Time to go Mark Neeld

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/33930-collingwood-chasing-sylvia/page-5

You used Moloney, rivers and Martin all leaving as a direct result of the coach. No if's, but's or maybe's.

In my eyes, you are no better than the flesh-eating journalists looking for a easy target to feast on. That you are upset mark neeld is pushing culture change, and forcing the weeds out (Moloney etc) so that the roses (jones, Howe, garland, viney, hogan etc) can bloom, shows a distinct ignorance to where the on field problems previously bred. The ceiling for growth was so minor pre neeld, in comparison to now. There is a genuine unity in the playing group, there are no rats who want to undermine senior officials and a categorical "one in all in" mindset.

The past is done, we've covered that numerous times. That you can't see similarities between how Al Clarkson and Mark Thompson cleared out players who were detrimental to unity and team growth, is disappointing. The outsiders who feel that the club is worse off without gysberts, Moloney, petterd etc, may well be right in the short term. However, later this year, we will all see the growth and development that we are craving (and have been for 7 years). This was a proper "ground up rebuild". When Peter Jackson comes out and endorses mark neeld, but fine tunes the lines of communication and isolates the uncertainty, watch how this club turns around on and off field. Watch How we stay in games longer and put more pressure on opposition teams. Watch how our players link up better and control the footy more consistently. We are a lot closer than anyone can see, unfortunately the same shallow minded journalists who today pot the club, will be the same ones who heap praise on Craig, or Lyon, or Mission.

Say what you want about mark neeld GNF, he put his own reputation on the line a early on, and since then he has dealt with media, ex- players who were the root of the problems, and supporters like yourself, who have all tried to undermine him. It's a matter of when, not if, we start producing results on field. If you are that despondent with how our senior team is playing, head down to casey and see some of the future players coming through, and the game plan they are implementing.

You can't be for real. The culture is terrible, it is toxic, no player wants in, many in the team want out. Our players are not playing for each other, they are not playing for the club, its supporters, or the gurnsey. The culture is worse now than at any time in 30 years I have supported the club. I can't believe that anyone can fall for "I have fixed up the culture" spin. Just look at the way they are playing and act. I saw head down after 2 goals and 10 minutes last week. FFS! Can't you see the disaster, can't you see the culture is worse than ever?

Again I challenge you to tell us why the statistical worst coach in the history of the game (yes this is true), who has taken us backwards in the most dramatic of ways to a point the very existence of the club is in question should keep his job.

Come I want to here your case.

Edited May 31, 2013 by Grand New Flag

[Generation dee 1,336]

Without using Damien Barrett or Caroline Wilson, or any of the media backwash we hear, to back your claims, can you prove our "toxic culture" as you have alluded to?

Proof. Your incessant rants deserve at least an explanation.

[jazza 1,323]

? None of the things you listed are improvements or things that Neeld has done well at. You have taken a long imaginative bow desperately trying to come up with anything he has achieved. The writing is on the wall for all to see, every part of our on-field performance, every statistic including fitness has gone backwards since Neeld arrived. Further rthe culture is worse than it ever is. It is so toxic our better players want out. Hell we are among the worst teams in the history of the comp. Yet you guys somehow continue your blind faith. Blind faith that will take us to extinction. This is not scare tactics...... this is reality. Wake up!

why are they not improvements

how come other people dont see your WRITING ON THE WALL?

fitness backwards is a harsh line, it was 10 years behind every afl club and the BOARD not the fd wanted to bring it up to afl standard and they were told it will take 3 preseasons, now mn might not have wanted this but is doing as instructed re 3 YEAR PRESEASON fitness regime. thats why players were buggered before the start of last season and thats why some of them are battling this season please get that into your head

wake up yes

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

why are they not improvements

how come other people dont see your WRITING ON THE WALL?

fitness backwards is a harsh line, it was 10 years behind every afl club and the BOARD not the fd wanted to bring it up to afl standard and they were told it will take 3 preseasons, now mn might not have wanted this but is doing as instructed re 3 YEAR PRESEASON fitness regime. thats why players were buggered before the start of last season and thats why some of them are battling this season please get that into your head

wake up yes

I don't want to be rude, but if you truly at the bottom of your heart believe we have not gone backwards, the club is not in danger of going under, and that Neeld is not significantly responsible, you have fallen for spin or you have blind faith.

