Leaderboard

I've changed the title to accommodate the fact that Gerard Healy never was, is or will be a Melbourne great. He left the club for big coin from Sydney and was a part of the Sydney team that was humiliated by Melbourne in a semi final in 1987. That's how I like to remember him - a mercenary in a losing finals team. He might have won a "Bluey" and might have been a Sydney "great" but he's done nothing to inspire a feeling in me that he was a great of our club and to use that adjective in relation to the person demeans our club.

Yeah....Someone like Mark Neeld....?

Gerard Healy has never done a thing for this football club, he is a Swans man through and through.

I truly hope we have put out a generic statement to all player managers: Would you like to earn double your current salary AND get an extra month off in September every year?

A very reasonable post again and a welcome contribution. You certainly don't give off the impression of someone purely sticking to principles on this subject, and have clearly thought it through. Kudos. A few points which come to mind: - I doubt anyone is claiming that Neeld took over a picnic. I am however of the opinion that the situation has worsened, significantly, since Neeld took over, through poor decisions both on and off field. Clearly there were issues to which you have alluded, not least of which was the dearth in leadership. This in itself is something for which there is no easy fix, though your post seems to assume that the captaincy appointment was the only move that could have been made. I doubt many could honestly say that the Trengove appointment has been shown to be a correct decision. Quite the opposite. It would appear no-one has benefited from it, least of all Jack himself. And I don't for one minute buy into Neeld essentially washing his hands off it by claiming it was put to a vote. He's the coach for heaven's sake. Selecting the CAPTAIN is one of his most important decisions of which he must take ownership. - The loss of Rivers and Moloney - a huge chunk of games experience walking out the door. For what reason? Both have provided a pretty clear indication it was due to an inability to play for Neeld. His defenders on this site will point to this as a positive, citing Moloney and Rviers as being representative of a poor culture that preceded Neeld. In the scheme of things, this is irrelevant. They are human beings, and they have talent. A good senior coach would have been able to achieve their buy in as SENIOR players, no question. Neeld had the opposite effect, resulting in both seeing their only option being to walk. Moloney in particular is certainly not free from blame, but both his and Rivers' absence has hurt us, and for that, Neeld must be held accountable (note I am not disregarding the impact of the J Mac decision under Bailey, which was a stinker). - I think to attribute the form of Garland and Jones to Neeld is a little too convenient. I'm not discounting it, but the form of the vast majority of the list points towards it being more likely that these players are simply coming into their prime, Jones in particular. - To single out the Freo and Gold Coast games is essentially washing over other performances which have, on the whole, been completely unacceptable at AFL level. Granted, Gold Coast showed against the Hawks that they are a much better side than they were last year, but this does not absolve the team from the disgusting lack of effort in that match. Which leads to the next point which you raise...who is to blame for this absence of the fundamentals? - I am not for one minute saying all for this is Neeld's fault. Clearly the playing group have to take an equally large degree of responsibility for what is happening. But the buck stops with Neeld for good reason. As senior coach he is the one providing the instruction and motivation, which on the footy being produced has been a monumental fail on both counts. Players look lost, constinually second guessing themselves, and simply unable to move the ball on quickly which is so important in the modern game. Over the weekend I witnessed players simply not running in the first quarter. The FIRST quarter. It was almost unbelievable to witness, and it is inexcusable because it can not possibly be a fitness issue. It is either a misunderstanding of the gameplan and not knowing where to run, or a basic unwillingness to try. After 18 months at the helm, this to me can not be defended because this MUST come down to Neeld. We're not asking for miracles here. We're asking for something remotely resembling a cohesive, competitive side. He may be an absolute gun coach for a developed side, but for a developing side, he clearly is not. - If Neeld is somehow able to retain his job after the Bye, following thrashings at the hands of Hawks and Pies, am I to assume that your view will be altered if we are put to the slaughter by St Kilda and the Bulldogs? Having watched both of those teams a fair bit, I can't see us getting close to either one. I just want to be sure that I understand you when you say those matches will be "the benchmarks of our progress", because I know there are some posters for whom no loss will be too great to covnince them, or at least to admit, that we've got the wrong bloke leading us out of this hole. You seem a reasonable guy, so am I understandfing you correctly that failure of these tests would see an alteration in your view on Neeld? - We all know the lines being fed to the footy world. "We're in a rebuild of a rebuild". "It is what it is". Right now, we are accepting of the state we're in because we have to wait it out while the players build up games' experience. That's what we're told. We have to accept being legitimately and statistically compared with Fitzroy on its last legs, having our brand massacred and mocked by the entire country. Reduced to complete and utter irrelevance. We have to accept it, because "it is what it is". I say that's crap. It doesn't have to be this way. No club has to be brought to its knees like this in the name of a rebuild. The time for a statement has come, and that statement is we do no accept the football being produced, and we will move heaven and heart to bring the person or persons to this club who are capable of restoring it to where it once was, and utilising the talent on our list to its full potential, of which are are only seeing a shred.

