Demon Dynasty

Nice. Another defensive mid. Thats gonna help our record low inside 50s

Not sure about that olisik.

Up to Round 15 Magner is ranked 5th for inside 50s.

Only 2 matches i realise but the record is there. Should have received more game time given the parlous state of our mid field stocks atm.

this is a really strange club df26

Very strange. It doesn't resemble "a club" in any normal sense of the word Daisy. Quite possibly part of the reason why players don't turn up to play very often. Decisions which completely deflate and fail to inspire. From the outside it would appear that it doesn't seem to reward "effort" consistantly or promote a hard working "team" environment. It's been run like an "old boys" NETWORK by the boys, for the boys, for decades. Never grown into a real club, let alone a professionaly run AFL one until now. The fact we haven't won an "AFL" premiership since its inception in 1990 and an AFL/VFL one in 49 years says it all.

Looks to me like idiots still run things at MFC

I'm afraid they've never left 31, at least not entirely. The fact we have the worst mid field in the comp but our mid field coach over the last 2 disgraceful seasons is still coaching the mid field, is testament to that. Let alone the fact that he should have been fighting tooth and nail to get the extra mid, in Magner, into the middle to help with rotations well before now.

If we don't land Roos (or 2nd banana Choco) and just as importantly a few very strong mid field recruits (along with some decent assistant/line coaches) i'm afraid The AFL will be funding us for 10s of millions over the next decade and most within the comp (Clubs/Club Presidents/Journos/Opposition supporters) will be calling for us to be axed/relocated. Not that this hasn't been suggested already by some.

Think it's an appropriate time to bump this thread.

Can we say that we got it wrong yet?

No need to say it 3. Easily one of the biggest [censored] ups in MFC's recent lengthy history of [censored] ups.

Didn't find out much unfortunately. Still think roos is a chance apparently. Sorry to disappoint.

I think you meant to say WAS

I would like to hear Biffen's advice on what, logically, should be next.

Are you really sure about that?

Edit: Sorry, i just read Biffs responses. Too late!!

Our game plan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEjI7_BKU9s

I stayed with an American family in the 70s and one of their boys had that electronic American Footy game! I got to play it and the little plastic men moved with alot more purpose than most of the MFC players out there today!

P.S. May i suggest we use this game as our new white board for match days?

CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHY NATHAN JONES ISN'T OUR CAPTAIN?

I can't actually comprehend it.

I'm not sure what boxes you had to "check off" on Neeld's Captaincy check-list, but on my check list:

guts, loyalty, determination, honour, pride, training dedication, consistency etc.

He ticks ALL of them and more.

Craig still believes in the "Two Jacks as Captain" blunder. This situation wont change until a new coach is appointed. And even then i'm not confident he would get it right, unless it's a Roos or Choco appointment.

IMO the 2 Jacks decision was as damaging to the entire playing group/club as any under the Neeld reign. There were just too many damaging blunders during that period as we have all come to learn.

This is the blow back from so many blunders and so much ineptness.

The MFC only has itself to blame.

If i was the AFL i would change the player contract rules and put every MFC player on a performance based contract. If they don't meet their KPI's over rolling 3 to 6 month periods i'd show them the door and just ring in the changes from Casey or other "special assistance" drafting avenues lol.

I can only hope this club has enough $$ available from the AFL to make Roos a massive 'overs' offer.

I would consider Choco as 2nd banana if Roos wont budge.

But foresaking those 2 i think it's allover red rover for this club now. I doubt it will improve significantly under an Eade reign or anyone similar or lessor. I'm not even that confident Choco could turn this shameful ship wreck around. And i know there's no way PJ can sitting behind his desk.

Craig has unfortunately proven himself to be a "has been" in the last few uninspiring weeks, both before the game at the selection table and in terms of being unable to motivate the troops to any degree on match day.

IMHO it's either Roos/Choco or bust. Unless the AFL are happy to keep bailing out a completely irrelevant club for the next decade or more with tens of millions in losses from here over that period.

Without seriously watching it (and the Norf non-effort last week), just glimpses as it's just not worth the effort anymore, our opponents are in the clear by at least 3 to 4 meters almost every time they receive. Meaning they have ample time to make their next disposal/choice/option including kicking for goal. We just give them too much space to work in and don't pressure them out of it often enough. This gives our opponents too much possession early in the match and boosts their confidence ten fold from the get go.