Again tell me why he should be kept? Tell me what he has succeeded at? He is after all the statistical worst coach in the history of the game. There needs to be a compelling reason to keep him.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

? None of the things you listed are improvements or things that Neeld has done well at. You have taken a long imaginative bow desperately trying to come up with anything he has achieved. The writing is on the wall for all to see, every part of our on-field performance, every statistic including fitness has gone backwards since Neeld arrived. Further and importantly the culture is worse than it has ever been. Neeld has completely failed to improve the culture, in fact he now resides over the worst culture this club has ever had. It is so toxic our better players want out. Hell we are among the worst teams in the history of the comp. Yet you guys somehow continue your blind faith. Blind faith that will take us to extinction. This is not scare tactics...... this is reality. Wake up!

It's true. When you look at the KPI's before MN and now during MN we have gone backwards. But you have failed to consider the changes in the list and the improvements MN has made.

It's not blind faith. We see the bigger picture unlike you who is only looking at bias statistics.

We see that MN:

• Has fixed our FF issue by recruiting Clark and Dawes
• Got rid of the dead weight on our list
• Recruited premership players from other clubs to offer leadership and direction (something not done by Bailey might I add)
• Invested in new future players (Hogan, Barry, Toumpas [development player])
• Highlighted fitness as a key and fundamental issue and has Misson (very well regarded) who has implimented a 3 year plan to get us to AFL fitness

Stop being immature and solely looking at KPI's and then critise us for blind faith when you're not willing to look at the big picture.

I'm not saying you have to agree with what you see, but at least most people on DL have the decency to judge MN fairly and say that the club needs to focus on short-term wins because of membership numbers, attendance and moral ect.

Unlike you has chosen to adopt a "Mark Neeld has nothing nothing to improve the club - look as the KPI's" which are a bais statistic, and narrow minded perspective, which fails to take into consideration the bigger picture.

MN has done more than just KPI's. As you said "this is reality. Wake up!"

Edited May 31, 2013 by PJ_12345

[Generation dee 1,336]

It's true. When you look at the KPI's before MN and now during MN we have gone backwards. But you have failed to consider the changes in the list and the improvements MN has made.

It's not blind faith. We see the bigger picture unlike you who is being bias.

We see that MN:

• Has fixed our FF issue by recruiting Clark and Dawes
• Got rid of the dead weight on our list
• Recruited premership players from other clubs to offer leadership and direction (something not done by Bailey might I add)
• Invested in new future players (Hogan, Barry, Toumpas [development player])
• Highlighted fitness as a key and fundamental issue and has Misson (very well regarded) who has implimented a 3 year plan to get us to AFL fitness

Stop being immature and solely looking at KPI's and then critise us for blind faith when you're not willing to look at the big picture.

I'm not saying you have to agree with what you see, but at least most people on DL have the decency to judge MN fairly and say that the club needs to focus on short-term wins because of membership numbers, attendance and moral ect.

Unlike you has chosen to adopt a "Mark Neeld has nothing nothing to improve the club - look as the KPI's" which are a bais statistic, and narrow minded perspective, which fails to take into consideration the bigger picture.

MN has done more than just KPI's. As you said "this is reality. Wake up!"

It's a credit to you that you haven't fallen for GNF's vomit. The more people who realise there is a long term plan in place, and a whole club overhaul. The more we dig deep now and stay strong, the more rewarding it will be when we push back up the ladder.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

It's a credit to you that you haven't fallen for GNF's vomit. The more people who realise there is a long term plan in place, and a whole club overhaul. The more we dig deep now and stay strong, the more rewarding it will be when we push back up the ladder.

GNF's rebuttle when someone mentions something other than bias KPI statistics:

[P-man 13,366]

Let me ask you this. Whats more important: short-term success or long-term success?

Right now, with the debt figures both current and forecast, I would say short-term success.

