Macca

And isn't it Dank that doesn't blink much at all? What a weird combo. To blink or not to blink. ...

Well we've got Redleg running for President/Chairman (got my vote) Coach - pantaloons CEO - Biffen or stuie You and I can take care of the barrels for the pleasant Sunday arvo's and Bob's ya Uncle.

He posts here regularly. I was being a little flippant although pantaloons did put up his hand to coach the team a few days ago. You obviously missed that post.

pantaloons

I've often wondered what might have happened if we'd won that round 22 game in 1996 vs the Hawks. Remembering that the Hawks would have missed the finals if they hadn't have won the game against us by 1pt. I know that they hadn't voted on the merger proposal yet and them making the finals might have given their voting members more hope to stay as a non merged club (you'd think so anyway) Had we already voted in favour of the merger before that game? 1 point might have changed history ... 1996 Season

For a $400,000 a year and up to 1 million+, you would have an endless queue. There are about 100+ assistants in the system - most of whom would give their eye teeth for a shot at the top job. Any prospective coach would know what the rules of engagement are. They're not forced to do it. It's not a knock on Mark Neeld, it's any head coach, anytime, anywhere. .

I don't doubt that you may be right but ... Right now, if we take Don on face value, there will not be any more changes at the club this season. The 'resignation' of Cameron Schwab is according to Don, the only change we will see at the MFC. That's it. At the end of the press conference Don said, "No, Mark Neeld's not on notice at all" If we continue to play the way we do, it's time to (once again) buckle up for the long haul. A new CEO is going to need a fair bit of time to turn this ship around.

Not sure what time frame you're talking about JR, but if we're talking '09, '10 and '11 then shouldn't the club have acted on Cameron then? Why now? If he meddled, you make a decision on him then, you don't not do that and then in spite of all those previous 'possible' indiscretions, offer him a 3 year contract in August last year. And then because of our current predicament and possible pressure from the outside, make a decision now based on those previous 'possible' indiscretions. (is this sounding a bit 'Yes, Prime Minister(ish)?) My argument is about the principal of how the club might have acted. The parting of the ways may be the best way forward but the timing of it is a little baffling.

You might be right Wyl but we don't have proof positive of that. We probably won't find out the real reasons. If Don acts on every person at the club because they 'Polarise the supporter base', he's gonna have to dismiss a few people - we wouldn't have many players left! I have no problem with change but it has to be done properly and it has to make sense. As a coach, the threat of dismissal is always there at any time if the team you coach can't win games. To 'change' a CEO like this is a little unprecedented. Or should I say, it doesn't happen very often after 2 games of footy. I'm not necessarily going into bat for CS, it's just a strange time to do it.

It's entirely possible that CS has been 'moved on' because of '186'. Dismissed 20 months later because of what happened that day. If that is true then the same people who kept him on and later on gave him a 3 year deal, are the same people responsible for today's decision. "Polarises the supporter base" according to Don. That cannot be a 24 hour opinion or maybe it can. Did Don get a stack of emails on Monday from angry fans saying 'Sack Schwab'? How on earth does the team play badly because a number of our supporters wanted to see the end of CS? Makes no sense to me. Example ... Supporters - "We want Schwab out" The Team - "Ok then, that's gonna make us play really badly now" I can't believe the departure of CS is going to make Neeld coach any better or the players play any better. From what we can gather, the Football Dept. has been allowed full autonomy to go about their business. We've also been told that Schwab had largely been kept out of the Football Dept. How is this decision going to make us play better?

In a lot of ways we've now got more questions now than we had before. Huge turnaround in 24 hours. Don says that CS polarises the supporter base? How long has Don and the Board had this view? 24 hours? Don did not need to say that about Cameron at the press conference. Or at all, for that matter - unnecessary. You've got to think of the blokes future. How can Don say two totally conflicting things about CS in the space of 24 hours and then just fob it off as if it's ok to do a complete about face? If Schwab had been kept out of football matters since '186', then how can this be effecting our on field performances? Can we assume that the departure of Schwab is related to our on field performances? Are the players suddenly going to play a lot better because he's gone? And if the team does play a lot better then what are we to think then? If our form remains putrid then what happens?

