That is because we have a sooky membership base... not like we haven't worked that out.. you only need to read demonland.

  On 08/05/2013 at 04:27, RobbieF said:

Membership numbers are supposed to grow not shrink, ours are shrinking. There are more people living in Victoria than two years ago, but instead of us picking up our share of the new settlers we are in fact giving up those we already had. No business survives unless it continues to grow, costs are up, footballers in our case earn more, staff costs are increasing and it simply costs more to run a business.

We are falling further behind and we will continue to do so until we are able to show we are capable of progressing up the ladder or at least running the club professionally.

  On 06/05/2013 at 06:15, Grand New Flag said:

The weekend may well have been seen as a borderline pass by those who wield the stick. The performance was still unacceptable but at least the club did not go further backwards. The players did give it a crack. If they did not Neeld was gone.

However, make no mistake Neeld continues to remain one week from being fired................. and rightly so.

Lets not get soft, lets not get emotional. Neeld is not our man. If Neeld was a player he would have already been shown the door. His performance as coach has been horrific. If we were not looking at a mass walk out come season end, I would be happy to give him until round 11. However, the risks are simply too high. Only a new coach with ample time to make a difference can stop the rot and give our players some self respect, self confidence, and give back their natural abilities. Only a new coach can save the furniture. You could easily see what Carlton’s game plan was, but apart from kicking long I had no idea what Melbourne’s was. This is not good enough.

I see no reason why we can't get a coach that can continue to install a better culture AND is able to coach at the same time. These things are not mutually exclusive.

On Trenners, he clearly has OP or some other injury that is debilitating his run and streagth. He must be rested until this is fixed. If that means a season on the sideline.....so be it, but it is simply unfair on the kid to have him in the side as captain, a shadow of the player he was at the tender age of 21. Poor coaching.

1) Actually, I thought the Carlton game was one of the first time's I've been able to decipher our gameplan. Perhaps that's because I took the emotion out of it this week? Our zone was working the majority of the time. The times it failed were a result of abhorrent skill errors and lapses in concentration (that I'm certainly not excusing). Our defenders were sucked into the contest a few too many times and goals resulted out the back. We have to be smarter about how we attack certain contests. I was merely happy finally seeing endeavour from our players. Week by week it becomes clearer RE: fitness. This is the biggest hamstring, outside of disposal and decision making, that our team must deal with this season. The zone seems incredibly taxing and they will not be able to sustain this consistently this year. But all I want is endeavour all year. Every week, every quarter, every minute.

2) And Trenners doesn't have OP. This was my opinion last year. I think it's his workload in the legs. He's lost some yards, because of the last two pre-seasons. But his seeming dedication to training and preparation tells me he'll make it. The skills at his disposal, along with his professionalism, support this.

What kind of loser tweets out their own blog entry about a BS rumour that everyone involved is going to deny?

Just astonishing.

  On 08/05/2013 at 09:52, dee-luded said:

sorry but I disagree.. re the coach at this moment... the coach's methods is what is needed. But if we/the club change the coach this year,,,,,, then we'll need another coach who'll carry on the Cultural rebuild...

... it takes guts to undertake the biggest job any AFL club will ever have to undertake,,, & that is to change its Spots! (shed the skin & lets get started)

I agree with what you say about 1965,,,, but look at this, I say the culture was already Cosy, from back near the start of the Club,,, & it then took a man from Richmond by the name of Percy Page,, to bring some change to the club... the club had one 2 Premierships prior to 1933, (1900 & 1926) that is all in a smaller competition...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_%27Checker%27_Hughes#Coaching_career

.... Enter the Dragon,,,, (Percy Page), who in turn brings the FireBrand (Frank Hughes) to the club in 1933... changed the name, to change the Culture... from pretty flowers to hardened (Demons).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne_Football_Club#Age_of_greatness

It took him 6 Years to change the club into a Premiership Outfit... 1939,,, & then plenty more,,, & in turn spawned a ruthless culture of Winning, & of developing great players, & strong people.

... a heritage to handover,,, & it was,,, to a fella by the name of Smith. He kept the flame aglow...

those who quelled it (the flame) were IMO, of the gentleman's club. they took back, that with which they had lost to Hughes & Smith, those pretty flowers.

.... IMO this is the culture of the North... a lovely & politically correct, sterile & safe abode.

this is the culture we Don't want our young players to adopt, not until they're at least 28 Yrs old. finishing school is done far too young at Melbourne.

