1 hour ago, Roost it far said:

I think you’ll be surprised who will come to us this off season

Innuendo, wink-wink bs that will be proven wrong

Please bookmark this so that we can call you out October

2 minutes ago, bing181 said:

  13 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Simpson said they liked how Port attacked so got Port folk in but their attempts at a system change still failed as they didn't have the right players.

Yes, I said we didn't and still don't have the right players.

Yet we didn't learn from that WCE experience. At least WCE brought in coaches to help, We didn't. Longmire brought in someone who was able to develop a system to suit their list..

We could have learnt from both and maybe tried something that had a better chance of working with what we have.

We could have recruited an assistant coach that had the relevant experience.

Edited April 18Apr 18 by Lucifers Hero

1 hour ago, Wrecker45 said:

I have been a massive Goody supporter but take this to the bank, we can't sack him until we appoint a CEO.

It doesn't matter if we miraculously win the next 10 games straight he is gone.

There are alot of Melbourne ex players who's names don't normally come up that want him gone and it has nothing to do with the game plan.

Hopefully we sort this mess up before Kalani White makes his decision.

Make no mistake Green will sack him as soon as he he has a CEO. They will probably do a pre planned review first

Take this to the bank has a ring of certainty to it (especially when buttressed by the next sentence): upon what is that based?

These ex Melb players - why do they want Goodwin gone if not for the gameplan?

Genuine questions, not snark

1 hour ago, jaydenh10 said:

are they even allowed to do that?

The AFL sets the fixture, they can fixture teams where they want.

10 minutes ago, Stiff Arm said:

Innuendo, wink-wink bs that will be proven wrong

Please bookmark this so that we can call you out October

I’m not implying I know anything. I do know though that there’s more than a few worthy assistants we can chase to become coach. We have the makings of a strong list that will help attract good people. I also have faith in Green, Smith and co. to make good decisions. But go ahead and bookmark it if proving people wrong floats your boat.

17 minutes ago, bing181 said:

  29 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Simpson said they liked how Port attacked so got Port folk in but their attempts at a system change still failed as they didn't have the right players.

We have enough good players that we shouldn't be losing by 40-60 points every week. A better coach would have this side playing far more competitive footy than we've seen not only this year but most of last year too.

4 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

I’m not implying I know anything. I do know though that there’s more than a few worthy assistants we can chase to become coach. We have the makings of a strong list that will help attract good people. I also have faith in Green, Smith and co. to make good decisions. But go ahead and bookmark it if proving people wrong floats your boat.

Thanks, I will

Although West Coast lost to the Bombers, they have improved their percentage to the point where a thumping defeat could leave us as the ladder tailenders.

Goodwin would then have "succeeded" in taking us from table-toppers to cellar-dwellers.

I hope to be proved wrong, but I fear the Dockers forwards will have a field day against a backline minus May, Lever and McVee.

15 minutes ago, Stiff Arm said:

Thanks, I will

Awesome, don’t forget

7 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

We have enough good players that we shouldn't be losing by 40-60 points every week. A better coach would have this side playing far more competitive footy than we've seen not only this year but most of last year too.

My take is that the players have adopted a work-to-rule attitude much like what we saw in 2011, 2012 & 2013

Back then we blamed the coaching as well and let the players off the hook until '186'

When that happened we turned on the players and backed Neeld to the hilt. Until we turned on Neeld and wanted to blame him for everything (some still do) and once again, we let the players off the hook

... until Roos arrived and then we had the final proof that the players were the issue all along (Roos effectively cast aside 35 players from 2013 to 2016) There might have only been 8-10 players who survived the Roos cull

But upon arrival, Roos stated that the players managers were an issue (i.e. the players ruled the roost)

And they are doing it again but the lazy way of evaluating things is to just blame Goodwin

Anyway, tomorrow is D-Day, Gonzo. Whichever way one wants to look at it

2 minutes ago, Macca said:

