well below their potential. There are too many for it all to be a coincidence.

Any coach needs to get the best out his players. Apart from a few players that is not happening. In a lot of ways the reverse has happened and many of our players have gone backwards or just haven't come on. To say otherwise is ignoring the truth. Critiquing our established players and/or our players who haven't come on is largely an academic exercise but I'll at least list them.

Frawley

Garland

Sylvia

Trengove

Howe

Tapscott

Watts

McKenzie

Strauss

Blease

Nicholson

Davey

Jamar

Jetta

Bail

Davis

Spencer

Fitzpatrick

All the above have the capacity to play better footy or much better footy than they're actual output (including last years form) In some cases, it's a lack of opportunity at senior level, but it's not like they're dominating at Casey.

With the exception of Howe I agree. And Evans has improved I think. What's frustrating is that other club supporters are looking at MFC in sorrow, and with pity, and commenting that "it's not a bad list" Come on, do it now- the club won't stand another 16 weeks of this

[bing181 9,194]

Only things like "he was no good when he coached the Western Jets" and "he's just not a good coach". They're both from separate youth organisations in the western suburbs, it's not a big thing, and I didn't ask them for details, it was just said in passing.

Good enough for Collingwood to sign him up, and Geelong to chase him as an assistant in 2011.

[Macca 16,923]

With the exception of Howe I agree. And Evans has improved I think. What's frustrating is that other club supporters are looking at MFC in sorrow, and with pity, and commenting that "it's not a bad list" Come on, do it now- the club won't stand another 16 weeks of this

Howe could be a better footballer. Obviously he takes a nice grab but if you look at his overall game, he falls a bit short.(like so many others) He has a lot of potential though and I'd like to see him used as a permanent deep forward (the problem then is getting the ball to him)

If I had to take 3 off that list he'd be one of the 3. Still leaves 15 though. Trengove's injuries haven't helped and Garland is starting to play a bit better. We might be able to make excuses for all of them but there are too many for it all to be a coincidence.

Evans I didn't list because we haven't been able to have a good enough look at him yet. Another one with a fair bit of potential.

Edited May 1, 2013 by Macca

[Adam The God 30,129]

The MFC need to be very careful about handling the coach situation. I am in favour of keeping Neeld until at least the end of this season, for the following reasons

• It will provide us with more time and data to assess the progress of the list and the coach
• It will demonstrate the MFC is not a rabble of flighty hens unable to keep to their own directions, plans and commitments. This would be important in attracting the next coach.
• It will allow time for a spill of the board that employed Neeld (should he go) such that they are not responsible for hiring his replacement
• It will allow us to identify what went wrong with the Neeld /Craig FD (if indeed it has gone "wrong")

Should we sack Neeld prior to the end of the year, we would be telling any future coaching aspirant they have 15 months to turn what has been widely acknowledged as a weak list around. This would result in most first time Coaches avoiding us and leave us with failed but experienced Coaches that can't get a role elsewhere...

We need to stay calm and support Neeld.

The reality of our situation is that the team has lost one game (to Port) that we expected to win, we have lost several by margins greater than acceptable that we expected to lose and most recently lost to Brissie in Brisbane by 28 points... not a huge surprise.

We need to learn to grind out 4 quarters of effort to stop the blow outs, and the Carlton game will be a good test of our improvement in this area.

Very sensible and reasoned post, Paul, I'd be with you if I'd seen the team play more than one quarter this season at the required AFL standard.

[demon3165 2,711]

Am going to laugh my arse off if Jackson comes out in support of Neeld, watch this board go into meltdown blaming him for all our woes.........

[PJ_12345 1,098]

Sue, im a believer that whenever there is smoke there is generally fire, and the following issues have raised my concerns;

• Public slagging of Davey & Watts before he knew them
• Davey / Misfud allegations
• incumbent leadership group being relieved of their duties
• Reigning B&F winner and VC being stripped of his leadership duties and spending 1/2 the season sulking in the 2's
• radical changes to playing list in off season (Moloney, Rivers, Green, Martin, Petterd, Bate etc etc etc)

None of these are clear evidence, but combined i believe it tends to paint a picture of a coach/playing group that have had, or are having 'issues'

There is some clear evidence re the Davey and Misfud allegations - Davey has said multiple times that it just did not happened. Hence the apology the AFL gave to him and Neeld.

