thats is our problem, 10 years of cotton wool, & no bruises.

this IS where our remaining culture went over the last 10 years. 'sooooft' & softer. our kids have not developed since around 2005, or before. & it wasn't great before that footy admin era...

The kid is 17 and the best talent we have had since David Schwartz.

At least give him a chance to do his knee playing AFL.

FFS.

Don't even talk about our poor culture in the same sentence and Viney and Hogan, they are cut from a different cloth.

I heard today while at the ground that Jesse Hogan was OK. No major damage and he will play in the VFL finals.

Nothing official although someone said they saw it in a club tweet.

I wouldn't risk Hogan, only my opinion, it appears 98% are in favor of playing him, I don't see much point.

I wouldn't even nearly play him, i'll be surprised if we do.

I wouldn't risk Hogan, only my opinion, it appears 98% are in favor of playing him, I don't see much point.

I wouldn't even nearly play him, i'll be surprised if we do.

Creating a winning culture that doesn't give up on their mates is what it's all about.

He should have a week off and if his knee is structurally fine, then he should play VFL finals.

We want hardened guys and we have a rare chance of winning the VFL comp against Geelong and Hawthorn (Box Hill).

Yes it is only VFL, but have a look what losing each week is doing to the mentality of our senior players.

Creating a winning culture that doesn't give up on their mates is what it's all about.

He should have a week off and if his knee is structurally fine, then he should play VFL finals.

We want hardened guys and we have a rare chance of winning the VFL comp against Geelong and Hawthorn (Box Hill).

Yes it is only VFL, but have a look what losing each week is doing to the mentality of our senior players.

have a look what its doing to All of us, & the club generally.

.... grass roots is all its about... the day we go out on astro turf is the day I'm done with it. visy cardboard cutouts will take the place of spectators.

time to get real, & next years first H&A game Prep starts at 2.00PM next Saturday @ box hill oval the 24th of August 2013.

The kid is 17 and the best talent we have had since David Schwartz.

You keep saying he's 17. He turns 19 in February.

No doubt you'll be annoyed at being corrected by a pedant. But it is what I say it is.

Just posted some pics from the Casey game on my blog - feel free to check them out > http://www.theaussieword.com/2013/08/casey-scorpions-james-magner-blitz.html

Just posted some pics from the Casey game on my blog - feel free to check them out > http://www.theaussieword.com/2013/08/casey-scorpions-james-magner-blitz.html

Good pix, brought the emotion of Joel's last game. It's obvious he was a very respected team mate.

Ben, I beg to differ on both counts.

On Mark Neeld I've spoken with a sample of the players about him and I would suggest that it wasn't so much hatred which is far too strong a word but rather, that in the end, it was Neeld's failure to garner respect from the playing group. They found him too inflexible and unable to convince them of his methods and the style of play he wanted from them. From my perspective, he never really demonstrated an ability to change a game or turn it around to avoid the massive confidence sapping losses that were a feature of his 33 game coaching tenure. We are now left with a shell-shocked group that's struggling and desperately in need of an end to the season and a new start under a new coach. The changes under Neil Craig have helped a little but these were offset by injuries to so many key on field personnel. In short, we need a new start with fresh faces at the helm. But my view is that the players didn't hate Neeld - he simply wasn't up to it as an AFL coach.

On Schwab, I don't think his attendance or otherwise at training sessions or his style would define his role as CEO. He did a lot of good things in his role but in the end, it was the failure of the team to improve that brought him and others undone and for which he rightly took ultimate responsibility. The reality is that it took more than Schwab and Neeld to produce the train wreck which was the result of a several year build up of poor coaching, recruiting, list management and player development. and can't be sheeted home against one person or one board. I just hope it's behind us now and wish those who are picking up the pieces good luck.

I don't know enough about Glen Bartlett and some of the other new faces (or PJ for that matter) to say I have full confidence in them yet but, like most of us, I'm hoping.

PS How did we get into this discussion on the Casey thread?

