How do you fix this?

[bing181 9,193]

Time for Jackson (and the AFL) to step up; tell the members "what the hell is going on".

Not sure what more he can say than "we're just not very good". Or, we have too many players who are just not very good.

No easy fix, no conspiracies either. As Neeld said today, we're relying (too much) on players who have a handful of games. What happened to all our draft picks - e.g. where are some of the "3 year" players, the ones who should be getting up/over 50 games by now, and establishing themselves as decent AFL players, or even "stars"? Strauss, Blease, Tapscott were highish draft picks, then add in Jetta and Bail. These are fringe players at Melbourne (for the moment anyway). But compare that to even mid-level sides e.g. North: Players in that same age bracket include Cunnington, Ziebel, Bastignac, Harper, Atley.

We have massive holes in our list, from the absence of good if not great experienced players (over 150 games), right down to the second and third year players who we should be getting something out of by now.

The road is long.

[Sir Why You Little 36,983]

The changes need to start tomorrow from the top down

[dee-eee 231]

We figure out what we would normally do . . . then just do the opposite.

Didn't George Costanza already try that ?

[bush demon 2,038]

Not really into importing captains or "culture".

It's a slap in the face of the leaders we have.

Just get a coach who has a sense of purpose and wants to make the team as efficient as possible.

Going through the process and going through the motions are the same thing and lead nowhere.

But they have to believe they can win.

There is no belief.

We imported Checker-Hughes from Richmond in 1934 and it was the start of ten premierships. Carlton imported Barassi and he was the saviour of that club as well as North.

[biggestred 5,015]

How do we get through this? Alcohol.

[Sir Why You Little 36,983]

We imported Checker-Hughes from Richmond in 1934 and it was the start of ten premierships. Carlton imported Barassi and he was the saviour of that club as well as North.

Spot on.

It is time to Head Hunt the best.

Otherwise the MFC is dead.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,190]

Not sure what more he can say than "we're just not very good". Or, we have too many players who are just not very good.

No easy fix, no conspiracies either. As Neeld said today, we're relying (too much) on players who have a handful of games. What happened to all our draft picks - e.g. where are some of the "3 year" players, the ones who should be getting up/over 50 games by now, and establishing themselves as decent AFL players, or even "stars"? Strauss, Blease, Tapscott were highish draft picks, then add in Jetta and Bail. These are fringe players at Melbourne (for the moment anyway). But compare that to even mid-level sides e.g. North: Players in that same age bracket include Cunnington, Ziebel, Bastignac, Harper, Atley.

We have massive holes in our list, from the absence of good if not great experienced players (over 150 games), right down to the second and third year players who we should be getting something out of by now.

The road is long.

Why aren't they playing Blease and Strauss? They need to get games into these guys or if they think they're not good enough delist them at the end of the year. No use sitting on the fence and have them clog up the list (FWIW I think Blease will make a good player not sold yet on Strauss simply because I haven't seen enough of him).

[jackaub 1,402]

Rumour is that Melbourne Football Club is actually an elaborate reality television series designed to measure football supporter's breaking points. All other supporters are actually paid actors as are clearly the players, coaching panel and board...

hOoooaoaooa hahahahahhahaha Best post i have read here Thanks Norm Smith,s Curse

[jumbo returns 6,739]

Spot on.

It is time to Head Hunt the best.

Otherwise the MFC is dead.

Easy fix?

Head hunt the best what?

Players are the ones that need to kick to a target, handball to a player IN SPACE, kick goals from 30 WITHOUT PRESSURE and run hard together.

Another hard nosed RDB? Players will sulk and start 'not buying in?'

Please stop your constant parroting of 'Sack the coach' - have a long, hard look at the LIST!

Apologies for the capitals.

[Dee Dee 1,105]

This board our administration our current coaching all need to be sacked.

Our club needs to be taken over by the AFL.

We have allowed this club to be run into oblivion all on the back of snake oil salesmen who only ever promised a false dawn.

I can't tolerate this slow death any longer I need to see action from somewhere.

We are that dead horse.

Both you and Mr Rino make the same assertion to have us taken over by the AFL.

Is that possible? Would our constitution allow such a move?

Surely the members would need to vote on the matter at an extraordinary general meeting!

Wow what a meeting that would be!!!!!

All you lawyers - can the AFL just step in?

