Grand New Flag

neeld was quoted before a game earlier this year< we all want jw to just go out there and get a kick and enjoy his footy>

in what way has he treated him badly

ask the senior players who hung him out to dry in his first 4 games what they were thinking

and what WALKOUT. names , numbers, and proof please

Jazza, I don't have the time nor patients to go through this subject again. Fellow posters certainly don't want a rehash of previous posts. Please refer to my posts in "Time to go Mark Neeld". All your questions plus the source is spelt out in this thread.

Sylvia and watts may both leave, Frawley will stay unless we get an offer we can't refuse, if he wants to leave to go to a winning team the draft wouldn't be an option because surely GWS would be all over him, Jamar is another i can't see being on the list next year with how well gawn is going.

The appointment of a coach like Roos would save us from the walk out!

Neeld's management of Watts has been atrocious.

when you say its common knowledge in football community. are you calling cfc, steve kernahan. mick malthouse and greg swann liers or is the football community calling them liers?

and are you know calling paul roos a lier. and if so why appoint him if he is??

Yes, I am calling them all liars......... if that's what you want to call it.

Call it a professional lie, call it a required lie, call it a necessary lie, call it a legal lie, call it what you want, this is what happens. When a coach is in contract a club simply cannot be seen to be luring another coach. Surely you can see why this is.

Can anyone tell me how much they think Roos will coach for (if he does) and how much we would have to pay to get him (remember there will be other clubs looking for his services) . Then add that to our 1.5 million dollar debt and then add Neelds payout to that also. Then add his staff budget to that because he will want his people around him.

Just trying to gauge how in peoples minds they think we could realisticly get rid of Neeld with our budget anytime soon.

Would love to have him at Melbourne but I'm a realist not a dreamer and the reality is about availability and price.

Sorry if I come across as a downer (realist).

WE have little choice but to go for a high profile coach like Roos. I understand your argument but in reality a high profile coach like Roos will pay for himself via increased media interest, this in turn increases sponsorship and members. Just imagine the excitement and speculation coming into next season with Roos as coach. We have no choice but to go for the lowest risk, highest profile coach who has the best chance to rapidly make us competitive, if Melbourne cannot become competitive within a couple of years our finances will continue to deteriorate, we will become insolvent and the AFL WILL relocate us in time for the next broadcasting contract.

I feel few understand the magnitude of the situation we are currently in. We must go all out for Roos or a coach of similar criteria. As I said, simply we have no choice.

We didn't get bagged as per normal .... Interesting.

But I do guess there not much point in bagging us now its beyond a story. I also remember hirdy saying No No No I will not coach essendon. So who knows hey

There is a realistic chance that Roos will coach Melbourne next season. I am aware of "sounding out" discussions with our club (directly from board member).

It means absolutely nothing that Roos denies or semi denies. Roos and the MFC must deny such contact as Melbourne currently has a coach in contract until the end of 2014. All parties simply have no choice but to deny.

This situation reminds me of Malthouse and Carlton last season. Malthouse denied interest and denied contact and discussions with Carlton, but never absolutely closed the door on the possibility. Just like Roos has done. It is now common knowledge in the football community that Malthouse agreed to terms with Carlton around mid-season while Ratten was still coach. All at Melbourne have their fingers crossed that one way or anther Roos takes up the challenge and saves our club.

Harry Taylor was set to be a Dee, he woke up on draft day excited to be going to Melbourne but he ended up at Geelong. I saw an interview with him once and he said he was initially devestated, but as it turned out the best thing that ever happened to him. He will not come to us for money.

Next

The board is ultimately responsible for the health of the club, so there needs to be responsibility taken and some change in personal at board level. It is my view that they kept Schwab too long, however, Schwab was doing an excellent job with sponsorship, and keeping the books in the black. It was an outstanding achievement for our club to make a profit last season, Schwab was responsible for this and deserves all credit. Where Schwab went wrong was playing politics and trying to influence what happened on-field. As time goes on it becomes more clear that at least some of the seeds for our divided club were sewn by Schwab. This is why he is no longer at the club. The board must stand up and take responsibility for this but whether a complete turnover at board level is in the interest of the club is debatable........... it probably is not. Some board members will resign, new board members will be appointed and Mclardy will step down for Freeman. To me this is probably enough, it would be dumb to turnover every senior position, it would leave the club in a weaker position. I see mass changes in FD and Administration, keeping some old heads on the board who know what has gone on and why we are where would be smart.

