rjay

Jackson's first move will be to get an experienced head of the FD, a Balme type but who is available??? and then address the coach. Well that was before 4.40pm today, he may not have a choice now.

Get the ball in Kent's hands a bit more, at least he can kick and hit a target.

Absolutely amazing how he was appointed in the first place but the extension, I think I've used that beggars belief line before because it does. I don't know how anyone can still defend what he has done to this club and that also beggars belief.

I'm not sure it does. Jim's legacy will be getting the club out of debt but unfortunately there were some bad decisions made during his time that have effected the on-field performance of the club which in turn will effect the financial performance of the club. A catch 22. At least we are in a position to absorb the loss even though it will hurt.

Finally we can start to move forward from the disastrous appointments of the past.

It hadn't been his squabble; that's the crux of it for me, unfortunately it had been the squabble of the ones who gave him the job and he seems to have given them all the answers they wanted and then followed through. He walked into a divided club that wasn't of his making and has not been able to heal the wounds, his approach has been to cut out what he sees or has been told was the infection. The infection was higher up the chain unfortunately and those that employed him were the carriers, one has been moved on and another so called power broker (don't like the politics he says) has been marginalised. His career as a senior coach is in the balance now and may live and die on the decision to involve himself with the division. At the time of his appointment we needed a senior coach but those available would not have been so pliable and sucked into the squabble. That bares a lot of thought. Sorry to focus just on this part of the post 'robbie', I think the whole post is well reasoned and written. I still hold out some hope that Neeld will make it through but it is diminishing by the week, he may well have burned bridges very early and that is a pity for all of us.

The terms are not great but they do indicate 2 different basic philosophies of play. Take 'em on through the middle of the ground or move around the boundary, attacking style v defensive. It's all a bit simplistic really but I believe this is what G Lyon and his cronies looked at when changing a coach and hiring a new one. It's what put Rod Eade on the outer, he was seen as not being defensive enough when really he was just using his cattle to their best advantage. Too much emphasis was put on the so called Collingwood model, it was the flavour at the time. The other more attacking model, but of course based on a great defence was ignored. No interview for Sanderson or Hinkley. For all the great defensive structures of Lyon (Ross) and Malthouse they have only pulled off one flag in the last 6 years between them where the other mob have 3 and may make it 4.

As I said last week they make football worth watching. You know there was a time a few years back when we played this type of football and it was so exciting to watch but then some thought (GLyon, CS and the media contingent) it was an old game plan and we needed to be a defensive side. Well we turned back the balance way too far. The Collingwood/Malthouse plan v the Geelong plan???? Work it out for yourselves, it is beyond me.

Look I'm going to say this again. Most of the stats that we use are worked in hindsight...why did that team win, it was because of dah, dah, dah.... This is also the problem with KPI's that are based on stats. I say that the scoreboard is the only stat or KPI that counts and as someone that looks at the game and analyses it to the n'th degree I know that seems simplistic but at the end of the day it's all that matters. How many GFC players had played under 50 games tonight, a lot. Well maybe they shouldn't win but then you add Bartell, Selwood, Enright etc. etc. to the mix and you get why the stat standing alone makes no sense at all. According to the stats and KPI's Sydney lost last years GF and by a fair way, as Geelong lost the game tonight. But hang on, what's going on here, they won it, they held the cup. Well there are a hole bunch of intangibles that can't be accounted for and that's where things come unstuck. Stats don't tell our story, our biggest problem at the moment is we don't have Bartell, Selwood, Enright etc. and even that in itself is not the answer although it would make things easier. How did these guys grow into the players and the team they are, Geelong was a basket case. The team was built from the top down. We have suffered from bad management from the board to CEO and now we have the opportunity to change that. Until we get that right there is no point changing the coach, it's just a bandaid solution. Our current coach places way to much emphasis in games played, yes it plays a part but it doesn't tell the full story. Some of our crucial recruiting decisions have been based on that stat and I think it is a mistake. Longwinded answer to midfield stats but I am concerned about the idea that stats can tell the story. The fact that we play with an oval ball really makes stats that much more difficult to assign to reason as to why a team wins or doesn't win. Think St. Kilda v Collingwood one bounce of the ball and it's a whole different story.

Didn't say he was good 'Rhino' but a better bet than Pedersen (the other wondering mr. flex) I would think.

Pretty much right there 'master', he brings greater flexibility.

Unfortunately for him his 2 years are being added to Bailey's 4. Whilst this is not fair, the fair question is should we persevere with a coach if he is not the right man for the job. We did with Bailey and many on here are still a bit gun-shy. I know the answer to the question is we most certainly shouldn't and I couldn't see anyone disagreeing with that, the bit I don't know and where we get the argument is, is Mark Neeld the right man for the job.

Including you.

Turns 40 this year, 900+ games and still going strong, could well make it to 1000 games. Hard to relate the 2 sports but Tuck, Bartlett, Bradley, Fletcher...

All we need next is our own Giggs and we're in biz 'Ron'

It's this games experience stat that bothers me quite a bit. For some reason it's become an obsession with Neeld and like all stats can be misleading. Some of our recruiting decisions are being influenced by this stat. Yet last week against Richmond Geelong went into the game with 7 or 8 players I think it was with under 50 games experience. Stats and KPI's, according to them Geelong should be nowhere near the top of the ladder, smashed in most key performance areas that the experts hold dear, and last years premiers should have been Hawthorn. The scoreboard...

I like a man who answers his own questions. Keep up the good work.

ah...so now you think there might be something wrong with him like the rest of us apologists do.

Slower last year than his first two years then slower again this year. ...and that's the story isn't it. So how does that happen to a 21yo? obviously you don't think it's because of injury or any other reasons given on the forum so, "why is it so"?

No, I thought it may have been workload last year but remember he had a big chunk of this pre season off his legs because of the stress fractures. The mystery of Trenners slowing down.

Was more a rhetorical ?, I should have put !!! ...but I suspect that you are on the money, it's the only thing that makes sense.

...and if it were only this year I could say yeah it's the stress fracture. However he slowed down and lost a remarkable amount of power last year, I mean we all remember when he couldn't kick the distance from around 30mtrs. Why???

That's interesting.

No, I can't see the truth coming out. It usually doesn't and it's not likely to here. ...besides the club and it's senior officials have a history of being liberal with the truth. The GFC, Mathew Knights, Mark Williams, the football media and the general supporter on the street could tell you that. Yet we still get fed the line about these honourable people against the black hat in Dank, well sorry I wouldn't believe much from any of them, no matter what side of the fence.

Something doesn't add up here, does it?