In my view Neeld has come in with exactly the right idea (fix the culture and instigate hardness) but has not had the communication skills to deliver the message in a way that is clear and brings the players on the journey with him. That has been his downfall.

The interim they choose should be the person they think can galvanise the players the most in the second half of the year. With a new direction, galvanised group and potentially winnable games second half of the year Saints, Dogs x2, Lions, Suns and Giants the feel of a group could change very quickly.

I wonder what happens if heaven forbid we win today (that would be the MFC thing to do).

A Williams/McDonald led coaching panel would excite most I would think.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/shane-crawford-explains-what-melbourne-must-do-to-get-the-club-back-on-the-right-track/story-e6frf3e3-1226655279133#.Uaqu15EaySM

Interesting read. Found myself agreeing with quite a lot of it.

On one hand he says whats the point having a forwardline of Clark, Dawes and Hogan if you don't have the mids. Next point throw money at Buddy, and Harry Taylor.

Fix the midfield and sell the message resonated though.

Neeld is cooked.

I am circumspect about both Williams and Eade, who base their games around freeing up loose men. I would prefer Thompson, who is the Geelong architect. I would accept Matthews, who is all about contact footy and who commands respect and even though he has been out of the game would attract savvy offsiders.

Roos has said no.

Melbourne wants Matthews, but don't think they can get him. So they are currently working on Thompson and Eade.

Good post Ben. Welcome back. Before leaving you made a comments about initially being supportive of Neelds decision to cut Moloney etc but that perhaps in hindsight underestimating the impact of on the team of having their mates leave. I agree with that and if more to were to go at years end it would be difficult to repair.

As i have said a few times Neeld will go because in AFL/VFL history coaches who have these sort of hidings always get the sack, always. And Neeld will be no different. I also feel sorry for him particularly as as he says his mandate was to change the culture and that's what he is trying to do. Well the board (and Garry Lyon) should share the blame but to be hones both he and the board were pretty naive to imagine it would be possible to endure such losses and not come unstuck. He should have realised that he needed progressions and if that meant keeping a Moloney then so be it.

I agreed with cutting Moloney at the time but i also perhaps underestimated the impact on team mates but given our biggest weakness was clearly our midfield (the most crucial element in modern footy) a bit of pragmatism might have been in order and Neeld might have helped himself and the team if he had found a way to get Moloney on the same page.

Good post Ben. Welcome back. Before leaving you made a comments about initially being supportive of Neelds decision to cut Moloney etc but that perhaps in hindsight underestimating the impact of on the team of having their mates leave. I agree with that and if more to were to go at years end it would be difficult to repair.

As i have said a few times Neeld will go because in AFL/VFL history coaches who have these sort of hidings always get the sack, always. And Neeld will be no different. I also feel sorry for him particularly as as he says his mandate was to change the culture and that's what he is trying to do. Well the board (and Garry Lyon) should share the blame but to be hones both he and the board were pretty naive to imagine it would be possible to endure such losses and not come unstuck. He should have realised that he needed progressions and if that meant keeping a Moloney then so be it.

I agreed with cutting Moloney at the time but i also perhaps underestimated the impact on team mates but given our biggest weakness was clearly our midfield (the most crucial element in modern footy) a bit of pragmatism might have been in order and Neeld might have helped himself and the team if he had found a way to get Moloney on the same page.

Balanced response IMO Binman. The reality is that footy is not an exact science and mistakes are made. It's what we learn from them as a club. On this, would love to see James Mac back because it would signal an acknowledgement that we did not treat him well.

Nice one Crawf .

It's the first article that offers any constructive solutions to our issue .

Agree with it all .

Is there ANY hope of getting Lethal?

If we get Lethal I will be very ,very happy .

Biffen, if we could get Lethal it would be extraordinary.

Despite my strong opinion that Neeld must be sacked ASAP, I do feel sorry for him. He did not start the rot. He has given his all, and the decisions he has made have been what he thinks is best for the club. He will be bitterly disappointed. However, he simply was the wrong man for the job, he was a poor choice. He does not have the personal management or motivational skills required

I am disappointed that this story appears to have leaked. This is unprofessional. How the board managers this will be a big test for them. It is important that his dismissal is done with the highest level of compassion and professionalism. They appear to be off to a bad start.

