Nathan Jones.

Started his improvement under Bailey though didn't he, but I'll let you have that one, shame about the other 30 odd.

Plus, if you read the posts, he wasn't one of the players originally talked about.

Edited May 3, 201312 yr by stuie

Nathan Jones.

That wasn't the point 'Ron', the previous post had mentioned the players listed as improvers when clearly they hadn't. Nathan is a clear winner in the improvement stakes and a credit to himself.

Had an interesting conversation with a coterie member last night. According to him Neeld has the backing, support and friendship of the players. However he is quite dictatorial and is steadfast in implementing a gameplan he believes will succeed in the long term. The players are struggling with this at times and seem to get caught flat footed during games as they work out where they should be on the ground, in relation to the ball, their man, their teammates and the opposition as a whole. He says the crap about "lost the players" is simply that, crap. Neeld argued with several of the old brigade including a stoush with Davey. All normal stuff when a new coach arrives.He's content in sitting tight as like me believes our total lack of quality midfielders is the main impediment to our success.

Maybe like him we should back our coach for a little longer

By the way, this guy is a friend of a friend who I met for the first time last night. Seemed a have genuine love of the club and I've no reason to doubt what he said.

I'd be inclined to agree if we showed any semblance of work rate on game day. We don't.

That wasn't the point 'Ron', the previous post had mentioned the players listed as improvers when clearly they hadn't. Nathan is a clear winner in the improvement stakes and a credit to himself.

... and Mark Neeld considering the significant improvement Nugget has shown between 2010&2011 to 2012&so far 2013 (averaging more disposals, goals, kicks, handballs, tackles, clearances - more than trippled, contested posessions - more than tripped, and more Brownlow votes).

But heaven forbid you guys actually credit Mark Neeld for something!

I mean its fine to compare players stats during Bailey years and Neeld years and when the player plays poorly (like Moloney) lets all blame the coach but not the player and when a player has shown improvement its all credit to the player and not the coach.

Come off it.

Had an interesting conversation with a coterie member last night. According to him Neeld has the backing, support and friendship of the players. However he is quite dictatorial and is steadfast in implementing a gameplan he believes will succeed in the long term. The players are struggling with this at times and seem to get caught flat footed during games as they work out where they should be on the ground, in relation to the ball, their man, their teammates and the opposition as a whole. He says the crap about "lost the players" is simply that, crap. Neeld argued with several of the old brigade including a stoush with Davey. All normal stuff when a new coach arrives.He's content in sitting tight as like me believes our total lack of quality midfielders is the main impediment to our success.

Maybe like him we should back our coach for a little longer

By the way, this guy is a friend of a friend who I met for the first time last night. Seemed a have genuine love of the club and I've no reason to doubt what he said.

This is Exactly what I've been thinking, & what i observed from the replay of the Lions game.

players slowly learning to play this style, after a total Melbourne culture of Non Accountability. or a very basic see man tackle man.

this learning is showing & the blowouts appear so far to have gone as we have brought more experienced players back into the lineup.

the Carlton midfield is a worry, & will test us, no doubt... Are we expecting ourselves to win this game? or what is acceptable in our progress, as far as this game is concerned?

I see nothing of our players resenting the coach, but I hear Plenty of the 'Bygone Players', having issues with the Coach & the Professional requirements he wanted from them...

Edited May 3, 201312 yr by dee-luded

That is just ridiculous PJ. let's re-look at that list:

Trengrove - Improved, but last few games performance has dropped. No. His year last year was very average, at best you would say he's the same.

Grimes - Improved How can you say "don't blame Neeld for Strauss but then say Grimes has improved because of Neeld? Convenient way of looking at injuries.

Watts - didnt improve under Bailey or MN and the moment MN was going to play him in the forward he gets injured Same as Trengove. hardly think you can say "MN was going to play him forward" just because he did it in a half in a losing game.

Frawley - improved. Had to tag the best forwards in every team, including two undefeated clubs. Improved??! WTF??! He was an All-Australian and is our most talked about out of form player this year. Bad call.

Strauss - come off it, he broke his leg and had a shoulder reconstruction, how is MN supposed to improve a play who hasnt been able to play footy for the last 2 years Agree.

Blease - improved. Played some great footy last year, setting the majority of his pb's such as 5 goals, 29 disposals ect. Ummm... don't you think it's fair to apply the Strauss rule here?

Garland - most improved player out of them all this year He may seem to have improved this year due to playing at the other end most of last year, but he's no better now than under Bailey.

