binman

Only if they are good. And besides how many players consistently have a disposal efficiency of around 85% (in the league, little lone Melbourne). So if his stats sky rocket and 85% of them hit their target then that's fantastic, particularly seeing we struggle so much with turnovers

Excellent post and i agree. Watts still has a huge amount of improvement left, in large part due to the fact he is likely, in the next 2-3 years, put on aprox 5-8 kgs and perhaps even get a bit taller. He'll fill out in the chest and his legs will get stronger making him super difficult to move off the ball. The other area he will improve is in the all round footy coaching (eg fitness, line coaches, tactics, sports science etc) he is now receiving that he hasn't previously enjoyed, or at least to the same extent (if for no other reason than the huge increase in FD spending). Hurley on the other may put on a little bit of weight and height still but i expect not nearly as much as Watts (logical seeing he is older). I don't think he would want to put on much more weight anyway as he is not super quick and it may slow him down. I think Hurley is a terrific player and would love form him to be a demon. But i'd take Watts before him all day every day. As noted above he has more scope for improvement, is a better runner and athlete and can play in more positions (which will end up being a real positive for Watts, this business about him having to play as a KPF because that't what we picked him for is a nonsense as Neeld seems to have conceded). Sure Hurley is more ferocious at the ball and that is terrific, perhaps even his best asset. But whilst Watts is unlikely to play with the same intensity he will improve in this area (has already IMO and i thought even his harshets critics would have to acknowledge he was great in this regard on Sat night)). Watts makes up for the gap with far superior skills and an incredibly quick brain. Some bits of play that reinforced that for me on Sat were: Not getting sucked into packs and trusting the one Melbourne player to win the ball (obviously listening to his coaches about the need to have outside players) The over the head handball, in tight to Sellar i think, who broke from our back line. In fact there wer numerous examples of his super quick hands A great mark on the wing at an important point in the game, followed up with a pin point pass off the left foot (he could have used his right foot as it was a stoppage but would have had to turn his body as he was kicking to a player on his left hand side, he had no hesitation whatsoever to use his left foot) The 12 intercepts he was credited with, fantastic. The commentators (mainly that [censored] Darcy but also Richo) were saying how great fletcher is in that role of back half sweeper and whilst admittedly they played Sylvia on him after quarter time to curb him he ended up with only 7 intercepts. It is worth noting that Watts wasn't playing as a free man either

Thanks. That makes sense. Neeld very keen for him not to discuss, obviously wants to keep as much info from Buckley as possible (probably shouldn't have picked Beamer to go on with him then as he's not the sharpest tool in the shed). Neelds an intense dude isn't he. In terms of strategy next week it should be interesting as Neeld knows their strengths etc and having worked with Buckley for some time would be across his philosophies

Yes i agree, just watched it and i got the sense Neeld didn't want Moloney to say any more about his different role. Which was what btw? Did he play a tagging or run with role, perhaps on Stanton?

What i find funny is 'commentators' making these sort of silly statements when there is not a hope in hell the club would/could do it. I mean there is no way the club or the players would relinquish the captaincy. There are always examples of this sort of palaver. The one that got my goat recently was David King saying the club should come out and admit it made a mistake in appointing Neeld. I mean as if they would do that, even in they did actually think they had made an error. Never going to happen so why (especially if you are a so called expert) bother suggesting it. Crazy stuff.

The problem is that she/he is Monoccullar. If the name was Binocular he'd have had all 7, 200 seconds

Amazing really to see a fit Petterd running around for Casey. I recall the talk on demonland about Gold Coast being him to him and the angst on this board about that. Can't get a game in the team stone motherless last is not a good look and one wonders where his AFL career is at.

I'm for sticking the course, rome wasn't built in a day etc etc. But if we are 0-222 at seasons end then its most def time to start rocking the boat. Conversely what if we end up with 5-6 wins will critics of Neeld and the rest of the coaching staff ease up a bit?

