Leaderboard

John So is my bro.

The one thing that concerns me the most at the moment is that this club will once again exercise no proper judgement and make yet another epic mistake in relation to a significant decision (ie, in relation to Mark Neeld, and the way in which any termination may be announced and any transition will then be undertaken). In this regard, some of the suggestions for a replacement coach I'm reading here at the moment are laughable in the extreme. In fact, some of the suggested replacements are just plain stupid. They won't result in ANY positive outcome for this club. At all. Hence, the club cannot afford to react in a knee jerk manner to this issue, much like most of the media and some of the supporters here tend to. Quite simply, it is far too important an issue. Now, more than ever, is the time for the club and its supporters to remain calm, allow the club to conduct a measured and intelligent review/assessment of where the list and the football department is at, and, if the review tells us that Mark Neeld needs to be replaced, conduct an AFL endorsed process to identify and select a new coach. What troubles me however is that won’t happen. Why? Because this club has an unenviable history of exercising poor judgement and emotional intelligence in recent years in relation to delicate issues. Off the top of my head, some examples of poor judgement/limited EQ include: 1. Neeld comes in, treats the incumbent leadership group with absolutely no respect, publicly embarrasses certain players in the media (eg, Watts), runs down the quality of the list and the previous fitness regime, and marginalises most of the senior players (eg, Green, Moloney, Davey). Poor judgement – we paid for this (apparent player dissatisfaction). 2. The way in which Bailey was dumped was poorly handled by the club. It also resulted in various comments being made which seemingly led to the media driven 'tanking' investigation some three years after the club had been cleared of it by the AFL. Poor judgement – we paid for this (almost $1M in fact). 3. Bailey’s decision to dump Junior a year prematurely, and the way in which the news was delivered to him (just prior to the Port game at the end of 2010), was poorly handled. Poor judgement – we paid for this (no senior leadership). 4. Bailey’s decision to prematurely end the MFC careers of the likes of Robbo, Yze and White (and possibly also Brock McLean in retrospect) – and not to play some of the senior players who were still clearly in our best 22 at the time – revealed poor judgement (see 3 above – and 2 re: Brock McLean). Point of this being: If the decision is made to bring in a new head coach prior to the end of the season, it MUST be handled in a way that is sensitive to Mark Neeld and in a way which doesn’t fracture the player group and cost us plenty of money unnecessarily. Whilst it seems some of the senior players have, or have had, an axe to grind with Neeld, I expect plenty of the junior and recently recruited players have strong loyalty to him. Surely that's obvious. The club needs to be aware of this and very sensitive to this fact. So MFC - please don’t stuff this up so as to temporarily appease: (a) many in the media whose interests aren’t aligned to ours; and ( B) a body of restless supporters who simply want to see something done, even if it ultimately proves to be the wrong thing. As an aside, I’m not sure Mark Neeld would agree to it, but perhaps there’s some utility in honouring his contract (saving us $$, saving him face and hopefully maintaining player unity) and appointing him the senior assistant midfield coach reporting to a known and respected senior coach of the ilk of a Roos, Matthews, Worsfold, Williams or Eade?

Who made the decision to put Lyon on the coaching selection panel? McLardy, Schwab and Stynes. They are admin. Schwab was sacked because he was no good and he approved tanking. That has cost us an extraordinary amount. No amount of criticism of those in charge of our situation "over the top". We are where we are because of them.

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

The main reason for low crowds is not the competition. Please stop deflecting blame. Melbourne was pulling 40,000 to the 'G in 2004, 2004 in games against West Coast, Adelaide, etc. The reason is that the team plays an insipid brand of football.

The guy is coming off a limited preseason and had 20 possessions @ 93% and 2 goals. Was far from our worst. In fact if a player at another club did that there would be a thread as to why we didnt draft them. People need to get a clue.

