Jack Watts Interview

[TRIGON 4,715]

The Mark Neeld years were as grim as it gets. My understanding was the he was given the mandate to 'toughen" the squad up. Unfortunately it sounds like he took it way too far...

 

[Guest]

It's a bit easier to talk about now @Pates because we can talk about it with less vitriol, and can discuss it in a more clinical and detached manner.

I had Stockholm Syndrome for a while there, and was gung ho behind a lot of this 'toughening the players up' stuff. It was understandable in one way as we had been just through an absolutely traumatizing time with 186, and many of us wanted to vicariously let out our rage out at the most available target; that being the players. Results clearly indicated it was a bad decision, and I once had a conversation with one of the parents of a player of the time that let on that things were not rosy behind the scenes. However, the more we hear about stuff like this, the more apparent it was that it was an absolutely terrible appointment. Caro and David King seemed premature in some of the calls and pronouncements they were making at the time, but they were clearly getting inside mail about how grim things really were.

Let's also make one thing very clear too. It wasn't entirely Mark's fault (though he clearly could not be allowed to have kept his job beyond 2013). He ultimately was the bunny chosen to keep certain football administrators in power as a validation of their sacking of Bails. He was an assistant coach who probably didn't have the tools to be the senior man, but was desperate to become one. He seemed all too willing to follow the lead of said administrators (we all know who I am talking about) in complying with their talking points that Bails was 'too soft' and too much of a players man.

It's not until nearly 10 years later that the full story of that time has been brought to light. Personally, I think the entire tanking/Red and Blueprint/Reality Bus era could be the subject of a fascinating documentary. Let's delay that for ten years down the road though! I don't want to dwell on it too much when there is a premiership we can still win! 😎

Edited September 2, 2021 by Colin B. Flaubert

[Smokey 4,115]

If he were drafted in the last few years, and came into our system as it is now, he could have been ANYTHING.

Work rate can be learned. Jacks skill can not.

 

[TheWiz 692]

35 minutes ago, Pates said:

I think the sad thing to hear is that during the Neeld era there was fear and dread about turning up to training. I’m sure he wasn’t alone with that as well, when there’s that kind of atmosphere in any organisation you are never going to have success. I hate Sheedy, but even he would’ve been a much better choice as say what you like about him he has a passion for footy and it came out in his players. It sounded like Neeld had a passion for discipline and being unlikeable. All this matching players up against each other, punishing those that came in the bottom part, AFL is competitive enough as it is without pitting teammates against each other. I remember seeing in Hell and Back, Burgess would do these competitions but the winners were praised, the losers weren’t chastised.  

Thank [censored] Roos came in and flipped everything on its head. I actually think Jack would’ve turned into a much better (possibly still playing) footballer if he had someone like Roos from the start. Dean Bailey’s (RIP) sacking was a mistake by the club sadly. 

Well said - no one should feel like that in a sporting club or business.

Regarding Bailey, no coach could ever keep their job after a 186 point loss. Plain and simple - he had to get the axe. Roos at the time was still on a big wicket at the Swans Academy and my understanding was that he wasn’t interested.

[Gawndy the Great 7,298]

2 hours ago, dieter said:

 Neeld's first job was as a school teacher at Ivanhoe Grammar: a remark like that sounds very school-teacherous to me. I'm glad I didn't have him for a teacher.

Neeld was just an angry man who may have some footy smarts but lacked personable qualities. Given the onset of millennials at around the time he came to MFC, this was just the perfect storm. 

[At the break of Gawn 3,476]

Jack was one of my favourite players but it’s obvious now he didn’t have the drive to be a truly elite footballer. Jack liked the idea of the lifestyle of an AFL footy player more so than the actual hard work that’s required to be successful at it.

People will ponder things such as what if we had drafted a player like Jack 10 years later than what we did in 2008. I’d argue that we wouldn’t have because his lack of competitiveness would have been identified earlier. 
 

