Time to go Mark Neeld

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

Can those that want immediate removal of Neeld please tell me why we would be so set back by not giving him another, say, three months?

Please read my previous posts. I have spelt these reasons out again and again.

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

Can those that want immediate removal of Neeld please tell me why we would be so set back by not giving him another, say, three months?

Please read my previous posts. I have spelt these reasons out again and again.

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

Can those that want immediate removal of Neeld please tell me why we would be so set back by not giving him another, say, three months?

Please read my previous posts. I have spelt these reasons out again and again.

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

I had a quck look GNF

Please read my previous posts. I have spelt these reasons out again and again.

Maybe you should inform the club the decision has been made

In all seriousness, what differnece does it make if Neeld coaches out the year?? An intrim coach is going to do no better or worse the Neeld.

Edited April 30, 2013 by Unleash Hell

[Tricky 337]

I had a quck look GNF

Maybe you should inform the club the decision has been made

In all seriousness, what differnece does it make if Neeld coaches out the year?? An intrim coach is going to do no better or worse the Neeld.

Not that hard to understand really, depending on your viewpoint.

With a couple of assumptions:

1. Neeld is a really, really crap coach
2. The replacement coach is better than really, really crap

I can see how the "Neeld bashers" would see benefit in sooner rather than later.

The "Neeld apologists" on the other hand would probably not concede the given assumptions.

[bing181 8,335]

Not that hard to understand really, depending on your viewpoint.

With a couple of assumptions:

1. Neeld is a really, really crap coach
2. The replacement coach is better than really, really crap

I can see how the "Neeld bashers" would see benefit in sooner rather than later.

The "Neeld apologists" on the other hand would probably not concede the given assumptions.

They're assumptions, but you're overlooking the one given:

1. The team is really really crap.

(for the moment ....)

[Tricky 337]

They're assumptions, but you're overlooking the one given:

1. The team is really really crap.

(for the moment ....)

Actually the assumptions belong to the bashers and apologists, not me.

You however are stating absolute fact - we suck. (for the moment ....)

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

Not that hard to understand really, depending on your viewpoint.

With a couple of assumptions:

1. Neeld is a really, really crap coach
2. The replacement coach is better than really, really crap

I can see how the "Neeld bashers" would see benefit in sooner rather than later.

The "Neeld apologists" on the other hand would probably not concede the given assumptions.

Haha fair enough

I like the idea of the club run on assumptions - Could explain a lot of things

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

Actually the assumptions belong to the bashers and apologists, not me.

You however are stating absolute fact - we suck. (for the moment ....)

So if we can't get any worse - why bother sacking the coach?

[rpfc 27,664]

Please read my previous posts. I have spelt these reasons out again and again.

Please read my previous posts. I have spelt these reasons out again and again.

Please read my previous posts. I have spelt these reasons out again and again.

The inference is that I haven't considered anything I have read as particularly compelling...

[Tricky 337]

Haha fair enough

I like the idea of the club run on assumptions - Could explain a lot of things

Well you know what they say about assumptions being the mother of all f' ups - would explain a lot.

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

I have no idea what point you are trying to make Tricky

[Hannibal 5,814]

I was in favour of shedding Moloney, but it was mainly due to how he played under Neeld. Yes, he's a flat track bully, yes he's no star, but he was a strong bodied clearance player that wasn't managed properly. He may have had one trick, but it was better than most of our mids who have no tricks. Neeld shoved Moloney out the door. It started when he convinced Moloney that due to the umpire balling up at stoppages in 4 seconds and not the 11 it previously took that he couldn't set up in time. Neeld enunciated this to supporters at a meet and greet day at AAMI. And clearly he ruined his 2012 with such negativity. Put simply, it's the coaches job to get the best out of each player. It's the coaches job to not only notice a player's weakness, but to learn how to best facilitate their strengths. Playing Moloney at Casey for 5 or 6 weeks is hardly what I call good management. And this was on the back of trying to turn him into a defensive half-forward. He was never going to play well in that role.

