Neeld is not the problem

[heartbeatstrue 57]

Well, it's fair to say Neeld is not the ONLY problem. Neeld probably can coach, under certain circumstances. Like, taking Ocean Grove to a premiership. He perhaps could coach Geelong quite well. But the evidence clearly indicates that Neeld can't coach the current Melbourne list.

Just look at the abysmal lack of defensive pressure and structures we've been watching for 9 weeks now. Ineffective defence equals big thrashings. It was evident in Rnd 1. What has changed? Whose job is it to put effective defensive structures in place? The only alternative is that the coach is demanding it but the players are not obeying orders, week after week. Even that would not reflect well on any coach. Or they're incapable, which is the worst nightmare thought imaginable because this lot is what we've got, more or less, for the foreseeable future.

Going back over the past 10 years or so, you can reasonably point the finger at recruiting, boy's club culture, inept boards, some ordinary presidents, morale-sapping staffing decisions, Garry Lyon's fiddling, some poor coaching staff, etc.

Now I share the view that we are at crisis point. We need to change some things that can be changed, quickly. Perhaps Gary Ayres would come across? Or else the AFL will step in and take over.

I am just gutted with where we currently are, and it's fundamentally not Neeld's fault. But he's shown that he's not part of the solution. Supporters can't have any faith in Neeld stemming the thumping losses by effective defensive structures (it hasn't happened in 9 weeks although the need is patently obvious), or in Neeld motivating the players to play hard, tough accountable footy.

So, change nothing and what are we prepared to accept against the Hawks? Will losing by something between 60 & 100 be seen as a respectable loss "considering where we are"? Perhaps much more than 100 would have Neeld "on shaky ground"?

For my part, going to the 'G on Sunday expecting anything less than a win is unacceptable. For the players to run out knowing that the only expectation is to not lose by too much, is pathetically objectionable. But without change, that's the awful reality.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

I'd be interested to see any posts that would confirm that.

I'm sure others on here can assist you, but surely your not saying you have not seen any posts on MN's tenure that don't suggest that there are those that believe that staying the current course is the only way to go?

[reynolds46 1,310]

"I thought in the second half we responded pretty well. I think we only lost by 20 points in the second half so a good turnaround but the first half was not good enough." - M.Neeld

[jackaub 1,402]

I think Neeld is a part of the problem and certainly appears not able to a part of the solution

I was just thinking how great it would be if senior players including those who apparently want out i.e Silvia Frawley and Jackie boy all got together duriing bthe week and decided amongst them selves that THEY were going to make a difference THEY would show leadership THEY would chase and tackle and assist in making the whole team play as a team

Stand up you weak pricks and have a go Dont just talk about dont wonder Just decide to do it

If you cant or dont want to then go and play else where or dont play at all People are just so tired of the lot of you You want to help the club DO IT!

[jackaub 1,402]

"I thought in the second half we responded pretty well. I think we only lost by 20 points in the second half so a good turnaround but the first half was not good enough." - M.Neeld

Freo just played with us after half time doesnt count.

[Bobby McKenzie 2,408]

Why is it so? When we were thrashed by the Gold Coast I was convinced that our players were not playing for their coach. The next week we were very competitive against Richmond and my thoughts changed to 'They ARE playing for their coach'. This weekend I go back to my thoughts after the Suns thrashing. We gave the Tigers a real run for their money and we were so insipid against the Dockers. What puzzled me and a lot of you was the fact that Richmond very nearly beat the Dockers on this very same ground! My daughter who is a Melbourne fan thanks to her father, but not a keen follower of football, said to me seriously after the game, "Why is it that whenever there is a bun fight for the ball in a pack a Docker player almost always emerges with the ball and with a pin point pass finds a teammate further afield and away they go to score yet again?" it was a good question which I just couldn't answer. She was also shocked to hear her old man, so passionate about his beloved Demons for many decades, exclaim after yet another unforced turnover or dropped , unopposed mark, "They are pathetic, just pathetic!" Sadly, it was how I felt at the time. I was wearing my Melbourne colours and when leaving the ground some Docker supporters said sympathetically, " Don't worry mate they will come good one day." When that one day comes is anyone's guess. BUT I will never stop loving and following the Melbourne Football Club.

