binman

If that's true we'll get conclusive evidence one way or the other if Neeld has the support of the players. All evidence thus far is he hasn't and if we play with a similar lack of effort this week Hawthorn will destroy us. I can sense a massive, massive loss and unfortunately would not be surprised if it was 20 goals plus.

Any more detail iva?

Easy done Iva - and you will enjoy the respite from trolldom. Go to your name at top right. Click and the button for manage settings then navigate to set ignore settings.

Exactly. The message isn't the issue. The forum this issue is delivered in is the issue. Plain stupid to be honest and i thought so at the time. RPFC's point in the post above that "most of Neelds words in public are poorly worded and haphazard and they get misconstrued constantly" is spot on. He is a head coach a and for any coach (in any sport) being a good communicator is a key competency. There are any number of examples of him making comments that are not clear, the recent one about 5 years being the most recent - a comment that had Mitch Clark perplexed. Its one reason why i think he should stop doing so much media. If your messaging makes things more confusing don't say anything. I wonder whether his poor communication in the media extends to explaining to his players his game plan or what he wants them to do. The on field evidence suggests it does. Much was made of him being a teacher and good teachers also have to be good communicators. I wonder if he was a good teacher?

i don't think any of these reasons are plausible. I'd suggest the plausible reason for this rumour is the same as the one about Roos. To destabilise Neeld.

What about rewarding Fitzy for good form at Casey?

Right. Do you understand parenthesis? Perhaps with your ability to misquote you could become a footy journo for the age or the hun

Almost all of these players left because they were not best 22 and wanted to play more senior footy (with some obvious exceptions, two of which are covered in my post above). Of course as say above players leave but if Watts goes we will have had 3 of our best 22 choose to leave the club in 2 years.

I didn't say MFC members wouldn't care if Watts left. I said i would be gutted. As for my comment that clubs with healthy cultures don't lose players perhaps i needed to be more literal. Clubs with good cultures rarely lose player because they are not happy or leave because they have been treated poorly. Clubs with good cultures rarely lose multiple players who are in the best 22. Clubs with good cultures rarely lose their young guns (potential a graders with 40-60 games). Clubs with good cultures keep their best players. Think Sydney. Think Hawthorn. Think the Cats. Even Port were able to keep their young guns. Give me some examples of a club noted for its culture who has had a genuine young gun choose to leave? And the examples you gave? Judd returned to Victoria but before he did helped win a flag for West Coast (and played what 150 games for them?). Ablett was lured north for a then unprecedented amount of money (interestingly rumors were a factor in his decision was he was not getting on with an increasingly erratic coach - a coach who left in acrimonious circumstances soon after. Also interesting that the talk is Ablett may return to the cats) . But not before playing 150 odd games and winning a flag. Both clubs were solid and remained solid after their star player departed.

Like it Chook. Can't see Nicho getting dropped though. Neeld likes him and he is a runner. Fitzy should be rewarded for his performances in the magoos.

Top post as was the one you quoted. Clubs with strong, healthy cultures do not lose players . Full stop. I would be gutted if Watts was to leave, but you know what i would not be down on him. I totally agree with GNF's post about his treatment during and post round 2. Shameful - and it came after Neeld publicly slagged Watts only months into his tenure as a coach. Since when is public humiliation effective motivational tool? For that matter since when is public humiliation an acceptable management approach. Hasn't Neeld heard the management mantra - public praise, private criticism. Leaving aside the fact we can not afford to lose any quality player, or that Watts is closing in on that 60-80 game mark that Neeld has been at pains to point out is a crucial milestone in a players development if Watts (or Frawley, or Gawnwas ) was to go it will tear at the fabric of mateship and connection that is crucial at a footy club. Watts is clearly a popular team member and no doubt brings a really positive energy to the club. He is a heart soul bloke and every clubs needs them. His team mates will be shattered if he goes and like me i doubt if he does few will blame him.