[Clark_Kent 315]

We have a serious issue at the club. Due to some highly dubious drafting practices over a number of years, we have a list f players who largely fall into two categories. Hard nuts without skills and skilled players without guts. There are a few players with both qualities who are trying to carry the team, but simply put not enough of them. This leaves us with a dilemma. Do we play the hard players who will fight for the ball, win contests and then turn it over, or do we play the ones who will use the ball really well but can't win a physical contest and so will be smashed at stoppages and in traffic? At present, we appear to be taking the former tack and playing guys who will contest for the footy but who have very limited game sense and skill. It's clearly not working.

What do we do to fix this? Again, there are two avenues. Firstly, we can try to get the skilled players to be harder at the ball and the hard players to think about what they are doing and use it better. Secondly, we can call the majority of the list a wash and trade/delist them and start drafting pure footballers who won't shirk a contest and can use the ball. The first option has a chance of delivering a degree of success in the short term, but I don't think we can get either group up to the standard they need to be to compete at the top level. The second option basically admits that the bulk of the list is a wash and starts again, setting us back at the beginning of "the rebuild" and requiring us to do it all over again, but it may in time deliver us a better result. One important point here would be the ongoing issue of a lack of senior players, since they would likely desert in droves if we followed this path.

I was thinking something very similar the other day. We seem to have players who don't really fit in anywhere. Watts isn't big enough to be a key forward/back but isn't really fast enough to be a mid. Tapscott is tough but lacks speed and nouse and any idea of how to win possesion. Nicholson has speed and fitness but really doesn't have a football brain. The same could be said about ex players like Morton, he wasn't quite a mid but also wasn't quite a back. Why do we draft these players? It's ok to have some flexibility but really players have to be good in one area. Either they are a ball winning mid, a gut runner to space, a small speedy forward, a big pack busting fwd. So effing frustrating!!!

[Fat Tony 5,220]

Fats,

The sand is at the bottom of the glass on free agency and expansion clubs.

MFC has shown over the past 15 years and certainly in the 5 years that we are unable to competently manage our affairs.

Vlad is not going to pour money and opportunities on incompetent operations.

The best way they can assist us is the key appointments I mentioned.

If the AFL wants a competitive 18 team comp then it needs to specifically bail MFC out of this mess.

This is greater than some warm and fuzzy advocacy issue. MFC problems are its own doing and needs more in the short term and a longer range re balancing of the comp.

That's why Jackson is there now.

The AFL stepping in will make little difference. If anything, it could highlight to AFL just how little it needs the MFC. We are a dwindling club with a small supporter base that is operating in an overcrowded market. In fact, our administration has done a reasonable job in converting our barrackers into supporters and members over the years.

Our drafting has been appalling and is the crux of our current position. However, drafting is a very inexact science and while the AFL could help boost our resources in this area, this effort could still be in vein in the near term.

The AFL may be able to help by funding a high profile coach, but then again ‘saviours’ have tended to be no such thing.

I can’t see how the AFL can really help us in retaining our best uncontracted players (Sylvia, Watts and Gawn) if they want to leave.

What the AFL can do is give us priority picks, change the system to provide clubs at the bottom with greater salary caps, redistribute more revenue to the poorer clubs, fixture our games so we are on free to air TV more often and assist us in gaining sponsorships.

[Nasher 33,607]

My conservative estimate just going over the list quickly says there at least 15 (more likely 17-18 plus another couple who are too inexperienced to jude) players there who simply aren't good enough. We have 1 good midfielder, a couple passable another couple too young and about 23 flankers on the list. This is our problem, we need players who can run through the midfield and be effective we have an abundance of guys like Strauss, Blease, Davey, Rodan, Byrnes, Bail, Tapscotr, Grimes, Nicholson, Dunn, Sylvia etc who either aren't up to scratch or can play well as flankers but not midfielders. You need at least 8 good midfielders these days and closer to 14 to compete for top 4. We have 1 with potentially another 2 more if you want to count Viney and M Jones.

So how do you fix this problem? If you delist all 15 of your NQR players at once, you go so deep in to the draft that you're finding 8 more Nicholsons, Couches and Bails, only now they have zero games experience rather than 30 to 50. If you are lucky you might find a Matt Jones or two, but while he is handy, that hardly seems like the path out of oblivion.

