Leaderboard

I attended a forum conducted at AAMI Park this evening on the MFC's approach to free agency, trading and drafting. The Melbourne Business Community function was hosted by Chris Connolly with speakers Mark Neeld and Tim Harrington. Some of the general information about FA and trades has been published on the websites of the AFL or club or discussed at previous meetings while there were some mildly sensitive issues that can't really be expanded on publicly but no specific players who we were seeking over the next month or in the draft were named. Suffice to say we did gain an insight into the type of player the club is seeking but that was predictable. We should know by now that Neeld wants those who play hard contested football. He wants players who uncompromisingly want to be the best in the game. Those who are happy just to be AFL footballers need not apply. Neeld says things will be different in 2013. The players now know how they are expected to present themselves on 29 October when the pre season starts. The volume and intensity will be lifted from 60% to around 75% of the optimum as part of a 3 year plan to get the team up to the standard of the leading clubs. One of the innovations we will see is the introduction of combatative training designed to harden players in mind and body. Naturally there was discussion on players (there was the usual Jack Viney stuff but we need to wait seven days for the outcome) and while I won't elaborate here and now, it's clear that most of the rumours we've been hearing and reading about are simply not true. I can say that we never made a 7 year offer for Cloke and were never seriously interested (for various different reasons) in the four free agents confirmed earlier today (Goddard, Pearce, Chaplin and Knights) or in Lynch or Tippett, nor has there been an offer made for Wellingham. In some cases to bid for these players at 8% of the salary cap is not warranted in the stage at which the club is at present. In short, the rumour files and such threads both here and elsewhere on the Internet are way, way off the mark. Some of the stuff is complete bollocks! The club will get involved in the right deals and we should get what hopefully will be a good mix of 18 year olds and more seasoned players including possibly some from the state leagues but the scuttlebutt and innuendo is just that! Anyway, I just wanted to say well done to the club for keeping us informed. The lack of any sizzling news might disappoint some but I was impressed at how these guys are sticking to what they call their "premiership plans" and persevering undaunted with their programme to rebuild this football club.

He's got it right. We embarrassed ourselves this year.

You guys spend all your time bagging our list, our recruiting, our overall performance and then you think someone who says we were a big disappointment this year is stretching it?! Fark.............rying out loud

stuie, can you please change your display name to Tweek? Every time you post I can't help but think of Tweek from South Park.

It would need to be a fair deal. Let's say he wants to back to WA. I think we should do the following deal with the Dockers. 1. We give them Morton. 2. We give them pick 3 for taking him off our hands. It would be win-win.

Who gives a shiz if we take Viney at 3. I would have taken him at pick 1. To have a guy that 100% wants to play for us and has a top work ethic is 3/4 of the battle. How many other high draft picks rated by the so called experts have turned out to be guns? This kids deserves to be picked and we deserve to have him.

I think many people are somewhat bedazzled by the achievements of the Sydney Swans and their recruiting people and are automatically assuming that we can just go out and do the same thing. Some even think this can be achieved by throwing around $'s alone. If you analyse who the Swans' most successful recruits from trading are, you'll find that they were generally unloved or low paid players not able to get regular games at their clubs. They came as bargains and not high profile players to who you simply throw money at and they will come and perform. Kennedy, Shaw, Mumford and co were in nowhere near the same category as a Goddard or a Tippett who are commanding substantial offers or Lynch, who also appears to have changed clubs in the hunt for $'s. We're only one day into a four week marathon so let's see what happens over the coming weeks.

Unbelievable hatred towards Dawes on this thread, and simultaneous unfounded comparisons with Martin, where Martin comes out on top. There simply isn't any basis for claiming Martin is better than Dawes. I'm sorry to all Martin fans, but he's achieved very, very little in his career so far, and Dawes has done more. If the price is right, he should definitely be on our radar, as he'll help Clark immensely and that helps the team.

I'd take Martin over Dawes.

Brad Hardie still adamant on 6PR tonight Lynch will be coming to us, does not believe Pies can get any where near our offer. Also said despite all the hypre re Freo & Meth Coast thinks we are still in the running for Wellingham. Wellingham likes the lifestyle in Melbourne and the only reason he would leave Pies is for extra money and by going to Dees may be able to remain in Victoria and get decent cash Food for thought

hahaaha yeah Martin is totally better than a 24 year old key forward who kicked a combined 57 goals and took a combined 200 marks in Collingwoods two grand final years what a joke Martin is nothing, he has done nothing at AFL level and never will. Dawes will be the perfect support for Mitch inside forward 50. I hope we land him.

