I confess to not having read a lot of this thread so apologies if this observation has been made before.

Neeld must go and he must go now and that was clearly demonstrated on Sunday when Moloney ripped us to shreds. Yes, Moloney is a B grade mid but he would be our best mid if he currently played for us with a coach able to utilize his skill sets. Voss has demonstrated this. Further Moloney clearly demonstrated why it is now impossible to judge our playing list. He showed that Neeld can't utilize mature players skill sets and we already know Neeld cannot develop youngsters. Few if any of our players has shown significant improvement under Neeld and a whole host haven't come on or gone backwards under his guidance.

Accordingly we can't judge our list and any new coach coming in would not be able to make LM decisions.

If Neeld were to be replaced now and an interim coach installed then there is a chance that we could see what some of the players could do. If that happens we are in an infinitely better position and if it doesn't then the new coach is in the same position as if Neeld coaches through to the end of the season.

Also if Neeld is replaced now there is a reasonable expectation that the damage he is doing to this group of players will cease. That would be a very good thing.

Of course there is a chance that Neeld will inspire this lot to great heights during the remainder of the season but given that after 27 coaching games he has one win against a non development club that would be wishful thinking.

Even more ideally is that we are looking for a new coach now and he takes over directly from Neeld. That would show some good fortune and excellent administration.

These are good points BB, although i am inclined to give him until after the bye to try and extract something out of the list but in general i agree.

It is very clear that we have gone backwards under Neeld but DB & CS have to answer for the greatest f**kup at our club which was forcing Junior out too soon.

It exposed our derth of leadership and caused us to loose Bruce who would have been a more natural captain as oposed to Green who was awkward as captain.

We need a coach who inspires our young list to play better not someone who treats them like misbehaving 2 year olds.

So you didn't read any of the posts in this thread, just the transcripts from the last few Caroline Wilson articles.

"Moloney ripped us to shreds", I was waiting for the flashing lights, and the der de de der music, how over dramatic

There are 3 camps

!. Posters who hate everything and want to sack everybody

2. Posters who are swayed by the latest article or media commentary and paraphrase them whether true/factual or not

3. Posters who are still [censored] off by the way we are playing but listen and form their own opinions and think maybe yes there are issues but sacking a coach six games in, isn't the brightest thing to do, there is no guarantee the replacement could do a better job, let's leave it till the end of the season and see where we stand then, Peter Jackson will have completed his review and he will be ready to make recommendations, if a clean sheet is required then that can occur in September

I don't think he is there to just do a review and make some recommendations. He will be pushing changes and they will be happening way before September. This guy is not a benevolent CEO, he is a guy you appoint when things need to be done. Whether that means the coach goes who knows, maybe Jackson will think he is the man for the job.

Our list is capable of winning 7 games this season IMO.

We've got three more games against development clubs and if we win all of them that's 4 wins. We've won one game against non development clubs in Neeld's reign and our losing margin so far this year against non development clubs is 87 points. 87. Hell, that 14 goals 3 behinds per game. That's hard to comprehend.

On what basis do you think we can win 3 more games against non development clubs? It's a very hard proposition to accept.

The value bet says it won't happen.

I don't think he is there to just do a review and make some recommendations. He will be pushing changes and they will be happening way before September. This guy is not a benevolent CEO, he is a guy you appoint when things need to be done. Whether that means the coach goes who knows, maybe Jackson will think he is the man for the job.

Why do you think he has a six month contract, perhaps they should have said, "to satisfy the blood seekers on Demonland, we want you quickly get up to speed and sack anyone who you think is crap, you have three weeks"

I confess to not having read a lot of this thread so apologies if this observation has been made before.

Even more ideally is that we are looking for a new coach now and he takes over directly from Neeld. That would show some good fortune and excellent administration.

How would giving him another 12 games or so endanger our ability to attract a new coach?

What value is there in having 16 weeks of caretaker coaching?

I do not believe that confidence in oneself and teammates is an irredeemable commodity.

If constant failure for 6 years doesn't snuff it out than another three months isn't going to extinguish it.