[jackaub 1,402]

Why is it so? When we were thrashed by the Gold Coast I was convinced that our players were not playing for their coach. The next week we were very competitive against Richmond and my thoughts changed to 'They ARE playing for their coach'. This weekend I go back to my thoughts after the Suns thrashing. We gave the Tigers a real run for their money and we were so insipid against the Dockers. What puzzled me and a lot of you was the fact that Richmond very nearly beat the Dockers on this very same ground! My daughter who is a Melbourne fan thanks to her father, but not a keen follower of football, said to me seriously after the game, "Why is it that whenever there is a bun fight for the ball in a pack a Docker player almost always emerges with the ball and with a pin point pass finds a teammate further afield and away they go to score yet again?" it was a good question which I just couldn't answer. She was also shocked to hear her old man, so passionate about his beloved Demons for many decades, exclaim after yet another unforced turnover or dropped , unopposed mark, "They are pathetic, just pathetic!" Sadly, it was how I felt at the time. I was wearing my Melbourne colours and when leaving the ground some Docker supporters said sympathetically, " Don't worry mate they will come good one day." When that one day comes is anyone's guess. BUT I will never stop loving and following the Melbourne Football Club.

Hey Bobby I can relate to that

I can stand most things except the pity of other club supporters just does me in Hope your daughter gets to see the demons in better times coz I dont think I ever will havent got 20 years left in me

[heartbeatstrue 57]

My daughter who is a Melbourne fan thanks to her father, but not a keen follower of football, said to me seriously after the game, "Why is it that whenever there is a bun fight for the ball in a pack a Docker player almost always emerges with the ball and with a pin point pass finds a teammate further afield and away they go to score yet again?" it was a good question which I just couldn't answer.

Quite simply, because the team isn't religiously putting in place the defensive structures at stoppages that prevent this from happening. Why that is so is more inexplicable. The obvious answer would be that the coaching staff aren't enforcing this and practising it as an absolutely essential part of any game plan that aims to prevent huge thumpings. But these are AFL coaches, so that doesn't exactly ring true. But clearly Neeld isn't able to get the players to do this, every stoppage in a totally disciplined and accountable way.

Which is what I would blame the coach for.

As your daughter sees very clearly, something's seriously not working with the current setup. What can we change?

Like you, I will never stop loving and supporting this frustrating club of ours. It's in the blood!

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

Posted this in the - How do we fix this thread but just as relavent here

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-05-27/cale-morton

Pretty big slap in the face from an ex player - and was a top 3 for fitness??

Highlights for me how far behind we really are

[drdrake 3,203]

Posted this in the - How do we fix this thread but just as relavent here

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-05-27/cale-morton

Pretty big slap in the face from an ex player - and was a top 3 for fitness??

Highlights for me how far behind we really are

nothing new from Cale, we are all aware that when Neeld took over he got a shock on how far our back our preparation was. The plan that Neeld has followed was increase work load with year 3 pre-season the target to have the list at AFL top level fitness.

[angrydee 842]

The inept one is a vacuum cleaner for hope and expectation - he sucks it right out of the club.

I've followed the club for 60 years and have been a member for most of that time and I've never felt so bereft of hope before.

I've never before felt that we were totally irrelevant except for media fodder - not during the late 60's, the 70's and the early 80's; nor during the meetings at the Camberwell civic centre and other places as we tried valiantly to change our losing culture - until now.

I never entertained the possible death or relocation of this once proud club - I do now.

Thanks McLardy. Thanks Schwab. Thanks Neeld.

[pm24 451]

I've been as frustrated as the rest of you with the performances this year, but after each big loss which at the time seems unexpected, I find it useful to sit back, remove emotion from the equation and consider the lists and clubs who have handed us the latest belting.