Melbourne great Gerard Healy? Melbourne traitor Gerard Healy.

WTF? I am not concerned about the players who appear to be incapable of making an AFL career. Every team has them, but I admire their work ethic and their "want" to get better, even if they are fighting a losing battle. It's the ones that are capable that need addressing. The line of "I want to play finals before the end of my career so I will look elsewhere", that doesn't sit with me. You think you're good enough to get a game with Geelong or Hawthorn? Why don't you start by playing to the best of your ability with the MFC first. The Moloney saga last year was satisfying for me. Great example of a player who thinks they can do what they want because they are a "good" player, have a person (Neeld) challenge them, they sulk, think they can get a walk up start in a better/higher/successful team, make it known well before the end of the season about their intentions, then all of a sudden when push comes to shove, only 1 team wants tehm, and it's a team that is not much better off than us! It gave me great pleasure to see that unfold for a player who tried to hold my club to ransom. Out of "the" 3, only Frawley will get snapped up by a top team, but not all in the Top 8 will take him on because of his professionalism.

This is what annoys the hell out of me LS. For decades we have had the players dictate what happens at the club, and as soon as someone comes in and tries to change that mentality, they don't "buy in" and it's the coach that cops it. I'm not saying the coach should stay, but the players shouldn't escape charges. They are as responsible for the state of the MFC as the coach, president and board are, but are the ones that avoid any level of accountability being placed on them.

Who on the Board are there for personal gain. I know two Board members and they are not there for personal or financial gain and certainly both would say they would definitely not "gained" anything by being a MFC Board Member. Both are there because they like many Demon supporters actually believe that being a supporter means assisting the Club by any means that they have. That may mean by volunteering handing our scarves, organising Club members interstate or imparting valuable business skills they may have. The position of a football Club Board is an honorary position with no financial remuneration. Would you put yourself in their position. The Club has faced many challenges over the last ten years or more. More so than probably any other club. Some of those have been by our own making, some not. Some of those challenges have been exacerbated by the AFL's decision to bring in the two expansion Clubs at a time when the lower Clubs were struggling to improve. It was always going to make the Club's job all the more harder. There have been poor decisions made by the Club over the last decade, by previous CEO's, Boards and Football Departments. The current Board's decision to continue CS tenure was flawed. The current Board will and should face the same scrutiny but there is a time when that should happen and that is at the end of the year. In the current state of the Club it would be too destabilizing for the Board to stand down and anyone with any business skills would understand that concept. (I would doubt that half of the current Board will want to restand given the tirade of abuse it receives from supporters.) We now have a functioning and experienced interim CEO who has no previous connection to the Club and who is now privy to all that is wrong and right with Club. Let him make the recommendations that are required. Don't pre-empt what is going to be I believe the most important course of action ever to be taken by the Club. The result of the next six months of this Club's life could mean my children and grandchildren will or will not have a Club to support.

What I reckon needs to be done is to hire a Roos or a Matthews to come in as a consultant for the rest of the year to complete a thorough and clinical assessment of the list from the inside. They would need to watch them train and play - both afl and vfl, talk to them and give their report to the incoming coach next year. Meanwhile, the caretaker (whoever that is) could concentrate on freeing up the way they play now - so they can stop looking like trauma victims every game.

Moloney was on AFL 360 the other night. To be honest, WTF was he doing on there in the first place? It seemed like a McLean/OTC style fix up, but Moloney was too stupid to realise what he was saying. Basically, he felt Neeld didn't have faith in him, and in return, Moloney didn't have faith in Neeld. Then, I think he even admitted that for a part of the year he didn't act how he should've (can't remember his exact wording, but basically he cracked them). Now, for a start, Neeld was an ex-midfield coach at a strong club. He would've put endless amounts of time analysing opposition midfields, so for Neeld to come in and not "have faith" in Moloney tells me how much other clubs rated him. This is probably further supported by the fact that 1 solitary team wanted him when he decided to leave, and from all reports, it wasn't until late in the FA period that he received an offer. I have to admit though, I'm staggered to think that any player hasn't bought in to Neeld's ideas. WTF not? Reality check players - this bloke was hired as your coach, your boss. In the real world, you do what your boss tells you to do. Instead of p!ssing and moaning about what is wrong, why not look at what's right. I don't know of one AFL coach that would've been hired with no intention of winning a flag, so why not just do what he says? Also NSC, you made reference to the 3 newbies that have been brought in to the midfield. I think a couple of these players indicate what sort of p!ss weal attitude some of our other players have got. I refer to Matt Jones and Dean Terlich - arguably in our Top 5 for the year. These blokes are first year players, who have had no option other than buy in to Neeld's plans. They are rewarded for their commitment by playing decent footy. Why is it that we have 2 x first year players who were taken at cricket score picks, that are in all honesty playing well above where they should, yet there are players who were there before Neeld arrived that have gone backwards? Tells me more about those players than the newbies. Give me a team full of Matt Jones and Dean Terlich every day. Not the best footballers going around but they give 100% and importantly, you know they have no hidden agenda.