My take is that the players have adopted a work-to-rule attitude much like what we saw in 2011, 2012 & 2013

Back then we blamed the coaching as well and let the players off the hook until '186'

When that happened we turned on the players and backed Neeld to the hilt. Until we turned on Neeld and wanted to blame him for everything (some still do) and once again, we let the players off the hook

... until Roos arrived and then we had the final proof that the players were the issue all along (Roos effectively cast aside 35 players from 2013 to 2016) There might have only been 8-10 players who survived the Roos cull

But upon arrival, Roos stated that the players managers were an issue (i.e. the players ruled the roost)

And they are doing it again but the lazy way of evaluating things is to just blame Goodwin

Anyway, tomorrow is D-Day, Gonzo. Whichever way one wants to look at it

Neeld also moved on a bunch of players. Roos was basically chucking out the trash he brought in.

Just now, KozzyCan said:

Neeld also moved on a bunch of players. Roos was basically chucking out the trash he brought in.

You might want to check things a bit more closely

Neeld did not get rid of many players at all (as compared to what Roos did) Maybe 5 or 6 went in both of the Neeld off-seasons. Which is about as low as number as it gets

Where as Roos went 14, 9, & 9 and then in his final season as coach, another 8 or 9 went

The issue with Neeld were all the thrashings, not the delistments

Mind you, we had a list full of players that were incapable of winning anyway

And that was my point. We keep blaming the coaching when it's the players who are the real issue

But I don't expect to change your mind anyway. Like a number of others here, you are fixated on Goodwin too much

As previously stated, the players are effectively on a work-to-rule mode right now and from the outside, it looks like they are trying to get rid of the coach

Edited April 18Apr 18 by Macca

And I've been there myself @KozzyCan

I did not like Bailey as a coach and couldn't stand the way we played (bruise-free)

But over time I've realised that he was coaching a club that had a myriad of issues so I'm not sure that he got a good run at it anyway

And to scapegoat Bailey and effectively let the players off the hook was wrong

As previously stated, PJ & Roos sorted things out with very few players from that era surviving the Roos cull

You see, we only talk about the Bailey rebuild and we don't talk about the Roos rebuild (enough)

One rebuild didn't work for all sorts of reasons but the other rebuild did work (for all sorts of reasons)

Edited April 18Apr 18 by Macca

9 minutes ago, Macca said:

And I've been there myself @KozzyCan

I did not like Bailey as a coach and couldn't stand the way we played (bruise-free)

But over time I've realised that he was coaching a club that had a myriad of issues so I'm not sure that he got a good run at it anyway

And to scapegoat Bailey and effectively let the players off the hook was wrong

As previously stated, PJ & Roos sorted things out with very few players from that era surviving the Roos cull

You see, we only talk about the Bailey rebuild and we don't talk about the Roos rebuild (enough)

One rebuild didn't work for all sorts of reasons but the other rebuild did work (for all sorts of reasons)

One of those ringleaders who escaped the ire... well now runs the club.

Irony mych

8 minutes ago, Macca said:

...

Mind you, we had a list full of donkeys that were incapable of winning anyway

And that was my point. We keep blaming the coaching when it's the players who are the real issue

....

I agree. Of our 45 listed players I think the following are 'dead wood' or will be shown to be: Billings, McAdam, Campbell, Henderson, Kentfield, Hore, Verrall, Adams, Mentha, and Sestan.

That's 25% of our list.

I'm unsure about AJ and Sharp.

I have hope for MJ and Culley.

I think we'll be 1-12 by the King's Birthday and Goody will be moved on.

Dark days ahead methinks.

Edited April 18Apr 18 by M_9

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

The AFL sets the fixture, they can fixture teams where they want.