.

That's a good post 'dee-luded'. I can't agree on MN, but otherwise you have it pretty well pinned.

  On 08/05/2013 at 10:42, AdamFarr said:

1) Actually, I thought the Carlton game was one of the first time's I've been able to decipher our gameplan. Perhaps that's because I took the emotion out of it this week? Our zone was working the majority of the time. The times it failed were a result of abhorrent skill errors and lapses in concentration (that I'm certainly not excusing). Our defenders were sucked into the contest a few too many times and goals resulted out the back. We have to be smarter about how we attack certain contests. I was merely happy finally seeing endeavour from our players. Week by week it becomes clearer RE: fitness. This is the biggest hamstring, outside of disposal and decision making, that our team must deal with this season. The zone seems incredibly taxing and they will not be able to sustain this consistently this year. But all I want is endeavour all year. Every week, every quarter, every minute.

2) And Trenners doesn't have OP. This was my opinion last year. I think it's his workload in the legs. He's lost some yards, because of the last two pre-seasons. But his seeming dedication to training and preparation tells me he'll make it. The skills at his disposal, along with his professionalism, support this.

No, I thought it may have been workload last year but remember he had a big chunk of this pre season off his legs because of the stress fractures.

The mystery of Trenners slowing down.

  On 08/05/2013 at 10:50, Hardnut said:

That's a good post 'dee-luded'. I can't agree on MN, but otherwise you have it pretty well pinned.

Hardnut, what do you think Barassi & Jordan & Di'ck [censored] Seddon & others like Barry Richardson, Ray Manly, Rod McNabb, etc,,, all did in the 1981 & 1985 Era???

Why is it do you think that the Club was able to get up off its 20 odd years of kneeling??? the Flame was re Kindled, for someone to come set it ablaze.

We needed someone to keep that Heritage Aglow, & then launch another attack to the Summit.

Instead we went toward the comfort zone & flashy entertainment values, where stars were born, Individuals reigned, & the main goal was lost.... we playerd well & won more than we lost, until the wheels were worn, & then started again with Newbies in names of colours... white, green, brown, & we were all robbod at the turnstiles.

.. we got our fair show, but No Cigars. the Jo Jo then began, & the numbers dropped & the money dropped & the quality of the list dropped as did the tenacity of the contest... all the while still trying to play wide around the wings...

then we woke up that something was crook in tallerook.. the eND was nigh... removed the coach who presided over further failure & weakened list, & culture...

enter Ol' boys & a committee who interviewed prospects, one of which was an AFL legend Coach.

He wasn't truly considered & a lamb to the slaughter was shipped in like a Sheep to Egypt.

& here we are, doing what should have been done in 2006, or 2007/8... chop out the cancer & Grow Quality stock.

we're fixing whats been damaged for well over 10 Yrs.

.

  On 08/05/2013 at 09:52, Rhino Richards said:

A fluff press release is flimsy evidence at best. Its one thing to "say" it in a press release but its another thing when your body language says otherwise. For a bloke who ran down Lewis Jetta at the MCG over 100 metres, Frawley cruizes these days reminiscent of Goddard in 2012 at St Kilda.

Ohh okay - so we can't believe anything the players say about the player group, the club, the coaching staff or themselves that's featured on the website or that's said to the media at a press conference and the like?

I take it however we are to believe much of the innuendo posted here. Because it's bullet proof. Unlike the statements actually made by the players, that is - ( ... because they're not telling the truth).

Wow. Interesting angle.

 

  On 08/05/2013 at 11:47, Ron Burgundy said:

Ohh okay - so we can't believe anything the players say about the player group, the club, the coaching staff or themselves that's featured on the website or that's said to the media at a press conference and the like?

I take it however we are to believe much of the innuendo posted here. Because it's bullet proof. Unlike the statements actually made by the players, that is - ( ... because they're not telling the truth).

Wow. Interesting angle.

 

You would hardly expect him/them to say otherwise now would you Ron in a club presser? And you were probably right the first time when you said the comments were attributed to a player.

I still cant work out how you called the end of bruise free footy last year. Some "facts" involved werent there Ron?

  On 08/05/2013 at 11:12, dee-luded said:

Hardnut, what do you think Barassi & Jordan & Di'ck [censored] Seddon & others like Barry Richardson, Ray Manly, Rod McNabb, etc,,, all did in the 1981 & 1985 Era???

