Cheap Seats

Spot on WJ Am not happy with this club ATM but I will be there Monday Coaches, Presidents, Players come and go the club is forever

I readily admit that I do not have the time to put in the effort in to posts that I probably should You want to speak about 'business' issues then you need to make that clear yourself as it is my opinion that Neeld is not directly responsible for this. This is the responsibility of the board. It's not a massive issue Iv'a you have every right to believe whatever you like..... Fact remains that Neeld is not solely responsible for the MFCs position and people need to open their eyes to the fact on and off field its gong to take a while to fix this club Sacking Neeld won't make all the issues go away - Neeld inherited a shite club and it shows - there are no quick fixes

I am of the belief we shouldn't unnecessarily fracture the club I think we should fix the club 1 step at a time - the first step was getting a competent CEO Number 2 is fixing the board The rest will fall in to place when we fix the very top If it's done properly (no takeovers or board spills) I support change

Agree BH I've said it for a while now this club lacks strong leadership and you sum up the current boards flaws pretty well As long as it's done properly I would support Jeff - he's a proven winner and helped turn the HFC around

Jesus Christ Wow I reckon I'd support Jeff - this club needs a stong leader and Jeff is that I'd compare it to Eddie taking over Collingwood - Don needs a chop out, as long as this is done properly I would support it

Context Redleg We are not talking about those 4 we are talking about the 8 u mentioned - c'mon mate poor

lack of forseigh and leadership hardnut Either back Neeld in or kick him out I say - there are good arguments for either. Either say we are developing and let him do his job otherwise fire him as it's obvious to everyone that he hasn't achieved anything short term Thats probably the biggest thing we have missed - this direction was the club's decision and we are all taking it out on Neeld, it is unjust

Once again I've failed in my replies haha I've just found it hard to have rational thought while trying to compete with so many opinions Do enjoy the debate and banter at Demonland but am going to live my life a little for a while What I should have said is I haven't got the energy to give your post the respect in reply it deserved I will be there QB to support the boys and will be back to post - but am argued out Enjoy lads and ladies - Go Dees

lastly apologies if i offended anyone that was not my intention - I am a passionate supporter/member I like you guys and girls want to see us back in the 8 where we belong soon rather then later as well Cheers lads

I CBF anymore with this.... The club has been poor for years - yes we have been more successful in the past (yo yo one year up one year down) Then we had tanking and all the other crap - We've had a pretty poor culture at this club for a very long time - Not even rumors it's obvious that the list lacked development, AFL fitness and standards So the club get an untried coach in Neeld to fix everything - Now the club and eveyone says it's his fault when he's dong what he's been told to do. Expectations were that we'd be more competitive we aren't, we had holes in the list before Neeld and we have holes in the list now and people expect wins now I don't know for sure if Neeld is the man to lead us out of this rut - I can only put my faith in the board to make the right decisions - The board are responsible for this People you can judge our performance and you're not wrong in saying Neeld has failed - but there is no way if you know for sure if we are on the right track or not - NO ONE can realiably assess development or if key areas of recruiting, coaching and development have improved because there simply hasn't been enough time That is simple fact . Most of you won't agree and i don't care but this club needs leadership from the top the Board more then anything else at the moment - year end will take care of the important structures and coaching issues I will continue to post but can't be bothered with this anymore Cheers lads enjoy

So much abuse so little time I can't argue for Neeld and his policies, I don't think he's made the right decisions every time - All I am saying in this thread is I don't think he is 100% to blame that we are a developing side and it will take time to rebuild There are so many factors to decisions and I don't have the enthusiasm to go through them all.... All I continue and will continue to say is we are fielding a development side most weeks - improvement will take time

Thank you for contributing a really good discussion piece BH - i am not being insincere about that I really do think you have a pretty balanced opinion and you know your stuff when it comes to talking about talent. What really disappoints me about this post is you don't mention players Neeld has brought in that are buying in and will develop to be the core of the side Gysberts is probably (most likely apart form Moloney and rivers who lefr through FA) that will have an impact at AFL level for another club Watts, Sylvia and Frawley are the interesting ones - can Neeld keep them and get them to buy in??? I reckon 2 out of the 3 will go (just a hunch). Without turning this in to a Watts thread Neeld and Bailey have not gotten mcuh out of Watts - Watts reminds me of Gysberts in that respect A massive loss if he goes but a Massive drafting blunder more likely - And they were not Neeld's fault As I've mentioned it's a fine line between development and competitiveness - Neeld has failed at competitiveness he can only hang his hat on development - hes got 10 weeks to prove everyone wrong otherwise he will be gone

I am not going to knock your opinion on this as I actually think you are right - the fisrt 4 probably do have more upside then the last 4 Where the arguement falls down and is out of context is that all 8 players have had 0 Zero nil none impact in an AFL side in 2013 - 4 players on a list will not will not change our fortunes one way or another long term I honestly assume the first 4 were not up to standard (none are playing AFL so not sure how strongly you feel at disagreeing) and the last 4 were added as a chop out to 18 - 19 y/o kids so they could develop and giving us a chance at being competitive. It's a fine line between development and competitiveness - I assume Neeld knew he had to be competitive and has failed

So by your theory 9 of the 18 on the field that are good AFL footballers is enough for us to beat Hawthorn last week? You might think that is a harsh opinion and it is - but just pointing out how you refuse to see the reality of the situation that the other 9 bloke have played 0 - 40 games. Thanks for playing