Isn't this just great, the brother of the guy on our board responsible for the football department making big statements on our coach. Is this inside knowledge or his opinion? It is unfair to Mark Neeld to judge him on the next two games, even if we are playing our best footy Fremantle, Hawthorn and Collingwood are 10 goal better teams. The fact we are playing bad footy makes these clubs 15 goal better teams, the fact that we have 5 starting 18 players out just adds to this. Can Mark Neeld coach, no idea, will we ever find out no because he is in charge of the second rebuild, if this season was our second year of a rebuild Neeld would not be under this pressure, was Bailey in his second year, from memory we were 1 and 10 mid year and happy for our club to lose to get the priority pick on offer, the fact is we have lost patience to be 6 years into a rebuild and have a worse list than we started with is extremely upsetting. Is this Neelds fault no way, we got our drafting and trading so badly wrong since 2007. He has nothing, 1 AFL standard midfielder that is consistantly at AFL level, 1 only, how can any coach win games with 1 midfielder, unless Sylvia, Trengove, Viney, Toumpas, Blease, Grimes can lift there consistant out put to be AFL standard midfielders our team will continue to be smashed. We can't expect to much from Viney and Toumpas this year but the other 4 need to drive our midfield forward. I don't want Mark Neeld sacked, I want to find out if he can coach and this won't happen till the back half of this year when we get Clark, Grimes, McDonald, Sylvia, Viney back in with hopefully a fully confident Blease and Toumpas, playing mainly against teams that will be bottom 8.

Equally as sad is that if they do put in a winning performances after he is sacked what does that say about the players.

Neeld must coach out the rest of the season. Our chance for the finals has dissapeared already so the only thing that Neeld has to do is play games into the players that he believes are the foundation of the club going forward. When he came on board and cleared out Bate, Morton, Pettard etc i'm sure most Dees fans (myself included) went "great, finally he's clearing out the decks." When he said "hardest team to play against" even i wen't 'not for a few years buddy." When he talked about training standards going up about 30% in 3 years most of us went "my god were we that far behind?" What is the major concern for this supporter is the lack of a game plan. It seems that the players are told to play within a 5 metre line of the boundary line. Too often there have been times where the team finally decides to go down the middle and what do you know...we score! We've tried to play man on man but we don't have the fitness to do it, we've tried to play the zone but are too fragile mentally to execute it. The players are clearly confused between going up the line towards a fast lead coming from half forward or kicking to a player running laterally towards the boundary line. For some reason as a strategy we are deciding to hug the boundary line to slow down the contest and minimise any chance of turnovers due to the limited space. Yet with this limited space you need fast hands and footy smarts to not only hit targets running past but win the ball in the contest .We don't have that either short of nathan Jones and an emerging Jack Viney. In short we need another a-grade midfileder. What it comes down to is just letting the players play, see how they stack up for the rest of the season and make the decisions then. There is no benefit sacking due to the fact no-one really wants our senior coaching job (unless someone knows something) and we have abunch of kids that need games put into them. What i think everyone is missing is the comment from McClardy when he said Neeld had "cart blanche" to change the club culture. To me that comment sums up everything wrong with the club. A culture in an organisation has to come from the top, not from a first year coach. Neeld never stood a chance.