My view, as everyone knows, is that the monster mistake has been made with the appointment of Neeld. Simply he is the wrong man for the job. Neeld has done untold damage (please see my other posts). The board must take responsibility for this appointment and quickly rectify the situation. If they do not do this imminently then they too have become part of the problem and a alternative ticket should be taken to the AGM.

Depends how long they hold onto Neeld.

Pennant: On reflection Sydney were much, much better in 2002 than we are today.

Still Neeld must go and go quickly.

14 players is not half a list.

Yes, but 26 is. That's the number of players that have been turned over since Neeld arrived.

Moloney (note spelling) - most public humiliation was demotion from Vice Captaincy after being drunk in a public place - NOT under Neeld's watch

Brad Green's greatest public humiliation was being played as a sub - NOT under Neeld's watch

Jack Watts was sent back to Casey under Bailey and Neeld for underperforming. His greatest public humiliation was being played in the Queen's Birthday game - NOT under Neeld's watch.

Martin and Rivers - can't recall either being publicly humiliated by any coach... but of course, if you care to elaborate, as I said previously, I'm all eyes.

His recruitment efforts are yet to be proven poor... Hogan will be a plus, Toumpas will be a plus, M Jones is already a plus, Barry we don't know enough about yet, Kent has shown a bit already, Viney is going to be very good, Dawes will be a worthwhile get, Clark has been our best get for a long time, Byrnes and Roden were brought in for leadership (not necessarily purely onfield) and cost us next to nothing - who else do you suggest we could have got in their place?

Total hogwash.

As I said: suggesting Neeld is not responsible is defending the indefensible. Are you watching the games?

deelusion: There is only one way to test this market and that is by setting this up.

Are you able to do this? The marketing of this venture would be the easy bit once it is up and running...... crazy things can happen when you combine social media and traditional mediums. Personally I think this idea is well worth the effort.

As a good friend of mine likes to say, "You just can't make strawberry jam out of camel shite."

Yeah, it's the coach's job to motivate but when you're dealing with a culture that has seen the last three coaches sacked I think it's time to tell the players to get stuffed and fix things up. Sacking the coach, whoever it might be just reinforces a culture in which players refuse to accept responsibility for their own performance.

What do you think will happen under a new coach? Will these blokes actually grow a pair and turn into men? Can't see it! When the youngest player in the team leads the way in desire and effort, it speaks volume for the intestinal fortitude of many on our list.

Go ahead, sack Neeld and appease the supporters, but don't expect it to make a difference until we fix the real problem.

This is out and out rubbish. Since Neeld became coach in September 2011, half our list has been turned over. Only half our list even played under Bailey. These are Neelds hand picked troops. We are not even half the team we were in 2011.

Either: The recruiting has been terrible - this is Neelds responsibility.

Or: The players are alright but the coach can't get them to believe in him, other players, the club or themselves - this is also Neelds responsibility.

Which ever way you look at it responsibility lies with the head coach Neeld.

Reality is Neeld has recruited poorly, and coached poorly. He has divided the playing group and his people management skills are beyond appalling. He has shattered self belief, he has destroyed self confidence, he has publically humiliated players (Watts, Green, Maloney, Martin, Rivers) on numerous occasions. He has traded players we should have kept for worse, older players. He has put up the two most inexperienced captains in the history of the sport in the most difficult of times. Do I need to go on? This bloke is a disaster, suggesting Neeld is not responsible is defending the indefensible.

As I mentioned in my previous post....should Roos get ALL the praise for the state of the Swans after Barassi coach the team in the early 90's and then Eade took them all the way to a grand final before Roos took over. I'm sorry, but the two situations are not the same, but I am also not trying to suggest that Roos doesn't deserve the respect he receives.

