Neeld is not the problem

[robbiefrom13 892]

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

WE"RE SAVED!!!

[chookrat 4,268]

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.

Hear hear, this is one of the most well written, sensible posts I have read on DL. Well done!

[Satyriconhome 10,879]

PM24, excellent post (thought I'd shout it, seeing that others are getting loud as well)

[13thFlagIsComing 542]

Neeld must coach out the rest of the season.

Our chance for the finals has dissapeared already so the only thing that Neeld has to do is play games into the players that he believes are the foundation of the club going forward.

When he came on board and cleared out Bate, Morton, Pettard etc i'm sure most Dees fans (myself included) went "great, finally he's clearing out the decks."

When he said "hardest team to play against" even i wen't 'not for a few years buddy."

When he talked about training standards going up about 30% in 3 years most of us went "my god were we that far behind?"

What is the major concern for this supporter is the lack of a game plan. It seems that the players are told to play within a 5 metre line of the boundary line. Too often there have been times where the team finally decides to go down the middle and what do you know...we score!

We've tried to play man on man but we don't have the fitness to do it, we've tried to play the zone but are too fragile mentally to execute it.

The players are clearly confused between going up the line towards a fast lead coming from half forward or kicking to a player running laterally towards the boundary line. For some reason as a strategy we are deciding to hug the boundary line to slow down the contest and minimise any chance of turnovers due to the limited space. Yet with this limited space you need fast hands and footy smarts to not only hit targets running past but win the ball in the contest .We don't have that either short of nathan Jones and an emerging Jack Viney. In short we need another a-grade midfileder.

What it comes down to is just letting the players play, see how they stack up for the rest of the season and make the decisions then.

There is no benefit sacking due to the fact no-one really wants our senior coaching job (unless someone knows something) and we have abunch of kids that need games put into them.

What i think everyone is missing is the comment from McClardy when he said Neeld had "cart blanche" to change the club culture. To me that comment sums up everything wrong with the club. A culture in an organisation has to come from the top, not from a first year coach.

Neeld never stood a chance.

[pm24 451]

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

I honestly do not know if he is the right man for the job, because I don't believe he's actually had a real opportunity to show his abilities.

From everything I've heard hear, read in the media, and heard through a colleague of mine who works with the club, Neeld did get the senior players off-side when he came to the club, and that includes players like Frawley, Davey and Sylvia, and obviously Rivers and Moloney. However, I look at the story about Davey last week, and it is obvious that Neeld is working to rebuild those relationships. That is a huge positive to me. He may have come into the club and been a bit too hard, and not shown enough respect to the senior players, but he seems to be trying to build stronger relationships with the current group. He has shown to have been of great benefit to a number of players around the club, but obviously there are some that are still unsure.

Do I think someone else may have been able to have us in a better place than the club is at now, particularly with all the speculation that is going around....maybe. But at the same time, I think anyone else that took over this list at the time that Neeld started would be in exactly the same position, albeit they might have had more success in transforming and retaining the more senior players. However, with that said, I'm not really sad that Moloney is no longer on the list. I've only ever heard negatives about his attitude to the game. Sometimes that cleaning out of the old is needed in order to rebuild the foundations of a club.

[pm24 451]

PM24, excellent post (thought I'd shout it, seeing that others are getting loud as well)

Cheers guys. Appreciate the comments. I just think the worst thing this club can do at the moment is bow to public and media pressure to sack Neeld and further destabilise the club. I can not see how the impact of removing a coach is going to be a positive for the remainder of the season, particularly when that coach has only been in the job for 18 months with the 2nd least experienced list in the competition.

I actually think what the club has tried to do is implement a rebuild model similar to that used by GWS and GC, but with the lack of additional cash injections from the AFL, and with the added challenge of not just creating a solid culture, but also addressing the cultural issues of the past. That's a much harder proposition than just starting from scratch like GWS and GC.

[dee-luded 2,959]

He didn't lose them. He got rid of them.

Green, Moloney, Jurrah, Rivers, Gysberts, Morton, Martin, Bennell, Petterd, Cook, Bate, Bartram

Are you saying that those players should be there at the club?

