Hazyshadeofgrinter

I agree that I am wasting my time with you.

You seem to have formed an opinion after only 17 games. Isn't anyone else allowed to?

I'm sure I will but this thread is about what people think now, so I am posting within those parameters (and the constraints of space/time/Higgs field).

Well they could be members of the inner sanctum. Or they could even just be accomplished students of football. Either way, I'm just trying to work out what people are basing their "faith" on. I figured someone must have had some ideas. You have since given me some. I can't say that I found them convincing but at least I understand where you are coming form a little better.

belzebub, I hope this doesn't sound too harsh, but I found it easier to respond to you point by point. Neeld being the face of our football club strikes me as more of a sign of weakness in our broader administration than a sign of strength in Neeld. This just sounds like fluff to me. Like you have got a bunch of buzz words and put them in a sentence without providing any explanation or justification. With respect to accountability, Bailey was pretty accountable back in July last year. I think the club as a whole has a huge issue with accountability. Your attitude toward Neeld is no exception. Once again, this just sounds like fluff to me. Your comments re: "generalisations and non specific rhetoric" are a little ironic. Ok, now once again the stuff about "a more specific outline" sounds good in theory but is there any substance to what you are saying or are you simply mouthing platitudes? If you have something of substance to say about where Neeld is trying to get and how he is trying to get there, then spell it out. Otherwise, don't pretend to know. Every administration does this. Bailey did it. Baillieu does it. You can typically keep it up for around a year before it wears thin. What are the foundations of change that you see that give you confidence? Are you talking about kicking it along the boundary or what? Even if it is too early to make a categorical call, it is not too early to form opinions in the interim. I disagree with the assertion that we will not be able to pass informed judgment for another two years. Perhaps I'm being obstinate, but I still haven't read any meaningful explanation from you explaining why you believe Neeld is "on the right path". Does it just come down to hope?

Thanks for this response Range Rover. I actually see points 1 and 3 as negatives. Point 2 I agree with and I have pointed it out myself. I give Neeld some credit on points 4 and 5 but we have other people at the club who are supposed be able to deal with such matters. Neil Craig's appointment as the "conduit" between the board and the football department came about in part as a result of our previous dysfunction. Nevertheless, that is another conversation and shouldn't detract from the credit Neeld deserves. On the whole, I see where you are coming from, but your examples fall well short of convincing me. The "brass balls" stuff sounds like hollow rhetoric to me. Points 4 and 5 are ok, but they don't really speak to the kind of coaching ability that I have in mind. Perhaps Neeld might one day make a good Director of Football Operations or some such.

I can understand why you would think this, but my question is genuine. You're right in that my opinion of Neeld is informed by my inability to identify anything much that he has done to inspire my confidence in him. You're also correct in that this pretty much forms the basis of the "point" that I have made. Nevertheless, I genuinely thought that maybe there are some positives about Neeld's performance that I have missed. I still think that there probably are (and I've pointed out a couple that I haven't missed actually) and that somewhere out there, there is a person reading this thread who has a better understanding of coaching than me and who has picked up on some of these things. For instance, there could be a subtle evolution in our centre bounce setup which is yet to yield results but which may be new or exciting or theoretically sound. I figured that, given that so many people profess such strong confidence in Neeld, I must be missing something. Well this is what I was thinking right up until I saw this: It was then that I remembered why I don't post very often. Clearly I am just giving everyone too much credit and I should save this kind of discussion for the pub.

Who are these questions directed at? I will answer them if you answer mine (what has Neeld actually done to date that has inspired your confidence in him?)

I don't want to repeat myself too much because this thread seems to be almost entirely composed of repetition (with some added gibberish and pissing contests). One mob seem to be saying "it's too soon to make a definitive judgement on Neeld and there are valid excuses" the other mob seem to be saying "yes, but the season is nearly over and he has given us no cause for confidence" and on and on it goes. What I do want to say is that when I came to this thread I brought some preconceived notions about Neeld's performance to date but I also brought an open mind. I remain prepared to be convinced about Neeld's abilities. I was hoping that when I opened this thread today, at least one Neeld supporter would be able to point to some tangible reasons for their "faith" in Neeld as a coach. Sadly, 24 hours after my last post, these reasons are still not apparent and all that remains are the same excuses. This pretty much says it all for me and only serves to increase my skepticism of Neeld. I suppose I am just repeating myself after all, but can any of the Neeld supporters at least give it a shot? Forget the excuses for the moment, I don't think anyone is arguing these anyway, just please tell me - what has Neeld actually done to date that has inspired your confidence in him?

I am sympathetic towards your view but if you don't like the thread you should just skip it.