Thats the question we need to ask ourselves. We all know the team is crap, the coach looks like getting the arse, a number of players may or may not be looking at leaving or requesting to leave and we are headng for a fnancial disaster. But what can we do as loyal passionate demons supporters? 1. Turn up and pay you money and barrack. The players need support and the club needs the money. 2. Walk away like I do angry [censored] off and wanting blood but dont vent to to club receptionist, coaches players or other employees, they know and they feel the same way. You can vent on Demonland thats what its is good for. 3. Accept that Jackson has come in with a mandate, is an experienced and intelligent adminstrator and let him do his voodoo and support the decisions moving forward. 4. Continue to bag Scully over the boundary line and any other low life chicken hearted peice of [censored] who deserts this once mighty club in its hour of need. 5. Look to the future with a forward line of Clark, Dawes and Hogan and a bigger stronger Viney tearing up the midfield.

Thanks, Nineteen. You, and your cadre of selfless Demons, are a reminder that this club is not the coach of the day, the performance on the weekend, or the Admin that writes the cheques: you are the salt of the Earth that preserves the club. Well done.

As most know I was worried about this Board, the CEO and the coach quite some time ago. Having said that I didn't think it was this bad. For these reasons and the fact that I didn't see it as a sustainable business model I didn't become a Foundation Hero but I have supported the club for over 25 years and I hate to think of the amount I've put in over that period. The Foundation Heros are a group of generous MFC supporters who eliminated the club's debt, their contribution was significant and the single achievement of the Stynes/McLardy Board. They have been remembered at AAMI Stadium (as I understand it) and were promised success and professional management of the club and their contributions would be the cornerstone of a new era. But reports in the press that we are again unprofitable and heading into significant seven figure debt must be distressing to them. Much of the loss is being attributed to AFL fines, legal fees and payouts of contracts of CEO and potentially the coach and others. All of these expenses were avoidable with sound and sensible management which they comprehensively failed to deliver. I know that there are a number of Foundation Heros who read and post here and I'm interested in their reaction to our situation and whether they would again help the Club out of this position. For my part I'll continue to contribute in the way I do because the Club is much greater than a bunch of misfit administrators and because what I do is within my sustainable business model. But this administration should know that my ongoing support is despite and not because of their effort. Frankly I'm angry and appalled at how they've trashed my contribution. How do our Foundation Heros feel?

Ron we've won one game against a non development club since Neeld took over. He's shown no skills as a coach. His list management has been a failure. The MFC is a laughing stock. We need to act professionally but we need to act now even if it's appointing Viney or another FD person as coach until the end of 2014. To fail to act now would be as big a failure as the many you've listed.

Ralph, when you have some spare time, can you come around to my place? I have these pig things flying around my backyard and i need your advice on what to do

So, no?

I don't think we have "failed to choose a good coach" fitter, that neeld has a terrific history at ocean grove and collingwood shows the opposite. Dean bailey is an interesting one, maybe he was 5 years early with his method. I think it's more that we have chosen a coach who didn't fit the players we had on the list. Bailey tried to mould players with attacking flair who were on average taller and good on the spread, but at the expense of hard working defence and without the body density to be stron over the ball. Unfortunately when neeld has come on board, he has tried to swing too far towards the "100% effort" type player who competes hard, but unfortunately at the expense of the attacking playmaking style. It's all about balance, unfortunately we have swung too far in either direction. I genuinely believe mark neeld is a good coach, but with where we find ourselves now, I don't think he is the right fit for us. That said, I still think he has changes from the ultra authoritarian style he was, and now I feel he is a lot more of the trusting, protective style of coach. I'm lucky that through school, I'm friends with several players who are at different clubs around the country. The reason Sydney and Paul roos were such a great fit is because Paul protected his players, whether that was onfield or whether it was just his demeanour of dealing with players who may have been homesick, struggling with off field issues or whatever. Examples of that are something like having a player and family around for a BBQ, frequent calls or texts just saying g'day or offering encouragement or advice on issues from living away from home, lifestyle or development. For the same reason as that, I can guarantee you that collingwood is the exact opposite of that, with a lot less welfare or support and as such, why they are down a bit since Buckley took over. I still hope that neeld can turn it around, for the reasons I have mentioned. That said, hawthorn and collingwood games will show everyone exactly how bad they want him to stay on, or not.