The two that stand out in most people's memories are the Gold Coast loss, and the Freo game. The first two rounds were obviously also very hard to take.

However, upon reflection I think we are underrating the teams that are giving us these beltings. Firstly, the Gold Coast. They have now beaten all four teams that are also in a rebuilding phase (GWS, Melb, Dogs, Saints) and pushed the premiership favourites only to go down by just over 4 goals. Upon reflection, do I think we were favourites for that game based on a list comparison....hell no. Our experienced senior players do not hold a light to there collective group of Ablett, Bock, Brennan, Rischetelli, Brown and even Hunt (in terms of approach to the game). Secondly, our young developing players do not compare to their group.

Now onto Freo. Going into this game, they had just drawn with Sydney on the SCG while undermanned, they had also just beaten Collingwood by just under 5 goals with a depleted side, and sat 4th on ladder despite all their injuries. In short, they are a bloody good side. A top 4 side now, and probably for the rest of the season. So should we be surprised they belted us...probably not.

But the reality is, that it's the perceived "lack of effort" that is killing us as supporters, and making our team harder and harder to watch. But is the lack of effort of Neeld's doing??? The more I read, the more I listen to what the players are saying, the less I believe it is. Originally Neeld said the club was 3 years behind the level of fitness required to play AFL football. Here's a simple thought; if a player is not fit enough to play against other AFL players, they are not going to catch them in a chase, they are not going to be able to run out games, and their skills will not be at the same level for as long as the fatigue earlier.

I just noticed this article about our good mate Cale Morton about his time at West Coast so far (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-05-27/cale-morton). If anything, it highlights how right Neeld was with his comments about the fitness of our players, and the lack of leadership within the player group. Leadership that obviously wasn't coming from the senior players like Moloney and Rivers, who were present when Neeld came into the club.

So let me paint a picture of what Neeld took on when he accepted the head coaching position. When Neeld took over this club after Bailey's tenure, he took on a list that had kicked out it's best leader, Jnr McDonald, and said goodbye to good clubmen like Yze, Miller, Robertson, and Bruce; lost Tom Scully due to financial incentives and (if Scully is to be believed) concerns around the leadership of the veterans on the club list; had training standards and fitness levels that would take 3 years to fix; had a core group of young inexperienced players that had never experienced an environment with real AFL level standards before; and a history of poor drafting and insufficient investment of funds into player development; but he took it on with an aim to turning the club around to become "the hardest team to play against" within 3-5 years.

Now, some people seem to think that this can be fixed within 18 months. I think that is unrealistic. We have a team bereft of leadership, which is why we have two of the youngest captains in the history of the game. We have also said goodbye to some senior players during the last offseason and gotten younger again. We are now in a position where we have the 2nd least experienced team in the league.

However, the foundations are there for change. Veteran players recognised as good clubmen, who are recognised for their attitude to training, as well as some seriously talented Key Position talent, have been recruited. Byrnes and Rodan were two such players recognised as good club men, who were brought into to help mentor the player group. Clarke and Dawes have been recruited to provide us with the most promising Key Forward combo this club has seen since the Neitz and Schwartz years. Players have been recruited to fill roles, and some good mature age recruits have been brought in to bolster the ranks (Pederson, Magner, Terlich, Couch, M Jones). All the while, some seriously promising young talent has been recruited (Toumpas, Hogan, Viney) while games have been poured into our developing list. Some players have also shown a new level of consistency not previously seen (N Jones, Sylvia (some may disagree on this one), Garland, Grimes) under previous coaches.

There are a number of positives, to go along with the negatives. Some say blame Neeld, some say don't, blame the players instead.