Look at the crowds. Listen to the flood of stories from parents whose kids no longer want to support the Dees. Every week this goes on we lose more of a generation of fans so crucial to the livelihood of the club. This has simply gone on too long and the situation is only worsening. Those who dismiss the notion of there no longer being a Melbourne Demons because "we have to have a team called Melbourne" better take a reality check. If we become a serious enough drain on the AFL, the cord will be cut.

[hardtack 10,429]

Right now, with the debt figures both current and forecast, I would say short-term success.

Look at the crowds. Listen to the flood of stories from parents whose kids no longer want to support the Dees. Every week this goes on we lose more of a generation of fans so crucial to the livelihood of the club. This has simply gone on too long and the situation is only worsening. Those who dismiss the notion of there no longer being a Melbourne Demons because "we have to have a team called Melbourne" better take a reality check. If we become a serious enough drain on the AFL, the cord will be cut.

Really? Where is this flood? I know my 11 year old son berates me for threatening to give up... I get the feeling these parents you talk of (if they exist - I haven't noticed too many) are projecting their own emotional state onto their children.

[P-man 13,366]

Really? Where is this flood? I know my 11 year old son berates me for threatening to give up... I get the feeling these parents you talk of (if they exist - I haven't noticed too many) are projecting their own emotional state onto their children.

On here. On radio. On other forums. It's a very constant theme. Not being a parent myself, I have no such story, but it's not something I take any pleasure in hearing about as regularly as i do.

Sounds like you have a tough little nugget there, but not everyone is so fortunate with stories of bullying, not wanting to attend the footy, or simply jumping off altogether. This is really news to you? I don't think so.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

Right now, with the debt figures both current and forecast, I would say short-term success.

Look at the crowds. Listen to the flood of stories from parents whose kids no longer want to support the Dees. Every week this goes on we lose more of a generation of fans so crucial to the livelihood of the club. This has simply gone on too long and the situation is only worsening. Those who dismiss the notion of there no longer being a Melbourne Demons because "we have to have a team called Melbourne" better take a reality check. If we become a serious enough drain on the AFL, the cord will be cut.

Short-term priorities are what got us to this spot.

At the end of the day, the changes have been made, and there is nothing we can do about it.

We are stuck for the rest of the season with this list, and I don't think that any new coach, no matter how skilled or experienced can do a better job with this list. Particularly not considering Grimes, Viney, Silvia, Trengrove, Tommy Mac, Clark ect are out.

This year isn't the year to be demanding short-term results because the reality is that we won't win another game.

We all knew this was coming. Neeld said he was going to rebuild the club. It's short term pain for long-term gain.

Next year is the year to start to expect improvement. That's when players should be up to AFL fitness, Toumpas and Viney should be developed enough to play consistantly and well, Hogan is ready to come in, our inexperienced midfielders like Evans has enough AFL games under his belt, Tommy Mac should be up to the stage where we can judge his long-term skills and if he is good enough.

Whether we like it or not we are in this spot. We have commited to the changes. Nothing to do now but let it play out.

I know there will be some people here who will get angry and me being so passive about this, and they have a right to be. We have all invested alot in the club, but its not time to get the pitchforks and go lynch mobing.

[jazza 1,323]

I don't want to be rude, but if you truly at the bottom of your heart believe we have not gone backwards, the club is not in danger of going under, and that Neeld is not significantly responsible, you have fallen for spin or you have blind faith.

Again tell me why he should be kept? Tell me what he has succeeded at? He is after all the statistical worst coach in the history of the game. There needs to be a compelling reason to keep him.

am i writing in japanese and if so could somebody point it out to me

i think im answering his question but not sure if its getting through

if i am writing in japanese its because of smoking, so i do apologise

but PLEASE tell me the truth so i can fix up my script

[P-man 13,366]

Short-term priorities are what got us to this spot.

At the end of the day, the changes have been made, and there is nothing we can do about it.

We are stuck for the rest of the season with this list, and I don't think that any new coach, no matter how skilled or experienced can do a better job with this list. Particularly not considering Grimes, Viney, Silvia, Trengrove, Tommy Mac, Clark ect are out.

This year isn't the year to be demanding short-term results because the reality is that we won't win another game.

We all knew this was coming. Neeld said he was going to rebuild the club. It's short term pain for long-term gain.