Just one final point. What Roos did at the Swans was fantastic and he was/is a great Coach. Roos did it as an untried, inexperienced head coach in his first senior appointment. Just saying.

True, but Roos was put in as a temporary coach before mid season, who was there simply to build confidence and self belief in the playing group. He did so well he got the main gig. The board (at great expense) had to renege out of a contract with Wallace to keep him. I might add this was probably the best ever money wasted by Sydney FC.

The point I am trying to make, is that we are now in the same position as Sydney in 2003, they too were a basket case (though not as bad). We too have an opportunity to put in a temporary coach who like Roos will be told to build confidence and self belief. You never know our temporary coach may turn out to be the one we have been looking for. Nevertheless, we would have a jump on the other clubs securing the best experienced coach available. Hopefully that would be Roos himself.

What ever the case there is simply nothing to lose from dumping Neeld today.

Yeah, I saw that. It hasn't passed by unnoticed.

My point is that if we sack Neeld we are still left with players who lack the drive to do their bit in this debacle. Six of them could not even execute one tackle for the game. Given we were chasing the Suns all day you'd reckon we might have been able to do better than that. This is a pretty basic skill - grab someone and hold on. We apparently spent a lot of time practising it over the pre-season. These clowns are killing their coach and killing the club. How is a fill-in coach going to address this simple fact? Please don't tell me it's because Neeld has upset them. I've played football under coaches who were nothing but pricks. [censored] with no credentials other than having the right mates. It made no difference to me and how I played the game. My pride was at stake every time I went on the field. I might not have had silky skills but I cared enough to give it my best effort at every contest, despite the coach.

Neeld might well be the wrong man for the job but if we're ever going to change the poor player culture at Melbourne it's time to send some messages. Sacking the coach is not the right message at this point in time. It's a quick fix to a long term problem. Let's start making players accountable. I don't care if we don't win another game as long as we don't give games to the pea-hearts on our list. These guys have to know that pulling on the jumper is an honour. I'm sick of seeing it defiled by tossers who won't even run to make a contest.

The problem is that Neeld has split the players and lost the players. Few players have developed under him. The players have lost confidence in the coach, so have I. Not changing coaches imminently would be a grave mistake.

GNF, you certainly have been both vocal and consistent in your views, particularly in regard to Neeld having lost the players (or never having them) I have said that there was a flicker (more spirit) in the last few weeks suggesting that he had the boys onside. Well the first q of the game yesterday snuffed that flame out for me.

I went and cannot recall a more insipid lifeless performance that that first q. The players must take some responsibility but i agree that it is the coaches job (perhaps his most important job) to make sure his team is ready and switched on. In Neeld speak it is the fundamental KPI and he has failed to meet it on way, way too many occasions.

GNF you have been vocal in your arguments for sacking Neeld but for my money your comment i've quoted above is the most compelling argument for sacking him now. He is certainly only part of the problem but as you say he is not part of the solution.

Its funny though, the timing of that Roos rumour. As Terry Wallace said on radio players get hinky when a coach is discussed as being on the way out and i wonder if the Roos rumor was a deliberate attempt to destabilize Neeld given it came in the week of a must win game.

Interesting analysis of the Roos rumour. Could possibly be the case, there are many at the club who want him out. I know (as a fact) that Roos has been contacted by the club, and that Roos will coach someone next season. So what I am saying is that although the rumour may have not been precisely true, where there is smoke there is normally fire. I have no idea where conversations have gone between the Board, Jackson and Roos, but I do know there has been at very least "sounding out" talks. Naturaly considering we have a coach in contract any such conversations would be denied by the club. But this being the case you would think that there is a chance Roos coaches or is Head of Football at Melbourne next year. Particularly considering the AFL is highly likely to get behind any move since they now control our club (thank god).

youve definately missed the point of the mark neeld is a good coach people

you reasons for sacking him are not relevant

he WAS appointed to build a 3 year fitness base level. tick

he WAS appointed to keep young draft picks at reserve level until thier bodies were strong enough to COMPETE at senior level. tick

he had to get some average senior level players with ready made bodies to play this year to cover the learning period of the youngsters. tick

yesterday he attacked gws down the middle and by q/time this was proving a bad decision. they then changed game plan , i personally thought this was a sign of improved understanding of strategy by the players.unfortunately they were definately not good enough to carry out this exercise.