And our club has a new interim CEO, should have a new President by October, and looks on the road to have a new coach for 2014.

Can we not allow our new interim CEO to have some input over what we do with the coach? Wouldn't that be a sign that we are comitted to excellent administration?

Why do you think he has a six month contract, perhaps they should have said, "to satisfy the blood seekers on Demonland, we want you quickly get up to speed and sack anyone who you think is crap, you have three weeks"

Because his job is not to sit there and take 6 months to do a review and a nice report. He is a person that is a doer, he gets things done. It doesn't mean he will come out swinging day 1, he hasn't (as far as we know) but if he is to get things done he won't be leaving it until the last day to file his report. Things will change over the period of 6 months.

How would giving him another 12 games or so endanger our ability to attract a new coach? I didn't say it would.

What value is there in having 16 weeks of caretaker coaching? My preference is for our permanent coach but I believe Neeld is damaging the players as we speak. We need to stop that damage.

I do not believe that confidence in oneself and teammates is an irredeemable commodity. Let hope not.

If constant failure for 6 years doesn't snuff it out than another three months isn't going to extinguish it. See above

And our club has a new interim CEO, should have a new President by October, and looks on the road to have a new coach for 2014.

Can we not allow our new interim CEO to have some input over what we do with the coach? Wouldn't that be a sign that we are comitted to excellent administration? I think everyone knows what to do with this coach. Excellent administration would be to get our permanent coach quickly, good administration would be to stop the damage this one is doing.

Because his job is not to sit there and take 6 months to do a review and a nice report. He is a person that is a doer, he gets things done. It doesn't mean he will come out swinging day 1, he hasn't (as far as we know) but if he is to get things done he won't be leaving it until the last day to file his report. Things will change over the period of 6 months.

I think he has just sacked the tea lady.

Cannot believe this thread is still covering the same ground after 55 pages.

IMO we have a very ordinary list that is playing up to its ability and is worse than 2012 so far.

A large part of this team has been chosen by this Coach.

Due to the poor nature of our list I don't see how it is possible for us in the outer to judge if Neeld is good or not.

Only those close to the coal face would be able to make that judgement.

However the loss ratio cannot continue past the end of 2013.

Unless there is a dramatic change the Coach is gone be it in the next few weeks or at the end of August.

Simply with a continuation of the current form it will be impossible to sell Mark Neeld to the Members / Sponsors past 2013.

There will need to be hope for 2014 and beyond.

For what it is worth ( probably not a lot ) that is my feeling

I think he has just sacked the tea lady.

There goes the Banana Bread!

Cannot believe this thread is still covering the same ground after 55 pages.

IMO we have a very ordinary list that is playing up to its ability and is worse than 2012 so far.

A large part of this team has been chosen by this Coach.

Due to the poor nature of our list I don't see how it is possible for us in the outer to judge if Neeld is good or not.

Only those close to the coal face would be able to make that judgement.

However the loss ratio cannot continue past the end of 2013.

Unless there is a dramatic change the Coach is gone be it in the next few weeks or at the end of August.

Simply with a continuation of the current form it will be impossible to sell Mark Neeld to the Members / Sponsors past 2013.

There will need to be hope for 2014 and beyond.

For what it is worth ( probably not a lot ) that is my feeling

What cannot be disputed is how badly we have performed under MN. Really, the only game we have won was the fluke against Essendon. The others were against the newbies. To make it even worse, we haven't even been close in any of the other games - not so much as an unlucky loss.

I didn't think we could get worse than the results under DB but we have. We can't simply accept more calls to be be patient - it is unsustainable.And as for last weeks summation - happy to gey within 5 goals on the road - spare me !

PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF THE SAME ARGUMENTS??? Let's get a little nuanced then....

One of my favorite short stories of all time is one about a man treking across the freezing Yukon with his dog, Jack London's 'To Build a Fire'. I belive it can be directly applied to Neeld's way...

http://www.jacklondons.net/buildafire.html

An early excerpt is...