Dont have time to go through each individual again atm and their improvement/non-improvement compared to 2010, 2011, 2012 and so far in 2013 but the difference to not applying my Strauss argument to Gimes is that Strauss has played less than 20 games but Grims has played over 60 - big difference in the type of injury and the recovery periods.

Again Blease has played more games than Strauss, and had more time to actually train - you cant get alot done with the recovery periods from a shoulder reco and a broken leg

RE Watts I watched a couple of pressers and Neeld was very happy with Watt's performance up forward. With Clark out I would like to think Neeld would have played him in a forward position. Clearly his current one isnt working out. Could be a different story in a couple of weeks so I'm going to hold off from Watts until he has been played there.

Might have been pushing it with Trengrove. Very flat over the past few weeks.

I stand by Frawley.

This is Exactly what I've been thinking, & what i observed from the replay of the Lions game.

players slowly learning to play this style, after a total Melbourne culture of Non Accountability. or a very basic see man tackle man.

this learning is showing & the blowouts appear so far to have gone as we have brought more experienced players back into the lineup.

the Carlton midfield is a worry, & will test us, no doubt... Are we expecting ourselves to win this game? or what is acceptable in our progress, as far as this game is concerned?

I see nothing of our players resenting the coach, but I hear Plenty of the 'Bygone Players', having issues with the Coach & the Professional requirements he wanted from them...

on the money.

perhaps this site should be halved

negative and positive

and at the moment the positives are winning,

although the we hate neeld, lets sack the coach , board, and fd. troops are writing the same claptrap daily and i think when the club and players have stuck to the long term 3 year goal this drives the negatives that dont get thier own way crazy

makes me happy every day the negatives lose thier marbles

at least something good is bringing a smile to my face

Can we please get rid of this thread......It's just going around and around and around and around

Can we start a new thread "Time to go.......(Place new coach here)

Over it...

Neeld has a fairly full list to choose from a defensive point of view - sure we're missing our forward keys Clark and Dawes and that will affect our ability to score and the way we enter forward 50 - both of which have some flow on defensive impact - but the core of our defensive set-up is in place. Jamar is missing but I think he's well covered by Spencer. Defensive forwards - Tapscott, Bail, Byrnes. A full midfield complement. Only Watts and Jetta missing from the backline - but we've got a lot of players competing for spots back there. First choice key backs Frawley, McDonald and Garland are in place. Our midfied is ordinary but I agree with posters here that it's not as terrible as results have suggested. N.Jones, Grimes, McKenzie, Trengove and Viney should be able to provide clearances, defensive structure and running. Then in addition we've got Sylvia, Howe, M.Jones and Evans who can all run hard and play. That 9 decent rotations through the middle.

Neeld has all resources at his disposal in team defence that he could reasonably expect to have and has had 5 weeks to refine who he wants where and what they should be doing and eliminate who is a team defence liability. We will struggle to kick a winning score. But if we get sliced open like a fat sausage a hot plate again this week there's really no excuse.

Roost It, this confirms what I have been trying to say for last month or so, but the naysayers don't want to hear it, I have heard it from staff members, players and the assistant coaches

I'm with PaulRB "Less than 1% offer anything more than biased venting from our weekends defeat dressed up as "justified anger" toward our coach. Which I think has become tedious and demeaning to all"

It angers me that some supporter/posters on this board seem to be wishing for Melbourne to get belted and this will lead to Neeld being sacked, which is what they want

And then we have others, where the post is all about them, "i am sad", "I am depressed" etc etc ad nauseum...it's footy, they can't have much a life if it means that much to them....maybe they should look at that first

Edit must proof read something typed qukicyl

Yes there's the whingers who think it's about them and post about how the team is affecting their life - get over it. But your complaints about lack of substance in the criticisms of the coach and our results seem hypocritical - you just provide platitudes of support. We're not going anywhere near expections of supporters and far importantly expectations of the club and its officers who are directly responsible for our performance. How about explaining why this is happening?

on the money.

perhaps this site should be halved

negative and positive

and at the moment the positives are winning,

although the we hate neeld, lets sack the coach , board, and fd. troops are writing the same claptrap daily and i think when the club and players have stuck to the long term 3 year goal this drives the negatives that dont get thier own way crazy

makes me happy every day the negatives lose thier marbles

at least something good is bringing a smile to my face

Really - have you tallied the posters?

You could always start a poll instead of declaring the majority as the view that you agree with...