Why is it do you think that the Club was able to get up off its 20 odd years of kneeling??? the Flame was re Kindled, for someone to come set it ablaze.

We needed someone to keep that Heritage Aglow, & then launch another attack to the Summit.

Instead we went toward the comfort zone & flashy entertainment values, where stars were born, Individuals reigned, & the main goal was lost.... we playerd well & won more than we lost, until the wheels were worn, & then started again with Newbies in names of colours... white, green, brown, & we were all robbod at the turnstiles.

.. we got our fair show, but No Cigars. the Jo Jo then began, & the numbers dropped & the money dropped & the quality of the list dropped as did the tenacity of the contest... all the while still trying to play wide around the wings...

then we woke up that something was crook in tallerook.. the eND was nigh... removed the coach who presided over further failure & weakened list, & culture...

enter Ol' boys & a committee who interviewed prospects, one of which was an AFL legend Coach.

He wasn't truly considered & a lamb to the slaughter was shipped in like a Sheep to Egypt.

& here we are, doing what should have been done in 2006, or 2007/8... chop out the cancer & Grow Quality stock.

we're fixing whats been damaged for well over 10 Yrs.

.

A somewhat mixed batch of part-eloquence and part-interpretation of events, but you certainly have not convinced me that MN is the coach we need - what I have seen does not impress me (and I may be proven wrong), but I believe MFC needs a coach with a more appropriate approach to achieve the success that both you and I want, and more importantly, what the club needs.

  On 08/05/2013 at 11:47, Ron Burgundy said:

Ohh okay - so we can't believe anything the players say about the player group, the club, the coaching staff or themselves that's featured on the website or that's said to the media at a press conference and the like?

I take it however we are to believe much of the innuendo posted here. Because it's bullet proof. Unlike the statements actually made by the players, that is - ( ... because they're not telling the truth).

Wow. Interesting angle.

Hey Ron, what did McLardy say the day before Schwab "resigned" again?

Waving around a club presser as if it puts the issue to bed is almost as ridiculous as taking internet rumours as gospel, especially in light of recent events.

I'll be thrilled if the group is as tight as it has ever been, but I'll believe it once I start seeing it translate onto the field. Plus I'm not sure how that article vindicates Neeld in any way. Indeed Chip mentions pretty much everyone bar Neeld - his fellow backmen, backline coaches, new senior players and Neil Craig gets a big wrap.

Looks like the Roos rumour has no basis according to Robbo who phoned up Roos and asked him directly. His response was, "let me put it this way, I won't be coaching Melbourne next year". So the door is left ajar as to him coaching, it just won't be us.

  On 08/05/2013 at 13:00, P_Man said:

Waving around a club presser as if it puts the issue to bed is almost as ridiculous as taking internet rumours as gospel, especially in light of recent events.

I'll be thrilled if the group is as tight as it has ever been, but I'll believe it once I start seeing it translate onto the field. Plus I'm not sure how that article vindicates Neeld in any way. Indeed Chip mentions pretty much everyone bar Neeld - his fellow backmen, backline coaches, new senior players and Neil Craig gets a big wrap.

Looks like the Roos rumour has no basis according to Robbo who phoned up Roos and asked him directly. His response was, "let me put it this way, I won't be coaching Melbourne next year". So the door is left ajar as to him coaching, it just won't be us.

Mick Malthouse said the same thing about Carlton last year, of course they are going to deny it at this point.

we just have to wait and see what happens

  On 08/05/2013 at 12:28, stuie said:

Hey Ron, what did McLardy say the day before Schwab "resigned" again?

He said 'I love you Stuie - you're like a little Buddha, only covered in hair'.

The people who fall victim to this line of reasoning are generally susceptible to conspiracy theories, which are generally not aligned to rational, common sense thinking and which are hugely selective in the way in which they 'use' the available evidence.

It's convenient, but it's actually not very insightful. The Schwab situation was complex, and its presenting issues and history make it far, far different to comments being made by the players as to morale within the player group.

Now, I accept the moon landing occurred. However I know people who don't 'believe' it happened - these same people 'believe' 9/11 was some kind of plot by the US government to justify the commencement of the 'war on terrorism'.

