One things for sure, if Bailey had a ruck man that played in the reserves and had 15 possessions , 39 hit outs and booted 4 goals , he would be playing tomorrow at the G, that is the most bizarre selection I can recall, how Max isn't playing tommorow is a bloody disgrace.

It should be noted that Bailey won 11 games between round 15 2010 and round 17 2011.

Why should that be noted?

One things for sure, if Bailey had a ruck man that played in the reserves and had 15 possessions , 39 hit outs and booted 4 goals , he would be playing tomorrow at the G, that is the most bizarre selection I can recall, how Max isn't playing tommorow is a bloody disgrace.

Have to confess : I'm a fan

No doubt there are top men on the case, however

Haha... You mean Morton who Neeld traded away, Gawn who is yet to re-sign, Blease who isn't getting games, and Howe who's playing in the backline half the time....?

Reckon their honest opinions might not be that much different to Green's.

I'm not sure what you're laughing at, I suggested that it would be interesting to hear the testimony of those players as a more balanced view, not that they would definitely vote for Neeld. Green played for 4 years under Bailey and one under Neeld, The 'old dog new tricks' saying springs to mind - not saying its true, but its unlikely Green would be saying he loved his one year under any coach at the end of his career when he is being asked to learn new things, work harder than before etc. The players I suggested would have a more balanced view.

RE the other players - Morton has stated that the WCE players work much harder than we ever did in the Bailey era and that he thought Melbourne was now on the right track. That indicates that to me, while he might get on with bailey better, or have a better relationship, he also recognises that Bailey was not getting the best out of his players nor training them appropriately. It isn't hard to imagine him saying 'I enjoyed playing under Bailey better, but I think Neeld is a better coach'. Blease and Neelds relationship is well documented and I don't believe Blease has any problems with the current selection, he will get games when he deserves them - he is aware of the requirements and has worked hard on his deficiencies to improve them.

Howe has improved under Neeld, and his increased aerobic capacity has allowed him to be used on the ball. RE Howe being utilised in the backline: he is a player who needs space, his biggest weapon - his aerial ability - is suited to space where he can move and jump, not one on one physical scraps where he lacks in strength. He is also a beautiful user of the ball and a sound reader of the play. Why wouldn't you get him involved at times?

Gawn I included because he is an interesting one, has probably played equal under both coaches, both coaches have stuck by him despite injuries, Neeld gave him an extended run before sending him back where he dominated. To bring him back to AFL Fitzpatrick would have been dropped, and if that was the case everyone would be calling for Neelds head because he dropped Fitzpatrick after only 1 game. He hasn't resigned, but also hasn't stated that he is putting off contract talks. Given he will be quite popular with other clubs, I don't blame him for negotiating his contract closely. His view would be more interesting than many others.

One things for sure, if Bailey had a ruck man that played in the reserves and had 15 possessions , 39 hit outs and booted 4 goals , he would be playing tomorrow at the G, that is the most bizarre selection I can recall, how Max isn't playing tommorow is a bloody disgrace.

Well if you can remember 3 weeks ago Fitzpatrick was also dominating and big Max seemed a bit tired after playing the first 6 or 7 games. So Fitzpatrick came in for Gawn's spot so basically you want to drop Fitzpatrick after one game?

If dean bailey had overseen 4 seasons of finals performances, consistent effort and tough footy, then we may have something to be nostalgic over. He didn't, we haven't, move on and look to the future. Nothing but constant pain and "what if" looking in the past. It's happened, lets stop pretending 8.5 wins in a season was a success and look at where we are going- to an era of tough, accountable footballers who actually want to succeed.

Bailey or.........yawn!!

Maybe he preferred Bailey cause he would pick up a 6 pack of Jimmy cans on the way home from training for him.

A few stories I've heard around Bailey's player management, it does not surprise me that alot of players would prefer him to Neeld. Bailey has many excellent characteristics that make him a excellent coach but just not a head coach, his inabiity to crack the whip being the main one.

Is Neeld a better coach? Not sure, but he is paying for the sins of Bailey.

Hmm, worst coach of all time or second-worst coach of all time? Can't we have both?

Well if you can remember 3 weeks ago Fitzpatrick was also dominating and big Max seemed a bit tired after playing the first 6 or 7 games. So Fitzpatrick came in for Gawn's spot so basically you want to drop Fitzpatrick after one game?

No I would Drop Jamar.

I choose option C. Daniher.

Under Bailey in 2010 against Collingwood we got within 1 point and then drew against them.

I would like to say I am excited about tomorrow, but under Mark Neeld, to get within 10 goals would be a good result.

Thesedays we celebrate any loss under 100 points.

Bring back the Balme

Jack Darling says hi.

Jack Darling says hi.

Jack Darling, lol..