Next year is the year to start to expect improvement. That's when players should be up to AFL fitness, Toumpas and Viney should be developed enough to play consistantly and well, Hogan is ready to come in, our inexperienced midfielders like Evans has enough AFL games under his belt, Tommy Mac should be up to the stage where we can judge his long-term skills and if he is good enough.

Whether we like it or not we are in this spot. We have commited to the changes. Nothing to do now but let it play out.

I know there will be some people here who will get angry and me being so passive about this, and they have a right to be. We have all invested alot in the club, but its not time to get the pitchforks and go lynch mobing.

Fair enough, but this is where the two sides of the debate (if we can group them as simply as that for argument's sake) seem to differ.

I absolutely reject the idea that what we're currently seeing is the best we can expect this season. I'm not expecting a new coach to perform miracles but the list, whilst underwhelming, is not nearly as bad as this. I've never seen a team this easy to play against, which makes a mockery of Neeld's mantra of being the hardest to play against. In 18 months he has converted us into the polar opposite. It's not just a disgrace to this club, it's become a disgrace to the game itself.

It's not about grabbing pitchforks, it's assessing a situation as being unsustainable and moving on it now before the damage becomes almost irreversible.

I think you'll find that there is indeed something to do rather than just "let it play out", and hopefully the Board feels the same way.

[P-man 13,366]

I'd also add that the idea of Jim's Debt Demolition work being completely undone makes me sick to my stomach.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

Fair enough, but this is where the two sides of the debate (if we can group them as simply as that for argument's sake) seem to differ.

I absolutely reject the idea that what we're currently seeing is the best we can expect this season. I'm not expecting a new coach to perform miracles but the list, whilst underwhelming, is not nearly as bad as this. I've never seen a team this easy to play against, which makes a mockery of Neeld's mantra of being the hardest to play against. In 18 months he has converted us into the polar opposite. It's not just a disgrace to this club, it's become a disgrace to the game itself.

It's not about grabbing pitchforks, it's assessing a situation as being unsustainable and moving on it now before the damage becomes almost irreversible.

I think you'll find that there is indeed something to do rather than just "let it play out", and hopefully the Board feels the same way.

I think Neeld's hardest team to play against was his end goal, ie the end result of his strategy.

I dont think it's entirely fair to be using a goal in 3 years half way through his contract, particularly considering that his investment into long-term picks (Hogan, Barry, Toumpas) wouldn't be included.

Personally I dont think there is another solution. I think he i a good coach and I like his strategy.

I think the biggest cause of our poor performance has been due to the players; they dont have AFL level skills or fitness and are lazy.

The board will make their decision on what is best for the club and with PJ are in the best position to judge. People shouldn't be commenting that they should make the right decision and get rid of MN just because that's their personal view.

They will obviously weigh up where we are at, what MN's strategy is short-term and long-term, and the consequences of getting rid of him - financially and functionally (ie caretaker, and new coaches out there).

The majority of the board were elected by Jim and have played an active role in getting the club debt free. I think they of all people will be the most sick about the cost of the long-term strategy.

Personally, its short-term pain for long-term gain.

Wins will fix our issue, but I'd rather win more than 8 games a year like we have for the past 4 years. The AFL can't get rid off us yet because of TV rights ect, so what better time to do this and get this over with. Supporters will come back when we win... that includes next year not just this year

[Dee1987 277]

Interesting little observation, nearly all the top sides coaches and quality coaches have all played in a flag in there playing days, aside from Mark Williams, Paul Roos, Rodney Eade and Alistair Clarkson.

Malthouse played in richmonds 1980 flag,

Matthews played in Hawthorns 76, 78 and 83 flags

Longmirue played in Norths 96 and 99

Sheedy Richmond 67, 73, 74

Eade Hawthorn 78, 83, 86

Worsfold 92,94

Obviously goes to show how much it helps having someone who was from that experience of being in a successful era and winning a flag. Daniher, Bailey, and Neeld. Daniher obviously never played in a flag at Essendon but was a good player until injured, but Bailey and Neeld weren't much!

[P-man 13,366]

I think Neeld's hardest team to play against was his end goal, ie the end result of his strategy.

