How do you fix Melbourne?

[ManOfClay]

Amazing how all the talk pre-season was how good Neeld is, how he has instilled a gameplan, hardness and work ethic into the players (kind of like what Brendan McCartney has done at the Dogs).

Two rounds in and they are calling for his head, with no signs of the three things they were all raving about.

 

[slashin_velvet]

Amazing how all the talk pre-season was how good Neeld is, how he has instilled a gameplan, hardness and work ethic into the players (kind of like what Brendan McCartney has done at the Dogs).

Two rounds in and they are calling for his head, with no signs of the three things they were all raving about.

Apparently they are training well.

 

[Thurlow2Mackie]

I'd bring in a coaching team known for building a strong club culture. I'd also get rid of any player who is not buying in. Let them run around in the reserves for the rest of the year. No point in rebuilding their squad and having a great game plan if they can't get the most fundamental element of a football club right.

The Tasmanian Tigers and the Sydney Swans are good examples of teams with strong cultures, who may not have always had the best talent, but could manufacture results because they played for the team. Both clubs have had excellent leaders from Dan Marsh, Tim Coyle, and George Bailey, to Kirk, Roos, Longmire, Goodes and McVeigh.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

No matter how horrible Neeld is, now is not the time to sack him. I'd continue the cleanout at the admin level (any of Schwabs cronies, if there are any) but keep the football department intact. Its a long season and things can turn around (at least with effort, never mind wins at this stage) but that will only happen if the players and coaching staff are united. Sackings at this stage would reek of panic and only make the situation worse.

 

[footyfix]

I think you need to get through this week first. I would start every day by showing the players highlights of their BEST work (jokes are not helpful people). Tell them right now who they are matched up on and get everyone individual coach sessions to work out strategies on their match ups. Extra training session on the G would help and a very precise game plan. They desperately need to get some confidence and be prepared for the crap they will cop verbally from Eagles as well as their "supporters". Then, they need to watch the highlights and lowlights of the Eagles last two weeks so they have a clue what they can expect. All this should be obvious but I was at the game last week and they looked like sleepwalkers so maybe the obvious needs to be stated.

 

[andypie]

Melbourne need more money pumped into player development. Their is nothing wrong with their recruiting, its what happens once the players were their. Richmond had the same problem for a long time before Benny Gale fixed the issue I think. No point givig them priority picks until they get the player development right, as it would be like losing a fortune on the pokies and then pumping more money in to win it back. The debt is the issue aswell as revenue, but I think if the AFL is going to be involved in equalisation and funding struggling clubs, they need to ensure the extra money goes into footy departments, as survival cant be the only priority for clubs, it has to be success.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Melbourne need more money pumped into player development.

Its not a matter of money. Port and the Bulldogs seem to be bouncing off the bottom and are doing it on the smell of an oily rag. Add North to that list too.

 

[Dazb86]

Amazing how all the talk pre-season was how good Neeld is, how he has instilled a gameplan, hardness and work ethic into the players (kind of like what Brendan McCartney has done at the Dogs).

Two rounds in and they are calling for his head, with no signs of the three things they were all raving about.

Mistakes don't matter.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

And they should shave their beards.
And make Luke Darcy coach.
And force Garry Lyon to do something something.
Actually, all body hair should be removed.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Its not a matter of money. Port and the Bulldogs seem to be bouncing off the bottom and are doing it on the smell of an oily rag. Add North to that list too.

Port have Kochie.

But seriously, two games ago Port and Melbourne looked to be in the same boat. What's the difference? What I've heard of Port, particularly with Primus in charge, was pretty disastrous. Not to mention their poor state off field. Why are they on the up but Melbourne discovering a new rock bottom? I honestly don't know.

 

[Thurlow2Mackie]

And they should shave their beards.
And make Luke Darcy coach.
And force Garry Lyon to do something something.
Actually, all body hair should be removed.

I know their only decent player is bald, but I think this is one of those instances where correlation =/= causation

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Watts has to lose his beard. Blonde beards dont work unless you play keyboards for ABBA.

 

[Dazb86]

Port have Kochie.

But seriously, two games ago Port and Melbourne looked to be in the same boat. What's the difference? What I've heard of Port, particularly with Primus in charge, was pretty disastrous. Not to mention their poor state off field. Why are they on the up but Melbourne discovering a new rock bottom? I honestly don't know.

