I know I'm going to cop a flame for this, but I want to say I actually feel better after watching the Collingwood game than I did at the start of the year after the Port one.

I feel really hopeful and I reckon we're on the right track, as horrible as that may seem right now.

What I saw in that first quarter was nothing short of remarkable. Sylvia laid 5 tackles. The boys played with real intensity. If not for 3 (I think it was 3?) posts, we would have been way in front. I normally don't subscribe to the "what-if" scenarios of hindsight, but in this case, those 3 goals would have made a huge difference. Collingwood looked demoralised, and would have been further had those been on the board.

But the real hope IMHO came in the press conference. Neeld said something that really resonated with me, it was something like "we could have stuck Howe and Trenners on half back and limited the score, but then they wouldn't learn anything." He makes an interesting point. Does it really matter if we loose by 50 points or 90 points? It's a loss either way. The important thing is sticking with the structures and making sure the players actually learn something in the course of the game.

I'm also encouraged a bit when I look at our injury list. We played 3 quarters of the game without Dawes, and we didn't have Clark, Frawley and Grimes. Garland did a great job on Cloke, but his job would have been much easier had Frawley been there, plus Grimes in the centre to help prevent the ball coming back there as often. Clark and Dawes ARE the forward structure. The best teams can cope with the loss of 4 of their best players, but we are in the unfortunate position that we can only replace them with VFL standard players or developing ones. We have no depth, but I'm convinced that our best 22 is much much better than anything we've seen this year.

So the players play as if Clark and Dawes are there, and when they get back, the team will be used to the structure. I'll deal with the losses being larger in the meantime if the result is a team that learns their structure quickly and are ready for when those players slot right back in.

/flameshield on.

edit - spelling

Edited June 11, 201312 yr by Choke

I know I'm going to cop a flame for this, but I want to say I actually feel better after watching the Collingwood game than I did at the start of the year after the Port one.

I feel really hopeful and I reckon we're on the right track, as horrible as that may seem right now.

What I saw in that first quarter was nothing short of remarkable. Sylvia laid 5 tackles. The boys played with real intensity. If not for 3 (I think it was 3?) posts, we would have been way in front. I normally don't subscribe to the "what-if" scenarios of hindsight, but in this case, those 3 goals would have made a huge difference. Collingwood looked demoralised, and would have been further had those been on the board.

But the real hope IMHO came in the press conference. Neeld said something that really resonated with me, it was something like "we could have stuck Howe and Trenners on half back and limited the score, but then they wouldn't learn anything." He makes an interesting point. Does it really matter if we loose by 50 points or 90 points? It's a loss either way. The important thing is sticking with the structures and making sure the players actually learn something in the course of the game.

I'm also encouraged a bit when I look at our injury list. We played 3 quarters of the game without Dawes, and we didn't have Clark, Frawley and Grimes. Garland did a great job on Cloke, but his job would have been much easier had Frawley been there, plus Grimes in the centre to help prevent the ball coming back there as often. Clark and Dawes ARE the forward structure. The best teams can cope with the loss of 4 of their best players, but we are in the unfortunate position that we can only replace them with VFL standard players or developing ones. We have no depth, but I'm convinced that our best 22 is much much better than anything we've seen this year.

So the players play as if Cloke and Dawes are there, and when they get back, the team will be used to the structure. I'll deal with the losses being larger in the meantime if the result is a team that learns their structure quickly and are ready for when those players slot right back in.

/flameshield on.

You would not get flamed from me, only the posters on here who can't look at things logically

as i have said all along, the list isnt bad. We have some damn good players.

Get a proper coach in and we will start winning games.

I agree with this but also don't understand how people don't see how much BP and DB stuffed us up?? We have next to no decent 23-25 year olds when really we should have a side full of them. We have no 26+ leaders whatsoever. I don't think anyone could coach this side to more than 4 wins in a season.

You would not get flamed from me, only the posters on here who can't look at things logically

......... mmm I think you need to look at things 'logically'

Its like looking over a chasm. if we had Swan and Ball, we would be in the hunt. Or is it just their workrate?

Haha! The only supporters who speak of improvement after the last 6 years are on here.

Admirable but completely delusional.

At halftime we had kicked one goal.

Let us not forget The Filth did not play well.

Past employees and some present ones have completely buggered us up.

I do not blame Neeld. He does not have the experience for what is needed, he is now asking for leniency from the journo vultures. He knows what's coming.

Bring on the cleanout and restructure. Top to Bottom.