This was more an issue of what WJ would describe as 'faceless men' leaking incorrect information. As Caroline Wilson said "I can categorically deny Jason Misfud would have made this up", she provided this in the context that someone was leaking unsubstantiated rumors to him.

CW didnt run or believe the racist claims because when she was, believe it or not, checking her facts Davey told her on the phone and said it was completely incorrect - so I think its a bit wrong to include that in your assesment of Neeld.

Re the list:

Green retired

We never should have recruited Martin (already recruited Gawn)

Petterd was constanly injured and we needed the spot

Bate wasnt good enough

ect.

That is more about the quality of the players and forming a list. Alot of them didnt improve under DB either might I add.

The biggest issue with Neeld's strategy, as you noted, was his approach to the leadership group and senior players. Im a big fan of him, and his strategy, but he mucked this part up.

A new leadership group fitted in with the clubs, new coach, new coaching staff, new captains, new list, new facilities but I think in this instance it was a huge oversight and caused a significant resistance to the strategy and impacted performance.

[PaulRB 6,350]

Very sensible and reasoned post, Paul, I'd be with you if I'd seen the team play more than one quarter this season at the required AFL standard.

I'm hoping we are turning the ship and simply need more time for the changes to be obvious on the field. Keen to see

• Clark and Dawes play 6+ games together in forward line.
• Maxy and the Russian play 6+ games together in ruck/forward.
• Continued improvement and time playing together in our 12 mids, I've liked M Jones, Evans, Terlich, Byrnes, Viney, but they are all in first 5 games at club and mid-field synergy takes time.
• the players produce 4 quarters of intensity, getting better each week (from very low start)

These factor all point toward an improving team that simply need time (injury free) for the pieces to come together and start to gel into something that resembles a decent footy team.

[pantaloons 2,019]

From the outset I was disgusted that we went with an untried coach, regardless of who it was. However, in some ways I feel for Neeld. A lot of the things he's tried to implement - a more defensive gameplan, changing on-field leadership, weeding out downhill skiiers, trading for Mitch Clark - I'm in favour of in theory. From the outside he seems to have fallen down due to a lack of people skills, leadership and coaching ability - relatively important criteria for a coach. I do feel for him in the sense that he was brought in to make these changes with everyone involved at the club including supporters knowing full well that we had a list full of ninnies who needed strong leadership from their coach (again, highlighting the failure in not luring an experienced coach).

Since my mind is made up on Neeld, my attention turns to what happens to fix this. I'm convinced we need an established top-level coach, and unless the Hawks falter and Clarkson gets the axe, that leaves Roos (though I'd settle for a couple of next-tier coaches in Eade or Williams before going rookie again) as our man. I constantly hear excuses on here as to why Roos wouldn't coach Melbourne or why it wouldn't work, chiefly:

• We're a basket case and he wouldn't touch us with a ten foot pole
• We wouldn't have the money
• The one-man messiah complex has plagued the club in the past and won't solve our dilemma
• One that I'll add is that since Roos has been there and done it all before, would he have the desire to go through such an arduous climb again?

What I will say to those is that ours is a situation in which our players have consistently performed on levels ranging from disgusting to dispirited to insubordinate since Daniher left. A "mass exodus" away from Neeld and the conclusion is that Neeld has lost the players and is not up to it. In the incredibly unlikely event of a mass exodus from Roos, the conclusion would be that the players are soft serves and Roos can build the team as he wishes.

As to the question around why Roos would choose to coach Melbourne, it's 5% the challenge of taking an underdog to the top, and 95% money. Big fat money. If it needs to be in the absurd realm of $2M a year for 5 years then so be it. Hold a Pay Paul Roos' Wage So the Club Doesn't Fold fundraiser gala every year. Big wigs (and small toupees) will pay to see the club competitive - I'm sure that was part of the motivation for Debt Demolition, not to pump in money in order to see us continue to be a laughing stock on and off the field. Does anyone think he'd knock that back? The only reasons he'd knock it back would be if his wife still needs to work in Sydney, or if he's earning 67%+ of that already (very unlikely). It is absurd to think that he would not take that salary simply because the job was too hard.