To a large degree I agree with you on Neeld. I've been pleased at the response of the players I've spoken to who are disappointed (that he was appointed) rather than bitter. But I've spoken to others at the club who were worried about him as early as the first few rounds of his first year where he had alienated the senior players and had failed to unite the playing group or engage the younger players. In actual fact he divided the playing group and it's why blokes like Moloney and Rivers wanted out. They'd had enough.

I don't know if the reason Moloney left, or at least his initial conversations with Neeld, have been stated here but suffice to say Neeld was not a leader of men and a very poor communicator. Moloney's tweet when Neeld was sacked was immature but totally understandable given that exchange.

Neeld lacked the one thing a coach needs - an ability to communicate with players. That's the primary reason he failed and a simple due diligence would have established that. We didn't do it.

As for Schwab I think to a large degree you are wrong. You state that he "did a lot of good things" but I can't think of them. If you like the blazers, the bugler and white board Wednesday and list them in your "good things" then you really do accept mediocrity. He took over when Gardner and Harris had found us a home and established links with Casey. He was CEO as the Gutnick inspired Bentleigh Club finalized but that had been nurtured by every CEO and Board since Joe instigated it. They were the meaningful things that happened on his watch but he didn't "do" them. His failures sit in his inability to manage an organization. He didn't act as CEO but invited the Board to participate in all forms of management. He pandered to them as they controlled his position. It led to all forms of trouble including a divided football department culminating in Bailey's departure.

Even after Bailey he instigated the most flawed senior coaching appointment process and result I've seen. It's hard to think of a coach that has done more damage to a Club than Neeld and many, me included, questioned the process from the beginning. He appointed or reappointed Bailey, Neeld, Connolly and Prendergast. Sadly not one of them could call their time with us a success. He set up a structure where 4 FD people reported to him as CEO leading to a lack of cohesion and purpose. As Jackson said "it's not a hard fix, it's just not a quick one".

I don't disagree that over the years we've never established enduring competent CEO's or Boards. But given his length of tenure, his experience in football and the opportunity he had (which far exceeded any previous CEO) it's hard to come to any other conclusion than he was a compete failure. The same results in the 90's would have seen us gone.

You say ". The reality is that it took more than Schwab and Neeld to produce the train wreck....... This is the culmination of a decade or more of poor leadership at the club and can't be sheeted home against one person or one board. ". You're right, you need to include the Board in producing the train wreck.

Over 5 years of Stynes/McLardy and 4.5 of Schwab this club is worse now than then, perhaps the worst it's ever been and that is saying something. They had a wonderful opportunity to progress us but instead we ended up in AFL administration.

They need to take responsibility for what they did and we need to recognize it and move on.

Just posted some pics from the Casey game on my blog - feel free to check them out > http://www.theaussieword.com/2013/08/casey-scorpions-james-magner-blitz.html

thanks mfc, its nice to see some pics... I haven't been able to get there most season.

thanks again Joel Mac for your footy.

great pics.

To a large degree I agree with you on Neeld. I've been pleased at the response of the players I've spoken to who are disappointed (that he was appointed) rather than bitter. But I've spoken to others at the club who were worried about him as early as the first few rounds of his first year where he had alienated the senior players and had failed to unite the playing group or engage the younger players. In actual fact he divided the playing group and it's why blokes like Moloney and Rivers wanted out. They'd had enough.

I don't know if the reason Moloney left, or at least his initial conversations with Neeld, have been stated here but suffice to say Neeld was not a leader of men and a very poor communicator. Moloney's tweet when Neeld was sacked was immature but totally understandable given that exchange.

Neeld lacked the one thing a coach needs - an ability to communicate with players. That's the primary reason he failed and a simple due diligence would have established that. We didn't do it.

As for Schwab I think to a large degree you are wrong. You state that he "did a lot of good things" but I can't think of them. If you like the blazers, the bugler and white board Wednesday and list them in your "good things" then you really do accept mediocrity. He took over when Gardner and Harris had found us a home and established links with Casey. He was CEO as the Gutnick inspired Bentleigh Club finalized but that had been nurtured by every CEO and Board since Joe instigated it. They were the meaningful things that happened on his watch but he didn't "do" them. His failures sit in his inability to manage an organization. He didn't act as CEO but invited the Board to participate in all forms of management. He pandered to them as they controlled his position. It led to all forms of trouble including a divided football department culminating in Bailey's departure.