Macca 12.6

Welcome to 'land Strafford and good post. Yep. Whilst I believe that players won't generally say anything when they're involved at a club, I'm a little surprised that we haven't heard more about the players stance immediately prior to '186'. We've heard bits and pieces, hearsay and lots of innuendo but no actualities. Most of us believe the commonly held belief but if that is true, then there has to be residual effects. 8 players are gone from the club who played that day. A certain 'silence' can pervade footy clubs even after the event. It's like there's a pact to say nothing publicly. Someone might say something one day. We've only had one legitimate win since that day.

A coach has the power to end a players career. They do so on regular occasions by cutting them at the end of a season. A player rarely talks bad about a coach whilst both are at a club. It just doesn't happen very often. A player's way of protesting about a coach is to simply not play for him or to ignore him. I very much doubt that we will see one of our player's come out and criticize the coach publicly or privately. He could ruin his own career. As for fronting a coach behind closed doors, that might happen but we're not going to hear about it or the details. A player either plays for a coach, plays in spite of him or does neither because he resents him. I'm not necessarily talking about our coach. The same rules apply in any club, in any sport.

Good post 'Micky Dee' and it's hard to fault much of the content but ... Why should we be telling the coach how to coach? He should know what to do. He's getting paid handsomely to do a job and he needs to deliver. With all the assistants at his disposal, the 'State of the Art' facilities and all the practice sessions he's overseen, surely he'd know what to do by now. Yeah? The bit I've highlighted bears a little bit of discussion. I've seen no evidence of any gameplan apart from last year, when we blindly kicked the ball around the boundary line with zero teamwork.

The mind boggles on why you would ever try to turn a 28 year old attacking midfielder into a defensive half forward. Just another in an extremely long list of terrible coaching moves. People reading this shouldn't see this as me necessarily defending Moloney. It's more the theory of such a poor decision. Nonsensical in my opinion. A leopard doesn't change it's spots and it's always important to try and get the best out of a players strengths. How's our midfield clearance work going? Apart from the work of Jones, it's virtually non existent. Get the best out of the best and the most out of the rest. That should always be a coaches modus operandi. It's fair to say Voss will know how best to use Moloney. Brent probably won't be a dominant all round player but he will be of some value. What if we start seeing Jones used as a defensive half forward? Nothing would surprise me.

The worst thing you can ever do is compare mediocrity with mediocrity. You never look back and take any solace from past misery. If you're playing rubbish then you do something about it. Not sure how that can happen with the way this team is coached. It's virtually impossible. We have no team work. None that I can see. These coaches prattle on about structures, processes, systems and all the other putrid buzz words but in old fashioned terms it's all about teamwork - we haven't got any of it and it's not going to suddenly reappear. Our players are guarding grass a lot and when a team is this bad you have to play man on man football. What's even worse is that if a coaching crew need to be told this, then you've really got problems. Do they even know what the problem is? I doubt it. It's quite possible that the coaching staff have literally no idea how the team needs to be coached. We are an exceptionally poorly coached team and things will not get any better until we see change. Or if Neeld can somehow start coaching a lot better. The players are totally confused, they're not playing for each other, they don't back each other up, they don't run for each other, they don't bring their teammates into the game and they are devoid of any confidence. Instead of playing selfless footy we're doing the opposite. In other words, we don't play as a team and there is no teamwork. Under the current coaching group, it's been that way since round 1 last season. That's the brutal reality.

Just get rid of the coach, Don. Neeld is a poor coach. Make Rawlings the interim coach. That's a good start. The club doesn't exist to make a profit, keep people gainfully employed or the like. It is there to play well and win football games. That's our primary goal and function. If you can't do that well then we're mainly a business. You don't support a company, a business or a firm. But that is what we are supporting at the moment. This business doesn't necessarily need to win games. That's why they never talk about winning. Until the tipping point is reached, of course. We've been at the point with our on field performances for quite some time. Our club merely exists to keep x amount of people gainfully employed (many of whom are earning a truckload of dollars) Need a total clean out and it should have happened a long time ago. If Neeld is kept on and can somehow coach a lot better in the future and we start winning consistently, then that would be great for all of us. I'm only commenting on what we've seen so far and it hasn't been good.

