Time to go Mark Neeld

[Guest]

This furphy is getting to be yet another Demonland reality that has no basis in fact. Not directed at you per se, but what the players, coaches and staff have repeatedly said, is that we've been training and aiming to play the same way over the whole pre-season and into the season. Nothing has changed.

Garland's comment above is in regards to Neeld (and the other FD staff) sheltering them from the external stresses, so that they could just concentrate on playing. It has nothing to do with a change in directives to the players or the game plan.

Compare Garlo's quote with that speech and get back to me.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Why can't we get out players to put on nearly 20 kgs in two years; what's wrong with our development; I guess you could see from this kid when he went to Collingwood he had the body that looked like it would develop quickly, bit like Cale Morton.

I'm just interested in knowing how the other clubs know how to do this.

[bing181 9,219]

Compare Garlo's quote with that speech and get back to me.

??? There's nothing in what Garland said that contradicts anything there. On the other hand, there's plenty in what you're implying Garland said that contradicts what Garland said.

As in the other thread: you're quoting selectively and in doing so, misrepresenting the meaning. It's clear in everything that has been said from within the club, there has been no change in game plan or approach, only in execution and intent on the field.

Edited April 25, 2013 by bing181

[Dr. Gonzo 24,213]

So good Dr - let's summarise:I think we both agree that fitness is important, but I suspect we disagree on how to obtain that fitness and probably on the type of fitness.You claim Neeld is trying to introduce a modern game plan - I say it is too complicated and has only been used by one club (where Neeld came from) and even there it is being changed.I offer the Geelong style as a much more simple, effective and proven plan, but it does require very good skills - shouldn't Neeld be emphasising skills anyway?In the end it's all about scores - the team with the higher score on the day wins - isn't that what our game is all about and isn't that a reasonable measure of where the two teams on the day are at, in a relative sense, and including fitness, skills, coaching etc?Also, I don't have preconceived views, my position is based on observation and the last 18 months or so haven't given me any confidence in MFC.I think you can now see why I don't rate Neeld.

Elite skills and elite fitness are clearly not just desirable but required to be successful in the modern game. One without the other is pointless.

If I referred to "game plan" earlier I was wrong - as I said in my last post think more about Neeld trying to implement modern tactics requiring greater fitness. Of course the Geelong side has great skills but they also have and require top level fitness to succeed.

All of this is a bit of a sidetrack to the initial point though, which was that you said "stats show we were clearly fitter under Bailey and have gone backwards under Neeld". I disputed this and still do. Our fitness under Bailey was atrocious.

Edited April 25, 2013 by Dr. Gonzo

[old55 23,561]

As in the other thread: you're quoting selectively and in doing so, misrepresenting the meaning. It's clear in everything that has been said from within the club, there has been no change in game plan or approach, only in execution and intent on the field.

That's not correct - for a start off in both the first two games we continuously played with an extra man in the backline, sometimes two, whereas in the games 3 and 4 we went man-on-man all over the ground and only rarely pushed an extra man back when the opposition got a run-on - and it didn't really help when we did - we played our best footy man-on-man.

[Adam The God 30,239]

Why can't we get out players to put on nearly 20 kgs in two years; what's wrong with our development; I guess you could see from this kid when he went to Collingwood he had the body that looked like it would develop quickly, bit like Cale Morton.

I'm just interested in knowing how the other clubs know how to do this.

He's an arrogant little fella, Seedsman. I used to coach his brother and saw quite a bit of him around the traps. He didn't look that built today, but seems to be doing well though and is not shown up in his contested footy.

Edited April 25, 2013 by AdamFarr

[Hardnut 327]

Elite skills and elite fitness are clearly not just desirable but required to be successful in the modern game. One without the other is pointless.

If I referred to "game plan" earlier I was wrong - as I said in my last post think more about Neeld trying to implement modern tactics requiring greater fitness. Of course the Geelong side has great skills but they also have and require top level fitness to succeed.

All of this is a bit of a sidetrack to the initial point though, which was that you said "stats show we were clearly fitter under Bailey and have gone backwards under Neeld". I disputed this and still do. Our fitness under Bailey was atrocious.

You talk about 'modern tactics' as though they are something new which Neeld has brought to MFC. I see it as the reverse, which Geelong has

clearly shown - they play a simple, logical game which surely must be seen as the 'modern game' given their success. Neeld is out of touch. As for fitness, that is open to interpretation, but I'll take a winning score anytime as proof of a side which has their total act together.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

He's an arrogant little fella, Seedsman. I used to coach his brother and saw quite a bit of him around the traps. He didn't look that built today, but seems to be doing well though and is not shown up in his contested footy.

I find it quite extraordinary that an 18 year old can lift his body weight from 69kgs to 87kgs in two pre seasons, more than 25% of his body weight.

It seems that there are some clubs who have the happy knack of doing this, West Coast, Essendon, Collingwood, Hawthorn, Adelaide, Brisbane and Geelong spring to mind. Funny that most of them have won flags too.

