Cheap shots by Peter Jackson. I like the logo and the blazers. Yep we should be able to acknowledge our history and improve on and off the field.Not an either/or.

Did anyone ask him about Essendon's decline into mediocrity in his term as CEO? He was their CEO from 1997 to 2009. The slide is on after 2000 Flag and 2001 Grand Final as their ladder position in the last 8 years of his tenure demonstrates: 02 - 5th, 03 - 6th, 04 - 6th, 05 - 13th, 06 - 15th, 07 - 12th, 08 - 12th, 09 - 8th.

In summary thats 5th - once, 6th - twice, 8th - once, 12th - twice, 13th - once and 15th - once.

I have my fingers crossed that he can do better than that at the Dees and that given the only senior coach he has been involved in selecting is Matty Knights he does a much better this time. I always thought at Essendon that he seemed to sometimes not realise that he was the CEO of a footy club. Hope he has learnt from the mistakes of the second half of term as CEO of the Bombers and makes a positive contribution to the MFC.

And now I've got that off my chest well done to the Foundation Heroes.

It's reasonable for you to scrutinise Jackson.

I think it's worth recognising that Jackson made the hard call on Sheedy due to the deteriorating ladder position leading up to 2007. He recognised the performance or "slide" wasn't acceptable and did something about it. Does anyone realise how difficult it was to remove such a cult figure at Essendon ?

I also wouldn't put too much emphasis on one coaching appointment. It's one decision in a very long tenure. And anyone connected with football acknowledges that appointing coaches is one of the hardest tasks in the AFL. There are no guarantees despite often much due diligence.

And I find your stats self-serving. You conveniently skate over his first 6 years as CEO. He could have left the job after that reasonable tenure looking like a genius with finals in all but one year and the ultimate success.

I also thank the FH but I'd like to make a couple of points.

• I'd particularly like to thank those FH whose commitment meant they gave up tangible and important quality of life alternatives. I'm aware of one person in particular whose contribution meant they sacrificed a meaningful "other". I'm sure there are others. $10,000 to someone earning $80,000 per annum is a significantly greater commitment than someone who has $10 million and donates $100,000.
• Whilst the FH are extraordinarily generous there are other financial supporters of the club who commit significant cash to the club on an ongoing basis who are not recognized in the same way. Good on you I say.
• PJ is an interesting character. One of my criticisms of Cameron Schwab was his obsession on the past - all the functions I went to were full of our significant past history. He introduced the blazers. He made a big deal of giving Norm Smith's number to Watts, Barassi's to Scully and I'd bet my bottom dollar he was behind Grimes changing his number to 31 this year. It was a way of hiding from our current issues and making ourselves feel comfortable. PJ is not doing that and recognizes the importance of creating a current "history". I fully support that.
• Those questioning PJ are quite right. Too often have we put our faith in messiah's who've failed. I support him, I've got no choice, but I'll also scrutinize all he does in the same way I did to Schwab and McLardy.

Agree 11/10, particularly with the highlighted bits. PJ is certainly talking a good book, but successful execution of these principles is essential; at least PJ's message is confronting, and not a soft sell. Also, it is at least a positive that we can still raise significant sums in such bleak circumstances.

I also wouldn't put too much emphasis on one coaching appointment.

Especially at the moment. Hird has now had 3 years at Essendon, not sure that it's a night and day difference to their time under Knights, especially given that Hird has a better list (outsider's view perhaps ...).

Wouldn't be surprised to see Knights get another chance at AFL level if he has the appetite, he's certainly doing well at Geelong.

Especially at the moment. Hird has now had 3 years at Essendon, not sure that it's a night and day difference to their time under Knights, especially given that Hird has a better list (outsider's view perhaps ...).

Wouldn't be surprised to see Knights get another chance at AFL level if he has the appetite, he's certainly doing well at Geelong.

Not a chance in the world Knights will get a senior coaching gig in the Afl, assistant at best for him.

Thanks for that guys. Great work by not only the FH but to all of those/us who have stuck by and supported this club in whatever financial and emotional way possible through a particularly difficult few years.

It's reasonable for you to scrutinise Jackson.

...

And I find your stats self-serving. You conveniently skate over his first 6 years as CEO. He could have left the job after that reasonable tenure looking like a genius with finals in all but one year and the ultimate success.

Like Roos did as a coach at Sydney..?

Like Roos did as a coach at Sydney..?

Schtaker ?

Que?

I just think Roos has an overly positive image because he pulled the pin early.

Conversely, someone like Williams stayed at Port too long.

I just think Roos has an overly positive image because he pulled the pin early.

Conversely, someone like Williams stayed at Port too long.

With the help of Maxwell Roos changed the entire culture of the Sydney Swans. A legacy that exists to this day. I don't dismiss that lightly.

He also broke a 70 year plus premiership drought. I don't dismiss that lightly.

I remember Roos talking years ago about a list of things he'd try never to do as a coach. It was a list of things he hated when he was a player. It showed smarts and empathy. No wonder his player bought in and were committed to his cause. Smart guy Roosy. But, if he doesn't have the burning passion he shouldn't do it. And it looks like he's not going to. As I said, smart guy.

What sort of list do you reckon Neeld had ?

Funnily enough, I recall Neeld talking about having a list of the exact same things.

Yes, Roos & Maxfield changed the culture.

They did have help from Ross Lyon, Kirk, Tudor, etc. but it still stands and should be respected.

Funnily enough, I recall Neeld talking about having a list of the exact same things.

I don't.

Direct me to evidence.

I don't.

Direct me to evidence.

I don't have any. Do you?

I recall reading it prior to Neeld coming into the club, when looking into his background.