Copy and paste for those too lazy to scroll down the board... I've read at least one simpleton, possibly more, argue that the bloods culture is a myth, I'd argue that said posters intelligence is a myth. Even more so than fantastic coaching and intelligent recruiting, the swans success over the last decade is built on the back of one player looking into their history at depth (as opposed to management lecturing on it) and discovering the old 'bloods' culture that existed for a period of time. With the backing of the senior players in Sydney, they vowed to adhere to a culture that represents the 'bloods'. Without exception. The players bought in, those that didn't, didn't play. I envy them and pray for the day that Melbourne show the type of commitment and passion for their club that the Sydney players do.

Watched Cale closely this year and he was clearly making an effort to up his contested football, but it was to no avail. He is almost irreversibly soft, and as much as he might try to get involved and get under a few packs, which he did try to do, it will take a better club than the MFC to turn him around. This isn't really a knock on Cale the person, as most of us mere mortals aren't cut out for it, but it is a knock on Cale the AFL footballer, and unless you are sublimely skilled and lightning quick, you can't survive at this level with his 'softness'. Put out the press release that he is seeking a new home to make it look like we are still keen on him, and then cut the rope and take what we can get. Sorry if that seems harsh, but that is the way I see his career.

I'd rather keep Cale, as I doubt we'd get a worthwhile return for him, but I think he's still a chance to make it. I think Neeld's style of coaching is exactly what he has always needed, but it'll be a while before we see any results. I know many won't agree. We'll see.

Not sure if it's been posted elsewhere, but I heard the complete opposite; he'd been told in no uncertain terms where his game was lacking and where his career was headed, and said he'd rather stay and work his guts out to correct his game than be traded. Gotta love this time of year.

I still hold some hope for Cale I reckon his position is in the forward line not the back line or as a tagger. He can find space and that's important for a forward, he could be a 2 goal a game player but he will never be a defender.

Neeld and Brown would have detailed knowledge of Dawes's strengths and weaknesses, and what he can bring to the club. If they sign off on it, good enough for me.

Dawes would be a good pickup for the dees right now as as a poster above noted his value is low and Collingwood may want to get rid of him (good Supercoach pickup!) Ás i have said before Neeld wants a twin tower set up and he would fill that role to perfection. Even this year, although he had a poor season he still needs a big gorilla type to match him which stretches defenses when there is a Cloke as well (or a Clark if he was at the dees). The post above that notes he said he struggled playing the second ruck role is interesting as at the dees he wouldn't need to do that and could just stay down forward, and possibly play out of the square. He was poor this year but i wouldn't be surprised if Neeld could turn him around. Which raises another point. Neeld would know Dawes, his capacity etc and i would trust his judgement on him if we decided to go after him. In an article i read this week about the Swans (i think about Morton) it was noted that new players were recruited specifically for a role and were told as much. Their job was to play that role. Also it noted they had a focus on getting players who could train at the elite level and were more interested in this than talent per se. All about players able to meet the Swans standards and buy in to the culture from the get go. Sound familiar? I have no doubt that this will be/is the approach to recruitment that Neeld will take/s (and has done already with Magner and Couch). Dawes would meet this criteria IMO. Buckley noted a few times what a terrific trainer Dawes is and that this was one of the key reasons he wasn't dropped earlier. He can play a role, he'll buy in to Neelds vision, he trains at an elite AFL standard, he's from a successful club, he knows and has played with our forward coach, he'll be at a reasonable price and he's still young. He's also a braniac and that suits the MGC. Get him

If we don't draft Viney I will microwave my membership card. The jury is still out on the MFC's new look, but one thing is certain, if we allow Viney to run around in a GC jumper, we not only loose out on potentially one of the hardest players to ever play the game, but we will also go a very long way to loosing the faith of every MFC supporter who has been waiting for the day that Viney Jnr plays for the MFC like his old man. Can you imagine MFC playing a strong GC in years to come and JV ploughing our blokes into the turf and us lamenting what could have been? We talk about club culture, this is a perfect example how to set it, and get a gun son of a club champion in the process. In case the arm chair experts are wondering to be top 10 in even a weak draft means you have enormous talent. Mix that with innate skills like hardness and commitment - thats when you get the good AFL players. From what I've seen Viney ticks all the boxes.