No, the replacement of NQRs has to be piecemeal, otherwise the very real possibility is the side getting even worse. Don't think that is possible? Neither did I until this year. Delisting players currently in our best 22 is not going to help us at all, because they have to be replaced with someone.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,190]

I was thinking something very similar the other day. We seem to have players who don't really fit in anywhere. Watts isn't big enough to be a key forward/back but isn't really fast enough to be a mid. Tapscott is tough but lacks speed and nouse and any idea of how to win possesion. Nicholson has speed and fitness but really doesn't have a football brain. The same could be said about ex players like Morton, he wasn't quite a mid but also wasn't quite a back. Why do we draft these players? It's ok to have some flexibility but really players have to be good in one area. Either they are a ball winning mid, a gut runner to space, a small speedy forward, a big pack busting fwd. So effing frustrating!!!

Drafting or development?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,190]

So how do you fix this problem? If you delist all 15 of your NQR players at once, you go so deep in to the draft that you're finding 8 more Nicholsons, Couches and Bails, only now they have zero games experience rather than 30 to 50. If you are lucky you might find a Matt Jones or two, but while he is handy, that hardly seems like the path out of oblivion.

No, the replacement of NQRs has to be piecemeal, otherwise the very real possibility is the side getting even worse. Don't think that is possible? Neither did I until this year. Delisting players currently in our best 22 is not going to help us at all, because they have to be replaced with someone.

I agree but that doesn't change the fact that a large portion of our list are simply not up to it. Unfortunately it's going to take more time (at least 3 years plus more to get exoperience and development into them) which can be mitigated somewhat through trading but then you ahve the even bigger task of trying to convince the players we need to come to the club.

We will not be a serious finals contender until our younger guys like Trengove and Grimes are the senior players teaching the new kids coming through which is at least 5 years off (ie when Trengove is 26-27). Until then we need to start building from the ground up with strong foundations so that in 5 years time we have the right leaders in place who can then teach the kids coming through at that stage. The hard sell is 1) to keep the players we want on the list until then and 2) to keep the supporters/members/sponsors to keep showing up and signing up. The culture of this club and the playing list has been so utterly destroyed over the last 6 years (not that it was perfect before then because it definitely was not) that I think this is the only way forward. It is disgraceful that the inept mismanagement of the club has come to this but "It is what it is".

[jazza 1,323]

Easy fix?

Head hunt the best what?

Players are the ones that need to kick to a target, handball to a player IN SPACE, kick goals from 30 WITHOUT PRESSURE and run hard together.

Another hard nosed RDB? Players will sulk and start 'not buying in?'

Please stop your constant parroting of 'Sack the coach' - have a long, hard look at the LIST!

Apologies for the capitals.

as usual very well put

couldnt believe average players trying lookaway handballs .no doubt another monday rant from fd

sacking the coach mmmmmmm., i still dont see the point of this. it wont stop frawley giving up when we have 3 goals kicked against us in the first 3 minutes.

i can only imagine how frustrating it must be to teach a young man to approach a game in a certain way and then watch senoir players lead him down the track of laziness .

as for building from the ground up. your right dr gonzo, its difficult when you still have bad apples in the mix

im not a fan of the coach but im a fan of rebuild and all for one. unfortunately this fd has inherited a group of < we have always done it our way> and the chasm is slowly starting to appear between the new and the lazy. couldnt help but think this may be intentional to show the newer players its< either this way or get traded> and the older set is struggling to come to terms with the new regime

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

I agree but that doesn't change the fact that a large portion of our list are simply not up to it. Unfortunately it's going to take more time (at least 3 years plus more to get exoperience and development into them) which can be mitigated somewhat through trading but then you ahve the even bigger task of trying to convince the players we need to come to the club.

We will not be a serious finals contender until our younger guys like Trengove and Grimes are the senior players teaching the new kids coming through which is at least 5 years off (ie when Trengove is 26-27). Until then we need to start building from the ground up with strong foundations so that in 5 years time we have the right leaders in place who can then teach the kids coming through at that stage. The hard sell is 1) to keep the players we want on the list until then and 2) to keep the supporters/members/sponsors to keep showing up and signing up. The culture of this club and the playing list has been so utterly destroyed over the last 6 years (not that it was perfect before then because it definitely was not) that I think this is the only way forward. It is disgraceful that the inept mismanagement of the club has come to this but "It is what it is".