When he was at Geelong, Blight said to the playing group that those who had an interest in coaching should be making notes of everything they do in their playing careers. This was the first moment it dawned on Neeld that he had an interest in coaching (recently I also read that this moment formed an epiphany for Hinkley also).

Neeld said he made extensive notes of drills, methodologies, better ways of going about things.

And especially things he did and didn't like as a player, what to avoid doing as a coach.

But I honestly can't remember exactly where I read it, and I'm not going to look.

It may have been an old archive buried somewhere on the AFL website of coaching articles/materials that I remember reading, but I don't think that was it. Possibly an old article from the Geelong Advertiser from when he was at Collingwood.

M: I recall reading that somewhere too

Sad thing is Neeld probably did write the things he liked and those he didn't. It's just that they were irrelevant when Schwab and Lyon told him to take apart the leadership group and to 'discipline' the list.

Sad to say that I fully supported that strategy.

I also, in my uneducated opinion, had Neeld as my first choice for coach.

People can think they know what they want, but they rarely do.

Indeed Machiavelli. Looking at some old threads, I can't believe how wrong I and many others were. I think why a lot of us were so mad keen on Neeld was that we could live vicariously through him as he delivered the sprays we wished we could (while being largely unaware of what was going on behind the scenes). What we forgot is the truth articulated by Grant Thomas. Coaching isn't all that different from most management jobs. More of a profile is involved for sure but many of the duties are the same. If you turned up to work with the kind of manager MN turned out to be, do you think you could deliver your maximum output? Nope, you'd be [censored] off and be thinking of where you will be playing next.

Footballers, and politicians, aren't TV characters whose existence is limited to what we see on TV. If the only times Neeld sprayed the team were the ones we saw and human beings didn't hold grudges then Neeld might still be employed. Alas that's not how homo-sapiens or life works.

I didn't so much want to give the players a spray, but I wanted mental toughness from them.

I guess I naively believed that Neeld's approach would get that, but I also probably didn't even have an accurate insight into what his actual approach was.

The perils of assuming you have any true insight when viewing from the outer.

I still put a lot of the blame on a petulant playing group that resisted change.

There were a number of cancers that needed to be cut out, and the new coach coming in wont have to be the bad guy by making his first moves negative ones.

Indeed Machiavelli. Looking at some old threads, I can't believe how wrong I and many others were. I think why a lot of us were so mad keen on Neeld was that we could live vicariously through him as he delivered the sprays we wished we could (while being largely unaware of what was going on behind the scenes). What we forgot is the truth articulated by Grant Thomas. Coaching isn't all that different from most management jobs. More of a profile is involved for sure but many of the duties are the same. If you turned up to work with the kind of manager MN turned out to be, do you think you could deliver your maximum output? Nope, you'd be [censored] off and be thinking of where you will be playing next.

Footballers, and politicians, aren't TV characters whose existence is limited to what we see on TV. If the only times Neeld sprayed the team were the ones we saw and human beings didn't hold grudges then Neeld might still be employed. Alas that's not how homo-sapiens or life works.

I think everyone got it wrong, Sadly thats the way it is.

In all walks of life there is a huge difference between knowing what needs to be done and doing it. Knowing what makes a leader and leading. Great leaders make it look easy and effortless. It is anything but. You only have to look at politics and world leaders. It is often said leaders are born not made and while I think that is true in many cases its not true of all.

That's why experience is an imperative for us. We can't afford another untried coach and the club has said as much.

I think everyone got it wrong, Sadly thats the way it is.

In all walks of life there is a huge difference between knowing what needs to be done and doing it. Knowing what makes a leader and leading. Great leaders make it look easy and effortless. It is anything but. You only have to look at politics and world leaders. It is often said leaders are born not made and while I think that is true in many cases its not true of all.

That's why experience is an imperative for us. We can't afford another untried coach and the club has said as much.

Well put JnrMac.

The experienced coach and footy manager will be needed as much to sort out the past once and for all. They will be able to do the basics of their jobs on auto-pilot. Their jobs will mostly entail fixing the psyche and culture of the group. A newbie unfortunately will have to focus on getting the basics down pat before they tackle the real problems plaguing the club.

Yes everybody got it wrong.

The biggest lesson to be learnt is not to employ friends to the top positions of a club, unless they are clearly the best in their field.

I do not blame Neeld at all really. It was the system behind him that still existed after 186 was still the major problem.

Neeld is not blameless and i bet $$$ he can coach, but our list was too much of a mess for a rookie.

The 2 Captains just made things worse.

It's reasonable for you to scrutinise Jackson.

I think it's worth recognising that Jackson made the hard call on Sheedy due to the deteriorating ladder position leading up to 2007. He recognised the performance or "slide" wasn't acceptable and did something about it. Does anyone realise how difficult it was to remove such a cult figure at Essendon ?

I also wouldn't put too much emphasis on one coaching appointment. It's one decision in a very long tenure. And anyone connected with football acknowledges that appointing coaches is one of the hardest tasks in the AFL. There are no guarantees despite often much due diligence.

And I find your stats self-serving. You conveniently skate over his first 6 years as CEO. He could have left the job after that reasonable tenure looking like a genius with finals in all but one year and the ultimate success.

He could have left the job. He did not. Therefore the stats serve nothing else than to establish the ladder position of Essendon over the last 8 years of Peter Jackson's term as CEO. Ultimately the CEO must be accountable for the football performance. That is the business their employer is in.

Yes everybody got it wrong.

Rubbish.

He could have left the job. He did not. Therefore the stats serve nothing else than to establish the ladder position of Essendon over the last 8 years of Peter Jackson's term as CEO. Ultimately the CEO must be accountable for the football performance. That is the business their employer is in.

I'll recognise his whole tenure, including a premiership and constant competitiveness in a brutal industry.

Naturally, you can please yourself.