I question that he has built a club from our position before...

Barassi left in '95 with 9 wins. Eade already had players of the likes of Lockett, Kelly, O'Loughlin, Lewis, Creswell, Roos, Kickett, Dunkley, Bayes... its not a wonder he got them to a grand final that following year.

The dogs when he arrived in 2005 had West, Darcy, Johnson Smith, Murphy, Eagleton, Cross, Gia, Gilbee, Lake, Cooney, Grant to name a few...

My point is not so much that he is not a good developer of players, and not a good coach, but it's perhaps worth understanding that he had the nucleus of a good team already at his club and on the list.

We don't have that core group yet. We have some nice bookends and a lot of 'potential' but in terms of experience, leadership, and hardness at the ball we are miles away from those lists above.

We are a whole new challenge for whoever we get...This list is that bad.

Perfect example right there. "It worked for Port", so it MUST work for us.

There is a lot more to it than that. Port at least had key importances that we don't. Leaders, culture, effort, list goes on.

The culture instilled by Choco? I've been saying for weeks to drop Watts, but if we do that we might upset him and he will want out. That's been our problem everyone's to afraid of upsetting someone. It's a tough game, weeds must be removed.

I question that he has built a club from our position before...

Barassi left in '95 with 9 wins. Eade already had players of the likes of Lockett, Kelly, O'Loughlin, Lewis, Creswell, Roos, Kickett, Dunkley, Bayes... its not a wonder he got them to a grand final that following year.

The dogs when he arrived in 2005 had West, Darcy, Johnson Smith, Murphy, Eagleton, Cross, Gia, Gilbee, Lake, Cooney, Grant to name a few...

My point is not so much that he is not a good developer of players, and not a good coach, but it's perhaps worth understanding that he had the nucleus of a good team already at his club and on the list.

We don't have that core group yet. We have some nice bookends and a lot of 'potential' but in terms of experience, leadership, and hardness at the ball we are miles away from those lists above.

thats right & ol' vanilla failed to really advance the teams in any really meaningful ways. they got to a plateau & just sat there aging.

IMO he is a very good development coach But NOT a finishing coach... & I said so a couple of years back as well after Baileys time. He would be no more tan 2 yrs worthwhile.

to get the training wheels back onto the bike.

The culture instilled by Choco? I've been saying for weeks to drop Watts, but if we do that we might upset him and he will want out. That's been our problem everyone's to afraid of upsetting someone. It's a tough game, weeds must be removed.

...said Mark Neeld.

No one here really knows what a good coach is.........Wins = Good coach......That's about it

You win and the coach is absolutely brilliant........You lose and you can pick faults with every aspect of his game plan, motivation, ect ect....

I wish the next coach all the very best of luck, no matter who it is......

...said Mark Neeld.

Choco has a better footy brain than Neeld. I have no doubts Neeld has made/ will make a competent assistant but the big gig was too much.

Edited August 23, 201311 yr by Al's Demons

The culture instilled by Choco? I've been saying for weeks to drop Watts, but if we do that we might upset him and he will want out. That's been our problem everyone's to afraid of upsetting someone. It's a tough game, weeds must be removed.

Hell no. I agree with you 100% here Al. No more bruise free footy. If our boy Watts doesn't harden up now he may never will.

He is about the exact same height and weight as me. He should be smashing those packs like no tomorrow. Fitzy can.

I question that he has built a club from our position before...

Barassi left in '95 with 9 wins. Eade already had players of the likes of Lockett, Kelly, O'Loughlin, Lewis, Creswell, Roos, Kickett, Dunkley, Bayes... its not a wonder he got them to a grand final that following year.

The dogs when he arrived in 2005 had West, Darcy, Johnson Smith, Murphy, Eagleton, Cross, Gia, Gilbee, Lake, Cooney, Grant to name a few...

My point is not so much that he is not a good developer of players, and not a good coach, but it's perhaps worth understanding that he had the nucleus of a good team already at his club and on the list.