I’m all for our club recruiting diverse personalities, and people will always have different vices outside of footy, however when it comes to applying your trade, you have to be 100%. There would be players out there who would put more effort into their footy who are also balancing life with 3-4 kids than what Jack was doing.

Edited September 2, 2021 by At the break of Gawn

[Pates 9,536]

1 hour ago, TheWiz said:

Well said - no one should feel like that in a sporting club or business.

Regarding Bailey, no coach could ever keep their job after a 186 point loss. Plain and simple - he had to get the axe. Roos at the time was still on a big wicket at the Swans Academy and my understanding was that he wasn’t interested.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you regarding Bailey, I think there were some insane things going through the club and talk of a players strike of sorts has been discussed. The fact that it sounded like it went from Schwab getting the sack to Bailey getting the sack just shows that the club was chaos personified. Whatever happened that day was bigger than whether a coach was any good at his job, I will admit that at the time I was of the opinion he had to go for the very reason you mentioned. I feel in retrospect this was an error as Bailey had a good relationship with the players and when things clicked it clicked well. We had a talented bunch, but there were glaring defensive issues that hurt us that year. 

In the end though it has lead (eventually) to the success we’re having now.

I also agree with some sentiments that Neeld may well have been acting in accordance with the direction the club was telling him to go, but just took it way too far. (He was still a god awful choice no matter how you look at it)

[deegirl 1,288]

Notice any similarities between Watts and Hogan?  Both golden prospects who don't really want to do everything it takes to be the best.  Jesse has time to turn it around, and here's hoping he does.

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Pates said:

I also agree with some sentiments that Neeld may well have been acting in accordance with the direction the club was telling him to go, but just took it way too far. (He was still a god awful choice no matter how you look at it)

It was actually written that Neeld  had to be counselled by the club about his aggression towards the playing group.

It was written in the Hun, so take that for what you will. 😉

[Skuit 9,120]

Vociferous Anti-Neelder from day-dot (well, from our first outing against the Lions), but let's not gloss over Crawford laughing during that interview about Clarkson - considered the greatest coach in modern football - also punishing the soon dynastic Hawks with early-morning ice-cold swims. It was another era. 

Neeld was a rookie coach with a mandate to toughen the team up (and it was a talented young team) - from the board and selection committee down through to the supporters, and took that role on because he had no other ideas. Many of those same supporters hoped to see the back of Goodwin last year.

As for Jack - sure, our development was a serious issue in those early days, but he had the opportunity under Roos (who coddled him a bit, but is also considered one of the modern-day coaching greats) and then Goodwin and McCartney to get involved with a serious and focussed program - and he effectively chose not to. 

I was admittedly never a fan of Jack either. While accepting it was his prerogative in how much he wanted to get out of his career, it's aggravating knowing I would go harder when it came to my team than some of our players. Jack was being disingenuous in that interview about why he was rejected by Goodwin. 

Credits Simon with having the greatest influence on him getting the best out of himself as a player, and then repays that by rocking up to training out of shape (along with later discretions) right when he should have been stepping up in maturity and leadership. Goodwin rightly had no time for him. That's on Jack, not the club. 

I've made my feeling clear on Goodwin from the very start - and those who still don't want to see it have no idea about football and its context in the modern world. Every one of our players who gets some praise credits Goody - you don't even hear that with Hardwick or the other top clubs. Jack chose to bail out to where he was 'wanted' - read; where it was easy. 

 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Skuit said:

As for Jack - sure, our development was a serious issue in those early days, but he had the opportunity under Roos (who coddled him a bit, but is also considered one of the modern-day coaching greats) and then Goodwin and McCartney to get involved with a serious and focussed program - and he effectively chose not to. 

I was admittedly never a fan of Jack either. While accepting it was his prerogative in how much he wanted to get out of his career, it's aggravating knowing I would go harder when it came to my team than some of our players. Jack was being disingenuous in that interview about why he was rejected by Goodwin. 