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

Cheers guys. Appreciate the comments. I just think the worst thing this club can do at the moment is bow to public and media pressure to sack Neeld and further destabilise the club. I can not see how the impact of removing a coach is going to be a positive for the remainder of the season, particularly when that coach has only been in the job for 18 months with the 2nd least experienced list in the competition.

I actually think what the club has tried to do is implement a rebuild model similar to that used by GWS and GC, but with the lack of additional cash injections from the AFL, and with the added challenge of not just creating a solid culture, but also addressing the cultural issues of the past. That's a much harder proposition than just starting from scratch like GWS and GC.

I'll say it again, as much as some would like to paint a picture of the MFC's current situation as being somehow unique, we can no longer be afforded the luxury of time to fix a brand that is so severely tarnished, it has become almost worthless.

Peter Jackson is not in the CEO's chair simply to make sure of the day to day running of the business, he has been put there, due to the severity of our situation and the urgency to get something done.

We can debate as much as we like, as to who is at fault, which players we should have kept and which we should have let go. We can talk about how inexperienced we are or whether our fitness levels are up to scratch - not withstanding Neeld has now had 2 pre-seasons to improve the fitness levels and not all that long ago, spoke volumes as to just how fit we are supposed to be.

While we currently sit 2nd last on the table, with only GWS below us, there is daylight between us and the others, in terms of how our brand is perceived. You can ridicule journalists like Barrett, Robinson, Smith et al, but they cannot be all wrong. Healy said what he said last night, because he knows something. These guys are in the jobs they have, because they have the ears of people within the industry who are in the know. We are in diabolical trouble and the time for action is upon us. While in an ideal world it may be more desirable to let Neeld serve out his term, the MFC simply does not have the time.

We must act sooner rather than later, otherwise the consequences of our inaction will be far worse than the alternative of taking action.

Edited May 28, 2013 by iv'a worn smith

[agent 99 71]

I'll say it again, as much as some would like to paint a picture of the MFC's current situation as being somehow unique, we can no longer be afforded the luxury of time to fix a brand that is so severely tarnished, it has become almost worthless.

Peter Jackson is not in the CEO's chair simply to make sure of the day to day running of the business, he has been put there, due to the severity of our situation and the urgency to get something done.

We can debate as much as we like, as to who is at fault, which players we should have kept and which we should have let go. We can talk about how inexperienced we are or whether our fitness levels are up to scratch - not withstanding Neeld has now had 2 pre-seasons to improve the fitness levels and not all that long ago, spoke volumes as to just how fit we are supposed to be.

While we currently sit 2nd last on the table, with only GWS below us, there is daylight between us and the others, in terms of how our brand is perceived. You can ridicule journalists like Barrett, Robinson, Smith et al, but they cannot be all wrong. Healy said what he said last night, because he knows something. These guys are in the jobs they have, because they have the ears of people within the industry who are in the know. We are in diabolical trouble and the time for action is upon us. While in an ideal world it may be more desirable to let Neeld serve out his term, the MFC simply does not have the time.

We must act sooner rather than later, otherwise the consequences of our inaction will be far worse than the alternative of taking action.

I can understand both sides to this arguement and totally agree a little with each arguement

But I just want to know Who? and with What? we can make this change.

I haven't really heard a realistic plan from anyone calling for his head,just that it has to be done.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

I'll say it again, as much as some would like to paint a picture of the MFC's current situation as being somehow unique, we can no longer be afforded the luxury of time to fix a brand that is so severely tarnished, it has become almost worthless.

Peter Jackson is not in the CEO's chair simply to make sure of the day to day running of the business, he has been put there, due to the severity of our situation and the urgency to get something done.

We can debate as much as we like, as to who is at fault, which players we should have kept and which we should have let go. We can talk about how inexperienced we are or whether our fitness levels are up to scratch - not withstanding Neeld has now had 2 pre-seasons to improve the fitness levels and not all that long ago, spoke volumes as to just how fit we are supposed to be.

