A lot has been written about our fitness/training having improved since Neeld took over. Here are some of the facts:

• Neeld and Misson have been with the club for two pre-seasons.
• 45% of our list has been turned over since Bailey departed.
• We have been outscored 44 to 271 in second halves this year.

the base fitness levels were krap according to my nephew and it was understood last season would be a waste on field, it was also taken by committee that this year would be difficult , fitness wise, but next year the base fitness level quoted by neeld and misson was meant to be equal of collingwood. so this isnt really our issue at the moment

trade choices, and previous admin and fd are said to be responsible . im still on the fence either way and im just trying to remain positive for the next 2 weeks.

i think we all need less bagging and more positive outlooks

the base fitness levels were krap according to my nephew and it was understood last season would be a waste on field, it was also taken by committee that this year would be difficult , fitness wise, but next year the base fitness level quoted by neeld and misson was meant to be equal of collingwood. so this isnt really our issue at the moment

trade choices, and previous admin and fd are said to be responsible .

So when does it cease to be all Bailey's fault?

So when does it cease to be all Bailey's fault?

Next year.

i was told after malthouse saw 2 games towards the end of 2011, he said it took 3 preseasons for collingwood to see benefit of this training regime

im not saying this is the answer , just that opinion was very clear that base fitness levels were poor and 3 preseasons was regarded as the modern template. im not convinced , just relaying the info

So when does it cease to be all Bailey's fault?

So when does it cease to be all Bailey's fault?

When we make up for all the dud draft picks and the poor player developement, which won't be this year and maybe not next either

neeld, quote, 2014 should show results,

committee took him for his word

When we make up for all the dud draft picks and the poor player developement, which won't be this year and maybe not next either

So when does it cease to be all Bailey's fault?

Well said.

This is crap. We played a hard running style and Bailey and ran out games better than this.

Hell we ran out games better last season.

Fitness can't be the issue. Further, I reject the notion that we were so far behind it has/will take us 3 pre seasons to build back to an AFL standard.

well the admin believed him??????

Well said.

This is crap. We played a hard running style and Bailey and ran out games better than this.

Hell we ran out games better last season.

Fitness can't be the issue. Further, I reject the notion that we were so far behind it has/will take us 3 pre seasons to build back to an AFL standard.

Don't let the spin fool you. After 18 months under Neeld the scoreboard shows 44 to 271 in second halves against two bottom eight sides and one finalist from the year before.

And for the record, we won 8.5 AFL games with the base level fitness.

Don't let the spin fool you. After 18 months under Neeld the scoreboard shows 44 to 271 in second halves against two bottom eight sides and one finalist from the year before.

And for the record, we won 8.5 AFL games with the base level fitness.

Makes me wonder if you are Mark Neeld..... throwing around all these stats

Just a quick question - How long is a piece of sting?...... All your comments are based on speculation. Not sure if you realise [censored] changes. 8.5 wins in 2010 means nothing today.

And for the record it's 2 coaches in 2/3 years this list hasn't played for......

Maybe every 18 months we need to change coaches to keep the players fresh.... That could be the secret

When Bailey left our record was 7-9-1 for that season. Now I am not saying that the fitness was where it needed to be however to win 7 games at the AFL level, you need some fitness.

That said, there is no doubt the fitness credentials are higher now.

Well said.

This is crap. We played a hard running style and Bailey and ran out games better than this.

Hell we ran out games better last season.

Fitness can't be the issue. Further, I reject the notion that we were so far behind it has/will take us 3 pre seasons to build back to an AFL standard.

When we had the ball, we were good downhill skiers.

Our 3rd quarter percentage is 8.86.

I've said elsewhere it was telling on Saturday that while leading late in the first and second quarters we went in a goal and a half behind at 1/4 time and 1/2 time.

In other words we cannot run out entire quarters against mature sides like West Coast. We looked good, played some intense footy, crafted some positive forward moves but we appear to lack the fitness to run out entire quarters.

I'll put my faith in Neeld for a while longer. I was flattened in the pre season when he said we were still 12 months away from decent fitness and strength levels but I am prepared to see him through. I just want evident improvement this year and serious gains next year.