And this is why I think, for some here, this anti Neeld stance has become like a religious crusade. IMO it's getting completely irrational. Any information that does not support their anti Neeld crusade is conveniently ignored or discredited.

In this context, I find it ironic in the extreme that a comment has been made about the McLardy/Schwab presser - yet many here have been boxing at shadows for the last couple of days all because of some b.s rumour posted on some b.s blog about Roos being our coach in a few weeks - notwithstanding that ALL of the 'evidence' to date is that Roos wouldn't go near this club with a fifty foot barge pole.

But hey, that's right - we can't 'believe' what Roos has said about his own intentions and various 'on the record' comments he has made over the past couple of years about this club, because such comments are unreliable and probably untrue.

Talk about people who can't think ...

  On 08/05/2013 at 09:58, machine11 said:

That is because we have a sooky membership base... not like we haven't worked that out.. you only need to read demonland.

Reality is that Demonland represents a very vocal minority. The casual supporters are the ones you need buying memberships because the hardcores that come here for all the complaining they do they still go to games and pay memberships.

The casual fan wants to pick a team and no one picks the underdog unless your name is Clementine and you're a full-time student living in Fitzroy that survives on thrift shop handouts.

It's becoming "cool" to go for Melbourne because of how bad they are. That sort of support is the "fickle" support you hear of: "fickle" is not paying members that complain but still go to games. They're the "hardcore" fans.

It's not just about winning anymore. It's about creating a brand associated with winning so that the Chinese exchange student living in Melbourne chooses the Demons instead of the Pies, or Blues. They don't need that support because they've had it for 100 years.

  On 08/05/2013 at 20:57, Ron Burgundy said:

It's convenient, but it's actually not very insightful. The Schwab situation was complex, and its presenting issues and history make it far, far different to comments being made by the players as to morale within the player group.

Now, I accept the moon landing occurred. However I know people who don't 'believe' it happened - these same people 'believe' 9/11 was some kind of plot by the US government to justify the commencement of the 'war on terrorism'.

And this is why I think, for some here, this anti Neeld stance has become like a religious crusade. IMO it's getting completely irrational. Any information that does not support their anti Neeld crusade is conveniently ignored or discredited.

In this context, I find it ironic in the extreme that a comment has been made about the McLardy/Schwab presser - yet many

Talk about people who can't think ...

The "complex"history of Schwab is indeed convenient to you Ron. Schwab was given a further 3 year contract in November in the midst of a serious AFL investigation into the Club. When the tanking findings came down it was McLardy in a pressed that implored for unity and that we should all stick together. After round 2, McLardy sacks Schwab and cites in a pressed that this was done to address divisions in the supporter group. Huh?

There is proof enough to be even a little skeptical about Club press releases.....but not you Ron.

And the "ant-Neeld crusade" can't be any worse than the sock sniffers last year that claimed Neeld to be messiah and called an end to bruise free football. I can't think of a group that ignored what was happening on the ground or just did not understand it. Your sense of irony should be focused no further away than your own backyard Ron.

And FWIW, I agree Roos is not a chance to coach MFC and there is no basis to the rumour. But I can't disparage those that cling to morsels of hope and upside when the past 6 years have been a disaster and the past 2 years have plumbed new lows in on field embarrassment and off field incompetence.

  On 08/05/2013 at 22:11, Rhino Richards said:

The "complex"history of Schwab is indeed convenient to you Ron. Schwab was given a further 3 year contract in November in the midst of a serious AFL investigation into the Club. When the tanking findings came down it was McLardy in a pressed that implored for unity and that we should all stick together. After round 2, McLardy sacks Schwab and cites in a pressed that this was done to address divisions in the supporter group. Huh?

There is proof enough to be even a little skeptical about Club press releases.....but not you Ron.

And the "ant-Neeld crusade" can't be any worse than the sock sniffers last year that claimed Neeld to be messiah and called an end to bruise free football. I can't think of a group that ignored what was happening on the ground or just did not understand it. Your sense of irony should be focused no further away than your own backyard Ron.

And FWIW, I agree Roos is not a chance to coach MFC and there is no basis to the rumour. But I can't disparage those that cling to morsels of hope and upside when the past 6 years have been a disaster and the past 2 years have plumbed new lows in on field embarrassment and off field incompetence.

40 year supporter? Remember some big beltings? I'm sure you do.

How was it resolved? Can you remember? Do share.