For all my efforts at shooting you down, it's only been due to no respect being shown for neeld and his efforts at implementing that cultural change that the board asked him to. Now, this club has effectively black marked another coach (along with bailey) incompetent. Which is frustrating as neeld has shown at collingwood and previous, that he is a very competent coach. Perhaps he was too heavy handed, perhaps the board told him to cut Moloney etc. we won't know that. But I think it's safe to say that whoever has leaked this information must be held accountable, that this playing group still needs to work harder, or individually they will go down as unfulfilled and mediocre. If this is accurate, best of luck neeldy.

But competent at lower leagues or as a assistant does not mean competent as a AFL senior coach which he has not shown himself competent at all.

Biffen, if we could get Lethal it would be extraordinary.

Matthews has not been in the coaching caper for 5 years. If possible I don't think it would be the right move.

Matthews has not been in the coaching caper for 5 years. If possible I don't think it would be the right move.

More than anything, we need a leader of men. That's what he is. Then you have tactically astute assistants.

Nice one Crawf .

It's the first article that offers any constructive solutions to our issue .

Agree with it all .

Is there ANY hope of getting Lethal?

If we get Lethal I will be very ,very happy .

These are my thoughts exactly. How refreshing to hear someone offering some constructive ideas instead of taking the easy option and writing cheap stories about the 'basket case' club.

The AFL media mirrors the sport well for mine...has much too high a view of itself when on a world scale it is a blip on the radar...and more constructive reporting might actually help improve the game and see the standard rise to something that can justify the claims to being an 'elite' professional sport.

Whether people agree with what Crawford says or not , at least it offers a constructive opinion.

No one can categorically say he can't coach, or he is incompetent. We very easily forget some match day moves he has made that were inspired at the time (watts back last year, garland forward, Dunn defensive) but ill agree with his man management blowing up in his face. As I said in my last post, no one can confirm or deny If cam schwab or others came to neeld and said we need to cut Moloney and rivers, and be harder on players.

Mathews with say Scott Burns and a succession plan would be fine by me.

More than anything, we need a leader of men. That's what he is. Then you have tactically astute assistants.

Disagree. We need someone who can develop and motivate a young group. At 62 years of age does he know how to lead a bunch of mainly 18-22 year olds? My understanding was that was one of his issues towards the end at Brisbane.

Williams for mine.

I wouldn't mind Williams but I'm staggered that you think Leigh Matthews couldn't motivate a group of young men.

Matthews has not been in the coaching caper for 5 years. If possible I don't think it would be the right move.

His record alone indicates differently.

I believe our players all speak plain English ,even the 18-22 year olds .

He is the most successful player/coach since Barassi.

He is the same age as Malthouse and he has new teeth.

It would be awesome.

The bloke reeks of success. And new teeth can only enhance that.

On these points PJ:

"Has fixed our FF issue by recruiting Clark and Dawes"

We certainly needed to add some size to our forward line, however we have to question the amount spent on both players. Certainly Clark has shown his worth and his versatility, able to play as a Ruck and even as a tall midfielder like Roughead does for the Hawks, but he has had injury problems. Dawes is a different one - he signed a 3 year deal for around 280k at the end of 2011, and Bucks was willing to let him go at the end of his first year as Coach, which given how hard it is to find a quality key forward is worth noting. If Bucks didn't feel that he was worth 280k a year that doesn't say much for us giving him 500+ for four years does it?

"Got rid of dead weight off our list"

You could certainly argue that Bate had had long enough at our club and make the case that it was time to cut the losses with Morton. I'd can't buy that Martin, Gysberts and Petterd were dead weight. In particularly Martin and Gysberts that were both young and had shown a bit. Lucas Cook's delisting was ridiculous, as key position players take time, and as an U18 All Australian he'd shown plenty as a junior. Given Clark's injury history keeping Cook on the list and continuing to develop him was a no-brainer. The Moloney and Rivers ones have been discussed to death but neither particularly wanted to leave and were pushed out.

I'm not sure the mass changes constitute getting "dead weight" off the list.

"Recruited premership players from other clubs to offer leadership and direction"

Byrnes who spent nearly all of last year in the VFL and Dawes who as discussed above was thrown out the door by the Pies. Add to this the recruiting of Rodan, Pederson and Gillies, none of who played consistent AFL football in 2012. I'd argue that these players were not upgrades on those they replaced, and that while they can provide off-field leadership (although only Byrnes and Dawes would do this), they'll provide very little on-field leadership playing at Casey.

"Invested in new future players (Hogan, Barry, Toumpas)"

Hard to argue that there has been a strong investment in youth when Byrnes, Dawes, Pederson, Gillies and Rodan were brought in. There hasn't been any "tough" decisions to trade players away for youth the way Bailey had to (McLean, Johnstone) - we traded 3 and 13 for Hogan, Barry and 20, then used 20 to get Dawes. Essentially out of last years draft we had Hogan (3), Toumpas (4), Barry (13). That's investing in the future just by using our picks to draft players, nothing more.