I went to the doctor for my speech impediment and he gave me a predictive script to get filled at the chemist

So, so true Redleg. Thank you for a bringing a bit of sense to the dialogue. I have said it before but Melbourne has largely been a complete basket case off the field for much of the last 45 years and this is the key problem at the club. Effective governance underpins any successful organisation. Our woeful on field performance for much of that time is merely the manifestation of the off field chaos, division and petty politics that has longed defined our board and footy admin teams (hopefully no longer though). Until we get the off field stuff right forget the on field stuff. The focus is often on the CEO but again governance is the key and the buck stops with the board. Things seem to me be much better in that regard and off field things are on the improve in terms of football department spend, facilities etc etc. Root and branch re build is the only way if we want to turn around a ship that ran aground decades ago

Pre empting and predicating a mid season draft prescriptive text ???????

I agree with this to an extent, it has been an issue that has long plagued us. However there is no doubt fatigue impacts on skill and decision making abilities (at least it does for me!). If we have an issue with skill, which i agree we do, fatigue will make it even more an issue, particularly if the skill problems are related to poor technique and perhaps even more so if the skill problems are related to decision making.

Yes this is true. Interesting article a couple of weeks ago about the approach by the Bombers new fitness dude (the machine, the animal, the warrior - or some such nonsense) who said this idea underpinned his approach and consequently they have really focused on building body mass and strength to ensure player can better with stand (and not fatigue as much) the battering that modern footy demands. Also interesting that Bomber Thompson pushed for this guy (and his approach) as this strength has been as important to Geelongs sustained success as their corridor focused, attacking game plan and highly skilled players capable of pulling it off. In terms of the last couple of lines i also agree. I think the point is that Melbourne at present are not elite athletes and probably won't be until at least start of next season and yes it is dead obvious they are absolutely exhausted, hence that sense in the second half of quarters and games you always have the feeling they are about to be run over.

Bollocks. We didn't win our "fair share" with Bailey. 8.5 was the high water mark was it not. The players knew his game plan and were committed to it - and why not it suited front runners and lazy players (it relied on speed of ball movement not players having to run hard to cover space). It was an attacking free wheeling style that was bound to come off at some point, partic against sides who were not on their game or who tried to play attacking footy aginst us. But we simply could not get any where near a side who played hard contested footy, flooded or ran both ways, still can't because we simply are not fit enough. Full stop. You can't seriously suggest we could have beaten Carlton purely on mental strength. Apparently our GPS data is showing we are running much further in games this year and this obviously takes it toll. We continued to put in but just ran out of legs. Blind Freddy could have seen it

GWS. Our grand final?

That's right, and besides players can only leave if they're out of contract (or quit footy i suppose). I'm not up on contracts etc but i doubt there's a huge number out of contract at season's end and precious few of them are likely to attract any interest whatsoever from other clubs. Teams might be keen on Jamar but performances like Sunday where as a the key ruck-man he gets the princely total of 5 possessions won't help his cause. Indeed we have few players full stop that other clubs would want - contracted or uncontracted - which doesn't really put us in good position to trade (perhaps we could package up 5 player lots - "a bit shop soiled but great filler for your VFL affiliate side - get em while they're hot!") There will be a mass exodus, mark (neeld) my word, but it won't be because players are clamoring to leave. MN will cut as many players as is practicable, i reckon up to 8 or nine.

We will win 5-6 and won't finish last or second last

He's buggered like the rest of the list. Post bye freshen up and 5-6 wins will follow

I know i'm banging on about this (i'll stop i promise - or maybe not) i really reckon all these queries can be explained by our intensive training regime. The players are super fatigued, from the first bounce and then progressively more so. When exhausted their structures and ability to keep playing their assigned role falls away. As for Trengove, in an article a couple of weeks ago Gary Lyon noted how slow he appeared ("heavy in the legs" i think was the phrase) and put it down to a heavy pre season and suggested a freshen up was in order. Well i reckon the pre season has continued and they are still in a heavy training phase but post bye they'll get the freshen up and all players will relish the drop in training load. 5-6 wins in the second half of the season is my tip

There were some comments flying around on Demonland that we should have gone after Lyon as a coach a bit harder and that he wouls have been better than Neeld. My view is i'm bloody glad we didn't as Lyon and his approach to footy shits me (i expect Neeld will get more expansive once we master the defensive part of the game - Lyon will always remain dour it would seem). However i understand the argument that his experience would have been useful. However there is an obvious parallel between the two coaches in terms of their new positions. Both have taken over flashy, attacking sides that have been heavily criticised over the last 5 - 10 years for a poor culture, being inconsistent and flaky. Also both taking over from coaches that had an aggressive, attacking centre corridor style and are replacing that style with a boundary hugging contested footy style. Wait for the big questions of Lyon after today's game. Two second half goals and only five for the match.With a side that all pundits rate as much more talented than the Melbourne list and much closer to a flag. If they were a Victorian side they would be under the pump here but i bet the Freo fans will get increasingly vocal (sounds familiar). So who would people prefer, Lyon or Neeld?