I dont think it's entirely fair to be using a goal in 3 years half way through his contract, particularly considering that his investment into long-term picks (Hogan, Barry, Toumpas) wouldn't be included.

Personally I dont think there is another solution. I think he i a good coach and I like his strategy.

I think the biggest cause of our poor performance has been due to the players; they dont have AFL level skills or fitness and are lazy.

The board will make their decision on what is best for the club and with PJ are in the best position to judge. People shouldn't be commenting that they should make the right decision and get rid of MN just because that's their personal view.

They will obviously weigh up where we are at, what MN's strategy is short-term and long-term, and the consequences of getting rid of him - financially and functionally (ie caretaker, and new coaches out there).

The majority of the board were elected by Jim and have played an active role in getting the club debt free. I think they of all people will be the most sick about the cost of the long-term strategy.

Personally, its short-term pain for long-term gain.

Wins will fix our issue, but I'd rather win more than 8 games a year like we have for the past 4 years. The AFL can't get rid off us yet because of TV rights ect, so what better time to do this and get this over with. Supporters will come back when we win... that includes next year not just this year

The new tv rights deal isn't exactly far away..

My confidence in the Board isn't exactly sky high either, but I will accept PJ's judgement and decision, whatever that may be.

I can somewhat accept the argument that we don't know whether Neeld is a good coach yet, even if I may not agree with it. PJ himself said the Neeld needs a bit more fresh air, and he's certainly had no fairytale beginning as far as external pressures. Neeld stated after the Richmond match, "I can coach now". It was then followed up by the performance against Fremantle. But still, I can accept that argument.

But how you can actually say, " I think he is a good coach and I like his strategy", is beyond me. On what possible basis? A statement like that to me screams blind faith, which is a dangerous position.

[bing181 9,029]

You can't be for real. The culture is terrible, it is toxic, no player wants in, many in the team want out.

You keep saying it, but have nothing whatsoever to back it up. On the other hand, all reports on here from those who've had direct contact with the players contradict what you're saying.

Perhaps go and read the thread re the other night's meeting between Neeld, Craig, Jones and supporters.

[Generation dee 1,336]

You keep saying it, but have nothing whatsoever to back it up. On the other hand, all reports on here from those who've had direct contact with the players contradict what you're saying.

Perhaps go and read the thread re the other night's meeting between Neeld, Craig, Jones and supporters.

Bingo!

[Clark_Kent 315]

Josh Mahoney, Leigh Brown both played in flags as did Byrnes and Dawes. What's the point?

Interesting little observation, nearly all the top sides coaches and quality coaches have all played in a flag in there playing days, aside from Mark Williams, Paul Roos, Rodney Eade and Alistair Clarkson.

Malthouse played in richmonds 1980 flag,

Matthews played in Hawthorns 76, 78 and 83 flags

Longmirue played in Norths 96 and 99

Sheedy Richmond 67, 73, 74

Eade Hawthorn 78, 83, 86

Worsfold 92,94



Obviously goes to show how much it helps having someone who was from that experience of being in a successful era and winning a flag. Daniher, Bailey, and Neeld. Daniher obviously never played in a flag at Essendon but was a good player until injured, but Bailey and Neeld weren't much!

[jazza 1,323]

gnf

list all your FACTS in order , no dilly dallying just list your FACTS and let the posters digest your FACTS

and lets see if we can agree on some of them, no bs just FACTS

[PJ_12345 1,098]

Interesting little observation, nearly all the top sides coaches and quality coaches have all played in a flag in there playing days, aside from Mark Williams, Paul Roos, Rodney Eade and Alistair Clarkson.

Malthouse played in richmonds 1980 flag,

Matthews played in Hawthorns 76, 78 and 83 flags

Longmirue played in Norths 96 and 99

Sheedy Richmond 67, 73, 74

Eade Hawthorn 78, 83, 86

Worsfold 92,94

Obviously goes to show how much it helps having someone who was from that experience of being in a successful era and winning a flag. Daniher, Bailey, and Neeld. Daniher obviously never played in a flag at Essendon but was a good player until injured, but Bailey and Neeld weren't much!

You forgot the two best coaches currently in the AFL, Brad and Chris Scott... both played in Brisbane's 2001 and 2002 premership winning team.

