Is this sunday the Beginning of the End or the End of the beginning?

IMO a loss this weekend will mean we have the worst list in the Comp.

You really are a hypocrite the way you taunt others on the site who oppose your views and then when you are held accountable you squeal like a little piggy.

Your comment to Stuie above just evidences it. Go away and grow up.

I'm no hypocrite.

It's just pointless arguing with you.

Stuie is on the blame Neeld bus as well

Maybe you guys could catch up and pat each other on the back for being in agreement.

Now rack off and spout your dribble to someone else

Could not agree more. Neeld team was only less experienced last week due to injuries and omissions.

I was going to back MFC to win by 4 goals in my local tipping comp. I will have to re consider that.

Talk about flying the white flag. He won't need to give a pressed afterwards.

Honestly, I really enjoy the debates with all the posters on this forum, but you have no idea.

No jest, RN.

James Magner is far too slow for AFL footy and against a fleet footed Suns midfield, if he played, we'd be one player down all day.

Mitchell, Jobe, Sewell, Lewis, Bolton, Cooney (on one & a half legs). Greg Williams, one of the all time great centermen but slow as a wet week. Used his agility and footy smarts to escape opponents and find space. None are fleet footed but they have a role to play and carry it out effectively on most occasions. They burrow, fight, extract the ball and use it quickly by hand around congestion in an attempt to get the first clearance and link/ spread play working for us instead of giving it up to the opposition and letting them do it.

Many are also fine tacklers that often "finish off" a tackle. They know the importance of bringing a player to the ground, even burying him if possible to ensure there's one less opponent able to influence the very next contest or disposal or offer themselves up as an outlet. They also know the tiring effect this sort of play has on younger, smaller bodied less mature players over the course of 4 quarters. They certainly don't lay flimsy half hearted tackles like some in our mid rotations presently. Magner has that tackling agro and finish.

And as for your fleet footed argument... Other, than Evans at this point, I would argue that we have very few fleet footed "AFl capable" mid outsiders anyway. Certainly none worthy of keeping Magner away from an opportunity to show if he can replicate his good VFL form in the seniors if given a 3 to 5 week stint to find his AFL legs and the extra speed of the game at that level generally.

And as for the present inside mids, there's only Jones, Sylvia and McKenzie. I certainly wouldn't rate Jones or McKenzie as fleet footed. No reason why Magner couldn't come in for McKenzie right now. McKenzie hasn't shown anything special to warrant continual selection in this line up.

....DemonOX.....your assertion is incorrect, not everybody on here wants Neeld to succeed, some posters are willing him to fail, to justify their rather pathetic stance

I think this is out of line - ( you are entitled to your opinion) - There are a number of very reactionary posters on this site that are "woe is us" and after little consideration want all and sundry sacked for not meeting unrealistic expectations. However I dont think there is one supporter on this site who honestly wants Neeld fired more that they want the team to succeed.

Is this sunday the Beginning of the End or the End of the beginning?

IMO a loss this weekend will mean we have the worst list in the Comp.

I think that's already been establish old dee

I think that's already been establish old dee

You are correct Django but I keep clinging to the hope it is not the worst.

Mitchell, Jobe, Sewell, Lewis, Bolton, Cooney (on one & a half legs). Greg Williams, one of the all time great centermen but slow as a wet week. Used his agility and footy smarts to escape opponents and find space. None are fleet footed but they have a role to play and carry it out effectively on most occasions. They burrow, fight, extract the ball and use it quickly by hand around congestion in an attempt to get tbe first clearance and link/ spread play working for us instead of giving it up to the opposition and letting them do it.

Many are also fine tacklers that often "finish off" a tackle. They know the importance of bringing a player to the ground, even burying him if possible to ensure there's one less opponent able to influence the very next contest or disposal or offer themselves up as an outlet. They also know the tiring effect this sort of play has on younger, smaller bodied less mature players over the course of 4 quarters. They certainly don't lay flimsy half hearted tackles like some in our mid rotations presently. Magner has that tackling agro and finish.

And as for your fleet folted argument... Other, than Evans at this point, I would argue that we have very few fleet footed "AFl capable" mid outsiders anyway. Certainly none worthy of keeping Magner away from an opportunity to show if he can replicate his good VFL form in the seniors if given a 3 to 5 week stint to find his AFL legs and the extra speed of the game at that level generally.

And as for the present inside mids, there's only Jones, Sylvia and McKenzie. I certainly wouldn't rate Jonez or McKenzie as fleet footed. No reason why Magner couldn't come in for McKenzie right now. McKenzie hasn't shown anything special to warrant continual selection in this line up.