The Marxist Strategy By Fat Tony Like the Bulldogs have embarked on under President Peter Gordon, the MFC needs to start encouraging the AFL and the AFL Players Association to look in the mirror for an answer as to the current state of the game. The many systemic faults in the game are sending poor clubs to the wall and are fast leading to the competition that is permanently uneven. This is a travesty, as Australia’s ‘fair go’ culture won’t stand for the AFL evolving into an English Premier League, which only maintains any relevancy due to relegation system and the reward of European Cup/Champions League qualification. I fear that once the genie is out of the bottle there is no turning back. While our fixture is ultra friendly from a ‘winning’ point of view, it is horrendous from a commercial standpoint. Putting aside the pitiful football we are currently playing, the lack of free to air TV exposure reduces our ability to attract sponsors and members and will see our supporter base quickly dwindle over time to a point of irrelevancy. The AFL is obviously looking to maximise its TV rights deal, however short-term profits will come at the expense of poorer clubs and will ultimately see the total size of the pie decline. The introduction of expansion teams has clearly hurt the poorest clubs at the bottom of the ladder. The cream of the draft has been taken by GCS and GWS. And they have also clearly targeted the weaker clubs for their uncontracted mature recruits. The introduction of free agency has also obviously hurt the bottom clubs. Key players have left clubs such as Melbourne and St Kilda for greener pastures, while other players have moved to successful clubs despite being offered more money by elsewhere. The AFL also needs to look at players successfully manipulating the draft by nominating contractual terms. The ability of players like Luke Ball and Kurt Tippett to get through to top sides highlights this issue. Players are also weakening the poorer clubs in the trade period. The Brian Lake trade to Hawthorn for less money and the Chris Dawes’s trade to Melbourne for twice the money he was on at Collingwood are both examples that highlight this issue. Furthermore, Josh Caddy wouldn’t even entertain playing for MFC despite the fact that he would have had greater opportunity and earned more money here. The AFL also needs to stamp out third party deals like the Judd/Visy contract, which obviously subverts the intentions of the salary cap. The AFL Players Association needs to be called out for its incredible hypocrisy, wanting to see all players given equal chance of success no matter where they are drafted, yet pushing for higher salaries (and maximised TV rights), greater flexibility in moving between clubs and the allowance of third party deals. It is a ‘cake and eat it too’ stance and the AFL PA is really letting down its members at the poorer clubs. One idea I think we should propose is a change to the salary cap system whereby the salary cap reduces for the clubs that finish higher the year before. Obviously the AFL would have to ensure that the cap is fully paid by all clubs. This would help reduce the incentive for players to leave the bottom clubs for the top clubs. An example of the sliding salary cap is shown below. Premier in 2013 - Salary Cap in 2014: $10,000,000 2nd - $10,100,000 3rd - $10,200,000 . . . 17th - $11,600,000 18th - $11,700,000 I feel the AFL should also look to promote club loyalty and could also consider weighting the salaries lower in the salary cap for one-club players. (i.e. loyal players are weighted as 0.9 in the cap.) Of course, the MFC would need to tread carefully in pushing for greater equality measures, as we could easily be accused of biting the hand that feeds us. (Particularly given our draft picks/tanking history.) However, without changes like this to the system we will be dead anyway. I fear for the club unless we adopt this strategy and I am not convinced that Peter Jackson will be the person best equipped to take on this fight. While I am certainly glad to see the back of Schwab and I am happy Jackson is there at present, I am not sure whether he should be a long-term appointment given he has come from within the AFL.

Grant Thomas or Malcolm Blight . When the going gets weird ,the weird turn pro. H.S Thompson.

Look, the girl probably didn't know what the connotation of 'ape' is. But it is an epithet and her ignorance shouldn't save her. No person has to put up with racism, even if it is perceived, the person should know why what they said was so hurtful. Goodes handled it all well and so did Eddie. We move on.

I am interested in why people believe Paul Roos to have such an ego? He subscribes to the Buddhist philosophy, where there is no place for ego. Don't confuse confidence and honesty with ego.

If this was English Football it would be Northey, Barrassi, or Daniher to take over as caretaker... Different worlds. The coach in 2014 would have to be Eade, Williams, or Ratten. Bassett gets huge wraps but I don't think the MFC will handle another rookie coach. We will see.

It would be interesting to dangle a carrott at The "Chemist" Worsfold. We need to poach someone. Stand up & not take the leftovers. Worsfold aint perfect but he would toughen them up. Wet Coke train so much harder than us we are told last night. So get him over East. A challenge.

I hate this revisionism re: Port. 'Pinched' a flag? They were minor premiers three years straight before winning a flag, and had an awesome list. Josh Francou is probably the most underrated player of the modern era. Mark Williams will have to do something very different with the hopeless list Bean and Nark have assembled.

