On 03/06/2013 at 12:24, Mc dee said:

First time long time. Have felt compelled to write my thoughts as I am stunned the amount of vitriol directed at neeld whilst the board seem to be getting off very lightly.

This board was given a free kick to begin with and started with no debt courtesy of stynes. Now losing millions a year. Crowds, membership and hope are well down. They have overseen a football department structure which has been openly canned by new CEO. Copped $500k fine for tanking. Lied to afl about dank. Gave former CEO 3 yr contract extension before sacking him 6 months later. Got us to the point where it is widely recognized that we need afl intervention so as not to implode. I could go on.

Meanwhile, neeld walked into a fractured playing group who hadn't been within a bulls roar of finals in 5 years because they didn't work hard enough. It is no secret we had a toxic culture and he went about trying to change it. He has been canned for alienating the leaders when he came in. These leaders had got us nowhere in the past 5 years and were the epitome of the lack of work ethic which got us to where we are in the first place. It is not like he walked into Geelong and proceeded to get all the leaders off side. Last year our so called senior footballers in green, davey, sylvia and moloney responded to being made accountable by dropping their bundle and spending time at Casey. I would think this is more of a reflection on the character of these players than it is of neeld. Moloney spends the off season urinating in nightclubs and then sooks for a year when he isn't made captain. Again, reflects more on moloney than it does neeld. Because of this neeld has copped flak for getting some noses out of joint after being given carte blanche to fix the culture at the club. Note that blokes like jones, Howe, grimes, dawes, clarke etc. who are actually prepared to work hard don't seem to have a problem with the neeld's regime. I think the development problems we have had can be attributed to the work ethic of the bulk of our players who are 26 and over. Few if any would get games at a decent club. In the absence of a decent senior group neeld was forced to throw two blokes into the captaincy who ideally wouldn't be captain yet. Again, says more about the quality of senior players we had at the club prior to neeld's arrival than it does about neeld.

The other thing neeld gets canned for is his 'moneyball' recruiting policy. This is absolute garbage, i think his recruiting has been excellent. Let's look at last year:

In

Hogan - pick 3, gun

Toumpas - pick 4, hasn't started well but has obvious talent

Viney - pick 26, gun

Dawes - pick 20, good acquisition

Barry - steak knives with hogan deal, going ok at Casey

Rodan - effectively traded for Morton (pick 88). Was excellent on the weekend and from all reports is a good influence on the group

Byrnes - free agent, has played a couple of good games

Kent - pick 48, forced his way into side, wait and see

M jones - pick 52, great pickup

Terlich - pick 68, great pickup

Gilles - awful

Pedersen - traded for gysberts who has spent 2 years in vfl

How can the above be deemed to be bad recruiting?

Neeld shouldn't have to deal with players not putting in. These problems go back further than neeld and are problems which grew under the board. I think neeld has gone about trying to fix things up the right way and I hope he stays to see out his rebuild with a competent board in place providing some stability instead of the current circus

Yes and no. I agree that the players were running the show but like most things in life, the middle ground is where the true answer lies. Neeld needed to authoritative rather than authoritarian. He needed to use a carrot and stick approach rather than just the stick. He needed blokes to be aware of the consequences of not towing the line but also to let them know the rewards they will reap if they prepare properly and put in on match day. The approach he has had so far just makes him sound like a bully with a whistle.

  On 03/06/2013 at 12:24, Mc dee said:

First time long time. Have felt compelled to write my thoughts as I am stunned the amount of vitriol directed at neeld whilst the board seem to be getting off very lightly.

This board was given a free kick to begin with and started with no debt courtesy of stynes. Now losing millions a year. Crowds, membership and hope are well down. They have overseen a football department structure which has been openly canned by new CEO. Copped $500k fine for tanking. Lied to afl about dank. Gave former CEO 3 yr contract extension before sacking him 6 months later. Got us to the point where it is widely recognized that we need afl intervention so as not to implode. I could go on.