Wow! Comparing Magner to these players is just a fantasy, RN. All are very quick over the first 5 metres, have amazing peripheral vision, sublime skills and time.

Club champions and incredible footballers - Magner doesn't hold a candle to these blokes.

As for the Williams argument, that's so passé - the game's pace has increased threefold.

McKenzie is a disciplined tagger that competes all day. He'll be better off for the run.

Neeld took over the list that Bailey had which yield 8.5 wins from 19 games before he was sacked for not being good enough.

Neeld has had Craig, Misson, development coaches and Clark in addition to the list he inherited. It was not a great list still very young but in terms of results Neeld has taken us significantly backwards.

And Bailey took over a spent, exhausted and talentless list after NDs final tilt flopped and Cameron was making a meal of recruiting.

Bailey had pension off Neitz, White, Yze, Robbo, Whelan and others whose careers had ended. His list was then flooded with junior players. The list got progressively younger as Bailey played the younger players as the older players retired.

The number of games that the side had for the 186 game was comparable with the games experience of the MFC side of the first two rounds in 2013.

And it should be noted that Bailey was definitely coaching to outcomes to deliver sub 5 win seasons. Neeld does not have that constraint but would fill that criteria admirably.

The team we fielded last week had less experience than the team GCS fielded in their game due to having Jamar 120 games and Clark 95 games out injured. And we had dropped Rodan and Davey (170 games).

We all know what Neeld took over and what Bailey took over but it doesn't change the fact that people are howling for Neeld's blood now while Bailey was given almost four seasons before he hit the wall with 186.

And while Bailey may have had to pension off some of his older players, he still had experienced heads like McDonald, Bruce and others while Neeld doesn't have them. On top of that, instead of pensioning off some of his older players Neeld has had a number of obstacles put in his place as a result of events that happened both before and after he came which were beyond his control. He deserves a little more respect than some are giving him in comparison to Bailey who was apparently not far from having an extra 2 year contract that would have had him coaching until the end of this season.

WJ, I agree, Mark Neeld certainly deserves respect. What confronts us now is not all of his doing. I accept that. In a an ideal world, he should be retained, but something is terribly wrong at our footy club, which requires drastic measures. It is clear that the AFL are not going to sit idly by, while the brand is being trashed.

We all know what Neeld took over and what Bailey took over but it doesn't change the fact that people are howling for Neeld's blood now while Bailey was given almost four seasons before he hit the wall with 186.

And while Bailey may have had to pension off some of his older players, he still had experienced heads like McDonald, Bruce and others while Neeld doesn't have them. On top of that, instead of pensioning off some of his older players Neeld has had a number of obstacles put in his place as a result of events that happened both before and after he came which were beyond his control. He deserves a little more respect than some are giving him in comparison to Bailey who was apparently not far from having an extra 2 year contract that would have had him coaching until the end of this season.

Unfortunately for him his 2 years are being added to Bailey's 4. Whilst this is not fair, the fair question is should we persevere with a coach if he is not the right man for the job. We did with Bailey and many on here are still a bit gun-shy. I know the answer to the question is we most certainly shouldn't and I couldn't see anyone disagreeing with that, the bit I don't know and where we get the argument is, is Mark Neeld the right man for the job.

Unfortunately for him his 2 years are being added to Bailey's 4. Whilst this is not fair, the fair question is should we persevere with a coach if he is not the right man for the job. We did with Bailey and many on here are still a bit gun-shy. I know the answer to the question is we most certainly shouldn't and I couldn't see anyone disagreeing with that, the bit I don't know and where we get the argument is, is Mark Neeld the right man for the job.

Spot on rjay.

How the decision was made to hand this tragic mess to an untried coach beggars belief.

Could not agree more. Neeld team was only less experienced last week due to injuries and omissions.

I was going to back MFC to win by 4 goals in my local tipping comp. I will have to re consider that.

Talk about flying the white flag. He won't need to give a pressed afterwards.

Just in case People think Mark Neeld was taken out of context, just follow the money.

I backed Melbourne after Trengrove was out but before he waved the flag at $1.80.

They are now not favorite and currently $2.00.

Thats a very big swing seeing there isnt anyone else injured. So Im not happy but JC what a squib.

Generation Y think things happen over night... I'd give Neeld the time till the end of his contract - who is to say by halfway through the year, things won't begin to click.