The bloke who dominates the easy sides and can't get a kick to save himself when the heat is on.

Other than the Hawthorn game earlier in the year where Darling kicked 3 goals from 3 kicks.

Against any other top 8 side, 4 of which they have played - his return in those 4 matches is a lowly 4 goals.

Darling has beaten up on GWS, Bullies and us with 5 goal hauls in those games.

If you want nostalgia go back one more coach

Why should that be noted?

It should be noted because the coach could actually win enough games in a 12 month period to equal roughly an 11-12-1 record which is good enough to finish about 10th. Therefore Bailey > Neeld

Jack Darling, lol..

The bloke who dominates the easy sides and can't get a kick to save himself when the heat is on.

Other than the Hawthorn game earlier in the year where Darling kicked 3 goals from 3 kicks.

Against any other top 8 side, 4 of which they have played - his return in those 4 matches is a lowly 4 goals.

Darling has beaten up on GWS, Bullies and us with 5 goal hauls in those games.

Cale Morton says hi.

Give Bailey the extra million Neeld got for his footy department. We wouldn't be behind the expansion clubs now I assure you.

Jack Darling, lol..

The bloke who dominates the easy sides and can't get a kick to save himself when the heat is on.

Other than the Hawthorn game earlier in the year where Darling kicked 3 goals from 3 kicks.

Against any other top 8 side, 4 of which they have played - his return in those 4 matches is a lowly 4 goals.

Darling has beaten up on GWS, Bullies and us with 5 goal hauls in those games.

Yep fair call. But how about jeremy cameron hey.. superstar!

I'm not sure what the technical term for this kind of reasoning is, where one looks unfairly favourably on the past because the present is gloomy.

It's called Golden Age Thinking, and it's very popular amongst socially conservative politicians.

Gotta love that our 'Golden Age' was finishing 14th.

It should be noted because the coach could actually win enough games in a 12 month period to equal roughly an 11-12-1 record which is good enough to finish about 10th. Therefore Bailey > Neeld

Oh, you mean the 12 month period commencing halfway during Bailey's third year?

I'm not sure what you're laughing at, I suggested that it would be interesting to hear the testimony of those players as a more balanced view, not that they would definitely vote for Neeld. Green played for 4 years under Bailey and one under Neeld, The 'old dog new tricks' saying springs to mind - not saying its true, but its unlikely Green would be saying he loved his one year under any coach at the end of his career when he is being asked to learn new things, work harder than before etc. The players I suggested would have a more balanced view.

RE the other players - Morton has stated that the WCE players work much harder than we ever did in the Bailey era and that he thought Melbourne was now on the right track. That indicates that to me, while he might get on with bailey better, or have a better relationship, he also recognises that Bailey was not getting the best out of his players nor training them appropriately. It isn't hard to imagine him saying 'I enjoyed playing under Bailey better, but I think Neeld is a better coach'. Blease and Neelds relationship is well documented and I don't believe Blease has any problems with the current selection, he will get games when he deserves them - he is aware of the requirements and has worked hard on his deficiencies to improve them.

Howe has improved under Neeld, and his increased aerobic capacity has allowed him to be used on the ball. RE Howe being utilised in the backline: he is a player who needs space, his biggest weapon - his aerial ability - is suited to space where he can move and jump, not one on one physical scraps where he lacks in strength. He is also a beautiful user of the ball and a sound reader of the play. Why wouldn't you get him involved at times?

Gawn I included because he is an interesting one, has probably played equal under both coaches, both coaches have stuck by him despite injuries, Neeld gave him an extended run before sending him back where he dominated. To bring him back to AFL Fitzpatrick would have been dropped, and if that was the case everyone would be calling for Neelds head because he dropped Fitzpatrick after only 1 game. He hasn't resigned, but also hasn't stated that he is putting off contract talks. Given he will be quite popular with other clubs, I don't blame him for negotiating his contract closely. His view would be more interesting than many others.

Posting an essay doesn't mean you understood the point, I hope you get that now...

Yep fair call. But how about jeremy cameron hey.. superstar!

I'd love to see Jeremy Cameron in a Demons guernsey.

That would be a dream come true.

The fact is that we were a rabble under Bailey. We won a few more games because his mantra was "attack at all cost" and it cost plenty. Our players were soft and undisciplined in defence, and they were being exploited by every team that could run the other way.

Neeld is the opposite. He wants them to be accountable and disciplined first and foremost. The said right from the start that he would not be focusing on how to attack. I think this mas changed somewhat since he first arrived, but it is still evident in the low scores we are producing.

Personally, I will take Neeld's approach over Bailey's. What Bailey was teaching them would have gotten the team to the first week of finals, but no further. What Neeld is teaching has the potential to take the team all the way if they can get the attacking side of things right.