"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"

While Misson has an excellent reputation, on the surface we have gone backwards in how we run out games compared to under Bailey. That said, Misson's hiring was part of the extra $1.5M in football department spending that Neeld has had compared to the year before he took over. Certainly with that much additional spending you'd expect to see much better results (in both fitness and on-field play).

In addition I'd suggest in the last 18 months we've seen a regression in skill level, a substandard game plan, a fracturing of the playing group and the appointment of two Captains way before they were ready. It's hardly a surprise that the on-field results have been as bad as they are. I believe a change has to be made, and in the next few weeks I'm sure it will be.

You've raised some good points - particularly about Pederson and Gillies.

But I think you've made the mistake when looking at our experienced recruits of not taking into consideration their teams original list. For example with Dawes, at the end of the day there was no room for him at Collingwood - not with Cloak and Lynch.

He is worth the money, and easily in our 22. Same with Byrnes.

Also I think you've drawn a bi of a long bow by saying it was a no brainer to keep Cook... There is a reason he never played a single AFL game. Will never be up to AFL standard and I'd rather move him on to make room for someone else.

From what I heard he showed quite litterally 0 improvement.

Haha trading Travis wasn't a though decision. For me it was a no brainer. Interesting to note our different views here on no brainers.

The players elected their captains, I don't believe alot of this "fracturing of the playing group" - Moloney left because he got burnt and Rivers wanted to play finals - the rest is just rubbish but feel free to show me evidence that points to otherwise.

People want change because they think a new coach can get more out of this list... at the end of the day you cant polish a turd. I dont think anyone else can get more out of this lazy, and sub standard AFL list, until next year. They need another preseason to clearly get up their fitness levels, for new recruits to come in (about when Toumpas can play properly) and where we can trade for some established players.

Get a group of players minds right and amazing things can start to happen. I genuinely believe that if this is his last game that the club can start moving forward from the last half dozen years where it completely lost its way.

Maybe we need Nanny McPhee.

Nice one Crawf .

It's the first article that offers any constructive solutions to our issue .

Agree with it all .

Is there ANY hope of getting Lethal?

If we get Lethal I will be very ,very happy .

Lethal will be our Barassi (if that makes any sense as Barassi is our Barassi!). When I say that, I mean he will be our Barassi when RDB went to Sydney. Lethal to be honest has probably been out of the game a bit too long, is on the wrong side of sixty and would be at the club for no more than 3 years. However, he would be the hard but fair voice we need right now. Some may say 'Isn't Neeld that already?'. I would tend to disagree. Neeld, for all his good intentions, didn't have the runs on the board to get that kind of commitment from the players. A lot of the hard man act was just that, an act. If the players dare question if Lethal would actually do the things he is demanding from them, I would suggest the answer would be a resounding yes.

I think Leigh would be smart enough to realize that this would be the kind of job where he would walk in and leave the place better than he found it. The guy is well over community retirement age and I don't think he would want 10 more years of stress and strain in his life so therefore, he would be short term at best. However, he is the short term we need.

This isn't a Collingwood or Brisbane where he got the absolute best out of underachieving lists. This job is to turn around a complete culture. Stuff game plan. Just get these blokes to have a bit of pride in themselves and to get the best out of themselves. Establish that first and we are on the start of the road to recovery.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/shane-crawford-explains-what-melbourne-must-do-to-get-the-club-back-on-the-right-track/story-e6frf3e3-1226655279133#.Uaqu15EaySM

Interesting read. Found myself agreeing with quite a lot of it.

Shane Crawford makes some great points.

The club does not sell itself enough. It sits and waits, and pretty much has since Norm left.

THE MFC IS A GREAT CLUB.

FORCE IT UPON PEOPLE, make some enemies to get what WE need (Ross Lyon to Fremantle).

Do you think the shockers care what people think of the way the deal was done?

Stand on a few toes MFC. Until your hear a cracking sound if necessary.

So from the last couple of pages and rumours its either choco and macca will be a coaching combo with macca as the midfield coach I assume or Leigh Matthews with possibly Scott burns as his succession plan.

Is that right?

Just heard on AFL game day, Possibility of Mark Williams and James McDonald packaging up and coming to Melbourne. They went on to say it would be well taken and a good sell to the members.

This would be the best thing to happen to the MFC since the 64 premiership.