binman

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

Why is he doing any interviews at the moment? Shut the fu. No surprise the comment comes as a shock to Clark. It is at odds with what Neeld said pre season and i'll bet very much at odds with what he pitched to Clark when he convinced him to come to the dees.

Fans have to remain patient apparently. Honestly he is clueless when it comes to communicating messages.

How often is someone sacked by an organisation only to be reemployed some time later (particularly CEOs)?

Me too, not sure why

That's all well and good but why is that he can not force his way into a side as deplorable as the dees? He was playing career best footy at the time of that interview and was easily in our best 22 and he can't get a game now? His form at Casey doesn't warrant it and i'm not blaming Neeld but what is going on? Its interesting with Misson. I have heard nothing but positives from players about him and i suspect that at the least he has them on side. I hope stays when the clean out of coaches happens. Perhaps he should coach.

Alanis Morrisette take note. This is irony.

No.

What have the Roman's ever done for us?

Spot on Django. Ports win loss ratio is not relevant to what is essentially a mission statement. His players can lose games and still meet their coaches base line expectation. That's essentially what Robert Shaw said yesterday in comments that he resented comparisons between Fitzroy and Melbourne. he acknowledged they were not a good side but they never gave up. Its a great message, applicable for any sport. No matter what your standard you never give up.

We will never give up is absolutely not a silly statement. It is a mantra, a code, a rally cry. It is achievable. And you know what? Port are playing as if they have integrated into their culture already. They have been terrific and have come back on two occasions fro 7 goals down to win and fought out the game against North. I would have loved it if Neeld had said that as opposed to the ridiculous hardest team to play against that will be the epitaph of his coaching career. I wish we would never give up - every game we have played thus far have whole periods of the game where we have completely given up.

Yes, but there was no reason he couldn't have been promoted last week as Grimes was already on the LTI. And he should have been given how poor our mid field is. Crazy stuff.

I'm slowly losing all positivity about the dees (not the club, the current directioon) and my faith in the coaching panel and their selection decisions is gone. I simply do not understand how Sellar could remain in the side. He may have played a role last week but he was terrible. The same could be said of Nicholson (though i like his effort level). I'm also confused as why Magner didn't play last week and why Fitzy isn't getting his cance given his form in the VFL. However that to me is not the worst of it. Two decisions completely baffle me: Why has Toumpas come in this week not last week? I don't mind him as an in but jeez the VFL had a bye last week so he missed a game (and the potential development) and they had the chance to play him against younger opponents in a game that nominally we had a chance to win. Instead they bring him in to game where we are likely to be hammered (Richmond are $1.01 to win - unbackable) and he will be monstered. What sort of approach to player development is that? Why Jetta this week not last week? Defies all logic. He had to come back last week. He played with great spirit and we needed hard bodies. Instead they effectively add a week to his two week suspension and he couldn't even play VFL. Crazy stuff

Which makes the fact that he was our best player in the first 4 rounds last season all the more sobering

Good points, well made

Ahhhhh! My head hurts. How on earth could you come to that conclusion. Neeld is the one who has set the non negotiables. The talent of the playing list has no bearing whatsoever on effort and desire. Neeld got rid of those he thought were a bad influence and brought in players who would help instill a fierce, elite (ha) take no prisoners culture From Connolly's article today: 'Melbourne was 15th for contested ball when it took on Richmond in round three last year. It finished the season 16th. Now it's 18th. On the clearance front, the Demons went into that April game 16th. It finished the season 18th. It's still 17th. Over the last year-and-a-bit, Richmond has been able to concentrate more on ironing out the rough edges in its make-up, finding some goalkicking alternatives to Jack Riewoldt in attack, and improving the quality of its disposal coming out of defence. Melbourne doesn't have that luxury when it can't even count on making it to football's first base, having a genuine crack.' Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/tigers-v-demons-no-debate-now-20130516-2jo9h.html#ixzz2TQqexefb

Ratten head coach, Black mid field coach. I'm feeling better already

I'm a little confused so instead i'll say that based on what i have seen so far Neeld has no chance whatsoever of achieving his objective

Sorry dee-luded but on this particlar issue i think you may have an apt posting name. There was a time i would have agreed with you (last season to be precise and perhaps even part of this season). Not any more. Last Sunday sealed it for me. Neeld has to go. Soon. Bye. Then bye bye

Surely PJ it is reasonable to expect some evidence of at least making progress towards meeting his stated goal. What employer would employee someone, allow that person set a long term goal (eg 3 years) and not track progress against that goal.