This so called lack of stability didn't stop Jones and countless others from becoming good players.

See ya Sam. Good luck getting a game for a team with stability and high standard. Lol.

I think that's exactly what I said (although I will question "countless others" becoming good players)

In any profession, if you are a junior and you come into an unstable environment where management continually changes and you are recognised in the industry as a poor performing organisation it shouldn't be a surprise that employees 'fall out of love' with the workplace. I think Sam was simply mentally fatigued by the time Roos and Co arrived and simply needs a new environment. This is the Club's failing, not Sam's.

In Roos press conference he was pretty clear that the club had failed to provide a suitable environment for players to develop and that Blease is an example of this.

Glad you don't work in my organisation.

6 yrs in the system. He ain't a junior anymore.....

Well, if you follow Sam's logic - he has only had 3 coaches...

Nah, he only showed anything under Roos.

I would still maintain that no matter how many messengers you have had, if you reject the messages, you will get nowhere.

Whilst the number of different coaches shouldn't cop all the blame, Roos made direct reference to Blease's comment in his presser, further mentioning that the players now have stability and assurance with Goodwin and McCartney signing on long term.

Clearly Roos thought there was some merit to what Blease was saying, as do I. It is a factor when looking at the overall picture.

Though again, I'm not defending his decision to say these things publicly and I agree with your last point.

The references to Jones being able to excel in the environment only highlights that Nathan Jones is someone of exceptional character and resilience. I'd suggest that Sam Blease is not.

I think that's exactly what I said (although I will question "countless others" becoming good players)

I think what Jaded means is that other players have improved and become better versions of themselves. Ro Bail will never be a great player but no one will claim he hasn't given himself every chance to succeed at the Melbourne Football Club. Same with both Jones's, Tom McDonald, Jeremy Howe, Terlich, McKenzie and apparently Maia Westrupp.

Sam Blease, on the other hand, despite being a running player never put in the effort to run. If during training you are consistently one of the worst distance runners you may think that getting fit is a priority. If during matches your opponent constantly runs off you. If your time trial numbers aren't coming down. If opposition players target you because they know you won't chase. If this happens year after year then it is difficult to see how the club is to blame no matter how poor player development is.

The only way that the club is to blame is that they paid him what was probably a small fortune to keep a spot on the list that he didn't deserve

If he comes out after a couple of months of training with Geelong and says he never knew how hard you had to train to be an AFL footballer I'll spew

If he comes out after a couple of months of training with Geelong and says he never knew how hard you had to train to be an AFL footballer I'll spew

I've taken those comments with a grain of salt considering the sources: Sylvia, Gysberts...not exactly the poster boys for hard work. Blease I'd place in the same category.

Glad you don't work in my organisation.

6 yrs in the system. He ain't a junior anymore.....

His major issue in my eyes is obviously he made no forward steps under the one year of Roos.

I do agree with CF regarding the toxic environment prior to Roos arriving,

Under pre Roos organisation name me 10 players who thrived - I can probably name 3 with another 10 that probably did no more than simply survive and have average output.

Build a structure where a player can thrive, can develop, has encouragement and support to improve then we can squarely point the finger at the player if this doesn't happen. No excuses. However this was not the case pre Roos.

Blease was an example of the worst affected by that period however it is a combination of Blease's attitude and a rotten environment. Nathan Jones has an attitude that would see him thrive no matter what the circumstances.

I gave every player a clean slate as soon as Roos arrived as I saw go about setting up a new structure and dare I say the dreaded "C" word - try and develop a decent culture that has long been absent. Some players took massive strides forward - some players took small steps - some like Blease did little to embrace the new world ( either wouldn't or couldn't) - thats why he is gone.

I think the stability at the club and the development has been non existent for the entirety of Blease's stay.

However you can prosper despite the surroundings like Jones has, you can be somewhat a mixed bag like many players but show enough to have the club believe you will prosper under a better environment like Jeremy Howe or you can display to the club that you are not prepared to work hard enough to get to the desired level at our club and that's Blease.

or you can admit you are just not good enough.......no shame in that

Some players took massive strides forward - some players took small steps - some like Blease did little to embrace the new world ( either wouldn't or couldn't) - thats why he is gone.

Nut who do you think made massive steps under Roos because of Roos' regime? I thought our development last year was decidedly disappointing so I'm interested in your view.

BTW, on Blease. Firstly both parties are right in this thread. What Blease said was right, he just shouldn't have said it - but that reflects the person. Secondly the concept that Blease "decided to go" is stretching the situation. He was asked to leave and Geelong would have been one of his few suitors. No developing club would want him because they can't carry his limitation. Good teams can and will have a punt as he has some good AFL attributes.

I gave every player a clean slate as soon as Roos arrived as I saw go about setting up a new structure and dare I say the dreaded "C" word - try and develop a decent culture that has long been absent. Some players took massive strides forward - some players took small steps - some like Blease did little to embrace the new world ( either wouldn't or couldn't) - thats why he is gone.

Dom Tyson and Nev Jetta seemed to go OK. Kent contiinued to show serious glimpses. JKH exceeded expectations early but tired. Salem with limited preparation showed how good he will be.

Viney and Toumpas didn't advance, Watts is Watts and others like Blease, Tapscott and Strauss aren't cut out for AFL footy. Howe spent the year learning about defence and I think is Roos pet project.

The club has been poor at development but I maintain that most of the damage was done on draft day Ie recruiting players that had serious physical and/or psychological deficiencies which rendered them unable to compete at the highest level.

I think the game plan was stripped back and the footy dept re-educated about footy. In these circumstances there will be some that are able to ride along, some that take time and others that fall away.

