Leaderboard

this thread sucks get behind the club, stop being so negative, give neeld his time to make a difference, if at the end of his contract it has been a fail then move him on, early days

The one thing that I find to be a major inconsistency in some of these arguments about Neeld losing the players etc etc, is that many of the players have come out and shown how they support Neeld and Garland even recently complimented Neeld by saying he was coaching better than ever. To think that the reason we are still struggling is solely due to Neeld being unable to coach is just rediculous. By making such a statement it completely disregards the lack of support and strength in the footy department pre-Neeld but under Bailey, it also completely underestimates how bad the culture may have been and how much a change/shift in culture was required. Such things can not be done in a short space of time, and if you also consider what has been said by the coaches and players alike regarding the training standards of the club pre and post Neeld, it is obvious that the club faced an uphill battle just to get the players at an AFL fitness level. I also find it unlikely that successful AFL types like Neil Craig and Dave Misson would continue in their work, given they are obviously well regarded in the league and would be sort after, if Neeld was an absolute basketcase and they felt they were wasting their time. Just because some on here are getting annoyed that we are still losing does not mean that Neeld has gone about things the wrong way. Out of the players that have recently left the club, only Moloney and Petterd have been playing regular games. Stefan Martin is still getting injured and playing as above average athlete with below average skills. And for those criticising the game style being implemented, watch the Craig report video, and the passage of play highlighted as the way the team wants to play makes me think of teams like Sydney and St Kilda (under Ross Lyon), who constantly harass and pressure the opposition to win the ball. All of us here are naive, myself included, about what is actually happening in the club. None of us have all the information, and to just say "sack the coach" based on perception while also disregarding relevant information is rediculous.

i'm a Neeld supporter, but i will be honest and say that this rumour has somewhat excited me a little.

Just exactly how many paying clients has the MFC lost during Neeld's tenure? Membership numbers appear to be going along at a similar rate to last year, sponsors have come and gone and come again as is perfectly normal. He was given the brief to fix things and as we all know, he is at the halfway mark of that brief. As I said earlier, by adding a couple of high performing mids at the end of this season, plus possibly one more defender, we will start to look like a real team. Let him complete his brief and then see whether he is up to it or not. There is NO quick fix when it comes to the issues at the MFC and the fast-food, want-it-now approach will not work. I've been following the Dees for 55 years and am quite prepared to wait for them to get it right this time.

I wouldn't care less who ran the MFC if we were successful.

I doubt this will ever happen, but my god I will weep with joy if it does.

I agree there's speculation Ron but we're not going to get anything definitive on an open fan forum. Some have sources and some sources have more credibility than others. We can observe what happens at training and on fields and extrapolate. But unless you're on the inside it's impossible to really know if Neeld "has lost the players". Which really means important players to the club's future want to leave. This if true would be the key reason to move on Neeld in the short-term. We don't know but those inside the club should know. Edit: I've heard from sources I consider credible and seen on-field performance to make me very concerned.

We lost two good players the rest where duds Rivers - wanted to play finals, fair enough. Moloney had a sook like a five year old cos the coach said he had to work on his defencive game.

What kind of loser tweets out their own blog entry about a BS rumour that everyone involved is going to deny? Just astonishing.

8 months ago, we employed a guy with outstanding credentials. He had a great name within the profession, his references were glowing and his previous and demonstrated results, outstanding. We were absolutely rapt we could land a candidate that we thought would have been able to name his own price and get a job with a much larger firm. Within 4 months of being with us and despite the fact we bent over backwards to vary our practices and processes, he is gone. His productivity was minimal, he had an adverse affect on employee morale, upset a number of clients with his gung ho demeanour and the revenue he generated was well below budget. So what happened? Maybe it was our fault. Maybe we did not provide a working environment to his liking, maybe we didn't provide him with a vision he could share. That accepted, we believe he just held that his way was the only way. He was not flexible enough to adapt to our way of doing business. That we had to cut him loose, did negatively affect our business, but that was short term. We are back tracking where we should be. His replacement does not have as high a profile, but their results are 65% better already, than the bloke we thought was a gun. The staff are much happier and our workplace is a much nicer place to be. Things like this happen and it is regrettable, but we run a business and we had to fix what was an obvious problem. These things happen unfortunately, in spite of our best intentions.

