Neeld is not the problem

[robbiefrom13 877]

Really well thought out post. It makes me wonder what Neeld was like at Ocean Grove and Collingwood - has he put on this hard act because that's what he was told was required by the board? Or has he always been this way? Surely he had some kind of nurturing ability at the other clubs.

Cam Schwab briefed him perhaps?

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Absolute crap, anyone on here who doesn't realise how insipid our midfield is is clearly in a tiny majority.

Tiny majority? hmmm.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

So, it may be joining the dots, but any sane human being can reasonably form a conclusion that Neeld hasn't connected with his players on an individual level. You don't seem to find that notion palatable and no doubt hope it's wrong, but in my opinion the circumstantial evidence, as well as some of the facts, clearly says otherwise.

How some supporters can find excuses for and wave away the worst team performance by any established club in 30 years is extraordinary. I wonder how bad it would have to be for some of you to acknowledge that we've made an error of shocking proportions.

Your last paragraph in particular is staggering. But continue on they will.

My only hope is that Neeld goes with other culprits from the FD as soon as possible and we can begin to hopefully move forward.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

So by your theory 9 of the 18 on the field that are good AFL footballers is enough for us to beat Hawthorn last week?

You might think that is a harsh opinion and it is - but just pointing out how you refuse to see the reality of the situation that the other 9 bloke have played 0 - 40 games.

Thanks for playing

This is staggering. My post was in response to a comparison made between us and the 2 "expansion teams". Nowhere did I say that with this list we had I had an expectation of beating Hawthorn last week.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

You're right I mean what do Gold Coast have???? Gary Ablett Jr (Brownlow Medallist, multiple All Australian, premiership player), Jarrod Harbrow, Jarred Brennan, Michael Rishetelli (Brisbane B&F winner), Nathan Bock (All Australian), Campbell Brown (premiership player).......and Swallow, Bennell, Dixon, Lynch, O'Meara, Matera....... should I keep going.

GWS still have the leadership of Dean Brogan (premiership player), previously had Chad Cornes (premiership player) and Junior McDonald. They are the only team you could argue should be below us if you want to focus on experience and leadership etc.

But you have no basis for suggesting that we Gold Coast should be in a worse situation than us. None whatsoever.

I did not suggest that. i was simply responding to your comparison between us and them.

[pm24 451]

This has become more and more evident. The lack of improvement in players that have been there 3-5 years now is just staggering.

Are you suggesting that a coach who has been there for 18 months is responsible for the failure to develop players over the last 3-5 years?

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

I will apologise for the lack of tact in my posts but you have offered nothing to this conversation - the circle work is frustrating

All i hear from yourself and Scoop is Neeld is bad - yet you won't articulate why or address this thread title that it's not all Neeld fault - you just hang your hat on that Neeld is the problem

articulate it otherwise it's a waste of tme

This clearly demonstrates that you do not read posts closely. I have said time and time again on here, that Neeld should not shoulder the entire blame on this. There have been shocking decisions made prior to his tenure and during it. However, I maintain Neeld is still part of the problem.

I am coming from the perspective of the "business" environment in which we must operate. You may want to wait and hope that Neeld can turn it around. In an ideal world, I would hope for that as well. The point is, the AFL won't wait and have already demonstrated that to us.

There is none so blind.

[pm24 451]

I did not suggest that. i was simply responding to your comparison between us and them.

I've just re-read your post below:

Let's compare like with like shall we. They are expansion teams, the AFL's baby, totally supported by the AFL. We have been around just a little bit longer than that and that is what makes our position so serious.