Unable to close check an opponent when we don't have the ball means they are able to run it coast to coast either from the middle or from the kick out with little or no pressure. Not putting in the hard work early means we are chasing tail all day as well. Not in all cases i'm sure there are exceptions but too few to matter. Having too many slackers just deflates the others who are playing a close checking game and working hard to get their own possessions.

I'm not sure why so many are unwilling to close check an opponent once we lose possession (which is alot of the time given our woeful disposal) but those who are unwilling or incapable of doing so must be weeded out and delisted/traded pronto.

This could end up being up to 10 to 15 players off the current senior list but in the end this is reality for us right now.

From what i can garner Craig is pretty uninspiring in his match day selection and structure, as well as whatever it is he's preaching on game day.

I'd say the only chance this club has of ever becoming an AFL competitive football club from here is a new experienced premiership coach and a massive clean out of the present list while keeping a core (8 to 12 or so) who have shown they are willing, capable and/or have super potential to develop.

Dunn is a [censored].... a half trained monkey could make better decisions!

And be more entertaining!!.....

Dont run hard enough. Dont dispose well enough. Kent has been gifted games for a month.

Meanwhile a potential ok midfield option continues to rot at Casey (magnet). Too many talls, not enough mid field rotations to help Jones etc. poor coaching selection (again) by Craig & co.

Another black mark against Craig continuing. The negatives continue to mount by the week for him being considered beyond this season.

I think the explanation is easy RN

They did not want any more negative comment

More than likely on the money OD.

There wasn't a contradictory/combative person on the entire panel taking an opposing view eg., picking up McVeigh on his defense/aggressive outburst earlier in the year when the story first broke, why didn't Luke "the AFL apologist" Darcy ask about Dr Reid's role?, If Reid was left out of the supplements experiment who made the decision? where is Dr Reid now and why has nobody spoken to him (not one person on the panel mentioned or asked about Reid, probably the most important cog in the entire saga outside ot Dank!?) etc etc.

No doubt some unwritten guidelines must have been put in place by 7 hierarchy and producers prior to the program going to air with legal situations/advice as an overlay. 7 not willing to jeopardise the next broadcast contract. With the amount of $$/careers at stake now nothing is left to chance and everything would appear to be very carefully "managed", from the top down. What you say is correct, and looking back on it in the clear light of day now, it was no coincidence that not one member of the panel was willing to put the hard questions up.

If get thrashed today it shows to me that the players have officially put the cue in the rack for 13' (not that it was really off the rack at any stage)

You mean this team actually has a cue somewhere?

Last time I saw them use something that resembled a cue was 2006

This might be a critical point. If (and it's a big if) the players were told that they were only being given vitamins (1) McVeigh would be correct in saying he believed they only ever had vitamins and (2) medical fraud would have been committed if they'd been injected with something else without their knowledge or consent.

It's not strange. He's on Channel 7's payroll. Similarly, Channel 9 goes to Matthew Lloyd for the same reason.

Are you sure about this? Or just a freelance under contract. Does a whole lot of work. Sportingbet TV, SEN 1116. Not sure he's actually on the payroll as an employee for 7 even if making regular appearances. Still doesn't explain why 7 couldn't have brought in another ex Bonger in Reimers for a completely different view/aspect given that he was the first "public" whistleblower.

Mcveigh is hardly independent

Spot on I turned it off could no longer stomach the Ch 7 lot.

A couple were almost weeping for poor James

Their empire is near collapse and they know it.

As for Mcveigh I remember him in the first week of this saying they only ever had Vitamin injections.

Ha Ha

And also derided/lambasted Reimers in this first week for talking rubbish over the supplements program during his whistle blowing interview.

In addition, when asked tonight whether there were any players other than Zaharakis who refused the program McVeigh intially said something along the lines of "there were others", then when prompted again said "the OTHER player", then contradicted himself yet again a little while afterwards saying "the others who refused".

The question also needs to be asked, why is McVeigh's view given more weight than the guy who started the ball rolling in the first place, Kyle Reimers? McVeigh's reaction/info in that first week towards Reimers and his interview has since been proven to be so off the money yet Chanel 7 uses McVeigh as their main "go to" guy for all things Essendon. Seems a little strange IMO. Why not bring in Reimers for his opinion as well???

