hardtack

Granted it is not a large number, but the OPs original request was not about numbers as much as about the fact he believes not a single player has improved. The inference to be taken from the OP is that players are going backwards under Neeld which is why I named Garland and Jones, because they continue to improve. Sylvia's improvement is in his attitude, which is something that can be attributed to Neeld. Also, as I understand it from other posts on these forums, Casey are applying Neeld's methods as well (is this correct?) and they seem to be on an upward trend. So BH, do you care to name any that have gone backwards as a direct result of Neeld's coaching?

Why? Do blinkers improve the ability to focus?

Watts had what was arguably his best season last year under Neeld and is finally starting to show a little hardness this year, Grimes has improved, Jones continues to improve, Frawley and Davey have been rediscovering their respective mojos, Garland is playing the best and most consistent football o0f his career, Howe is starting to really develop as a player as Neeld seems to have been able to convince him to temper his inclination to always go for the speccy (sp?) and Sylvia is showing consistency and applying himself much more than he has ever done in the past. As Bedraggled Dee mention, Clark has found marked improvement on what he was for the most part at Brisbane (he has been given the chance to play in his best position) and the same could be said for Dawes who has already shown marked improvement on what he was offering at the Pies last season. Now, how about you name a few players that have genuinely gone backwards under Neeld, Mongel Dee.

I agree on the first part. To me it seems that their fitness may still be an issue. After working so hard in the first quarter, it seemed that they started the second feeling the affects of all that hard work and started to make bad errors in judgement and in execution... both of which can be attributed to physical tiredness. One thing I noticed that I thought indicated a general mental tiredness was that whenever a behind was scored by Collingwood, there was no-one running to a space or calling for the ball to enable a fast restart; often players 40 to 50 metres up the field were walking to their man with their backs to the player (usually Garland) taking the kick.

They are now saying on AFL360 that it's 3 out of the last 5.

The wheels on this bus are square not round, they don't go round, they're square not round...

Well, it seems that David Schwarz will be the only happy Melbourne "supporter".

How are we going to keep this kind of intensity for 4 quarters?

Watts is really putting in well.

Well, I'm not so sure that Lyon, Newman and Brayshaw will bring too much to the side, but I suppose it's worth a try ;-)

GCS have been pretty much a stable team for the past three years and so are now gelling very well. Unfortunately due to our multiple rebuilds, we don't have that unity.

Where did that come from? Care to show me where I have "gone the throat" with anyone and where I am going both barrels? And what does my post count have to do with anything? Weird post.

Settle down... does it really matter what I think? Will it make any difference to what the club does? No... just like anything you or anyone else on here might say, it will not make an iota of a difference as to what happens to the coach or the board at the MFC.

The comparison between Thompson and Neeld is not based on performance... it is about the fact that Thompson was given the chance to continue his work, a decision made that flew in the face of supporters/members calling for his sacking. Neeld has stated from the outset that a complete rebuild would be undertaken... he has already set up the forward line going ahead with some very good recruitment in Dawes, Clark and Hogan. The back line was already reasonably well set up, our ruck stocks are not too bad and the midfield is now the only area in which we are really falling down. It is obvious that if allowed to continue his work, Neeld will be recruiting experienced mids and possibly an experienced defender. All along I have said that he should be given the opportunity to complete this and then if he cannot show improvement next year with a complete list, he will obviously be replaced - to repeat, I believe that replacing him now will only fracture the playing group more and will not result in an improved performance. This is just my opinion and if the likes of BH wish to deride me for having that opinion, then so be it. If the club decides to terminate Neeld before this season is out...again, so be it. The club will do what they see fit and all of the bleating by the likes of BH will not sway them one way or the other. I also mentioned in an earlier post that I have no issue with paid up members not attending games... I just question whether BH is indeed a paid up member as with his stance I would be more inclined to believe he is holding off buying a membership until Neeld is gone.

Not sure what the "questionable dealings with sponsors" you refer are. Care to elaborate? Couldn't it be possible to attend games to show support for the players and to encourage them ( a good way to get better performances out of them), and take placards with messages directed towards the administration in order to get the message across to them directly... the media would be onto that like flies on stink. Supporters were happy to do that when directed at Scully, so why not do something similar to get the message across to the board? And yes, if you are referring to the Carlton v Essendon game, that was a cracker. It has however really put the score reviewing system under the hot lights as in this case it has had a direct impact on the premiership points. It should have been a draw at worst and, if that point was disallowed, a one point victory for Carlton. Well at least that will take some heat off us in the press over the next few days I suppose.

I take it that means you won't be logging on to Demonland that day? ;-)

Well, I am not alone in that comparison... it has been made by media pundits both respected and otherwise; so the fact that you choose to attempt to belittle me with your use of language doesn't particularly bother me in the slightest. It does however give me a fairly good insight into the maturity (or lack of) you bring to the debate. On another level, I'm not really sure what your choice of avatar is telling us about you, but there may be a direct correlation between that and your debating style (en masse)?

As I recall, he had a lot more to work with and yet the short sighted supporters were calling for his head - fortunately the board opted to allow him to complete his rebuild and the rest is history... as I said, if the likes of yourself were Geelong supporters, you would no doubt have been leading the mob on their witch hunt. If you're not happy, then perhaps you should go and buy yourself a membership so that you are eligible to start your own takeover bid for the club's leadership... then you can do whatever you like and sack whoever you like. In the meantime, you are still nothing more and nothing less than a fair weather supporter. And hey, I'm the first to admit I am not a particularly great footy brain, but perhaps you should take a long hard look at yourself... you seem to mistake your own arrogance for knowledge.

Well, for my part, I already explained the reason in a previous post... can't believe you didn't read more closely before passing comment.

The rebuild would be complete this year... we are short quality mids and possibly one more defender. These will be brought in at the end of the year and then the improvement should begin. If you believe that sacking him now is going to achieve anything beyond fracturing the player group even more, and if you think that a caretaker coach is going to get any more improvement, then you are delusional.

Nothing to do with it... a challenge to find a worse period was put up and so I took it up. No one believes Neeld is doing a good job, but some of us believe he should be given the opportunity to complete his rebuild (end of this year). No doubt people like Ben Her, yourself and a few others would have been leading the charge to have Bomber Thompson sacked had you been Geelong supporters at that time.

Ok, if percentage is the significant factor, then: 1919 42.96% (but it should be noted... this is an end of season percentage and you are isolating a percentage mid-season that is more likely to increase than decrease I would think).

No problem with that at all... at least you have the choice unlike we interstate members. Do we know if Ben Her is a member?... I for one get the feeling that he/she is probably holding out on a purchase conditional on Neeld's departure.

Love the selective quoting. And just because we aren't as prone as yourself to throwing a hissy-fit, that doesn't necessarily mean we are 100% behind Neeld. It means we support the players and we support the club.

1919... didn't win a game and it took them until 1925 to make it to finals football. 1981 was the next when they one a single game. I have been following them since the late 1950's and have never wavered in my support... unfortunately, living interstate means I cannot afford to attend on a regular basis, something I certainly did when I lived in Melbourne.