I might have gone a bit hard on you. Looks like you were only trying to highlight the "seriously" poor position we are in as a club, irrespective of the status of other clubs. I was only making the comparison with GWS and GC because of the link you made between losing margin and player buy in. However, I totally agree that this club is in a seriously troubling position, however I think it all goes further than Neeld, and that unless we can fix everything else up first, we won't be able to properly assess Neelds capacity as a Coach. I think that seems to be the conclusion that Peter Jackson came to as well. Also, I think that if there was a serious lack of buy in by the players, when Peter Jackson reportedly spoke to the senior players prior to the meeting, I'm sure that they would have communicated that to Jackson if they wanted him gone.

The fact that Jackson has decided and convinced the board to give Neeld more time, to me suggests that it is things other than Neeld that are the real problems that need to be dealt with first.

[old55 21,428]

Absolute crap, anyone on here who doesn't realise how insipid our midfield is is clearly in a tiny majority.

We all know that our midfield is abysmal.

Edit: Also, in the last few weeks we've actually been rather competitive in contested possessions and clearances. So I don't know which 'people' you're referring to.

You've been drinking Neeld's Kool-Aid. Contested possessions is his KPI

v Freo 109-150

v Hawks 118 - 163

That's some new definition of "rather competitive"

[old55 21,428]

I've just re-read your post below:

I might have gone a bit hard on you. Looks like you were only trying to highlight the "seriously" poor position we are in as a club, irrespective of the status of other clubs. I was only making the comparison with GWS and GC because of the link you made between losing margin and player buy in. However, I totally agree that this club is in a seriously troubling position, however I think it all goes further than Neeld, and that unless we can fix everything else up first, we won't be able to properly assess Neelds capacity as a Coach. I think that seems to be the conclusion that Peter Jackson came to as well. Also, I think that if there was a serious lack of buy in by the players, when Peter Jackson reportedly spoke to the senior players prior to the meeting, I'm sure that they would have communicated that to Jackson if they wanted him gone.

The fact that Jackson has decided and convinced the board to give Neeld more time, to me suggests that it is things other than Neeld that are the real problems that need to be dealt with first.

There's a subtle but important difference between giving Neeld more time and giving the club more time before it sacks him.

[pm24 451]

This clearly demonstrates that you do not read posts closely. I have said time and time again on here, that Neeld should not shoulder the entire blame on this. There have been shocking decisions made prior to his tenure and during it. However, I maintain Neeld is still part of the problem.

I am coming from the perspective of the "business" environment in which we must operate. You may want to wait and hope that Neeld can turn it around. In an ideal world, I would hope for that as well. The point is, the AFL won't wait and have already demonstrated that to us.

There is none so blind.

I can understand you feel this way given everything that has happened, but I still have my doubts, purely because the "business environment" that need has been operating in has had a weak foundation, and one could say it has been corrupted for some time by poor personalities, selfish ambition, a lack of discipline, a lack of leadership and so on and so on. Therefore, I reckon that until that business environment is fixed we cannot judge Neeld properly.

Some people have suggested that Neeld just can't coach at the AFL level. However, we should remember that we basically grabbed him out of Adelaide's hands. Had Neeld gone to Adelaide, and not had to rebuild an entire club culture, he would probably be seen in a completely different light by the AFL community. But instead he took the harder option and chose us. Secondly, Neeld was endorsed by Mick Malthouse when the club approached Malthouse for an opinion. If Malthouse didn't think a guy could coach, I doubt he'd recommend him for a head coaching position.

I just think it's too early, to judge whether Neeld can coach when the last 18 months has been spent rebuilding a player list, rebuilding a club culture, and establishing professional training standards and "football lifestyle" as he called it. With the state that our club was in, and the amount of work required for what I've stated, I doubt we've seen the best of Neeld as Coach. I can't help but think of Bomber Thompson at Geelong. There were calls for him to be sacked as well when their form was fluctuating so much. But instead Geelong chose to give him more time to coach, and reorganised the football department, and now the rest is history. Lets follow the lead of Geelong, get our structures in order first, then decide if Neeld is the best coach for us.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

I've just re-read your post below:

I might have gone a bit hard on you. Looks like you were only trying to highlight the "seriously" poor position we are in as a club, irrespective of the status of other clubs. I was only making the comparison with GWS and GC because of the link you made between losing margin and player buy in. However, I totally agree that this club is in a seriously troubling position, however I think it all goes further than Neeld, and that unless we can fix everything else up first, we won't be able to properly assess Neelds capacity as a Coach. I think that seems to be the conclusion that Peter Jackson came to as well. Also, I think that if there was a serious lack of buy in by the players, when Peter Jackson reportedly spoke to the senior players prior to the meeting, I'm sure that they would have communicated that to Jackson if they wanted him gone.

The fact that Jackson has decided and convinced the board to give Neeld more time, to me suggests that it is things other than Neeld that are the real problems that need to be dealt with first.

And that we can't afford to pay Neeld out just yet, unless the AFL bank rolls that decision.

[pm24 451]

And that we can't afford to pay Neeld out just yet, unless the AFL bank rolls that decision.

I hope that it's more than just because we can't afford it. I'd just like to see the club show the guts and show some professionalism in all this and even allow Neeld to see out his contract at a minimum. I think that in itself is an important sign to other prosective coaches that we are a professional organisation and treat our players/coaches with respect.

Something that has been severely lacking in the past with the departures of Jnr McDonald, Bailey and with the way it has handled all this pressure on Neeld. The club needed to make a statement earlier regarding Neeld. The media madness that happened on Monday should not have happened at all if the club managed this properly.

Edited June 5, 2013 by pm24

[old55 21,428]

Neeld lost me in R1 2013. I know he lost many others a long time before that. And there's still a few true believers. I cut him plenty of rope to make us more fit and harden us up defensively and in the long run there would be pay-off. In year one when I saw horrible results I was willing to accept them as part of a plan I couldn't fully understand because I'm not on the inside. But when the horrible losses continued from R1 this year and they clearly weren't part of any internal or external plan and totally unexpected for Neeld, then he was gone. Since then he's been unable to turn it around at all - our few "good" results are at the bottom end of my, and I'm sure his, expected results, the rest of the are way off the left hand end of the chart: -10 goals to GC at home! He's not the only problem, things are never that simple, but he's a big problem.

Edited June 6, 2013 by Fifty-5

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

I hope that it's more than just because we can't afford it. I'd just like to see the club show the guts and show some professionalism in all this and even allow Neeld to see out his contract at a minimum. I think that in itself is an important sign to other prosective coaches that we are a professional organisation and treat our players/coaches with respect.

Something that has been severely lacking in the past with the departures of Jnr McDonald, Bailey and with the way it has handled all this pressure on Neeld. The club needed to make a statement earlier regarding Neeld. The media madness that happened on Monday should not have happened at all if the club managed this properly.

Agreed. Other than a relatively short and written statement, we have heard very little from the President, during this time of upheaval. I wonder if he was gagged?

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

I can understand you feel this way given everything that has happened, but I still have my doubts, purely because the "business environment" that need has been operating in has had a weak foundation, and one could say it has been corrupted for some time by poor personalities, selfish ambition, a lack of discipline, a lack of leadership and so on and so on. Therefore, I reckon that until that business environment is fixed we cannot judge Neeld properly.

Some people have suggested that Neeld just can't coach at the AFL level. However, we should remember that we basically grabbed him out of Adelaide's hands. Had Neeld gone to Adelaide, and not had to rebuild an entire club culture, he would probably be seen in a completely different light by the AFL community. But instead he took the harder option and chose us. Secondly, Neeld was endorsed by Mick Malthouse when the club approached Malthouse for an opinion. If Malthouse didn't think a guy could coach, I doubt he'd recommend him for a head coaching position.