While we currently sit 2nd last on the table, with only GWS below us, there is daylight between us and the others, in terms of how our brand is perceived. You can ridicule journalists like Barrett, Robinson, Smith et al, but they cannot be all wrong. Healy said what he said last night, because he knows something. These guys are in the jobs they have, because they have the ears of people within the industry who are in the know. We are in diabolical trouble and the time for action is upon us. While in an ideal world it may be more desirable to let Neeld serve out his term, the MFC simply does not have the time.

We must act sooner rather than later, otherwise the consequences of our inaction will be far worse than the alternative of taking action.

I can understand both sides to this arguement and totally agree a little with each arguement

But I just want to know Who? and with What? we can make this change.

I haven't really heard a realistic plan from anyone calling for his head,just that it has to be done.

That is precisely the brief that has been given to Jackson. I, for one, trust that he is the best man for the task which confronts him.

[agent 99 71]

For the future of this club I hope he gets it right also!

[Satyriconhome 10,879]

I'll say it again, as much as some would like to paint a picture of the MFC's current situation as being somehow unique, we can no longer be afforded the luxury of time to fix a brand that is so severely tarnished, it has become almost worthless.

Peter Jackson is not in the CEO's chair simply to make sure of the day to day running of the business, he has been put there, due to the severity of our situation and the urgency to get something done.

We can debate as much as we like, as to who is at fault, which players we should have kept and which we should have let go. We can talk about how inexperienced we are or whether our fitness levels are up to scratch - not withstanding Neeld has now had 2 pre-seasons to improve the fitness levels and not all that long ago, spoke volumes as to just how fit we are supposed to be.

While we currently sit 2nd last on the table, with only GWS below us, there is daylight between us and the others, in terms of how our brand is perceived. You can ridicule journalists like Barrett, Robinson, Smith et al, but they cannot be all wrong. Healy said what he said last night, because he knows something. These guys are in the jobs they have, because they have the ears of people within the industry who are in the know. We are in diabolical trouble and the time for action is upon us. While in an ideal world it may be more desirable to let Neeld serve out his term, the MFC simply does not have the time.

We must act sooner rather than later, otherwise the consequences of our inaction will be far worse than the alternative of taking action.

Actually it's not daylight, it's four points, one win would fix that daylight

Brand, schmand, did you read Nineteen's post, 23 signed on again last night, so the brand can't be that damaged, agree it is a small number, but the numbers add up

So what is your suggestion, get rid of Neeld and install who?.....a interim coach like Todd Viney till the end of the season, no offence to Tood but his previous record isn't great, install one of the assistant coaches, if so which one? or are they tarnished as well

Are we going to get rid of Neil Craig and the assistants, if so we will have to pay out at least six contracts, what money will that leave for hiring a new Coach, or do you think Roos will work for free?

Is the playing list going to be sacked and a new 46 come in next week?, agreed with a new coach with the attached euphoria, we may snag a win, but these are the same players who everybody is bagging, you expect immediate change do you?

Healy is the next cab of the rank of media pundits who have put their two bob's worth in, if he knows something I hope we are going to remove his brother from the Board immediately for leaking confidential information

[dbj1983 138]

I have it on good authority that Paul Roos has already spoken to a number of Melbourne's leadership group over the last week. Stay tuned!

[agent 99 71]

Actually it's not daylight, it's four points, one win would fix that daylight

Brand, schmand, did you read Nineteen's post, 23 signed on again last night, so the brand can't be that damaged, agree it is a small number, but the numbers add up

So what is your suggestion, get rid of Neeld and install who?.....a interim coach like Todd Viney till the end of the season, no offence to Tood but his previous record isn't great, install one of the assistant coaches, if so which one? or are they tarnished as well

Are we going to get rid of Neil Craig and the assistants, if so we will have to pay out at least six contracts, what money will that leave for hiring a new Coach, or do you think Roos will work for free?

Is the playing list going to be sacked and a new 46 come in next week?, agreed with a new coach with the attached euphoria, we may snag a win, but these are the same players who everybody is bagging, you expect immediate change do you?

Healy is the next cab of the rank of media pundits who have put their two bob's worth in, if he knows something I hope we are going to remove his brother from the Board immediately for leaking confidential information

I Have to fundamentally agree.

We all want a superstar coach and superstar players, but are they out there for the taking and how the hell do we afford it.