And for posters on here to insinuate that Moloney was a poor leader and even toxic around the club is amateurish self-serving guesswork to support a weak position. If you're outside the club how would you know ? I looked at the players after the match, such as Davey, Grimes and Jones pay him warm respect. He wouldn't have got into the leadership group in the first place if he was a terrible teammate. He took it upon himself to conduct preseason boxing clinics for the young players at Warrnambool for many years. But it's far too easy to pot him now, isn't it ? He wasn't perfect, but he'd be our second best mid and make life far easier for Jones and others if he was still around. And what about Neeld's spin about him leaving ? At least acknowledge you didn't have him in your plans and not the crap you dished up in the post match interview.

I said last week that Neeld has fractured the playing group and it's patently obvious he has. They don't play for him. They don't put in an effort as a collective for him. They don't run, chase, contest, or harass. They don't do the fundamentals. Players even constantly talk of "buying in". Yet I'm asked by luminaries on here, "why do you think that" ? How could you not ? After 27 games I've never seen worse buy in, or a more dispirited group. A poster on another site put it best when he said "They might play for Neeld intellectually (there's a scary thought) but they don't play for him emotionally." I couldn't have put it better. We've won 2 quarters out of 20 and even GWS have won 5.

For all our top 20 picks over the last 5 years we have the worst list in the league. It's mind-boggling what has happened to this club. I still believe that there's a core there that can turn the club around, but it will take "buy in" from the entire playing group and a proven coach.

[Bossdog 2,002]

Neeld says when he first came to the club......."It's going to take time to build this footy club"

D/Landers......."No it won't ...We have these great recruits"

Neeld says in 2013(2nd year)....."We have started building this footy club and are changing the culture and it takes time"

D/Landers........."No it won't....We have more recruits and Viney......"

After 5 games

D/Landers........."Sack the coach....Sack the coach.....Lets get Roos....Mathews....Clarkson..."Two who will never coach again.....I even saw someone want Malcolm Blight to come back....FMD

It must be a Gen y or Gen something or rather....Instant success or nothing....We want to play finals NOW

Lets not build a club and a footy side (which will take time) lets just sack everyone now...and start again and again and again and again .........You get the message.......

[Bitter but optimistic 21,561]

Neeld says when he first came to the club......."It's going to take time to build this footy club"

D/Landers......."No it won't ...We have these great recruits"

Neeld says in 2013(2nd year)....."We have started building this footy club and are changing the culture and it takes time"

D/Landers........."No it won't....We have more recruits and Viney......"

After 5 games

D/Landers........."Sack the coach....Sack the coach.....Lets get Roos....Mathews....Clarkson..."Two who will never coach again.....I even saw someone want Malcolm Blight to come back....FMD

It must be a Gen y or Gen something or rather....Instant success or nothing....We want to play finals NOW

Lets not build a club and a footy side (which will take time) lets just sack everyone now...and start again and again and again and again .........You get the message.......

The problem is Boss that a lot of us have given them 50 years. That is surely enough.

[stuie 7,374]

Neeld says when he first came to the club......."It's going to take time to build this footy club"

D/Landers......."No it won't ...We have these great recruits"

Neeld says in 2013(2nd year)....."We have started building this footy club and are changing the culture and it takes time"

D/Landers........."No it won't....We have more recruits and Viney......"

After 5 games

D/Landers........."Sack the coach....Sack the coach.....Lets get Roos....Mathews....Clarkson..."Two who will never coach again.....I even saw someone want Malcolm Blight to come back....FMD

It must be a Gen y or Gen something or rather....Instant success or nothing....We want to play finals NOW

Lets not build a club and a footy side (which will take time) lets just sack everyone now...and start again and again and again and again .........You get the message.......

We should be improving, not getting worse though.

Scoring/Disposals Comparison

2012

Ranked last in disposals

Ave losing margin 50

Percentage 67.49

2013

Ranked last in disposals

Aver losing margin 87.25

Percentage 57.16%

Neeld's "hardest team to play against" 2013

Ranked last in contested possessions

Ranked second last in clearances

Ranked last in team vs opponent contested possessions

Ranked 14th in tackles per game

Edited April 30, 2013 by stuie

[robbiefrom13 877]

I had a quck look GNF

Maybe you should inform the club the decision has been made

In all seriousness, what differnece does it make if Neeld coaches out the year?? An intrim coach is going to do no better or worse the Neeld.