While I might seem to be heavily in the pro Watts camp re: the 'Neeld vs. Watts feud', please don't think I take his side entirely. I don't. Neeld may have carried on like Yosemite Sam, but Jack did himself no favors either. 

Jack tended to let himself down under a series of coaches.

For me, Jack vindicated the logic as to why that trade happened not long afterwards. And I'm not talking about his subsequent playing career at Port.

I remember in the days after the decision had been made for Jack to be moved on, there was an incident where a camera crew managed to 'randomly bump into Jack' at Melbourne airport; bound for a flight to Adelaide. Questions were asked about where he was going and what he was doing, and from memory, he pulled an intimated  'woe is me, I'm being unfairly disposed of' line of commentary in response.

That was followed by another totally 'random' press conference at the Spring Carnival races where he got to tell all in attendance how sad it was that he was being moved on 'just as we are about to become successful'. His Dad was piping up around the same time about how he was being 'crucified', and I think Roosy was throwing his ten cents in as well. He was also whinging on Twitter about how the club didn't like 'good kicks' or some other load of bollocks.

That sequence of events to me showed a real sense of entitlement. Jack seemed to think that he would be given a spot because of who he was. That commentary would never have made it to the media if he (and his management) had not planned it and subsequently chosen not to green light it. He and Paul Connors decided to run a media PR campaign to guilt us into keeping him.

I'll admit that Jack was let down in his early development, but as the club was evolving, Jack seemed unable to evolve in kind. He could never understand that they don't hand out our jumper in Weeties packets, and that he would need to bend to the club. The club was not going to bend to him.

As for the disingenuous stuff, I've mentioned the infamous trip to Byron twice, so no need to go over that in detail then. It was unsurprising that he never raised it. However, I will also say that back in 2018, Jack made a statement that absolutely floored me. It was at a press conference where he was asked whose list was better: Port's or Melbourne's? Jack without blinking an eyelid said something like 'Why do you think I chose to come here (Port)?' It really wasn't like he had full say in the matter, yet he was talking like he'd decided to leave us, not that he had been essentially been given the arze. It was peak delusion.

And there in lies the problem with Jack. Yes, the place was like living in the 9th circle of Dante's Inferno through 2012 and 2013. The club failed Jack and plenty of others. However, once a better environment was put in place, and Jack had the chance to be the footballer he could be, he chose to not ask the hard questions of himself, be honest as to whether he was doing all he could and basically decided to stay in neutral. While he was influenced by the environment beforehand, he chose to make those decisions. And they were the wrong ones.

Edited September 2, 2021 by Colin B. Flaubert

[Skuit 9,120]

29 minutes ago, Colin B. Flaubert said:

As for the disingenuous stuff, I've mentioned the infamous trip to Byron twice, so no need to go over that in detail then. It was unsurprising that he never raised it. However, I will also say that back in 2018, Jack made a statement that absolutely floored me. It was at a press conference where he was asked whose list was better: Port's or Melbourne's? Jack without blinking an eyelid said something like 'Why do you think I chose to come here (Port)?' It really wasn't like he had full say in the matter, yet he was talking like he'd decided to leave us, not that he had been essentially been given the arze. It was peak delusion.

As an outsider I will never know the sequence of events and how they panned out with respect to his move to Port. But I got the feeling during that interview that he is still rather delusional, as it doesn't at all accord with my memory at the time (and those aforementioned press conferences). He says Goody invited him back if he wanted to stay, and then he got an amazing offer from Port - where he 'felt wanted'. I doubt these two statements to be accurate in the way he presents them. The former is probably akin to what TMac experienced last year - if you can't find a home you'll remain on the list, but are not part of the current plans -  and the latter I think was his only offer. Then sounds like he got coddled at Port as well. 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Skuit said:

As an outsider I will never know the sequence of events and how they panned out with respect to his move to Port. But I got the feeling during that interview that he is still rather delusional, as it doesn't at all accord with my memory at the time (and those aforementioned press conferences). He says Goody invited him back if he wanted to stay, and then he got an amazing offer from Port - where he 'felt wanted'. I doubt these two statements to be accurate in the way he presents them. The former is probably akin to what TMac experienced last year - if you can't find a home you'll remain on the list, but are not part of the current plans -  and the latter I think was his only offer. Then sounds like he got coddled at Port as well. 

