titan_uranus

To your first 'error' - which mid did you want us to chase last year? Was there one out there who, as a midfielder, was worth the money we had in the same way Dawes is? Not only do I believe that taking a key forward like Dawes was a good move in terms of shoring up our forward line, I also believe it was a good move in terms of bringing in a premiership player with leadership skills, media skills, strength, focus and endeavour. He's shown his leadership skills already, and with time and match fitness he'll hopefully show why we need him on the park. To your second 'error' - no team ever plays 22 kids. Also you've picked one of the better of that group. Without Byrnes and Rodan, and with two more kids, thats 250-odd games of experience off our list, not present at training etc., not there to take some of the heat of these losses which do nothing for us. As we start to rebuild, we will be able to transition away from having a team with all four, to three, to two, to one, to none of them. That's the way this is going to work. At the very least, Pedersen is beginning to show form at Casey, which hopefully he can bring to Melbourne. Meanwhile Blease can't get a kick down there. I'd rather see someone a year or two older with less talent giving his all to get a crack, so hopefully that kind of attitude rubs off on Sam.

I already thought you were a complete numbskull. If this is truly your view, then you're only adding to that perception.

If your implication is that we'll beat Geelong later this year, I look forward to it! (please note this is clearly tongue in cheek)

What do you mean by this? Is there any source for this? If so, what is the argument - that players will walk mid-season? At end of year?

I'll be honest. If you were Jesse Hogan's manager, and Melbourne tabled him a 5-year offer, even if it was sizeable financially, would you recommend he sign it? Right now, that's not a certainty.

As much as we all want to say that, I can't help but think that he'd be a far better AFL player right now if he'd been drafted by West Coast in the first place (which they nearly did, before settling on Masten).

It's interesting to see the divergent views. Some think we need to go back to the drawing board, re-stock our list, and wait a few years. Others think it's as simple as changing the coach, with everything falling into place under him. Others again think we need the AFL to get us out of this mess. Some still think time will heal this all. I think the range of views and the ways in which different minds see things differently is a good indication of how complex the solution(s) to our crisis are. Let's try not to start that one up again. Just had to go over it all with RobbieF in another thread on the weekend.

How's that poll working out for you, Tonatopia?

There's nothing wrong with this. It's all true. Under Bailey we didn't work hard enough, we didn't train hard enough, and that is one of the more pertinent reasons why we are struggling so much right now.

Dunn, Tapscott, Sellar, Bail, Jetta, Nicholson all are worthy of being dropped. Whether we have enough players to bring in is another question. Pedersen seems to have earned his spot, so there's one.

Wasn't trying to make any sort of point, was just providing the numbers.

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.

This is kind of why I started this thread. People continually call for change, but can't explain what that change will entail. I'm not saying I don't think a new coach would make us better. I'm just wondering what exactly people think will happen, or more importantly, should happen, when we change coach. How does one 'install confidence'? I'm trying to see what people specifically want to happen. Yes, I know. My question is how does that happen? What does a new coach have to do to 'start showing something'?

Most people's step 1 seems to be sack Neeld and get a better coach. Let's for the moment assume that, first, a better coach exists, and second, that coach agrees to come to Melbourne. What happens next? What is step 2? Do we commence a total clean out of the list, again? If not, and we try to work with what we've got, what has to be done? More emphasis on running? Fitness? Clearances? Marking? Tackling? Is it a case of, we have the list, we just need a decent coach to make it work? If so, what is Neeld not doing that a new coach will do? If not, what do we need to target? In your minds, what exactly does a potential new coach need to do?

Absolutely not. He was rucking against Zac Clarke. Clarke is awful. He's only playing because Sandilands and Griffin are injured. To take 0 marks all day is pathetic for a ruckman. 1 kick is just as bad. Jamar was rank.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't that deal fall apart because Ferguson didn't consent (he had to consent because he was contracted to us)? As in, didn't MFC, HFC and Sewell all agree, but because Ferguson didn't want to go, we couldn't do the deal?

Off the top of my head, they were missing Pavlich, Sandilands, Hill, Walters, Morabito. We were missing Grimes, Clark, Viney, Sylvia, McDonald.

Average games per player: Fremantle - 77.2 Melbourne - 58.5 We had 11 players with less than 50 games. They had 8. We had 6 players with 100 or more games, they had 7 (granted, 4 of theirs are 150+ to our 1). Average age: Fremantle - 25 years 3 months Melbourne - 24 years 2 months

What I'm expecting to hear from Neeld: It's a rebuild of a rebuild. We're going to have troughs. Obviously this is too deep and we have to keep working on our slumps, but that's what happens when you're rebuilding a rebuild. We're inexperienced. When you're on the road and you're inexperienced and you give up 7 goals in the first quarter, you're always going to be up against it. But I thought we fought a bit harder after half time. We won the third quarter. We won the tackle count. We're not producing our training form on the track. Fremantle are a really good side.

Let's make sure we give Jeremy Howe his due credit. Sounds like he was fantastic today. I only wish he'd consistently reach this potential. Other than that, we won the third quarter and we won the tackle count (given how bad we were at tackling in previous games, that's not exactly meaningless). In all other aspects, we're abysmal.

Final statistics: 163 fewer disposals. 13 fewer clearances. 29 fewer inside 50s 40 fewer contested possessions. 4 more tackles. I don't have the marks numbers. They'll be horrifically in their favour. Moreover - Jamar had one kick, no marks nor handpasses.

This did not need its own thread.

They've had 153 uncontested marks. That's unfathomably bad.

If Dwayne Russell can't take the rudeness out of his commentary, he shouldn't be commentating. The SEN commentators are at least trying to be positive towards us in the areas we've improved in.

We won the quarter. What an incredible victory.