PJ_12345

It's a win win win. MN knows he has to improve, has a chance and knows where the club and his contract stands. The club has shown that this standard is not acceptable and wont be. The players know the fate of their coach, time to back him and incentive to improve. Personally, I think its a good move. Shame about the media hype and them trying to put a negative spin on it. Also the ABC is a joke. How could you get it so wrong so early? I'd like to see how they came to their conclusion, particularly if Barrett (*shudders*) got it in the morning/last night.

Alot of people need to get some nasal treatments for their premature statements...

Valar dohaeris (all men must serve)

I'm struggling to handle this and Game of Thrones tonight...

Cheer up Brian Billy

Julia Gillard on the 14th of September?

Eh

Williams has always been a bit 'left of center', a trait people say all good coaches have. He has been coaching at Coburg but still looking for a head coaching gig. These are my main concerns: Williams: takes a very hard approach. I worry that this isn't the time to be taking hard line approaches with players and start drawing lines in the sand. We a coach who can relate to the players a bit more and get the whole group invested in him. Right now a few players are with MN 100% (Garland, Grimes, Jones ect), but not all the playing group - same with DB. Ratten: never coached Carlton into the top 4. Got close in 2011 with 5th, but after his 2 year restructure from 09 to 12 their average finish was around 7 to 8. Since 1985 we have not had a coach with previous premership success (the last was Barassi)... MN did what any coach would have had to have done, but I think now more than ever supporters want a coach with proven AFL premership success. Williams provides that, plus other factors such as remained around footy for a bit ect.

Most likely because Williams won a premership. Nothing against Ratten, he got Carlton to several years of finals (bar 2012), but I think what most supporters are calling for is a coach who has gotten a team to win an AFL premership, unlike Bailey and Neeld.

Great effort by J Mac. Kept an inform Mitchell who has been over the past 3 games averaging 15 kicks, 34 disposals, and a goal to a relatively quiet 8 kicks, 24 disposals and nothing on the score board. One of the highlights for me today. Good on him.

And remember Byrnes is a small forward too. But both are seeing the end of their carreers over the next couple of years so here is one for thinking outside of the box: what about Dayle Garlett? Davey is a leader and can mentor him and also Byrnes brings that premership experience.

Can't wait to see Dawes next to Clark and Hogan... + Watts/Howe

Pederson got pushed off the mark by a skinner kid in his second AFL game today. Wouldnt stand a chance against Cloak. Garland is too small. Played really well against Roughead today but Cloak plays more with his body and you cant afford to be behind him with his big leads. Tommy Mac just doesnt have the skills. Can play him against a #3 forward but not Cloak or Lynch ... Which leaves Seller.

For me it sounds like a great set up. We have seen from this year that Howe and Watts get shut down when played as #2 forwards, but when played as #3/4 and on worse defenders they dominate - both for polar opposite reasons (Watts with his strong mark and Howe because he is too unpredictable). I'd like to see a small foward, but Watts and Clark are pretty quick

After watching today's game here is my list of basic mistakes which are being made almost every game: 1) Can Howe please step back further off his mark. He consistently walks (might as well stop and smell the roses) back three steps and as a result either kicks a lofty hospital kick because he is too close to the man on the mark, giving the opposition more time to contest or it just simply gets smothered like today 2) Can players please have a ruck/tall defender or forward to shepherd and man the goal line. Again today we could have smothered a ball from an opposition set shot on the 50 + shephered one of our shots in too 3) Can players please back up the man on the mark to stop the opposition running off the line when having a snap at goal (Terlich today just walked away, the opposition ran around and kicked the goal - no pressure/smother) 4) Can Jamar kick his own ball. Its getting ridiculous. He consistently hand balls it off and we know he has a good kick (no Dutchy Holland) but the one time he has had to kick it himself was some horrible bent legged un-confident technique and the ball lofted 25m... get him some practice during the week. Its an absolute joke that our ruck cant kick - look at the confidence in Cox, Pike even Gawn. 5) Can Pederson please please for once win a contested mark. He needs to practice using his body more. The fact that he was getting beaten by a skinnier kid in his second game sums it up 6) Can Watts for once get in front of the contest and be the first in and first out for a change... also can he stop complaining when he doesnt get a free and man the mark 7) Can players remember Kent has one of the longest kicks in the game, and when he moves to kick it forward hold back and let it go over the oppositions head 8) Can Strauss please stop giving away silly frees. Got up to 3 or 4 today 9) Can we get the old footy show handball sign/template and get players to start to handball hard at the body... not at their feet 10) Can Rodan start wearing a glove. His butterfingers in the first half was horrible and is a recurring trait everytime he plays. I know it wont add grip but maybe help out the sweat/confidence Feel free to add on.