Doc, I do not disagree with you at all. But to say it is what it is is not good enough I'm afraid. While you will not suddenly become stars, you have to be seen to be doing something positive and in turn, the list, as inadequate as it may be, shows more positivity. The market demands that we do.

[rpfc 28,262]

So how do you fix this problem? If you delist all 15 of your NQR players at once, you go so deep in to the draft that you're finding 8 more Nicholsons, Couches and Bails, only now they have zero games experience rather than 30 to 50. If you are lucky you might find a Matt Jones or two, but while he is handy, that hardly seems like the path out of oblivion.

No, the replacement of NQRs has to be piecemeal, otherwise the very real possibility is the side getting even worse. Don't think that is possible? Neither did I until this year. Delisting players currently in our best 22 is not going to help us at all, because they have to be replaced with someone.

Action needs to be deliberate and considered.

As you say, we cannot simply get rid of another 15 players and 'start' again with training and developing players. Especially those at the end of the draft whose best hope is to become one of those many NQR players we constantly lament.

There is a common refrain in the NBA that there is, at any one time, about 15 'superstars' capable of a deep run in the finals.

That number is not far off in our game either. We have 18 teams in our league and about 40 'stars' of which you can mould your team around. The rest of the players are kids, role players with one or two elite facets to their game (vast majority), or NQR players fashioned into a role player or waiting to be spurned.

We have to, again, trust our judgement in the draft on the high end picks and make sound decisions on whether it is beneficial to replace a Bail (to use an example) for Pick 78 or PSD1.

That is the only way out of our playing list issues.

[Craig Drinker 179]

I don't believe the list is that bad. It appears that way because for whatever reason they are not responding to the current coaching group.

I personally think the only way forward is with some coaching changes.We need someone who the players, understand and are respond to.

The chemistry just isn't right at the moment.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,190]

Doc, I do not disagree with you at all. But to say it is what it is is not good enough I'm afraid. While you will not suddenly become stars, you have to be seen to be doing something positive and in turn, the list, as inadequate as it may be, shows more positivity. The market demands that we do.

I agree - the "it is what it is" comment was just a flippant tongue in cheek remark referencing Neeld.

[Theo 272]

Gerard Whately said this morning that he heard Neeld was given 4 weeks to prove himself. This ends after the Hawthorn game.

A change is likely before the Collingwood game.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,190]

I don't believe the list is that bad. It appears that way because for whatever reason they are not responding to the current coaching group.

I personally think the only way forward is with some coaching changes.We need someone who the players, understand and are respond to.

The chemistry just isn't right at the moment.

The list is not as bad as they are performing and I agree the coaches/FD needs to change as does the admin side of the club. However they are still bad and I think the best this group could hope for at the moment is to push up to 9th-12th on the ladder all things going right - possibly a rung or two higher if other teams collapse through injuries etc.

To put it plainly we need guys with good skills who can run through the middle and win their own ball and we need about a dozen of them. We have Nathan Jones and then possibly a few others like Viney, Matt Jones, Trengove, Toumpas IF they come on. You need at least 8 or so to make finals and about 14 of these guys to push for a flag. We have 1 and maybe 5 at a stretch. Compare this tithe sides in the 8 and even those in the lower half of the ladder like GWS, GC, Brisbane, Port etc

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Gerard Whately said this morning that he heard Neeld was given 4 weeks to prove himself. This ends after the Hawthorn game.

A change is likely before the Collingwood game.

What if the players knew this and didn't like Neeld?

[binman 42,681]

Gerard Whately said this morning that he heard Neeld was given 4 weeks to prove himself. This ends after the Hawthorn game.

A change is likely before the Collingwood game.

If that's true we'll get conclusive evidence one way or the other if Neeld has the support of the players. All evidence thus far is he hasn't and if we play with a similar lack of effort this week Hawthorn will destroy us. I can sense a massive, massive loss and unfortunately would not be surprised if it was 20 goals plus.

[rpfc 28,262]

What if the players knew this and didn't like Neeld?

That kind of ultimatum has a lot of issues besides the one you have pointed out.

I really don't think Jackson would have given this. It doesn't make sense to me - he is there in massive part to restructure the FD. Everyone knows this and they are aware there will be changes. Giving ultimatums on top of that over an abritrary number of weeks is pointless and draws Jackson into a corner.

I call BS.