We don't have that core group yet. We have some nice bookends and a lot of 'potential' but in terms of experience, leadership, and hardness at the ball we are miles away from those lists above.

Dunkley & O'Loughlin were nobodies before Rocket got hold of them, from my memory of 1996 he turned Stafford into almost the best ruckman in the league and he also made the likes of Luff, Matthews & Crouch into solid players.

The Dogs under Rohde were almost as bad as we were under Neeld, it was he who turned Gilbee into a player when he was almost delisted under Rohde. Rockets game plan and ability to instil confidence into the group was a major factor.

I don't cop all this our list is so bad it will take 5 years to sort out, don't kid yourself that our list is that bad, there are holes big holes but our list is bereft of confidence more than anything else and we can turn very quickly into a mid table side and good development can see us finals bound in 2/3 years

Dunkley & O'Loughlin were nobodies before Rocket got hold of them, from my memory of 1996 he turned Stafford into almost the best ruckman in the league and he also made the likes of Luff, Matthews & Crouch into solid players.

The Dogs under Rohde were almost as bad as we were under Neeld, it was he who turned Gilbee into a player when he was almost delisted under Rohde. Rockets game plan and ability to instil confidence into the group was a major factor.

I don't cop all this our list is so bad it will take 5 years to sort out, don't kid yourself that our list is that bad, there are holes big holes but our list is bereft of confidence more than anything else and we can turn very quickly into a mid table side and good development can see us finals bound in 2/3 years

the bullies were undergoing a youth rebuild & installed rhode to teach as they fished the draft... they rebuilt the list with talent from the draft.

after that they hunted in eade. but he is vanilla & gets stale quickly.

If the rumours about Craig being as good as done are true then i'm content. At least the players look like they're trying under him.

Lets not kid ourselves, no iterim coach would have gotten any more out of our jaded and mentally fatigued playing group.

If craig is the coach you can bet that come preseason he will have changed a thing or two with regards to the game plan & structures - things he didnt have the time to do in the interim role.

Dunkley & O'Loughlin were nobodies before Rocket got hold of them, from my memory of 1996 he turned Stafford into almost the best ruckman in the league and he also made the likes of Luff, Matthews & Crouch into solid players.

The Dogs under Rohde were almost as bad as we were under Neeld, it was he who turned Gilbee into a player when he was almost delisted under Rohde. Rockets game plan and ability to instil confidence into the group was a major factor.

I don't cop all this our list is so bad it will take 5 years to sort out, don't kid yourself that our list is that bad, there are holes big holes but our list is bereft of confidence more than anything else and we can turn very quickly into a mid table side and good development can see us finals bound in 2/3 years

Even without a couple of those players that you mention... it is still true that the core of experienced players were already at the club. Incidentally, where exactly did I stay that our list is so bad that it will take 5 years to sort out??, if you read what I said again, I said we have some very good bookends and a lot of potential... Experience leadership and hardness are things that our playing group are lacking,...

My point was not that Eade isn't a good coach, it's just that people think that he built clubs up from scratch, and that the MFC is a different proposition to what he had to deal with at the Dogs or Sydney. Sydney was a mid table team, and the dogs were towards the bottom, but had still managed 5 wins for that season.

I wouldn't disagree with you.

I really like Craig but just don't want to see him as coach next year. In the public eye he is damaged goods (from the Neeld regime).

I really wanted Roos (just love everything that comes out of his mouth and his personality) but I will accept that thats not going to happen.

So I guess its Eade or WIlliams or ...... with Craig as an assistant or in a development role - thats what I want.

The coach is pretty much an investment into hope and as much as I like Craig he just doesn't bring as much as a Williams.

I keep saying the players need a clean slate but we can't just keep giving them clean slates every time they try and drive this football club into the ground (this is our last shot).

Who ever is the next coach is in it for the long hall - is Craig up for another 4 or 5 years? Can Craig sell hope to supporters and players? (the former most important!)

See craig for top job thread

Has he signed yet?