Don's fighting speech yesterday left me hollow. He is a good man. Not the leader we so desperately need.

The playing list has potential but will not progress under the present MFC structure.

We do need a "Jeff Kennett" type to run this club, probably 2-3. It's that bad.

................

But the real hope IMHO came in the press conference. Neeld said something that really resonated with me, it was something like "we could have stuck Howe and Trenners on half back and limited the score, but then they wouldn't learn anything." He makes an interesting point. Does it really matter if we loose by 50 points or 90 points? It's a loss either way. The important thing is sticking with the structures and making sure the players actually learn something in the course of the game.

..................

Thought this really interesting too. There was a bit of the "toughen up" from Neeld at the presser. Nothing to lose, maybe.

I know I'm going to cop a flame for this, but I want to say I actually feel better after watching the Collingwood game than I did at the start of the year after the Port one.

I feel really hopeful and I reckon we're on the right track, as horrible as that may seem right now.

What I saw in that first quarter was nothing short of remarkable. Sylvia laid 5 tackles. The boys played with real intensity. If not for 3 (I think it was 3?) posts, we would have been way in front. I normally don't subscribe to the "what-if" scenarios of hindsight, but in this case, those 3 goals would have made a huge difference. Collingwood looked demoralised, and would have been further had those been on the board.

But the real hope IMHO came in the press conference. Neeld said something that really resonated with me, it was something like "we could have stuck Howe and Trenners on half back and limited the score, but then they wouldn't learn anything." He makes an interesting point. Does it really matter if we loose by 50 points or 90 points? It's a loss either way. The important thing is sticking with the structures and making sure the players actually learn something in the course of the game.

I'm also encouraged a bit when I look at our injury list. We played 3 quarters of the game without Dawes, and we didn't have Clark, Frawley and Grimes. Garland did a great job on Cloke, but his job would have been much easier had Frawley been there, plus Grimes in the centre to help prevent the ball coming back there as often. Clark and Dawes ARE the forward structure. The best teams can cope with the loss of 4 of their best players, but we are in the unfortunate position that we can only replace them with VFL standard players or developing ones. We have no depth, but I'm convinced that our best 22 is much much better than anything we've seen this year.

So the players play as if Cloke and Dawes are there, and when they get back, the team will be used to the structure. I'll deal with the losses being larger in the meantime if the result is a team that learns their structure quickly and are ready for when those players slot right back in.

/flameshield on.

well done mate, this is exactly it & is how the players will learn to develop. I to was wondering about stemming the bleeding in past matches

by putting extra numbers back, but that just serves the players who want to take the soft way out of the embarrassment,,, instead of working harder in the first place.

the key is for the players to learn to put the opposition back on their own back foot from our pressure.

Neeld is on the right path.

well done mate, this is exactly it & is how the players will learn to develop. I to was wondering about stemming the bleeding in past matches

by putting extra numbers back, but that just serves the players who want to take the soft way out of the embarrassment,,, instead of working harder in the first place.

the key is for the players to learn to put the opposition back on their own back foot from our pressure.

Neeld is on the right path.

You are delusional if u think Neeld is on the right track

You are delusional if u think Neeld is on the right track

Your profile pic proves to me your delusional!

.

Neeld is on the right path.

hahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Admire your optimism but we are a long way of the pace. I disagree with Neeld re third quarter as I thought we employed an old fashioned flood in order to limit the damage. The 2 goals we got were almost Pagans paddock like. The last quarter saw a more traditional man on man set up and we got smashed. 28 marks inside 50 good grief if they had kicked straight it would have been like Essendon.

Your profile pic proves to me your delusional!

Wow thats all you could come up with? Must be school holidays.. now beat it son!

Haha! The only supporters who speak of improvement after the last 6 years are on here.

Admirable but completely delusional.

At halftime we had kicked one goal.

Let us not forget The Filth did not play well.

Past employees and some present ones have completely buggered us up.

I do not blame Neeld. He does not have the experience for what is needed, he is now asking for leniency from the journo vultures. He knows what's coming.

Bring on the cleanout and restructure. Top to Bottom.

Don's fighting speech yesterday left me hollow. He is a good man. Not the leader we so desperately need.

The playing list has potential but will not progress under the present MFC structure.

We do need a "Jeff Kennett" type to run this club, probably 2-3. It's that bad.

How was the 50th? All good?

I know I'm going to cop a flame for this, but I want to say I actually feel better after watching the Collingwood game than I did at the start of the year after the Port one.

I feel really hopeful and I reckon we're on the right track, as horrible as that may seem right now.