Meanwhile, neeld walked into a fractured playing group who hadn't been within a bulls roar of finals in 5 years because they didn't work hard enough. It is no secret we had a toxic culture and he went about trying to change it. He has been canned for alienating the leaders when he came in. These leaders had got us nowhere in the past 5 years and were the epitome of the lack of work ethic which got us to where we are in the first place. It is not like he walked into Geelong and proceeded to get all the leaders off side. Last year our so called senior footballers in green, davey, sylvia and moloney responded to being made accountable by dropping their bundle and spending time at Casey. I would think this is more of a reflection on the character of these players than it is of neeld. Moloney spends the off season urinating in nightclubs and then sooks for a year when he isn't made captain. Again, reflects more on moloney than it does neeld. Because of this neeld has copped flak for getting some noses out of joint after being given carte blanche to fix the culture at the club. Note that blokes like jones, Howe, grimes, dawes, clarke etc. who are actually prepared to work hard don't seem to have a problem with the neeld's regime. I think the development problems we have had can be attributed to the work ethic of the bulk of our players who are 26 and over. Few if any would get games at a decent club. In the absence of a decent senior group neeld was forced to throw two blokes into the captaincy who ideally wouldn't be captain yet. Again, says more about the quality of senior players we had at the club prior to neeld's arrival than it does about neeld.

The other thing neeld gets canned for is his 'moneyball' recruiting policy. This is absolute garbage, i think his recruiting has been excellent. Let's look at last year:

In

Hogan - pick 3, gun

Toumpas - pick 4, hasn't started well but has obvious talent

Viney - pick 26, gun

Dawes - pick 20, good acquisition

Barry - steak knives with hogan deal, going ok at Casey

Rodan - effectively traded for Morton (pick 88). Was excellent on the weekend and from all reports is a good influence on the group

Byrnes - free agent, has played a couple of good games

Kent - pick 48, forced his way into side, wait and see

M jones - pick 52, great pickup

Terlich - pick 68, great pickup

Gilles - awful

Pedersen - traded for gysberts who has spent 2 years in vfl

How can the above be deemed to be bad recruiting?

Neeld shouldn't have to deal with players not putting in. These problems go back further than neeld and are problems which grew under the board. I think neeld has gone about trying to fix things up the right way and I hope he stays to see out his rebuild with a competent board in place providing some stability instead of the current circus

I am also a long time reader but rarely post and this post makes more valid points than the rest of the thread combined.

  On 03/06/2013 at 12:24, Mc dee said:

First time long time. Have felt compelled to write my thoughts as I am stunned the amount of vitriol directed at neeld whilst the board seem to be getting off very lightly.

This board was given a free kick to begin with and started with no debt courtesy of stynes. Now losing millions a year. Crowds, membership and hope are well down. They have overseen a football department structure which has been openly canned by new CEO. Copped $500k fine for tanking. Lied to afl about dank. Gave former CEO 3 yr contract extension before sacking him 6 months later. Got us to the point where it is widely recognized that we need afl intervention so as not to implode. I could go on.

Meanwhile, neeld walked into a fractured playing group who hadn't been within a bulls roar of finals in 5 years because they didn't work hard enough. It is no secret we had a toxic culture and he went about trying to change it. He has been canned for alienating the leaders when he came in. These leaders had got us nowhere in the past 5 years and were the epitome of the lack of work ethic which got us to where we are in the first place. It is not like he walked into Geelong and proceeded to get all the leaders off side. Last year our so called senior footballers in green, davey, sylvia and moloney responded to being made accountable by dropping their bundle and spending time at Casey. I would think this is more of a reflection on the character of these players than it is of neeld. Moloney spends the off season urinating in nightclubs and then sooks for a year when he isn't made captain. Again, reflects more on moloney than it does neeld. Because of this neeld has copped flak for getting some noses out of joint after being given carte blanche to fix the culture at the club. Note that blokes like jones, Howe, grimes, dawes, clarke etc. who are actually prepared to work hard don't seem to have a problem with the neeld's regime. I think the development problems we have had can be attributed to the work ethic of the bulk of our players who are 26 and over. Few if any would get games at a decent club. In the absence of a decent senior group neeld was forced to throw two blokes into the captaincy who ideally wouldn't be captain yet. Again, says more about the quality of senior players we had at the club prior to neeld's arrival than it does about neeld.