[Guest]

??? There's nothing in what Garland said that contradicts anything there. On the other hand, there's plenty in what you're implying Garland said that contradicts what Garland said.

As in the other thread: you're quoting selectively and in doing so, misrepresenting the meaning. It's clear in everything that has been said from within the club, there has been no change in game plan or approach, only in execution and intent on the field.

I would have thought there was a pretty big difference between 'giving blokes a licence to just go out and play' vs. 'everyone has a role in our structure... if the bloke beside you can't do that (earn trust) to a level I set, he won't play.'

I'd better be careful. If I have misquoted him, I'm in for a world of hurt.

[Hardnut 327]

I have been reflecting on our posts Dr Gonzo - I think we are saying the same thing, but seeing it through different eyes.

Fact is that we performed better under Bailey and Daniher, but as I said, I am not interested in such comparisons as they have no current significance.

MFC should be using a club like Geelong as their measuring stick, given Geelong's recent record. Personally, I put Geelong's performance down to skills development, apart from the obvious other factors such as fitness, team bonding and understanding etc., which all clubs should be aiming for. (Having our own VFL side would also help!).

I don't believe Neeld has what MFC needs - I believe his appointment was wrong and nothing I have seen has changed my mind - IMO, MFC has no choice but to replace him, whatever the cost. (Keeping him will cost us more in the long term.)

Cheers and Go Dees!

Edited April 25, 2013 by Hardnut

[Dr. Gonzo 24,213]

You talk about 'modern tactics' as though they are something new which Neeld has brought to MFC.

They are. Bailey had no idea about, or didn't care about them.

I see it as the reverse, which Geelong hasclearly shown - they play a simple, logical game which surely must be seen as the 'modern game' given their success. Neeld is out of touch.

You dont think Geelong implements any of the tactics of the modern game (both offensive and defensive) which require top level fitness? If you believe that you've got no idea about how footy is played these days.

As for fitness, that is open to interpretation, but I'll take a winning score anytime as proof of a side which has their total act together.

Fitness is not open to interpretation, it is cut & dry. You said as much initially when you said "stats show we were fitter under Bailey and have gone backwards under Neeld." Just admit you were wrong and get over it, it doesn't necessarily mean you're wrong about Neeld being the right man as coach only that you're wrong about this particular aspect.

Edited April 25, 2013 by Dr. Gonzo

[Dr. Gonzo 24,213]

I have been reflecting on our posts Dr Gonzo - I think we are saying the same thing, but seeing it through different eyes.

Fact is that we performed better under Bailey and Daniher, but as I said, I am not interested in such comparisons as they have no current significance.

MFC should be using a club like Geelong as their measuring stick, given Geelong's recent record. Personally, I put Geelong's performance down to skills development, apart from the obvious other factors such as fitness, team bonding and understanding etc., which all clubs should be aiming for. (Having our own VFL side would also help!).

I don't believe Neeld has what MFC needs - I believe his appointment was wrong and nothing I have seen has changed my mind - IMO, MFC has no choice but to replace him, whatever the cost. (Keeping him will cost us more in the long term.)

Cheers and Go Dees!

Fair enough. I think Neeld is clearly on the back foot, frankly I don't know if he is the right man nor whether he has been given enough time to make an accurate judgment. I think the list was in poor shape when he took over despite all our high picks. I think our side had a pathetic fitness base. I think the culture of the club and playing group was very poor. The club agreed which is why they gave him a mandate to change the culture of the club. I don't think its fair to expect he would achieve that in 18 months.

The loss to Essendon was clearly horrible but not without precedent in our game. Essendon lost by 160 points to Hawthorn in 1992 and won the flag the next year.

I am willing to give Neeld this year to see whether he can make improvements and another draft to see if he can improve our midfield clearly our biggest weakness.

The only thing I will say is that if the rumours of rifts between Neeld and certain players are true they need to be sorted out yesterday. That may mean Neeld goes or maybe the players in question but if it is the whole playing group (which I sincerely doubt) then his position is untenable.

I also would be reluctant to sack Neeld and go with another rookie coach. If we have an experienced coach lined up then you can start thinking about replacing him. But at this stage I'd rather see Harrington, Royal, Rawlings, Mahoney and even Viney and McLardy go before Neeld does.

[Hardnut 327]

Thanks to the modern world of computers, we have crossed over posts Dr!

Dr. Gonzo, on 25 Apr 2013 - 20:22, said:

They are. Bailey had no idea about, or didn't care about them.

You dont think Geelong implements any of the tactics of the modern game (both offensive and defensive) which require top level fitness? If you believe that you've got no idea about how footy is played these days.

Fitness is not open to interpretation, it is cut & dry. You said as much initially when you said "stats show we were fitter under Bailey and have gone backwards under Neeld." Just admit you were wrong and get over it, it doesn't necessarily mean you're wrong about Neeld being the right man as coach only that you're wrong about this particular aspect.