I don't think McDonald has gone backwards, his disposal has always been very poor, I just think people's expectations grew.

' ... the longer he stays the worse the discontent within the player group.'Some posters here continue to assert this - but what exactly is this based upon? I'm not trying to be a smart arse here, although I would really like to know where this is coming from. If it's purely outside speculation, that's fine. If not though, I'd just like to know what the underlying evidence for such statements is - and, if it is actually based on something, what exactly it is, who exactly thinks it within the player group, how serious it is and how exactly did it occur? Ie, please provide some facts ... Edit - iPad typo

Nothing! Melbourne fullforward,, watching play down the other end

There's a lot that's bothered me when watching the MFC in recent times, much of which has been covered by the members of this forum. Making it worse is that our team's weak and insipid performance is characterised by a weak and insipid clash uniform. To me it's akin to the royal blue we wore in the 70s and 80s - another era associated with a lack of success. Given that we must have a clash strip, I would love for the club to wipe the slate clean and come up with something that has far more presence. I note the Dogs are now wearing red, which we had been told wasn't an option when creating a clash strip of our own. Given that precedent, can we revise the option of simply reversing our traditional jumper?

Can someone explain to me what I am missing with Tapscott?

1) Actually, I thought the Carlton game was one of the first time's I've been able to decipher our gameplan. Perhaps that's because I took the emotion out of it this week? Our zone was working the majority of the time. The times it failed were a result of abhorrent skill errors and lapses in concentration (that I'm certainly not excusing). Our defenders were sucked into the contest a few too many times and goals resulted out the back. We have to be smarter about how we attack certain contests. I was merely happy finally seeing endeavour from our players. Week by week it becomes clearer RE: fitness. This is the biggest hamstring, outside of disposal and decision making, that our team must deal with this season. The zone seems incredibly taxing and they will not be able to sustain this consistently this year. But all I want is endeavour all year. Every week, every quarter, every minute. 2) And Trenners doesn't have OP. This was my opinion last year. I think it's his workload in the legs. He's lost some yards, because of the last two pre-seasons. But his seeming dedication to training and preparation tells me he'll make it. The skills at his disposal, along with his professionalism, support this.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

If i had one left I would

oh really yeah i'm sick of seeing dane swan and gary ablett languishing at Casey get real

On the basis of the some of the comments posted here, I take it the following is rubbish and not to be believed ... Frawley - article on the official MFC website: Having been through plenty already, Frawley said he hadn’t seen his team as tight knit as it is at the moment. In fact, Frawley said he was “proud” of the resilience shown by his teammates under adversity. “After a great pre-season, all the boys were full of optimism and hope,” he told melbournefc.com.au. “It’s been a tough six weeks, with one win and five losses - but that’s the good thing about this group, the boys are staying pretty positive and upbeat and they’re looking to get better and improve as a group. “We’ve been pleased with how the group has responded to week to week situations – as a group and as a club.” http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2013-05-08/frawley-focused-and-firmly-on-his-feet

The telltale sign will be when we say we're 100% behind the coach. At that point and not a moment before, will he be gawn ...

'fledgling club'? Wonder what that makes all those other clubs that aren't 150 years old.

It's relevant because we had to continue to run a profitable business, take care of all stakeholders, not just one and at the end of the day, ensure our paying clients remained on our books. Just how relevant do you want the point to be? By any measure, Neeld has failed to reach the brief.

Just once, I'd like someone to support the claim that the players are discontented with Neeld with some evidence rather than speculation and perception.

The Bombers have done a wonderful snow job to date with the Ziggy Report, a report paid for by the club and produced by a fan. Better to have had an independent report done or better still, waited for the ASADA and ACC investigations to be completed and for the facts to come out, surely? Perhaps they can commission someone else to do a report when that happens?

