Knights may have been good at developing the list to a stage that golden boy could take over.

  On 17/06/2013 at 01:39, PD72 said:

Jackson was involved in appointing Knights as coach at Essendon. Knights lost the players after a promising start and the game plan was all out attack no defending at all. I hope Knights doesn't get the job but l think he will be on your short list.

From an outsiders view Eade as the coach , maybe Ayres as a senior assistant , McDonald returns to Melbourne in some capacity and some people fresh out of the game.

Only bad thing with Jackson was the Knights appointment which was a major balls up.

  On 17/06/2013 at 00:32, why you little said:

Hahaha! People saying this is a knee jerk reaction.

The team has not improved since Round 1 2012.

Now we find real coaches.

Yep, who will likely be chosen in exactly the same manner as the last few - by the presentation they make to the club and there record in lower leagues or as assistants.

There's three coaches with previous coaching experience in the AFL at the moment. One is on the bottom of the table. Another (Malthouse), thus far, has a worse winning record than his predecessor and the final one is tracking well.

The chances of us getting some one who has coached at AFL level before, let alone one with a successful record, are very slim - so the reality is that we are on the same train we were on after Daniher and after Bailey.

Another untried coach is likely to be signed (and fired) by a club unwilling to stand up to story chasers with a vested interest in the failure of coaches.

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:05, Rusty Nails said:

Too early and probably impractical contractually. Then there's the players to consider as well. But after the dust has settled following the appointment of new coach for 2014 (assuming we do and the new coach is open to it) any realistic chance of Neeld as mid field line coach taking over from Royal?

NO chance... PJ has already stated MN will be paid out..(press conference today) . Pointless re hiring him in ANY capacity .. What would be the point in paying his contract out ??

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:07, dl4e said:

Yes they had a couple of good years first off but it really plunged for him near the end.Im only interested to what may appear as "change"

I can remember we beat Adelaide by 90 something points in 2011.

I am only interested in what will appear as "change" from here on in til seasons end

We have all thought about how this list might operate differently with another in charge. Well now we might find out

Neelds and Craigs coaching ratios are chalk and cheese 15% v 55 % !!!

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:07, markc said:

i turned off as soon as i heard her voice

"GOOD CALL, BAD CALL GAWWY ?? "

Just watched 24 mins of the media conference on ABC news site. Mark Neeld is gracious and generous in his comments and still using the collective 'we' when he's talking about the Club. No passing the buck or looking to blame anyone.

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:13, belzebub59 said:

I am only interested in what will appear as "change" from here on in til seasons end

We have all thought about how this list might operate differently with another in charge. Well now we might find out

Neelds and Craigs coaching ratios are chalk and cheese 15% v 55 % !!!

Not exactly this list.. We will hardly improve... A few very serious changes need to and will be made before 2014.. THEN we will improve... MN had no hope with the current list and I am NOT going in to bat for him, not at all ... No coach would succeed with this list... GWS are even worse, regardless of having one of the AFL greats as coach... Cannot win with the wrong cattle..

  On 17/06/2013 at 02:18, Cards13 said:

This part is also of interest from the press conference:

Jackson said he would take responsibility "as a matter of urgency" to convince the players of the merits of staying. "We need to convince them as a club this is a place they want to be for the next 10 years of their career."

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/demons-finally-sack-neeld-20130617-2ocws.html#ixzz2WR5Rh9Yn

Anyone who didn't think that Neeld was fracturing the playing group and creating serious doubt in the minds of many, especially those with expiring contracts, should now admit that it wasn't just an "anti-Neeld" agenda paddling, but the truth.

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:23, Jaded said:

Anyone who didn't think that Neeld was fracturing the playing group and creating serious doubt in the minds of many, especially those with expiring contracts, should now admit that it wasn't just an "anti-Neeld" agenda paddling, but the truth.

Still not convinced of that.

The ineptness of the club on-field might send players running.

That is why this decision was made.

it was obvious he was gone after we lost to Essendon by 148 points and his embarrassing uninspiring per-match speech was aired on TV

the guy is a terrible speaker and motivator, no wonder the players looked asleep every game under him

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:07, dl4e said:

Yes they had a couple of good years first off but it really plunged for him near the end.

I can remember we beat Adelaide by 90 something points in 2011.

FIVE straight years of finals footy including 3 prelims..? Not bad compared to our record ?? So we beat them once by over 90 points... Big Deal, probably an indictment on our attitude. Premiership form one week couldn't care less the next... We beat Essendon under Bailey too Didn't we ??

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:12, WAClark said:

Yep, who will likely be chosen in exactly the same manner as the last few - by the presentation they make to the club and there record in lower leagues or as assistants.

There's three coaches with previous coaching experience in the AFL at the moment. One is on the bottom of the table. Another (Malthouse), thus far, has a worse winning record than his predecessor and the final one is tracking well.

