PJ_12345

Short-term priorities are what got us to this spot. At the end of the day, the changes have been made, and there is nothing we can do about it. We are stuck for the rest of the season with this list, and I don't think that any new coach, no matter how skilled or experienced can do a better job with this list. Particularly not considering Grimes, Viney, Silvia, Trengrove, Tommy Mac, Clark ect are out. This year isn't the year to be demanding short-term results because the reality is that we won't win another game. We all knew this was coming. Neeld said he was going to rebuild the club. It's short term pain for long-term gain. Next year is the year to start to expect improvement. That's when players should be up to AFL fitness, Toumpas and Viney should be developed enough to play consistantly and well, Hogan is ready to come in, our inexperienced midfielders like Evans has enough AFL games under his belt, Tommy Mac should be up to the stage where we can judge his long-term skills and if he is good enough. Whether we like it or not we are in this spot. We have commited to the changes. Nothing to do now but let it play out. I know there will be some people here who will get angry and me being so passive about this, and they have a right to be. We have all invested alot in the club, but its not time to get the pitchforks and go lynch mobing.

GNF's rebuttle when someone mentions something other than bias KPI statistics:

It's true. When you look at the KPI's before MN and now during MN we have gone backwards. But you have failed to consider the changes in the list and the improvements MN has made. It's not blind faith. We see the bigger picture unlike you who is only looking at bias statistics. We see that MN: Has fixed our FF issue by recruiting Clark and Dawes Got rid of the dead weight on our list Recruited premership players from other clubs to offer leadership and direction (something not done by Bailey might I add) Invested in new future players (Hogan, Barry, Toumpas [development player]) Highlighted fitness as a key and fundamental issue and has Misson (very well regarded) who has implimented a 3 year plan to get us to AFL fitness Stop being immature and solely looking at KPI's and then critise us for blind faith when you're not willing to look at the big picture. I'm not saying you have to agree with what you see, but at least most people on DL have the decency to judge MN fairly and say that the club needs to focus on short-term wins because of membership numbers, attendance and moral ect. Unlike you has chosen to adopt a "Mark Neeld has nothing nothing to improve the club - look as the KPI's" which are a bais statistic, and narrow minded perspective, which fails to take into consideration the bigger picture. MN has done more than just KPI's. As you said "this is reality. Wake up!"

If you have a look at the "Its time to go Mark Neeld" forum this is news to most anti-Neeld supporters

Remember that statements by Moloney and Morton are from disgruntled players and articles from the media are also to feed journalist's families too. You have to take everything with a grain of salt. Chook's statement about Jones was in regards to when the captaincy was chosen. Didn't say that he was an A grade mid, just said when the captaincy was chosen Jones wasn't at his good form as we see currently. Don't need to jump down people's throats with how Jones will never be A grade when you clearly missed Chook's point.

Please dont put words in my mouth TBT. I never said I was satisfied. All I am saying is that I would rather improve long-term than continue with the small wins which aren't sustainable. At the end of the day as others have pointed out we have been stagnant for a while. We were always going to have to go through this radical process, no matter who was coaching. Every club does, and every club looks long term. It's time that we prioritise, because right now the most important thing for the club is long-term success rather than short-term wins... such as the ones under Bailey. Short-term pain for long-term gain.

Most people who support Neeld on DL, like myself, believe that this was always going to happen GNF. Neeld is doing what has to be done. Whatever coach we chose, they would also have had to do the same. Ie, cull the list of our failed picks (Morton, Martin ect), draft in experienced players to offer leadership (Byrnes, Rodan), secure good future drafts (Hogan, Barry, and Toumpas [development player]), focus on bringing up fitness to AFL standard (bringing in Misson ect.) A bit of short-term pain for long-term gain. Again, it doesn't matter which coach was chosen, Roos, Clark, Lyon, Williams ect. They would all have had to have made the same decisions. As for Neeld's game plan you can see its shaped around the fact that our players aren't up to AFL fitness (zoning) and the execution of this again is a reflection of the list's fitness and skills. Let me ask you this. Whats more important: short-term success or long-term success? I dont know about you but wining 8 games a year wasn't really cutting it for me and not sustainable for long-term success.

I don't think it will be too bad. Buddy's start to this season has been, historically, his worst since he started. We have seen what Chip and Garland can do, and also what Dunn can do to taller players like Judd in the midfield if he ventures.

Me thinks MN needs an apology from all the people who used Moloney as an example of how the players dislike him and why Moloney left. I know I'm barking up the wrong tree, particularly on DL, but MN has copped a bit on flack here about Moloney...

Got to take his Silvia comments with a grain of salt, but he is spot on about Rodan and I can believe his comments on Moloney.