For what it is worth, I can vouch for this (albeit as an anonymous forum participant). Yes, that pretty much sums up where he was coming from.

Maybe the problem is on my end, but I simply don't understand what you are trying to say in this post. Suffice it to say that whilst I have read and agreed with several excuses for Neeld with respect to our poor record this year, I have not encountered much in the way of clearly explained reasons for confidence in Neeld aside from the two points that I have already raised (experimenting with player positions and making players earn their spot in the seniors). Yes, there are valid excuses and yes it is probably unfair to write Neeld off less than a year into the job but this doesn't mean that it is too early to make observations on his performance to date. In my view, Neeld has not demonstrated a capacity for creativity, originality or strategic/tactical flexibility. Based on this, I am concerned that he may not be up to it. I realise that I am probably getting a little repetitive now but I would be really keen to read some observations from other people, particularly from those with "faith" in Neeld, justifying their positions.

I agree with what your saying. Sadly the "outlier" game plan might even be considered cause for confidence if he wasn't merely doing a cut and paste job from where he used to work.

I did read it. I thought it was pretty straightforward and I agree with a fair bit of it. However you seem to be alluding to some kind of deeper understanding beyond the ken of many of us mere mortals so I was wondering if their was something I had missed? If you don't want to explain yourself, perhaps you could explain your reasons for your faith in Neeld, i.e. what it is that you have seen him do to date which justifies your confidence in his ability as a coach? So far all you have added to this conversation has been platitudes, sniping of other posters and excuses. The excuses at least are somewhat constructive but despite what you seem to think, I suspect that they are pretty well understood by most of us. Unless you mean "faith" in Neeld as in a belief not based on evidence/proof? That would make sense.

Explain it then.

That's all well and good and I have already conceded that it is too early to write him off. But putting the excuses to one side for a moment, what exactly has he done to inspire faith in his ability to coach to date? I've come up with: - Has experimented with player positions with some mixed success - Has been prepared to drop players who do not meet his standards With five games to go and only two wins on the board, that's not a lot to hang your hat on really. Based on my observations to date, he is merely trying to implement a carbon copy of Collingwood's expired game plan which does not suit our list. This gives me little hope for the future and leads me to conclude that he is failing in his role and lacks the tactical and strategic creativity required to be a premiership coach.

Thank you RalphiusMaximus, Fat Tony and Wells 11 for your thoughtful contributions re: "structures" and game plan. I share these concerns and was relieved to learn that I am not alone. I remember at the start of the season that all we seemed to be doing was kicking it along the boundary to contests, but I reassured myself that Neeld was simply laying the foundations and teaching the players how to play accountable contested football. I had my concerns that this was merely a graft of the Collingwood plan, that it did not demonstrate any creativity or originality from Neeld, that it did not suit our list and that he was throwing the baby out with the bathwater in terms of our attacking game. But, like a lot of posters on here, I felt that you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs, and that eventually, Neeld would add "layers" to his game plan, particularly in offensive terms. But with every week that goes by, my hopes for Neeld fade as I see no evidence that there is anything more to his plan than a "monkey see monkey do" implementation of Collingwood 2010 (but not as good and without the right players obviously). The other layers still have not eventuated. The best coaches are creative. They can adapt their plans to the "meta" of the competition and to the strengths of their squad. They are leaders, not followers, of the tactical evolution of the AFL. They will sometimes implement styles of play that are original or that have at least not been seen for many years. If they seek to implement an existing style of football, they will at least add their own twists. This is why I think Clarkson is the best coach in the AFL and why I have serious doubts about Neeld. As for the Neeld cheer squad, I get your rhetoric about laying foundations, having to take a step back so we can go forward etc. and as you can see form this post, I am sympathetic to this thinking to an extent. What I would like to know is what it is exactly that you have seen on field that justifies your faith in Neeld and what criteria we can use to judge his performance into the future. For what it's worth, I can think of two positives so far - he has shown a willingness to experiment with player positions such as putting Garland up forward or using Manger as a defensive forward (albeit with mixed results) and he seems to have shown a propensity to make players "earn" their spot in the seniors and drop even very talented players who don't meet his expectations.

For all of his tough talk, Neeld has given mug punters only one key selection criteria by which to judge him. From when he took over the reigns in September last year: Yes, it is too early to pass definitive judgement on Neeld but with only five games left in the season, it is not to early to make some observations about his progress to date. I certainly hope the club's administration have some Key Performance Indicators of their own (though I have my doubts), but whatever you have to say about Neeld, it is difficult to demonstrate that our team has made any meaningful progress towards his stated goal of becoming "hard to play against". The last time I felt that we looked genuinely hard to play against, was when we played Collingwood in round 2 of the pre-season. I know it was just a practice match, I know we have taken some beltings in the last couple of years (to say the least) and I know we've had some injuries this year. Nevertheless, it seems that, judging by his self-imposed criteria of being hard to play against, Neeld has failed this year and the team has only gone downhill since round 2 of the pre-season warm up matches. I am not writing him off, but nor do I think he has given us any demonstrable cause for hope.

