I'm not a Gardner supporter by any stretch but he is correct when he says aiming for 7 wins is modest. At the start of every season the aim should be to make finals, no less. You reassess as you go but to say winning 7 games is a pass is downright demoralising. No wonder the players are disenchanted when their bosses have such little faith to set such dismal targets.

Also saying that 10 wins were "promised" is disingenuous. A target is a target not a promise to supporters.

No wonder you thought we could have gone 8 and 2 to finish the year...

Good god, you want the club to have unrealistic internal aims? How would that be helpful? Do you really think that the players hear that they have budgeted and expect 7 wins that they are playing poorly because of it?

The inept last two games have only reinforced that the 7 win expectation of the club.

We were 2 and 20 before he took over and 4 and 18 last year and you want to have a 'target' of Finals?

What is the point of having 'targets' or 'promises' when you are just placating the fan base by having them be so unreachable.

He has shipped off 22 players and that will reach 30 this summer. How they hell can they target what you want them to target.

I have no problem with his comments. They are what the majority of MFC fans are thinking.

I have no problem with his comments. They are what the majority of MFC fans are thinking.

And vice versa during his rule.

That is the problem.

No wonder you thought we could have gone 8 and 2 to finish the year...

Good god, you want the club to have unrealistic internal aims? How would that be helpful? Do you really think that the players hear that they have budgeted and expect 7 wins that they are playing poorly because of it?

The inept last two games have only reinforced that the 7 win expectation of the club.

We were 2 and 20 before he took over and 4 and 18 last year and you want to have a 'target' of Finals?

What is the point of having 'targets' or 'promises' when you are just placating the fan base by having them be so unreachable.

He has shipped off 22 players and that will reach 30 this summer. How they hell can they target what you want them to target.

Though it was obviously to some extent tongue-in-cheek, those that pondered a massive run home did so in the wake of the win down at Geelong. A win that PROVED beyond a shadow of a doubt what this team/coach/gameplan is capable of at their best. That is precisely why everyone is so p'd off about what has happened in the 8 games since (particularly the 2 most recent). IF we had bothered to replicate the performance of the Cats game every week of the season we would have cleared 10-12 wins easily. That's the problem, for some reason we can't just keep bringing the same effort 4 quarters 22 games a year.

Your thinking seems to be that instead of holding up our best as the target to be achieved, our expectations should be instead lowered to match our worst.

Your thinking seems to be that instead of holding up our best as the target to be achieved, our expectations should be instead lowered to match our worst.

Mate, if he'd aligned his forecast with our worst, the "expectation" would have been zero wins. You've been around Demonland long enough to see how often that actually becomes the expectation for some.

Mate, if he'd aligned his forecast with our worst, the "expectation" would have been zero wins. You've been around Demonland long enough to see how often that actually becomes the expectation for some.

Or a premiership depends on which day you visit Demonland.

People aren't taking into account the inconsistency of a younger side. Many Demonlanders predicted we'd win games that we wouldn't be expected to win and drop games we'd be expected to win. That is exactly what has happened. Doesn't make it any less frustrating and it doesn't excuse the pitiful lack of effort on the weekend, but it does go some way to explaining it. The 7 win internal target would have factored precisely this sort of form into the equation.

Your thinking seems to be that instead of holding up our best as the target to be achieved, our expectations should be instead lowered to match our worst.

You, stmj, and jnrmac really think that?

That I pick the lowest expectations as what can be achieved?

I was backing Watts to come good when you were still calling him a 'girl.'

I have taught myself not to get carried away in either direction with bitter experience over the last decade but it was absolutely absurd to think that the team that played so well down at Mordor, could carry that through the rest of the season.

I would mirror that amazing performance with the threads on here before that game that were full of some of the most egregious expectation lowering to mitigate the impending disappointment of another loss.

What is so wrong with having a consistent view of what this team can and can't do that doesn't change based on last week?

The thing is that lowering your expectations give you a greater field of error.

Schwab and co. went around promising that we'd be the next best thing. We all followed mindlessly while the club got rid of its best leaders from arguably the club's best period since the '60s (Daniher years). When it all came crumbling down, that exodus was the core piece of what led to such a colossal failure. Ultimately, fans had been let down because such erratic changes had led to such erratic failure.

Roos and Jackson and co. tell us to keep our expectations in check. Neeld did the same thing. I don't think it's a conscious direction as a way to avoid mistakes of past years. I think they're just looking at what happened then and are saying what they say -- like winning 7 games as a pass -- as a means to keep expectations in check, because you don't know what can happen.

There's nothing wrong with having a minimum KPI with the expectation of using it as a means to grow and build off of it. Saying that finals was a KPI would have been unrealistic and ultimately false advertising. Schwab and co damaged our business relations by promising a golden era, and we had sponsors throwing money at us based on hope and nothing else. We need a tangible product and still don't have it but at least we can go to sponsors and say, "Look, this is where we're at, we're not sugar coating it, but we're setting long-term goals as means to build upon".

Gardner is a hack. Somehow he couldn't even get a consistently finals-bound club over a 10-year period to build a fanbase and a war chest of funds. When he left we were massively in debt with zero prospects, no money, and no members. Jackson has done more with the club being an absolute basket case than what Gardner did with the club looking like a legitimate flag threat.

IMG_1040.JPG

IMG_1040.JPG

nice one

I have no problem with his comments. They are what the majority of MFC fans are thinking.

so all he, muppet gardner has to do, is tell the fans what they want to hear then, & all will be happy, & win ever after ?

thats what kennet thinks as well, talk it up & pretend... but I think I recall is that the Hawks were already rebuilt, before kennet got anywhere near them... then he talked big as president, costing them some premierships... the cats were preening their whiskers every-time they heard the sound of kennet's voice.

I hope they're not sounding out that kennet ticket again after next season, trying to harpoon this club again. that ticket will have us down in Tassie after Gillons speech in canberra the other day.

kennet likes nothing better than playing the matchmaking, he'll try to mate the bummers with the Doggies, then have the Roos hopping mad with the Dees right into them. thats 4 clubs into 2, but which ones will fly south for the winters ?

he just likes to make things smaller & cheaper, & give the managers more for being quiet.

Edited August 26, 20159 yr by dee-luded

Gardener nearly destroyed the club under his reign -enough said

This guy has zero relevance

We're so on the right track