"In all seriousness", do you suppose asserting something is an argument? It seems fairly likely that a different coach would do differently, and therefore to deny either "better or worse" is to take up what is at the very least a doubtful position. Your opinion here would need some sort of supporting arguments to warrant anyone taking it seriously...

[Bitter but optimistic 21,561]

I was in favour of shedding Moloney, but it was mainly due to how he played under Neeld. Yes, he's a flat track bully, yes he's no star, but he was a strong bodied clearance player that wasn't managed properly. He may have had one trick, but it was better than most of our mids who have no tricks. Neeld shoved Moloney out the door. It started when he convinced Moloney that due to the umpire balling up at stoppages in 4 seconds and not the 11 it previously took that he couldn't set up in time. Neeld enunciated this to supporters at a meet and greet day at AAMI. And clearly he ruined his 2012 with such negativity. Put simply, it's the coaches job to get the best out of each player. It's the coaches job to not only notice a player's weakness, but to learn how to best facilitate their strengths. Playing Moloney at Casey for 5 or 6 weeks is hardly what I call good management. And this was on the back of trying to turn him into a defensive half-forward. He was never going to play well in that role.

And for posters on here to insinuate that Moloney was a poor leader and even toxic around the club is amateurish self-serving guesswork to support a weak position. If you're outside the club how would you know ? I looked at the players after the match, such as Davey, Grimes and Jones pay him warm respect. He wouldn't have got into the leadership group in the first place if he was a terrible teammate. He took it upon himself to conduct preseason boxing clinics for the young players at Warrnambool for many years. But it's far too easy to pot him now, isn't it ? He wasn't perfect, but he'd be our second best mid and make life far easier for Jones and others if he was still around. And what about Neeld's spin about him leaving ? At least acknowledge you didn't have him in your plans and not the crap you dished up in the post match interview.

I said last week that Neeld has fractured the playing group and it's patently obvious he has. They don't play for him. They don't put in an effort as a collective for him. They don't run, chase, contest, or harass. They don't do the fundamentals. Players even constantly talk of "buying in". Yet I'm asked by luminaries on here, "why do you think that" ? How could you not ? After 27 games I've never seen worse buy in, or a more dispirited group. A poster on another site put it best when he said "They might play for Neeld intellectually (there's a scary thought) but they don't play for him emotionally." I couldn't have put it better. We've won 2 quarters out of 20 and even GWS have won 5.

For all our top 20 picks over the last 5 years we have the worst list in the league. It's mind-boggling what has happened to this club. I still believe that there's a core there that can turn the club around, but it will take "buy in" from the entire playing group and a proven coach.

Wasn't it also Moloney who used to present new players with a history of the MFC?

[Bossdog 2,002]

The problem is Boss that a lot of us have given them 50 years. That is surely enough.

I'm in that catorgary ....But Neeld has had 1 and 1/4 years to turn the whole crappy club around.....

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

"In all seriousness", do you suppose asserting something is an argument? It seems fairly likely that a different coach would do differently, and therefore to deny either "better or worse" is to take up what is at the very least a doubtful position. Your opinion here would need some sort of supporting arguments to warrant anyone taking it seriously...

Thanks for the advice robbie

Maybe you should have a look at my prvious posts regarding my position of the coach...... it gets boring repeating yourself over and over

Why is your assumption that a new coach will be any better then keeping Neeld on? At the end of the day what changes are a care taker coach going to implement that will benifit this club? I think you should consider your own argument.

What changes will the care taker coach make?

Would it be safe to assume that a care-taker would manage the games left and not actually coach (development etc gameplane etc etc) - as they are only a caretaker?

If you sack the coach do you sack the FD as well as they are equally responsible for the current form

Who is going to the be the caretaker and what exactly assures you they are better qualified

Who would want to step up from our current coaching group to take this role after basically being told by they club they have no confidence in the FD ability?

