The reference to a solid 3rd quarter against a mediocre club like Essendon says it all.

What a joke.

Brad Green is just as much of the problem - don't let anyone tell you otherwise. CEO or not, this club has needed to remove Goodwin since two straight sets finals exits.

We continually do not hold people to account for performance. The same players keep getting games, the same staff keep doing their job poorly. Tim Lamb's record of recruiting players from other clubs outside of May, Lever and Langdon is god awful in the 10 + years he's been at the helm.

The sooner someone with any balls on the board can move Goodwin, Richardson and Lamb on, the better.

6 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes i agree. The Rock and a Hard Place.

He had to say something, and i am glad he has. Silence is not an option.

Until the CEO moves into the desk…

That's one of the things I am most curious about. Impact of a new CEO...

It's well overdue and hopefully leads to something. Anything. Can't stay the same doing what we're doing.

18 minutes ago, Supreme_Demon said:

Was good Brad Green communicated something to Melbourne members and supporters.

Unfortunately, he will end up with egg on his face if Melbourne get belted by Fremantle.

Sadly, I will be surprised if we have over 10,000 show up at the MCG on Saturday. Hope I am wrong though.

As others have mentioned, the only relevant information in Brad Green's letter was the search for the new CEO. Hopefully, it is someone with the capable skills and experience as they have a massive job on their hands fixing all the issues at the Demons.

Some might have pull out in the last month. Would you want to take on a basket case?

To be fair to Greenie half of one quarter isn't much material to work with.

It's blindingly obvious to most media commentators & our supporters that the appalling match day coaching is costing the team dearly and this is being ignored.

51 minutes ago, Red But Mostly Blue said:

But he kind of has to?

I've never understood the idea in corporate communication that you "need to respond" in a crisis, but that it's OK for that response to be meaningless. Not a single person reads something like that (or any anodyne corporate statement) and thinks "Ah, thank goodness they responded".

It seems like the definition of box-ticking.

Just now, The Taciturn Demon said:

I've never understood the idea in corporate communication that you "need to respond" in a crisis, but that it's OK for that response to be meaningless. Not a single person reads something like that (or any anodyne corporate statement) and thinks "Ah, thank goodness they responded".

It seems like the definition of box-ticking.

If he said nothing he’d avoid a meaningless response like today’s letter, but be criticised for being “asleep at the wheel” or similar.

If he says what he said today it’s vice versa.

Reality is, because we’re down in the dumps and/or in a crisis right now, he is going to be criticised no matter what he does.

Firstly, as others have said, it is good Brad Green has come out and said something. Think about Kate and Pert last year... it was utter silence through some very questionable times. This transparency has to be applauded as an improvement no matter what message was delivered.

The team have to find something positive no matter how small to focus on and build on. It definitively is clasping at straws with the references to Q3. But the message from that quarter is actually really simple. EFFORT & INTENSITY. It is the only major thing that was different from the other 3 quarters. Goody mentioned it in his presser. Its what we did well against GWS and what has largely been missing since.

You fix that one little thing, which doesn't need talent or skill and we will be much better for the cause. Doesnt mean we would have the games we lost, but im sure with some fight we would have walked away with at least 1-2 wins. Sure there are the forward line issues and other method / system problems but they are exacerbated by the lack of intensity in the team.

Just now, The Taciturn Demon said:

I've never understood the idea in corporate communication that you "need to respond" in a crisis, but that it's OK for that response to be meaningless. Not a single person reads something like that (or any anodyne corporate statement) and thinks "Ah, thank goodness they responded".

It seems like the definition of box-ticking.

Completely agree.

I guess it leads back up to the investment aspect of all of this - members - who are clamouring for a return on investment, both time and $, which is where the CEO (TBC) and President typically (have to) roll out the corporate response.

Again, damned if they do/don't. And you're right, not much to be taken from them generally, aside from the 'relief' that they, too, can see everything's on fire. Just no water.

Box-ticking nothings being whispered in our ears...

Brads a good man.

He has clambered onto the deck of a sinking ship.

Saving all he can.

Not sold on Smithy anymore, it’s been 7 months, he is, he isn’t, now headed off to the chateau for an undefined period of time, considering his options.

Not the sign of a man rolling up his sleeves.

Jungle drums....

26 minutes ago, bluey said:

Brads a good man.

He has clambered onto the deck of a sinking ship.

Saving all he can.

Not sold on Smithy anymore, it’s been 7 months, he is, he isn’t, now headed off to the chateau for an undefined period of time, considering his options.

Not the sign of a man rolling up his sleeves.