But all this—the mysterious, far-reaching hair-line trail, the absence of sun from the sky, the tremendous cold, and the strangeness and weirdness of it all—made no impression on the man. It was not because he was long used to it. He was a newcomer in the land, a chechaquo, and this was his first winter. The trouble with him was that he was without imagination. He was quick and alert in the things of life, but only in the things, and not in the significances. Fifty degrees below zero meant eighty-odd degrees of frost. Such fact impressed him as being cold and uncomfortable, and that was all. It did not lead him to meditate upon his frailty as a creature of temperature, and upon man's frailty in general, able only to live within certain narrow limits of heat and cold; and from there on it did not lead him to the conjectural field of immortality and man's place in the universe. Fifty degrees below zero stood for a bite of frost that hurt and that must be guarded against by the use of mittens, ear-flaps, warm moccasins, and thick socks. Fifty degrees below zero was to him just precisely fifty degrees below zero. That there should be anything more to it than that was a thought that never entered his head.

I confess to not having read a lot of this thread so apologies if this observation has been made before.

Neeld must go and he must go now and that was clearly demonstrated on Sunday when Moloney ripped us to shreds. Yes, Moloney is a B grade mid but he would be our best mid if he currently played for us with a coach able to utilize his skill sets. Voss has demonstrated this. Further Moloney clearly demonstrated why it is now impossible to judge our playing list. He showed that Neeld can't utilize mature players skill sets and we already know Neeld cannot develop youngsters. Few if any of our players has shown significant improvement under Neeld and a whole host haven't come on or gone backwards under his guidance.

Accordingly we can't judge our list and any new coach coming in would not be able to make LM decisions.

If Neeld were to be replaced now and an interim coach installed then there is a chance that we could see what some of the players could do. If that happens we are in an infinitely better position and if it doesn't then the new coach is in the same position as if Neeld coaches through to the end of the season.

Also if Neeld is replaced now there is a reasonable expectation that the damage he is doing to this group of players will cease. That would be a very good thing.

Of course there is a chance that Neeld will inspire this lot to great heights during the remainder of the season but given that after 27 coaching games he has one win against a non development club that would be wishful thinking.

Even more ideally is that we are looking for a new coach now and he takes over directly from Neeld. That would show some good fortune and excellent administration.

As I pointed out last night Moloney is averaging the same amount of posessions with Brisbane as he did with us in 2009, 2010, 2011.

He played poor football last year due to his own motives, ego being bruized from being dropped from the leadership team and he basically gave up.

Using Moloney's performance last year and this year is an incredibly bias example. You're comparing him from a year he didnt care how he played to a year where he does - not a comparison of Neeld's ability to utilize his skill sets.

This is shown in that he is averaging this year the same amount of disposals in 2009, 2010, 2011

Second, you are incorrect on your statement that Neeld hasn't been able to develop our young draftees. Magner, Couch, Trelich, Evans, Nicholson - and all are playing great football (particulary Evans).

Neeld has only been coach since sept. 2011 and he has produced better young players than Bailey.

Players like Bennell, Morton, Martin - all drafted pre-Neeld and not even Bailey could get the best out of them, they were duds.

Smoke and mirrors because you cant say "I dont like Neeld because we arent winning games". In turn sacrificing a long term strategy over short term results

Edit: Mistake pointed out by angrydee in regards to me saying when Neeld coached

Edited May 2, 201312 yr by PJ_12345

I think he has just sacked the tea lady.

Had a connection with Dank???

I think he has just sacked the tea lady.

so that was the deep throat? Not a faceless man, but a faceless lady...hmmm

What cannot be disputed is how badly we have performed under MN. Really, the only game we have won was the fluke against Essendon. The others were against the newbies. To make it even worse, we haven't even been close in any of the other games - not so much as an unlucky loss.

I didn't think we could get worse than the results under DB but we have. We can't simply accept more calls to be be patient - it is unsustainable.And as for last weeks summation - happy to gey within 5 goals on the road - spare me !

Football is a long-term strategy game.

Every club goes through cycles. We are at the bottom. This will take a while and there is no quick fix or quick results.

With Bailey we had an aging list, not alot of tallent coming through and I was struggling to see any type of strategy.