Not surprising is it? Has been raised by many before...............Foundation Heroes an unsustainable revenue stream for the club. Apart from coordinating charity events, how was the previous CEO planning on growing the business? What a circus.

.

I love how people equate sacking a man with an 80-point average losing margin and essentially no wins against reputable opposition as a "knee jerk reaction". A "knee jerk reaction" would have been to sack him at the end of last season, or even after round 1 this year. Now it's just a formality.

The footy reporters are getting worse every year. The article failed to identify the main reasons for our poor attendances for home matched, we have played Port, GWS, Gold Coast, WCE as home matches with the GC at the worst time slot in the AFL season Mothers day 4.40. You replace that with our away matches Carlton, Essendon, Richmond, Brisbane and Fremantle and all of the sudden we average over 30,000 per game. The remainder of the year we have home games against Brisbane, Western Bulldogs, North, Fremantle, Hawks, Pies and Sydney The AFL have created a two tiered competition, the big clubs get the prime matches which equates to increase sponsership, attendances and the Corporate entertainment. Even a winning MFC team would not have increased our numbers by a great deal. Membership different story, the fence sitters would have not brought a membership based on on field performance and no one can blame them for that. One thing we do have which North and the Bulldogs don't are a lot of closest supporters they do go to the footy when times are good. I remember one year we averaged over 40,000 at our home games I think 2004 and for most of the ND years we have good crowd averages, winning brings out every supporter but our membership was lower than current levels.

Not keen on Laidley I know he had limited resources at North Melbourne but overall his tenure there was nothing flash. Matthews has been out of coaching for too long, the game changes so quickly since 2008 so not an option. We are better off targeting Eade and Williams both are still in the coaching system, both have the runs on the board! Eade- 5 Played Grand FInals, 4 Premierships, Coached at the time a basket case Sydney to a Grand Final and FInals series, Turned the Bulldogs into 3 Preliminary Finals, just missing out on a granny in all of them Williams- Played in the Pies 1990 Flag, coached Port to numerous finals series, a couple of pre season cups, coached port to the 2004 premiership 2007 grand final. Looks a bit more impressive than Laidleys cv

He was much better and effective on the weekend. It appears that Neeld has been focusing purely on the defensive part of his game, I can only assume to make him a more complete player. But I want him attacking, I want him to be the one causing headaches for other teams not trying to nullify opposition players. I also think, when it comes to his speed, it's fair to assume no matter what the club says about him he has lost some conditioning over pre-season due to his stress fracture. Hopefully a full pre-season next year will help him regain some pace. He was never a speedster, but I remember that Richmond game in 2011 where he was able to chase down two people consecutively and tackle them effectively.

If you say So

12 yes twelve volunteers turned up tonight & we complete all the clubs databasing at 7.30pm. What timing. And would u believe 26 MCC affiliate renewals at this late stage of the year. Tx to Steve G, Steve M., Geoff D., Peter, Daniel, Catherine, Julian, Sarah, Cheryl, Danielle & Trish. We ticked over the 600 mark of D2D sign ups at 6.20pm tonight. Trish wrote up that one. (Apologies came in in from Dave & Michael M - families before club - Tx for trying) Peter Jackson was in again & expressed thanks to all 34 volunteers who attend this year. It goes with out saying that volunteering D2D is not an easy ask right now, but the success of our group has put a big smile over the gloom that pervades the club. We are becoming a strongly bonded group & the club will now be counting on us in to the future. Fantastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

And some on here suggest boycotting games and memberships to send the players/club a message. Well the only message it sends is a white flag. I'll be there AGAIN on Sunday, as i have all season. Will you be?

Implement Peter Jackson recommendations. Sack Neeld at end 2013. Appoint Worsfold on 4yr contract Liam Anthony (NMFC) ... offer 3-yr contract and trade for Daniel Nicholson Aiden Riley (Crows) Matthew Jaensch (Crows) Todd Banfield (Lions) Shane Savage (Hawks) ... offer 3-year contract and pick #38 trade Mitch Hallahan (Hawks) Tom Curran (Saints) and priorities: Dylan Shiel (GWS) ... offer a 4-year contract and pick #2 trade Dion Prestia (Suns) ... offer a 3-year contract and pick #20 trade Sign Jesse Hogan to a 4-year extension. Sign Colin Sylvia for a further 3-years to end 2016 Sign James Frawley for a further 3-years to end 2016 Get POSTERS of Jeremy Howe printed and sent to all junior supporters I love this club. We are Melbourne. We will not be silenced. Unleash HELL.