'Sources yesterday told the Herald Sun the versatile playmaker wanted a fresh start next season, save for a major change of fortune at Melbourne in the second half of the season.' - one assumes the source is Watts manager. Perhaps the mate of Grand new flag. Like the bit about 'save for a major change of fortune" - code for save for Mark Neeld getting sacked. I'm assuming the source has put this out there to put pressure on the club to sack Neeld. I don't like that sort of tactic but probably indicates Watts unhappy. I would hate to lose Watts. The tragic irony would be that my prediction of him making AA in a couple of years would come true, just not as a demon player.

A disgruntled Watts apparently 'wooed by 8 clubs' http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/afl/fremantle-heads-pack-of-eight-clubs-chasing-the-signature-of-melbourne-defender-jack-watts/story-fni5f22n-1226648706348

DWA you are absolutely not alone. You can put him on ignore but like a weed he keeps coming up as quotes. There have been some annoying posters on this site since i've joined and whilst t he is not as objectionable as some i think he now has taken the mantle of the most annoying DL poster. Quite some feat. His need to blindly respond to any critique of the club is strange. I have come to the conclusion he is like a reverse troll. Please fellow posters stop giving him oxygen and at the least stop quoting him so at least i don't have to see his posts.

I reckon that's bollocks. If you want to be a senior AFL coach there are very few chances to become one. Only 18 clubs and perhaps on average perhaps 2 vacancies a year. Someone like Roods has the luxury of picking and choosing so but an Ayres, Eade, Williams or Ratten (or any talented assistant coaches) doesn't. I have a gut feeling we'll get Ratten.

What are the odds?

Like Gary Lyon?

Yes i recall that. I think those who wanted Bailey gone might be reassessing a little now - perhaps talk of winning quarters is better than no talk of winning whatsoever. But yes his call, though i struggle to believe constantly reinforcing the lack of experience could actually help the players, but there you go.

I agree. I thought AD was pretty good actually last night on Footy Classified and he was pretty clear he'd want to be confident the dees would use any pick wisely. Swapping say a top 3 pick for a decent mid would be a start.

Good post. Yes even using that scale we are a ways off, but not as far as he seems to be suggesting if they get the development right i would have thought. As for supporters not understanding a nuanced analysis of the list, experience age etc why not just stop saying anything about it? Perhaps he could simply say we are teaching the boys to win. And as a starting point we will try to win as many contests and quarters as possible

The way he dealt with Walters was very instructive. Obviously Lyon has very high standards in terms of training, dedication etc (as several players have made clear in interviews). Walters wasn't meeting those expectations apparently and by all accounts he was told to go away (to Claremont) and work if he wanted to. Tough stance and one that Neeld might have also taken i guess. What is impressive is the whilst Walters has obviously put in the hard work and is now top shelf i can only assume Lyon dealt with what must have a tricky situation in a way that didn't disenfranchise Walters and was sufficiently supportive and motivating. Not saying that Neeld would not have been able to this, just that it is a hard balance to be a tough, brook no argument coach, whilst also being sufficiently nurturing and supportive. Perhaps that comes from experience but i do wonder if Neeld got the first bit right in his first year but not yet the second bit?

Absolutely spot on 55, was saying exactly the same thing to a mate the other day. I reckon Neeld is being a little disingenuous with his comments about inexperience as historically few mature aged recruits came into the system so that for a player getting to the oft quoted key 60-80 games mark they would be 23-24 years old. Whilst of course experience playing AFL is super important in terms of performance i would argue of equal importance is that by 23-24 a players is physically ready to endure the demands of AFL footy, can take the punishment and has the core strength to compete week in week out. Look at Wines, good player but of course he's going to taper as the physical demands hit. When he gets to 23-24 he won't taper so much and will be a much more valuable player (again of course because of his experience but also his physical strength). As you have noted the older players will be able to play at a consistent AFL level faster than younger guys, which is obviously is a key reason Neeld drafted a bunch of older players. Terlich is a good example. If Neeld was being a little bit more transparent/honest he would also talk about average age of the side. A different story would emerge and it would be one that wouldn't give the same cover or excuse for where we are at that the average/total games provides.

probable Neeld response: we won't know if in fact it was a loss until we have time to properly analyse the data and KPIs, but a preliminary scan indicates that on most metrics it was a win

What about Dawes for captain coach?

I wouldn't mind if he ruined MFC if it meant winning a flag before he did so