i have heard mn talk and it does nothing for me. but he WAS employed to do a job and so far has carried it out to the boards requirements

any statistic wont get him sacked . it will be the boards desire to see this rebuild through or else a complete walkout and members looking for a new board.

ps members with business background and 45 hours a week to donate to a football club are hard to find at this stage.

we havent been able to find them for 30 years, so please if you know 10 or 12 good available people let the club and present board know

Jazza, if you think Mark Neeld has filled his brief or met his KPIs you are smoking the really good stuff.

Agree with you RR entirely.

The AFL would be greatly embarrassed by our position. We are non competitive and a non viewing TV option. That hurts the AFL. We are also unbalancing the ladder, by who we play.

I can see the AFL quietly "directing" other clubs to not poach MFC players this year.

I can see us getting not 1 PP but maybe 2 or even more depending on our finish to the year and where the PP's are placed. I don't think you would get that much argument from the other clubs given our situation and their need to keep the AFL happy.

I can see us getting a large AFL grant to pay off the extraordinaries this year, like the fine, the CEO termination , the Coach termination and any other staff terminations.

I can see some help from the AFL on sponsorship in some way.

I can see another favourable draw next year.

I can see the AFL leaning on certain personnel to join the club.

I can see Jackson staying on well after his suggested 6 months, to get the ship going the right way.

As I have said previously I think we are in bed with the AFL now and clearly need to be and this will provide a lot of help.

I pray to God Jackson gets the right people in place in the right structures and that they all do a brilliant job, that is our only hope.

We are very, very lucky in that the AFL has just started a new 5 year broadcasting contract. If we were coming into the end of that contract and Melbourne were in this state, things could be much, much worse. Imminent extinction or relocation would be on the cards. As we have it we have 4 years...maybe 3 years to get our act together. The AFL will step in and run our club and get us back on track for the good of the game. However, be warned if we are not strong and independent again in 3 years, the AFL will consider other options. We must move forward, we must sack Neeld today.

Hang on, you stated that Frawley's desire to leave the MFC is well documented... I simply asked where.

As for my other comments being bizarre, I just want a playing group that is prepared to work hard to advance themselves and the club. Can you tell me what leadership Moloney displayed when we really needed him to show it...I liked him, but he went missing far too often when he was really needed. Rivers wanted a chance to play finals... his nose may have been put out of joint by being dropped from the leadership group, but I think his primary reason would have been to play finals... so who would begrudge him moving to a team like Geelong?

Believe what ever you want hardtrack. Convince yourself that Neeld is a good coach. I can't be bothered arguing with you. One little pointer for your future endeavours. When people leave organisations, what they say as their parting remarks rarely has anything to do with the truth and usually has everything to do with politics.

Ok, then of the three you have mentioned, two are players many posters (not myself, by the way) are suggesting should be delisted anyway (Watts and Sylvia). The only real documenting of Frawley's desire to leave the club that I have seen has been on these forums and was very tenuously linked to some altercation between himself and Sylvia in a nightclub and that no-one else seems to have seen or heard about... it was certainly never written up anywhere but on D'Land and Big Footy. Of course, if you have links to more reliable sources, then I'm all eyes.

In some ways, I will be pleased if he has split and antagonised the playing group, as they needed waking up... if they are upset over having to do some hard work and temper their social activities, then I'm ok with that. If they are upset over changes to the leadership group in a team that had no leadership being displayed, then I am ok with that as well.. however, if you are privy to information that says it is for other reasons, then please do tell.

Mate, my source is not this website or big footy. My source is a player manager who will not be happy me. I have been told Frawley's desire to leave is Neeld, just as Moloneys, just as Rivers.

Outside of this I find your comments bizarre.

I hear what you're saying GNF but we can't excuse the non effort form the players - Effort on the field is dictated by the playing group not the coach.