Shannon Byrnes was pretty terrible on the weekend I'll give you that, but he was one of our best against Brisbane and has been for most of the year. You don't drop your senior leaders (or anyone for that matter) on the basis of one poor game. That's a recipe for "in again, out again" shenanigans that totally disrupts your team dynamic and cohesion.

yes, yes yes. I understand. i'll stick to words, and leave the gifs for particular impact where required. So yes, from now on mostly words for TSFKA... Sooo umm... how's those...dee's??? umm...sack...that Neeld? Watts...won't..i mean.. will...no i mean won't...no will...yes will make it!...? Ummmm...well...ahhhh...be right back! *runs out the door, slams it, and a car is heard starting and screeching away*

He is better than Howe every day of the week and twice on sundays. He is better than viney and will be for 2 more years. He is better than clark because he can stay injury free. In terms purely of performance he is better than all on your list. Now ask yourself how many key backs we have at the club and how many mids. If we lose him we have no replacement. If neeld has lost players and the players are not just being ultra sooks, then neeld goes. We cannot keep losing experience and talent.

finally someone who knows what it takes to rebuild the club, the Culture, & the lacking development tools.... the environment around the club, the attitude about the club, & the 'leadership abilities' of the more mature players. this Is Why our youth push came unstuck, & we haven't really been very successful at developing young recruits over the last 20 years, & certainly since the turn of this century. ... after about 2002, our culture went very South.

I agree this is not the time for knee jerk reactions about the coaching position but the jungle drums are beating. I like your approach and it resonates with me because it reminds me of another time when everybody seemed to be baying for the blood of one of our coaches. I might be digressing a bit but, as a club we were in a sad and sorry state in 1986 when John Northey took up the coaching mantle. The Barassi five year plan had seemingly gone awry and although we started off well enough under Northey (but we lost the night series game against North Adelaide!!), we fell into a massive mid season slump with regular defeats in excess of 100 points. Carlton beat us by 116 points at the G, Essendon by 122 points also at the G and we copped a belting from Sydney by 124 at the SCG. Even wooden spooners St. Kilda (who only won one other game that year) thrashed us at Moorabbin by 52 points. I remember leaving VFL Park Waverley after another devastating defeat at the hands of Hawthorn (about 11 goals) and the supporters outside the ground were calling for Northey to be sacked. Then something unusual happened ... Former Hawk Don Scott was a commentator (3LO I think) and, as I was driving home, I expected him to come out with a scathing attack on the club. Instead, he actually complimented Northey and the way he was coaching. Said he had a purpose in what he was doing and he just had to drill that into the players. He felt that eventually the players would get it right and improvement would come quicker than people might think. I was gobsmacked and personally thought Scott was nuts but twelve months later, we clicked as a team and went deep into the finals. I know the cirumstances are different today and Melbourne did end 1986 with a fair number of wins (mostly against fellow cellar dwellers) but, to overcome numerous debiltating morale defeating losses and 12 months later beat North Melbourne by over 118 points in our first final in 23 years was something to behold. I don't think you're nuts AOB but, after seeing Scott's prophesy come to fruition all those years ago, I reckon you just might be onto something*. * if not we're really stuffed

I would sack him now because I've made up my mind on him and I think keeping him will further hurt the club. That decision is based on his entire time at MFC. But Old55 put it very well before. We are making a judgement from the outside which is unsatisfactory/limited. I'm glad Schwab is gone as his job and McLardy's are (were) to some degree linked to Neeld's. If both were still there they would have been tempted to keep him partly to protect themselves. Jackson and others are free of the appointment and can act without self implication. I'm happy to follow Jackson's call and trust his judgement. IMO a win on Sunday will keep him on life support, a loss and the hand will be moving towards the off button.

So how and why is this relevant? Neeld was employed to do a job. He was not employed to continue the culture of adapting his processes to suit the demands of existing personnel. His brief was to shake things up and implement change. It's what the board wanted. It's what the club needed.

I think it's a completely false to decide whether a coach stays or goes based on whether the players are playing for him. It should be based on results. Wins/loses, individual player improvement, success of game plan etc. I spoke with some players after Bailey left. The universal answer was pretty much "if the coach isn't picking you then you don't like him. If he is you do." Just because the players are playing with spirit doesn't mean they are doing it for the coach, they might just be doing it for themselves.