No they can’t within reason we are an MCG tenant and therefore entitled to play the majority of our games at the MCG

To think they can make us play the majority of our home games at Docklands is untrue

14 minutes ago, Macca said:

And I've been there myself @KozzyCan

I did not like Bailey as a coach and couldn't stand the way we played (bruise-free)

But over time I've realised that he was coaching a club that had a myriad of issues so I'm not sure that he got a good run at it anyway

And to scapegoat Bailey and effectively let the players off the hook was wrong

As previously stated, PJ & Roos sorted things out with very few players from that era surviving the Roos cull

You see, we only talk about the Bailey rebuild and we don't talk about the Roos rebuild (enough)

One rebuild didn't work for all sorts of reasons but the other rebuild did work (for all sorts of reasons)

It is ancient history now, but I agree. We should never have appointed Dean Bailey as coach back at the end of 2007. That was a massive blunder. It should of been Kevin Sheedy, at least in my opinion, but it doesn't matter now.

What happens this year in 2025 depends upon both the Demons players and Simon Goodwin. Either we succeed with this new game plan or we fail. Time is ticking though....as there are ALOT of angry Melbourne supporters out there.

Edited April 18Apr 18 by Supreme_Demon

1 minute ago, M_9 said:

I agree. Of our 45 listed players I think the following are 'dead wood' or will be shown to be: Billings, McAdam, Campbell, Henderson, Kentfield, Hore, Verrall, Addams, Mentha, and Sestan.

That's 25% of our list.

I'm unsure about AJ and Sharp.

I have hope for MJ and Culley.

I think we'll be 1-12 by the King's Birthday and Goody will be moved on.

Dark days ahead methinks.

Why are Mentha, Adam’s, and Kentfield dead wood. A next gen player and 2 19/20 year old key position players

19 minutes ago, Macca said:

And I've been there myself @KozzyCan

I did not like Bailey as a coach and couldn't stand the way we played (bruise-free)

But over time I've realised that he was coaching a club that had a myriad of issues so I'm not sure that he got a good run at it anyway

And to scapegoat Bailey and effectively let the players off the hook was wrong

As previously stated, PJ & Roos sorted things out with very few players from that era surviving the Roos cull

You see, we only talk about the Bailey rebuild and we don't talk about the Roos rebuild (enough)

One rebuild didn't work for all sorts of reasons but the other rebuild did work (for all sorts of reasons)

Are you always this patronising? Good lord. This is like watching someone have an argument with themselves in the shower.

3 minutes ago, Pennant St Dee said:

Why are Mentha, Adam’s, and Kentfield dead wood. A next gen player and 2 19/20 year old key position players

I'm tipping none of those will play a senior game this year.

1 minute ago, M_9 said:

I agree. Of our 45 listed players I think the following are 'dead wood' or will be shown to be: Billings, McAdam, Campbell, Henderson, Kentfield, Hore, Verrall, Addams, Mentha, and Sestan.

That's 25% of our list.

I'm unsure about AJ and Sharp.

I have hope for MJ and Culley.

I think we'll be 1-12 by the King's Birthday and Goody will be moved on.

Dark days ahead methinks.

Well, we keep hearing that the FD and the Board are all on board with Goodwin and the new game plan ... so they may well come to the conclusion that Goodwin is not at fault and stick with him

Reasonably large payout would be required as well

I'm now looking upon the squad of players as a group that either can't adapt or they don't want to adapt. Lazy, undisciplined and ruling the roost

Again, why do we not blame the players? Why let them off the hook? They are the ones who are playing well below standards

I'd clear the decks and go all in on a rebuild. We need a new list of players because the ones that we've got are taking us nowhere

A new coach probably won't improve them as they are too set in their ways

The only issue is we don't want to leave ourselves short on experience like we did in the Bailey era (too many kids)

So it's a delicate exercise when culling

2 minutes ago, M_9 said:

I'm tipping none of those will play a senior game this year.

Kentfield won’t as he’s missed to much pre season with glandular fever. Mentha has just arrived, but Adam’s is close.