Now hang tight just a moment. Without pointing the finger at individual posters here who have changed their tone now, it's common knowledge we all felt a coach with a harder edge was necessary. Mark neeld came with not only glowing endorsement from mick malthouse and several senior collingwood players and staffers. The board then put an invitation to Neil Craig to join under the role of general manager of sports performance.. Neil Craig had offers from Brisbane, collingwood and Richmond, yet picked the role with Melbourne as the most succinct, but also the greatest challenge. We then poached Dave mission as manager of elite performance. Add to that the array of experience assistant coaches and line/development coaches, its disappointing to sit here and read quotes from posters that the board is responsible for the current uncompetitive situation which the club finds itself in. There isn't a supporter who could currently say they are happy we are 1-8 with a average losing margin of 75 points and a grand total of 6 quarters won from 36. There isn't a supporter that would say they are happy with every article about the club containing words "pathetic, rabble and irrelevant". Don't sit here and think that players don't care, that coaches don't care, that anyone involved with the club on game day doesn't care that we are so uncompetitive at this point. Do many posters here understand the hours players put in just to make it on a list? It is a fallacy to think they would do that, just to get on a list and be content with 90 point thrashings. For all WYLs rantings its only because he is frustrated with where we are at, GNF for all his doomsday talk it is equally because he is frustrated with where we are at. Rhino, jaded, young dee, old dee; the list goes on. We are all frustrated that we aren't in the top 4, that we have been smashed on and off field this year, but we must hang in together. This club has had too many splintering factions over the past decades. We can't let Supporters and members leave the club or not go go to games in protest. I apologise for this post getting emotional, I'm as frustrated as the rest of you guys.

We all know it goes back to the sacking of Norm Smith

We are failing dismally because we don't have a midfield, that's what it comes down to. It is the worst group of midfielders I have ever seen at AFL/VFL level, I challenge anyone to come up with another. Now, for the sake of this discussion, who's fault is it? First of all let's look at the players we've lost. Scott Thompson: Go home factor at a time when the club was reasonable strong culture-wise, nothing we could have done about it. Moloney was a decent return, but we lost out on the trade. Brock McLean: Bailey has to wear this one, although at the time Brock wasn't going well and the future was uncertain. Pick 11 was a good get. Tom Scully: Left for $6.6m over 6 years, how can you compete against that? The question remains though, would he have left if our culture had been stronger? nfi The club has done well out of it though, Scully is just a vanilla mid. Morton & Gysberts: Delisted and traded, they wouldn't have made a difference at all. Brent Moloney: Moloney would be pretty handy right now, not sure why the reasons why left but on face value it appears to be at the root of our current issues. Different players I know but when Boak was all but gone to leave Port they moved mountains to get him to stay. We took a different path. Jack Trengove: I only put him in here because of the decision to make him captain. I'm still unsure of the effect it's had on his development, his injuries have made it hard for him to perform. Individually the losses haven't been that bad, it's only when you add them all up that it becomes a problem. Recruiting or development: Bothhave been [censored] ordinary. We've constantly picked up the smokies, Lucas Cook being a good example. Hearing Morton talk about how he trains now is not surprising at all, but the fact remains that we have continually wasted our top picks, the effect has been disastrous. List management: Do we have it? Club culture: [censored]. I think we've sucked at almost every level, from the President downwards. I think the problem was much greater than Neeld ever imagined and he's tried to fix it but went about it the wrong way. I Still believe he's putting in procedures that will be successful in time however he's contributed to our problem by not managing the ego's of the players well. The solution is to get good midfielders by either FA or trade because it will take too long for our kids to mature, but convincing talent to come to us now is going to be bloody difficult.

NOBODY knows how to fix it, but there will ALWAYS be those who say they do. They don't. They're guessing and postulating. Somebody in charge however will employ general good management and get lucky with timing as the MFC ship begins to right itself, who knows when, and then be attributed as the reason for the improvement. For all of the supporters and the media who imagine everyone at the club is doing everything wrong, they need to grow up and see how ridiculous this vulture like frenzy for sackings and dumpings and change for its own sake is. Exactly how much influence do people think Don McLardy has over our current on field performance? Pretty close to f***-all I'd say. Perspective is needed far more desperately than the blood mania the modern media drive.