Fark me ..What a weak character .. Don't even try and persuade him to stay.. If I don't like the new Coach I will take my ball and go home !! We have had enough of that culture.. He is now showing me his on field "non performances" are completely in line with his "soft C...k" character.. Bye Mr. Watts..... I would keep a genuine tryer with the club at heart not a person who grizzles because the coach might not suit HIS demands.. Get rid of these types.. We need to start getting serious in this once great club...I wouldn't play him at all ...From now !! ..

I don't often see eye to eye with you Soxy but on this one i'm with you.

SOFT SOFT SOFT!!! Both mentally and physically.

It was Watts earlier in the year who whined and went sooky sooky la la in public interview after a loss about being dissapointed that he wasn't playing in a team with any decent leaders like Selwood, Hodge etc. No matter how much you might desire that, IMO if you are a team player you just wouldn't go public about it. There's nothing TEAM orientated in that or this bloke's behavior on and off the field. He's a liability and has been carried and given too much leeway by all at the club. And yes that includes Craig. Stand up and have some balls Craigy and call it for what it is mate. The bloke can hold out but don't make a bloody song and dance of it via Manager. He just aint THAT good yet. Honor before honors Mr Craig.

Another negative cross against appointing Craig. I'm tending more and more towards Choco as the days pass (assuming Roos is unavailable as stated).

Watts doesn't or isn't willing to do the hard 1 percenter team things on the field either that might inspire a hard nosed coach and FD to want to continue putting time/effort & $$ into. He plays a "bruise free" selfish style of game with a few minor exceptions demonstrated over 4 years. He isn't alone in that regard (ie., not being hard nosed at the ball/carrier, doing the critical 1 percenters etc) and certainly not expecting a Nathan Jones type, but i'd take a Kent/Howe/Terlich/Grimes type attitude with some reasonable talent over a primadona like Watts anyday.

Time to trade for a half decent mid fielder and reasonable draft pick.

One of the biggest mistakes (of many) this club has made in the last decade was not going after Nic Nat and instead putting their blind faith in this bloke.

His rankings vs the rest of his 37 team mates (that had played up to Round 15 against the Swans on which these stats are taken) are as follows......

Contested 15th (no i'm not expecting a mid field/on baller result here)

Uncontested 17th (not so good given he plays most of the time in space/getting away from his opponent or playing loose down back for the most part of the first half of the season)

Effective Disposals 13th (a pass mark but not setting the world on fire)

Effective Disposal % 8th (a good result but has a below average disposal count vs top 18. Just doesn't get enough of it to be damaging)

Clangers 31st (positive result as you would expect given his disposal effectiveness %)

Contested Marks 9th (average ranking vs top 18 regulars)

Goal Assists 16th

Marks i50 4th (competitive effort but even Fitzy is up on him here at no. 3 and he's only had a handfull of games)

1 Percenters 15th (Bettered by Pedo, Sellar, Strauss, Nicho and even newcomer Clisby!)

Kicks 17th (simply doesn't get enough of it himself unless someone's giving it to him on a platter)

Handballs 15th (as above)

Inside 50s 23rd

Tackles 34th (only beaten to the bottom by 3 others..... Clisby [35th], Blease [36th] and Gillies [37th])

Basically Watts is sitting on the outer edge in most comparative stats vs his team mates (ie., sitting a little inside the top 18 rankings/players on most stats) with the exception of contested marks (9th), Marks i50 (4th) and effective disposal percentage (8th overall). His tackle ranking at 34 is IMO a solid indicator of a man that is either unable or unwilling to impose himself on his opponent and the contest when he doesn't have the ball. I certainly wouldn't want that level of committment in a team member going into a big game where everything's on the line in the clinches.

Time to part company with Jack Watts IF we can get some value for our severly under-manned mid field stocks.

Arguably the best small forward in the game.

He is a FA end of this year and is only 26, with Davey most likely calling it a day at the end of this season I think that we should make a play for him.

He would fill a gaping hole and would give us one of the most dangerous forward lines in the game with Hogan, Dawes, Clark, Betts with some of our quick mids resting.

Even if we don't get him we can force Carlton to pay overs, make them regret paying Mclean what they do.