1. Effort
2. Looks like the coach has lost the players. He came in and ruffled a few feathers and now it looks like he's going for the softly softly approach
3. Lost experienced players and replaced them with guys who are on their last legs and are worse than the guys they replaced
4. Poor development of existing players
5. Assistant coaches are horrible, none have come from winning environments
6. Rebuilding from a rebuild
7. Got rid of all their Melbourne grown experienced players

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

1. Effort
2. Looks like the coach has lost the players. He came in and ruffled a few feathers and now it looks like he's going for the softly softly approach
3. Lost experienced players and replaced them with guys who are on their last legs and are worse than the guys they replaced
4. Poor development of existing players
5. Assistant coaches are horrible, none have come from winning environments
6. Rebuilding from a rebuild
7. Got rid of all their Melbourne grown experienced players

1. has to lift (obviously)
2. he has to win the players back and learn that theres more than one way to skin a cat.
3. didnt lose any experienced players that they actually miss
4. horrible. And poor Magner is stuck on the rookie list and cant get a callup. CEO to blame for a lot of that
5. Leroy is a premiership player!! Neeld also from Collingwood. Yep need to bolster coaching stocks
6. Lots of teams have had failed rebuilds in the past and have had to re-rebuild
7. You already said that but seriously who are they missing? Rivers?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Because we replaced Primus with a guy who can instill and has instilled a positive club culture of players who want to play for the team. Maybe Neeld is Melbourne's Primus. They need to find themselves a Hinkley, and they need to do it quickly. The only problem with that theory is that Neeld seems from the outside at least to be a hard bastard, so I don't know why Melbourne's players aren't responding to him. Maybe they need a big name coach.

Maybe Neeld needs to reinvent himself. The Primus comparison is not a good one. Melbourne like Port with Hinkley went for an "outsider".

Melbourne chose Neeld because he was the hardest bastard they could find and after Bailey they didnt want another "good bloke". Neeld is going to now have to dig deep and find some good bloke within himself, because being an arseh*le isnt working.

 

[*PAF]

Port have Kochie.

But seriously, two games ago Port and Melbourne looked to be in the same boat. What's the difference? What I've heard of Port, particularly with Primus in charge, was pretty disastrous. Not to mention their poor state off field. Why are they on the up but Melbourne discovering a new rock bottom? I honestly don't know.

I see it differently from many Port posters.

To see why Port appears to have improved one needs to look at the last couple of years.
1. Fitness:
The main thing that stopped us winning more games was our fitness and injury. We could have and should have won more games including against Hawthorn but our fitness was so shite that we would get run over towards the end of each and every game. Too many of our best players played too few games, the list includes Hartlett, Pittard, Boak and Butcher. That too seems to have improved thanks to our new fitness department.
Our fitness now is great and our new fitness department was in place before Hinkley got there.

2. Depth: Whenever we had a full side we were more than competitive. Our top end was fine but once we got to 15 or so it dropped off remarkably, and once we got to 22 it plummeted. We had many many injuries and were forced to use the 15-30 player more than any team should. Our recruiting this year has been brilliant and it concentrated on making us more competitive rather than to go for the jugular and try and win a premiership. Steady as she goes is the better path IMO and that is exactly what we did.
IMO the groundwork was set in place whilst Primus was there, not since. If it was Primus, KT, Rhode or whoever doesn't really matter but we went down the Sydney Swans path of improving our depth and not go all out for stars. Players that were getting games on a regular basis such as Cassisi, Brett Ebert, Thomas are now outside the 22, others such as Banner, Phillips, Rodan and Surjan have moved on. That is a big change and the players that have replaced them are playing at a higher level.
Surjan was a great player but unfortunately his body let him down and Rodan was unlucky that we aren't a top shelf team as he is not suited to a team that needs to defend more often than attack.

Stevenson, Heath, Monfrie and Hombsch have added massively to our depth. as did Brad Ebert in 2012.
Neade and Wines have also added to the depth.
Pittard, Boak and Hartlett being fit has added to the depth.

So depth and fitness has been the biggest reason for our improvement and that in turn has allowed us to draft for the future with players such as Clurey, Shaw and Colquhoun.

EDIT: Got this from our Port board.

Our deth is now such that we have the following running around in our twos or injured.

B D.Butcher Blee Logan
HB Pfeiffer Hombsch Colquhoun
C Newton Cassisi Moore
HF Young D.Stewart Ebert
F Hitchcock J. Butcher Shaw
R Renouf Gray Thomas
IC Hoskin Clurey Salter Ah Chee

The ones in bold were getting regular games last year and or the year before that.

Again I am not sure if Hinkley had much to do with the above.

3. A new coach and coaching director. Both Hinkley and Richardson seem to be experienced and really know what they are doing and the players seem to respond to them. So far they have scored 100/100 but its early days. IMO Primus wasn't a bad coach and had potential but his lack of experience let him down.

So yes, Hinkley does appear to be a better head coach than Primus however IMO it need to be recognised that Primus did a lot of the legwork to improve our side and KT seems to be an old school operator from a successful footy and business background that knows that Rome wasn't built in a day and that to build a great city one needs to start with proper foundations.

What are we expecting this year? To be competitive in all games, more wins than losses against the not so strong sides and anything else is a bonus.

 

[chinggis77]

Melbourne seem to be in a death spiral. All the calls for tough action, cutting players who are not buying in etc are going to increase the death spiral.

This all stems from the tanking episode. Senior players were pissed that it was going on and felt sorry for Bailey who was being asked to implement the strategy. Said players get pissed at Senior Management (Connolly and Schwab), start of the division between players and club.