I remember PJ saying, during a follow up radio interview to defend the trade, that 31 was the best offer we could get, and that if he revealed what Geelong and Sydney had offered us and had we taken either of their offers, then we would have been rightfully pilloried. He also mentioned quite bluntly that the reason why Jack had been traded was that he wasn't 'ruthless' (corporate speak for unmotivated).

I'd say that you are basically correct. It was similar to what Tomald was told last year. 

It would have been interesting to see if Jack would be able to take the feedback about his performance on board had he found no suitor. 

Edited September 2, 2021 by Colin B. Flaubert

[Engorged Onion 9,250]

4 hours ago, Smokey said:

If he were drafted in the last few years, and came into our system as it is now, he could have been ANYTHING.

Work rate can be learned. Jacks skill can not.

 

All true

BUT

When you're languishing down the bottom of the ladder - you get access to the best talent

When you're doing alright, competing for premierships, have players with 'work ethic/kulcha' - you don't have access to that talent.

Edited September 2, 2021 by Engorged Onion

[Smokey 4,115]

4 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

All true

BUT

When you're languishing down the bottom of the ladder - you get access to the best talent

When you're doing alright, competing for premierships, have players with 'work ethic/kulcha' - you don't have access to that talent.

Catch 22 for sure 

[Engorged Onion 9,250]

1 minute ago, Smokey said:

Catch 22 for sure 

Let me ramble a bit more...

25 degree Thursday arvo Beers at a relatively strong %.

The hilariousness of top draft picks being 18yo's old changing a clubs destiny is clearly flawed. An 18yo changing 'culture' (not that is ever termed like that in media) is clearly problematic vs an army of people who are a) older than him and b) more entrenched in an existing culture.

But, this is exactly what is implicitly implied in the media. 

I'm so out of touch with American sports it's not funny - but I guess a lottery feels pretty fair these days for the AFL...

The evidence is, there are so many layers to challenging for premierships - and that there is no real formula, its an amalgam of great people who provide a safe spaces for people to explore their growth....whatever that growth looks like.  Be it as a player, a coach, an administrator. 

Also, you can have a great amalgam...and it STILL doesn't guarantee success... be it for the individual or for the club. But that doesn't mean culture is actually poor either... 

I hope we can sustain finals appearances for the next 4-6 years...and then bottom out, because - we are no longer challenging for a premiership - thus we're not destination, but also our talent dissipates... then rinse and repeat over a decade/decade and a half cycle.

These times are rare air for us Melbourne supporters.... sincere thanks to all those that suffered so much pain, or provided the pain, for our club to realise the hopelessness of those strategies.

[KysaiahMessiah 725]

1 hour ago, Skuit said:

Vociferous Anti-Neelder from day-dot (well, from our first outing against the Lions), but let's not gloss over Crawford laughing during that interview about Clarkson - considered the greatest coach in modern football - also punishing the soon dynastic Hawks with early-morning ice-cold swims. It was another era. 

Neeld was a rookie coach with a mandate to toughen the team up (and it was a talented young team) - from the board and selection committee down through to the supporters, and took that role on because he had no other ideas. Many of those same supporters hoped to see the back of Goodwin last year.

As for Jack - sure, our development was a serious issue in those early days, but he had the opportunity under Roos (who coddled him a bit, but is also considered one of the modern-day coaching greats) and then Goodwin and McCartney to get involved with a serious and focussed program - and he effectively chose not to. 