Even after Bailey he instigated the most flawed senior coaching appointment process and result I've seen. It's hard to think of a coach that has done more damage to a Club than Neeld and many, me included, questioned the process from the beginning. He appointed or reappointed Bailey, Neeld, Connolly and Prendergast. Sadly not one of them could call their time with us a success. He set up a structure where 4 FD people reported to him as CEO leading to a lack of cohesion and purpose. As Jackson said "it's not a hard fix, it's just not a quick one".

I don't disagree that over the years we've never established enduring competent CEO's or Boards. But given his length of tenure, his experience in football and the opportunity he had (which far exceeded any previous CEO) it's hard to come to any other conclusion than he was a compete failure. The same results in the 90's would have seen us gone.

You say ". The reality is that it took more than Schwab and Neeld to produce the train wreck....... This is the culmination of a decade or more of poor leadership at the club and can't be sheeted home against one person or one board. ". You're right, you need to include the Board in producing the train wreck.

Over 5 years of Stynes/McLardy and 4.5 of Schwab this club is worse now than then, perhaps the worst it's ever been and that is saying something. They had a wonderful opportunity to progress us but instead we ended up in AFL administration.

They need to take responsibility for what they did and we need to recognize it and move on.

Well yes...and I agree with much of that but it's easy to overlook the fact that the CEO was there during the period in which the enormous debt left by previous administrations was erased (to the tune of something like $5m) or to rationalise that he was piggybacking off others. That's fine with me - as a great man once said, "The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones." All depends on the way you look at it.

Well yes...and I agree with much of that but it's easy to overlook the fact that the CEO was there during the period in which the enormous debt left by previous administrations was erased.

The debt was paid off and then, if Jackson is to be believed, re-established; not to the same tune admittedly, thanks to an AFL bailout to pay out him, Connolly and Neeld and rebuild a footy club that was completely non competitive.

Gardner's Board inherited a $5 million debt, repaid much of it without relying on members only to see it re-establish itself in his last year.

The only difference was that Gardner didn't trash the members generous donations.

Most would probably recognize that the FH was largely JImmy's work. Sadly it's counted for little.

Your post does nothing to help me see the "good things" you asserted Schwab achieved nor to establish your assertion that the blame also lies at the feet of previous administrations.

It's time to move on Jack, recognize you backed the wrong horses and stop being an apologist for people who by their own hand failed the membership miserably.

As for Schwab I think to a large degree you are wrong. You state that he "did a lot of good things" but I can't think of them. If you like the blazers, the bugler and white board Wednesday and list them in your "good things" then you really do accept mediocrity. He took over when Gardner and Harris had found us a home and established links with Casey. He was CEO as the Gutnick inspired Bentleigh Club finalized but that had been nurtured by every CEO and Board since Joe instigated it. They were the meaningful things that happened on his watch but he didn't "do" them. His failures sit in his inability to manage an organization. He didn't act as CEO but invited the Board to participate in all forms of management. He pandered to them as they controlled his position. It led to all forms of trouble including a divided football department culminating in Bailey's departure.

Even after Bailey he instigated the most flawed senior coaching appointment process and result I've seen. It's hard to think of a coach that has done more damage to a Club than Neeld and many, me included, questioned the process from the beginning. He appointed or reappointed Bailey, Neeld, Connolly and Prendergast. Sadly not one of them could call their time with us a success. He set up a structure where 4 FD people reported to him as CEO leading to a lack of cohesion and purpose. As Jackson said "it's not a hard fix, it's just not a quick one".

I don't disagree that over the years we've never established enduring competent CEO's or Boards. But given his length of tenure, his experience in football and the opportunity he had (which far exceeded any previous CEO) it's hard to come to any other conclusion than he was a compete failure. The same results in the 90's would have seen us gone.

You say ". The reality is that it took more than Schwab and Neeld to produce the train wreck....... This is the culmination of a decade or more of poor leadership at the club and can't be sheeted home against one person or one board. ". You're right, you need to include the Board in producing the train wreck.