The coach is ultimately responsible for the playing group - I believe the FD will be held responisble (we all know the implactions of these preformances) but I don't like that the players get off scott free...

It's too easy to just blame the coach - this culture is why we are where we are now, no accountibility from the playing list all the way through to the top of the admin

I don't disagree, but I say the culture is the direct responsibility of the coach. The lack of effort is indefensible. However, a good coach has the ability of developing a good culture, of motivating and inspiring players. Getting the most out of your players is the PRIMARY responsibility of a coach.

Neeld is part of the problem. He certainly is not part of the solution.

And what happens when he can't get the team to the promised land WYL????......After paying out contracts......Paying Zillions for Roos.....and financially ruining the club.......I thought Barassi coming back to coach all those years ago was supposed to deliver some success?????....What happened to that?????....Paul Roos does not want to coach........and if he did he would not come to Melbourne......You can demand all you want....but it will not happen....

No you are wrong. Roos does want to coach again. He will be coaching somewhere next season. Melbourne is in the hunt. Take this as fact.

Although Barassi,s period of coach did not produce finals, I think it would be unfair to say it was a failure. Melbourne made the finals for the very first time since 1964 in 1987 one season after Barassi's departure. It is my view we were unlucky not to win a premiership with this group. The seeds that Barassi sewed in culture and playing group may have taken longer than expected to grow, but they did and Barassi was responsible for kicking off two decades of success. Two decades that we were consistently in the finals.

Ok, of those 12 uncontracted players (is there a list available?), how many are likely to be asked to re-sign. how many would be picked up by a club should they decide to walk, and how many are likely to be delisted anyway? If you are so confident that they are planning a mass exodus, perhaps you could name names (it's easy to make sweeping statements)?

As for the contracted players, I believe that the club can simply refuse a trade request, yes?

I know as a fact the Carlton are all over Watts. Watts is very seriously considering. It is well documented that Frawley wants out and will almost certainly leave at seasons end. Three clubs have already approached Sylvia who is considering offers. There have also been enquiries about a number of our mid tier players who are out of contact. Neeld has split and antagonised the playing group. He is the problem. Hardtrack I am not exaggerating or making things up. I am only naming names as I trying to do my bit to help save the club.

Considering that we have just one free agent and one unrestricted free agent, how do you propose this um, "mass walkout", will be effected? You should never make promises you can't keep.

Are you serious?? 12 players are out of contract. Other players in contract simply ask to be put up for trade.

When are you guys going to get it?

The playing list is the responsibility of the coach. Our list has gone backwards under this hopelessly under qualified coach. At the end of 2011 when there were 4 teams looking for a new coach, Melbourne had by far the most exciting developing list of the 4. The media agreed. We were 4 years into a rebuild with a good smothering of experienced older players with the remainder of the list made up almost entirely of 1st and 2nd round players. The club was in finals contention until late in the season (for the 2nd year in a row), and had some thumping victories. Sure there were some holes and there were issues, but there was also the basis for an excellent developing team. What has happened since this point is nothing short of horrifying. I don't need to rehash in a step by step blow, you have all read it before. What is important to remember is that Neeld is personally responsible for all the stuff ups, poor trading, player management, game plan, etc etc etc. The buck stops with the coach. The leadership style, everything to do with football is the responsibility of the coach.

As I first said after 4 rounds last year (and I was smashed for saying this). The appointment of Mark Neeld as coach is the greatest mistake this club has made since the sacking of Norm Smith. I wish my prediction was wrong. The red flags started to shoot up almost from his very first press conference. Anyone who knows anything about management would have started to have serious concerns very early. The way he split the playing group was breathtaking. You cannot understate the damage he has done to the playing group, to the club.

I am close friends with one of the player managers who is directly responsible for a number of our better players on our list. I promise that a number of our better players are very seriously considering asking for trades or taking free agency come seasons end. Worse the general AFL community know this, opposition clubs have already started to make moves on our better players. The only chance we have of saving our club from extinction is to sack Neeld today (pretty sure it will happen). Even then the damage he has done may already be terminal.

For God Sake cut out this cancer..... Neeld before it kills us.