Such a ridiculous op. So, so silly it beggars belief. Watts played another pretty good game of AFL footy. If you look at his last 20 odd games he has been one of most consistent players at the clun in terms of performance. Full stop. Did he make mistakes today. Yes. But again he is not alone. Was he soft?. I don't think so. He got his share of contested ball, went back with the flight a few times and got some hard balls. Used the ball incredibally skillfully a couple of times in close - even the Channel 7 commentators noted it. A peer of his is Hurley. I'd rather Watts any day, so much more upside. Hurley was poor against GWS. I know he's coming back from a hammy but he was poor before he did his hammy. He will also be a top player but he will do so without any of the hate JW receives. Also he is playing back, another new position for him to master. How many roles has he had this year and how many positions has he been asked to play? People knock him yet he has not had a chance to settle in one role. And as much as it pains me to say Trengove was taken no 2 in his draft IIRC. Has been made captain, I reckon he is a good player but Watts's numbers this year slay his unfortunately. I'm not saying knock Trengove but if people are realistic they'd be questioning Trengove before they ask questions of Watts. Watts is our only elite level kick and hand baller. Hand balling and kicking. The two most fundamental skills of the game and JW excels at both. Add his ability to read the play and you have a pretty complete package. Not playing AFL footy in 2 years? So, so silly

I (sort of) agree to this. In terms of Neeld and his game plan i'll give him to mid next season to form my judgement (obviously i have my short term views etc but i'll keep my powder dry). As i have said in another thread in the short term i have little doubt they are getting absolutely flogged on the track which means on top of not being able to fully recover before the next game means they are stuffed late in quarters and in games. They'll ease up in the second half of the season and we'll get a few wins (5-6 i reckon, which if we did wouldn't look so bad compared to last year) I'm completely unfit but when i do do some exercise i know once i get fatigued (about 10 mins after i started) my capacity to think straight diminishes and i suspect fatigue will also be affecting the players ability to stay focused on their role, structure etc (as NJ has pointed out they are working on making things instinctive, which takes ages). But in regard to the quote above i share the view in so far as i reckon there is an incredible amount of revisionism going on in the media about our so called game plan and form in 2011. I reckon we went backwards in 2011, wins not withstanding. Of course alot of player want to play that sort of game, its what they are used to and it doesn't take as much effort but half decent sides crushed us last year because of it. Essendon (as much as i hate to admit it) and the Crows are playing great attacking footy this year but is 100% underpinned by ferocious tackling and pressure and attention to defensive structures.

RudeBoy i'm a bit surprised by this post and not a little concerned in so far as i can't recall many posts from you where you have been negative about the club. Given your potential insights it worries me more than David Kings rantings that you reckon he's spot on about everything.

I reckon they will do a bit of both. There's no doubt he will cut the list back as far as practicable (there is a limit, perhaps no more than 9?). Neeld will want some hard bodies who will do what they're told and play whatever role they are assigned. They will come from a mix of FA, trading and picking up ready to go players from the VFL (or other equivalent comps). If you are a committed, hard training, strong VFL in the early to mid 20's you've got look in. Some of the Casey boys would be on that radar no doubt. Basically they need a new senior group. But they will also want some quality young players with their early picks. Can't have it all i guess but they will do their best to balance these demands.

To me this is the nub of the issue. No one can argue huge changes were (are) needed at the club but i agree with the sentiment above and to be honest was concerned from the outset with Neelds tough man, what's past is in the past approach. I get the feeling he is moderating this a bit though and one hopes he is savvy enough to change if required (not that he should be knocked off course by the players, we def don't want the tail wagging the dog but getting 40 odd blokes heading in the same direction is obviously a very complex process and requires a level of sophistication and acknowledgement that one size doesn't always fit all)