Over 5 years of Stynes/McLardy and 4.5 of Schwab this club is worse now than then, perhaps the worst it's ever been and that is saying something. They had a wonderful opportunity to progress us but instead we ended up in AFL administration.

They need to take responsibility for what they did and we need to recognize it and move on.

This has to be considered correct.

For anything good Schwab did (I'm sure there will be something), his ineffective, inefficient, ego-driven management style was destructive to the club, as we've seen this year.

But as you say, we have to move on now. Gardner, McLardy, Schwab, Connolly, Bailey, Neeld, Prendergast and Harrington are all gone now. All we can do by looking to the past is to learn from our predecessors' mistakes and not repeat them. I doubt very much that either Jackson or Bartlett will make those mistakes again.

You keep saying he's 17. He turns 19 in February.

No doubt you'll be annoyed at being corrected by a pedant. But it is what I say it is.

Ok, he is 18, my mistake, it's ok to ruin him now then.

This has to be considered correct.

For anything good Schwab did (I'm sure there will be something), his ineffective, inefficient, ego-driven management style was destructive to the club, as we've seen this year.

But as you say, we have to move on now. Gardner, McLardy, Schwab, Connolly, Bailey, Neeld, Prendergast and Harrington are all gone now. All we can do by looking to the past is to learn from our predecessors' mistakes and not repeat them. I doubt very much that either Jackson or Bartlett will make those mistakes again.

I think you are being a bit hard on CS

He gave us some great Blazers and a terrific logo!

I think you are being a bit hard on CS

He gave us some great Blazers and a terrific logo!

To be fair, the current logo, whilst polarising, really can only be described as an improvement on the square that Harris gave us.

The debt was paid off and then, if Jackson is to be believed, re-established; not to the same tune admittedly, thanks to an AFL bailout to pay out him, Connolly and Neeld and rebuild a footy club that was completely non competitive.

Gardner's Board inherited a $5 million debt, repaid much of it without relying on members only to see it re-establish itself in his last year.

The only difference was that Gardner didn't trash the members generous donations.

Most would probably recognize that the FH was largely JImmy's work. Sadly it's counted for little.

Your post does nothing to help me see the "good things" you asserted Schwab achieved nor to establish your assertion that the blame also lies at the feet of previous administrations.

It's time to move on Jack, recognize you backed the wrong horses and stop being an apologist for people who by their own hand failed the membership miserably.

Do you have a source for that alleged $5m debt that Gardner's board fixed up Bob or do are you suggesting the current debt is $5m or are you confused or maybe being alarmist?

To be fair, the current logo, whilst polarising, really can only be described as an improvement on the square that Harris gave us.

so we agree his five years netted a Logo!

Do you have a source for that alleged $5m debt that Gardner's board fixed up Bob or do are you suggesting the current debt is $5m or are you confused or maybe being alarmist?

I can't be bothered looking up the exact figures in the Annual Reports but when Gardner took over Szondy and Ellis had run the club into the ground and an unpaid tax bill sat in the bottom draw of a desk.

From memory Gardner ran profits for all but his final year and the debt reduced from the $5 million to something less than $2, again from memory. It blew out in his last year and was around $5 again when he was replaced by Stynes.

Stynes raised enough money through the FH to repay all the $5 million but PJ has said the club will run a loss this year in the order of $1.5 million. We'll have to wait and see what it is. But it would have been significantly more if the AFL hadn't agreed to back us.

I don't know what the club "debt" will be as the Bentleigh club has probably been booked at a significant profit so whilst the club may be in a positive net asset position the operating loss from this year will be significant if PJ is to be believed.

Hope this clears things up and if anyone has the exact figures that would be good.

Well, I can't be bothered looking up the annual reports either but if my memory serves me well, I understand we were in the black by over $1m 12 months ago and if PJ's early projection has us as losing $1.5m and the foundation heroes collected $.5m then we're hardly $5m in the red.

The best way of resolving this is by checking out this year's annual report later in the year. My conclusion is that since the Gutnick era we've been run by an ordinary lot who have collectively done very little other than Jimmy's debt demolition to improve the club and to the contrary, have led us down the path to where we stand today. That includes Szondy, Gardner and the Stynes/McLardy combo.