Pennant st dee, your opinions have also proven to be failures.Jurrah, if managed correctly, would be the biggest star in the land right now.

Very slow for me. Matthew Bate slow.

I know some people see this as a joke, but this really was the beginning of the end for the club. Internal politics took precedence over onfield performance and we've never recovered. It set the standard for the next 50 years. And of course, it was the day the club was cursed...

No, you'd just need a bit of knowledge about the history of the use of such terms with racist connotations, or a bit of experience of it (as Goodes pointed out he'd had in the past). I'd expect a bit more understanding of the oppressive uses of language from someone calling himself Michael Collins, but there you go.

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.

We figure out what we would normally do . . . then just do the opposite.

He was a turncoat of the highest order and is a [censored] to boot. Won the B& F at the Dees in 1985 I think. Doesn't make him a great. Left and won 3 B&Fs at the Swans and a Brownlow. Imagine how we would have performed in 1987/88 with Healy?? I am still dirty on him. And he has taken every opportunity to pot us since.....

It's like talking to a brick wall. Racism in its European/American practices can and has been traced to the beginnings of the slave trade. Racist language was a tool used to dehumanise Africans, thereby functioning to legitimise slavery. That's not an argument it's a history. I wasn't in fact making any argument, I was referring to that history. And to refer to that history has nothing to do with guilt about it either. By defining racism as 'caring about' skin colour - a pointless and misguided definition at most - you completely miss the full and complex reality of the problem, but that's your choice. Don't impose that inadequacy on me. BTW other forms of racism have had nothing to do with skin colour. Check out the word 'barbarian' some time. It derives from the word the Ancient Greeks used for people who weren't Greek and it was supposed to describe the way they talked, nothing to do with how they looked.

Naive is probably too generous. Do you have any idea of the history of racism? Do you have any idea of the history of the language of racism? Words like 'monkey' used by a white person about a black person are used to degrade by suggesting that the latter is subhuman/primitive/'just down from the trees' and so on. Your description of George Bush as a monkey has got nothing to do with this, it's got nothing to do with the colour of his skin and it's got nothing to do with racism, just as a black person describing another black person as a monkey wouldn't either, although because of the specific history of the word there probably wouldn't be too many who'd choose to use it about someone else anyway. And no you're not trying to get at the fundamental question of racism at all. Trying to separate racism from the language and symbols and behaviours through which it's enacted isn't just naive, it's stupid.

I do feel cheated.

If each Demons member put in an extra $30 a year on top of their membership,that would give us an extra $1 Million a year. That's about 60 cents a week.

No So.

I don't understand why people think that getting a big name coach will just instantly attract bigger crowds. Carlton have got the biggest named coach in the AFL and their crowd figures aren't showing signs of significant increases. In some games they have actually gone down from last year, and we're only 9 games in to the season. I'm also concerned about this expectation of player buy-in. A majority of the playing group give me no confidence that this will happen - they've had 18 months to buy-in to what Neeld was wanting them to do, which most on here would agree sounded a lot better than what was previously happening. But no, our soft in the head, weak pack of bastards that pull on the red and blue each week do what they want and it costs others their jobs.

This announcement should at least highlight to you that the Coach is only part of the problem. He is a problem but he is not the whole problem. And we wont get a high calibre coach until we have all the necessary off field issues settled (re Board, CEO and clearing the ASADA issues. You need to get your head out of the sand if you think its a quick fix.

There was a thread last year where there was lauding of the Board and the business model when we claimed a profit of 80k based on the generous FH contribution of 700k. Those that exposed it as a house of cards and a faux indication of the financial "health" were beset upon by all and sundry with their varying degrees of financial ignorance Members and debt reduction contributors have every right to feel cheated by incompetent rubbish that has been served up over the past 5 years. The AFL needs to rescue this club before it inflicts any further damage on itself.