My point was what difference does it make - the coaches attitued Bailey - soft = we were [censored] Neeld - tough - we are [censored] People need to accept where we are as a club - as I posted above There is hope there - I wish I had 'on the couch's graphic' where they showed 12 - 14 solid players to take us forward - but [censored] me most of them were young or injured....We've got 2 weeks of crap ahead then we can really see how good of a coach Neeld is - and if he [censored] up the last 10 weeks then let's [censored] him off All this dramatic chest thumping to sack everyone is not going to solve our problems short term....... People just want change to make themselves feel better and give themselves hope. We can't even run a club properly - A footy club is run like a company - the board make decisions and run the place - supporters/media = owners and have no say in decisions but just watch this [censored] weak club fold to pressure - and that right there will see the MFC be a laughing stock for ever If the owners disagree wiht the board they get voted out - and someone else takes over - so my example here is that the owners (us members and the media) are dictating the direction of the club I don't care if you agree or disagree with this - that is the basic fundamental of operations People say people are leaving the club - thanks for stating the obvious - I wonder if they realise people will return when someone has the balls to do the hard work and turn the club around. People love success and unfortunately we are so far away from it and have been for years when someone actually attempts it they get fired half way through a job they were hired to do Just listen to that muppet the bald one - on AFL 360 (the chief writer at the Sun damn i've forgotten his name) regarding Neeld he says he should be sacked - something has to happen now Scott Watters is on the panel and he starts blabbing on how Waters inherited a list and dosen't understand how people don't get it a coach needs a few years to rebuild Right there is the stupidity that is dictating the direction of our club - media pressure will force our clubs hand I guarantee it - we are a [censored] weak club and always will be No matter how right or wrong you think Neeld being coach is - the board need to make the decisions based on their inside knowledge, evaluate consequences and plan ahead strategically - sacking Neeld right now stinks of [censored] weak administration. Fire him at the end of the year once the season has played out and we have the total picture.

I've been as frustrated as the rest of you with the performances this year, but after each big loss which at the time seems unexpected, I find it useful to sit back, remove emotion from the equation and consider the lists and clubs who have handed us the latest belting. The two that stand out in most people's memories are the Gold Coast loss, and the Freo game. The first two rounds were obviously also very hard to take. However, upon reflection I think we are underrating the teams that are giving us these beltings. Firstly, the Gold Coast. They have now beaten all four teams that are also in a rebuilding phase (GWS, Melb, Dogs, Saints) and pushed the premiership favourites only to go down by just over 4 goals. Upon reflection, do I think we were favourites for that game based on a list comparison....hell no. Our experienced senior players do not hold a light to there collective group of Ablett, Bock, Brennan, Rischetelli, Brown and even Hunt (in terms of approach to the game). Secondly, our young developing players do not compare to their group. Now onto Freo. Going into this game, they had just drawn with Sydney on the SCG while undermanned, they had also just beaten Collingwood by just under 5 goals with a depleted side, and sat 4th on ladder despite all their injuries. In short, they are a bloody good side. A top 4 side now, and probably for the rest of the season. So should we be surprised they belted us...probably not. But the reality is, that it's the perceived "lack of effort" that is killing us as supporters, and making our team harder and harder to watch. But is the lack of effort of Neeld's doing??? The more I read, the more I listen to what the players are saying, the less I believe it is. Originally Neeld said the club was 3 years behind the level of fitness required to play AFL football. Here's a simple thought; if a player is not fit enough to play against other AFL players, they are not going to catch them in a chase, they are not going to be able to run out games, and their skills will not be at the same level for as long as the fatigue earlier. I just noticed this article about our good mate Cale Morton about his time at West Coast so far (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-05-27/cale-morton). If anything, it highlights how right Neeld was with his comments about the fitness of our players, and the lack of leadership within the player group. Leadership that obviously wasn't coming from the senior players like Moloney and Rivers, who were present when Neeld came into the club. So let me paint a picture of what Neeld took on when he accepted the head coaching position. When Neeld took over this club after Bailey's tenure, he took on a list that had kicked out it's best leader, Jnr McDonald, and said goodbye to good clubmen like Yze, Miller, Robertson, and Bruce; lost Tom Scully due to financial incentives and (if Scully is to be believed) concerns around the leadership of the veterans on the club list; had training standards and fitness levels that would take 3 years to fix; had a core group of young inexperienced players that had never experienced an environment with real AFL level standards before; and a history of poor drafting and insufficient investment of funds into player development; but he took it on with an aim to turning the club around to become "the hardest team to play against" within 3-5 years. Now, some people seem to think that this can be fixed within 18 months. I think that is unrealistic. We have a team bereft of leadership, which is why we have two of the youngest captains in the history of the game. We have also said goodbye to some senior players during the last offseason and gotten younger again. We are now in a position where we have the 2nd least experienced team in the league. However, the foundations are there for change. Veteran players recognised as good clubmen, who are recognised for their attitude to training, as well as some seriously talented Key Position talent, have been recruited. Byrnes and Rodan were two such players recognised as good club men, who were brought into to help mentor the player group. Clarke and Dawes have been recruited to provide us with the most promising Key Forward combo this club has seen since the Neitz and Schwartz years. Players have been recruited to fill roles, and some good mature age recruits have been brought in to bolster the ranks (Pederson, Magner, Terlich, Couch, M Jones). All the while, some seriously promising young talent has been recruited (Toumpas, Hogan, Viney) while games have been poured into our developing list. Some players have also shown a new level of consistency not previously seen (N Jones, Sylvia (some may disagree on this one), Garland, Grimes) under previous coaches. There are a number of positives, to go along with the negatives. Some say blame Neeld, some say don't, blame the players instead. I say, the problems lie largely in the past, and have contributed to the poor practices that our current player group have displayed. Why, because when you look at everything that has happened, our club was a basket case before Neeld took over and changes were needed to turn it around. Those changes are currently being made, and I believe that we will not see the improvement we are all craving, until next year. And when I say improvement, I simply mean that we will jump over the Saints and Bulldogs on the ladder while holding off a developing GWS. But we shouldn't expect much more than that, because that's just not where we are at with our list. Many on here will disagree, and many will say, BUT IT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!. It may not be good enough for where we WANT this club to be. But we are where we are for a reason and I do not believe that the big improvement will come until next year, and the year following. For me, the benchmarks of our progress for the remainder of this season should be when we play St Kilda and the Bulldogs, two clubs I believe to be in a similar transition period to us, but with a better group of experienced leaders. Those are just my thoughts on where we are, agree or disagree I don't care.