If that's the highest coaching salary in the league, so what? I'd say we are the club in greatest need of the best coaching. You get what you pay for. Nerd alert: It's like the man/woman/child playing Risk outmanned but continuing to implement the same conservative strategies that will see them last longer but give them no chance of victory. Or for the less nerd-like, I guess you could use actual war analogies. But you get the point. We aren't going to save this club with another anonymous, bland coaching hire. Spend the money and you will get it back. Macca earlier listed a few consequences of us continuing to stink under Neeld. Can you imagine the increase in club enthusiasm and PR with Roos at the helm? The prime time games and positive media exposure increasing as win games and finals? The increase in membership and so on and so on and so on.

We may not have the most members, but without wanting to be self-congratulatory, we've shown ourselves to be resilient and up to the challenge of saving the club from financial peril. Give us Paul Roos and we'll do it again. You get what you pay for.

[felixdacat 459]

so you want to play the part of Grant Thomas, sack 'Blight' before he barely starts, & then take over and coach, as Thomas did.. great we'll all play 'Thomas the Tank Engine with you, for the next 5 years...

& then we'll all be back again, on this same 40 Yr Old Movie set...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt4JXKUv5MQ

.

Seems pretty close to the mark for mine. IMO It's Bailey all over again. Last time we did that it cost us $500K. The media and other clubs will love it because it reinforces their view of what a basket case the MFC is but so be it.

Posters on here want to get rid of someone who has been doing the job for 5 minutes because things are not going to your own plans or wishes for MFC. All because people want instant gratification and instant progress we hear the drums a beating for another sacrifice of our coach. Others argue that they have been waiting for 60 years and they are sick of waiting, How is that laid at the current coach's door he only started in September 2011? but posters continue to bleat like the length of their Martyrdom means they have more valid claim to being more righteous than other who are calling for calm.

44 pages of venting and negativity towards a Coach who has been in the job for 18 months on the basis of various assumptions and misguided realities vs the personal hell in Ground Hog Day hard to separate IMO.

Edited May 1, 2013 by FerdDaDee

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Howe could be a better footballer. Obviously he takes a nice grab but if you look at his overall game, he falls a bit short.(like so many others) He has a lot of potential though and I'd like to see him used as a permanent deep forward (the problem then is getting the ball to him)

If I had to take 3 off that list he'd be one of the 3. Still leaves 15 though. Trengove's injuries haven't helped and Garland is starting to play a bit better. We might be able to make excuses for all of them but there are too many for it all to be a coincidence.

Evans I didn't list because we haven't been able to have a good enough look at him yet. Another one with a fair bit of potential.

Howe has all the attributes to be as good as Nathan Fyfe, he could be a super player for us but at the moment he's playing below his capacity; if he had a few other good players around him the sky's the limit.

Evans could also be a top player but watch us play him out of position and destroy him. WTF have we done to Trenners; he was looking great in his first year but is just plodding along now. Grimes used to be one of the most reliable marks in the side, not any more. Tapscott has got plebty of ability but he just doesn't seem to have any confidence; in fact which of our players have.

Tommy Mc will be a good footballer, I just hope it's with us.

We all know those that are good and we all know they are playing like they aren't.

[bing181 9,194]

Again I go back to the example of Roos. Roos was brought in as a temporary coach with limited coaching experiance.

You keep going on about Roos. We don't have a Roos waiting in the wings. The nearest we might have got would have been if Junior had stayed on and become an assistant, and the closest we have now would be Leigh Brown. Roos played for years at the Swans, and knew the team and the club inside out. He'd then been assistant for 2+ years under Eade.

Roos is the exception that proves the rule: interim coaches invariably never make (good) senior coaches. For every Roos there's a Bickley, a Paul Williams, or a Primus. Go and ask Richmond fans for their thoughts about Rawlings as interim coach.

Clutching at straws. There are no easy solutions.

[Adam The God 30,129]

I cannot see how anyone on this forum who is not closely connected to the club would have any idea of Neeld's relationship with the players. Examining the entrails of post-match press conferences and player's performance is just so much guesswork. I'm constantly amazed by the bold assertions people make.

Lack of skills compounded by lack of confidence seems far more likely to be the problem than whether player like or respect the coach.

I agree. There's a certain amount of guesswork involved, but when I sit there every week and watch players jog and at times walk around in the first term, that tells me it's not merely a lack of skills and confidence that has this team down the bottom.

Edited May 1, 2013 by AdamFarr