hoopla

Absolutely right. Ex- battlers can often relate more easily to battlers than natural stars. It was important that we develop a group of coaches who understand each other and have a common philosophy. I'm sure one of the problems we had last year was that the players were getting mixed messages from the coaches - hence their hesitancy.The fact that many of new coaches know and understand one another already.is a big plus ..... especially as they come from a winning culture Daniel McPherson was a terrific gutsy little player ........ and his coaching pedigree is first class. The fact that he has been out of the game for a couple of years suggests that he was specifically sought out by Roos who must rate him very highly as a leader, motivator etc.. That's good enough for me

Interesting that no one else has commented on this one. The Moloney link does give it some cred.............. but I'm not sure he fits in alongside Leeunberger

Who to? (Bearing in mind that Jolley is a free option to a club looking for rucking experience...........)

3 may be the minimum requirement.- but we may want a bigger turnover than that .............. which means that there is a surprise or two ahead.especially has Cross has now taken a spot Clisby could be left on the rookie list - but if we are really serious about his development you think we'd want to ease his financial worries by putting him on a full contract. Unlike Magner, he doesn't have a home here - and his body hasn't yet fully developed. Must be some trades or de-listings to come Whatever people may think of Dunn, he has size experience and adaptability on his side.At the very least he is the sort of depth player we need ( especially down back)

Looked at another way , we have 8 off our main list so far -Sylvia, the 3 retirees ( Davey,Roden, Joel Mac) and 4 delistings ( Davis,Gillies, Sellar,Tynan). There are 4 definite ons ( Hogan, Michie,Tyson,Vince) plus almost certainly Clisby as a promoted rookie. If Roos wants to keep Magner, he'll be the 6th "on". Even if we only want 4 "live openings" ( including Cross?), we've got a couple of "outs" to go

This early post summed it up well Sylvia is exactly the type of player we need ( experience, body size, mid-fielder, goal kicker) Given the weaknesses in our list we are considering offering pick 2 for an experienced midfielder - perhaps even a running defender ( like Heath Shaw) - with a similar mix of upside and downside to Colin. At best we'd get pick 21 for him ........... which means an untested kid for a proven senior player Just wish he'd sign asap ........ so we can move on. The longer the delay - the more likely he is to be serenaded by someone else. The clubs chasing Daisy Thomas may have Colin as Plan B

Simpson has already been senior assistant at a premiership side The next step for him must surely be as Senior Coach - not as an assistant with a bottom side. Don't think he could ever have been Plan A

Does this work? All the players we want to keep ( including Clisby) were sent on leave so that they can start pre-season on the earliest possible date We left Casey with the players we intend to de-list......................

If we don't get a priority pick this year - .no one ever will

I mentioned Chapman's name to the Chris Connolly at a function about 18 months ago - well before Mr McLean stirred the pot and put CC on the skids. I was a bit surprised that he had" never heard of him "as either a businessman, philanthropist ........ or former player. He said he would specifically follow it up. If he did, he got nowhere!!

Really don't understand this Here we are as a bottom side with a very limited midfield - and people are actually hoping that one of our few mature-bodied mids leaves!! Yes - by reference to the champion we hoped he'd become - he has been disappointing .But he's probably playing as consistently now as he ever has. Under free agency, he has no trade currency . I just hope that somehow we can keep him.

Haven't heard that before If that is correct, then we are at the nub of the problem. Did Schwab suppress It - or did the Board reject it?

Surely the problems are on field problems Andrew Leoncelli left the Board soon after Bailey was appointed . Jim wasn't well enough to fill the void ......... and all of a sudden the non football people on the Board found a player/coach/footy ops/CEO split Gary Lyon stood in long enough to sanction some critical appointments before hurrying away to the comforts of his media career. At Xmas Greg Healy joined the Board as Football Director despite the pressures of being CEO of a major Asia Pacific corporation ( Quiksilver). How often has he been to training? Now Peter Jackson points out that reporting lines through the CEO to the Board make no sense. Where has our Football Director been through all this? Shouldn't he have seen that the reporting lines were not functional? We were going OK financially until our dysfunctional on field management and performance bit us through the tanking investigation- and pitiful on-field performances. Let's not just tear down every facet of the club - when our approach to player selection and development over some years has clearly been the problem

Gerard's little brother , Greg , is the club's Football Director. Now even if - as professionals- the two take care to avoid discussing sensitive subjects, I'd be very surprised if Gerard hadn't shared some of his observations with his brother. Which makes me wonder where Greg sits in all this . Peter Jackson's comments on the confused reporting lines between the FD and CEO - weigh directly on the governance matters specifically overseen by the Football Director, on behalf of the Board. Greg has not denied that he had to carefully consider his Quicksilver obligations before joining the Board. There is no evidence that the has added any strength to the Board's understanding of the workings of the FD - or ensured that appropriate policies and procedures have been adopted. Moreover he appears to have condoned the fact that our footy department operates under four heads ( Craig, Harrington, Mahoney and Neeld) - none of whom has the long term contract Viney has. Is Sugar to the fore in sorting out all this mess? If not what's he doing as Football Director?

I don't think it takes a lot to work out what happened and why..... The Green-Moloney- Rivers leadership group went to the Board on the eve of 186 and asked them to sack CS. When CS - and his mate, Gary Lyon - starting talking to possible replacements the first thing they said was that the leadership group had rebelled and that they expected the new coach to pull it apart and start afresh. The day CS prevailed over Bailey was the day the leaders effectively lost their jobs. We are kidding ourselves if we think that Neeld started assessing the leaders with a clean sheet of paper. Neeld may have irretrievably "lost" the players with his tough initial stance - but I'm not sure that would have been entirely his fault.I'm prepared to give him the rest of the season to demonstrate progress ................ but I reserve the right to change my mind if we get thrashed this week!!