Thought it was really awesome to see the Suns signed their young gun mini draft pick Jack Martin to a 5 year deal last week, Obviously they see him as cornerstone of the club going forward, and have huge confidence in the kid, I would love to see the Demons do the same thing with Jesse Hogan. If Martin is good enough for a 5 year deal already, then Jesse is good enough for 10. Hogan is the kind of player build an entire team around. I wonder if he would sign on for 5 years at this stage? Guess its hard to say.

The next two weeks are our last chance for a decent earner so all those disenchanted supporters of ours must roll up to face the Hawks and Pies. Our home games this year are a disgrace. Only these next two weeks offered any prospect of a windfall. Look at the rest of them: Port Adelaide, GWS, Gold Coast, Eagles, Saints, Dogs, Swans, Freo and Norf (at Etihad!). Of those, only the Saints offers a break even prospect unless Demon fans stick fat. Tough as it is, get there this week and for QB for our club's sake.

What no Daniher!

You know as well as anyone that Carlton were crippled by salary cap breaches in that period.

Thanks, good for a chuckle! Pagan at Carlton 2003-2007 22 wins from 104 games

Because you gift 72 games to a spud like Cale Morton and all of a sudden he becomes Superman when he ticks over the 100 game mark. FMD I used to scream at that and the "post of the century" on the 'other' supporter site. Its insane to think that games into players by itself is what separates a good team from a bad team.

Agreed, thought it might have been Range Rover. And the floggings will continue, but i feel any change of coach would be as much about satisfying the disgruntled playing group and members. Things cant get any worse on field IMO

I wondering that myself... Smells like Range Rover-type nonsense... And I am afraid the floggings will continue post Neeld. Just a warning.

Most of the board an co. will go. This has very possibly been the worst managed club in the history of the AFL/VFL. Now Fitzroy did go under but they just couldn't continue with their supporter base and debts. We finally got our club out of the s*it and somehow our Administration team pulls us right back down. I want to see a board and administration who aren't just focused on their own personal gains and rather that care about the football club. For too long we've had segmented leadership and backstabbing all for what? These peoples egos have brought this club to its knees and its absolute crap. If I had the experience and know how I would go for it but really I wouldn't know what it takes but surely there are people out their that will know how to properly run a business/football club.

With respect to the delusional people you are staggered with - they don't exist... So feel better.

I get the feeling you want to say something Stuey Spencer I know my opinion is not the popular opinion - I know Neeld has dug his own hole, but I also firmly believe Neeld is out to change this culture and turn this club around - It hasn't happened in the first 18 months - we are playing a lot of inexperienced players or kids, this is going to take time, we have a soft draw for the last 10 games - that will answer for me if Neeld can coach or not. The board have inside information and know the direction, we already know 2013 is a write off - What I want from this club now is a CLEAR direction. Fixing this starts at the board level they need to decide if Neeld is the man, they need to support their blue print for this club or fire Neeld..... and when they fire Neeld we should fire them for putting this club in this position...

Will that happen in two weeks time will it? That big name coach will rock up middle of the season? You don't have to go to the games but don't boycott the f___ing club... How is that not self-defeating?

Oh please. Ok will have to take your word for that - I don't understand why he wouldn't be pumping games into guys like these though if they are going to be part of our future, nothing like learning on the job. Surely they'd have to be better choices than some of the guys who keep getting games.