I beg to differ. He was the president of the MCC and had always planned for this career break. It the perfect time before taking on another mammoth job at MFC. You want to be re-energized and refocused for your next challenge - one that will take full commitment for at least the first 1-2 years.

I usually take 1-2 months off between change of employers so this move actually resonates with me.

Edited April 14Apr 14 by GS_1905

20 minutes ago, bluey said:

Brads a good man.

He has clambered onto the deck of a sinking ship.

Saving all he can.

Not sold on Smithy anymore, it’s been 7 months, he is, he isn’t, now headed off to the chateau for an undefined period of time, considering his options.

Not the sign of a man rolling up his sleeves.

You know what Bluey I think he is too old for the job. Being envolved at the top of an AFL club is not easy. It is the job for younger person. He quit the MCC to live a quieter lifestyle.

Brad Green's heart is in the right place. but the stage has been reached where meaningless waffle cuts no ice.

When circumstances change, good coaches and teams adapt.

Sadly, Goodwin has put his head in the sand and refused to make necessary changes, in selection and tactics.

Viney provides a classic case of this syndrome. Week after week he persists in belting every kick as hard as he can in the general direction of his forward line, frequently resulting in a turnover. Yet he is deemed undroppable and therefore has no reason to change.

Green has to wake up to the fact that the fans are rapidly losing the confidence they once had in Goodwin.

And that has to lead to tough decisions, not more attempts to hide the crisis.

42 minutes ago, The Taciturn Demon said:

I've never understood the idea in corporate communication that you "need to respond" in a crisis, but that it's OK for that response to be meaningless. Not a single person reads something like that (or any anodyne corporate statement) and thinks "Ah, thank goodness they responded".

It seems like the definition of box-ticking.

Sort of you are dammed if you do and dammed if you don’t.

What a load of Codswallop!

1 hour ago, Billy said:

People aren’t going Brad if changes aren’t made, lucky to get 10k on Saturday

Dees supporters right now.

My doctor recommends me to avoid watching the Dees for a few weeks

My blood pressure is through the roof !!

2 hours ago, Redjacket said:

We should get AI to run our club.

Can you running Goody's post match press conferences through the AI checker?

1 hour ago, Cranky Franky said:

It's blindingly obvious to most media commentators & our supporters that the appalling match day coaching is costing the team dearly and this is being ignored.

It's not obvious to me. Our teams lack of pressure, ability to lay effective tackles to pressure the ball carrier / force turnovers, and poor kicking and/or forward movement into our forward 50 makes it impossible to compete. While coaching is a part of the problem it is more to do with the 18 players on the ground not performing at the level required irrespective of match day tactics.

No comma after an introductory ‘What I can assure you of’... disgraceful. Disgusting. Egregious even.

Worst letter ever.

Won't come as a suprise to anyone but I didn't mind receiving this email

It's fairly obvious they're not going to sack Goodie (at the very least until the CEO and other appointments are in place), so this email at least the speculation which the media is running with.

2 hours ago, Redjacket said:

We should get AI to run our club.

Interesting.

isitai.com and quillbot.com both come up with less than 1% chance of AI.

A ran a couple of random old notes of my own through, and they all agreed that I am human.

The more I look back over it, the more it has that tone of 'tell the AI writer the pieces of information you want to share, and it will put it into an email'. My wife used to use AI writing apps as a kind of second pair of eyes just in case she hit a second-language blind spot when grinding out dozens of information-for-client emails a day.

But to be absolutely blunt, if the club is using AI for this kind of communication, then the people responsible should be sacked and I should replace them myself.

It would also explain why there is no actual mention of the Melbourne Football Club until the 'go Dees' sign off.

Yeah, I'm doing it. I'm actually going to apply to work for the club.

I'll use my writing abilities (I can bang out fresh copy at almost typing speed) as the wedge to get me in, and then secretly start doing anthropology in the storerooms.

37 minutes ago, chookrat said:

It's not obvious to me. Our teams lack of pressure, ability to lay effective tackles to pressure the ball carrier / force turnovers, and poor kicking and/or forward movement into our forward 50 makes it impossible to compete. While coaching is a part of the problem it is more to do with the 18 players on the ground not performing at the level required irrespective of match day tactics.

When a whole team performance is like that I fail to see how it doesn't fall on the coaches. Those issues arise because the players arent well drilled enough about what they should be doing with or without the ball.

You can see it in our performances. The second guessing, the indecision, the poor running patterns. The players look shackled by a gameplan they don't understand.

Alright.

We have seen a lot of words and little action.

The president has said to judge us on next week where the players are ready to impress.

I'll be watching expecting an improvement. If it doesn't happen then I'll be done with the current administration and expect a number of staff to give notice.

Basically says that the Board cares a lot. We were sort of expecting that.