Re double standards the difference is that one is refering to hair and one is refering to skin colour. Clearly two completely different issues. Primarily because people with red hair have not been discriminated to the extent of black people.

I just don't like that there is a can be a degree of influence from the AFL. I understand clubs didn't like the old system but at least it was transparent... But back to the original statement - its definately not "locked in"

I'd prefer Fitzy to Gawn this game. I'd personally like to have Dawes, Howe and Fitzpatrick (FF) up forward and then select Byrnes, Watts and Davey and drop them into the midfield. Leaving 3 up forward and 13 in the midfield (with options to rotate talls with smalls + Watts can be put as extra in defence). Sydney do a similar thing, but also with their defence (ie 3 down back, 3 forward, and 16 in the midfield). There is no point in having a traditional set up if the ball isn't going forward, so might aswell use them to stem the bleading from the midfield.

Unless you have the AFL formula then no can do. It's not a prescribed win-loss ratio/amount any more. Given the circumstances/past seasons performance we should get one - but definately not locked in.

When was it locked in?

WYL it can also be argued that this club has been in trouble for a long time. Neeld is trying to turn it around. Neeld rebuilt the list and fixed the problem of no key forarwards (Clark and Dawes), has been left with poor list this year, drafted in new players to be ready next year (Toumpas, Hogan), tried to reduce the bad list by drafting in experienced aged players (Rodan, Byrnes) and as a result sacrificing short-term results for long-term results so we are not in this position again. Mind you his approach to the seniors exacerbated this. Its a matter of perception: You want short-term results, will will sacrifice long-term results. Neeld wants long-term results, which will sacrifice short-term results. What is causing us to loose is our bad list... and guess what - there is nothing you can do to fix it now. No new coach can. All we can do is wait till this national draft pick, which I'm sure Neeld/the club has already a strategy for and when Toumpas and Hogan come in next year. Is it really worth $600k to get rid of him when the changes to our list has already been done? I don't. Personally I like what he has done so far. I think it's good forward thinking and a short amount of pain for long-term gain.

If we get some priority picks that will open up some room to trade for established players - we don't have the time to choose anymore development players like Toumpas. There is also the option of trading Watts aswell. I don't like this option that much, particulary because he was improving last year and I'd like to see him up forward but with Hogan coming I think it's more important to trade him for an established midfielder or even better defender whilst he still has value. Otherwise we will end up trading him like Johnstone or Morton

I feel the same way... I have always liked that footy is one of the only games in the world where you can sit next to someone who goes for the opposition, to, from and at the stadium without an issue - but sometimes there will always be some drunken low life who has to ruin it. If you want a bit of passion on the field put Davey and Tappy in. So far they have been the only players I have seen that if one of their team mates is getting pushed around they will stand up.

Yeah the Bailey comment was my bad.

Bannana bread sponsorship would be at an all time high

That's got to be the biggest load of rubbish I have read on DL: The cause of our loss this year was the fine from the tanking saga, not a reflection of a failed business model. Th debt demolition is, as you mentioned, a campaign to get us to profit - which we posted only last year... I am confused how you're wanting to criticise a campaign to get us to profit which was running when we weren't in profit Their donation is to set an example, this isn't their primary income and do it because they support the club, and also its a bit rich to sit and ask for donations yet take a salary. I've said this several times; I dont know why anyone would bother with this club... the players don't put in effort, the supporters are too short-term orientated when we can't afford to be, and now where people will criticise board members for making donations.

I don't think anyone has the right to tell Goodes to harden up unless they have been discriminated by the colour of their skin. I haven't and can't imagine how it would feel.

Too many cooks spoil the broth.

Heard he is interesting to say the least. I know someone who works with him now at Richmond's VFL affiliate and says he is tough and has that 'left of centre' mind all great coaches have. Also said that he might be past his time in regards to AFL footy. I'm a little bit over tough guy coaches, doesn't seem to work with where we are right now - didnt work with DB and not working with MN. If the players are struggling to to put in effort then maybe they need more of a coach they can relate and have more of a vested interest in. High turnover, particularly at coach level, is never good for any organisation....

The board do this almost pro-bono. If you went to any of the B&F's or Hero Foundation Dinners you would see they are among the largest donators. All of them support are care about the club. To suggest otherwise is pretty insulting. That's why they were asked by big Jim to join the club. Please show me how their egos brought this club to its knees? I am yet to see personal vendettas, bias and from where I am standing most supporters don't like DM because he isn't charismatic enough, not in the spot light enough, doesn't have an ego - too placid and quiet. These people know how to run businesses. Have a look at their credentials on the MFC website, and if you want to see this in effect look how they wiped out $5m of debt in 3 years during the GFC. I don't think any of them are treating this as a Sunday toy WYL. Please feel free to show me otherwise though.