186 happened in response to Schwabby being reappointed. Lyon and Co back Schwabby and sack Bails.

Schwabby being pissed that players tried to get him sacked (and Connolly), has a hand in bringing in a coach who will "put them in line" with some tough love. Enter Mark Neeld, given a brief to shake them up.

Exodus begins with senior players who rebelled against tanking orders moving on (begun a year early actually). They rightly feel hard done by as they were simply trying to uphold a winning culture by rebelling against tanking. Senior players demotion further entrenches this "hard done by" feeling.

Neeld is seen as a stooge of Schwabby and Connolly by players. In implementing his "tough love" orders given to him by Schwabby and Connolly (Lyon had his hand in this also), he puts players further offside. Several more leave. Many players never buy in from the start as he is seen Schwabby and Connolly´s stooge and the tough love approach is seen as revenge by Schwabby/Connolly against the players. This disfranchisement infects the playing group.

Neeld continues on his tough love approach. Brings in hacks who train hard and set an example on the track. The lack of buy in and lack of respect for Schwabby and Connolly´s stooge becomes apparent in round 1 and round 2, 2013.

Melbourne only has itself to blame and I bet it wishes it had its time again.

How about instead of the above. Following the senior players rebelling against tanking, the Board instead stepped in and said, "okay, enough´s enough, we are here to win at all costs". Melbourne goes out and attacks in 2009 and wins 6-7 games instead. They don´t get Scully, but retain a winning culture. Senior players continue to play for the jumper. They still get Viney under F/S and players like Watts, Tapscott etc actually come on instead of stagnating. Players like Mclean and Moloney would still be leading their midfield and they would be in a lot better position.

Now I see guys like Schwartz ranting and wanting to get involved in fixing the club up promising more tough love and supporters asking for more culling of players not buying in (heck the whole team ain´t buying in, what they want to sack everyone?).

Schwartz said in an interview a few days ago that the Football Department had been given too much freedom and autonomy with no accountability. Heck, he sounds like a Schwabb mach II who wants to come in and shape the football department in his own vision. Melbourne better pray Schwartz doesn´t end up as CEO.

IMO Neeld needs to go. He is tainted by the players distrust for Schabby/Connolly, who appointed him to shake up the players, after the players simply protested that they wanted to win and not partake in the tanking episode. Feel sorry for Neeld who has been put in this position.

Melbourne needs someone like Roos, who is brilliant with building confidence and rapport with players. They don´t need more "tough love". Look where that has got them.

 

[Kwality]

The % gives you flexibility in lower sides, allows you to reward performance and punish non-performance. If your bottom side is still making at most 5% less than what the top side is, there's less incentive for those people who do play for the money.
Furthermore, you can show an appreciation for those that deliver for you by granting them a bigger contract.

You clearly understand the intent of the % but disagree with that purpose - so do I, but its rendered useless by player groups sticking together, with few players of real value moving, maybe they dont consider themselves underpaid?

Those less than the elite can be attracted by money, e.g Dawes, who took less at the Pies, found himself on the outer, up arrived a truck load of gold, g'day Bullies.

Wont fix Melbourne regardless of the % paid sadly.

 

[Falchoon]

Think Shagga was brought in more for the belief that he could impart some knowledge about how a successful side goes about it

some would say Byrnes spent much of his time at Geelong running forward of the ball

 

[Falchoon]

IMHO it's a large part of why we got Goddard.
If you watch him off the ball, he's taking a lot of the set-up & directing traffic (yelling & pointing) away from Fletch.

Funny that, a large part of why we got rid of Goddard was the yelling and pointing.

Not sure yelling and pointing will help Melbourne.

 

[Bluelegs]

Relocate them to Tasmania. Tassie needs a permanent team. They can be called the Van Demons.

Well at least you're more original than everyone saying they want us to be the Tasmanian Devils.

 

[Tulip]

Schwartz said in an interview a few days ago that the Football Department had been given too much freedom and autonomy with no accountability. Heck, he sounds like a Schwabb mach II who wants to come in and shape the football department in his own vision. Melbourne better pray Schwartz doesn´t end up as CEO.

Huh? All Schwartz wants to do is get involved, maybe get a spot on the board, but use his experiences and those of his team mates 15 years ago to say that this is unacceptable from the FD and players.

He'll never be CEO.

 

[Old Spice]

Follow the tortoise

 

[Old Spice]

Huh? All Schwartz wants to do is get involved, maybe get a spot on the board, but use his experiences and those of his team mates 15 years ago to say that this is unacceptable from the FD and players.

He'll never be CEO.

You'd hope not. If brains were petrol, the Ox couldn't power himself around the inside of a fruitloop.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Huh? All Schwartz wants to do is get involved, maybe get a spot on the board, but use his experiences and those of his team mates 15 years ago to say that this is unacceptable from the FD and players.

He'll never be CEO.

Make him Treasurer