Personally I don't think it's that cut & dry at all.

... and Mark Neeld considering the significant improvement Nugget has shown between 2010&2011 to 2012&so far 2013 (averaging more disposals, goals, kicks, handballs, tackles, clearances - more than trippled, contested posessions - more than tripped, and more Brownlow votes).

But heaven forbid you guys actually credit Mark Neeld for something!

I mean its fine to compare players stats during Bailey years and Neeld years and when the player plays poorly (like Moloney) lets all blame the coach but not the player and when a player has shown improvement its all credit to the player and not the coach.

Come off it.

I didn't knock Neeld for the ones that have gone backwards either, and I'm not one calling for his head...but something is not right, it's not always the coach but the results and the way the team is playing is not good no matter how many stats people like to run. The only stat that matters is the scoreboard.

I was calling for Schwabs head and I'm happy he's gone, I know he wasn't the person to sort out what is wrong with the MFC. One failed rebuild and another looking very shaky. It's now up to the people in charge to make the decision if we have the right man or not, I hope we have but the results are making it very difficult for him.

By the way, I think you are off the mark with Frawley. At best he has stalled, he has had a lot of ball coming down admittedly but his one on one work is nowhere near as strong as it was and he is not giving us the run he did in the past.

Anyone read the team sheets??

Collingwood - out Hudson, Russell

What was Buckley thinking?? Two washed up players in and out of the side.

They are only there for depth, play a role, now it makes sense.

Edited May 3, 201312 yr by Al's Demons

Yes there's the whingers who think it's about them and post about how the team is affecting their life - get over it. But your complaints about lack of substance in the criticisms of the coach and our results seem hypocritical - you just provide platitudes of support. We're not going anywhere near expections of supporters and far importantly expectations of the club and its officers who are directly responsible for our performance. How about explaining why this is happening?

What don't you go to games, it is happening because as I put in another post, we haven't got an experienced midfield at the moment, we are trying like hell to get there though

Not platitudes, just trying to put to be the lie that Neeld has lost the players

There is no substance, half the time negative posters contradict themselves......Spencer gets picked and they decry him, yet they ask for competitiveness, he is one of the most competitive we have

Of course we are nowhere near the expectations, I wanted us to be 5 and zip, but we aren't and I understand why, walked away from Essendon game gutted...but backed up next week....that's footy....

What don't you go to games, it is happening because as I put in another post, we haven't got an experienced midfield at the moment, we are trying like hell to get there though

Not platitudes, just trying to put to be the lie that Neeld has lost the players

There is no substance, half the time negative posters contradict themselves......Spencer gets picked and they decry him, yet they ask for competitiveness, he is one of the most competitive we have

Of course we are nowhere near the expectations, I wanted us to be 5 and zip, but we aren't and I understand why, walked away from Essendon game gutted...but backed up next week....that's footy....

"that's footy"?? No it's not.

How long do you expect supporters /members to witness what we have to put up with. For the last time, we can accept the realities of talent or the lack of it that we have and the losses that will inevitably bring. What we won't accept is the manner in which we lose and and the magnitude of those losses. Nor bloody well should we.

Let's get in the real world shall we.

What don't you go to games, it is happening because as I put in another post, we haven't got an experienced midfield at the moment, we are trying like hell to get there though

Not platitudes, just trying to put to be the lie that Neeld has lost the players

There is no substance, half the time negative posters contradict themselves......Spencer gets picked and they decry him, yet they ask for competitiveness, he is one of the most competitive we have

Of course we are nowhere near the expectations, I wanted us to be 5 and zip, but we aren't and I understand why, walked away from Essendon game gutted...but backed up next week....that's footy....

"inexperienced midfield" - that's all you've got?

I've been every week and watched Brisbane on TV last week and will be there on Sunday and No, that's not footy.

"inexperienced midfield" - that's all you've got?

I've been every week and watched Brisbane on TV last week and will be there on Sunday and No, that's not footy.

Then you tell me what it is then? Coz that's all I think the problem is

Neeld has a fairly full list to choose from a defensive point of view - sure we're missing our forward keys Clark and Dawes and that will affect our ability to score and the way we enter forward 50 - both of which have some flow on defensive impact - but the core of our defensive set-up is in place. Jamar is missing but I think he's well covered by Spencer. Defensive forwards - Tapscott, Bail, Byrnes. A full midfield complement. Only Watts and Jetta missing from the backline - but we've got a lot of players competing for spots back there. First choice key backs Frawley, McDonald and Garland are in place. Our midfied is ordinary but I agree with posters here that it's not as terrible as results have suggested. N.Jones, Grimes, McKenzie, Trengove and Viney should be able to provide clearances, defensive structure and running. Then in addition we've got Sylvia, Howe, M.Jones and Evans who can all run hard and play. That 9 decent rotations through the middle.