Young whipper snappers. Back in my day we'd keep coaches for three years, now they don't get to see out two years of a contract. Oh wait, Daniher, a coach serving during the early Gen Y days, is the longest serving MFC coach. I wonder if instead this has something to do with the dissatisfaction of a broad subsection of the MFC supporter base? Nah, it's just short-sighted Gen Ys.

Anyway, I get it. You're disappointed your life has passed you by, you've probably bought yourself a flashy new car, a leather jacket or motorbike, so be happy with that, but there's no way you'll convince me this has anything to do with Gen Y.

No I would not rather sack a Coach with a long term strategy and I have never wanted to or said I wanted to ?? Just like to see at least a Coach with an acceptable and credible long term strategy which in the case of the current Coach doesn't appear to be either...I just want to see us going somewhere we haven't been for a long time. I HATE sacking coaches.... I , like many others want MN to succeed...

appearances are deceptive, sox.

as are people whinging. they always say their part, & biased in their own direction.

.... of the better stronger characters in the team, the ones who haven't been let go,,, which ones are going great guns under team Neeld/Craig/Misson?????

and which ones aren't currently?

.

You make a very valid point. The words Development & Rebuild should never be heard by players. The equal subconcious relaxation.

I wish our list played with a desperation to improve skills and decision making, of which i have not seen for a long time.

Remember that Friday Night flogging by Geelong in the rain? (2008?)...We are still at that point 5 seasons later...Re bloody building.

It is a mere excuse.

... you cannot do a good job rebuilding, or building on soft mud...

you need good solid foundations to do the rebuild upon.

& it takes a very good engineer to see/know the pitfalls & do the necessary things to ensure the building will stand up to all issues along its lifetime.

not every AFL player,,, big names are often the worst as an engineering point of view, to building something as intricate as a culture, & most coaches can only build a structure, without building the complete job well.

One that will stand up in Torrents, Storms, & Earthquakes... any dumbass can nail 2 planks together.

Not everyone can foresee the weaknesses & likely issues to be faced down the track. this is where a true culture shifter is required, to get the Melbourne Football Club out of its cultural Mire of 46 Years in the making...

.

BM shows the people skills required of a coach and he began with a list that did not have the potential of MFC's list - he also, sensibly, did not unreasonably raise expectations, and he has maintained a sensible and simple game plan, even though the Doggies struggled to find a key forward!

... what, How would you know hardnut, & do you know Brendan McCartney.. do you know Mark Neeld?

the clubs situations are very different over the last 5 years journey.

Melbourne's 5 Yrs are very turbulent,,, & the Doggies are very stable for the supporters.

big difference to peoples perceptions.

.

Unfortunately for him his 2 years are being added to Bailey's 4. Whilst this is not fair, the fair question is should we persevere with a coach if he is not the right man for the job. We did with Bailey and many on here are still a bit gun-shy. I know the answer to the question is we most certainly shouldn't and I couldn't see anyone disagreeing with that, the bit I don't know and where we get the argument is, is Mark Neeld the right man for the job.

... thats right, & by his actions I can see he Is.

he is Not a pushover, he stands by his principles & will not bow in the face of public ignorance.

this is a sound character trait.

don't give in to people squealing about their own personal interests, & expect to hear the Reality (truth)... just their version, in their eyes.

.

Is this sunday the Beginning of the End or the End of the beginning?

IMO a loss this weekend will mean we have the worst list in the Comp.

Then you may as well suggest that St Kilda also has an equally inept list as us given GC beat them in round 1. But let's not that fact get in the way of an overreaction shall we...

Wow! Comparing Magner to these players is just a fantasy, RN. All are very quick over the first 5 metres, have amazing peripheral vision, sublime skills and time.

Club champions and incredible footballers - Magner doesn't hold a candle to these blokes.

As for the Williams argument, that's so passé - the game's pace has increased threefold.

McKenzie is a disciplined tagger that competes all day. He'll be better off for the run.

Lol. Too funny Jumbo. So you're saying, if given the opportunity today, you would overlook a Greg Williams type in favour of say McKenzie?

Not comparing Magner to any of those in terms of what he's acheived or likely to mate. The fact that you managed to garner that into your feable response shows that you don't have a good grasp on the game. None of these players have amazing burst speed as you claim. They might have strength through the core and legs and be able to break tackles and find their way through a tackle or 2 into space but certainly not fleet of foot.