I just think it's too early, to judge whether Neeld can coach when the last 18 months has been spent rebuilding a player list, rebuilding a club culture, and establishing professional training standards and "football lifestyle" as he called it. With the state that our club was in, and the amount of work required for what I've stated, I doubt we've seen the best of Neeld as Coach. I can't help but think of Bomber Thompson at Geelong. There were calls for him to be sacked as well when their form was fluctuating so much. But instead Geelong chose to give him more time to coach, and reorganised the football department, and now the rest is history. Lets follow the lead of Geelong, get our structures in order first, then decide if Neeld is the best coach for us.

The business environment to which I was referring is external to our own "domestic" business environment. It is the environment of the entire AFL industry. Not only were we well behind before Neeld, but we have fallen further behind. As I said, if we do not do something, the AFL will take it out of our hands and get it done themselves - perhaps that has already started. However, that is the reality of the business environment that confronts us and the one in which we are obliged to compete.

[pm24 451]

Agreed. Other than a relatively short and written statement, we have heard very little from the President, during this time of upheaval. I wonder if he was gagged?

Who knows. I'd like to see Jackson come out and make a statement honestly. I'm just interested to hear him speak because if he was the one that kept a level head in the board meeting and if the rumors are true that he convinced the board to fix up the footy department first before dealing with Neeld, I reckon it would be refreshing hear a real professional speak on behalf of the club.

[timD 994]

Neeld lost me in R1 2013. I know he lost many others a long time before that. And there's still a few true believers. I cut him plenty of rope to make us more fit and harden us up defensively and in the long run there would be pay-off. In year one when I saw horrible results I was willing to accept them as part of a plan I couldn't fully understand because I'm not on the inside. But when the horrible losses continued from R1 this year and they clearly weren't part of any internal or external plan and totally unexpected for Neeld, then he was gone. Since then he's been unable to turn it around at all - our few "good" results are at the bottom end of my, and I'm sure his, expected results, the rest of the are way off the left hand end of the chart: -10 goals to GC at home! He's not the only problem, things are never that simple, but he's a big problem.

When I saw how brittle the team was on the field I thought "How can they play that badly...they aren't that bad!" They completely lack on-field leadership and in 18/12, Neeld has not built it - a team - nor does he appear to have a single plan to do so. The players look like they do not want to be there. It is easy to see. Neeld missed the players and that means he is not the right bloke to coach. Maybe some other position, but not senior coach.

[titan_uranus 22,635]

It's not crap. Firstly, there's quite a few here who seriously thought we were a team due to be on the up in 2012. Secondly, of those who recognise that we have a shocking midfield, I would say any who are focusing on Neeld are by extension under-estimating how bad our midfield is and how unlikely it is that we can win games with this midfield.

Our midfield is that bad by any reckoning that whoever assembled it ought to be sued in negligence. Seriously. And the way footy is played this year, it is even harder than ever to counter a bad midfield.

Most people still don't get it.

Expecting us to be a team due to be on the up does not mean you also thought our midfield is good.

Besides which, that's not what HT's silly statement was about. You and he are trying to say that people right now don't realise our midfield is bad. Who are those people?! Even the most positive Melbourne supporter understands that we have a midfield that would hardly compete at VFL level.

You're just spouting hyperbolic nonsense to claim otherwise.

Tiny majority? hmmm.

Oops, good pick up.

You've been drinking Neeld's Kool-Aid. Contested possessions is his KPI

v Freo 109-150

v Hawks 118 - 163

That's some new definition of "rather competitive"

I was following the stats during the came and at half time it was much closer than that. Granted, clearly it didn't play out over the course of the match so that's not great.

I'm not drinking Neeld's anything. I don't believe he is the right coach for us, I don't think he's doing a good enough job, and I don't think he's going to be here in 2014. But I do take umbrage at stupid comments like 'people don't recognise how bad our midfield is', when we all do.

[CHAMP 347]

I can understand you feel this way given everything that has happened, but I still have my doubts, purely because the "business environment" that need has been operating in has had a weak foundation, and one could say it has been corrupted for some time by poor personalities, selfish ambition, a lack of discipline, a lack of leadership and so on and so on. Therefore, I reckon that until that business environment is fixed we cannot judge Neeld properly.