I think we need to also look at mechanisms around "mass exodus of players who will leave at the end of the season". We have two players eligible for FA - so they are at risk of leaving. Players out of contract - ("Carlton are into Watts big time") - sooo once you are out of contract you dont have free choice to go where ever you want. If Watts wants to go to Carlton - if we want him to go - Carlton have to deal something we want for him to be guaranteed to get there. We can tell him to get stuffed and enjoy yourself at GWS as they would probably have first crack at getting him if he goes into the draft. That is the problem that players who are out of contract face. Players in contract - we have all the say whether they stay or go The only players we lost last year that we may wanted to have kept were free agency footballers and they didnt work to hard to keep Moloney as I dont think the coach wanted him. So this nonsense about a mass walk out of players is just that...a nonsense.

Would it have been too much to ask on the weekend to wear red socks against a team with only blue socks? Totally moronic. The redlegs are just as important as the traditional guernsey.

This is an old article, TD. We have previously discussed this. With that said - I will repeat: I don't care if isn't feasible and shoudn't be done. Let's sell it and worry about logistics later. This would be the thing that allows us to thrive. We would turn breakeven games at the G against interstate teams into $500k games in an area we are trying to convince to be financial members of the club. We could build a social club out there and for those that don't want us to have pokies - having a boutique stadium to mirror what Geelong has is the only feasible option.

People say a lot of stuff here, and then seemingly influence others to form quite strong views based on that information. Quite often, I don't trust the underlying information which is reported. For instance, many seem to contend that Bailey was loved by the players and Neeld is not. Here are a few things that perhaps counter the universal view that Bailey was loved. 1. I spoke to Stef Martin at a Debt Demolition Dinner a couple of years ago. He told me, to my face, that many of the players, including him personally, hated the boring, tedious weekly regime that Bailey imposed on the player group, and that he regarded Viney (as caretaker coach) as a breath of fresh air. Martin said it was like going to a school class room each day under Bailey - it didn't feel like a 'footy club'. 2. I also know that Junior McDonald had a massive issue with how Bailey broke the news to him that he was not going to give him a contract extension. I understand it was on the flight to Adelaide before the game against Port in round 21 of that year. Not great player management IMO - particularly given that Junior then had to go into the sheds and rev the players up for that game shortly afterwards. 3. Scully. Even though we all know he left for the club money, it has been widely reported that he thought the football department and culture lacked discipline and wasn't sufficiently professional, and that this also influenced his decision to leave. Convenient line to adopt perhaps, but I expect there was some truth to it. Hence, my request for facts re: player dissatisfaction under Neeld now. I want to know the reality, not base views on pure speculation and poster bias.

I gave up trying to do this, it's better for your sanity.

And then they let officials wear orange against GWS!

almost as much as the Watergate-house affair,, where theres money, theres managed outcomes. & behind the scenes, expensive silks & private threats. smooth it over as the organisation is more important than people & the truth. the organisation is everything, just ask your local bishop.

Most improved - probably Evans but he hasn't played many games to really compare with, so I'd throw Garland, Sylvia, Grimes and Tappy's names into the ring Backwards - Tom McDonald, James frawley, jack trengove, Surprise packet - Terlich, matt jones, Evans

I think the AFL has gone overboard with the clash strip anyway. It should only be used when two teams with similar colours play against each other. It should only be so that players and umpires don't get confused with the crush of bodies around a ball, who did what. When we play someone who has a completely different uniform, say Collingwood, we shouldn't be wearing it. The same goes for all the other teams. I like to see teams in their 'traditional' colours, not some silly thing they wear for every away game. Another stupid idea to chalk up to the AFL.

The point is we have already lost good players because of MN - time to turn the club in the right direction!

Hang on a minute so we sack a coach to keep a player??? wtf... Maybe the player is finding it to difficult to adjust to the culture change. So what happens when a new coach come with different ideas, another senior player says f thst im outer here Come on.

What are we all arguing about again? I forget...

I think you mean short sighted, reactionary and impulsive. Just what the club doesn't need at the moment.

I am with AoB here - nothing I have read on here these past few weeks has convinced me that letting Neeld have until at least July/August of this season is such a disaster. Caretaker is beyond worthless. If you worry about playing under a 'lame duck' then a caretaker only confirms it. He isn't half way through his contract and we have a 5 day old CEO on an interim basis. It's a big decision and one that looks like a fait accompli right now but that we don't need to happen tomorrow. I am sorry, but this just does not need to happen tomorrow.