Terribly disappointed in Gary's attitude He was at pains to tell us that he stepped into the breach out of love and respect for Jim Stynes. Well if that gesture was genuine, then he would be busting his gut to make sure that his actions lead to the success Jim so desperately wanted to see. "Sorry Jimma, you probably know by now that I haven't fixed things like you asked me to. . I can't be bothered lifting a finger to help sort things out now As an independent media person, I can't be seen to defend the footy club because it is playing crap footy. Although I was acting director responsible for setting up the current FD, I've decided to keep my mouth shut and let Scwabby carry the can. I'm out Mate." Too busy Gaz? McGuire and Brayshaw have 5 times the media commitments you have.Don is chairman of Reach - how many Community Service organisations occupy your time?

It was of course only a matter of time before Caro took the opportunity to throw more muck in the direction of Cameron Schwab. For a long time now she has done her best to make his position untenable. She has persistently blurred the differences between supposition and fact - and between causality and coincidence.She produced nothing new this morning - just returned to her anti CS hobby horse. It is beginning to look like she is going to win .............CS - whatever good he may have done off the field - is starting to look like a dead duck Caro - facts please. CS has "history with the AFL" .The AFL set out to" get him" on tanking - but couldn't pin him. How clever must this man be? Jack Watts is struggling.Somehow that gets back to CS apparently. Does Jack regard CS as the arch villain? Where are you getting all your up to date info from Caro?

You are only a phone call way Andy? Well your organisation spent 7 months trying to tear us apart.................... you forced us to outlay at least $500k in legal fees and you imposed on us a $500k penalty........ you reopened wounds we were trying to heal ............................ and now you are only a phone call away!! You have got to be kidding!! The AFL has exacerbated all our failings over recent times. Even McLardy's most strident critics would have to agree that the AFL has quadrupled the problems he has had to confront recently - and now he is supposed to look on it as a a friend ?! The AFL's whose rules encouraged us to establish a losing culture beat us for playing their game.Now they are only a phone call away ! Give us a break!!

For years I've had reason to give up on Melbourne - but I've stuck it out - and I'm going to stick it out again. Ron is right. A week is a long time in football. Round 1 is often an aberration ............ and we can only hope that we will see it that way in a month's time.

I must say that I didn't object to these comments Old Dee.I thought Don's speech soundly balanced positivity with realism. For years Melbourne supporters have been slagged off as soft "theatre-goers " just as happy to waltz off to the snow as to watch their team struggle. The club is increasingly trying to get the message across that Melbourne supporters are passionate about their club. We aren't going to win any competition for supporter numbers - we want to be known as a club whose supporters stick - and fight. I suspect that he was warning us that a loss is in store for 2013. What with a $500k fine, legal fees of at least that amount, a distracted Community Relations Manager - and heaps of bad publicity to discourage potential members and sponsors - Don was just stating the obvious. Let's quietly remind the AFL of the damage their criminally unfair investigation has done to our club as equalization talks hot up If we can lift on the field - and secure enough match day revenues in these tough economic times to keep the loss to less than $500k - I reckon we will have done well. Sad - but true.

Struggling to believe that a sober Demonlander would post drivel like this

I've said before and I'll say it again : sponsors are hard to find - especially in this economy- because we haven't won a flag for 50 years - not because our present CEO is not performing!! Your argument simply does not wash. A neat summary : very good advice

t And how many of those other clubs won 4 games last year? And how many have had their brand dragged through the mud by the media for the the last 7 months? And how many have the same number of prime time blockbusters to promise potential sponsors? If you are stating that it is Schwab's fault that sponsors haven;t been throwing money at us through this period ........... then every thinking supporter we have will be jumping down your throat - not just me! Sounds like you've just had been a cup of lemon tea with Caro

I reckon all this negative supposition has gone far enough. I have it on good authority that one embittered former employee really stirred up the stove. No doubt other people formerly associated with the club made a few negative comments about the events of 2009, 2011 and 2012 .This doesn't mean that dozens of former staff or directors are lurking around the next corner ready to drag us even further down as some seem to be suggesting.Let's face it, Its fairly hard to avoid negative observations when you asked about Melbourne in those years!! Today's club - current board and staff - has done well to maintain a united front through this investigation. We need to take comfort in that - and back the FD to lead us onward and upward. Forward march!!

I am afraid I struggle to understand why the majority of Demonlanders have concluded that Royal is no good. He doesn't come over particularly well in media interviews - but that doesn't mean he can't coach. Our midfield struggled last year - but so did our forwards - and so did our backs. Of the 3 coaches - Royal probably hd the weakest cattle relative to the rest of the competition. Royal is a career coach .He was considered critical the emergence of the Bulldogs under Wallace - and was considered unlucky ( perhaps because of his lucklustre media work) not to pick up senior job. He coached the Saints midfield into two Grand Finals. With his track record as a senior assistant coach, he may be Neeld's most valuable off-sider. No premiership ..... but a clear association with clubs.that got the absolute maximum out of their midfield groups. How many would he have won if he hadn't coached against Swan, Pendlebury and Thomas or Ablett Bartel Ling and Selwood.THe list goes on.......... Now I 'm not saying that he is critical to our coaching structure - but equally reading through this thread I haven't seen any evidence to support the proposition that he is not up to it . As with rpfc, "I would love to see someone come up with an anti-Royal argument that doesn't boil down to "I like shiny new objects!""