This Club has now combined its disastrous era by 'on field embarrassment' and 'off field incompetence' - your premise to replace Neeld will solve all ills?

In your best acronym......FMD.

Back to the anti Neeld altar for some more prayer time Rhino.

Meanwhile I'll continue to do what I've been trained to do throughout my life - that is, to think logically and calmly and, as far as possible, without uncritical bias.

  On 08/05/2013 at 22:48, jumbo returns said:

40 year supporter? Remember some big beltings? I'm sure you do.

How was it resolved? Can you remember? Do share.

This Club has now combined its disastrous era by 'on field embarrassment' and 'off field incompetence' - your premise to replace Neeld will solve all ills?

In your best acronym......FMD.

Removing Neeld will be a start to address the on field embarrassments. And the people involved in the off field circus should moved on as well following Jacksons review.

Misrepresenting other people's argument does not show you in the smartest light.

  On 08/05/2013 at 22:51, Ron Burgundy said:

Back to the anti Neeld altar for some more prayer time Rhino.

Meanwhile I'll continue to do what I've been trained to do throughout my life - that is, to think logically and calmly and, as far as possible, without uncritical bias.

You mask it well Ron. And you do it with critical bias as well! LOL!

Take a break from the socks.

  On 08/05/2013 at 13:00, P_Man said:

Waving around a club presser as if it puts the issue to bed is almost as ridiculous as taking internet rumours as gospel, especially in light of recent events.

I'll be thrilled if the group is as tight as it has ever been, but I'll believe it once I start seeing it translate onto the field. Plus I'm not sure how that article vindicates Neeld in any way. Indeed Chip mentions pretty much everyone bar Neeld - his fellow backmen, backline coaches, new senior players and Neil Craig gets a big wrap.

Looks like the Roos rumour has no basis according to Robbo who phoned up Roos and asked him directly. His response was, "let me put it this way, I won't be coaching Melbourne next year". So the door is left ajar as to him coaching, it just won't be us.

Could it mean that Roos approached the MFC about the coaching role next year and we told him that Neeld is contracted and will be our coach in 2014?

Could it mean that Neil Craig will be our coach and that Roos will step in to Craig's current role?

It could mean hundreds of things. BUt as it stands, I would prefer to give Neeld the opportunity to see his current contract out. And that's coming from a bloke that has been on the fence since his arrival, and perhaps somewhat critical about some of his decisions.

  On 08/05/2013 at 13:00, P_Man said:

Waving around a club presser as if it puts the issue to bed is almost as ridiculous as taking internet rumours as gospel, especially in light of recent events.

I'll be thrilled if the group is as tight as it has ever been, but I'll believe it once I start seeing it translate onto the field. Plus I'm not sure how that article vindicates Neeld in any way. Indeed Chip mentions pretty much everyone bar Neeld - his fellow backmen, backline coaches, new senior players and Neil Craig gets a big wrap.

Looks like the Roos rumour has no basis according to Robbo who phoned up Roos and asked him directly. His response was, "let me put it this way, I won't be coaching Melbourne next year". So the door is left ajar as to him coaching, it just won't be us.

Whilst I don't think Roos will coach Melbourne next year, he's hardly likely to come out and say he will, when Neeld has another year of his contract to run.

Just a bit of perspective.

I'm perplexed as to the objective of those looking to undermine Neeld through this ongoing campaign of rumour and innuendo.

If Neeld fails to perform as coach then the appropriate steps will be taken at the appropriate time (i.e. either at the end of the season or at the end of his contract). For the MFC do otherwise (i.e prior to those points) would be amateurish and raise more questions about the capacity of those in charge of the MFC than it would resolve.

Given this, what is the point of giving Neeld anything other than our unqualified support?

How does it serve the MFC, the players who take the field weekly, the FD and Coaches, etc... to have a section of their supporters highlighting every failing (real or perceived), making up or honing in on any rumour of division or the coach being sacked? How is it helping us win games of footy?

Where is Caro on Roos @ Melbourne. I only ask as she supposedly knows all!!!!

  On 08/05/2013 at 23:27, Rhino Richards said:

Removing Neeld will be a start to address the on field embarrassments. And the people involved in the off field circus should moved on as well following Jacksons review.

Misrepresenting other people's argument does not show you in the smartest light.

You're the author - perhaps your inability to articulate your thoughts may be the issue.