I go to support the players out on the ground every week, whether they win or lose. Old fashioned? Boring? It's just the way I was taught to support my team.

We had 1 AFL standard midfielder playing yesterday, only 1, Trengove is cloase to making that 2 but needs more consistancy winning the footy. No team can compete with 1 quality midfielder. We play 4-5 small forwards that can't run through the midfielder, only Davey over the past 2 weeks has shown that he can spend time in the midfield, Jetta, Tapscott, Byrnes, Bail, put us four players down straight away, they don't impact the game on any front they don't give us forward pressure, they don,t impact the score board and they are unable to go through the midfield. The issue is at the moment we have no one to come in and have an impact, no one is ready for next week. We can bring in Fitzpatrick, MacDonald and Toumpas but the is card shuffling and will not make us more competitve. I feel sorry for Mark Neeld, he may be a good coach but he will never find out, he has got the worst midfield group in the AFL by an absolute mile. Give him the year, after this week and the bye week we start to get players back, Sylvia, Grimes, Clark, Viney, McDonald, these players do make a difference the last two are still young but are better than anything else we have. We have 5-6 games against bottom 8 clubs in the last half of the year, these games should decide Neeld's fait.

Moderators, surely we cannot have well reasoned and measured posts like this on Demonland. Off with their heads.

That is so wrong, It insults me and others on here who have supported this club, been members of it and been there through all the bad times. We have parted with our hard earned mate. In my case I have been a member for 43 years. I say that for no other reason, but that it is fact. Any supporter has a right to expect their team to give something back. More importantly, we feel for the players. We don't want our guys suffering in the way they must be right now. Do not ever accuse me of not caring bout my footy club. It is because I care so much, that I want to see the changes which are necessary. Fellini - Satyricon (1969) More at IMDbPro In first century Rome, two student friends, Encolpio and Ascilto, argue about ownership of the boy Gitone, divide their belongings and split up. The boy, allowed to choose who he goes with, chooses Ascilto. Only a sudden earthquake saves Encolpio from suicide. We follow Encolpio through a series of adventures, where he is eventually reunited with Ascilto, and which culminates in them helping a man kidnap a hermaphrodite demi-god from a temple. The god dies, and as punishment Encolpio becomes impotent. We then follow them in search of a cure. The film is loosely based on the book Satyricon by Gaius Petronius Arbiter, the "Arbiter of Elegance" in the court of Nero. The book has only survived in fragments, and the film reflects this by being very fragmentary itself, even stopping in mid-sentence.

The OP is both right and wrong. Neeld is not the sole problem. Those who suggest otherwise are being too simplistic. However, Neeld is definitely a source of our problems. He cannot escape liability for his poor game-day coaching, his poor PR, his poor player selection, and his apparent inability to implement his gameplan or instil confidence. Let's not howl down the OP for showing support for the coach. But, Dr M, I don't think it's correct to absolve Neeld of all blame.

That's it, we are calling for our team to do the basics right, the only problem is these are meant to be the best players in the country, not junior footballers. When I watch the top teams play I feel as though I am watching a different league or division.

We have a serious issue at the club. Due to some highly dubious drafting practices over a number of years, we have a list f players who largely fall into two categories. Hard nuts without skills and skilled players without guts. There are a few players with both qualities who are trying to carry the team, but simply put not enough of them. This leaves us with a dilemma. Do we play the hard players who will fight for the ball, win contests and then turn it over, or do we play the ones who will use the ball really well but can't win a physical contest and so will be smashed at stoppages and in traffic? At present, we appear to be taking the former tack and playing guys who will contest for the footy but who have very limited game sense and skill. It's clearly not working. What do we do to fix this? Again, there are two avenues. Firstly, we can try to get the skilled players to be harder at the ball and the hard players to think about what they are doing and use it better. Secondly, we can call the majority of the list a wash and trade/delist them and start drafting pure footballers who won't shirk a contest and can use the ball. The first option has a chance of delivering a degree of success in the short term, but I don't think we can get either group up to the standard they need to be to compete at the top level. The second option basically admits that the bulk of the list is a wash and starts again, setting us back at the beginning of "the rebuild" and requiring us to do it all over again, but it may in time deliver us a better result. One important point here would be the ongoing issue of a lack of senior players, since they would likely desert in droves if we followed this path.

Like any Big company. We need the right people running it. Top to bottom. Massive clean out. The List of players are not this bad. They are not great but can be salvaged.

IMO the club should give him a 2-year deal and then let him walk. It's the Melbourne way!