The other thing neeld gets canned for is his 'moneyball' recruiting policy. This is absolute garbage, i think his recruiting has been excellent. Let's look at last year:

In

Hogan - pick 3, gun

Toumpas - pick 4, hasn't started well but has obvious talent

Viney - pick 26, gun

Dawes - pick 20, good acquisition

Barry - steak knives with hogan deal, going ok at Casey

Rodan - effectively traded for Morton (pick 88). Was excellent on the weekend and from all reports is a good influence on the group

Byrnes - free agent, has played a couple of good games

Kent - pick 48, forced his way into side, wait and see

M jones - pick 52, great pickup

Terlich - pick 68, great pickup

Gilles - awful

Pedersen - traded for gysberts who has spent 2 years in vfl

How can the above be deemed to be bad recruiting?

Neeld shouldn't have to deal with players not putting in. These problems go back further than neeld and are problems which grew under the board. I think neeld has gone about trying to fix things up the right way and I hope he stays to see out his rebuild with a competent board in place providing some stability instead of the current circus

Yep, pretty much my thoughts, until... Reports that Watts, Sylvia, and Frawley, want out. Neeld, is not able to sell them the vision, and we simply can't afford to lose these key players , especially Frawley. His loss would be devastating.

  On 03/06/2013 at 01:45, hogans_heroes said:

Rumours that McLardy will step down, not sure how accurate they are though.

Of course the big question is will Neeld be sacked? Neil Craig will also be present at the board meeting by the way.

I have said this before.

Mc Lardy will step down later this year and that is why Freeman was recruited to the board. To take over from Don.

  On 03/06/2013 at 12:24, Mc dee said:

First time long time. Have felt compelled to write my thoughts as I am stunned the amount of vitriol directed at neeld whilst the board seem to be getting off very lightly.

This board was given a free kick to begin with and started with no debt courtesy of stynes. Now losing millions a year. Crowds, membership and hope are well down. They have overseen a football department structure which has been openly canned by new CEO. Copped $500k fine for tanking. Lied to afl about dank. Gave former CEO 3 yr contract extension before sacking him 6 months later. Got us to the point where it is widely recognized that we need afl intervention so as not to implode. I could go on.

Meanwhile, neeld walked into a fractured playing group who hadn't been within a bulls roar of finals in 5 years because they didn't work hard enough. It is no secret we had a toxic culture and he went about trying to change it. He has been canned for alienating the leaders when he came in. These leaders had got us nowhere in the past 5 years and were the epitome of the lack of work ethic which got us to where we are in the first place. It is not like he walked into Geelong and proceeded to get all the leaders off side. Last year our so called senior footballers in green, davey, sylvia and moloney responded to being made accountable by dropping their bundle and spending time at Casey. I would think this is more of a reflection on the character of these players than it is of neeld. Moloney spends the off season urinating in nightclubs and then sooks for a year when he isn't made captain. Again, reflects more on moloney than it does neeld. Because of this neeld has copped flak for getting some noses out of joint after being given carte blanche to fix the culture at the club. Note that blokes like jones, Howe, grimes, dawes, clarke etc. who are actually prepared to work hard don't seem to have a problem with the neeld's regime. I think the development problems we have had can be attributed to the work ethic of the bulk of our players who are 26 and over. Few if any would get games at a decent club. In the absence of a decent senior group neeld was forced to throw two blokes into the captaincy who ideally wouldn't be captain yet. Again, says more about the quality of senior players we had at the club prior to neeld's arrival than it does about neeld.

The other thing neeld gets canned for is his 'moneyball' recruiting policy. This is absolute garbage, i think his recruiting has been excellent. Let's look at last year:

In

Hogan - pick 3, gun

Toumpas - pick 4, hasn't started well but has obvious talent

Viney - pick 26, gun

Dawes - pick 20, good acquisition

Barry - steak knives with hogan deal, going ok at Casey

Rodan - effectively traded for Morton (pick 88). Was excellent on the weekend and from all reports is a good influence on the group

Byrnes - free agent, has played a couple of good games

Kent - pick 48, forced his way into side, wait and see

M jones - pick 52, great pickup

Terlich - pick 68, great pickup

Gilles - awful

Pedersen - traded for gysberts who has spent 2 years in vfl

How can the above be deemed to be bad recruiting?