Viney will be ours, i can only laugh at anyone suggesting we would not use pick 3 on him The kid will be the best player from tihis draft, not to mention he loves the MFC and would never leave us like for example, Tom Scully and Scott Thompson

True. Even if they are giving us a bit of spin, I trust Misson & Craig to get the list to the right fitness levels in time. They both have the runs on the board over a long period in the game with other clubs. There were a few positives I took away from the meeting. The introduction of combat training for our players is well overdue. All finals have an element of body on body combat so it's great that the club is going down this path. Also the type of player Neeld is looking for as well as the character traits to belong to the club, not just as a player but employee. He wants winners/competitors in all positions throughout the club. From my perspective the club is addressing the culture & genuinely trying to be the best. In regards to player movement I believe they will try to attract 2-3 premiership experienced players through free agency & also trades. Whilst I can't make comment on certain players discussed throughout the meeting, what I gained from the meeting is that we are in a predatory position to take advantage of deals, but will not pay overs. Don't be surprised if similar to what happened with Mitch occurs again.

Mitch Clark?

Footy is no longer controlled by the AFL. It is merely managed by it. The Game is now run by sponsorship, the chief sponsor is the TV, of which other media outlets are an extension of the TV sponsorship. Journalists are virtually owned by the media, hence the move from written journalists to TV performers. They protect the sponsor ship industry. The chief Media sponsor is supported then by the numerous other subsidury club sponsors. The AFL is merely an agent of the Sponsorship industry. If it thinks the commission is independent it is deluded. The AFL is totally depended on sponsorship. The chief supporter is the home viewer. They are the target of advertising. Hence the weekend timetabling of every match - wall to wall weekend TV football watching, to hell with the convenience of the regular attender. The faithful football attender/usually member is lowest on the totem poll. We are nothing other than emotional fodder for the home viewer and more importantly the TV sponsor, eg the closing of 3rd level Etihad stadium on smaller crowds, the seating of people behind goals whether they want to sit there or not. The best example is that of Grand Final tickets given first to Sponsors to give out round the office for that one game in September. Clubs get limited dregs. Treat the regular attender as a none entity and bingo the tide will eventually turn. I'm not surprised attendences are down WHEN YOU CHANGE YOUR CORE VALUES ULTIMATELY THERE WILL BE CONSEQUENCES. WHEN MONEY BECOMES THAT VALUE - IT WILL SHAPE THE ORGANISATION ACCORDINGLY THIS HAS HAPPENED IN THE AFL

Interesting - it seems odd to suggest that they were after none of them.After all the ho-ha about how we are going to go after players, who exactly is left when you take out that top tier? Surely they didn't raise $750k to go after Cam Pedersen and Shannon Byrnes....

I reckon he was totally wrong. At long last Melbourne had the balls to recognise they had a fundamental problem with the whole club and decided to do something about it. Rebuild from the ground up and not be satisfied with Band Aid solutions. I give them 10/10 for cleansing the trash or restructuring in all departments. This is exactly what any Business would do with 48 years of under performance. If only they could cleanse the trash from the media outlets. That would make a great Forum Title. Sheahan, Denman, Healy the list goes on.........

Probably a fair call. We plumbed the depths in so many ways from the death of Jimmy, to the Jurrah fiasco, the need to ditch a player/sponsor, the uncalled for false claims of racism against the coach, injuries, poor form, constant sniping from the media, the pathetic Brock McLean interview on Sheahan's own programme, the seemingly endless AFL tanking investigation while the same AFL refuses to look into the activities of other clubs on the same subject. On the other hand, now that the season's over there's only one way to go and that's up.

They can't, f/s bidding happens next Monday in which GC will still be in posession of pick 2. Viney can only go to Melbourne, GWS or GC.

Pick 3 for Caddy and I'm outa here

He came in to the side and was allowed to play a free wheeling style of game with no accountability and no pressure on his spot in the team so he got games when he probably shouldn't. On the other hand he got plenty of possessions so it looked like he was performing well when he really needed to do more. Different style of game now and his lack of accountability and inability to develop his frame have put his career on hold but you can see when he plays that he's really having a go he just doesn't have the physic to do what's required and his confidence has taken a huge hit. Put him in the forward line let him kick some goals let him get some confidence and see how he goes.

Would Bud suit Neeldys game plan? Would he fit in with our culture, and be under our cap?

I've listened to the interview and he said nothing of the sort. He said we'd take him if we thought he was the best available at pick 3 and it depended what would be available at the first live pick, which would be pick 2. Report what you hear, not what you think someone means. And fwiw, I have zero doubt we'll take him.

Thumbs?

I expect that Collingwood have picked up Lynch to play the Leigh Brown fwd-ruck role and let Cloke and Dawes resume their successful 2010 roles. I expect Dawes to stay at Collingwood.