In the case of MN, thats why he has Craig who has played 319 games in SNAF + 61 games at VFL [Pre AFL], captian, 11 State of Origins, was assistant coach/fitness advisor for Adeliade in 2 premerships, coached them to a minor premership/5 consequitive finals and been involved with fitness at an Olympic level (Cycling team). Again, hasn't won a premership in his playing days but has "that experience of being in a successful era".

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

I think Neeld's hardest team to play against was his end goal, ie the end result of his strategy. What the. So he lied? I am not sure what you are saying but we are the easiest to beat, most mentally weak team I have ever seen.

I dont think it's entirely fair to be using a goal in 3 years half way through his contract, particularly considering that his investment into long-term picks (Hogan, Barry, Toumpas) wouldn't be included. Every team has players the recruit for the future. So what. None of these players are proven...... though Hogan does excite.

Personally I dont think there is another solution. I think he i a good coach and I like his strategy. What strategy?

I think the biggest cause of our poor performance has been due to the players; they dont have AFL level skills or fitness and are lazy. Getting the players up, building confidence, self belief, fitness, skills this is all the coaches responsibility. Remember 26 of the 42 are Neelds recruits. These are his hand picked troops.

The board will make their decision on what is best for the club and with PJ are in the best position to judge. People shouldn't be commenting that they should make the right decision and get rid of MN just because that's their personal view.

They will obviously weigh up where we are at, what MN's strategy is short-term and long-term, and the consequences of getting rid of him - financially and functionally (ie caretaker, and new coaches out there).

The majority of the board were elected by Jim and have played an active role in getting the club debt free. I think they of all people will be the most sick about the cost of the long-term strategy. It must kill them that their hard work has so quickly and easily been undone. These disgraceful performances were never part of the plan. The on-filed disaster has created our off field disaster.

Personally, its short-term pain for long-term gain. No this is short term pain creating ever bigger long term pain. We are now in survival mode, aspirations of premierships must be put on hold as all effort must now go into survival. You can forget about another big budget recruit. Not only would they not want to come to our toxic team, we simply can't afford now.

Wins will fix our issue, but I'd rather win more than 8 games a year like we have for the past 4 years. The AFL can't get rid off us yet because of TV rights ect, so what better time to do this and get this over with. Supporters will come back when we win... that includes next year not just this year. We have 2 years or they will merge, dissolve or relocate us in time for the next broadcasting contract. Negotiations for this start in 2 years.

Mate I wish I agreed with any part of this but my views are polar opposites.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

The new tv rights deal isn't exactly far away..

My confidence in the Board isn't exactly sky high either, but I will accept PJ's judgement and decision, whatever that may be.

I can somewhat accept the argument that we don't know whether Neeld is a good coach yet, even if I may not agree with it. PJ himself said the Neeld needs a bit more fresh air, and he's certainly had no fairytale beginning as far as external pressures. Neeld stated after the Richmond match, "I can coach now". It was then followed up by the performance against Fremantle. But still, I can accept that argument.

But how you can actually say, " I think he is a good coach and I like his strategy", is beyond me. On what possible basis? A statement like that to me screams blind faith, which is a dangerous position.

It's not blind faith. I formed my opinion from his track record at varying levels of footy - particulary at Collingwood.

I like his long-term strategy. I've agreed with all of his changes (what I've listed prior). Its what I would have done (have had no coaching experience btw), and what I think the club needs.

I don't think we have seen his full capacity to coach. Dawes was out at the start of the season, some players were sick, now Silvia, Clark, Grimes, Trengrove, Viney, Toumpas, Watts, Tommy Mac have all been out.

I'd personally like to see what Neeld can do next year... wheather he last last long will be the biggest factor. Either way the list will be in better shape than he got it. Fitness and skill wise... but who knows in regards to effort (considering currently under Neeld and previously under Bailey).

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

You keep saying it, but have nothing whatsoever to back it up. On the other hand, all reports on here from those who've had direct contact with the players contradict what you're saying.

Perhaps go and read the thread re the other night's meeting between Neeld, Craig, Jones and supporters.

What? You mean the reports from the media department of our club. What else are they going to say. These reports mean nothing, they are propaganda.