Lads and lasses

Go and listen to an inverview/conversation with Ox and Dr Turf talking with Derm tonight.

It's not the only reason but I reckon it highlights a lot of our problems........ Fitness or lack of from MFC players could be self inflicted

I am not against blokes enjoying themsellves and having time off, but you'd think at times like these they'd be trying to improve themselves... apprently not

I don't buy it's all Neelds fault - that interview strengthed my view

Edited April 15, 201312 yr by Unleash Hell

Just a quick question - How long is a piece of sting?.

Twice half its length.

Well said.

This is crap. We played a hard running style and Bailey and ran out games better than this.

Hell we ran out games better last season.

Fitness can't be the issue. Further, I reject the notion that we were so far behind it has/will take us 3 pre seasons to build back to an AFL standard.

It is true that we played a hard running style under Bailey. It was just that it was one way. . Reject the notion all you like. Ask a player about when they were told by Neeld, Misson and Craig what the standards at the Pies, Saints and Crows were. And how far off our players realised they were. Remember that Misson been running pre seasons at the Saints and the Swans for more than 10 years without any player discontent reaching the press until he conducted his first pre season for us.

I know it may be a dumb question, but howe the hell does it take THREE years to get fit?? I mean.........

I know it may be a dumb question, but howe the hell does it take THREE years to get fit?? I mean.........

For starters, it's not 3 years, it's 3 pre-seasons which isn't quite the same thing. Secondly, it's not about getting fit, it's about getting to the extremes of fitness needed these days to play professional AFL footy. Which takes time, because there's only so much loading the body can take without injuries.

For starters, it's not 3 years, it's 3 pre-seasons which isn't quite the same thing. Secondly, it's not about getting fit, it's about getting to the extremes of fitness needed these days to play professional AFL footy. Which takes time, because there's only so much loading the body can take without injuries.

How come we're the only club that talks about 3 pre-seasons to get fit?

Has it crossed people's minds that these people are protecting their own interests. It's called an excuse in advance. In other words, these people are all earning a truckload of money out of football and they cannot ever be seen as failures. Otherwise the money might dry up. They could easily be protecting their own careers.

So throw it out there that it's going to take 3 pre-seasons to get these players 'AFL' ready and if the team gets smashed, you've already got the excuse laid out. An extension of this ridiculous notion is that any 18 year will only be able to be 'AFL ready' in his 3rd season of footy. Viney looks ready to go. Wines as well.

It's been said that we used last years 'season proper' as another pre-season. Including the 2 actual pre-seasons, that makes 3. So why do we look so tired and unfit? I don't buy it.

It's just more spin and more bs.

.

Edited April 15, 201312 yr by Macca

They have no mental fitness. And that's what counts

How come we're the only club that talks about 3 pre-seasons to get fit?

Has it crossed people's minds that these people are protecting their own interests. It's called an excuse in advance. In other words, these people are all earning a truckload of money out of football and they cannot ever be seen as failures. Otherwise the money might dry up. They could easily be protecting their own careers.

So throw it out there that it's going to take 3 pre-seasons to get these players 'AFL' ready and if the team gets smashed, you've already got the excuse laid out. An extension of this ridiculous notion is that any 18 year will only be able to be 'AFL ready' in his 3rd season of footy. Viney looks ready to go. Wines as well.

It's been said that we used last years 'season proper' as another pre-season. Including the 2 actual pre-seasons, that makes 3. So why do we look so tired and unfit? I don't buy it.

It's just more spin and more bs.

Go out and run a marathon tomorrow then. You'll find that you can't, no matter how much you want to.

These people are physical constructs acting according to the laws of nature. Just deciding to be a good AFL player isn't enough. They need time to develop their bodies so that they can compete. Call it an excuse if you want, but don't discount the value of consistent training.

What is wrong with the players doing some extra over the off season. Who came back better before the preseason

What about a little personal responsibility and desire

Our players are weak have been looked after too much excused and not been held accountable enough

I really dont think they believe enough, the surrounding culture has made them soft and they play soft and mentally they are weak

Its the players really in the end I'm sorry to say!

They have no mental fitness. And that's what counts

this