If your primary concern is the midfield, then I wonder if you would prefer McKernan and Goddard to Cloke. Either way, I'm mostly just interested in hearing about KPFs who are not Cloke.

This thread isn't really about whether we need mids more than a key forward. It's about what key forwards might be available other than Cloke, given that Neeld appears to be trying to bring another one in. If you actually think about it, if we brought in, for instance, Shaun McKernan with a cheap trade or Merrett (free agent) to play a role in our structure, it would actually leave plenty more room in the salary cap for other mids given what we are rumored to have offered Cloke (not that I want this discussion to degenerate into how we should be using our salary cap).

So I notice that people are kind of worked up about the Cloke question. Putting Cloke aside (and Cook for that matter), and assuming that Neeld is dead set on drafting another big forward, who else is realistically available? Here are a couple being thrown around on bigfooty to get you started (not that I'd want all of them). Who's missing? Kurt Tippett (Adelaide), 202cm, 25 yo Pros: Proven talent Kicking bags Immediate impact Can ruck A good age Out of contract Cons: Recent concussions Will cost us to trade Shaun McKernan (Adelaide), 196cm, 21yo Pros: Can't get a game up forward due to Tippett, Jacobs and Walker Cheap trade Young Can take a grab Can ruck Cons: Unproven (limited opportunity up forward) Daniel Merrett (Brisbane), 195cm, 27yo Pros: Unrestricted free agent Versatile Can ruck Aggressive Immediate impact Cons: Short term solution - a bit old Not a big goal kicker Not a natural forward Jesse White (Sydney), 196cm, 24yo Pros: Cheap/Free trade Aggressive A good age Can ruck Cons: Averages < 1 goal per game Unproven (has had opportunity) Obligatory inclusion in these types of posts for the last few years Nick Salter (Port), 190cm, 21 yo Pros: Proven goalkicker in SANFL Natural forward Long, accurate kick Can't get a game up forward due to Schultz and Butcher Cheap/Free trade Young Cons: Currently injured Frequently injured Unproven (limited opportunity up forward) Scott Lycett (West Coast), 202cm, 19yo Pros: Can ruck full time Young Can't get a game behind Kennedy, Darling, Naitanui, Cox, Lynch A goal with his first kick (I love it) Cons: Unproven (still very young) Re-signed for 2 years in June (probably not realistic) Not a cheap trade Quentin Lynch (West Coast), 192cm, 29yo Pros: Consistent veteran Immediate impact Ruck rotations Free agent (I think) Cons: Probably won't want to leave WA Short term solution - too old Charlie Dixon, (Gold Coast), 200cm, 21yo Pros: Rumored to want to leave Young Aggressive Can ruck Versatile Gold Coast must cull list Cons: Unproven as an AFL standard full time forward Interest from other clubs, not a cheap trade Lachie Hansen, (North Melbourne), 197cm, 23yo Pros: A good age Good in patches Versatile Has shown continued improvement Cons: Lacks aggression Not consistently an AFL standard forward Not a natural forward

Can we have their coach and CEO as well? Would be much better than appointing a bunch of retired Melbourne players out of misguided sentimentality.

Out of interest, do you subject the claims that Viney is ranked in the top 3 to the same level of skepticism? I see this written on here quite a lot but as far as I can tell, the first mention of it on Demonland was in a post which appeared to base this assertion on a bigfooty phantom draft ranking which may or may not have taken into account the father/son situation. Since then it seems to have been repeated a lot and there seems to be a touch of the "drinking our own bathwater" to my eye at least. For what it's worth, I wouldn't put Viney in the top 3, but this is based on armchair scouting and I certainly don't pretend to be an expert. This also means that I wouldn't take Viney if he is nominated by another club with a top 2 pick but that's another argument.

Here's one for fans of unsociable football: To the tune of "Walking in a Winter Wonderland" James Magner will knock you straight out Mitchell Clark will rip your arms out And Luke Tapscott's the hardest of the lot We're walking in a Grinter wonderland

Here's a simpler, less melodic one for GWS (still don't think these work well at AFL games though): To the tune of " " as featured on The Wire.You've got Tom Scully He's your problem And his dodgey knee Not our problem say, 6 mi-lli-on, 6 mi-lli-on, 6 mi-lli-on, 6 mi-lli-on! *repeats*