I say, the problems lie largely in the past, and have contributed to the poor practices that our current player group have displayed. Why, because when you look at everything that has happened, our club was a basket case before Neeld took over and changes were needed to turn it around. Those changes are currently being made, and I believe that we will not see the improvement we are all craving, until next year. And when I say improvement, I simply mean that we will jump over the Saints and Bulldogs on the ladder while holding off a developing GWS. But we shouldn't expect much more than that, because that's just not where we are at with our list.

Many on here will disagree, and many will say, BUT IT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!. It may not be good enough for where we WANT this club to be. But we are where we are for a reason and I do not believe that the big improvement will come until next year, and the year following. For me, the benchmarks of our progress for the remainder of this season should be when we play St Kilda and the Bulldogs, two clubs I believe to be in a similar transition period to us, but with a better group of experienced leaders.

Those are just my thoughts on where we are, agree or disagree I don't care.

[nutbean 8,838]

Posted this in the - How do we fix this thread but just as relavent here

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-05-27/cale-morton

Pretty big slap in the face from an ex player - and was a top 3 for fitness??

Highlights for me how far behind we really are

I actually think it is a slap for "pre Neeld" as Neeld found exactly the same thing when he arrived.

I also think the Cale is 100% right about the leaders and top end players of a club leading by example - you look at the likes of Cox, Galss, Kerr etc that their youth can flourish under compared to our ummmm...errr......hmmmm

[demon3165 2,862]

I've been as frustrated as the rest of you with the performances this year, but after each big loss which at the time seems unexpected, I find it useful to sit back, remove emotion from the equation and consider the lists and clubs who have handed us the latest belting.

The two that stand out in most people's memories are the Gold Coast loss, and the Freo game. The first two rounds were obviously also very hard to take.

However, upon reflection I think we are underrating the teams that are giving us these beltings. Firstly, the Gold Coast. They have now beaten all four teams that are also in a rebuilding phase (GWS, Melb, Dogs, Saints) and pushed the premiership favourites only to go down by just over 4 goals. Upon reflection, do I think we were favourites for that game based on a list comparison....hell no. Our experienced senior players do not hold a light to there collective group of Ablett, Bock, Brennan, Rischetelli, Brown and even Hunt (in terms of approach to the game). Secondly, our young developing players do not compare to their group.

Now onto Freo. Going into this game, they had just drawn with Sydney on the SCG while undermanned, they had also just beated Collingwood by just under 5 goals with a depleted side, and sat 4th on ladder despite all their injuries. In short, they are a bloody good side. A top 4 side now, and probably for the rest of the season. So should we be surprised they belted us...probably not.

But the reality is, that it's the perceived "lack of effort" that is killing us as supporters, and making our team harder and harder to watch. But is the lack of effort of Neeld's doing??? The more I read, the more I listen to what the players are saying, the less I believe it is. Originally Neeld said the club was 3 years behind the level of fitness required to play AFL football. Here's a simple though, if a player is not fit enough to play against other AFL players, they are not going to catch them in a chase, they are not going to be able to run out games, and their skills will not be at the same level for as long as the fatigue earlier.

I just noticed this article about our good mate Cale Morton about his time at West Coast so far (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-05-27/cale-morton). If anything, it highlights how right Neeld was with his comments about the fitness of our players, and the lack of leadership within the player group. Leadership that obviously wasn't coming from the senior players like Moloney and Rivers, who were present when Neeld came into the club.

So let me paint a picture of what Neeld took on when he accepted the head coaching position. When Neeld took over this club after Bailey's tenure, he took on a list that had kicked out it's best leader, Jnr McDonald, and said goodbye to good clubmen like Yze, Miller, Robertson, and Bruce; lost Tom Scully due to financial incentives and (if Scully is to be believed) concerns around the leadership of the veterans on the club list; had training standards and fitness levels that would take 3 years to fix; had a core group of young inexperienced players that had never experienced an environment with real AFL level standards before; a history of poor drafting and insufficient investment of funds into player development; but he took it on with an aim to turning the club around to become "the hardest team to play against" within 3-5 years.