Now, its over to Bartlett ...

Getting back to Casey for a moment (but another example of how fudging some facts and ignoring others can cloud the issue with people who have an agenda).

The injuries to Sam Blease, James Strauss (both season ending) and Jesse Hogan (2 - 3 weeks) at the weekend and the retirement of Joel Macdonald have cut deeply into Casey's playing stocks on the eve of the finals.

So it didn't take long for some pundits in the twitterverse to drop the boots into the MFC and suggest that history will repeat itself and the club will abandon Casey again for the finals as its claimed to have done for several years now.

However, the injuries are real and JMacd genuinely believes he can't go on but it doesn't stop those who have an axe to grind from hoeing into the club on the basis of some half truths about the past.

This, despite the fact that I've heard the opposite and that the club is making a genuine attempt to give Casey every opportunity to succeed in its finals campaign.

The Scorpions do need to win this week as an away loss to Box Hill could mean their first final will be an away fixture to Geelong.

Wait it out, hopefully it's not an ACL, if it was, then Boyd would come into calculations.

Boyd should come into our calculations irregardless [if we get the chance]. Clark and Dawes have hardly been on the park this year and Watts has not committed. Our fantastic forward depth is a myth. Come draft time, we should select the best player available and if that payer stands head and shoulders above the pack we should get him even if he isn't a midfield. We will be better in the midfield next year with Viney, Jones and Toumpas as a basis.

Boyd should come into our calculations irregardless [if we get the chance]. Clark and Dawes have hardly been on the park this year and Watts has not committed. Our fantastic forward depth is a myth. Come draft time, we should select the best player available and if that payer stands head and shoulders above the pack we should get him even if he isn't a midfield. We will be better in the midfield next year with Viney, Jones and Toumpas as a basis.

Correct.

Is there a list somewhere of the players that will be qualified for Casey's finals, all who are fit and available should play, unfortunately the fit part really seems to be an issue. Just thinking off the top of my head Sellar, Pederson, Magner, Spencer (Gawn as well?), Toumpas, Davey, Blease (injuy permitting), Rodan, Couch (injury permitting). Others I'm not so sure on are Matt Jones, Kent, and Fitzy (he did play a lot for the first half of the year).

Now those are just the players that have been in the seniors on a semi-regular basis, obviously you've got Jetta, Taggert, Barry, Davis, Gillies, Tynan, Stark and Bail you have barely/not played seniors this year. All named if they qualify should be made available with perhaps Fitzy being the only one we put on ice.

I feel sorry for Casey and Jesse, I reckon they would've had a serious crack at the premiership with him there but now I just can't see it.

Boyd should come into our calculations irregardless [if we get the chance]. Clark and Dawes have hardly been on the park this year and Watts has not committed. Our fantastic forward depth is a myth. Come draft time, we should select the best player available and if that payer stands head and shoulders above the pack we should get him even if he isn't a midfield. We will be better in the midfield next year with Viney, Jones and Toumpas as a basis.

& we should be chasing hard for Mature age midfielders as well, but not with out 1st pick.

# on Casey, I hope the club gives all its resources it can to help thru the finals campaign, otherwise it will be just another plain old Pain, yet again.

I always read that MFC leave Casey in the cold come finals, but this is also the Casey football clubs problem, Box Hill and Williamstown have very strong VFL depth, Casey doesn't they have 6 players that are reasonable VFL league players the rest struggle. They don't have the money to buy a range of really good VFL players, Best, Gent and Pannozza are three that come to mind but there fortune really lies with the MFC players. Which is great for the MFC we get to play nearly all our available players in Casey's VFL team not like Sandy when most of our younger players played a lot of reserves footy.

So when we get a run of injuries the depth of Casey's VFL list is tested and unfortunately it will come up short and most likely exit in straight sets. Shame but thats the reality, I fell for Casey because they are in a tough position, if they get good VFL players to the club we shout them down for taking MFC listed players spots, if they don't they expose themselves to being what they effectively are a MFC VFL team with Casey top up players and the MFC will always do what is best for them.