Our problems started long before this.

Cats supporters either said Gillies was a good player squeezed out of a good side, or didn't know much about him because he never played. He never played because Geelong's back line is star-studded. Pedersen did play good games for North Melbourne, and the same deal goes with him. Rodan's selection did not 'provoke mirth everywhere', that's untrue, but to the extent that people questioned it, that questioning was met with the fact that he was taken at 88 (i.e. no cost at all) and was brought down as much for his harder body and training standards than anything else. The same deal goes with Byrnes. Saying Moloney is better than Byrnes and therefore we made a mistake there overlooks the fact that Moloney wanted out of the club (for whatever reason) and we were powerless to stop him once he'd made that decision to due FA. It wasn't a decision of 'Byrnes or Moloney, who is better?'. It was a decision of 'can Byrnes add to Melbourne?', which was made independently of Moloney. I won't make fun of you for suggesting we should have taken Jordan Russell. Or Simon Buckley. But I really want to. As to Blease, he did not show 'a lot' last year, he showed flashes in amongst inconsistency and periods of lethargy and ineffectiveness. Nothing's changed. He is an inconsistent lazy player who doesn't work hard enough to build on what appears to be some talent, and until he does, he doesn't deserve to play AFL level football. That's what's happening.

You have to understand that WAYNE's a little backward.

Excellent post. The problems facing the club are multilayered, but the purpose of a football club's existence is to win games of football. We all understand that we are rebuilding. The signs that a coach is successfully implementing the build is incremental improvement (eg. WB, GC, Richmond). We saw it fleetingly between 2009-2010, before internal dissension and other factors saw it crash and burn very quickly. Under this coach we have seen a dramatic decline in form and a steady drop in effort and performance. He has asked fir another 12 months. If we had seen ANY improvement from last year, it could be thought about - but we haven't. Re how the team plays, I agree the buck stops with inept - and there appears no option but to stamp his papers and send him on his way.

A quick but lazy copy and paste from Wikipedia: Clarkson moved into coaching, first with Werribee in the VFL, followed by roles at St Kilda and Central District where he was a Premiership coach in 2001. In 2003 he became the midfield coach at Port Adelaide and forward coach in 2004. He was appointed his first senior AFL coaching role at the Hawthorn Football Club for the 2005 season, when the Hawks appointed Clarkson to lead their rebuilding phase. While his side could only manage five wins in his debut season, finishing 14th, 2006 saw the side improve, winning their last four games in a row and taking them to 11th spot on the ladder. The Hawks continued to improve in 2007, winning 13 games and finishing fifth on the Premiership table. This took them into the finals, where they defeated Adelaide in the Elimination Final, before being eliminated in the Semi Final against North Melbourne. On 13 May 2008, the Hawthorn Football Club announced that Clarkson had signed a contract until the end of 2011. In 2008, Clarkson took the Hawks to second place on the home-and-away ladder, before guiding the team to the premiership with a Grand Final victory against Geelong, a team which had lost only game during that year. In doing so, Clarkson became the first (and, as of 2011, only) coach to ever lead his sides to a Premiership in both the AFL/VFL and the SANFL. No he built his list - and he took them from near bottom to the top and has kept them thereabouts. A great list sure - but it's his list.

What a sad list.

Really, we drafted Toumpas, Viney, M Jones, Kent and Terlich, plus Barry, to me that is 5 mids and a running half back, add this to 2 key forwards in Hogan and Dawes, these players add or will add quality to our team, Pederson, Bynres and Rodan where drafted to be gap fillers so we can develop the younger players and not distroy them.

I can't help but feel that Carey is describing exactly what Neeld has try to do with this list, and those same characteristics that Neeld has been criticised for showing.

Roos the dream, Williams more likely the reality.

What makes you so special to actually say that? I understand from your postings you make the effort to talk to players at training but if you're not a family member or a best mate and confidant of the players do you honestly believe you would be told such delicate emotions and opinions?

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.