The chances of us getting some one who has coached at AFL level before, let alone one with a successful record, are very slim - so the reality is that we are on the same train we were on after Daniher and after Bailey.

Another untried coach is likely to be signed (and fired) by a club unwilling to stand up to story chasers with a vested interest in the failure of coaches.

What? There's at least Williams and Eade. We won't go with another untried coach. The AFL and we as members will demand an experienced, successful coach and they're out there alright.

is he the first coach weve had with 2 first names???

This is the first time in my life I've been ashamed to support the Demons.

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:27, rpfc said:

Still not convinced of that.

The ineptness of the club on-field might send players running.

That is why this decision was made.

There is no doubt that the entire club being crap is causing players to doubt their future, but CEO is gone, president is gone, and now coach.

Players have the most direct contact with the coach, I doubt McLardy really comes into anybody's calculation when deciding on renewing their contract.

This club has to sell hope not only to us members, but also to players. You wouldn't want to work for a losing organisation, or for a boss you thought was incompetent.

I don't think Neeld ever really had the majority of the players, and Jackson said that is so many words.

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:36, RalphiusMaximus said:

This is the first time in my life I've been ashamed to support the Demons.

You just receive Holy Communion?

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:36, RalphiusMaximus said:

This is the first time in my life I've been ashamed to support the Demons.

this is the first time in a long time i have been proud of supporting the Demons

  On 17/06/2013 at 00:26, hardtack said:

Do you seriously believe that we will win those games simply because Neeld has been shown the door? I seriously hope I'm wrong, but I get the feeling that this season from hell will continue unabated.

I reckon we will come out swinging, like a chain being released from our neck.

Hardtack, you were wrong!!!!

thanks for the debate tho.

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:46, Jaded said:

There is no doubt that the entire club being crap is causing players to doubt their future, but CEO is gone, president is gone, and now coach.

Players have the most direct contact with the coach, I doubt McLardy really comes into anybody's calculation when deciding on renewing their contract.

This club has to sell hope not only to us members, but also to players. You wouldn't want to work for a losing organisation, or for a boss you thought was incompetent.

I don't think Neeld ever really had the majority of the players, and Jackson said that is so many words.

Well the efforts (or lack thereof) of the players is confirmation that Neeld 'didn't have them.' You needn't say more.

I am only saying that I am not going to give credence to players actively seeking his dismissal without harder evidence.

It's all really moot now.

I felt alot worse for Bailey than I do for Neeld.

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:57, hogans_heroes said:

yes, i agree. The Bailey decision was a joke, it came down to Schwab vs Bailey and as we now know the selfish [censored] Schwab stayed around to destroy our club further while Bailey, who had his team at 8-9 record at that stage, took the fall.

Schwab is the sole reason we are in this mess, and now I wish I had listened to Freo fans when they gave me commiserations after we bought him and Connolly to the MFC.

Anyway, its onwards and upwards from here.

GO DEMONS

It is now ancient history HH

We are all clever with hindsight.

Lets concentrate on the the future because IMO this is our last chance.

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:23, Jaded said:

Anyone who didn't think that Neeld was fracturing the playing group and creating serious doubt in the minds of many, especially those with expiring contracts, should now admit that it wasn't just an "anti-Neeld" agenda paddling, but the truth.

Sorry but that comment by PJ could equally be directed at players like Dawes, Jack's etc who might want to quit the club because Neeld is gone. Or just the very obvious one that keeping good players at a basket-case club is difficult. I have no idea which interpretation is correct. Only PJ, the players and those close to the club know the truth.

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:23, Jaded said:

Anyone who didn't think that Neeld was fracturing the playing group and creating serious doubt in the minds of many, especially those with expiring contracts, should now admit that it wasn't just an "anti-Neeld" agenda paddling, but the truth.

  On 17/06/2013 at 03:46, Jaded said:

I don't think Neeld ever really had the majority of the players, and Jackson said that is so many words.

You can't draw that conclusion from PJ's words.

He was referring to how the MFC is a basket case, and hence the difficulty the MFC has in selling itself when it comes to signing players. Our on-field performances, and hence Neeld, were a big part of that.

It does not follow, however, that Neeld had 'fractured' the playing group.

  On 17/06/2013 at 02:41, armstrong35 said:

A friend of mine is good friends with one of the players and he had said that the playing group loved Neeld as a person but not as a coach. They didn't believe the game plan would work for them. Obviously not sure if true but thought I would share this....

I heard from a similar source that he lost many players due to hard line baking sessions that made several cry. There were definate doubts about his coaching.

proofs in the pudding - we might know more about our list at the end of the season than we do now.

Just finished watching the presser. It was handled infinitely better than the Bailey sacking. Jackson's performance was very good considering the circumstances. Every word had meaning and everything he said had been thought through before he said it. He obviously kept Mark informed through this process and this was not a decision based on one event.

I feel a little more comfortable with him as CEO now. He didn't waffle and stuck to the point. That is something I appreciate in any field.