...said Mark Neeld.

somewhat ironic isnt it..lol

welcome to Melbourne , proudly sponsored by Catch22

FFS Paul Roos, look at this thread. This sh!t is getting out of control. Just sign the dotted line and go swimming in a pool of $100 bills already!

Even without a couple of those players that you mention... it is still true that the core of experienced players were already at the club. Incidentally, where exactly did I stay that our list is so bad that it will take 5 years to sort out??, if you read what I said again, I said we have some very good bookends and a lot of potential... Experience leadership and hardness are things that our playing group are lacking,...

My point was not that Eade isn't a good coach, it's just that people think that he built clubs up from scratch, and that the MFC is a different proposition to what he had to deal with at the Dogs or Sydney. Sydney was a mid table team, and the dogs were towards the bottom, but had still managed 5 wins for that season.

Sorry Oucher if it came across that way re you saying our list was that bad my point being a lot of those players you mentioned on the Doggies and Swans lists prior to Eade taking over were potential. I was stating we have a lot of those and even if Eade comes in and succeeds people will say it is the list Neeld built, plenty of people saying the same before the Windy Pills saga about Knights building the Bombers list up for Hird to take over.

Eade knows how to get players having confidence in their own ability, but he is not Robinson Crusoe Choco could do the same, Neeld unfortunately could not do it

I read.

And you made a baseless assumption that different people would use exactly the same method.

Your standard is dropping, timD.

bollocks. you said different people = no need for fuss.

I mentioned method. not as an emphasis on people.

baseless... based on what you wrote. unlike your effort, which was based on what you thought, not what I'd written.

don't worry about grading my efforts. just worry about your logic. slippage is embarrassing.

and again, it matters if the method does not change. we have changed how we pick players. I'd hate to think that we restrict clear thinking. to kids.

Just on the couch, they were talking about Malthouse going "bonkers" in the coaches box. Then Gerrard said to Roos while laughing "I don't know why your going back to coaching Roosy." They then quickly changed the subject...

Just on the couch, they were talking about Malthouse going "bonkers" in the coaches box. Then Gerrard said to Roos while laughing "I don't know why your going back to coaching Roosy." They then quickly changed the subject...

Haha, I caught that also. I wonder whether it was tongue in cheek comment, or a genuine slip of the tongue...wait and see I suppose.

Haha, I caught that also. I wonder whether it was tongue in cheek comment, or a genuine slip of the tongue...wait and see I suppose.

Maybe I am seeing only what I want to see, but after replaying many times the look on the face of Roos tells me that it was a slip of the tongue. One can only hope...

Maybe I am seeing only what I want to see, but after replaying many times the look on the face of Roos tells me that it was a slip of the tongue. One can only hope...

I agree, however my wife thinks I'm delusional and in the past 6mths been reading into his body language way too much...

At the start i was never confident at all with Roos coaching us. Thought we were a long shot but as i said recently we are seriously in the box seat. Roos was really turned off with brisbanes managment of Voss and basically the reason why he was sacked. Wasnt impressed at all. Is a massive fan of what PJ has done so far and i believe the article he posted about our best 22 couple of weeks ago made him think hard about coaching us.

might well just be a tease :/ we continue to wait

Heard from a really good source that the coaching panel wasn't too overwhelmed with "chocos" interview..

Isn't that the reason we didn't offer the gig to Damien Hardwick in 2007?

Isn't that the reason we didn't offer the gig to Damien Hardwick in 2007?

True.

Reportedly his laptop had a last minute breakdown and Hardwick was unable to give his planned PowerPoint presentation.

I've also a couple of years later seen it reported that it was the excuse given due to Hawthorn being unhappy with him using large chunks of their IP in an interview, or that he "threw" he interview because he didn't want the job (when he could've just turned it down if offered).

But surely, when Roos, Eade, Craig and Williams all have similar records and glowing references, shouldn't the interview form a large part of what we judge the candidates on?

I'm not talking whether they are nervous or not.

It'd be about their individual perceptions of where the list is at, what needs to be done and how they will do it.

And if he wasn't impressive in articulating that, I'd be very careful.