Neeld has all resources at his disposal in team defence that he could reasonably expect to have and has had 5 weeks to refine who he wants where and what they should be doing and eliminate who is a team defence liability. We will struggle to kick a winning score. But if we get sliced open like a fat sausage a hot plate again this week there's really no excuse.

form & momentum as the list is still only just getting back to full.. the young are going great guns from the team Neeld brought in, with accompaniment from NCraig & MrMisson.... & the fitness regime Neeld wanted at the club,,,,, which led to some blowhards being gone....

lets see, >

OUT: retirements: Green, Bartram,

moved on: Moloney, Rivers, Martin, Petterd, Jurrah,

blow hards: Gysberts, Morton, Bennell, Cook,

????? Bater, Sheahan ®, Williams ®, Lawrence ®

there is a fair slice of experience gone, whether its good quality or not.

It takes time for the list to adjust to everyone stepping up. add injuries, and selecting wrong in Rnd 1, & we find where we were, in the first 2 weeks.

Now we are starting to form the shape of a semi decent side, we need to find more composure & conductivity.

Edited May 3, 201312 yr by dee-luded

I didn't knock Neeld for the ones that have gone backwards either, and I'm not one calling for his head...but something is not right, it's not always the coach but the results and the way the team is playing is not good no matter how many stats people like to run. The only stat that matters is the scoreboard.

I was calling for Schwabs head and I'm happy he's gone, I know he wasn't the person to sort out what is wrong with the MFC. One failed rebuild and another looking very shaky. It's now up to the people in charge to make the decision if we have the right man or not, I hope we have but the results are making it very difficult for him.

By the way, I think you are off the mark with Frawley. At best he has stalled, he has had a lot of ball coming down admittedly but his one on one work is nowhere near as strong as it was and he is not giving us the run he did in the past.

RE Frawley I'll have a closer look at him this weekend - he'll get a bit of work so I'll take back my comments and see how he goes.

My issue with your perspective i that, as you said, "the only stat that matters is the scoreboard"...

For me thats a short term assesment.

Long-term results > short term results

Then you tell me what it is then? Coz that's all I think the problem is

7 Years of inept recruiting & Development & you tell us all to be more patient, and not to be judgmental of the MFC

What so we wait patiently for another 50 years?

Having watched games since 1971 i am entitled to answers and on field action now...

I have had a gut full of patience watching other clubs win Flags.

RE Frawley I'll have a closer look at him this weekend - he'll get a bit of work so I'll take back my comments and see how he goes.

My issue with your perspective i that, as you said, "the only stat that matters is the scoreboard"...

For me thats a short term assesment.

Long-term results > short term results

I get where you are coming from re: short term results, it's just that the margins are still way too high on that scoreboard.

The scoreboard gives a very accurate picture of where we are and it's not in a good place. People can throw up any other stat they like but the one that matters is not showing any improvement and I would like to know why. I don't believe these losing margins are healthy for the long term future.

You will get an aberration with a developing team, the blow out result is part of that journey but the aberration for us is to not get a blow out.

Then you tell me what it is then? Coz that's all I think the problem is

Damn, you must be a troll. No one could seriously post that and not be.

If we sack Neeld now, any potential future coach may think this place has a history of sacking coaches and others, and they have a poor list, so think I may wait for the next opportunity at another club.

Leave him in until the end of the year. If we are planning on getting a new coach, we can start looking now. Fremantle pulled it off.

Then you tell me what it is then? Coz that's all I think the problem is

Well you just keep burying your head in the sand and believe what you will. If things keep going the way they are the club will have less than 25k members and no sponsors next year.

Edited May 3, 201312 yr by angrydee

If we sack Neeld now, any potential future coach may think this place has a history of sacking coaches and others, and they have a poor list, so think I may wait for the next opportunity at another club.

Leave him in until the end of the year. If we are planning on getting a new coach, we can start looking now. Fremantle pulled it off.

Essendon and Carlton have as well. Port were in this position (coaches ejector seat, troubled club) and a few potential coaches gave them a wide berth but they may have a winner in Hinkley.

Edited May 3, 201312 yr by rjay