At least with Neeld he has got rid of the dead weight, getting some young tallent through, new leadership team, new captains and drafted some experienced, premership winning players

What isnt sustainable is going through coaches ever second year.

Long-term results > short-term results

Edited May 2, 201312 yr by PJ_12345

As I pointed out last night Moloney is averaging the same amount of posessions with Brisbane as he did with us in 2009, 2010, 2011.

He played poor football last year due to his own motives, ego being bruized from being dropped from the leadership team and he basically gave up.

Using Moloney's performance last year and this year is an incredibly bias example. You're comparing him from a year he didnt care how he played to a year where he does - not a comparison of Neeld's ability to utilize his skill sets.

This is shown in that he is averaging this year the same amount of disposals in 2011 (when Neeld was still coach).

Second, you are incorrect on your statement that Neeld hasn't been able to develop our young draftees. Magner, Couch, Trelich, Evans, Nicholson - and all are playing great football (particulary Evans).

Neeld has only been coach since 2011 and he has produced better young players than Bailey.

Players like Bennell, Morton, Martin - all drafted pre-Neeld and not even Bailey could get the best out of them, they were duds.

Smoke and mirrors because you cant say "I dont like Neeld because we arent winning games". In turn sacrificing a long term strategy over short term results

Neeld started 2012

happy to gey within 5 goals on the road - spare me !

Easy to spare you, because that's not what he said ... or anything like it.

Go listen to the interview and the question he was asked.

Neeld started 2012

Yep you're right! Confused myself when I was talking about Neeld training drafts (full 2012 preseason - been there since sept. 2011), didnt coach 2011 season.

Thanks agrydee

I am intrigued with the statements "the players are not playing for the coach". I understand motivation but as an ex surburban footballer ( and mostly a dud one at that) I played to win, I played hard not to let down my team-mates ( not the coach - i had to go at the ball as hard as my mate and show as much effort as he put in), I played with some fear of being dropped ( again - i was a spud) but mostly I played for pride in my own performance. You will only go so far if you are playing for any other reason other than the slefish reason of being the best you can and the non selfish reason of contributing to the team.

Port finished 16th and 14th in the last two years, let's say it all together.

Port finished 16th and 14th in the last two years

Port finished 16th and 14th in the last two years

Port finished 16th and 14th in the last two years

Port finished 16th and 14th in the last two years

Port finished 16th and 14th in the last two years

Port finished 16th and 14th in the last two years

Port finished 16th and 14th in the last two years

Port finished 16th and 14th in the last two years

Whats your point?

By the way I love the format of your post

No one is suggesting that all problems at the MFC are his fault. No one is arguing that he has the most difficult of tasks.

Simply I am arguing that Neeld does not have the skill set or experience to deal with the monumental size of the problem. I will go one step further and say Neeld is making things worse not better. He has become a major part of the problem than part of the solution.

I feel sorry for Neeld, but he must go and go quickly.

No one minds losing (too much) when the players have given it a red hot go, particularly when undermanned. However, surely Neeld is just one more inept effort away from being shown the door.

Edited May 2, 201312 yr by Grand New Flag

Cannot believe this thread is still covering the same ground after 55 pages.

IMO we have a very ordinary list that is playing up to its ability and is worse than 2012 so far.

What ?

We're in the bottom couple for tackles, contested footy, and uncontested footy.

Tackles = we're not trying nearly hard enough, because the opposition nearly always has the ball. We have the least disposals in the league. They can at least show effort and that is gauged by your tackle count.

Contested footy = not having a crack nearly often enough.

Uncontested footy = means they're lazy, not making themselves options and they're not gut running. There's no courage to run.

If you think that they're playing to their ability you're delusional. The whackjob has drained every ounce of effort from their beings. They may not be great, but you can sheet their lack of effort firmly back to the coach. This is one dispirited lot.

A coach is their to maximise a groups talents. Mark Neeld is having the complete opposite effect.

I think he has just sacked the tea lady.

No it was the sandwich lady.

I would like to see what Todd Viney could do with our players for the rest of the season.

How about the selected players this week play football that is watchable , now that would be welcome.