Some people have suggested that Neeld just can't coach at the AFL level. However, we should remember that we basically grabbed him out of Adelaide's hands. Had Neeld gone to Adelaide, and not had to rebuild an entire club culture, he would probably be seen in a completely different light by the AFL community. But instead he took the harder option and chose us. Secondly, Neeld was endorsed by Mick Malthouse when the club approached Malthouse for an opinion. If Malthouse didn't think a guy could coach, I doubt he'd recommend him for a head coaching position.

I just think it's too early, to judge whether Neeld can coach when the last 18 months has been spent rebuilding a player list, rebuilding a club culture, and establishing professional training standards and "football lifestyle" as he called it. With the state that our club was in, and the amount of work required for what I've stated, I doubt we've seen the best of Neeld as Coach. I can't help but think of Bomber Thompson at Geelong. There were calls for him to be sacked as well when their form was fluctuating so much. But instead Geelong chose to give him more time to coach, and reorganised the football department, and now the rest is history. Lets follow the lead of Geelong, get our structures in order first, then decide if Neeld is the best coach for us.

You'd hope that we have yet to see Neeld's best else it'd be just plain sad.

At least The Cats under Bomber were fluctuating early on, apart from a fluke against Essendon and a few moderate wins against fellow minnows our form has been predictably mediocre, verging upon putrid. At least some fluctuation carries hope.

[Choko 493]

Expecting us to be a team due to be on the up does not mean you also thought our midfield is good.

Besides which, that's not what HT's silly statement was about. You and he are trying to say that people right now don't realise our midfield is bad. Who are those people?! Even the most positive Melbourne supporter understands that we have a midfield that would hardly compete at VFL level.

You're just spouting hyperbolic nonsense to claim otherwise.

Oops, good pick up.

I was following the stats during the came and at half time it was much closer than that. Granted, clearly it didn't play out over the course of the match so that's not great.

I'm not drinking Neeld's anything. I don't believe he is the right coach for us, I don't think he's doing a good enough job, and I don't think he's going to be here in 2014. But I do take umbrage at stupid comments like 'people don't recognise how bad our midfield is', when we all do.

I think you still miss the point. The fact of our midfield means we cannot be on the up. It is not possible. Failing to understand that means failing to understand how bad our midfield is!

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

This clearly demonstrates that you do not read posts closely. I have said time and time again on here, that Neeld should not shoulder the entire blame on this. There have been shocking decisions made prior to his tenure and during it. However, I maintain Neeld is still part of the problem.

I am coming from the perspective of the "business" environment in which we must operate. You may want to wait and hope that Neeld can turn it around. In an ideal world, I would hope for that as well. The point is, the AFL won't wait and have already demonstrated that to us.

There is none so blind.

I readily admit that I do not have the time to put in the effort in to posts that I probably should

You want to speak about 'business' issues then you need to make that clear yourself as it is my opinion that Neeld is not directly responsible for this. This is the responsibility of the board.

It's not a massive issue Iv'a you have every right to believe whatever you like..... Fact remains that Neeld is not solely responsible for the MFCs position and people need to open their eyes to the fact on and off field its gong to take a while to fix this club

Sacking Neeld won't make all the issues go away - Neeld inherited a shite club and it shows - there are no quick fixes

Edited June 6, 2013 by Unleash Hell

[pm24 451]

The business environment to which I was referring is external to our own "domestic" business environment. It is the environment of the entire AFL industry. Not only were we well behind before Neeld, but we have fallen further behind. As I said, if we do not do something, the AFL will take it out of our hands and get it done themselves - perhaps that has already started. However, that is the reality of the business environment that confronts us and the one in which we are obliged to compete.