Now, some people seem to think that this can be fixed within 18 months. I think that is unrealistic. We have a team bereft of leadership, which is why we have two of the youngest captains in the history of the game. We have also said goodbye to some senior players during the last offseason and gotten younger again. We are now in a position where we have the 2nd least experienced team in the league.

However, the foundations are there for change. Veteran players recognised as good clubmen, who are recognised for their attitude to training, as well as some seriously talented Key Position talent, have been recruited. Byrnes and Rodan were two such players recognised as good club men, who were brought into to help mentor the player group. Clarke and Dawes have been recruited to provide us with the most promising Key Forward combo this club has seen since the Neitz and Schwartz years. Players have been recruited to fill roles, and some good mature age recruits have been brought in to bolster the ranks (Pederson, Magner, Terlich, Couch, M Jones). All the while, some seriously promising young talent has been recruited (Toumpas, Hogan, Viney) while games have been poured into our developing list. Some players have also shown a new level of consistency not previously seen (N Jones, Sylvia (some may disagree on this one), Garland, Grimes) under previous coaches.

There are a number of positives, to go along with the negatives. Some say blame Neeld, some say don't, blame the players instead.

I say, the problems lie largely in the past, and have contributed to the poor practices that I current player group have displayed. Why, because when you look at everything that has happened, our club was a basket case before Neeld took over and changes were needed to turn it around. Those changes are currently being made, and I believe that we will not see the improvement we are all craving, until next year. And when I say improvement, I simply mean that we will jump over the Saints and Bulldogs on the ladder while holding off a developing GWS. But we shouldn't expect much more than that, because that's just not where we are at with our list.

Many on here will disagree, and many will say, BUT IT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!. It may not be good enough for where we WANT this club to be. But we are where we are for a reason and I do not believe that the big improvement will come until next year, and the year following. For me, the benchmarks of our progress for the remainder of this season should be when we play St Kilda and the Bulldogs, two clubs I believe to be in a similar transition period to us, but with a better group of experienced leaders.

Those are just my thoughts on where we are, agree or disagree I don't care.

Spot on!!!!

[Scoop Junior 3,574]

For me, the benchmarks of our progress for the remainder of this season should be when we play St Kilda and the Bulldogs, two clubs I believe to be in a similar transition period to us, but with a better group of experienced leaders.

The benchmark of progress is right before our eyes every week. You don't need to play someone at your level to see how you've progressed. Your performances against the top sides can give a very good indication of progress. For example, no one would have expected us to beat the Dons or Dockers, but a reasonably competitive showing would have shown some signs of progress. However, the way we were systematically dismantled in those games shows how far backwards we've gone.

Even if we are to look at sides around our level, I think our performances against Port, GC and GWS again highlight just how far we've regressed under Neeld. These are sides who finished near the bottom last year. We have played these three sides AT HOME and have been smashed by Port and GC and were 3 goals down to GWS at 3/4 time.

I don't need to wait any longer to see how far we've regressed - it is there to see each and every week of this miserable season.

[thevil1 421]

This group of players buried bailey who they supposedly supported..... And couldn't even be inspired by jimmy!!! I've stopped going to the footy because of the players on our list, Chris Dawes was 10000000% right!! For 10 years we've recruited nice guys with no fire in the belly!!!

At this stage I couldn't care who the coach is, our rookies & battlers with a few exceptions are the only blokes having a dip, and this has been the case for far too long, both under neeld & bailey.

[thevil1 421]

Even Peter Jackson thinks our players have no respect for the jumper let alone any bloody coach!!!

[jnrmac 20,331]

Yes he is.

[angrydee 842]

The benchmark of progress is right before our eyes every week. You don't need to play someone at your level to see how you've progressed. Your performances against the top sides can give a very good indication of progress. For example, no one would have expected us to beat the Dons or Dockers, but a reasonably competitive showing would have shown some signs of progress. However, the way we were systematically dismantled in those games shows how far backwards we've gone.