What I saw in that first quarter was nothing short of remarkable. Sylvia laid 5 tackles. The boys played with real intensity. If not for 3 (I think it was 3?) posts, we would have been way in front. I normally don't subscribe to the "what-if" scenarios of hindsight, but in this case, those 3 goals would have made a huge difference. Collingwood looked demoralised, and would have been further had those been on the board.

But the real hope IMHO came in the press conference. Neeld said something that really resonated with me, it was something like "we could have stuck Howe and Trenners on half back and limited the score, but then they wouldn't learn anything." He makes an interesting point. Does it really matter if we loose by 50 points or 90 points? It's a loss either way. The important thing is sticking with the structures and making sure the players actually learn something in the course of the game.

I'm also encouraged a bit when I look at our injury list. We played 3 quarters of the game without Dawes, and we didn't have Clark, Frawley and Grimes. Garland did a great job on Cloke, but his job would have been much easier had Frawley been there, plus Grimes in the centre to help prevent the ball coming back there as often. Clark and Dawes ARE the forward structure. The best teams can cope with the loss of 4 of their best players, but we are in the unfortunate position that we can only replace them with VFL standard players or developing ones. We have no depth, but I'm convinced that our best 22 is much much better than anything we've seen this year.

So the players play as if Cloke and Dawes are there, and when they get back, the team will be used to the structure. I'll deal with the losses being larger in the meantime if the result is a team that learns their structure quickly and are ready for when those players slot right back in.

/flameshield on.

Certainly our injuries to our few strong KPPs - Clark, Dawes, Frawley and until yesterday McDonald - hits us as a struggling club pretty hard, and makes it impossible to develop structures properly. Even the best teams would be in some bother if they were without their best FB, CHB, CHF and FF at the same time.

Add I presume that your last paragraph contains a minor typo, or is it wishful thinking ? :-)

How was the 50th? All good?

All very good JR, thanks.

Espresso maker and about 30 bottles of red. I did well!!

Edited June 11, 201312 yr by why you little

Wow thats all you could come up with? Must be school holidays.. now beat it son!

That reaction is all I needed , coming from a 23 yr old - that's rich

Putting our gameplan/coaching aside for a moment to look at the list..

At the moment we have 9 players on the list worthy of being in an AFL side: Clark, Dawes, Frawley, Garland, Grimes, Howe, Jamar, N.Jones, Sylvia (a couple of those are dubious too)

The next rung down are just battlers, some may have a brighter future ahead, but it's not looking great : Bail, Blease, Dunn, Evans, Gawn, Terlich, Jetta, M.Jones, T.McDonald, McKenzie, Nicholson, Strauss, Tapscott, Trengove, Watts (15).

After that we have the kids in Viney, Toumpas, Hogan, Barry and Kent

If we are to get anywhere near becoming a good side we need at least half of these blokes to go up a peg in the very near future

Given our current rate of individual improvement it is impossible to see that happening

Get whomever you like to be coach, they will not get far with these individuals and their deficiencies in skill, heart, athleticism and brains

Get whomever you like to be coach, they will not get far with these individuals and their deficiencies in skill, heart, athleticism and brains

Are we off to see the Wizard?

There is hope but so far not much improvement. I see that some of the fellas CAN play but Neeld isn't probably the bloke to bring them where they need to be.

Certainly our injuries to our few strong KPPs - Clark, Dawes, Frawley and until yesterday McDonald - hits us as a struggling club pretty hard, and makes it impossible to develop structures properly. Even the best teams would be in some bother if they were without their best FB, CHB, CHF and FF at the same time.

Add I presume that your last paragraph contains a minor typo, or is it wishful thinking ? :-)

Lol, sorry I'll fix that, thanks.

Good to see some posters share my optimism. I know we're a long way off, but I honestly think it's not as far as the score-lines would indicate.

There is hope but so far not much improvement. I see that some of the fellas CAN play but Neeld isn't probably the bloke to bring them where they need to be.

The press conference for me at least indicates that Neeld has the right attitude. He's not bowing to external pressure and he's putting his money where his mouth is when he says he's focussing on development and not the scoreboard.

For me it alleviated some of the doubt, however it still doesn't indicate how good he'll be as a game day coach. I want him to succeed, I really really do.

But let's not have another Neeld thread eh?

......... mmm I think you need to look at things 'logically'

Rather than through the hate filled gaze that you do?

hahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

The only thing laughable at the moment is you, try reading some of the posts you have put previously, you continually contradict yourself