Magner is a minnow, having played in most cases about 8 seasons less in experience to these guys. So it's definitely not an attempt to compare him to them as we have no basis upon which to do so over such a lengthy period. To make it easier for you, Magner and others like him who don't have great leg or burst speed have the capability of playing at the highest level and either being 'ok' at it, 'good' at it or in some cases even great at it. We might also find, given enough opportunity on the park, that he is woeful at it. But the difference between the way I see the game and the way you see it is chalk and cheese.

You believe an ordinary footballer like McKenzie deserves to hold his place before giving the likes of Magner, who may also prove to be ordinary, a go. You also probably have the same view on other ordinary footballers lile Bail and Strauss. Whereas I see it along the lines that if someone showes decent form weeks on end at Casey and the role/opportunity arises for him to be given a chance (and it has) and he's earned it plus he is needed (and he is as part of inside mid rotations with Grimes and Trengove out) then he should be given that opportunity to prove he can replicate something like his VFL form at AFL level.

Some people are beyond foresight/vision and logic though so I'm not expecting you to change your narrow view.

We all know what Neeld took over and what Bailey took over but it doesn't change the fact that people are howling for Neeld's blood now while Bailey was given almost four seasons before he hit the wall with 186.

And while Bailey may have had to pension off some of his older players, he still had experienced heads like McDonald, Bruce and others while Neeld doesn't have them. On top of that, instead of pensioning off some of his older players Neeld has had a number of obstacles put in his place as a result of events that happened both before and after he came which were beyond his control. He deserves a little more respect than some are giving him in comparison to Bailey who was apparently not far from having an extra 2 year contract that would have had him coaching until the end of this season.

Neeld managed to hit the wall earlier against Port Adelaide and Essendon. That was his 186.

I would have thought the obstacle of playing for draft picks was a significant obstacle in itself. And our ineptitude at managing it has been made plain to see.

Bailey was never close to getting another 2 year contract in 2011.

And just because Bailey got longer than he should because the Board had little idea of what happening in the FD ( Groundhog Day) is no basis to suggest Neeld is strangely entitled to that.

The bottom line is that the Clubs performances have gone backwards even further since they sacked Bailey.

We must be the only Club around that argues that Neeld should run his term when he has a W/L % sub 20%. It's a remarkable culture we have at MFC.

I'm no hypocrite.

It's just pointless arguing with you.

Stuie is on the blame Neeld bus as well

Maybe you guys could catch up and pat each other on the back for being in agreement.

Now rack off and spout your dribble to someone else

Rooster, you and Stuie slugging it out is a match made in heaven. Two absolute titans that could not be split on points. Like a couple of well meaning bookends.

Unfortunately for him his 2 years are being added to Bailey's 4. Whilst this is not fair, the fair question is should we persevere with a coach if he is not the right man for the job. We did with Bailey and many on here are still a bit gun-shy. I know the answer to the question is we most certainly shouldn't and I couldn't see anyone disagreeing with that, the bit I don't know and where we get the argument is, is Mark Neeld the right man for the job.

Bingo. Honestly, I suspect some who are so adamant in their defence of Neeld are basically afraid to admit that maybe his appointment was just another poor decision made by this club, to add to the list.

Afraid to admit that maybe Neeld isn't the anointed saviour after all, and is just an untried coach completely out of his depth.

All we had to hold onto were wins against the expansion clubs. As it stands, could anyone put their hand to heart and say they would really be surprised if we got beaten by 10 goals on Sunday? Playing an out of form Gold Coast at the MCG, and a thrashing wouldn't be unexpected. That is where we sit under Neeld. 18 months on and his " hardest team to play against" is by far the easiest. A given 4 points for practically every team in the AFL. An entirely uncompetitive, messy joke.

It's all very well to say we need stability, but essentially committing ourselves to losses before the ball has been bounced only serves to stabilise the losing culture at this club.

Neeld managed to hit the wall earlier against Port Adelaide and Essendon. That was his 186.

I would have thought the obstacle of playing for draft picks was a significant obstacle in itself. And our ineptitude at managing it has been made plain to see.

Bailey was never close to getting another 2 year contract in 2011.

And just because Bailey got longer than he should because the Board had little idea of what happening in the FD ( Groundhog Day) is no basis to suggest Neeld is strangely entitled to that.

The bottom line is that the Clubs performances have gone backwards even further since they sacked Bailey.

We must be the only Club around that argues that Neeld should run his term when he has a W/L % sub 20%. It's a remarkable culture we have at MFC.

OMG, we agree RR. Can you believe it? Points well made Rhino.

OMG, we agree RR. Can you believe it? Points well made Rhino.

Cheers Iva. We both want a more successful MFC and believe serious changes should be made. Here's to a brighter future.