Even if we are to look at sides around our level, I think our performances against Port, GC and GWS again highlight just how far we've regressed under Neeld. These are sides who finished near the bottom last year. We have played these three sides AT HOME and have been smashed by Port and GC and were 3 goals down to GWS at 3/4 time.

I don't need to wait any longer to see how far we've regressed - it is there to see each and every week of this miserable season.

Spot on

[Sir Why You Little 37,407]

I've been as frustrated as the rest of you with the performances this year, but after each big loss which at the time seems unexpected, I find it useful to sit back, remove emotion from the equation and consider the lists and clubs who have handed us the latest belting.

The two that stand out in most people's memories are the Gold Coast loss, and the Freo game. The first two rounds were obviously also very hard to take.

However, upon reflection I think we are underrating the teams that are giving us these beltings. Firstly, the Gold Coast. They have now beaten all four teams that are also in a rebuilding phase (GWS, Melb, Dogs, Saints) and pushed the premiership favourites only to go down by just over 4 goals. Upon reflection, do I think we were favourites for that game based on a list comparison....hell no. Our experienced senior players do not hold a light to there collective group of Ablett, Bock, Brennan, Rischetelli, Brown and even Hunt (in terms of approach to the game). Secondly, our young developing players do not compare to their group.

Now onto Freo. Going into this game, they had just drawn with Sydney on the SCG while undermanned, they had also just beated Collingwood by just under 5 goals with a depleted side, and sat 4th on ladder despite all their injuries. In short, they are a bloody good side. A top 4 side now, and probably for the rest of the season. So should we be surprised they belted us...probably not.

But the reality is, that it's the perceived "lack of effort" that is killing us as supporters, and making our team harder and harder to watch. But is the lack of effort of Neeld's doing??? The more I read, the more I listen to what the players are saying, the less I believe it is. Originally Neeld said the club was 3 years behind the level of fitness required to play AFL football. Here's a simple though, if a player is not fit enough to play against other AFL players, they are not going to catch them in a chase, they are not going to be able to run out games, and their skills will not be at the same level for as long as the fatigue earlier.

I just noticed this article about our good mate Cale Morton about his time at West Coast so far (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-05-27/cale-morton). If anything, it highlights how right Neeld was with his comments about the fitness of our players, and the lack of leadership within the player group. Leadership that obviously wasn't coming from the senior players like Moloney and Rivers, who were present when Neeld came into the club.

So let me paint a picture of what Neeld took on when he accepted the head coaching position. When Neeld took over this club after Bailey's tenure, he took on a list that had kicked out it's best leader, Jnr McDonald, and said goodbye to good clubmen like Yze, Miller, Robertson, and Bruce; lost Tom Scully due to financial incentives and (if Scully is to be believed) concerns around the leadership of the veterans on the club list; had training standards and fitness levels that would take 3 years to fix; had a core group of young inexperienced players that had never experienced an environment with real AFL level standards before; a history of poor drafting and insufficient investment of funds into player development; but he took it on with an aim to turning the club around to become "the hardest team to play against" within 3-5 years.

Now, some people seem to think that this can be fixed within 18 months. I think that is unrealistic. We have a team bereft of leadership, which is why we have two of the youngest captains in the history of the game. We have also said goodbye to some senior players during the last offseason and gotten younger again. We are now in a position where we have the 2nd least experienced team in the league.

However, the foundations are there for change. Veteran players recognised as good clubmen, who are recognised for their attitude to training, as well as some seriously talented Key Position talent, have been recruited. Byrnes and Rodan were two such players recognised as good club men, who were brought into to help mentor the player group. Clarke and Dawes have been recruited to provide us with the most promising Key Forward combo this club has seen since the Neitz and Schwartz years. Players have been recruited to fill roles, and some good mature age recruits have been brought in to bolster the ranks (Pederson, Magner, Terlich, Couch, M Jones). All the while, some seriously promising young talent has been recruited (Toumpas, Hogan, Viney) while games have been poured into our developing list. Some players have also shown a new level of consistency not previously seen (N Jones, Sylvia (some may disagree on this one), Garland, Grimes) under previous coaches.