Neeld shouldn't have to deal with players not putting in. These problems go back further than neeld and are problems which grew under the board. I think neeld has gone about trying to fix things up the right way and I hope he stays to see out his rebuild with a competent board in place providing some stability instead of the current circus

Probably one of the most well thought out and well presented first posts ever I reckon. You make some very good points in there. The so-called moneyball recruiting has been just an easy target for the media IMO, most of the players we got rid of would likely struggle to get a game in our current team let alone other clubs. Moloney is the only one that has hurt and he left because of his frustrations at being overlooked for the leadership group. Pederson and Gillies are the only two I'm not happy with as recruits and Pedo's more to do with his contract than anything else (not Neeld's department). The others all have roles to play at the club, and a fair chunk of that is off-field.

  On 03/06/2013 at 13:15, demondame said:

Yep, pretty much my thoughts, until... Reports that Watts, Sylvia, and Frawley, want out. Neeld, is not able to sell them the vision, and we simply can't afford to lose these key players , especially Frawley. His loss would be devastating.

Just whispers. Not any reports yet.

  On 03/06/2013 at 12:24, Mc dee said:

First time long time. Have felt compelled to write my thoughts as I am stunned the amount of vitriol directed at neeld whilst the board seem to be getting off very lightly.

This board was given a free kick to begin with and started with no debt courtesy of stynes. Now losing millions a year. Crowds, membership and hope are well down. They have overseen a football department structure which has been openly canned by new CEO. Copped $500k fine for tanking. Lied to afl about dank. Gave former CEO 3 yr contract extension before sacking him 6 months later. Got us to the point where it is widely recognized that we need afl intervention so as not to implode. I could go on.

Meanwhile, neeld walked into a fractured playing group who hadn't been within a bulls roar of finals in 5 years because they didn't work hard enough. It is no secret we had a toxic culture and he went about trying to change it. He has been canned for alienating the leaders when he came in. These leaders had got us nowhere in the past 5 years and were the epitome of the lack of work ethic which got us to where we are in the first place. It is not like he walked into Geelong and proceeded to get all the leaders off side. Last year our so called senior footballers in green, davey, sylvia and moloney responded to being made accountable by dropping their bundle and spending time at Casey. I would think this is more of a reflection on the character of these players than it is of neeld. Moloney spends the off season urinating in nightclubs and then sooks for a year when he isn't made captain. Again, reflects more on moloney than it does neeld. Because of this neeld has copped flak for getting some noses out of joint after being given carte blanche to fix the culture at the club. Note that blokes like jones, Howe, grimes, dawes, clarke etc. who are actually prepared to work hard don't seem to have a problem with the neeld's regime. I think the development problems we have had can be attributed to the work ethic of the bulk of our players who are 26 and over. Few if any would get games at a decent club. In the absence of a decent senior group neeld was forced to throw two blokes into the captaincy who ideally wouldn't be captain yet. Again, says more about the quality of senior players we had at the club prior to neeld's arrival than it does about neeld.

The other thing neeld gets canned for is his 'moneyball' recruiting policy. This is absolute garbage, i think his recruiting has been excellent. Let's look at last year:

In

Hogan - pick 3, gun

Toumpas - pick 4, hasn't started well but has obvious talent

Viney - pick 26, gun

Dawes - pick 20, good acquisition

Barry - steak knives with hogan deal, going ok at Casey

Rodan - effectively traded for Morton (pick 88). Was excellent on the weekend and from all reports is a good influence on the group

Byrnes - free agent, has played a couple of good games

Kent - pick 48, forced his way into side, wait and see

M jones - pick 52, great pickup

Terlich - pick 68, great pickup

Gilles - awful

Pedersen - traded for gysberts who has spent 2 years in vfl

How can the above be deemed to be bad recruiting?

Neeld shouldn't have to deal with players not putting in. These problems go back further than neeld and are problems which grew under the board. I think neeld has gone about trying to fix things up the right way and I hope he stays to see out his rebuild with a competent board in place providing some stability instead of the current circus

Very good, post,

just further re Morton, watched him again today at the East Perth vs West Perth derby, he is terrible, the intensity is always up in these games and was quite physical, surprise surprise he went missing, not 1 tackle or effort to put his body on the line today. No footy development could have made him into a player, he has all the tools but no heart or desire. Stood out at junior level with all the skills where effort wasn't a premium. Another Andrew Mcdougall here top 5 pick who just didn't have the drive to make it at the top level

  On 03/06/2013 at 13:15, demondame said:

Yep, pretty much my thoughts, until... Reports that Watts, Sylvia, and Frawley, want out.