Worth an attempt. Seriously lacking a small crumbing forward. The ball continuously gets crumbed front and square by most other teams' and rocketed out of our forward line with ease......year after year after year.

Ours were put on the placebo program.

I think you'll find even those on a placebo see some sort of positive outcome.

More like a Flacido program for our lot.

We are all waiting. Not just Mr. Watts

Fair call considering the last few years.

WYL the entire "out of contract" playing group might be waiting!!!

Correct me if i'm wrong but am i to understand that our number one draft pick, (who has been nothing but under whelming since the day we drafted him) is waiting to see if the club (who has been patiently waiting for years for him to actually fulfil or even look like coming close to fulfilling his potential) is able to sign a coach that is up to HIS liking before he even considers putting pen to paper?!!!??!!!

Excuse me, i just need a moment to myself here:

Top stuff Song. Funniest work around these parts for some time. Whole family had a chuckle over that clip and the context. Giving you 8/10 for that one mate

Will be wasted if we don't get a midfield that can get the ball past the centre line

Honestly I am wondering if we should get in the way of such a promising career! This club shows no signs of offering him a future.

I think the first thread here is a forerunner as to whether Hulk will stay or move on after contract expires.

This club would be in serious danger of folding in the next few years without the massive AFL lifebuoy that's already been thrown and we're pretty much AFL governed and funded anyway.

Hurts to say but any young potential stars serious about their footy career won't be hanging around our parts for too long unless there's some sort of miracle turnaround next year, and the mid field problem is without doubt our biggest issue right now. Our stocks are woeful. At the same time how the hell does Choco continue to get a gig and survive the carnage??? The coaching staff and executive must somehow still be impressed. I've certainly yet to see anything positive in this part of our game.

Wait. When Neeld has football university that's a bad thing, but when Craig or pj has a development academy that's a good thing?

Neeld's University may have been biased towards too much theory and he literally bored them all to death with this carp instead of focussing enough time/effort on pounding the skills/drills side of things into them on the track ie., the practical/match similution vs upcoming opponent.

But as Old Dee said up there, we would want to be careful this doesn't go the same way. Most players are meat & 2 veg type blokes (Dawes a possible exception lol).... once you start complicating things beyond 2 +2 you lose em' fairly quickly i would think. I'm not saying they aren't intelligent either, just that they'd rather be on the track mostly, training it, rather than sittin on their arses in front of a 'white board' etc. Oops, i probably shouldn't use that term around here

Craig's first 5 games as Coach vs Neeld's last 5

Average Differential / Average Differential % increase/decrease

Blue = positive result for Craig. Red = negative result for Craig. Black italics = potentially a negative/neutral or positive result.

Contested +18 / +15.6%

Uncontested +3.6 / +1.9%

Effective Disposals +10.4 / +4.7%

Effective Disposal % -3.3%

Tackles +10.4 / +17.4%

Clangers -2.6 / -5.5%

Contested Marks +1 / +12.2%

Goal Assists +1.8 / +37.5%

Marks i50 +1.8 / +28.1%

Clearances +4.6 / +14.8%

1 Percenters +4 / +9.0%

Bounces +6.6 / +94.3%

Kicks +22 / +12.5%

Handballs +2.6 / +1.9%

Inside 50s +6 / +16.9%

*Disposals Per Goal -6.7 / -15.0%

Rebound 50s +2.6 / +7.4%

Kick to handball ratio has increased by 10.4% (Craig 1.43 v Neeld 1.30)

*Note that our worst results this year were as follows..... 75.5 disposals per goal vs the Cats under Craig and 68 vs the Pies under Neeld. Our 2 best results were both under Neeld. 16.36 vs the Giants in Rnd 4 and 21.57 vs the Lions in Rnd 5. Craig's best result here so far is 23 vs the Bulldogs.

Stats: Courtesy of Footywire

actually you can od make a silk purse out of a sow's ear

how to polish a turd

Daisy would you mind refraining from spoiling such "tried and true" phrases!

We "live and die by the sword" and have to "gild the lily" a little at times in order to "make the most of what we have".

Besides, you have to "give a little to get a little" and i'm afraid OD is kind of correct here...... "you can't fatten a pig on market day", especially when it's a sow and MFC's market day appears to be so bloody far away!!