There are a number of positives, to go along with the negatives. Some say blame Neeld, some say don't, blame the players instead.

I say, the problems lie largely in the past, and have contributed to the poor practices that I current player group have displayed. Why, because when you look at everything that has happened, our club was a basket case before Neeld took over and changes were needed to turn it around. Those changes are currently being made, and I believe that we will not see the improvement we are all craving, until next year. And when I say improvement, I simply mean that we will jump over the Saints and Bulldogs on the ladder while holding off a developing GWS. But we shouldn't expect much more than that, because that's just not where we are at with our list.

Many on here will disagree, and many will say, BUT IT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!. It may not be good enough for where we WANT this club to be. But we are where we are for a reason and I do not believe that the big improvement will come until next year, and the year following. For me, the benchmarks of our progress for the remainder of this season should be when we play St Kilda and the Bulldogs, two clubs I believe to be in a similar transition period to us, but with a better group of experienced leaders.

Those are just my thoughts on where we are, agree or disagree I don't care.

pm24 i agree with what you write here.

Do you think Neeld is the right man to turn it around?

Did we make the right cal?l. I have my doubts

[Dr. Gonzo 24,463]

@pm24 You make some good points however two things I'll say in response

1) it's not about not being able to win, it's about being absolutely demolished - it's not about being fixed in 18 months it's about at least seeing some improvement

2) we are not even getting games into the right players - why are Blease and Strauss not getting game time? Let them develop in the seniors to at least see if they can play. Blease especially can break lines and kick goals something we sorely lack.

[jumbo returns 6,744]

pm24 i agree with what you write here.

Do you think Neeld is the right man to turn it around?

Did we make the right cal?l. I have my doubts

WYL, I'm not following you around, so don't think this is creepy....

I see your tone has softened as you have a clearer understanding of where we're at.

24 hours ago, you were screaming for Neeld's head on a tray.

Don't be seduced by posters who think Neeld is the problem - he's not.

We have too many players that are in love with being footballers, rather than coming together for a common goal.

We're getting there and I'll do everything I can to help this club.

[jumbo returns 6,744]

@pm24 You make some good points however two things I'll say in response

1) it's not about not being able to win, it's about being absolutely demolished - it's not about being fixed in 18 months it's about at least seeing some improvement

2) we are not even getting games into the right players - why are Blease and Strauss not getting game time? Let them develop in the seniors to at least see if they can play. Blease especially can break lines and kick goals something we sorely lack.

We lost the last half by 20 points to a genuine premiership contender.

Structures were in place, but not executed properly....yet.

The time will come.

Neeld has big plans for Blease and Strauss....he is taking notes to sort this list out properly.

[What 18,810]

"I thought in the second half we responded pretty well. I think we only lost by 20 points in the second half so a good turnaround but the first half was not good enough." - M.Neeld

hahahhaa

its like a bad comedy now

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,765]

I've been as frustrated as the rest of you with the performances this year, but after each big loss which at the time seems unexpected, I find it useful to sit back, remove emotion from the equation and consider the lists and clubs who have handed us the latest belting.

The two that stand out in most people's memories are the Gold Coast loss, and the Freo game. The first two rounds were obviously also very hard to take.

However, upon reflection I think we are underrating the teams that are giving us these beltings. Firstly, the Gold Coast. They have now beaten all four teams that are also in a rebuilding phase (GWS, Melb, Dogs, Saints) and pushed the premiership favourites only to go down by just over 4 goals. Upon reflection, do I think we were favourites for that game based on a list comparison....hell no. Our experienced senior players do not hold a light to there collective group of Ablett, Bock, Brennan, Rischetelli, Brown and even Hunt (in terms of approach to the game). Secondly, our young developing players do not compare to their group.