In case it has slipped your attention our Brand is worthless at the moment and part of the reason for that is we are getting flogged week after week and our club is, a joke. Now when a club loses credibility it loses members and sponsors, attendance's fall and our draw is compromised; we lose all chance of getting a draw that will attract supporters the following year. I'm not sure if it's escaped your attention but we are unable to get our hands on the ball in matches and our skills are abysmal, so I guess the coach has to accept some responsibility for this. We are worse this year than last, despite the coach saying at the commencement dinner that we will improve and much quicker than anyone thinks. We are worse despite his money ball idea of recruiting players from other clubs to show the other players the way on the field and at training, three of the four he recruited are now playing at Casey and they look like they'll be there for a while. The coach admits publicly after the first game, we never saw that coming; wtf why didn't he, he's the coach he should have known what we have at the club. In over 50 years of watching this club play I would say this is one of the worst sides I ever seen, and this is a side and a list that Neeld has said is his. What do I expect of a new coach; let's start with more competitive side, it couldn't get much worse. I'd like team that could not only take the field but could actually get a kick or handball and preferably when they did, the ball would finish up in one of our players hands, not the oppositions. I'd like a coach that didn't ask the media at his press conference what they suggest he does, I'd like to think we would get one that had a bit more nous than that. I'd like a coach that had a bit of credibility and could walk in and immediately gain the respect of the playing group. I'd like a coach that would reconcile the playing group so we wouldn't have to worry about losing any player with 8 years or more experience. I'd like a coach that knew what positions to play his men. Unlike you I'm not too keen on seeing the team get flogged every week just so we can keep the coach happy and in the vain hope that he will eventually get the idea how to coach an AFL team. Now what about you tell me what you expect from Neeld and how it's working out for you at the moment. What do you expect for the remainder of the season, how many wins do you think it will take to satisfy you that he's done a good job, and how many wins do you expect him to the get next year. Finally you obviously don't think or performance on the field is doing us any harm so how many losses in a row and how low does our % have to go before you do?

Hi. First post. I'm from Geelong and so have followed Neeld's career for a while. Melbourne supporter for 45 years. There was a moment after the drawn Grand Final when Neeld was the midfield coach (I think) for the Pies. A minute or two after the final siren, the TV coverage was zooming in on players and coaches in shock, trying to deal with the fact that they had another week to go. The camera then panned past Neeld and he already had his midfield group in a huddle and he was busy preparing them for the following week. Meanwhile Buckley, Malthouse et. al. were falling about looking helpless. I said to myself then that Collingwood would win the following week... If you track his coaching career, he's had nothing but success. 4 consecutive premierships at Ocean Grove. He turned Western Jets from perennial whipping boys (could barely win a game) to finalists in three seasons. In between he was at St. Josephs in the GFL for a year and he completely turned over the list and went with youngsters but then was offered assistant positions at Bulldogs and Collingwood. Wherever he's been he has won friends and made enemies - because he is clear about what is needed for clubs to be successful and he just goes for it. Players liked him at Collingwood. He identified a soft culture at MFC - a whole host of players who were just happy being AFL players (win, lose or draw. He's given them a chance to show that they want to win and those who haven't shown enough have been shown the door. There'll be more. Not exactly a recipe for making friends. I sense (I don't know) that there are still players who are dark on him for having lost mates from the club. For Neeld, he wouldn't care less. His job is to find a group of players who will work hard together to become successful. That's my take on him. He's made mistakes but he won't die wondering. Stick with him. Give him his three years. On Sunday I saw a far more competitive effort by a group who were hopelessly outclassed and still low on confidence. We need another go at the draft table for Neeld to assemble the kind of group that he'd be happy with. Leave him be. Support the club. When the wins come, enjoy them.