It doesn’t make them dead wood

8 minutes ago, KozzyCan said:

Your football knowledge is negligible... you talk a lot but say very little

Just sack the coach hey? Over and over again it's all about Goodwin

These woeful performances are on the players. Where's the Leadership group and why aren't Gawn & Viney backing their coach?

The silence is deafening

Only a fool would lay the blame solely at the feet of Goodwin

It is plainly obvious that the players could not give a stuff right now

Lazy, undisciplined and unaccountable. But they'll still pick up their cheques won't they?

And you're happy with their output? Astonishing

Edited April 18Apr 18 by Macca

5 hours ago, Van Demons Land said:

So, Simon Goodwin reckons he's the best option to turn things around at Melbourne. Well, I beg to differ and just to put a little perspective on just how badly the Demons are performing at present, consider North Melbourne in comparison.

The Kangaroos have only won one game (no prizes for guessing who that was against). They were beaten by the Dogs (by 16 points), beaten by Adelaide (by 36 points), walloped by Sydney (by 65 points) and then beaten by the Suns (by 52 points). At the time of writing their game against Carlton is not going well (they are behind by 27 points midway through Q2).

So how is it that the largely beatable North Melbourne manages to horse whip Melbourne to the tune of 59 points?

Taxi for Simon Goodwin please.

4 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

The loss to North, who have since regressed to their usual 20 loss a year standards, should really count against Goodwin. And I’m sure it will if decisions need to be made.

Some of our other losses have been understandable and a semblance of respectability (GWS and Geelong) but we have absolutely no business losing a game by 59 points to North Melbourne. Let’s get serious for a second.

I'm not trying to defend Goodwin overall, but this argument can be very flawed:

1. Sydney last year finished 1st and made the GF. They lost in Round 3 to Richmond who went 2-21.

2. GWS in 2023 made a prelim (lost by a point). They lost in Round 2 to West Coast, who went 3-20 that year, and didn't get within 40 points of a side other than North Melbourne until Round 16.

3. Collingwood in 2022 made a prelim (lost by a point). They lost in Round 4 to West Coast, who went 2-20 that year and lost the 7 games immediately following that win by an average losing margin of 80 points.

2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

You're not alone in thinking this. We have just come off our best period in 6 decades and still losing members at a phenomenal rate, 2x sub 20k crowds last year, booted from prime time etc

We would want a decent crowd/showing next week vs the Tiges or the AFL will look at whether we should maintain that fixture. They'll also be looking in the longer term whether we should be playing all home games at the G. Carlton and Essendon (and the Saints) all want more home games at the G so someone will have to make up those Docklands fixtures (and it won't be Collingwood, Richmond or Hawthorn).

I don't know if we'll be in danger of losing the fixture if we get one bad crowd, but the general point is correct. Each year the AFL is under increasing pressure to get Carlton and Essendon more games at the G, but so long as there is a minimum number of games that have to be held at Marvel, that means someone else has to make up the Marvel numbers.

We've been given a Marvel home game this year after not having had one for years. It will become 2, or 3, if we continue to draw small crowds.

Hence why it's so important for all of us who can go tomorrow, to go.

23 minutes ago, Supreme_Demon said:

It is ancient history now, but I agree. We should never have appointed Dean Bailey as coach back at the end of 2007. That was a massive blunder. It should of been Kevin Sheedy, at least in my opinion, but it doesn't matter now.

What happens this year in 2025 depends upon both the Demons players and Simon Goodwin. Either we succeed with this new game plan or we fail. Time is ticking though....as there are ALOT of angry Melbourne supporters out there.

I favour an experienced coach when rebuilding as it's hard enough for a rookie coach just to win games

Roos went 4 & 18 in his first year and no one batted an eyelid

But there are a number of rookie coaches who have rebuilt and been successful. I'd just prefer an experienced coach like a Roos to rebuild. Or a Sheedy, way back when

But Bailey and Neeld never stood a chance at a club like ours anyway. Development was neglible, our players weren't fit and we were in the midst of rebuilding ... how can a rookie coach cope with all that?