Ha ! Don't worry 'cfh', you'll get paid back on the NFL thread (now what evil deed can I think up about those Vikings?)

I really don't think it matters 'tpm'. I never really bought into Neeld but I'm like that with any coach. They get wins and get the team playing well and I'm on board. It's a very basic way of viewing a coach but it's largely foolproof. It's nothing personal either with our current people at the club. I love the club and have huge respect for the people who made the club what it is. Ivor Warne-Smith, Norm Smith, Ron Barassi and Robbie Flower and the like are the club in my eyes. Some of the people who are involved at the club right now wouldn't live in our past greats shadows. We owe them nothing. We only owe the club. Those who are involved at the club right now are mere custodians. They have an obligation to do a good job. If they can't do that they get replaced. It's as simple as that. I can't see Neeld surviving the debacle that we currently are. Our percentage is 27 and how do you come back from those first 2 games? The club will always be bigger than any individual. I'd favour an experienced coach to be appointed if we can find a suitable one. This coach will still need to have a driving ambition and hunger. We've also got some major issues with our Board, Administration and our playing list so it's not just about Mark Neeld. My opinion is based on what I think will happen. The coach is nearly always the first to go under these kind of circumstances. History tells us that.

Neeld cannot coach and never could. From his first game in charge we've gone backwards (from an already low point) He never had the players on board, they don't respect him and they don't take any notice of anything he says. His position has become untenable. By Tuesday or Wednesday he should be gone otherwise we're just delaying the inevitable. Rawlings could become the interim coach and the club should then target Eade or another experienced coach to take over the reigns. Craig is another option but he has stated that he'll never coach again. As for the players, the Board and the Administration, we need change there as well, but that will take a lot more time to fix. First port of call is that Neeld needs to be removed. Pay him out and cut your losses. The club is bigger than any individual and right now, there are a number of individuals that need to be shown the door. It's nothing personal. If he is kept on and somehow coaches a lot better and we start winning consistently then well and good. I can't see it but you never know. He needs to get the players on side.

Neeld is gone. It may not be fair for him, but it's the right thing to do. He never had the players, so it's not like he ever lost them. Loyalty? It's a 2 way street. We owe him nothing. Life is tough sometimes - he, like us, will get over it. Mark will live to fight another day. Time to get a new man. It's nothing personal. He is just flesh and blood like the rest of us. Wrong bloke, wrong time, wrong club. He may somehow turn this around and you never know for sure. Can't see it though and we can't keep having heavy losses like this. Who's next? That's more the question.

In Melbourne R-Mac, we're pitied. Talked to a few re this phenomena and there is just nothing your friends can offer. There is no encouragement because there is none to offer. Opposition fans often read things better. Greg Wells talked about the 80's players getting involved. Who else have we got? I favour a group from the 90's and the first half of the 2000's. We had some very committed players out of that era who may drive the club forward. Get some younger minds in there. Gotta be better than the current crop of people - they need to get out of the way and let others have a go at it. We've literally got nothing to lose. How many watershed moments do we need? The fans hanging over the race after the game was an eye-opener. The club has to act but really, who or what is the club right now? Most of us are looking for some sort of direction but it's with zero confidence. Lowest ebb for a lot of us. Solution - throw every position open and see what you can come up with. And hope to goodness that the right people come forward.

Just when you thought it can't get any worse, it does. I'm just as flummoxed and bewildered as anyone else. I think we're all beyond having any answers. What makes it even worse is that Essendon aren't even that good. We'll recover, lord knows how, but we will. You never chuck in the towel.

Change often only happens when the proverbial really hits the fan. We'll recover, but we need change.