Re-posted Mark Neeld has appeared to have correctly identified the appalling long term lack of appropriate "culture" at Melbourne and is dealing with it as his major priority as senior coach. Melbourne has not had real leaders (or indeed leaders amongst its senior players) since the early days of the Daniher era. Daniher oversaw the change of senior players from Lyon, Tingay, G & B Lovitt, Viney, Stynes, Walsh, Ward, N. Brown, M & S Febey, Leoncelli and Ingerson amongst others to such as Bruce, Green, Wheelan, James McDonald, Robertson, Neitz, Johnstone, White and Yze. Of the latter group I would only put Wheelan, Neitz and McDonald as being worthy successors but am of the view that Neitz and McDonald did not have the personality to impose themselves on the playing group and while they were terrific footballers who gave their all for the Club, could not translate this to ensuring that those young recruits who followed learnt to give what they gave as footballers. As a result of the overall lack of strong personalities the playing list became lazy and self-centered. I am not convinced that anything like the splendid "culture" existing at Geelong and Sydney could become part of the Melbourne ethos, or that Neeld's approach is the correct one to bring it about. However, the steps he is taking appear to be logical and realistic. I am certain that if this remedial work is not performed, this Club is going to remain about where it is until it folds for lack of interest. If whose who scream for the immediate appointment of a new coach are successful I accept that in the short term we may win a few more games over the next couple of years, however, without the change in culture it is currently undergoing, the Club is doomed to mediocrity. Unfortunately, this cannot be brought about in a few weeks, or even one season. Of those who were delisted last year, I noted real gnashing of teeth by supporters over only Rivers, Gysbert and Moloney. To suggest that Melbourne had a greater hold over Rivers than for example St. Kilda had over Goddard is not realistic. Rivers has taken the opportunity to play with a team with a famous culture, discipline and which has real hopes of immediate success. All strength to him. Stan Alves and Greg Wells did the same with varying success decades ago. Gysbert was sadly a victim of the Club's lack of ability to develop young players of promise, which is in part the immediate problem Neeld is attempting to deal with. While our drafting may appear extremely moderate over recent years, how many of those chosen who have not realized their full potential would have succeeded at other clubs? Moloney to my mind is one of those at fault in continuing the toxic culture and if we are to improve long term, he had to go. Brock McLean is an example of the point I am trying to make. At Melbourne he became noted for doing wheelies in the car park and getting into fights outside drinking venue's. I was delighted when he left. It has taken some years and it now pains me greatly to admit that he is playing excellent disciplined football. It would simply not have happened in the team he left. Further to the suggestion trumpeted by his critics that this is Neeld's team, therefore he must take all the blame, it remains the fact that 25 listed melbourne players at the start of 2011 are now on the senior list. It will be much closer to being his team after the draft this year, if he remains in power. He has however recruited a number of players from other clubs who are now roundly ciriticised. I believe this is criticism without consideration to the real reason for the drafting of many of them. Clark is probably the AFL recruiting coup of the last two years. He provides real on and off field leadership. A perfect mentor for such as Jesse Hogan. Dawes is an intelligent and articulate leader coming from a strong club. His excellent article in the Age set out his understanding of Neeld's focus. Again he is a leader on and off the field (I say that having followed his career with interest at Collingwood). In his one NAB appearance the whole forward line seemed much better structured. Byrnes is a (multiple?) best clubman winner at Geelong. Again he brings his experience to the club and in my view has also provided good leadership on the ground. Roden is also an excellent trainer and apparently a personality about the Club. He is there to teach because there are not many others who can (and hopefully play a bit). Each of the above were picked up for far more than their football ability. Of the others, Sellar was probably a Neil Craig pick and has played some solid games in defence. Gillies comes from a team with a great attitude and was good enough to play 13 games for Geelong (although I haven't yet seen why) and Pedersen also comes as a senior player with experience at another Club (although again his on field performance has been underwhelming). Only Clarke of this list may be/become an A grader, however, each of them do far more for the Club in the terms of what they bring on and off the training track than a few young late numbered draft picks who would quickly become culture victims (or retaining Moloney, Gysbert, Morton Bennell et al). They have mostly been chosen for the short term in their own careers, but for the long term good of the Club. Without their potential influence I would despair (even more) about the future of potential stars such as Toumpas and Hogan. If all Neeld does as our senior coach is to bring about enormous and vital changes in attitude at Melbourne, he will to my mind have been a success. He must be given at least to the end of this year and probably to the end of the next to cement changes, otherwise I fear we are doomed to spend the rest of its existance supporting a team at the bottom quarter of the AFL ladder.