A 2 Million dollar debt that may rise and people don't work for free.

I hate the reality of it all.

[agent 99 71]

I have it on good authority that Paul Roos has already spoken to a number of Melbourne's leadership group over the last week. Stay tuned!

We can only dream!

Will it be an end of year appiontment or in 2 weeks?

[rpfc 28,779]

I have it on good authority that Paul Roos has already spoken to a number of Melbourne's leadership group over the last week. Stay tuned!

Whose authority?

[dbj1983 138]

Whose authority?

Can't say but very reliable source

[jnrmac 20,186]

@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.

8 inside 50s in a half of football.

That says it all.

[nutbean 8,838]

I have it on good authority that Paul Roos has already spoken to a number of Melbourne's leadership group over the last week. Stay tuned!

I find it difficult to believe and even more so that someone like Roos would talk to players with an existing coach in place. Stranger things have happened but not much stranger IMO

[jnrmac 20,186]

Our disposal Average if 105 less than our opposition. 105! That is an average - every week.

The next worst is GWS at 61 then GC at 12.

Nathan Jones is averaging 22 disposals a match. We are gifting our opposition 5 Nathan Jones's every week in possession.

Its like we are playing a team with 27 players every week.

AND when we do get our hands on the footy (not much by the way) we give it back to the opposition half the time.

No wonder we are f*******d

[rpfc 28,779]

Can't say but very reliable source

You can't say.

Well, I think you know how I am going to react to a poster promising me the earth with sweet whisperings of the unlikely.

I don't believe it and you are being led down a garden path.

What club would allow their players to be distracted by meeting a prospective new coach while the old one is still breathing?

Would Jackson allow that sort of nonsense?

[nutbean 8,838]

Our disposal Average if 105 less than our opposition. 105! That is an average - every week.

The next worst is GWS at 61 then GC at 12.

Nathan Jones is averaging 22 disposals a match. We are gifting our opposition 5 Nathan Jones's every week in possession.

Its like we are playing a team with 27 players every week.

AND when we do get our hands on the footy (not much by the way) we give it back to the opposition half the time.

No wonder we are f*******d

You answered your own statements there.

Our possessions are so down because we cant string any chains together because of our deplorable skills - we hand the ball back way too quickly.

[rpfc 28,779]

Our disposal Average if 105 less than our opposition. 105! That is an average - every week.

The next worst is GWS at 61 then GC at 12.

Nathan Jones is averaging 22 disposals a match. We are gifting our opposition 5 Nathan Jones's every week in possession.

Its like we are playing a team with 27 players every week.

AND when we do get our hands on the footy (not much by the way) we give it back to the opposition half the time.

No wonder we are f*******d

That is a confidence issue and that can be rectified over a summer.

It is inertia. Inertia when players are worried about 'their' man more than getting the ball for their team.

When some on here think that all we need to do is 'worry about your bloke' and declare that 'we don't let our bloke get the footy' we are tacitly ceding any attack and adventure to the opposition.

The next coach has to rebuild the confidence of the players to run and be selfless - in both directions.

It is the one area that you can have some swift and satisfying reward in. It will reduce the margin of losses and it can be implemented rather quickly.

We will still be mauled out of the middle and from stoppages but we shoudl be able to encourage more dare and boldness and run over a summer.

Assuming we can all deal with the increase of mistakes that happens...

This is the deal: you would prefer a player get it 20 times a game and make 5 clangers than get it 10 times and make no clangers. Some of you might disagree but it is a failure to understand modern footy - the players willing to run and get those ten extra possies, even if they screw up half of them, is what drives teams from defence into attack.

[dazzledavey36 55,347]

Can't say but very reliable source

Keep dreaming

[nutbean 8,838]

You can't say.

Well, I think you know how I am going to react to a poster promising me the earth with sweet whisperings of the unlikely.

I don't believe it and you are being led down a garden path.

What club would allow their players to be distracted by meeting a prospective new coach while the old one is still breathing?

Would Jackson allow that sort of nonsense?

I am sure the post is all rhetorical but in case it isnt. the responses are - WTF,react with the scepticism and derision it rightly deserves. Agreed, No and no.

That about covers it