Sorry I didn't initially read your post properly on my first reply - (I shouldn't rush ) What more can I say then we are rebuilding - Mature age recruits may be physically ready but are they 100% AFL ready?? I am not gonig to argue with you as I don't know what Neelds intentions are with recruiting these players - we can only guess.... I assume we are rebuilding and he wanted mature bodies to help provide a contest and a chop out so the 18 yo kids have a chance to develop Some have failed some look good and that's AFL footy

Thanks professor i'll take that on board

I will apologise for the lack of tact in my posts but you have offered nothing to this conversation - the circle work is frustrating All i hear from yourself and Scoop is Neeld is bad - yet you won't articulate why or address this thread title that it's not all Neeld fault - you just hang your hat on that Neeld is the problem articulate it otherwise it's a waste of tme

Scoop & Iv'a Before we get caught in the same crap circule argument about how we are losing - (you are obviously hanging your hats on the margins that we lose) I still believe my experience and lack of leadership argument is relevant and the only comparisons would be GC & GWS in their first and second years The Dogs and Saints may even come in to debate but it depends if you rate our list as healthy as theirs (which I believe it isn't)

Thanks for your quality contribution I will not waste my time with another post with as little substance as yours again - If you'd like to take the time to read this thrad you'll realise I am not out to defend Neeld I am pointing out factors to why the performance of the team is where we are at - if you choose not to read it and discuss it then don't waste my time This thread is about factors other then Neeld which are causing such poor on field results If you want to blame Neeld for all the woes at the club go to the Time to go Neeld thread Thanks for playing

Thanks for missing the point of this thread which is to dicuss factor other then Neeld I will go back and look over our discussion and make comment - But you and Iv'a have basically offered little fact as to why we as a club are where we are and what we are doing to improve it... Your whole augment is Neeld is a failure and you refuse to listen to any debate and offer nothing but opinion to prove your points You refuse to accept the Club Neeld took over was damaged and it is going to take time to fix You refuse to accept so called leaders like -Green, Davey, Jamar, Dunn, Moloney, Rivers off the top of my head I am sure there are a few more (I will leave out Frawley, Sylvia and Garland as they have stood up under Neeld) are not consistent AFL players and the majority were passed their used by date I don't care how they were treated as this is not the discussion You refuse to accept drafting and list management was poor before Neeld So in a nut shell I get your argument - you say Neeld should be doing better with the list that he has but you refuse to identify the list as it stands at the moment and you over estimate the production it should be producing You don't acknowledge my question when you say the list is underperoming under Neeld - if so who should we have beaten in the last 10 games? You judge the performance of the list under Neeld against sides that have been together longer then the majority of our playing group has AFL experience I get your argument Scoop and that's why I won't listen

Probably told him to get a kick and stop being a [censored] and Watts feeling were hurt

yeh yeh yeh I understand it's all about how we lose You idiots - you are all talk about concepts and where the club should be without providing any solid discussion about why we aren't in that position So your not talking about wins and losses your talking about how the team loses. Talk about petty and you don't even acknowledge where the team is at from a development stand point because it doesn't suit your argument You Talk about me missing the point, when the whole point of this thread is to discuss issues other THEN NEELD himself Keep telling me stories and logic about how the MFC should be represente by proud traditions and we shouldn't be in this position after 150 odd yers of existence - I'll deal with reality each week and the reality is on Monday 8 - 10 blokes will take the field with 0 - 40 games and you expect a consistent team performance Thanks for being mind numbing

I'll give BH the benefit of the doubt on that one and pretend he was adding to the conversation

As i'm at work I've only skimmed it BH - as when you said Jesse Hogan it peaked my interest - but alas it is not our Jesse. It's a good piece from what I've read and I haven't taken it all in yet and will later this evening - a good contribution BH I still haven't changed my thinking that Neeld was brought in to make us the hardest team to play against (to borrow Neelds call) Tried to unite the players - failed. So in 2012 began the rebuild - got a little ahead of himself (like we all did) and is paying for it now I still think we are a rebuilding side - I still think at this stage Neeld is doing what was requested of him (all be it making some errors in judgement which I have accepted in this tread) As I said I will digest further tonight and make comment - but only the board can reliably tell us if Neeld has failed at rebuilding

Well you've changed your tact now because when we started this argument it was all about wins and losses I do understand you point - you want onfield performance now - you keep implying it in different ways but the nuts and bolts of your argument is you want performance NOW You and Iv'a keep giving me your opinion that our performance should have been better - I get what your saying because that is all you say with little supporting evidence of why we should be better then we are As I continually try and point out to you there are numerous reasons why we aren't getting the improved performance right NOW and also to clarify it for you as you seem to be confused, I was not happy with the performance against GC or GWS or Essendon or Port What I am trying to say is limit you expectations to the quality of the sides we fielded - if you look hard at the experience and leadership we are fielding comparted to the other sides you'll see we are a DEVELOPMENT team My expectations are in check - ask yourself are yours? Neeld has been brought in to do a job and I won't back down that the job is not done yet and if you listen to Dawes and others inside the club they say the JOB is getting DONE Only the board can reasonably assess if it is really being met - I can only go from what I hear and see and the past few weeks against Freo and Hawks, although we haven't seen the MFC get wins WE HAVE SEEN IMPROVED EFFORT I can't make this any simpler - WE are performing better gradually and it's going to take TIME as a TEAM to get better with the lack of LEADERSHIP and EXPERIENCE fielded each week. The only way for the team to get better is play more games and play more games together. I also don't believe short term successes will come with continued fracturing of the club - which is what you are promoting