Reports also to the contrary, that they'll leave if Neeld is sacked.

You don't know any more than I do, or any of us do. Conjecture.

  On 03/06/2013 at 10:55, Lordweaver said:

Agreed, it's a nice little scare for all concerned a case of what could be if things don't change, over to neeldy and the players now to respond

The only reason Neeld wasn't shown the door today was due to the club not being able to afford the $600,000 operation to remove the cancerous growth.

Maybe instead of debt demolition, they raise funds for the removal of Neeld. Wont take them more than an afternoon to raise the money.

  On 03/06/2013 at 13:15, demondame said:

Yep, pretty much my thoughts, until... Reports that Watts, Sylvia, and Frawley, want out. Neeld, is not able to sell them the vision, and we simply can't afford to lose these key players , especially Frawley. His loss would be devastating.

it would be devastating.....if the reports were even accurate, but I guess if a player wants leave then so be it. If they do walk and site the reason for it to be difference with the coach, does that mean that every time players decide to leave that you need to revisit the Head Coach position. Strangely that almost like the Tail is wagging the dog, where does it stop. At some point you will get players who want to be there for the right reason and we will back to square one and were having a rebuild of the rebuild of the rebuild.

FWIW I reckon Frawley, Watts and Sylvia are on board the reality bus. So we will just have to wait and see.

As you are aware I am not violently opposed to MN and I actually think he should see his contract out, because I still think at some point the penny will drop and our players will actually start to turn the tide. Watching Richmond tonight shows me what happens when you stay the course and start getting the right culture and attitude into a football club.

Others may disagree

  On 03/06/2013 at 07:51, Redleg said:

It's just the start Adam. Money, Picks, Fixture, love.

Thank God for an uncompromised AFL.

  On 03/06/2013 at 11:13, belzebub59 said:

The 600 K man

Oh...I dont think so....here she reports almost ( im guessing ) verbatim as to what transpired.

Still leaking like a sieve Id suggest

Don't you love Caro. Now saying that the sacking of CS was "knee jerk" yet she was diligently calling for him to be sacked for months.

All demonlanders should be aware that changes will occur in the football department and they might not mean MN or NC. Everyone is jumping to conclusions that DMc is talking about MN but he could be talking about the whole of the department.

Amongst all the journalistic dross, another nicely balanced article from Peter Ryan.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-06-03/why-the-dees-didnt-sack-neeld.workstation

  On 03/06/2013 at 16:43, bing181 said:

Amongst all the journalistic dross, another nicely balanced article from Peter Ryan.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-06-03/why-the-dees-didnt-sack-neeld.workstation

We have struck gold with Peter Jackson.

He knows how to run things like as pro.

To Peter Jackson I say sometimes the obvious answer is the right one. We suck worse than any time in the history of the club. We didn't 18 months ago. The coach has to go.

At board level also we need to clear house after such a spectacular failure. Those who have read many of my posts will know I blame most of this on Cameron Schwab's meddling. The Prez/board threw all their weight behind the wrong guy when following Schwab down the tanking vortex. Schwab's vision won the day. He buried the Leading Teams report, instilled tanking, cut a coach that had us 8-9. Hiring Neeld, a disastrously naive and slow-learning coach, was a horrible accident. Player disenchantment and walkouts followed and we find ourselves just above VFL standard onfield.

Peter Jackson talking about the FD restructure is a swipe at meddling Schwab who had 4 people reporting to him after he was supposed to be staying out of things. People might say that this is all in the past but, even with Schwab cut a few weeks ago, his regime is the current structure PJ has walked into.

Restructuring requires a close look and I can understand why he is taking his time. But the way forward is inevitable and that is to find new people to help this club out of this mess. New president (Freeman), new board members (Shwarzta etc), new coaches (Eade&Jnr Mac), new footy director (?), new players (draft kids and throw money at 1 or 2 FA guns not 5 old hacks). It's a big clear out but needs to happen and we could be up and about again in no time.

  On 03/06/2013 at 13:15, demondame said:

Yep, pretty much my thoughts, until... Reports that Watts, Sylvia, and Frawley, want out. Neeld, is not able to sell them the vision, and we simply can't afford to lose these key players , especially Frawley. His loss would be devastating.