With respect Dr, you are wrong, or have totally misunderstood my comments on Bailey and Geelong.

Fitness, as I indicated in an earlier post, has many aspects, including how to obtain what is required for a successful modern AFL team.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,213]

Fitness, as I indicated in an earlier post, has many aspects, including how to obtain what is required for a successful modern AFL team.

Can you expand on this? Because it makes no sense to me whatsoever.

[Hardnut 327]

Ever get the feeling we can't win Dr? We appear to agree on many more things than first appeared.

However, I do believe Neeld should go asap, but I agree we certainly should not have another rookie coach. I also believe that if we replace the Senior Coach we may resolve any issues with the Assistants.

[Hardnut 327]

Can you expand on this? Because it makes no sense to me whatsoever.

An athlete can train for many different forms of fitness. Clearly, a general level of fitness is applicable to all of these. However, let me ask you a question - which form of fitness do you think would be most applicable for an AFL player?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,213]

An athlete can train for many different forms of fitness. Clearly, a general level of fitness is applicable to all of these. However, let me ask you a question - which form of fitness do you think would be most applicable for an AFL player?

It used to be endurance however now it is the ability to burst for 5-7 minutes, recover for 1-2 minutes and then go again for the whole 2 hours which is key. This is what Geelong do which is why they have so many players rotating through the midfield.

[Hardnut 327]

Dr. Gonzo, on 25 Apr 2013 - 21:09, said:

It used to be endurance however now it is the ability to burst for 5-7 minutes, recover for 1-2 minutes and then go again for the whole 2 hours which is key. This is what Geelong do which is why they have so many players rotating through the midfield.

I believe that has been the case for a few years Dr - now what form of fitness training have we seen at MFC in the last 2 years?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,213]

I believe that has been the case for a few years Dr - now what form of fitness training have we seen at MFC in the last 2 years?

You tell me, as far as I'm aware it's been geared towards this. Whatever it was geared towards under Bailey they were incapable of putting it into practice.

[tonatopia 278]

28 pages debating the sacking of neeld. Where there's smoke.....

That 12 goal quarter of footy told us 2 things;

1. We have the talent

2. Gws were spent

Let's see how we go against the lions, who's list is the equal of ours.

The players, supporters and administration are doing their best to "buy in", but he is making it bloody hard.

Every game is a big game for neeld. It is still one minute to midnight.

Ps. To think garland says he is coaching aswell as he ever has, makes you wonder how bad he must have been.

[rpfc 28,405]

Anyone else thinking of pushing for a 10 contract for Neeld just to spite tonatopia's inanely gleeful ramblings about a bloke losing his job?

He has an uphill climb so just shut up already and hope he pulls it out of the fire, because if he does then your Demons are doing well.

[tonatopia 278]

Anyone else thinking of pushing for a 10 contract for Neeld just to spite tonatopia's inanely gleeful ramblings about a bloke losing his job?

He has an uphill climb so just shut up already and hope he pulls it out of the fire, because if he does then your Demons are doing well.

Mate, just look at our performance under Neeld. Do I have to say any more. Compare that to Malthouse at Carlton in just a few games or Hinkley at Port Adelaide.

And don't give me, its the players fault. It is wearing very very thin. Neeld aint up to it. I think 26 rounds of footy has proven me right. But if you want to hold onto your little delusional fantasy for another 2 years, be my guest, just dont tell me to swallow it. Let see how we go against a similar side like Brisbane. Another 10+ goal defeat is not acceptable. Full Stop.

[daisycutter 29,613]

Why can't we get out players to put on nearly 20 kgs in two years; what's wrong with our development; I guess you could see from this kid when he went to Collingwood he had the body that looked like it would develop quickly, bit like Cale Morton.

I'm just interested in knowing how the other clubs know how to do this.

supplements, robbie??

[tonatopia 278]

Compare Garlo's quote with that speech and get back to me.

Neeld

"I'm gonna drive you mad, I havnt got a problem with that"

"I have no interest in the past"

Well done proffessor nutjob, successful on all counts, now step down.

[rpfc 28,405]

Mate, just look at our performance under Neeld. Do I have to say any more. Compare that to Malthouse at Carlton in just a few games or Hinkley at Port Adelaide.

And don't give me, its the players fault. It is wearing very very thin. Neeld aint up to it. I think 26 rounds of footy has proven me right. But if you want to hold onto your little delusional fantasy for another 2 years, be my guest, just dont tell me to swallow it. Let see how we go against a similar side like Brisbane. Another 10+ goal defeat is not acceptable. Full Stop.

My issue is not with your doubts over Neeld - we all have them.

It is with your macabre glee with his failures so far that is making many feel uneasy.

I am fine with people parroting perfect prognostications, I have trouble accepting your, and a few others, intemperate love of watching our club getting punished just so you can have your point proved.

We are all Demons.

Start acting like it.