Otherwise don't waste my time

Edited April 30, 2013 by Unleash Hell

[demon3165 2,256]

Neeld says when he first came to the club......."It's going to take time to build this footy club"

D/Landers......."No it won't ...We have these great recruits"

Neeld says in 2013(2nd year)....."We have started building this footy club and are changing the culture and it takes time"

D/Landers........."No it won't....We have more recruits and Viney......"

After 5 games

D/Landers........."Sack the coach....Sack the coach.....Lets get Roos....Mathews....Clarkson..."Two who will never coach again.....I even saw someone want Malcolm Blight to come back....FMD

It must be a Gen y or Gen something or rather....Instant success or nothing....We want to play finals NOW

Lets not build a club and a footy side (which will take time) lets just sack everyone now...and start again and again and again and again .........You get the message.......

if only people could take the emotion out of their thinking and try to understand the process they would come to the same conclusion as you.

[stuie 7,374]

if only people could take the emotion out of their thinking and try to understand the process they would come to the same conclusion as you.

Stats have no emotions.

Read post #1041 on this page.

[Hannibal 5,814]

Neeld says when he first came to the club......."It's going to take time to build this footy club"

D/Landers......."No it won't ...We have these great recruits"

Neeld says in 2013(2nd year)....."We have started building this footy club and are changing the culture and it takes time"

D/Landers........."No it won't....We have more recruits and Viney......"

After 5 games

D/Landers........."Sack the coach....Sack the coach.....Lets get Roos....Mathews....Clarkson..."Two who will never coach again.....I even saw someone want Malcolm Blight to come back....FMD

It must be a Gen y or Gen something or rather....Instant success or nothing....We want to play finals NOW

Lets not build a club and a footy side (which will take time) lets just sack everyone now...and start again and again and again and again .........You get the message.......

You clearly don't understand that he doesn't have the playing group's support. If you don't have that you have nothing.

Schwarz may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but he understands footy clubs and players; and when he acknowledges that the coach doesn't have the players it's a massive issue. In fact, in his second year it's untenable. When you combine all the dumb things he's done it adds up to a club on its knees.

Once you understand the significance of that you'll better appreciate those who want change at year's end, or sooner.

[bing181 8,335]

It seems fairly likely that a different coach would do differently,

In the longer term, of course, but in the short term, mid-season? We tried that 2 years ago with Viney, didn't really change anything on-field.

[robbiefrom13 877]

Thanks for the advice robbie

Maybe you should have a look at my prvious posts regarding my position of the coach...... it gets boring repeating yourself over and over

Why is your assumption that a new coach will be any better then keeping Neeld on? At the end of the day what changes are a care taker coach going to implement that will benifit this club? I think you should consider your own argument.

What changes will the care taker coach make?

Would it be safe to assume that a care-taker would manage the games left and not actually coach (development etc gameplane etc etc) - as they are only a caretaker?

If you sack the coach do you sack the FD as well as they are equally responsible for the current form

Who is going to the be the caretaker and what exactly assures you they are better qualified

Who would want to step up from our current coaching group to take this role after basically being told by they club they have no confidence in the FD ability?

Otherwise don't waste my time

um. who's wasting whose? Both of us I suppose.

If you check you'll see that I didn't say another coach would necessarily be better, or worse - just inevitably different, and therefore presumably likely to be either better or worse.

I appreciate your thoguhts on what would be likely to happen; I can't answer your questions, not being a coach or a football administrator. I only really commented on the logical flaws in your post. You may be right in many of the points made here, but your earlier post was "argument by assertion" and therefore to be rebutted, even by an interested ignoramus like me.

Somebody says the trouble with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubt, the stupid people full of confidence; to argue by assertion is to look like you are one of the stupid. Which I admit, in light of your previous posts and this one, was probably pretty wrong and stupid of me. Thing is, I like Demonland, come here to learn, but boy do I get frustrated by some of the bar-style presentation of opinions.

I'll try to avoid wasting more of your time - though, why you'd be on Demonland if the views of others strikes you as a waste of your time, I don't know. Thought about running a blog? Sorry - don't answer - that IS a time-wasting observation...