How credible are these reports? Im Damien Barrett amd I wear non prescription glasses to look smart. Bunch of gossip columnists.

  On 03/06/2013 at 13:15, demondame said:

Yep, pretty much my thoughts, until... Reports that Watts, Sylvia, and Frawley, want out. Neeld, is not able to sell them the vision, and we simply can't afford to lose these key players , especially Frawley. His loss would be devastating.

These players are a bit of a litmus test for me.

If the club were to announce contract extensions for all of them in the coming weeks, that would fill me with confidence in Neeld.

If we're dealing with the opposite situation though, I'd be hoping for a Mark Williams/Junior McDonald announcement before this year's trade period.

  On 03/06/2013 at 13:15, demondame said:

Yep, pretty much my thoughts, until... Reports that Watts, Sylvia, and Frawley, want out. Neeld, is not able to sell them the vision, and we simply can't afford to lose these key players , especially Frawley. His loss would be devastating.

There were also reports that Neeld was sacked yesterday with McLardy stepping down, 90% of what is being written by the football "journalists", and I use that term loosely, is BS.

  On 03/06/2013 at 22:19, Ron Burgundy said:

These players are a bit of a litmus test for me.

If the club were to announce contract extensions for all of them in the coming weeks, that would fill me with confidence in Neeld.

If we're dealing with the opposite situation though, I'd be hoping for a Mark Williams/Junior McDonald announcement before this year's trade period.

Frawley would be a huge loss.

If the the other two walk, they walk.

They will be just as successful as all the others.....

I reckon....

I see yesterday as the Board getting together to do something (that they did not understand and would avoid responsibility for) and Jackson heading them off at the pass. He is not ready to sack people because he is not ready to appoint people.

So we wait. When Jackson is ready the FD will change. Neeld will be sacked. Maybe Craig too. Maybe Mahoney as well. We'll keep Todd but give him a real job. We'll get one senior coach.

Poor Neeld dangles on now because Jackson is not good to go yet. I feel for the bloke. Given the hardest job in footy, without knowing how to do it, and has drowned. I hope the board spend their time figuring out how to never meddle in issues that they don't understand. I hold them responsible for this bloody disaster. Came in with Jimmy on a mandate to "fix the club" and they've buggered it to within an inch of its life.

  On 03/06/2013 at 16:43, bing181 said:

Amongst all the journalistic dross, another nicely balanced article from Peter Ryan.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-06-03/why-the-dees-didnt-sack-neeld.workstation

Well detailed article, he makes no illusions that Neeld is still very much in the firing line but doesn't over simplify the situation unlike most of the footy journos. The issues with the club and the on-field performance are anything but simple.

  On 03/06/2013 at 22:22, Pates said:

There were also reports that Neeld was sacked yesterday with McLardy stepping down, 90% of what is being written by the football "journalists", and I use that term loosely, is BS.

Very true. We need a new word for these idiots rather than having to put "journalists" in quotes.

I'm also amazed how many posts I read here which make definitive statements as to what will happen when the poster clearly has no facts to base it on. At least the "journalists" have the excuse of making a living out of their confections.

  On 03/06/2013 at 22:48, sue said:

Very true. We need a new word for these idiots rather than having to put "journalists" in quotes.

I'm also amazed how many posts I read here which make definitive statements as to what will happen when the poster clearly has no facts to base it on. At least the "journalists" have the excuse of making a living out of their confections.

There is one, at least a phrase: yellow journalism. Unfortunately it still includes the word journalism, which is probably not all that relevant to the people you might have in mind.

And there I go, attributing them with some humanity by calling them people.

  On 03/06/2013 at 22:29, timD said:

Poor Neeld dangles on now because Jackson is not good to go yet. I feel for the bloke. Given the hardest job in footy, without knowing how to do it, and has drowned. I hope the board spend their time figuring out how to never meddle in issues that they don't understand. I hold them responsible for this bloody disaster. Came in with Jimmy on a mandate to "fix the club" and they've buggered it to within an inch of its life.

That is a very dangerous game the club is playing TimD

The board barracking that the team fails - what a great situation the club is in. Another management failure?

Anyone else think that Lyon was talking rubbish last night...he thinks the board is playing a dangerous game, "what happens if the club starts winning games" he says. Well good Gary, that's the whole idea.