Stuie is not going to make it to the end of the month!!

As much as I joked the other day about Dawes physique he suits Neeld's structure. I'm somewhat ambivalent as to whether we go for him, or not, but comparing him to Martin is comparing apples and oranges. Martin is a better ruck than forward - and he's no great ruck - and Dawes is a key forward who at 24 is coming into his best years. Martin's problem is that he'll only ever be an OK ruck and never a decent key forward. Dawes is no world beater, but he has displayed good form on occasions as a key forward. We shouldn't readily dismiss a key forward that has a premiership medallion hanging around his neck who's about to enter his prime.

Haha yeah so it would be Caddy for either: -Pick 13 or -Petterd plus pick 4 Lol

As if, they've had months to work that one out. They know exactly what they are going to do, although good on him for muddying the waters.

This competition is getting VERY uneven, VERY quickly. Melbourne must feel like the ugly chick at the school dance.

I've been raising this issue every few weeks for about three months. To recap - 1. By allowing clubs to recruit players outside the exchange process and not giving up any draft picks of their own, the FA system creates a 'super-incentive' to recruit through this method. How much would you pay extra to get a bonus first round draft pick? 2. The wealthier and better resourced a football club is, the more desirable they are as a destination, obviously. In a player's mind, how much pay would you be willing do give up for an extra $100,000 each year spent on your development? 3. This end result means that the less well resourced clubs actually need to pay more through their salary cap amounts to retain players targeted by wealthier clubs, meaning that over the medium to long term it will actually be the clubs LOSING players who find themselves under salary cap pressure. In effect, it costs them more to retain an 'equivalent' playing list. 4. As the process compounds, the stronger cubs increasingly dominate the upper half of the ladder, and weaker clubs spend more time at the bottom. Which of course creates a whole additional incentive for players to leave the weaker clubs, and a downward spiral develops. Basically, the free agency rules as they stand are just about guaranteed to wedge apart the gap between wealthier and poorer clubs, and that widening will proceed faster and faster over time. Guaranteed. So, Melbourne has to get two things right, and fast. 1 - get that footy department well resourced and well run 2 - go hard at free agency ourselves, to get the maximum advantage before the rules are corrected (hopefully they will, I'm not keen on a dysfunctional league)

Not all of us are with Jen.

I am with Paul Roos FA is going to kill weaker clubs as players understandably seek some success, those to go will be mature skilled players needed by the weaker clubs. Really is a disgrace there is no hope of levelling the playing field. Draft picks wont do it because the younger players wont be playing in a mature culture. It is sad to see. Port will be the first to fold.

Back on topic: I think what the game tells us is that Neeld is onto something in theory. But coaching isn't judged solely on theory. it's about making it work and that can only happen if the players buy in and put in. Honestly I think there was only one way Sydney could have won on the weekend and they pulled it off. That shows they followed through and worked hard. I've never seen a team tackle like they did on Saturday. There is 25 examples of extraordinary tackling. We don't have a list of hard workers like the Swans. That team committed to competing at every opportunity. We showed all year that we didn't want to do that. Part of it was buy in - it was obvious that some players didn't want to do it Neeld's way (Beamer) and it only takes 1 to not do it before 4-5 don't do it and it breaks down massively. The other part is execution and I think we don't have the midfield numbers or experience yet. The unfortunate thing is that the club also lacks the leaders required to pull everyone up to that level. It's going to take extraordinary on and off field leadership for us to get to that level.

also, crowds down DUE TO STUPID START TIMES LIKE 315 145 etc etc

There was some detailed explanation as to the reasons why they weren't interested and I've refrained from elaborating but it all made sense. To give you some food for thought - Goddard would have cost 8% of our salary cap and he's 27/8. Neil Craig coached Knights so would know a bit about him. Does anyone think we need another KPD and what do you think of Pearce? That's all I'll say.

Obviously he couldn't name his journalism as the biggest piece of crap for the year so it had to be us.

What a great supporter he is!

Spot onOne of the best TEAM efforts I have seen. No strutting "superstar" who can't kick straight from a set shot under pressure. Just a hard working TEAM who know they can rely on one another in a crisis. Well done - emulate that and we will (well, most of us) all be happy here.

I disagree - I think he has been a very good player and the general of our backline. Will be very sorely missed if he leaves.

Poor Brock. He is just the dumbest kid in the class trying to get his mates to like him. The more he tries the further they and everyone else steps away. This new era of social media is challenging for the I.Q deficient. So give the poor dumb bastard a break will ya.