Now onto Freo. Going into this game, they had just drawn with Sydney on the SCG while undermanned, they had also just beated Collingwood by just under 5 goals with a depleted side, and sat 4th on ladder despite all their injuries. In short, they are a bloody good side. A top 4 side now, and probably for the rest of the season. So should we be surprised they belted us...probably not.

But the reality is, that it's the perceived "lack of effort" that is killing us as supporters, and making our team harder and harder to watch. But is the lack of effort of Neeld's doing??? The more I read, the more I listen to what the players are saying, the less I believe it is. Originally Neeld said the club was 3 years behind the level of fitness required to play AFL football. Here's a simple though, if a player is not fit enough to play against other AFL players, they are not going to catch them in a chase, they are not going to be able to run out games, and their skills will not be at the same level for as long as the fatigue earlier.

I just noticed this article about our good mate Cale Morton about his time at West Coast so far (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-05-27/cale-morton). If anything, it highlights how right Neeld was with his comments about the fitness of our players, and the lack of leadership within the player group. Leadership that obviously wasn't coming from the senior players like Moloney and Rivers, who were present when Neeld came into the club.

So let me paint a picture of what Neeld took on when he accepted the head coaching position. When Neeld took over this club after Bailey's tenure, he took on a list that had kicked out it's best leader, Jnr McDonald, and said goodbye to good clubmen like Yze, Miller, Robertson, and Bruce; lost Tom Scully due to financial incentives and (if Scully is to be believed) concerns around the leadership of the veterans on the club list; had training standards and fitness levels that would take 3 years to fix; had a core group of young inexperienced players that had never experienced an environment with real AFL level standards before; a history of poor drafting and insufficient investment of funds into player development; but he took it on with an aim to turning the club around to become "the hardest team to play against" within 3-5 years.

Now, some people seem to think that this can be fixed within 18 months. I think that is unrealistic. We have a team bereft of leadership, which is why we have two of the youngest captains in the history of the game. We have also said goodbye to some senior players during the last offseason and gotten younger again. We are now in a position where we have the 2nd least experienced team in the league.

However, the foundations are there for change. Veteran players recognised as good clubmen, who are recognised for their attitude to training, as well as some seriously talented Key Position talent, have been recruited. Byrnes and Rodan were two such players recognised as good club men, who were brought into to help mentor the player group. Clarke and Dawes have been recruited to provide us with the most promising Key Forward combo this club has seen since the Neitz and Schwartz years. Players have been recruited to fill roles, and some good mature age recruits have been brought in to bolster the ranks (Pederson, Magner, Terlich, Couch, M Jones). All the while, some seriously promising young talent has been recruited (Toumpas, Hogan, Viney) while games have been poured into our developing list. Some players have also shown a new level of consistency not previously seen (N Jones, Sylvia (some may disagree on this one), Garland, Grimes) under previous coaches.

There are a number of positives, to go along with the negatives. Some say blame Neeld, some say don't, blame the players instead.

I say, the problems lie largely in the past, and have contributed to the poor practices that I current player group have displayed. Why, because when you look at everything that has happened, our club was a basket case before Neeld took over and changes were needed to turn it around. Those changes are currently being made, and I believe that we will not see the improvement we are all craving, until next year. And when I say improvement, I simply mean that we will jump over the Saints and Bulldogs on the ladder while holding off a developing GWS. But we shouldn't expect much more than that, because that's just not where we are at with our list.

Many on here will disagree, and many will say, BUT IT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!. It may not be good enough for where we WANT this club to be. But we are where we are for a reason and I do not believe that the big improvement will come until next year, and the year following. For me, the benchmarks of our progress for the remainder of this season should be when we play St Kilda and the Bulldogs, two clubs I believe to be in a similar transition period to us, but with a better group of experienced leaders.

Those are just my thoughts on where we are, agree or disagree I don't care.

A long post but also a good one. It's good to remain circumspect in situations like this. I have this feeling that at some stage we're going to have to back someone through a dark period otherwise we're going to be stuck in this spiral for a long time to come.