I was admittedly never a fan of Jack either. While accepting it was his prerogative in how much he wanted to get out of his career, it's aggravating knowing I would go harder when it came to my team than some of our players. Jack was being disingenuous in that interview about why he was rejected by Goodwin. 

Credits Simon with having the greatest influence on him getting the best out of himself as a player, and then repays that by rocking up to training out of shape (along with later discretions) right when he should have been stepping up in maturity and leadership. Goodwin rightly had no time for him. That's on Jack, not the club. 

I've made my feeling clear on Goodwin from the very start - and those who still don't want to see it have no idea about football and its context in the modern world. Every one of our players who gets some praise credits Goody - you don't even hear that with Hardwick or the other top clubs. Jack chose to bail out to where he was 'wanted' - read; where it was easy. 

 

 

Just looking at your favourite players Skuit, Allen Jakovich, Mitch Clark, Liam Jurrah, not sure they got the most out of their careers either...

I admit I loved JW, I loved Travis Johnstone, I loved Allen Jakovich, Mitch Clark, and Colin Sylvia.  All flawed in some way.  Not everyone gets the most out of their afl careers, but I've learned to appreciate their talents, and I dont profess to knowing the ins and outs of why they didnt "make it" to the level some expect.

[Skuit 9,120]

5 hours ago, KysaiahMessiah said:

Just looking at your favourite players Skuit, Allen Jakovich, Mitch Clark, Liam Jurrah, not sure they got the most out of their careers either...

I admit I loved JW, I loved Travis Johnstone, I loved Allen Jakovich, Mitch Clark, and Colin Sylvia.  All flawed in some way.  Not everyone gets the most out of their afl careers, but I've learned to appreciate their talents, and I dont profess to knowing the ins and outs of why they didnt "make it" to the level some expect.

Yes, indeed (although compared to Jack the others had arguably greater extenuating circumstances - one of which will cause a life-long sadness in me). Just to be clear though, I've bagged JV many times on here, but never for being a 'wasted' talent or not getting the most out of himself - his career ambition and commitment was always entirely up to him.

I'm fiercely competitive when it comes to sport (often to my own physical detriment), so I never warmed to Jack in that sense. But the notion of being paid well to play competitive sport and not worry about putting in the extra yards and just enjoy the swimming and [censored] that comes with it sounds pretty pleasing to me also.  

And I'm probably a wasted talent too - just thankfully not the most ever scrutinised and badgered individual in my field. So I'm not without empathy for Watts. But as a fan I have a different agenda. Goodwin's clear-out of probably our two most beloved players was highly ballsy, and is now reaping the rewards in more ways than one. 

[Jaded No More 57,744]

You only need to look at Jones and Gawn to know that if a player is driven enough to succeed, they will. Both aren’t as talented as Watts, both suffered the same horrible time at the club with some truly terrible coaches and administrators. Both went on to captain the club. One is on the verge of becoming a premiership captain. 
 

While what went on at the club for decades was unacceptable at all levels, from the board, to the administration to the coaches and the recruiters, an individual still needs to take responsibility for their own actions. Watts couldn’t even cut it at Port, a successful club with lots of quality leaders. He didn’t have the drive or the motivation to be a modern day footballer and that’s ok. Not everyone has that in them. 

[Doug Reemer 897]

On 9/1/2021 at 12:31 AM, bing181 said:

Really worth a listen. Depressing though what he - and others at the time - went through.

https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/inside-50-with-crawf-quinny/id1499492812

Very good listen!

[Sir Why You Little 34,430]

It was Jack who pleaded with Roosy to Coach them. To be treated with respect. 
 

So he had ample opportunities to change his attitude, but it didn’t happen 

He always had talent, but not the Attitude. I hope he can see that now. 
the fact that Goody still kept in contact after he left says a lot

But we couldn’t carry him if we were to go to the next level, that is now obvious