Nut who do you think made massive steps under Roos because of Roos' regime? I thought our development last year was decidedly disappointing so I'm interested in your view.

BTW, on Blease. Firstly both parties are right in this thread. What Blease said was right, he just shouldn't have said it - but that reflects the person. Secondly the concept that Blease "decided to go" is stretching the situation. He was asked to leave and Geelong would have been one of his few suitors. No developing club would want him because they can't carry his limitation. Good teams can and will have a punt as he has some good AFL attributes.

Let me rephrase - some players took a step forward.( massive is an overstatement) I think when Roos came in and said to the effect that the players were damaged and needed a hug - as corny as it sounded - it was pretty well on the mark. Forget about bringing any talent to the fore - Instilling any sort of confidence in our list was the first major hurdle

Jetta was the standout improver but players who took steps forward in my opinion - Bail ( was almost a delist under Neeld - I know many on here don't rate him at all but I believe he can be a week in week out contributor). Pederson likewise. Dunn continued his progression especially in the first half of the year. Kent continued to contribute. Jeremy Howe who I expect bigger things of - looked comfortable down back. Tom McDonald whilst still scaring me with ball in hand continued his progression and continued to attack. Even Dawes who faded as the season progressed showed reasons why we recruited him.

I suppose so many players went backwards under Neeld that any improvement was welcomed.

To me the test will be this year in seeing if the same mentioned players can take another step forward. The one consistent theme in our players has been inconsistency from year to year. They tease with improvement one year and go backwards the year after. We need to see twice the improvement leading to twice the wins.

The club has been poor at development but I maintain that most of the damage was done on draft day Ie recruiting players that had serious physical and/or psychological deficiencies which rendered them unable to compete at the highest level.

I think the game plan was stripped back and the footy dept re-educated about footy. In these circumstances there will be some that are able to ride along, some that take time and others that fall away.

I like the second paragraph a lot - it echoes my thoughts. The plan was not only about re-educating - it was about instilling some self belief which is obviously a work in progress.

As to our recruiting - I still maintain that we brought in players and immediately wrapped them up in a Turd suit which was our club and wondered why they smelled like crap.

or you can admit you are just not good enough.......no shame in that

I don't think there was an absence of talent in Blease - We have seen his best ( rarely) which can be very good - his attitude is absolutely not good enough.

I don't think there was an absence of talent in Blease - We have seen his best ( rarely) which can be very good - his attitude is absolutely not good enough.

i only saw one talent and that was shown only rarely

as derryn said "you only owe the departed the truth"

Thread title sounds like the name of a John Hughes film.

I heard the interview live. Was lead to his answer by the question, which basically asked did he fail because he was crap or because he was poorly developed. Probably should have played a dead bat but i have no probs with what he said. Who cares? Obviously has some fondness for BP, which is unsurprising given he selected him.

My only thought was about why do an interview now and why was it approved. Surely head down, play a few senior games with the Cats and then maybe do a radio interview. Not a big deal though i guess

Edited November 6, 201411 yr by binman

Nut who do you think made massive steps under Roos because of Roos' regime? I thought our development last year was decidedly disappointing so I'm interested in your view.

BTW, on Blease. Firstly both parties are right in this thread. What Blease said was right, he just shouldn't have said it - but that reflects the person. Secondly the concept that Blease "decided to go" is stretching the situation. He was asked to leave and Geelong would have been one of his few suitors. No developing club would want him because they can't carry his limitation. Good teams can and will have a punt as he has some good AFL attributes.

Secondly - Wrong - it was widely reported that Blease requested a trade at his exit interview. I have no doubt he would have been delisted anyway, but he did get in first.

Glad you don't work in my organisation.

6 yrs in the system. He ain't a junior anymore.....

Paul Little?

Please tell me I'm not the only one who took Sam Blease's comment today as a parting shot at Paul Roos.

"Geelong recruited me, believe it or not, for the things I can do so I'm just looking forward to using my speed and kicking ability out here and hopefully there's a role for me and it's up to me to take it now."

Admittedly, I didnt HEAR the interview but if there was any emphasis on the word can, I'm completely convinced.

Please tell me I'm not the only one who took Sam Blease's comment today as a parting shot at Paul Roos.

"Geelong recruited me, believe it or not, for the things I can do so I'm just looking forward to using my speed and kicking ability out here and hopefully there's a role for me and it's up to me to take it now."

Admittedly, I didnt HEAR the interview but if there was any emphasis on the word can, I'm completely convinced.

He speaks like a year 10 kid on radio. Nothing he said had and emphasis or conviction to it.

he is so far up his own a$$. really no loss at all

How did he go in their time trial today?

Why give a flying faarrck about Blease ? He's gone .. done ... dusted ...faarrck him!

How Full of sh is that lying son of b Clark is " I love the Melbourne footy club, but cats want to win and I want to win", like yes the dees don't want to win, os what he is saying, that's what it sounds to me he is saying.

It will be funny if he plays more than a couple of games.

How Full of sh is that lying son of b Clark is " I love the Melbourne footy club, but cats want to win and I want to win", like yes the dees don't want to win, os what he is saying, that's what it sounds to me he is saying.

Good thing you're not angry anymore.

Where did Clark say this?

Well they did well with Rivers as he jagged a pretty high placing in there B & F. Was it 5th or 6th? Not sure but not bad for a player in a top 4 team who most dees supporters I spoke to were fine with letting him go.

Why wouldn't the cats roll the dice again with a couple players who have some positive attributes.

In saying that I hope they both have wonderful pre-seasons so they can have a no excuse season at there physical peak.... and then not get a single kick!