You've raised some good points - particularly about Pederson and Gillies. But I think you've made the mistake when looking at our experienced recruits of not taking into consideration their teams original list. For example with Dawes, at the end of the day there was no room for him at Collingwood - not with Cloak and Lynch. He is worth the money, and easily in our 22. Same with Byrnes. Also I think you've drawn a bi of a long bow by saying it was a no brainer to keep Cook... There is a reason he never played a single AFL game. Will never be up to AFL standard and I'd rather move him on to make room for someone else. From what I heard he showed quite litterally 0 improvement. Haha trading Travis wasn't a though decision. For me it was a no brainer. Interesting to note our different views here on no brainers. The players elected their captains, I don't believe alot of this "fracturing of the playing group" - Moloney left because he got burnt and Rivers wanted to play finals - the rest is just rubbish but feel free to show me evidence that points to otherwise. People want change because they think a new coach can get more out of this list... at the end of the day you cant polish a turd. I dont think anyone else can get more out of this lazy, and sub standard AFL list, until next year. They need another preseason to clearly get up their fitness levels, for new recruits to come in (about when Toumpas can play properly) and where we can trade for some established players.

Alot of people are taking these rumors for fact and not fiction...

You're insufferable.

Remember you've got 2 other parties involved (Choco and Junior)...

Really? I mean you couldn't have posted this in "Realistic Future Melbourne Coach" thread?...

Skill wise Jones, Garland, ect. have improved. Other players like Magner, Mackensie ect. arent up to AFL standard, and to be honest havent and will never be. Either way you look at it (pro or anti Neeld), it's unanimous that on field performance does have to increase. To the degree or priority will be disputed, but it does. I'm all for the long-term but that isnt a licence to accept performances like this. I understand alot of Neeld's game strategy is shaped around fitness and skills (ie, zoning), but doesn't mean he cant think outside of the box and adopt a Sydney strategy (drop forwards into the midfield and flood it), and to tackle the biggest issue with this group - effort. Re seniors approach. I'm still trying to sort out the bs and the facts. I know Rivers left to play finals, not a reflection of Neeld. Moloney left because in some way he was burnt, that is a reflection of Neeld and Moloney.

And what about MN's changes I posted earlier to you?

It's not blind faith. I formed my opinion from his track record at varying levels of footy - particulary at Collingwood. I like his long-term strategy. I've agreed with all of his changes (what I've listed prior). Its what I would have done (have had no coaching experience btw), and what I think the club needs. I don't think we have seen his full capacity to coach. Dawes was out at the start of the season, some players were sick, now Silvia, Clark, Grimes, Trengrove, Viney, Toumpas, Watts, Tommy Mac have all been out. I'd personally like to see what Neeld can do next year... wheather he last last long will be the biggest factor. Either way the list will be in better shape than he got it. Fitness and skill wise... but who knows in regards to effort (considering currently under Neeld and previously under Bailey).

You forgot the two best coaches currently in the AFL, Brad and Chris Scott... both played in Brisbane's 2001 and 2002 premership winning team. In the case of MN, thats why he has Craig who has played 319 games in SNAF + 61 games at VFL [Pre AFL], captian, 11 State of Origins, was assistant coach/fitness advisor for Adeliade in 2 premerships, coached them to a minor premership/5 consequitive finals and been involved with fitness at an Olympic level (Cycling team). Again, hasn't won a premership in his playing days but has "that experience of being in a successful era".

I think Neeld's hardest team to play against was his end goal, ie the end result of his strategy. I dont think it's entirely fair to be using a goal in 3 years half way through his contract, particularly considering that his investment into long-term picks (Hogan, Barry, Toumpas) wouldn't be included. Personally I dont think there is another solution. I think he i a good coach and I like his strategy. I think the biggest cause of our poor performance has been due to the players; they dont have AFL level skills or fitness and are lazy. The board will make their decision on what is best for the club and with PJ are in the best position to judge. People shouldn't be commenting that they should make the right decision and get rid of MN just because that's their personal view. They will obviously weigh up where we are at, what MN's strategy is short-term and long-term, and the consequences of getting rid of him - financially and functionally (ie caretaker, and new coaches out there). The majority of the board were elected by Jim and have played an active role in getting the club debt free. I think they of all people will be the most sick about the cost of the long-term strategy. Personally, its short-term pain for long-term gain. Wins will fix our issue, but I'd rather win more than 8 games a year like we have for the past 4 years. The AFL can't get rid off us yet because of TV rights ect, so what better time to do this and get this over with. Supporters will come back when we win... that includes next year not just this year