I think I'd argue that under Neeld the football department has been doing something about trying to catch up to the pack with the additional funds allocated for the extra coaches, and other specialists like Misson and Craig. I'm hoping that by the end of the year, or even next season that will see the club become more competitive within the football industry and on the field. I actually think we've fallen behind because of the change in the list and the lack of quality mids this team has had. The failed recruitment/development of guys like Gysberts and Morton, the misfortune of injuries to Trengove, the loss of Brock McLean due the path of the club (I wish we had him now!!!), the mishandling of Jnr McDonald etc etc, have I think lead to were we are now placed under Neeld.

If our midfield was reliant on McLean, Sylvia, Jones, (I've intentionally omitted Moloney from this list) a properly developed Gysberts/Morton, we would not be anywhere near as bad as we have been this season. We have gone backwards since Neeld started, but I think it's a culmination of things that have lead us there, and in many ways we needed to go backwards, and restart in certain areas in order to catch up long term.

However, as I said, I think we are doing something to rectify the failures of the past under the current group. New training standards, new recruitment team, new approach to football for the players, more money for the football department. I reckon we just need to wait another 6-12 months before we see the fruits of those efforts.

[pm24 451]

This clearly demonstrates that you do not read posts closely. I have said time and time again on here, that Neeld should not shoulder the entire blame on this. There have been shocking decisions made prior to his tenure and during it. However, I maintain Neeld is still part of the problem.

I am coming from the perspective of the "business" environment in which we must operate. You may want to wait and hope that Neeld can turn it around. In an ideal world, I would hope for that as well. The point is, the AFL won't wait and have already demonstrated that to us.

There is none so blind.

I readily admit that I do not have the time to put in the effort in to posts that I probably should

You want to speak about 'business' issues then you need to make that clear yourself as it is my opinion that Neeld is not directly responsible for this. This is the responsibility of the board.

It's not a massive issue Iv'a you have every right to believe whatever you like..... Fact remains that Neeld is not solely responsible for the MFCs position and people need to open their eyes to the fact on and off field its gong to take a while to fix this club

Sacking Neeld won't make all the issues go away - Neeld inherited a shite club and it shows - there are no quick fixes

Ummm I actually think you are both saying the same thing, that is, that the fault for the state of the club shouldn't rest on Neeld alone, the only difference is that one of you are saying they believe that Neeld should shoulder some of the blame, the other is not.

You've both actually said that the problems also go deeper than Neeld. So you are only disagreeing on one point....

[Scipio 5,868]

I think I'd argue that under Neeld the football department has been doing something about trying to catch up to the pack with the additional funds allocated for the extra coaches, and other specialists like Misson and Craig. I'm hoping that by the end of the year, or even next season that will see the club become more competitive within the football industry and on the field. I actually think we've fallen behind because of the change in the list and the lack of quality mids this team has had. The failed recruitment/development of guys like Gysberts and Morton, the misfortune of injuries to Trengove, the loss of Brock McLean due the path of the club (I wish we had him now!!!), the mishandling of Jnr McDonald etc etc, have I think lead to were we are now placed under Neeld.

If our midfield was reliant on McLean, Sylvia, Jones, (I've intentionally omitted Moloney from this list) a properly developed Gysberts/Morton, we would not be anywhere near as bad as we have been this season. We have gone backwards since Neeld started, but I think it's a culmination of things that have lead us there, and in many ways we needed to go backwards, and restart in certain areas in order to catch up long term.

However, as I said, I think we are doing something to rectify the failures of the past under the current group. New training standards, new recruitment team, new approach to football for the players, more money for the football department. I reckon we just need to wait another 6-12 months before we see the fruits of those efforts.

It seems to me that we have gone out and got all the required personnel to build a modern football department, we just had nfi about how to structure it or set it up. Evidenced by Jackson's comment that he can't even tell if Neeld can coach or not because of the way we are set up.

Jackson should be able to sort this out I hope.